The changes that show up most
None of these are conceptually difficult and all of them are visible at a glance, which is exactly why they get penalised. A marker does not need to check the manual to notice that your reference list is using an old convention.
Work through this list once against a recent paper of yours and you will probably find three of them.
- In-text citations with three or more authors use the first author and et al. from the first mention. The old rule of listing everyone once is gone.
- Reference entries now list up to twenty authors before an ellipsis. The old cut-off was much lower.
- Publisher location is no longer included. City and state are simply dropped.
- Retrieval dates only appear for sources designed to change, like a wiki page. Ordinary web pages do not get one.
- DOIs are formatted as full URLs beginning https rather than with a doi prefix.
- The running head is no longer required on student papers unless your instructor asks for one.
Headings are the most common silent error
Five levels exist and each has a specific format, and students routinely invent their own. Level one is centred and bold. Level two is flush left and bold. Level three is flush left, bold and italic. Levels four and five are indented, run into the paragraph, and end with a full stop.
The rule people break most is skipping a level: jumping from a level one heading straight to level three because it looks tidier. Levels are hierarchical rather than decorative, and skipping one is the equivalent of a broken outline.
The other frequent error is using the word Introduction as a heading. The paper's title at the top of the first page serves that function, so your opening section runs directly underneath it without a separate label. This one appears in an enormous share of student drafts.
Quoting, paraphrasing and where similarity reports come from
A short quotation sits inside quotation marks with a page or paragraph number attached. A quotation of forty words or more becomes an indented block with no quotation marks, and the citation goes after the closing punctuation. Both need the location, not just the year.
Paraphrasing needs a citation too, and this is where most integrity problems actually begin. Students paraphrase a source, cite it correctly, but stay so close to the original wording that a similarity check flags it. The rule of thumb: if you can see the original sentence's shape in yours, it is not a paraphrase yet.
The reliable technique is to read the passage, close the source, and write what it said from memory in your own construction. Then check the source again to make sure you have represented it accurately. It takes slightly longer and it produces genuine paraphrase rather than substituted synonyms.
References that have to survive a click
This has become the most important formatting issue in academic writing and it is not really about formatting at all. A reference can be perfectly styled and describe something that does not exist, which is now common enough that experienced faculty check.
Every source in your list should be one you have opened and read. Not found in a search result, not recommended by a tool, not cited by somebody else's paper: opened. Fabricated references look flawless, and being unable to produce one when asked is a conversation with consequences well beyond a lost mark.
While you are checking, confirm the source actually says what you have attributed to it. A real article cited for a claim it does not make is its own problem and a more embarrassing one to have pointed out.
Where to look when you are unsure
Your university library almost certainly maintains a current guide with examples for the source types your discipline actually uses, and it will be more reliable than a generic web page written for a different edition. That is the first place to look and most students never do.
Citation managers help with volume and hurt with accuracy: they will format twenty references quickly and get several of them subtly wrong, particularly capitalisation in titles and which parts get italicised. Use one, then check its output rather than trusting it.
If formatting is quietly costing you marks every term, one round of having somebody go through a paper properly is usually enough to show you the specific habits doing it. Fix those and the problem generally does not come back.
Questions people actually ask
Do I still need a running head?
Not on student papers unless your instructor specifically asks for one, which some still do out of habit. Professional manuscripts intended for publication keep it. The title page requirements for student work also differ from the professional version, so use whichever your assignment brief specifies rather than a template you inherited.
How many authors before et al.?
Three or more, and from the very first citation rather than after an initial full listing. That's one of the most visible seventh-edition changes and one of the easiest for a marker to notice. In the reference list itself, list up to twenty authors before using an ellipsis and giving the final one.
When does a source need a retrieval date?
Only when the content is designed to change and there's no archived version, such as a wiki entry or a page of live statistics. Ordinary web pages, journal articles and reports don't get one. Adding retrieval dates to everything is a common habit carried over from the previous edition and it's visibly out of date.
My paraphrase got flagged for similarity. Why?
Almost certainly because it stayed too close to the original structure even though you cited it properly. Swapping synonyms into somebody else's sentence isn't paraphrasing. Read the passage, close the source, write the idea in your own construction, then reopen the source to check you've represented it accurately.
