# Reading Response
Joyce Valenza wrote, "News literacy is complicated," and well, she hit it right on the head. The idea of critical thinking and being able to tell whether or not something is credible or not is something that is very overlooked in the modern day world. While I read this, I wondered if I also overlooked it, and I think I do. Joyce gave us many different ways to check, along with the piece from the Berkeley Library, but why do we still ignore just checking? Is it because we are lazy?


Joyce gave us a few quick and easy things to check to make us feel a *little* more confident for ourselves (I italicized because we should be able to trust sources), but the Berkeley Library gave us a great idea on how to check a little more in depth. Berkeley gave us a more in depth look not only for the sake of credibility, but to see if it is relevant to our work, where they got the information from, how old it is, and more. Berkeley hit it a lot more on the head for the sake of a student, while Joyce hit it on the head for an everyday person. Especially since, "Fake news itself comes in a variety of flavors." In everyday life, we never tend to check that, we just read and believe, more often than not.

# Web Searching
**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?**

I would query ["Northeastern University" site:en.wikipedia.org](https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.ca%2Fsearch%3Fas_q%3D%26q%3D%2522Northeastern%2BUniversity%2522%2Bsite%3Aen.wikipedia.org&data=05%7C01%7Cdonohue.dy%40northeastern.edu%7C22d73e962dc84a8cc98d08dbbb071b22%7Ca8eec281aaa34daeac9b9a398b9215e7%7C0%7C0%7C638309411412622959%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=JhFaFql96Z74PvgbnG4y745I0IRk%2B%2FDEYncatg%2F%2BWRQ%3D&reserved=0).I got about 9,980 pages found.

**What would you query to see web pages about the skate fish without mention of the phrase “ice rink”? (Hint: It can still mention “ice” or “rink” but not “ice rink.”)**

You would query [skate fish -"ice rink"](https://www.google.com/search?q=skate+fish+-%22ice+rink%22&lr=&sca_esv=567422110&as_qdr=all&biw=1440&bih=783&sxsrf=AM9HkKlj9wj3ztP76NaQwmJziR2iFVKFWw%3A1695347852519&ei=jPQMZcz0HtKi5NoPruC82Ao&ved=0ahUKEwjM6pP0jr2BAxVSEVkFHS4wD6sQ4dUDCA8&uact=5&oq=skate+fish+-%22ice+rink%22&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiFnNrYXRlIGZpc2ggLSJpY2UgcmluayJIvBlQxxBYxxBwAXgAkAEAmAH2AaAB9gGqAQMyLTG4AQPIAQD4AQHCAgsQABgIGB4YDxiwA8ICCxAAGIoFGIYDGLAD4gMEGAEgQYgGAZAGBQ&sclient=gws-wiz-serp).

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

You would search [Northeastern Huskies](https://www.google.com/search?q=Northeastern+Huskies&lr=&sca_esv=567469796&as_qdr=all&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3AJanuary+1_2+2001%2Ccd_max%3ADecember+31_2+2002&sxsrf=AM9HkKnWSr4wEP1uOUT_oqOmWQzJ6hJfXA%3A1695348182358&ei=1vUMZc-xFcKt5NoPvsec8Ak&ved=0ahUKEwjP9LeRkL2BAxXCFlkFHb4jB54Q4dUDCA8&uact=5&oq=Northeastern+Huskies&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiFE5vcnRoZWFzdGVybiBIdXNraWVzMgQQIxgnMgUQABiABDIFEC4YgAQyBRAAGIAEMgUQLhiABDIFEAAYgAQyBRAAGIAEMgUQABiABDIFEAAYgAQyBRAuGIAESJUTUPQDWL8QcAF4AJABAJgBXaABvAaqAQIxMbgBA8gBAPgBAcICAhAmwgIGEAAYFhge4gMEGAEgQYgGAQ&sclient=gws-wiz-serp) and use the tools to range the date from Jan. 1, 2001 to Dec. 31, 2002.

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

The top image for "Penguin Pair":
("Penguin Pair"->images->tools->usage->creative commons license)

**Find a web page of questionable credibility and apply some of the criteria discussed by Valenza and Berkeley Library.**

Buzzfeed.com as the webpage has a lot of nonsense and content that doesn't make sense. Some of what Berkeley said was talking about the relevance and the author. These authors are not necessarily credible authors, and most of the information provided will not be relevant and known to not be trusted. According to Valenza, they post a lot of satirical and edited images. A lot of their content is meant to be more jokingly, and this causes their images to be edited.

**A version of the Joseph Reagle” Wikipedia article stated (a) I worked at the World Wide Web Consortium and (b) my book Good Faith Collaboration was “bestselling.” How does these claims relate to the policy of Wikipedia:Verifiability? Would you suggest any changes to the page?**

According to the verifiability, it says that statements will be taken down if they can't be verified by another source. So according to what I read, I believe that the page doesn't need to change.

**According to its history, when was this page first created (i.e., the oldest version)?**

The page was first created on August 1, 2011.