Mikhail Emelianov of Perverse Egalitarianism has posted an amusing guide, How To Fake Your Way Through Hegel.
Rule 3 is particular insightful: only read tertiary sources. In many situations in graduate school and still frequently at conferences, I run into professional philosophers who insist on having deep knowledge of a text despite having read only secondaries at best and usually only tertiary literature. When I talk to academics from other disciplines, it is often the case that they have read only tertiaries and do not even understand why this might be a big deal. I am looking at you, sociology, psychology, English, and media studies! I do not think that textual fidelity is necessary, but I do think that having a grasp of the distinction and its importance is so. Within philosophy, who does this seems to track with what tradition one comes from. The one grouping of traditions that I wouldnever accuse of not knowing their history: Indian and Chinese philosophy.
Link from An Und fur sich.