Referencing Mistakes

COMMON REFERENCING MISTAKES AND SOME QUESTIONS

By Beschara Karam

QUESTION

A student asked: which is more important?

In-text referencing or not including SOURCES CONSULTED?

ANSWER

Both are forms of PLAGIARISM.

However, if you do not include in-text referencing, you will lose 50% of your marks.

If you do not include your SOURCES CONSULTED, you will lose a maximum of 2 marks only.

QUESTION

When I put theory/concepts into my own words must I still include an in-text reference?

ANSWER

Yes, absolutely. This is because even though you have taken the time to put it into your own words, it is still someone else’s idea. If you do not include an in-text reference, you are still claiming that idea as your own, when it clearly is not.

You must use an in-text reference for every paragraph you write, unless it is your ideas, observations or analysis. For example, when you do an analysis of a photograph and you describe what you see in the photograph and you describe what you think it means: that is all your own work, then you do not need to use an in-text reference.

QUESTION

I was told that this in-text reference was incorrect: “du Plooy, 2009:55”. I do not understand why.

ANSWER

We use the Abridged Harvard Referencing Method and therefore we do not put a comma after the author’s name:

CORRECT METHOD: Reid 2008:215

INCORRECT METHOD: Reid, 2008:215

QUESTION

I do not understand why the following was marked incorrect? I put the following in my SOURCES CONSULTED:

Fourie, PJ. 2008. Media and sexual orientation: The portrayal of gays and lesbians, in Media studies: policy, management and representation. Volume 2. Cape Town: Juta.

ANSWER

It is incorrect because PJ Fourie is not the author of that particular chapter on Visual Text Analysis. You must always reference the author of the chapter you are using, and not the editor; PLUS: the page numbers are missing.

The correct method is therefore:

Cilliers, CP. 2008. Media and sexual orientation: The...