My first credible source is http://www.uic.edu/orgs/kbc/ganghistory/UrbanCrisis/Blackstone/BRindex.html
This is source is credible because:
It has very few ads on the site page.
It focus is on my topic and other related issues.
The author is clearly stated he is Timmel Black.
The page also gives sources on where he received his information from.
Lastly its credible because it ends in edu.
My second credible source is
This is a credible source because:
This website has NO ads at all.
It also ends in org.
There is no author given The site is geared toward my topic
There are no sources given.
My Third credible source is
http://www.hud.gov/offices/pih/programs/ph/index.cfm
This source is credible because:
The site has gov.
It focuses on my topic.
There is a author.
Some sources are given.
There are no ads.
My understanding on credible sources didn't come easy. What I learned was that in order to have a credible source it has to be basically strictly about your topic straight to the point.
My First Non-Credible source is
http://http//barelybad.com/cl_theprojects.htm
This is a non-credible source because:
It has the .com at the end.
There is no author.
Its not mainly focusing on my topic.
There is also no source information.
My second non-credible source is
http://http//www.eclipse.org/projects/
This is a non-credible source because:
It doesn’t give a exact author.
There are many different ads.
No source information given.
This site doesn't have anything to do with my topic.
It also has a .com.
My Third non-credible source is
http://http//www.theprojects.com/
This site is non-credible because:
It really doesn't focus on my topic.
This is a .com site.
There is no other.
No sources were given.
There are a few ads.
Learning about the non- credible sites was fun. I learned that all the sites that i go to on the regular are non-credible.
No comments:
Post a Comment