# Web Search and Evaluation

### Google Search

**What would you query to see how many pages on the English Wikipedia site mention “Northeastern
University”? How many results did you get?**

In order to turn up results of pages that mention "Northeastern University" on the English Wikipedia site you would enter the query below into Google's search bar:

“Northeastern University” site:en.wikipedia.org

This search found an estimated **7,480** pages.

**What would you query to see Web pages about the skate fish but no pages about an “ice rink”?**

If you wanted to see Web pages about the skate fish, but not about an ice rink, you would searh the following in the Google search bar:

"skate fish" -"ice rink"

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

To find Web pages about the Northeastern Huskies from the first day of 2001 through the last day of 2002, you would search "Northeastern Huskies", and then use Google's date/time range to filter the searches. To do this, you must first select "Custom Range", then the specificied dates as shown below:


But, if you're more of a fan of penguins than you are of huskies, you can freely use this public domain image of them in your next project.

They're *quite* the popular pair of penguins.

## Web Credibility

In recent months, I have seen celery juice touted as the end all be in all in health. But is it *really*? (I sincerely hope not because it tastes AWFUL.) I decided it was time to figure this out, once and for all.

In a search, I came across this [article](https://www.parsleyhealth.com/blog/benefits-of-celery-juice), in which a certified (we'll see about that) doctor weighs in on the health benefits of celery juice. I first judged the site based on its appearance. As Northern Michigan (2009) outlines, a credible website most often has "graphic or multimedia that complement the information present", a structure which is user-friendly and allows access to the content quickly, and working links.

Parsley Health checked out on all appearance accounts! A lovely complimenting photo:

I also clicked on links within the article, and they all worked. In fact, the links lead to other credible sources including the [US National Library of Medicine](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5871295/). This checks off the boxes for source **Accuracy** as noted by Northern Michigan (2009).

Now it was time to dive into the other four criteria to note when evaluating sources. As Valenza (2016) urges, in a world rife with fake news, post-truth, and "truthiness", it's increasingly important to empower ourselves to "deconstruct media messages" (p. 9) and form our own opinions. With help from Northern Michigan's (2009) criteria, and Valenza's empowerment to seek truth, I set out to form my celery juice opinion once and for all.

**Authority** and **Objectivity**: The article is written by Sara Angle, who is a Creative Content Manager for Parsley Health. Her "About" [page](https://www.parsleyhealth.com/user/sara-angle) states that she's also a certified personal trainer, and has a Communications degree from Villanova University as well as job experience at magazines such as *Men's Journal*. While this doesn't make her an authority on health, it does provide assurance that she has the skills necessary to interview and express ideas clearly.

The organization for which she works is Parsley Health. It turns out that Parsley Health is a primary care practice. They're "About" [page](https://www.parsleyhealth.com) shows a testimonial from *Forbes*, but also advertises to sign up for their primary care program. The testimonial is promising, but the **advertising** (objectivity evaluation) does reveal **bias** to getting customers. Overall, the organization seems credible.

Now for the doctor. A working link is provided to Dr. Gabriella Safdieh's [page](https://www.parsleyhealth.com/user/gabriella-safdieh) on Parsley Health. She works as a doctor for Parsley Health, and the "About" page for her lists her credentials of where she has studied, done her residency, and worked prior to this. This checks out on both Valenza's list of checking the "About Me" pages, and Northern Michigan's questions regarding credibility. So far, so good!

**Currency** and **Coverage**: The article clearly notes that it was written September 10, 2019 (very recently!).

Now I want to see when the website was last updated. Valenza (2016) and Northern Michigan (2009) note that this is important to making sure the information you are receiving is indeed from the date it says, and that the website as a whole is timely. I scroll down and find it has been updated in 2019. Good!

Now for **coverage**: The article discusses benefits, nutrients, and the scientific research behind drinking celery juice. The doctor uses research to back up her claims, and the interviewee writes her responses clearly. So, the information is clear, accurate, and well-discussed. However, as I go through reading there are many advertisements urging me to sign up to be in their primary care program. This has me worried that I've found myself in what Valenza (2016) calls an **"echo chamber"** (p. 6). Not only are the advertisements from Parsley Health, but also the doctor giving me the information is from Parsley Health as well, and in the article I have only gotten the viewpoint of Parsley Health and their associates. There are no other doctors or professionals weighing in. This leads me to believe that there is clear bias on their part to painting their company and professionals in the best light. Noted.

**Overall Conclusion**: While the information given to me about celery juice is legitimate, and the website checks out on most all aspects of evaluating a good web page, there does seem to be some bias towards their own practice. I feel that some of the information is simply to paint Parsley Health in the best light, and not necessarily to give me all the information I need to make the most informed decision. Thus, I would say this source is credible, but I would practice Valenza's **triangulation** and see what other verified experts are saying before I start drinking copious amounts of gross juice in the name of health.


## Wikipedia Evaluation

The statement on the [Joseph Reagle](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joseph_Reagle&oldid=620740325#cite_note-3) Wikipedia article, which states that you spent time working at the World Wide Web Consortium is cited using the Wikipedia:Verifiability method. If you click on the source page, it leads directly to a page in which he affirms his employment, as well as prior education and job experience. However, it is always best practice to verify the authority and credibility of your sources, as both Valenza (2016) and Northern Michigan (2009) encourage (what is to say that the source is not credible?). In order to discern whether or not the source found on the Wikipedia page could be trusted, I clicked on the W3 header above Reagle's statement. By clicking on this, I was then lead to the official page of the World Wide Web Consortium where I was able to read about their standards and membership. As Northern Michigan (2009) mentions, it is always in best practice to verify an organization's credibility by researching their membership numbers, as most credible organizations will have higher levels of membership.

The page also mentions that Reagle's book, *Good Faith Collaboration*, is "bestselling". The statement provides a direct link to the Wikipedia page for the book, which is where I went to verify this claim. I was, though, wary to begin with as the statement had no source attached to it.

Once on the Wikipedia [page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Faith_Collaboration) for the book, there was no mention of a "bestselling" status. However, it did mention positive reception of the book as well as other notable qualities. Thus, it would be more accurate to describe the book in other terms, since it does not have a verifiable bestselling status, then link this description directly to the source in line with Wikipedia's inline citation requirements.

Finally, according to its [history](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joseph_M._Reagle_Jr.&offset=20170131021745&limit=500&action=history), this article was first created in 2011.