---
# System prepended metadata

title: Web Search and Evaluation

---

# Web Search and Evaluation

## Google Search 

### 1. What would you query to see how many pages on the English Wikipedia site contain the exact phrase “Northeastern University”? How many results did you get?

![](https://i.imgur.com/Qdmq2sN.png) 

![](https://i.imgur.com/qSQpVc0.jpg)

<br/>

### 2. What would you query to see web pages about the skate fish without mention of the phrase “ice rink”?

![](https://i.imgur.com/PGh7oe1.jpg) 

![](https://i.imgur.com/kLCM1ax.jpg)

<br/>

### 3. What would you query to see web pages about the Northeastern Huskies from the first day of 2001 through the last day of 2002?

![](https://i.imgur.com/vDkPK73.jpg) 

![](https://i.imgur.com/unrxtwm.png)

![](https://i.imgur.com/BqJAOdc.jpg)

<br/>

### 4. Find me the top image of the exact phrase “penguin pair” with a “Creative Commons” usage right.

![](https://i.imgur.com/6pYIiaO.jpg)

![](https://i.imgur.com/Ti26jVb.png)

## Web Credibility 

This [webpage](https://authenticallydel.com/negative-effects-tiktok/) shows limited credibility for a multiude of reasons, many addressed by [Valenza](https://blogs.slj.com/neverendingsearch/2016/11/26/truth-truthiness-triangulation-and-the-librarian-way-a-news-literacy-toolkit-for-a-post-truth-world/) and [Berkley Library](https://guides.lib.berkeley.edu/evaluating-resources) in their articles. *Authentically Del* is a blog run by someone named Delaney, she does not provide her last name, immediately taking away credibility from the source. It claims to be an “authentic guide to self-care, productivity, and self-improvement”. This article specifically is called “10 Negative Effects of TikTok | Is TikTok bad for you?” She lists a basic explanation of what TikTok is and then 10 reasons why it is apparently bad for you, all of them being very situational and biased. Beyond this however, there are important factual issues with this webpage. Valenza, in his article “Truth, truthiness, triangulation: A news literacy toolkit for a “post-truth” world”, warns against the dangers of believing everything you see on the internet. At the end of his article he gives some “rules of thumb” to follow when on the internet. The first, and most important in this case, is to check the “about me” page on a website to investigate the author, their credentials, and their purpose for writing the piece. In this case, Delaney offers information about herself and her interests. She does not share any credentials or reasoning for why she would be qualified to give out mental health advice. This raises concern because it demonstrates that she does not have the authority to be giving the advice she claims to be knowledgeable in. Secondly, the Berkeley Library lists a guide of steps to take as precautions when browsing the internet. The most prevalent one in this case is, “documentation.” Berkeley Library states that webpages should have documented sources to verify their claims and to verify that the information is accurate. *Authentically Del* makes many claims about things such as disordered eating and mental health, yet does not provide documentation for where she got her information. This is troublesome because both of those topics are ones that should be deferred to a professional because of the impacts they could have on someone, once again illustrating the questionable credibility of this site. Finally, in addition to all of this, throughout the website she has ads for her merchandise which correlates to what she is preaching. For example, tip number one says that “TikTok encourages negative comparison” and under that she has a link to her store, selling a shirt which says “comparison is the thief of joy.” This clearly demonstrates that one of her motives for working is to make profit and therefore is once again not the most reliable source for this type of information. 

## Wikipedia Evaluation 
In my opinion, claim (a) which states that you “worked at the World Wide Web Consortium” is in line with the Wikipedia verifiability policy. The policy requires that all materials, which require it, must have an inline citation to a reliable source which directly supports that material. In the case of claim (a) that is done correctly.  However, in the case of claim (b), that your book Good Faith Collaboration was “bestselling,” does not meet these requirements. There is no source to prove that the book was best-selling therefore making that statement unreliable. If I were to edit the website I would remove the words best-selling so as to not provide inaccurate information. 
![](https://i.imgur.com/Otzkwxa.jpg)

### Wikipedia Hsitory 
![](https://i.imgur.com/3qBbIXy.jpg)
The history shows the first created webpage to be on August 1st, 2011. 









