# Web Search and Evaluation

## Google Search
When searching for specific information on the internet, Google Advanced Search comes in handy. The Google [refine web search article](https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/2466433?hl=en) helps explain different ways to refine your search. For example, when trying to find how many passages on the English Wikipedia website contain the exact phrase "Northeastern University," you can refine your search by searching on Google "Northeastern University" site:en.wikipedia.org, giving you the exact number of passages, 5780 results.

Next, when trying to find webpages about skate fish that do not include the words "ice rink" in the webpage, you search in Google skate fish -"ice rink," to exclude the words ice rink from the search. The use of the - in the search allows you to search for a specific thing while excluding a word or phrase.

To narrow searches to specific dates, you can utilize the tools button and input the specific dates you are looking for. In this case, if you want to see webpages about the Northeastern Huskies from the first day of 2001 to the last day of 2002 you click the tools button, then press the "anytime" where you can put the custom dates of the first day of 2001 to the last day of 2002.

To advance search for images you can use the [advanced image search](https://www.google.com/advanced_image_search) where you can specify specific words and phrases you want to find. To find the top image for the exact phrase "penguin pair," with a creative commons usage right, you go into advance image search, type "penguin pair" in the exact word or phrase box, and then below specify creative commons for the usage rights. This is the image that comes up:

## Web Credibility
After reading many different top news articles from a variety of news sources, I questioned the credibility of the Fox News article ["The End is Near for Putin's War on Ukraine."](https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/end-near-putin-war-against-ukraine) The title immediately stood out to me when I first went on the Fox News website, as it was a bold statement yet not incredibly realistic in my mind. The title is highly optimistic and striking, luring readers into clicking on the article. I noticed that the article was labeled as an “opinion piece,” yet it was still placed as one of the top articles to read on the main Fox News feed. The article used attention-seeking, hyperbolic language, including statements such as, “The end is near. For Putin’s military options in Ukraine, that is,” drawing on the reader's emotions. The author utilized a conversational tone that lacked professionalism. For example, he used sayings such as, “it sounded to me,” and “It's true that Russia has some rather nasty nukes.” This language indicates that the article is not credible as it is less about factual information and more about the author's biased opinions.

As Joyce Valenza explains in her article [“Truth, truthiness, triangulation: A news literacy toolkit for a ‘post-truth’ world,”](https://blogs.slj.com/neverendingsearch/2016/11/26/truth-truthiness-triangulation-and-the-librarian-way-a-news-literacy-toolkit-for-a-post-truth-world/) fake news often uses what she describes as “click bait” or sensational information that draws in clicks. In her outlined guide to finding credible news articles, she suggests to “suspect the sensational” as often exaggerated headlines are just a tool to lure readers in. In this case, when reading the Fox News article I questioned the provocative headlines and striking statements because I knew its purpose was to grab my attention rather than to inform. She also suggests checking what type of writing you are reading and paying attention to biases in the article to gauge its credibility. The Fox news article was labeled “opinion” so I knew before reading that it was biased and was not factual news reporting.

The [Berkeley Library’s Evaluating Resources Page](https://guides.lib.berkeley.edu/evaluating-resources) also details outlines questions that readers should ask when reading articles in determining if they are credible. In the list of things readers should question, the page suggests to ask what the purpose of the article is and if it is for scholars or a general audience. After reading the Fox News article, it was clear that it was not a scholarly article and was more of a source of entertainment for the public.

## Wikipedia Evaluation
On the [Joseph M Reagle Jr. Wikipedia Page,](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joseph_Reagle&oldid=620740325) it claims that he worked for the World Wide Web Consortium and that his book "Good Faith Collaboration" was “bestselling.” According to the [Wikipedia Verifiability Page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability) readers can check verifiability by checking to see if it is backed up by a reliable source.

In this case, the fact that Reagle worked for the World Wide Web Consortium is verifiable because it is cited by w3.org which outlines Reagle's involvement. When checking the verifiability of the fact that his book was bestselling, there was no linked source that recorded that the book was bestselling. After doing my own research, I could not find any reliable sources that stated that the book was bestselling. Therefore, the fact that the book was bestselling should be removed from the site.

As seen on the view history tab the page was created on August 1st, 2011.