View Single Post
Old 05-07-2009, 12:21 PM   #178
dmaul1114
Wizard
dmaul1114 knows the chase is better than the catch.dmaul1114 knows the chase is better than the catch.dmaul1114 knows the chase is better than the catch.dmaul1114 knows the chase is better than the catch.dmaul1114 knows the chase is better than the catch.dmaul1114 knows the chase is better than the catch.dmaul1114 knows the chase is better than the catch.dmaul1114 knows the chase is better than the catch.dmaul1114 knows the chase is better than the catch.dmaul1114 knows the chase is better than the catch.dmaul1114 knows the chase is better than the catch.
 
Posts: 2,300
Karma: 121709
Join Date: Feb 2009
Device: Amazon Kindle 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by catsittingstill View Post
It varies. Some of the papers I worked on had probably only 50 or 60 references. The grant applications my boss would ask us to proofread probably had 200+. At that point I *definitely* couldn't keep them straight. There was a set of about a dozen core papers I could keep mostly straight without looking. But when I actually checked on myself, "mostly straight" was about 80% of the time, which wasn't good enough, so I verified every cite, every time. A lot of work, but I thought it was worth it to avoid potential embarrassment.
Ah, we're about the same then. I'm just more confident with the dozen or so core sites in the main topic I research that I can bang out the names and years for the in text cites without mistake. I still have to look them up (or copy and paste them from references on older papers) when doing the bibliography of course.

And if I happen to make a mistake I'll catch it when I go through and double check that every text citation is in the bibiliography, and that nothing is in the bibliography that isn't cited in the text.
dmaul1114 is offline   Reply With Quote