Are presentable and articulate syntheses even possible without cherrypicking? If you include literally every aspect there remains little to be said, except the infamous "Possibly.".
>>18176185The whole fucking point of a synthesis is to filter noise and identify the signal. Including every aspect is a failure of intellect. A map as big as the territory is useless. The skill is in discerning what is relevant..
Yes. There is a strategy to it1: gather a decent amount of information and inferences2: put them in order of relevance3: create a general overview based on the most relevant factors while making it clear that there is more to it than what has already been mentioned4: determine how long it will take to cover other factors and various queries like addressing popular misconceptions5: determine if it is worth mentioning them given the time or the number of words you are limited to6: do the same for what might be called subqueries, for example if you have to say an area was suitable for agriculture, you may not need to go into detail about rainfall, temperature, soil fertility and so on, or you might decide it is worth mentioning flood plains or some other geographic featureyou now have a structured article about as concise as reasonably possible and the reader has enough grasp to look up any other details that interest them, like mm of rainfall
