A paper has references that need to be cited almost from beginning to end. For example, the most important and directly related documents should be cited in the introduction of the paper; In terms of methods, the methods adopted or used for reference should be cited; In the results, it is sometimes necessary to quote data to compare with literature; In the discussion, various supporting or contradictory results or viewpoints related to the paper should be cited.
All careless, do not check the literature; Deliberately not quoting, boasting innovation; Degrade others and raise yourself; It's wrong to avoid the weight and make a gesture lightly. Among them, mistakes such as not consulting documents, omitting important documents, deliberately not quoting other people's documents or deliberately belittling other people's work are obvious and easy to find. Some practices are subtle, such as introducing what should be in the introduction and introducing it into the discussion. This will be the basis or forerunner of your thesis, and put it on an equal footing with your thesis. For another example, scientific research is always developing in depth, and your work is always developing on the basis of previous work. The correct writing should be: what did someone do to this problem in a certain year, and what did someone do on this basis in a certain year? This statement will not harm your contribution at all. Some paper authors don't express it this way, but say that someone has done this problem in one year and failed to do it well in one year. This can sometimes fool some laymen who don't know the truth, but only one insider needs to poke it, and the paper tiger will be broken, and the result will be self-defeating and lose credibility. This phenomenon is not uncommon in real life.