Your task: Combine multiple texts into one detailed document. Include every piece of information from each source. The goal is to avoid repetition while being thorough and exhaustive.
Essential steps:
- Organize structure carefully.
- Integrate all details.
- Avoid redundancy.
Warnings:
- Be precise, not general.
- Don't omit any information, no matter how small.
Expected result: A comprehensive document that includes every fact or detail from the original texts.
Key points:
- Compile all texts into one document.
- Include all information and nuances.
- Be organized, and thorough, and avoid repetition.
Below are examples to guide someone in accomplishing this task effectively:
Bad: Simply compiling texts in the order you receive them, with no regard for thematic or chronological arrangement. Good: Creating an outline to organize information under relevant headings and subheadings, ensuring a logical flow of content. Bad: Listing facts and points as bullet points without connecting them to form a narrative. Good: Weave facts and points into a well-structured narrative that has a clear introduction, body, and conclusion.
Bad: Ignoring minor points or redundancies, assuming they are not important. Good: Painstakingly noting every detail, merging similar points from different texts into one comprehensive statement. Bad: Stating that "many animals were at the zoo" and leaving it at that. Good: Combining observations from multiple texts to specify that "the zoo houses 37 different species, including rare birds and endangered mammals."
Bad: Copy-pasting entire sections from different texts that say essentially the same thing. Good: Identifying overlapping information and integrating it into a single, non-repetitive statement that encapsulates all details from the original sources. Bad: Repeating that a product is "innovative" in multiple sections of the document. Good: Stating once that the product is "innovative" and later elaborating that it "introduces three features not seen in competitor products."
Bad: Saying, "The event was well-attended," without giving specific attendance numbers. Good: Stating, "The event had 450 attendees," to provide an exact figure. Bad: Describing a historical event as "significant" without elaboration. Good: Describing a historical event as "the turning point in the war, leading to the surrender of one side."
Bad: Leaving out a quote because it seemed similar to another or not critical. Good: Incorporating the quote but contextualizing it to highlight why it adds value or a different perspective to the narrative. Bad: Excluding technical specifications of a machine because you assume they are not important to the reader. Good: Incorporating all technical specifications while providing context or simplification for lay readers.
Bad: A final document that lacks specifics, leaves out minor points or is disorganized. Good: A final document that follows the outline, integrates all details, avoids redundancy, and is both exhaustive and specific in its information coverage. Bad: A document that gives an overview of a topic but lacks details like dates, figures, or specific examples. Good: A document that provides an overview but also dives deep into specifics, providing dates, figures, and detailed examples to give a full picture of the topic.