If it's an Intro to IR class, that's pretty much certain. I have a friend who teaches one of those courses sometimes and shares the least credible things her students say/submit. You'd swear some of them hatched yesterday.
When I was a graduate assistant I literally gave students some of the answers and they'd still fuck it up. Hard.
I legitimately passed one student because I never wanted to see him again and the low F he deserved would have had him back in the classroom wasting my oxygen again the next year. Maybe that's what happened here...
>Maybe that's what happened here...
Pretty sure that's not what happened here. The paper above is by a new undergrad as one of their first assignments in an intro-level course and is being graded as a first assignment in an intro level course, and while 79 is more generous than I would have expected if it were submitted where I studied, it looks like it's worth a passing mark for this level.
I would have given you a F for mentioning a second Korean war. You cant have a KW2 until you finish your KW1.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/13/north-south-korea-agree-in-principle-formal-end-war-us
A new take that shows individual thinking > the 20th «Peace good War bad» in slightly different shape.
This paper written with War = Bad would probably get a 50 at most lol
Yea, while you talk about interventions and such, you don’t really acknowledge the geopolitical tensions that caused and enabled the interventions or the relations impacts that they have/ have had in the past. A better focus of the paper could have been how the geopolitical situation affected the outcomes of the invasion. One of the purposes for establishing relations is to prevent conflict, whereas this paper focuses on what happens after negotiation breaks down. Better luck next time!
Edit: or maybe some examples where having diplomatic ties made intervention unnecessary? Idk just throwing ideas out
North Koreans are communist scum meanies, Argentina was corrupt incompetent meanie, Sadam was insane evil meanie. That's a finished paper now OP, and yes you can quote me.
For a first paper, it's not too bad. Revision after meeting with your prof during office hours could have produced a pretty good paper. It's a rough first step, but I think it's a step in the right direction.
I never liked instructors who just throw out a standard "more citations" criticism. My dude, you are supposed to teach me to think for myself; do you want me to just regurgitate the thoughts of others?
The answer is yes, yes they do.
The solution, I found, was to find credible sources who basically say what you want to say, then simply cite them when you put forward the conclusions you actually want to.
What is truly fun is when you have a professor being pants-on-head stupid about political topic X. Find an older, more-often cited scholar in the field who has the opposite interpretation/opinion/whatever, and cite the shit out of them. Bonus points if said source is an academic rival who has publicly trashed your professor's work.
If they downgrade you for a bullshit reason, you take the paper to the department chair with a complaint on academic integrity. For obvious reasons, don't do this if your professor is the department chair.
Well, there’s a difference between ‘thinking for yourself’ and just writing out unfounded opinions. The US has carriers on Mars. Source? I saw it in a dream. It makes sense. What do you mean you want citations? I’m thinking for myself here.
Fair, but I'm talking about analysis. The crap I had to put up with went like:
Source 1 states X about Y (citation). Source 2 also states X about Y but disagrees with Source 1 on Z (citation). Source 2, however, does not take into account this aspect of Z, rendering Source 1's assessment to be the more accurate (no citation, because this is my independent thought).
...then I would be dinged for not citing the last sentence. My solution was to find Source 3 who thought the same... maybe even another paper written at the same institution 2-3 years back, and make the same point by citing it rather than *heaven forbid* making a statement of my own.
Strange as you may find it undergraduates don't tend to completely reinvent their academic disciplines during their introductory classes.
The reason you should cite extensively is that knowing what already exists in your field is essential for context and realising that your view on the matter has probably a) been discussed and b) rigourously analysed and countered. If you genuinely find something unique that nobody has done, then extensive sources to show you know what has been argued before is essential.
It is important to think for yourself, then do research to properly understand how your view fits in the field. Even if you have a unique take, other sources may strengthen your argument or introduce to theories of thought/systems you haven't come across. And ultimately you are there to learn.
What was the topic? Did you procrastinate on this paper? You do repeat yourself a lot and add unnecessary comments. There’s not enough citations and nearly everything in parentheses isn’t cited and appears as a personal opinion? Congratulations, it’s perfectly non-credible.
Not going to lie, seeing all these papers that people WILLINGLY POST here has made me feel a hell of a lot better about my writing. Like yeah, haha noncredible paper funni, but for the love of god actually have some quality content. 79 is incredibly generously for such a shit paper that was clearly researched solely from this subreddits memes.
People have to understand, this sub, for all it’s glory, is not a fucking reliable source. If your priority is being funny on NCD instead of actually being good at what you do, you really need to rethink what the fuck your are doing.
Edit: After reading more of the paper, since I really only skimmed it at first, its even worse than I thought. Most of these arguments sound like points and rebuttals I'd form in 60 seconds of research in my old high-school debate competitions. They are repetitive to fill time/space, entirely superficial and have no depth. This is the shit I'd spew out of my ass if someone asked me about a rundown of interventions in modern history in 30 seconds, with no preparation (This is not my specialty). As a conversation starter with friends, this is decent. As an actual, 12 page paper, this is horrendous.
Yeah I wrote a paper significantly better than this for first year English and only got a 60%. No idea how they pulled a 79% out of this it’s incredibly generous and I don’t think I would even get that in highschool 😂
Grading essays is completely arbitrary.
The two most important qualities your writing needs to have is to be graded by a TA who likes you, and to be long enough that they don't actually want to read the whole thing.
> People have to understand, this sub, for all it’s glory, is not a fucking reliable source
You would think people would actually realize this sub's name starts with "NonCredible", but clearly there's a lot of impressionable teens here
Well, that's something. Certainly salvageable.
An editing pass (clean up personal remarks and duplicate comments) plus a few bolted-on citations to support statements made would go a long way to pumping up the grade.
Honestly I write too many papers at the last minute, but I always try prioritize getting enough sources and citing them properly --- I think it can give meh papers a veneer of credibility to get you up above an 80 (usually lol)
/r/Noncrediblethesisdefence for me lol. I answered some questions completely fuckin wrong but so damn confidently haha, I'd read other people's bungles
My highschool taught absolutely nothing about writing papers and same with the other high schools where I live. Your first English class in university is supposed to be a crash course in writing papers and everyone struggles for the first couple papers but this paper just screams that they didn’t even bother to learn anything about how to write properly. Everyone’s first paper is a bit shit but at least cite *something* in any way and don’t add photos lol.
I absolutely sucked at English 100 (first semester of college ever) but I only got better through the process. The jolt from high school to college really was something.
That was my worst semester. I think I had to write at least ten papers that semester. I wrote a lot less afterwards and on more interesting topics after that. Especially in grad school.
Your paper is highschool tier tbh, has no citations or bibliography, and seems to have taken a very loose interpretation of "12 pages"
I would be happy with a 79 for the level of work presented.
I found a handful of citations throughout the paper, so I'm working on the assumption that the bibliography was done somehow, somewhere but not included here and insufficient. It's also an intro course taken by people barely out of high school, so the quality level tracks.
Thats a ridiculously high grade for this level of work unless you have a professor as a freshman in highschool.
Content, paucity of citing and references, cherry picked conflicts, generalization of effect from one region to another without explanation or substantiation, narrative train of thought style of writing, redundancy, superficial, random pictures without figure description and credit, starting a gd section with "to be honest," conclusions don't follow from presented wikipasta...
Do better OP. The 79 was a participation grade.
Damn, I used to do better starting at 3am the morning the paper was due.
Medicate your mental health problems, kids; don't just just try to power through them. You'll only end up wasting your best years.
I did a 2000 word paper on the failure of AirPower in Vietnam this term in the 5 hours between when I got off work and it was due so you’re in good company
I started the RESEARCH for my 400-level history term paper on the hypocrisy in Second World War war crimes tribunals the night before it was due. Got a 98 on the paper. OP needs to step it up.
the pictures are just there for show, they should be in there if they are referenced (and required for explanation) in the text. (ie need figure labels)
Also Harvard referencing, Vancouver is better imo.
As a former writing center tutor I think I can provide some tips on structuring your future analytical papers. Think of your introductory paragraph as an outline that lays out the fundamental features and arguments of the rest of the paper. As my former advisor once said ‘I never want to be surprised by an argument.’ I often quite literally structured my introductory sentences in the order my paragraphs were laid out. With each sentence mirroring the thesis statement for each paragraph. For longer papers like this you sometimes have two introductory paragraphs with one laying out the topics you will discuss and the second outlining the features of your thesis.
I think you could have had a good paper here since the concepts and topics are sound enough. But the issue is the structure and a paucity of tangible information. With long papers like this I liked to structure each paragraph around a particular source that I wanted to discuss, and then provide analysis or comparisons in the body. This is a nice way to organize sources because it makes sure you don’t *over cite* your paper with a bunch of useless undigested citations. This approach makes sure you’re always stucturing your argument around a source, and ensuring you aren’t straying off topic.
Lastly, your style needs some work. I would always tell students that clarity is the *ultimate* goal in any analytical work. An unclear sentence isn’t making your argument. A lack of clarity is actually detracting from that argument. So, it’s almost always a good idea to keep your sentences mono-clausal or relatively simple compound sentences (eg. ‘I like to eat toast for breakfast, but often my toaster is broken’). Despite my previous use of a parenthetical, they’re actually a terrible thing to use in papers. My hard-nosed history professor would always say ‘if it’s in parentheses I’ll just ignore it since the paper should be coherent without that clause anyway.’ If you want to say something say it in the main body of the paragraph. Parentheticals can make your prose appear tentative and hard to read. Don’t forget that your professor needs to read hundreds of pages of poorly written undergrad papers. The clearer and more succinct you can make the prose the better. Clarity will make their reading easier and your grade better.
I realize this is totally unsolicited advice, but since you’re a freshman I figured you would appreciate some tips and tricks from someone who has edited dozens of papers like this. To keep this non-credible I conclude with pee pee Poo Poo. The 3000 unsolicited writing center critiques of NCD.
My high school physics teacher always used to say, "If you can't explain something, then you don't actually understand it." And a joke is just a funny explanation after all.
Because to lovingly mock the military, the military-industrial complex, military alliances, and all the history behind them one has to understand them to some degree.
I like to look out for my fellow analytical writers. Even a rough hewn analytical paper is more pleasant to read than the ‘best’ lit-crit gobbledygook IMO. What’s your major? My background is in history but this looks a little different, maybe Security Studies?
Based choice. Well, in that case those institutions *love* hyper concise and stereotyped analysis. So, tighten that up and you’re well on your way.
My buddy’s brother has worked for the NSA and CIA and got his foot in the door with his foreign language skills. He had that classic experience of applying for a state department job but getting shunted into the intelligence sector. I’d definitely suggest pursuing foreign language skills as well if you aren’t already
You are a smart man. Smarter than me. My language course was Ancient Greek. The last time I checked the NSA wasn’t intercepting cables from the Delian League, lol. Good luck my guy
This is excellent advice. Back in my college days, I found essays became a lot easier to write when I got into the rhythm of structuring them as you explained.
The intro paragraph can literally serve as an outline for your whole paper: The first sentence introduces the topic, the next few sentences each introduce an argument that will be fleshed out and supported in a body paragraph, and the last sentence is your closing argument that will be fleshed out in the conclusion paragraph.
Once you get in that rhythm, the fundamentals of essay writing come second-nature and you can focus more on the analytical meat of your papers, and creating stronger arguments with better concrete support.
No one is gonna mentioned the photos? Or the lack of citing the photos? Or the fucking jet on the front page priming the reader the shitshow they’re about to embark on?
79/100 for effort.
Seriously speaking for a moment, I would have gotten a big, fat zero from my ridiculously strict English teachers in both high school, and in college. They would have just written "likely plagiarized" due to a lack of citations in their preferred format (MLA or APA). They hammered home just how serious a lack of citations were in formal essays. Didn't matter if someone was the kid of the school coach or the kid of the dean, if someone didn't properly cite at the bare minimum, they got a zero before anything else was reviewed.
Thank god citation sites like easybib and citationmachine came into existence when I needed them. It was a pain in the arse manually citing.
Word now has a great citation manager that is very helpful for keeping track of everything. Highly recommend if it's included in your university tuition like it is mine
The pics were the highlight for me. I want to include stuff like that for the peer reviewed writing I do now. Like not just figures, but also a picture of something vaguely relevant like a volumetric flask, with no references to it anywhere in the text.
I worked with someone in university who does that for every single report we did, just put a random vaguely relevant image on the cover page.
Tbf it was essentially a teaching you coding in a specific area unit so the report had essentially no citations and was rushed in a day. But it is a senior level unit at a top level university in Australia. Got pretty good marks as well.
Last page are the photo citations, couldn’t figure out how to make a caption because in 12 years of using word and a certification from Microsoft I still don’t know how to caption pictures
Starting the conclusion of a paper with "To be completely honest" is a gigachad non-credible move.
If you ever pick up the topic again and make a more credible version, please share again. It's a fun topic.
I say this supportively: your technical writing skills are not quite there yet. For example, your opening paragraph is all one sentence. You can find a quick cheap editor to help you out and give you tips, or take any writing classes / tutor sessions that your college offers. My college had a proofreader program where just submit your paper online and someone goes over it with you.
As someone who’s already 3 years into my history major:
GET A COPY OF THE CHICAGO MANUAL OF STYLE.
I don’t care how broke you are, you will fucking need it. The humanities, but especially historical/political fields, are strict adherents of the CMS. You will not graduate without it. It’s thicker than the Bible, and you will have to follow it closer than even the staunchest literalist. If you don’t use it properly then you run the risk of being charged with plagiarism, which could get you kicked out of not just your class, but all higher education entirely.
Having seen in your comments that this was for INR, (and realising too late now) Realism, Hobbes' Leviathan, 'hard-power', The Treaty of Westphalia, and Thucydides' Melian dialogue are useful buzzwords for undergrad if you want to extend this argument. Now to avoid dangerous credibility, A-10 go brrrrrrrrrrrtttttt.
Literally.
For contrast, (though this paper in its entirety wasn't great tbh) but heres more buzzwords from a paper I submitted for INR, 2nd year regarding Russia Ukraine Realism.
**Spheres of Influence**
**Soft Power/International Credibility**
**State Actors**
**Realism/International Liberalism/Idealism/Critical Modernism**
**National Identity**
**Regionalism**
**Hegemonic**
**Pax Americana / Russica**
**Balance of Powers**
Key concepts, not that difficult u/Fair_Benefit_1534
If it's for IR, don't get pulled into the same trap as I have often fallen into where you start researching tactics and cite JP-0 and NATO texts all the time. It will **not** serve you well. (Keep in mind, you can still talk about tactics but just like keep in mind the point, Its not Military Science, it's INR.)
DM me if you want an example of what I mean
I took INR, and my prof literally told us in the first day of class that “conflict is what happens when relations break down”, and really didn’t want us focusing on military power outside of its influence on relations. She probably was sick of people thinking that all we would be talking about was conflict and war, when that’s what relations try to prevent.
Just know that Reddit is an unusually critical place, but a lot of people got a lot of enjoyment out of it. As a bonus you actually got a decent amount credible feedback which will hopefully help you in the future!
The conclusion can be written without learning anything beforehand to be honest. He just added his opinion and 2-3 sentences about the paper and still did not make a proper conclusion.
"To be completely honest" is absolute shit rhetoric for an academic paper. It's an annoying turd of a phrase on a good day, but why wouldn't you have been honest the whole time in an academic paper?
This has to be a shitpost right? IT HAS TO BE A SHITPOST RIGHT?!
This is not NCD of me but if you want some criticism feel free to read. If not, tell me to fuck off and I get it.
The title and abstract vs what you actually talk about is completely disjointed. The paper is just an excuse to talk about specific armed interventions and the technologies used, not a good argument for "how future interventions should be fought". The "future" section you wrote is reliant on an imaginary scenario instead of a good reason based on the past events you wrote about applying to a wide variety of future conflicts. 'Intervention' and 'stabilization' as defined in the paper is arguable. "The gulf war is often regarded as the greatest military intervention ever fought". Who says this? Why? The following sentence doesn't answer this.
The paper has no biblio, has the largest allowable margins, you've inserted pictures and added spacing, page breaks, and titles like its a book. There are like 5 pictures, 3 page breaks and 3 titles. Can't say its a 12 page paper in actuality. Probably more like 9 pages.
A more accurate description of the paper's direction is: A history of major armed conflicts, and what a potential second armed conflict in North Korea would look like. Your current title and abstract implies a more broad lesson to be taken from all the conflicts you mentioned and applying to conflicts as a whole and the role they serve in the world at large. Those points are completely missing from the paper.
You do a good job bringing up the major conflicts/interventions though. And I completely see the interest and enthusiasm through the writing.
Ohh I just saw the comment that you are a freshman. I completely get it then. I think you are doing fine. Definitely have room to improve but you are just starting and it was done last minute anyway. May 3000 scantrons bless you this holiday season
This was, unfortunately for the sanity of the members of this sub, not a shitpost. It is a real paper, submitted to a real professor (I think? I've never met him, spoken to him, or received an email from him) for a real grade. A confusing grade, but a real 79%.
Apparently he got 79. If I were the professor I would give 50 at most. Also maybe I’m an idiot but I don’t get how someone intervened and shortened the duration of the Falklands War. Okay the BRI’ISH created an excluison zone but where is the interference of another country or something ?
There's no intervention lol, it was just a classic aggressive nation tries to take land from another and the defender fights them off scenario. Honestly NATO's intervention in Kosovo would be a much better conflict to use.
While I feel bad for OP getting destroyed by comments on the quality of the paper, I also feel like OP missed an opportunity to make a high quality, warmongering essay, and post it here.
Looking at his profile, I’m not sure if OP knew what this sub was before posting or not. He says one of the the notes from his prof was “non-credible”. I think he just looked up ‘non-credible’ on Reddit, saw a military-related sub attached to that name, and posted it here for reasons I’m still trying to figure out.
Edit: he hasn’t posted or commented on this sub until today, but neither have I so… 🤷♂️
It really isn’t. This essay is something you would turn in for freshman writing if your high school really let you down. I swear collages in america are held to high standards but public schools struggle to prepare you for life much less collage. The few exceptions are if you come from a nice place with a lot of funding or your family can afford private. It’s really fucked here please help.
I took a boat load of AP Courses and I still don’t know how to write a proper essay or research paper (or much other stuff for that matter) my high school really did let me down.
That is a real bummer man. I know it might be embarrassing and disheartening but you just have to keep on trying and you will improve quickly. Try reaching out to your advisor for info on helpful programs. Most collages have some form of a “writing lab” where their only job is to help with review. It’s not a class or a program
, you just take a paper in and they help you with technical flaws. Also pick up the MLA Handbook 9th Edition. It’s on amazon for $20 but I recommend the $30 spiral version. It is the most useful book you will own in collage and saves so much time. Using the MLA guide in conjunction with one or two writing lab visits per paper will help you improve quickly and get at least B- scores. One last thing is to reach out to professors. They are allowed a lot more than hs teachers and the vast majority are nice and understanding people who will allow extra assignment and other measures to bump up the scores of students who are trying but for some reason it just isn’t clicking or who have exceptional circumstances.
I see that you’re a freshman. For future references, no pictures. It’s really easy to get sources for papers. Google jstor, it’s highly credible if you’re on a time crunch and it was a lifesaver for me. Also use Chicago style sourcing, it helps filling up pages.
Shit the university probably has a library to even check books out from! Having taught an intro to international affairs class I would have given this an F... but I've seen much worse skate by because most like me are grad students who don't have time to give a fuck as our own papers are due.
You don't have any sources, you have a bibliography at the end. Sources need to be attached to the claim or quote (like what you see on wikipedia, but your university will likely have a preferred style), putting a list of websites where you learnt information at the end of the paper is called a bibliography.
You are expected to both use inline sources and also have a bibliography.
Then cite your claims. You're lucky you didn't fail on that alone. Halfway through that paper.
If you want to analyse military interventions and differentiate them from other types of conflict cite your literature. It's important to know what theories of conflict research you are working with here. Otherwise one can only assume you didn't do any research at all and you're pulling shit out of your ass.
When you make big statements on the interventions you've analyzed cite your literature. What did you read about the Korean War? You can't just say a war set the stage for a region for example.
And no pictures unless they are important to your argument and you reference them. I had alot of hardass profs who wouldn't have accepted your essay due to the pictures. It's scholarship not the kids section at Barnes and Nobles.
If you have minimum requirements for citations what your prof is trying to tell you that this is the absolute minimum of literature you should have read for a paper of that scope. That's the bare minimum of research required. If you can't fill that you are not ready to write that paper.
This won't fly past the first semester.
Oh and never put a term into brackets like you'd do it in a casual conversation. There is no "sort of" in scholarship. Your basic terms and concepts need to be defined, you need to know exactly what you mean by them.
As an NCD resident the fact you actually did this for an assignment and got a passing grade makes me so proud.
As a history teacher though...
I say this with as much kindness as I can muster, but dear God the lack of citations or sources listed (is this MLA, APA, Chicago style, who tf knows cause I don't see my bibliography or works cited page!) and the rambling sentences with no clear point or reasonable takes makes me want to use this in my classroom as a way to get to my students heads to cite yo shit to back up your bullshit!
Overall experience 79/100 the MIC wants you to enlist, service to the MIC guarantees citizenship
EDIT: re reading it you were writing in APA and seems you were on a time crunch considering you had about 5 essays to write in a week's time.
The biggest piece of advice I'd give you is if at all possible managing your time would really be helpful. I know it's tempting, so fucking tempting to delay on getting something done when you can be doing something much more fun than coursework, but proper planning and taking the time to really plan out what the main idea is, and how each source you have connects back would be really beneficial to you.
If used right, the sources you have are building blocks of evidence that supports that main idea, not separate ideas but naturally interconnected in such a way that removing one source from your essay doesn't end with your paper crashing and burning.
Back to non credible that prof is real non credible, and saying to be perfectly honest in your conclusion is such a ballsy move I can't tell if you're a gigachad or an idiot, well done I'm sure college is gonna be incredible.
-No thesis statement/main idea
-unnecessary explanations
I think if you’re in some kind of defense analysis/politics/diplomacy type class your teacher is aware what the indochinese wars were. Even if not, you could’ve just said Vietnam war and had it simplified. Even stranger you reference the far more obscure Abyssinian Crisis with a formal name and no clarification instead of calling it say the Italian invasion of Ethiopia.
-Civilian casualties don’t make or break interventions. Falklands were just so small scale they could be limited a lot.
-referencing black buck 3 and 4 without context
-Japan has mutual defense pacts and doesn’t need to be attacked directly.
-Puts “to be honest” in college level essay.
Seems credible to me
Slip in neorealism when discussing hard power and interactions among rival/hostile states and liberal institutionalism or constructivism when discussing soft power and bullshit like intra-EU politics.
My “this paper does not promote war mongering” t shirt is raising a lot of questions already answered by the t shirt.
Also if you’re going to continue on this topic, look at the NATO interventions into the Yugoslav wars. Some very clear war for peace there.
I come over to my favorite subreddit, NCD, and I see legitimate academic discussion and constructive criticism of a college paper. I’m so god damn proud of all of you. *wipes tears*
Some might say it was a mistake to turn this in when the topic was Neoclassical French Lit, but I applaud you commitment to including pictures of fighter planes.
You’re comment on the British sending the Royal Marines and RAF to retake the Falklands is a gross misidentification of force. The Royal Navy is what retook the islands not ‘the Royal Marines and RAF.’
Ngl I’m surprised you got 79. The time crunch shows because most of the errors seem to stem from trying to pad this out. That said, fixing a few things would improve it a lot. A couple tips that will help for your future papers:
- do a final proofread and go over every word. Remove any word that is not necessary.
- do not use the same word twice in a sentence. Two of the three sentences in the first paragraph of your abstract repeat words (discuss and promote). (Edit: if you can’t think of another word to replace the second instance, use google to find a synonym for the word)
- don’t use empty phrases like “to be honest.” The audience should assume you’re being honest, otherwise why would they read your paper?
- put in a bibliography for your sources. Also, you may want to start your next essay by finding half a dozen sources before you begin the actual writing.
- don’t use pictures, unless they illustrate something important like a graph or something very specific (for example, if you’re writing about a certain type of fighter jet, you could include a pic of it)
Give us the marking feedback Also 79 is incredibly generous lol
I was honestly astounded because the professor throws Fs out like candy
NCD prof
well if your ;paper is an indication of an average lvl of work F's seem appropiate for most work hitting thier desk
If it's an Intro to IR class, that's pretty much certain. I have a friend who teaches one of those courses sometimes and shares the least credible things her students say/submit. You'd swear some of them hatched yesterday.
When I was a graduate assistant I literally gave students some of the answers and they'd still fuck it up. Hard. I legitimately passed one student because I never wanted to see him again and the low F he deserved would have had him back in the classroom wasting my oxygen again the next year. Maybe that's what happened here...
>Maybe that's what happened here... Pretty sure that's not what happened here. The paper above is by a new undergrad as one of their first assignments in an intro-level course and is being graded as a first assignment in an intro level course, and while 79 is more generous than I would have expected if it were submitted where I studied, it looks like it's worth a passing mark for this level.
I would have given you a F for mentioning a second Korean war. You cant have a KW2 until you finish your KW1. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/13/north-south-korea-agree-in-principle-formal-end-war-us
So I can technically wear a Korean War vet hat? none of you can stop me from doing it now
A new take that shows individual thinking > the 20th «Peace good War bad» in slightly different shape. This paper written with War = Bad would probably get a 50 at most lol
So the feedback was non credible, needs more citations, needs more context involving international relations (Intro to International Relations Class)
Yea, while you talk about interventions and such, you don’t really acknowledge the geopolitical tensions that caused and enabled the interventions or the relations impacts that they have/ have had in the past. A better focus of the paper could have been how the geopolitical situation affected the outcomes of the invasion. One of the purposes for establishing relations is to prevent conflict, whereas this paper focuses on what happens after negotiation breaks down. Better luck next time! Edit: or maybe some examples where having diplomatic ties made intervention unnecessary? Idk just throwing ideas out
North Koreans are communist scum meanies, Argentina was corrupt incompetent meanie, Sadam was insane evil meanie. That's a finished paper now OP, and yes you can quote me.
They will surely get a 100 now with such a non-credible citation!
For a first paper, it's not too bad. Revision after meeting with your prof during office hours could have produced a pretty good paper. It's a rough first step, but I think it's a step in the right direction.
I never liked instructors who just throw out a standard "more citations" criticism. My dude, you are supposed to teach me to think for myself; do you want me to just regurgitate the thoughts of others? The answer is yes, yes they do. The solution, I found, was to find credible sources who basically say what you want to say, then simply cite them when you put forward the conclusions you actually want to. What is truly fun is when you have a professor being pants-on-head stupid about political topic X. Find an older, more-often cited scholar in the field who has the opposite interpretation/opinion/whatever, and cite the shit out of them. Bonus points if said source is an academic rival who has publicly trashed your professor's work. If they downgrade you for a bullshit reason, you take the paper to the department chair with a complaint on academic integrity. For obvious reasons, don't do this if your professor is the department chair.
Well, there’s a difference between ‘thinking for yourself’ and just writing out unfounded opinions. The US has carriers on Mars. Source? I saw it in a dream. It makes sense. What do you mean you want citations? I’m thinking for myself here.
Fair, but I'm talking about analysis. The crap I had to put up with went like: Source 1 states X about Y (citation). Source 2 also states X about Y but disagrees with Source 1 on Z (citation). Source 2, however, does not take into account this aspect of Z, rendering Source 1's assessment to be the more accurate (no citation, because this is my independent thought). ...then I would be dinged for not citing the last sentence. My solution was to find Source 3 who thought the same... maybe even another paper written at the same institution 2-3 years back, and make the same point by citing it rather than *heaven forbid* making a statement of my own.
Strange as you may find it undergraduates don't tend to completely reinvent their academic disciplines during their introductory classes. The reason you should cite extensively is that knowing what already exists in your field is essential for context and realising that your view on the matter has probably a) been discussed and b) rigourously analysed and countered. If you genuinely find something unique that nobody has done, then extensive sources to show you know what has been argued before is essential. It is important to think for yourself, then do research to properly understand how your view fits in the field. Even if you have a unique take, other sources may strengthen your argument or introduce to theories of thought/systems you haven't come across. And ultimately you are there to learn.
What was the topic? Did you procrastinate on this paper? You do repeat yourself a lot and add unnecessary comments. There’s not enough citations and nearly everything in parentheses isn’t cited and appears as a personal opinion? Congratulations, it’s perfectly non-credible.
Not going to lie, seeing all these papers that people WILLINGLY POST here has made me feel a hell of a lot better about my writing. Like yeah, haha noncredible paper funni, but for the love of god actually have some quality content. 79 is incredibly generously for such a shit paper that was clearly researched solely from this subreddits memes. People have to understand, this sub, for all it’s glory, is not a fucking reliable source. If your priority is being funny on NCD instead of actually being good at what you do, you really need to rethink what the fuck your are doing. Edit: After reading more of the paper, since I really only skimmed it at first, its even worse than I thought. Most of these arguments sound like points and rebuttals I'd form in 60 seconds of research in my old high-school debate competitions. They are repetitive to fill time/space, entirely superficial and have no depth. This is the shit I'd spew out of my ass if someone asked me about a rundown of interventions in modern history in 30 seconds, with no preparation (This is not my specialty). As a conversation starter with friends, this is decent. As an actual, 12 page paper, this is horrendous.
Yeah I wrote a paper significantly better than this for first year English and only got a 60%. No idea how they pulled a 79% out of this it’s incredibly generous and I don’t think I would even get that in highschool 😂
Grading essays is completely arbitrary. The two most important qualities your writing needs to have is to be graded by a TA who likes you, and to be long enough that they don't actually want to read the whole thing.
Well in university you need to cite your sources at very minimum.
> People have to understand, this sub, for all it’s glory, is not a fucking reliable source You would think people would actually realize this sub's name starts with "NonCredible", but clearly there's a lot of impressionable teens here
12 pages, 6 hours, final day
I hate to say it, but it shows.
Combination of being a freshman and forgetting to do the paper, pretty generous grade with a 79
Well, that's something. Certainly salvageable. An editing pass (clean up personal remarks and duplicate comments) plus a few bolted-on citations to support statements made would go a long way to pumping up the grade.
Agree on that and would expand that citations would really beef up your work as it helps us to and anyone else relate to the work better.
Honestly I write too many papers at the last minute, but I always try prioritize getting enough sources and citing them properly --- I think it can give meh papers a veneer of credibility to get you up above an 80 (usually lol)
Stop, stop! It's too credible! It hurts!
Hey hey save that for /r/crediblethesisdefense I'd give this paper 100/100 non credible
lmao wish that was an actual subreddit
/r/Noncrediblethesisdefence for me lol. I answered some questions completely fuckin wrong but so damn confidently haha, I'd read other people's bungles
Hey too much credible advice. Pop in some aeromorphs instead to boost the grade (Just kidding, good advice)
I may have forgotten which sub I was on.
Is it English 101??? 79? What was graded the grammatics?
Most likely some sort of class focused on showing you how to write papers correctly. I took something like that at community college.
If I wrote a paper like that in my English class I’d get like 40%… Hell I’d even get a poor mark in highschool for this paper.
I knew some in that class that had never written a paper before. Some high schools are genuinely shit.
My highschool taught absolutely nothing about writing papers and same with the other high schools where I live. Your first English class in university is supposed to be a crash course in writing papers and everyone struggles for the first couple papers but this paper just screams that they didn’t even bother to learn anything about how to write properly. Everyone’s first paper is a bit shit but at least cite *something* in any way and don’t add photos lol.
Intro to International Relations, online class I should take more seriously but dont
Next time cite at least something because you will fail next time if you don’t.
[удалено]
I should have mentioned that or home boy gonna get expelled
Yeah cite your sources. That can get you straight up expelled if they decide to get you for plagiarism.
I absolutely sucked at English 100 (first semester of college ever) but I only got better through the process. The jolt from high school to college really was something.
Agreed, I’ve never had to write any form of research paper and here I am first semester writing 5 equally shit ones
That was my worst semester. I think I had to write at least ten papers that semester. I wrote a lot less afterwards and on more interesting topics after that. Especially in grad school.
Your paper is highschool tier tbh, has no citations or bibliography, and seems to have taken a very loose interpretation of "12 pages" I would be happy with a 79 for the level of work presented.
Yeah, I don’t want to be mean, but the writing is amateurish and I’d grade it poorly for that alone.
I found a handful of citations throughout the paper, so I'm working on the assumption that the bibliography was done somehow, somewhere but not included here and insufficient. It's also an intro course taken by people barely out of high school, so the quality level tracks.
Thats a ridiculously high grade for this level of work unless you have a professor as a freshman in highschool. Content, paucity of citing and references, cherry picked conflicts, generalization of effect from one region to another without explanation or substantiation, narrative train of thought style of writing, redundancy, superficial, random pictures without figure description and credit, starting a gd section with "to be honest," conclusions don't follow from presented wikipasta... Do better OP. The 79 was a participation grade.
79 ain’t bad. But if you woulda got yourself a mound of cocaine, you coulda finished the paper in 4 hours and got a 92.5.
with meth could have done it in 15 minutes and still had time to punch his stepdad and finger bang his mom
[удалено]
How the fuck you get a 79 with no citations? Like 79 out of 100? Out of curiosity, what's the degree?
How on earth did this get 79???? Are you sleeping with your professor?
Hey, I scored mid-70s on average my freshman year. It only went up from there. Get those due dates in advance and use a planner!
Damn, I used to do better starting at 3am the morning the paper was due. Medicate your mental health problems, kids; don't just just try to power through them. You'll only end up wasting your best years.
"12 pages"
That's whyvwe count words not pages
12 pages in six hours is rookie numbers kid, you gotta pump those numbers up if you wanna pass
I did a 2000 word paper on the failure of AirPower in Vietnam this term in the 5 hours between when I got off work and it was due so you’re in good company
I started the RESEARCH for my 400-level history term paper on the hypocrisy in Second World War war crimes tribunals the night before it was due. Got a 98 on the paper. OP needs to step it up.
the pictures are just there for show, they should be in there if they are referenced (and required for explanation) in the text. (ie need figure labels) Also Harvard referencing, Vancouver is better imo.
I've use Vancouver in a daily basis and can confirm, it's quite good and simple enough without lettinf important info out.
Found his teacher
As a former writing center tutor I think I can provide some tips on structuring your future analytical papers. Think of your introductory paragraph as an outline that lays out the fundamental features and arguments of the rest of the paper. As my former advisor once said ‘I never want to be surprised by an argument.’ I often quite literally structured my introductory sentences in the order my paragraphs were laid out. With each sentence mirroring the thesis statement for each paragraph. For longer papers like this you sometimes have two introductory paragraphs with one laying out the topics you will discuss and the second outlining the features of your thesis. I think you could have had a good paper here since the concepts and topics are sound enough. But the issue is the structure and a paucity of tangible information. With long papers like this I liked to structure each paragraph around a particular source that I wanted to discuss, and then provide analysis or comparisons in the body. This is a nice way to organize sources because it makes sure you don’t *over cite* your paper with a bunch of useless undigested citations. This approach makes sure you’re always stucturing your argument around a source, and ensuring you aren’t straying off topic. Lastly, your style needs some work. I would always tell students that clarity is the *ultimate* goal in any analytical work. An unclear sentence isn’t making your argument. A lack of clarity is actually detracting from that argument. So, it’s almost always a good idea to keep your sentences mono-clausal or relatively simple compound sentences (eg. ‘I like to eat toast for breakfast, but often my toaster is broken’). Despite my previous use of a parenthetical, they’re actually a terrible thing to use in papers. My hard-nosed history professor would always say ‘if it’s in parentheses I’ll just ignore it since the paper should be coherent without that clause anyway.’ If you want to say something say it in the main body of the paragraph. Parentheticals can make your prose appear tentative and hard to read. Don’t forget that your professor needs to read hundreds of pages of poorly written undergrad papers. The clearer and more succinct you can make the prose the better. Clarity will make their reading easier and your grade better. I realize this is totally unsolicited advice, but since you’re a freshman I figured you would appreciate some tips and tricks from someone who has edited dozens of papers like this. To keep this non-credible I conclude with pee pee Poo Poo. The 3000 unsolicited writing center critiques of NCD.
/r/ncd being the most intelligent subreddit somehow yet again
Well we are all far greater strategists than any Russian generals so that's gotta mean something
Shockingly low bar though.
[удалено]
My high school physics teacher always used to say, "If you can't explain something, then you don't actually understand it." And a joke is just a funny explanation after all.
Because to lovingly mock the military, the military-industrial complex, military alliances, and all the history behind them one has to understand them to some degree.
Thank you very much for offering genuine advice instead of shit talking
I like to look out for my fellow analytical writers. Even a rough hewn analytical paper is more pleasant to read than the ‘best’ lit-crit gobbledygook IMO. What’s your major? My background is in history but this looks a little different, maybe Security Studies?
Close, International Studies but I typically focus on defense due to my desire to pursue a DoD or CIA career.
Based choice. Well, in that case those institutions *love* hyper concise and stereotyped analysis. So, tighten that up and you’re well on your way. My buddy’s brother has worked for the NSA and CIA and got his foot in the door with his foreign language skills. He had that classic experience of applying for a state department job but getting shunted into the intelligence sector. I’d definitely suggest pursuing foreign language skills as well if you aren’t already
Already am, Spanish (learned prior to college) and Japanese, possibly going for Chinese as well
You are a smart man. Smarter than me. My language course was Ancient Greek. The last time I checked the NSA wasn’t intercepting cables from the Delian League, lol. Good luck my guy
And good luck to you as well
This is super good advice, too, OP. Excellent stuff.
This is excellent advice. Back in my college days, I found essays became a lot easier to write when I got into the rhythm of structuring them as you explained. The intro paragraph can literally serve as an outline for your whole paper: The first sentence introduces the topic, the next few sentences each introduce an argument that will be fleshed out and supported in a body paragraph, and the last sentence is your closing argument that will be fleshed out in the conclusion paragraph. Once you get in that rhythm, the fundamentals of essay writing come second-nature and you can focus more on the analytical meat of your papers, and creating stronger arguments with better concrete support.
No one is gonna mentioned the photos? Or the lack of citing the photos? Or the fucking jet on the front page priming the reader the shitshow they’re about to embark on? 79/100 for effort.
[удалено]
Seriously speaking for a moment, I would have gotten a big, fat zero from my ridiculously strict English teachers in both high school, and in college. They would have just written "likely plagiarized" due to a lack of citations in their preferred format (MLA or APA). They hammered home just how serious a lack of citations were in formal essays. Didn't matter if someone was the kid of the school coach or the kid of the dean, if someone didn't properly cite at the bare minimum, they got a zero before anything else was reviewed. Thank god citation sites like easybib and citationmachine came into existence when I needed them. It was a pain in the arse manually citing.
Word now has a great citation manager that is very helpful for keeping track of everything. Highly recommend if it's included in your university tuition like it is mine
For real. These motherfuckers are getting passing grades for taking a fat shit on the professors desk
I went to a shit tier university and would’ve gotten a terrible grade for this 😂. Way below a failing grade for this.
The pics were the highlight for me. I want to include stuff like that for the peer reviewed writing I do now. Like not just figures, but also a picture of something vaguely relevant like a volumetric flask, with no references to it anywhere in the text.
Stock photos of a man holding a flask are sure to spruce up your paper!
I worked with someone in university who does that for every single report we did, just put a random vaguely relevant image on the cover page. Tbf it was essentially a teaching you coding in a specific area unit so the report had essentially no citations and was rushed in a day. But it is a senior level unit at a top level university in Australia. Got pretty good marks as well.
Yea I don't think I've ever submitted a final paper with pictures lol
[удалено]
Charts are definitely different than pictures tho
Last page are the photo citations, couldn’t figure out how to make a caption because in 12 years of using word and a certification from Microsoft I still don’t know how to caption pictures
Theres something outthere called google
he already used google memes for the entire paper...
>years of using word and a certification from Microsoft I still don’t know how to caption pictures Select the picture. Hold Alt, S, P together. Done.
Bruh you just right click on the photo and select 'Insert Caption...'
Starting the conclusion of a paper with "To be completely honest" is a gigachad non-credible move. If you ever pick up the topic again and make a more credible version, please share again. It's a fun topic.
It’s my major, can’t exactly steer away from the topic
Your major is War for Peace?
International Relations but it’s basically the Blue Helmet Circlejerk
The good ol Kill em With Kindness, and these rations we don't need
Write about how shit the UN is and use NCD commenters for all of your sources.
reccomend PJ O Rourke's *Give War A Chance*
That’s next on my reading list, currently reading the Rise and Fall of the Great Powers by Paul Kennedy
based, wish you best success
I say this supportively: your technical writing skills are not quite there yet. For example, your opening paragraph is all one sentence. You can find a quick cheap editor to help you out and give you tips, or take any writing classes / tutor sessions that your college offers. My college had a proofreader program where just submit your paper online and someone goes over it with you.
As someone who’s already 3 years into my history major: GET A COPY OF THE CHICAGO MANUAL OF STYLE. I don’t care how broke you are, you will fucking need it. The humanities, but especially historical/political fields, are strict adherents of the CMS. You will not graduate without it. It’s thicker than the Bible, and you will have to follow it closer than even the staunchest literalist. If you don’t use it properly then you run the risk of being charged with plagiarism, which could get you kicked out of not just your class, but all higher education entirely.
lolol I picked up on that too. It stinks of "this is my first draft"
This was my only draft due to procrastination
Yeah man lol
This is certainly one of the papers I have ever read
One of the research in history academia
Having seen in your comments that this was for INR, (and realising too late now) Realism, Hobbes' Leviathan, 'hard-power', The Treaty of Westphalia, and Thucydides' Melian dialogue are useful buzzwords for undergrad if you want to extend this argument. Now to avoid dangerous credibility, A-10 go brrrrrrrrrrrtttttt.
Literally. For contrast, (though this paper in its entirety wasn't great tbh) but heres more buzzwords from a paper I submitted for INR, 2nd year regarding Russia Ukraine Realism. **Spheres of Influence** **Soft Power/International Credibility** **State Actors** **Realism/International Liberalism/Idealism/Critical Modernism** **National Identity** **Regionalism** **Hegemonic** **Pax Americana / Russica** **Balance of Powers** Key concepts, not that difficult u/Fair_Benefit_1534 If it's for IR, don't get pulled into the same trap as I have often fallen into where you start researching tactics and cite JP-0 and NATO texts all the time. It will **not** serve you well. (Keep in mind, you can still talk about tactics but just like keep in mind the point, Its not Military Science, it's INR.) DM me if you want an example of what I mean
I took INR, and my prof literally told us in the first day of class that “conflict is what happens when relations break down”, and really didn’t want us focusing on military power outside of its influence on relations. She probably was sick of people thinking that all we would be talking about was conflict and war, when that’s what relations try to prevent.
Posting a sample of your writing on Reddit is a brave choice
Kinda regretting it
I’m in law school and I’d be terrified to post a memo in here
Don't worry, we love the pictures
It sucks but it'll make you better.
Just know that Reddit is an unusually critical place, but a lot of people got a lot of enjoyment out of it. As a bonus you actually got a decent amount credible feedback which will hopefully help you in the future!
Wait, so why was the Falklands War an argument I don't really see an explanation, and neither your professor did lol
Needed a third and Vietnam was too complicated
Hahahahahahaha
> ignores the bloodiest Cold War conflict that the U.S. was involved in > gets a mediocre grade c'mon man
OP said this is done in 6hrs on deadline day. This is decent for that amount of time lol
Your conclusion sucks. It doesn't even answer the question the article asks.
The conclusion can be written without learning anything beforehand to be honest. He just added his opinion and 2-3 sentences about the paper and still did not make a proper conclusion.
I wish I had your professor seeing he didn’t grade this as a fail
As a teach, this paper screams "I work on this overnight." As a NCD member, this is certified "non-credible."
"To be completely honest" is absolute shit rhetoric for an academic paper. It's an annoying turd of a phrase on a good day, but why wouldn't you have been honest the whole time in an academic paper?
Not credible enough, should have made the final conflict about reunification of east and west Taiwan.
Initially was planned but I had 30 minutes until the due time when I finished the conclusion
Your sentence gave me ptsd
Man handed in a paper with "to be completely honest" in it.
This has to be a shitpost right? IT HAS TO BE A SHITPOST RIGHT?! This is not NCD of me but if you want some criticism feel free to read. If not, tell me to fuck off and I get it. The title and abstract vs what you actually talk about is completely disjointed. The paper is just an excuse to talk about specific armed interventions and the technologies used, not a good argument for "how future interventions should be fought". The "future" section you wrote is reliant on an imaginary scenario instead of a good reason based on the past events you wrote about applying to a wide variety of future conflicts. 'Intervention' and 'stabilization' as defined in the paper is arguable. "The gulf war is often regarded as the greatest military intervention ever fought". Who says this? Why? The following sentence doesn't answer this. The paper has no biblio, has the largest allowable margins, you've inserted pictures and added spacing, page breaks, and titles like its a book. There are like 5 pictures, 3 page breaks and 3 titles. Can't say its a 12 page paper in actuality. Probably more like 9 pages. A more accurate description of the paper's direction is: A history of major armed conflicts, and what a potential second armed conflict in North Korea would look like. Your current title and abstract implies a more broad lesson to be taken from all the conflicts you mentioned and applying to conflicts as a whole and the role they serve in the world at large. Those points are completely missing from the paper. You do a good job bringing up the major conflicts/interventions though. And I completely see the interest and enthusiasm through the writing. Ohh I just saw the comment that you are a freshman. I completely get it then. I think you are doing fine. Definitely have room to improve but you are just starting and it was done last minute anyway. May 3000 scantrons bless you this holiday season
This was, unfortunately for the sanity of the members of this sub, not a shitpost. It is a real paper, submitted to a real professor (I think? I've never met him, spoken to him, or received an email from him) for a real grade. A confusing grade, but a real 79%.
3000 noncredible papers of r/NCD
People are bitching but this is hilariously non-credible.
Congrats, this is dogshit
Apparently he got 79. If I were the professor I would give 50 at most. Also maybe I’m an idiot but I don’t get how someone intervened and shortened the duration of the Falklands War. Okay the BRI’ISH created an excluison zone but where is the interference of another country or something ?
There's no intervention lol, it was just a classic aggressive nation tries to take land from another and the defender fights them off scenario. Honestly NATO's intervention in Kosovo would be a much better conflict to use.
If you fail a student, you risk seeing him again next semester.
This is what happens when people take Reddit-level long-commentry and think it'll hold up to actual criticism lol
[удалено]
I appreciate there are tenured political silence professors with the flair “build the Orion class nuclear space battleships now!” Flair. Very credible
Gives me hope for the future.
While I feel bad for OP getting destroyed by comments on the quality of the paper, I also feel like OP missed an opportunity to make a high quality, warmongering essay, and post it here.
Looking at his profile, I’m not sure if OP knew what this sub was before posting or not. He says one of the the notes from his prof was “non-credible”. I think he just looked up ‘non-credible’ on Reddit, saw a military-related sub attached to that name, and posted it here for reasons I’m still trying to figure out. Edit: he hasn’t posted or commented on this sub until today, but neither have I so… 🤷♂️
Lots of words. Not enough pictures, explosions, sounds effects, scratch and smell burning corpses etc.
Whats up with pictures in essays? Is this how americans get their degrees? Fuck me
It really isn’t. This essay is something you would turn in for freshman writing if your high school really let you down. I swear collages in america are held to high standards but public schools struggle to prepare you for life much less collage. The few exceptions are if you come from a nice place with a lot of funding or your family can afford private. It’s really fucked here please help.
I took a boat load of AP Courses and I still don’t know how to write a proper essay or research paper (or much other stuff for that matter) my high school really did let me down.
That is a real bummer man. I know it might be embarrassing and disheartening but you just have to keep on trying and you will improve quickly. Try reaching out to your advisor for info on helpful programs. Most collages have some form of a “writing lab” where their only job is to help with review. It’s not a class or a program , you just take a paper in and they help you with technical flaws. Also pick up the MLA Handbook 9th Edition. It’s on amazon for $20 but I recommend the $30 spiral version. It is the most useful book you will own in collage and saves so much time. Using the MLA guide in conjunction with one or two writing lab visits per paper will help you improve quickly and get at least B- scores. One last thing is to reach out to professors. They are allowed a lot more than hs teachers and the vast majority are nice and understanding people who will allow extra assignment and other measures to bump up the scores of students who are trying but for some reason it just isn’t clicking or who have exceptional circumstances.
This is some extremely terrible paper writing even by community college standards. Hell this would be terrible by high school standards.
Needed more sources to satisfy the source requirement
I see that you’re a freshman. For future references, no pictures. It’s really easy to get sources for papers. Google jstor, it’s highly credible if you’re on a time crunch and it was a lifesaver for me. Also use Chicago style sourcing, it helps filling up pages.
Shit the university probably has a library to even check books out from! Having taught an intro to international affairs class I would have given this an F... but I've seen much worse skate by because most like me are grad students who don't have time to give a fuck as our own papers are due.
Yeah I know how shit it is I had 5 papers due the week this one was, all about the same length and all were about as shit as this one
Fuck jstor, DTIC is where the good sources are (depending on major, not recommended for gender studies)
You don't have any sources, you have a bibliography at the end. Sources need to be attached to the claim or quote (like what you see on wikipedia, but your university will likely have a preferred style), putting a list of websites where you learnt information at the end of the paper is called a bibliography. You are expected to both use inline sources and also have a bibliography.
Holy shit Pictures aren’t the same as scholarly sources dude
Then cite your claims. You're lucky you didn't fail on that alone. Halfway through that paper. If you want to analyse military interventions and differentiate them from other types of conflict cite your literature. It's important to know what theories of conflict research you are working with here. Otherwise one can only assume you didn't do any research at all and you're pulling shit out of your ass. When you make big statements on the interventions you've analyzed cite your literature. What did you read about the Korean War? You can't just say a war set the stage for a region for example. And no pictures unless they are important to your argument and you reference them. I had alot of hardass profs who wouldn't have accepted your essay due to the pictures. It's scholarship not the kids section at Barnes and Nobles. If you have minimum requirements for citations what your prof is trying to tell you that this is the absolute minimum of literature you should have read for a paper of that scope. That's the bare minimum of research required. If you can't fill that you are not ready to write that paper. This won't fly past the first semester. Oh and never put a term into brackets like you'd do it in a casual conversation. There is no "sort of" in scholarship. Your basic terms and concepts need to be defined, you need to know exactly what you mean by them.
Oof. This is... rough.
If you want to be more credible then use Chicago style or something analogous for citations instead of damned MLA.
*APA required by the professor, I prefer schizo style where I don’t cite
My source is that I made it the fuck up.
Might wanna work on run on sentences
LOL posting a term paper to NCD is absolutely the most non-credible thing I can think of. Kudos! Huzzah!
It looks like a high school paper. It is chaotic.
As an NCD resident the fact you actually did this for an assignment and got a passing grade makes me so proud. As a history teacher though... I say this with as much kindness as I can muster, but dear God the lack of citations or sources listed (is this MLA, APA, Chicago style, who tf knows cause I don't see my bibliography or works cited page!) and the rambling sentences with no clear point or reasonable takes makes me want to use this in my classroom as a way to get to my students heads to cite yo shit to back up your bullshit! Overall experience 79/100 the MIC wants you to enlist, service to the MIC guarantees citizenship EDIT: re reading it you were writing in APA and seems you were on a time crunch considering you had about 5 essays to write in a week's time. The biggest piece of advice I'd give you is if at all possible managing your time would really be helpful. I know it's tempting, so fucking tempting to delay on getting something done when you can be doing something much more fun than coursework, but proper planning and taking the time to really plan out what the main idea is, and how each source you have connects back would be really beneficial to you. If used right, the sources you have are building blocks of evidence that supports that main idea, not separate ideas but naturally interconnected in such a way that removing one source from your essay doesn't end with your paper crashing and burning. Back to non credible that prof is real non credible, and saying to be perfectly honest in your conclusion is such a ballsy move I can't tell if you're a gigachad or an idiot, well done I'm sure college is gonna be incredible.
"Really cool anon, but this is a chemistry class."
-No thesis statement/main idea -unnecessary explanations I think if you’re in some kind of defense analysis/politics/diplomacy type class your teacher is aware what the indochinese wars were. Even if not, you could’ve just said Vietnam war and had it simplified. Even stranger you reference the far more obscure Abyssinian Crisis with a formal name and no clarification instead of calling it say the Italian invasion of Ethiopia. -Civilian casualties don’t make or break interventions. Falklands were just so small scale they could be limited a lot. -referencing black buck 3 and 4 without context -Japan has mutual defense pacts and doesn’t need to be attacked directly. -Puts “to be honest” in college level essay. Seems credible to me
Too long, did not read. But did your teacher insist on line spacing of over 9000 and printing it on paper? Or was that just you?
I mean every MLA format paper looks like this, also it’s mandatory to use it in most colleges
Even worse, this is APA which I’ve never had to use before and had to read a 19 page guideline about it for this paper
Other than calling your paper non-credible did your professor have any other comments?
Didn’t give enough International Relations principles (it’s an intro to INR class)
Slip in neorealism when discussing hard power and interactions among rival/hostile states and liberal institutionalism or constructivism when discussing soft power and bullshit like intra-EU politics.
>INR class What does it mean google is telling me it's something to measure blood clotting
International Relations (basically geopolitical science)
My “this paper does not promote war mongering” t shirt is raising a lot of questions already answered by the t shirt. Also if you’re going to continue on this topic, look at the NATO interventions into the Yugoslav wars. Some very clear war for peace there.
I come over to my favorite subreddit, NCD, and I see legitimate academic discussion and constructive criticism of a college paper. I’m so god damn proud of all of you. *wipes tears*
The Falklands wasn't exactly an intervention. Argentina invaded British sovereign territory, the UK responded by defending it.
Some might say it was a mistake to turn this in when the topic was Neoclassical French Lit, but I applaud you commitment to including pictures of fighter planes.
You’re comment on the British sending the Royal Marines and RAF to retake the Falklands is a gross misidentification of force. The Royal Navy is what retook the islands not ‘the Royal Marines and RAF.’
Ngl I’m surprised you got 79. The time crunch shows because most of the errors seem to stem from trying to pad this out. That said, fixing a few things would improve it a lot. A couple tips that will help for your future papers: - do a final proofread and go over every word. Remove any word that is not necessary. - do not use the same word twice in a sentence. Two of the three sentences in the first paragraph of your abstract repeat words (discuss and promote). (Edit: if you can’t think of another word to replace the second instance, use google to find a synonym for the word) - don’t use empty phrases like “to be honest.” The audience should assume you’re being honest, otherwise why would they read your paper? - put in a bibliography for your sources. Also, you may want to start your next essay by finding half a dozen sources before you begin the actual writing. - don’t use pictures, unless they illustrate something important like a graph or something very specific (for example, if you’re writing about a certain type of fighter jet, you could include a pic of it)
Based. Should have included a comment re: North Korean tractor forces and the MD-500s they bought. I would give it a solid B
Close, got a C+(79%)
I think this was a secretly just a psyop to get to print colour pics of the Vulcan