---
# System prepended metadata

title: Web Search & Evaluation

---

# Web Search & Evaluation


Gareth Jenkins

Google has developed many ways of searching for information on the internet, for example from the classic search bar on the homepage to the advanced searches that can filter out any unwanted information.  Usually when browsing the internet it is common to see millions of websites pop up within usually less than a second or two, however this is an overload of information therefore it is important to understand how to use Google efficiently.  

# Google Search 

*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?*

In order to do this I went into Google’s advanced search to add my search parameters as containing the phrase ‘Northeastern University’ and all the searches having the domain as Wikipedia.org.  As a result this is what the search bar looked like.  There were a total of 12,100 results to this search that was provided to me .39 seconds after I searched Google with these parameters. 

*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.”)*

For this search query I went into Google’s advanced search once again however this time I put the phrase ‘ice rink’ into the parameter titled, ‘none of these words’.  This ensures that the phrase ice rink would not be included in any of the web pages that are in the results but it allows for the words to be mentioned separately.  Additionally, in the parameter titled, ‘all these words’ I typed in the words skate fish, therefore ensuring that they would be in my search results.  As seen below, I had 3.67 million results within 0.43 seconds.  

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

In order to do this task I did not go into advanced search on Google as there is already a tool section that can be used on Google’s homepage that is sufficient.  Firstly, I typed ‘Northeastern Huskies’ into Google and clicked search.  From there I clicked on the area, directly under the search bar titled ‘tools’.  From there I clicked on the drop down menu titled, ‘Any time’ and then selected a custom range of dates and set this to the 1st of January, 2001 to the 31st of December, 2002.

*Find me the top image of the exact phrase “penguin pair” with a “Creative Commons” usage right.*
![](https://i.imgur.com/CTGocCE.jpg)


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

The web page that I found that has questionable credibility is the Sun, a tabloid newspaper based in the UK.  “Politically, the paper has endorsed conservatives since 2010. “The paper generally publishes sensationalised, misleading stories with a right-wing bias.”  (Check, 2022).  It can be compared to TMZ in the sense that they both share stories with misleading headlines and are generally used as a way to read celebrity gossip rather than actual news.  

Accessing unreliable websites can lead to things such as viruses or bugs ruining someone’s computer however ‘The Sun’ is not on that level of bad credibility.  Despite not giving you viruses ‘The Sun’ does push a lot of fake news, which is one of the dangers of absorbing information and news online as stated in the article ‘Truth, truthiness, triangulation: A news literacy toolkit for a “post-truth'' world’ written by Joyce Valenza.  

In order to test ‘The Sun’ against the criteria that is provided by the Berkley Library, I clicked on the first news story that popped up when I opened ‘The Sun’ online.  From there I saw that there were two authors credited for their work on the article however only one of them had a link, showing that we have no information on the other author which doesn't look favourably on The Sun in terms of credibility.  Additionally, the author that actually had a link was noted for having a speciality in the field of ‘discussing and reviewing movies’.  This usually would be fine however the article was about how two historical towns in the UK have turned into run down ghost towns that are inhabited by junkies and riddled with poverty.  Therefore, maybe they should’ve had someone else write the article.  This may be due to the fact that The Sun is not popular for its political and social commentary but rather its commentary on celebrities which also links into the Berkley Library guidelines once again as the target audience is important when thinking about which sources are credible.

# Wikipedia evaluation

*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?*
The Wikipedia page has a pretty good credibility as there is a link to the book that is mentioned in the page and they both share the same information which makes this statement true.  However, the other claim which is still credible could be backed up by a photo or another piece of evidence (photo, quote from coworker, etc) that proves employment at the World Wide Web Consortium.  Despite this, it is still a pretty credible claim as there is a link to the Wikipedia page for the World Wide Web consortium which is helpful.  

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

First created:
2011-08-01

**Bibliography**
Check, M.B.F. (2022) The sun uk, Media Bias/Fact Check. Available at: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-sun/ (Accessed: January 22, 2023). 


