Scientific discourse is based on exchanging knowledge in the form of stringent and well-arranged argumentations. Capturing the full variety and flexibility of argumentations within a single knowledge repository is close to impossible. Therefore, we have designed a narrative model that, on the one hand, captures the key aspects of argumentations (entities, events, relations, etc.), and on the other hand, is a logical overlay on top of existing knowledge repositories. Hence, users may formulate a narrative and validate its plausibility with data of different knowledge repositories via narrative bindings. This paper describes and discusses the computation of narrative bindings against three different types of sources: the document collection PubMed, the knowledge graph Wikidata and the WHO data sets. We give insights into the computation of narrative bindings and discuss open research questions.