On 7/19/06, Oldak Quill <oldakquill(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I'm a big fan of referencing, but the problem I
have is determining
what is common knowledge. I think I tend to over-reference (which is
preferable to under-referencing). Could someone give me a good measure
of where to draw the line?
There is no such thing as over-referencing. There is no such thing as
"common knowledge" regarding encyclopedic content. If it feels "common
knowledge", it may be lacking relevancy at least in a certain context.
Mathias