This document provides criteria for evaluating the reliability of internet sources, including: whether the source is recommended by a faculty member, cited in other credible sources, from a reputable domain like .edu or .gov, lists author credentials, provides accurate and objective information, and is current and easy to navigate. Questionable sources mentioned include advocacy sites and Wikipedia, which should not be cited in academic papers.

1. Pow U
er p:
•W hat m akes an I nt er net sour ce
r el i abl e?
– Li st at l east 2 cr i t er i a you
can use t o det er m ne a sour ce’s
i
r el i abi l i t y.
– Expl ai n your cr i t er i a.

2. R evant & R i abl e M a
el el edi
Sour ces:
Eval uat i ng W Si t es
eb
W t h i nf or m i on t aken
i at
di r ect l y f r om
ht t p://w w i br ar y.i l l i noi s.edu/
w .l
ugl /how /w
doi ebeval .ht m l

3. A Shor t Vi deo: C A P
RA
ww
w .yout ube.com at ch?v=EyM
/w T08m 7D
D s

4. H di d you f i nd t he page?
ow
• W i t f ound vi a a sear ch conduct ed
as
t hr ough a sear ch engi ne? U i ke l i br ar y
nl
dat abases, t he accur acy and/or qual i t y
of i nf or m i on l ocat ed vi a a sear ch
at
engi ne w l l var y gr eat l y. Look car ef ul l y!
i
• W i t r ecom ended by a f acul t y m ber
as m em
or anot her r el i abl e sour ce? G ener al l y,
an i ndi cat or of r el i abi l i t y.
• W i t ci t ed i n a schol ar l y or cr edi bl e
as
sour ce? G ener al l y, an i ndi cat or of
r el i abi l i t y.
• W i t a l i nk f r om a r eput abl e si t e?
as
G ener al l y, an i ndi cat or of r el i abi l i t y.

5. What i s t he si t e's dom n?
ai
• or g : An advocacy w si t e, such as a not -
eb
f or -pr of i t or gani zat i on.
• .com: A busi ness or com er ci al si t e.
m
• .net : A si t e f r om a net w k or gani zat i on
or
or an I nt er net ser vi ce pr ovi der .
• .edu : A si t e af f i l i at ed w t h a hi gher
i
educat i on i nst i t ut i on.
• .gov: A f eder al gover nm ent si t e.
• .i l .us :A st at e gover nm ent si t e, t hi s may
al so i ncl ude publ i c school s and com uni t y
m
col l eges.

6. What i s t he aut hor i t y of t he
page?
• I s t he aut hor 's nam vi si bl e? D
e oes t he
aut hor have an af f i l i at i on w t h an
i
or gani zat i on or i nst i t ut i on?
• D oes t he aut hor l i st hi s or her
cr edent i al s? Ar e t hey r el evant t o t he
i nf or m i on pr esent ed?
at
• I s t her e a m l i ng addr ess or
ai
t el ephone num ber i ncl uded, as w l as
el
an e-m l addr ess?
ai

7. I s t he i nf or m i on accur at e and
at
obj ect i ve?
• H accur at e i s t he i nf or m i on
ow at
pr esent ed? Ar e sour ces of f act ual
i nf or m i on or st at i st i cs ci t ed? I s
at
t her e a bi bl i ogr aphy i ncl uded?
• D oes t he page exhi bi t a par t i cul ar poi nt
of vi ew or bi as?
• I s t he si t e obj ect i ve? I s t her e a r eason
t he si t e i s pr esent i ng a par t i cul ar
poi nt of vi ew on a t opi c?
• D oes t he page cont ai n adver t i si ng? Thi s
m im
ay pact t he cont ent of t he
i nf or m i on i ncl uded. Look car ef ul l y t o
at
see i f t her e i s a r el at i onshi p bet w een
t he adver t i si ng and t he cont ent , or

8. I s t he page cur r ent ?
• I s t he i nf or m i on pr ovi ded
at
cur r ent ?
•W hen w t he page cr eat ed?
as
• Ar e dat es i ncl uded f or t he l ast
updat e or m f i cat i on of t he
odi
page?
• Ar e t he l i nks cur r ent and
f unct i onal ?

9. Does t he page f unct i on w l ?
el
• I s t he si t e easy t o navi gat e?
Ar e opt i ons t o r et ur n t o t he
hom page, t ops of pages, et c.,
e
pr ovi ded?
• I s t he si t e sear chabl e?
•D oes t he si t e i ncl ude a si t e
m or i ndex?
ap

10. Si t es t hat ar e of f -l i m t s
i
Q & A Si t es
– N about .com or yahoo answ s (or
o er
anyt hi ng of t he sor t )
W ki pedi a!
i
– Thi s i s a good st ar t i ng poi nt t o
gat her gener al i nf or m i on on a
at
t opi c BU shoul d N
T EVER be ci t ed i n
an academ c paper
i