NationStates Jolt Archive

you should cite the original source.

for example (and to clarify what I think you are talking about) if I am writing a report on something and I find an article that cites a study, I should cite the study if the information I am using is directly from it and not from the article about it.......

that didn't clarify anything did it?

Edit:WOOT I timewarped the OP.......first time ever!

so if I get my information from a source that got that particular bit of information from another source, do I cite the source I got it from or do I have to dig through and find the source that they got it from and cite that?

This is for a poster, not a paper, I'm not sure if there's a difference in citing things.

do you mean for a poster with a slogan on or something? if that's the case then i'd cite the text from which the slogan was originally taken from, not the text where you found it.

I always thought you used "Qtd. in [Source]" if the material you're using is used by another author in their work.

so if I get my information from a source that got that particular bit of information from another source, do I cite the source I got it from or do I have to dig through and find the source that they got it from and cite that?

This is for a poster, not a paper, I'm not sure if there's a difference in citing things.

do you mean for a poster with a slogan on or something? if that's the case then i'd cite the text from which the slogan was originally taken from, not the text where you found it.
It's for a scientific type paper.


I was afraid that I'd have to dig through a pile of journal articles. I guess I have to. :(

The axolotl is a species of salamander that never matures and lives its whole life in a juvenile stage.

It's for a scientific type paper.


I was afraid that I'd have to dig through a pile of journal articles. I guess I have to. :(
yes, because the source you're citing from may have cut out some portions of the original.

you should always get the orignal source, especially for a scientific type paper.

yes, because the source you're citing from may have cut out some portions of the original.

you should always get the orignal source, especially for a scientific type paper.
Well, I'm not citing any information that isn't in the paper I want to cite (i.e. not the original) which is just stating the essentials of the original paper.

The only problem I have with citing the original source is that I can't access the journal articles from home, my school has a subscription but the astronomy journals aren't connected to the regular search engine that we can log into remotely so I can only look at articles from campus. It's just so much more effort. :(

Well, I'm not citing any information that isn't in the paper I want to cite (i.e. not the original) which is just stating the essentials of the original paper.

The only problem I have with citing the original source is that I can't access the journal articles from home, my school has a subscription but the astronomy journals aren't connected to the regular search engine that we can log into remotely so I can only look at articles from campus. It's just so much more effort. :(
then go to the public library, if you have the article, writer, issue that it appeared in, then most likely they will have it.

or you can write to the publisher and explain you need the original article. they may send you a pdf and your effort would help your report.

basically, the closer you can get to the original article the more weight it would have.

I think if you're doing a poster and it's high school or undergraduate level (except for a Senior thesis or project in college) citing your source is fine. As far as I can tell, the only people I've ever met who had to find and verify the sources of their source were graduate students in the sciences.

yes, because the source you're citing from may have cut out some portions of the original.

you should always get the orignal source, especially for a scientific type paper.

There's also the issue (although not so much with a poster) that failing to cite the original source leads to citation issues down the road. A piece of information may be "cited" through several sources, and, at some point, the original source data is essentially lost. It can get ugly.

Normally, for an undergrad poster, I wouldn't think it would be a huge deal. Of course, if the paper you are citing is written by your prof, he'll know that the information didn't come directly from his work, but from another paper....

Plus, even in undergrad, you really should get into good citation habits. Bad habits are hard to break.

I think if you're doing a poster and it's high school or undergraduate level (except for a Senior thesis or project in college) citing your source is fine. As far as I can tell, the only people I've ever met who had to find and verify the sources of their source were graduate students in the sciences.
I'm an undergrad and the paper I'd be refrencing that refrences another paper is written by the prof who's supervising my project.

The axolotl is a species of salamander that never matures and lives its whole life in a juvenile stage.


I like the way you think. ;)

It all depends. I the secondary source is providing a direct quote, then cite the original author. If, however, it is a summary, opinion, reflection et cetera based on the original author, than you should cite the secondary source.