So I have someone who wrote a pretty good paper, but whose references page contains the information that she searched for the subject on Yahoo, clicked on a bunch of links, and gathered information from various sites. How do I concisely but clearly explain why that's not really enough of a bibliography, even for such an informal paper?

This is not a case of simply using on-line sources? She just did a yahoo search and that is all she said? She did not even list individual sources?

Er, yes. That's one of those worst name ever things.

She just did a yahoo search and that is all she said? She did not even list individual sources?

'swhat I'm saying. Mind you, many of them didn't include reference pages at all (despite it being clear in the instructions and in my corrections to their rough drafts).

Emily, maybe provide an example of what you're looking for?

Typo, as I read that, I was reminded that in NM elections, if it is determined to be a tie, the tie breaker can be ANY method the parties (or the governing org, I don't recall) agree to. This came up in the 2000 elections. I found it...well, I pictured old west gunslingers if you must know, because it's so typical of my home state.

In Australia it's legally mandated to be a coin toss. I think I prefer rock, paper, scissors. "Pen Missile! NYERRM!!"

Er, yes. That's one of those worst name ever things.

Methinks this place is run by hippies.

It is nummy, though.

Emily, maybe provide an example of what you're looking for?

I suppose. Mind you, this is the final draft, so she's not going to be changing it. I just want a quick (less writing for me, with 30 papers to grade and me a math teacher) way of explaining why this isn't how we do it.

I would be afeared to eat a Libido Burrito.

pout I think I missed the Dana new hair pics.

Hmm. Is the fact that I'm going home alone after eating a Libido Burrito a good or a bad thing?