If you're going to conduct a coherent discussion using sourced information you need to. . .
1) Quote the most relevant portions and provide a reference (preferably a link if possible).
For example, if I'm discussing the mechanisms of evolution and want to introduce a newly discovered process with enormous ramifications mentioned in an article I don't need to copy and paste the whole blasted thing, all I need are the important parts,
"In research published this week, the Leeds team reports that a protein known as REST plays a central role in switching specific genes on and off, thereby determining how specific traits develop in offspring.
The study shows that REST controls the process by which proteins are made, following the instructions encoded in genes. It also reveals that while REST regulates a core set of genes in all vertebrates, it has also evolved to work with a greater number of genes specific to mammals, in particular in the brain – potentially playing a leading role in the evolution of our intelligence."
Look at that, I even italicized and indented it in order to make it clear that this was a quotation. Then I can include a link back to the original article so that if readers want to they can learn more about this amazing discovery. And because I'm such a nice guy I think I'll color my link blue to make sure it stands out.
Or, if direct quotations aren't your thing you can. . .
2) Briefly summarize the essential points and provide a reference (again, preferably a link)
For example, for the same article I could have written:
The mechanisms of evolution are an established fact about which we are learning more and more every day. For example, last year a team of researchers from the University of Leeds discovered a single protein that regulates how specific traits are expressed as an organism develops. This discovery could potentially explain evolutionary differences between species not so much as a product of new genetic sequences but instead as the product of the sequence in which certain genes are switched "on" and "off" during development (source).
See how nice and easy to follow that is? That's how sourced arguments should be structured; not only does it make it easier (or, in my case, a delight) to read but it also demonstrates that you actually have read and at least have a basic understanding of the material itself.
Lurker
