Ok, so you've found a source that you might use for your research project. But is it reliable? Write a few sentences below about your source's reliability. How do you know it is reliable? Where did you find this source? What do things like the publication, the style of writing, images, etc. say about this source?
(respond as a comment below)
The source I used was:
ReplyDeleteNavone, Frank. "Foodfight." Vegetarian Times 248 (1998): 72. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 26 Jan. 2011.
I know it is reliable because I found it using EBSCOhost at the library. It was published in a magazine, which also contributes to its credibillity. The style of the writing is formal and very factual.
One of the sources i found for my research project was an article by:
ReplyDeleteGonzález-García titled:
"Comparative environmental performance of lignocellulosic ethanol from different feedstocks"
Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews; Sep2010, Vol. 14 Issue 7, p2077-2085, 9p.
I know that this source is reliable because i used the libarary index search engine to find this source, as well as the fact that it was written for and by a University Affiliate and has alot of factual and formal information that appears to be very thorough. I like that this source has alot of charts and comparisons readily avaiable.
I used an article by Jeffery A. Soller titled "Estimated human health risks from exposure to recreational waters impacted by human and non-human sources of fecal contamination"
ReplyDeleteSource: Water Research; Sept. 2010, Vol. 44 Issue 16, p4674, 18p
I am confident that this is a reliable search because the library website doesn't allow fake articles on their website. Also, I searched this article on EBSCOhost which is also a credible, well known search.
A source i found in the course of my research is a article titled
ReplyDelete"Knowledge and technologies for sustainable intensification of food production" by author Richard Flavel. The article is from the scientific journal named New Biotechnology. I found this source using ESBSCO Host and believe it a very reliable source for multiple reasons. The first being that it's from a well known and respected scientific journal. Along with this the article also lists multiple references to a credit the information being discussed with in the article itself.
The source I found was:
ReplyDeleteWinter, Brian. "Military to save $1.6B Going Green." USA Today 12 Apr. 2010. Print.
I know it is realiable because it is from a major newspaper. I was acually able to go on to USA Today's website and find the article in its original printing. I found this article using the EBSCO host search engine. The wriing style of the articel is very intellectual, and utilizes certain words that make me feel like it is a professional sourse.
I found a source called: Domestic Poverty
ReplyDeleteI know this is a good source becuase it has accurate information and also a lot of unique information that i havent already read about. i got it from a link off of the OU library website so that adds some credibility
The main source of my research comes from an article on www.cracked.com called "5 Reasons The Future Will Be Ruled By B.S." I realize that, in class, it was said not to use any "dot coms", but when the information is both supported and relevant, what's the harm? I know the source is reliable because it links to the sources of all information in the article and, while Cracked is a humor website, it has a reputation for presenting valid information. I found the article through a friend, the style of writing is informal and comical, and the images pretty much always make an attempt at humor. Maybe that wasn't the intended genre of article, but that doesn't make the information within any less important.
ReplyDeleteReading up on Walmart criticism regarding local sustainability, I found every little problem people have had with Walmart. There are so many little issues that come from the most extreme anti-Walmart zelots. Sometimes I have to sift through propaganda. Sometimes these stories, like the employee who shattered his ankle and couldn't escape a Walmart that was locked, because of Walmart's nightly lock-up policy. They conveniently brush over the fact that there was an emergency door that the man refused to use for fear of losing his job just so the author could go on for four pages about union arguments. While that story may have been relevant to the unfair dilema of job security verses personal health a lower class minority has when his ankle is shattered at a locked Sam's Club in the middle of the night, it's not Walmart's fault that he didn't know he had all the right in the world to use the emergency door. Of course I only got that "minority" stuff from the fact that his name was Rodriguez, he was working in the back of a Sam's in the middle of the night and that he was afraid of losing his job. It may be an unfair assumption but that would be the real issue, not Walmart's unions.
ReplyDeleteWhat I learned was to examine a source for what it's trying to make me think. This was a story that was trying to make me hate Walmart for not unionizing because the liberal editorial that it turned into at the end, when it could have possibly been a far more genuine examination of the unfair disadvantages a Latin-American worker has when it comes to a dilema between health and employment.
My source is an article I found online Article: BIODEGRADABLE SERVICEWARE DEBUTS AT BAKER UNIVERSITY CENTER Article from:US Fed News Service, Including US State News Article date:
ReplyDeleteJanuary 10, 2007. Since my article has a publication and an author with date published it makes the article more reliable and trustworthy. The article was published in an actual paper which makes me believe its more credible. I found it while I was just browsing the web for "sustainable Ohio University". The information was very helpful that the article provided.
My source is a article "Once There Was a Mountain"..Authors:Motavalli, Jim. It is reliable because i got it from OU library website and ebscoHOST from there. It gave me alot of facts and information about my topic.
ReplyDeleteThe source I used was...
ReplyDeleteLoecher, Barbara. "Beyond Love Canal." Prevention 55.3 (2003): 126-34. Print.
I know the source is reliable because the the author is well-published and is the senior editor for Prevention Magazine. I also discovered this article from the school's website.
For one of my sources, I used a computer site that was "The New York Times".
ReplyDeleteI know this is a reliable source because it's the newspaper and it has a bunch of articles in it that has to deal with job lay offs and true stories and facts about the issue; It's not just some wikipedia type deal.
Great comments on what makes information reliable!
ReplyDeleteA dot com or a newspaper article or a short article from Cosmopolitan doesn’t exclude the information from being useful or used by you for a paper (of course we’ll want to meet any criteria our professor has given). The content used in our papers will be from multiple sources so it is possible to support information found in a publication classified as non-scholarly by scholarly resources.
It would be nice to conclude that because information is coming from a journal or a major newspaper that it is reliable. Honestly the majority of the time this is true; however, regardless of the source of information we never want to stop thinking critically. There are numerous examples of journalist and researchers (from all disciplines of study) that have falsified or fabricated date. For example, Jayson Blair, a former New York Times writer, fabricated details for numerous articles (for a list http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jayson_Blair#Plagiarism_and_fabrication_scandal). And yes that is a Wikipedia link. Even Wikipedia has its place and use in the information world, though you won’t find me citing it for a scholarly publication (unless of course the publication was on Wikipedia).