When Comparing Websites....there are 4 main criteria• Authority• Accuracy• Currency• ObjectivityWolfgram Memorial Library Reference Department. (2004). How to evaluate information on the Web. Widener University. Retrieved January 6, 2011 from http://www.widener.edu/about/campus_resources/wolfgram_library/evaluate/default.aspx
I have an interest in nutrition......so Im going to compare web site information on the benefits of whole grains using two web sites "WG GUIDE" http://www.cspinet.or g/nah/wwheat.html
Authority Whos responsible? What are their qualifications?Using WHOIS, I search the domain of the two websites Evaluation http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/index.jsp WG Guide: unusual web address extension neither educational, commercial or organizational. No contact information. WG Council: All contact information available (address, email and phone numbers).
Accuracy Are there other sources and links presented within the web page?Using Google search, I use link: before the URL in Evaluation the search box to find WG Guide: 2 sites are links to the websites linked to this web page.ex. link:www.wholegraincouncil.org WG Council: 163 sites are linked to this site. More links to other credible sources.
CurrencyDates are written and revision dates are on the web page; no dead links. Evaluation WG Guide: Dated 1997 but no recent revisions and no copyright information. One active link WG Council: Copyrighted and revised in 2011
ObjectivityMinimum bias and information is fair and balanced Evaluation WG Guide: Informative but limited information. Somewhat objective but again information is dated. WG Council: Very informative. Information has some bias but it is minimal given the amount of information and resources the page is linked to.
ConclusionsThe "WG Council" website is clearly more informative and reliable because:• There is an authority behind the website• The websites links provide more accuracy• There is currency because the website has been revised recently and copyrighted.• The web site offers objectivity because it had minimal bias