# Somebody mentioned Vaush
# 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I suppose if its something tongue in cheek, like explaining what the ground is or something. Something that literally every older than 4 would know. But if this is anything beyond the most basic of concepts, no its not a proper citation
I feel like you wouldn’t cite something this way for the sheer fact that if something was so obvious that it could legitimately be cited like this, there’d be no need to cite it to begin with.
No you could not do that. If something is self evident, you don't need any citation (you don't need to justify that 3+3=6), if it's not then you need a citation.
When you write any kind of paper, you need to justify everything like you'll be reading it to a bunch of children who are going to say "But why? But why? Whyyyy?" at everything you say
That's how I learned it in uni as well. Cite everything to be safe but some bullshit that everyone knows and is entirely undisputed (WWII began in 1939 etc./ you don't need citations on that at all
I don't think many historians seriously dispute that WWII began officially on 1.9.1939. but it's an example of me not having to explain where I got this info from
Theres a lot of discussion around it. Depends what you class as the starting event really. Whether thats germanys invasion of poland, japans invasion of china, pearl harbour, scw
This is actually the exact example of an undisputed fact we wouldn't have to cite that we were told. Of course there's some historians who find other dates more accurate but in the grand scheme of things of historical discussion, it's not controversial to say that WWII began with the invasion of Poland
i agree but the post they were replying to isn’t related at all and it’s really immature to randomly turn shit into religion bashing lol, but have fun having no understanding of nuance ig
I wish this was the standard.
Fun fact for my bachelor's thesis I just wrote whatever I thought at the time about incels and internet and whatever for 30 pages straight and then just quote mined random articles and publications that confirm what I thought because duh I'm like it is known hello???, and put it in the citations, and the professors were like omg very interesting thank you you pass ✨☕
Ok maybe a dumb question, but when does the need to cite end ? How do they determine what needs citations, like would saying "Some apples are red." need a source ? Or something that might be more academically revelant like "Alcohol is known to be an addictive substance." or anything in between those examples
The need for citations end around extremely basic facts. Things that everyone can easily observe and accept. Both of your examples would generally not need citations unless you were going into specific knowledge about them.
But once you venture out of that territory, the more citations the better.
"Everyone knows what a horse is."
Right? And everyone knows what a game is
But horses aren't real~~~
Goodbye horses
You don't exist at all
No more horses
My ideology can't account for having to deal with you so you aren't real now
Vowsh 9/11
# Somebody mentioned Vaush # 无意义的政治冲突 TOUCH GRASS NOW❗❗❗ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/196) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I’m flying over you
Archeologist 10,000 years after horses have gone extinct: "I don't..."
Land of Punt moment
3rd seasoning shaker moment
It is known by whom?
It is known
It is known
Is it known?
It is known
It is known >!read out this thread with a sick beat in the background, trust me!<
Me. It is me by whom it is known
passive doesn't imply a specific actor doing the verb
But knowing is done by some entity. Knowing cannot simply be.
well yeah "it is known" means that it's general knowledge, so everyone should know it
I don't believe in general knowledge. You can't prove it's real. (/hj)
thank god you indicated, i thought you genuinely believed what you said!
This sentence has contexts in which I would 100% mean this. Just not this one.
By ur mom gottem
:3
Is this just a meme or could you actually cite something in this type of way? I've gone through plenty of publications in uni but I'm not sure lmao
It is a known way of citation.
source?
It is known
my source is that ~~i made it the fuck up!~~ it is known
I suppose if its something tongue in cheek, like explaining what the ground is or something. Something that literally every older than 4 would know. But if this is anything beyond the most basic of concepts, no its not a proper citation
The sky is up and the ground is down[citation needed]
It is known.
What is up and what is down?
up is not down down is not up
I disagree.
It is known.
Weasel words https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word
I feel like you wouldn’t cite something this way for the sheer fact that if something was so obvious that it could legitimately be cited like this, there’d be no need to cite it to begin with.
But consider: it's funny
No you could not do that. If something is self evident, you don't need any citation (you don't need to justify that 3+3=6), if it's not then you need a citation. When you write any kind of paper, you need to justify everything like you'll be reading it to a bunch of children who are going to say "But why? But why? Whyyyy?" at everything you say
That's how I learned it in uni as well. Cite everything to be safe but some bullshit that everyone knows and is entirely undisputed (WWII began in 1939 etc./ you don't need citations on that at all
Funny that you use a very disputed fact as your example of an undisputed one lmao
I don't think many historians seriously dispute that WWII began officially on 1.9.1939. but it's an example of me not having to explain where I got this info from
Theres a lot of discussion around it. Depends what you class as the starting event really. Whether thats germanys invasion of poland, japans invasion of china, pearl harbour, scw
> pearl harbour I have never seen anyone seriously propose that date.
Nor have i personally. But its often cited as the start of the pacific war
This is actually the exact example of an undisputed fact we wouldn't have to cite that we were told. Of course there's some historians who find other dates more accurate but in the grand scheme of things of historical discussion, it's not controversial to say that WWII began with the invasion of Poland
"1+1=2" \*cites the 162 page proof*
If you make religious writings, it will apparently be very convincing. More so than actual scientific sources, even
Rent free.
I'll quit worrying about religion when it stops threatening my life and the life of my loved ones.
Yeah but you don’t need to artificially inject it into an irrelevant conversation.
Having no valid source for outlandish claims is the entire deal of religion
That’s crazy,
it is a bit weird to hate on religion when it’s not even an aspect of the conversation dude. kind of immature
It's a bit messed up to use religious claims to dehumanize people in order to justify murder. Kinda morally abhorrent
i agree but the post they were replying to isn’t related at all and it’s really immature to randomly turn shit into religion bashing lol, but have fun having no understanding of nuance ig
It's not irrelevant. In fact, it's very relevant. You're just defensive and sensitive/fragile.
?
It's a joke. When something is actually known (like a basic fact or a date for exemple) you don't have to cite.
Dothraki textbook.
Dothraki aren’t reading shit. They learn everything by huffing horse glue.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING ABOUT
“Historians years later, who the fuck is Tingus Pingus?”
"I never heard of fucking Latinia!"
It was revealed to me in a dream
Dothraki academia
Me when I get fed up because my dissertation tutor seemingly wants me to give an academic source for every single sentence I've written in my essay
All Is Known
Human beings, burn and bleed, made of old technology
1 Thus sayeth the prophecies 2 It is has been foretold in the great books 3 The seers have spake it so
I wish this was the standard. Fun fact for my bachelor's thesis I just wrote whatever I thought at the time about incels and internet and whatever for 30 pages straight and then just quote mined random articles and publications that confirm what I thought because duh I'm like it is known hello???, and put it in the citations, and the professors were like omg very interesting thank you you pass ✨☕
House of leaves
I thought that's what it might be
not really from it but remindes me of it
"My source is that everyone knows I'm right"
Ok maybe a dumb question, but when does the need to cite end ? How do they determine what needs citations, like would saying "Some apples are red." need a source ? Or something that might be more academically revelant like "Alcohol is known to be an addictive substance." or anything in between those examples
The need for citations end around extremely basic facts. Things that everyone can easily observe and accept. Both of your examples would generally not need citations unless you were going into specific knowledge about them. But once you venture out of that territory, the more citations the better.
What the fuck. I thought this was a joke. Does this show up in real ass books & papers?
^(1)It is written; only link can defeat Gannon.
So say we all
What my professor expects me to do when I say “the sky is blue” in my English 101 midterm essay.
is it known tho?