I’ve gotten back one of my papers’ marks. It’s only slightly better than what I had expected to get, so yeah…no heartache. Anyway, there was a part of the paper where I cited a source from The Star.
Not acceptable - please source serious material.
ROTFLOL 
NARCISSISM IS NECESSARY is proudly powered by WordPress
Theme Based On "Papillon"
Darknet Hacking & Cracking - Usenet Car Archives - DigiSniper - Digital Photography - How to Stop Smoking - How to Quit Smoking - Celebrity Vivids - SpyMy - ShaolinTiger
lynnee said:
on December 14, 2005 at 5:08 pm
newspaper too gossipy to be considered serious, perhaps? *hehh*
admin: who knows lol
dreamstate said:
on December 14, 2005 at 5:12 pm
Of course theStar it is not serious material. We use it all the time to poke fun of in our blog. It is a great source of entertainment though.
admin: then i must start reading it more often leh hehehe
eyeris said:
on December 14, 2005 at 5:37 pm
ahahahaha. That’s quite true you know. trust me, I know. hehehehe
admin: i trust you hehehe
foodcrazee said:
on December 14, 2005 at 7:56 pm
maybe u ought to source from the human resources ministry eh ?
admin: on a serious note, yeah I should have
Lainie said:
on December 14, 2005 at 10:47 pm
HAHAHAHHAHAHHA
You gotta admit though, your lecturer has a point.
admin: he has indeed lol
Giant Sotong said:
on December 15, 2005 at 8:11 am
I like your lecturer
Next time, cite the NST. If the same thing comes back, we can have an even bigger laugh
admin: next time? no thanks! lol i’m not going to write any paper ever again unless I wanted it myself
oysterman said:
on December 15, 2005 at 9:50 am
Hey, kim looks like Reese Witherspoon, but asian version.
Go google Reese’s pics. I am so not kidding.
admin: hehe lemme prove you wrong here. still, thanks
Dabido(Teflon) said:
on December 15, 2005 at 9:55 am
From what I can tell from the context, you are talking about Unemployment figures … No? Star isn’t a good enough source, and would have sourced their info from another place, like the Bureau of Statistics or some other Government office.
It would have been better to find where the Star got their info from, and used the same source.
I’m a bit worried you only had ‘The Star, 2005′, I would have thought you would need to have complete date of the publication. Like, ‘The Star, Page 4, Article - “Aadvarks taking Malaysian Jobs”, 13/12/2005′ or whatever it was.
But hey, you probably don’t need to know that now! lol
admin: yeah, i think you’ve got a point about the source. i used harvard referencing that’s why so much shorter, the long stuff were at the back. this was like my worst paper ever, i screwed up the referencing, i had no time for more (die procrastination die) and basically i just rushed it through. sigh, you’re right i don’t need to know that now, lol
mervkwok said:
on December 15, 2005 at 12:49 pm
i think citing FHM or Maxim would be considered a serious source haha
stupe said:
on December 15, 2005 at 3:37 pm
you lupa source majalah URTV la.
Wimal said:
on December 15, 2005 at 4:07 pm
Hahaha..that is funny.
huihonchung said:
on December 15, 2005 at 4:39 pm
ahhh….mr sidhu’s famous comments?
KY said:
on December 16, 2005 at 6:29 pm
with the likes of eyeris writing for the star, one can only guess why..
Andreas said:
on December 21, 2005 at 8:01 pm
Adoh - half my work in university would have been rotten if I would have gone to uni here. All my reports in my former company - not worth a cent. Umph
earl-ku said:
on December 22, 2005 at 12:33 am
hmm your fault, thats not the right way to refer to stuff not yours
you should have stated the editor, the publication date, page perhaps or column …
hmm ….
:)
S-Kay said:
on December 22, 2005 at 3:15 pm
I agree with Earl Ku…don’t you have a referencing guide? I have one and I always use it because the uni is damn strict when it comes to this. But anyway, the Malaysian Stats web is a damn good ref site. I got my sources for some of my assignments there.
earl-ku said:
on January 2, 2006 at 5:30 am
i was freakin careful with the referencing part as there was this one case with my seniors when they sumited their final copy to the uni and the supervisor just returned them back and gave them 1 day to redo all the referencing
it seems that what they did was (they did the referencing at the last section like that everyone did) wrong - they had to have the referal at the end of every page that a referal occured
each and everyones documentation was like 500 - 600 pages each - and they had 1 day!
admin: woah, that sucks man!