Cynthia Vaskis
SLM521 Spring
2004
Evaluating Websites
File: e7webev2.htm
Evaluating Web Sites
Title: LewRockwell.com
web page
URL: http://www.lewrockwell.com/
|
Evaluation questions |
Yes |
No |
Assumed true based upon source |
Can’t be verified |
|
1. Accuracy
- How accurate is the information and can it be verified? |
|
|
|
|
|
How reliable is the source
and can it be verified for any factual statements? |
|
|
|
X |
|
Is the information free
from errors? |
|
|
|
X |
|
Does it mention any
editors or fact checkers? |
X |
|
|
|
|
2. Authority
- Can you identify who is responsible for the web page and are they reputable? |
|
|
|
|
|
Can you identify the author
from the page and are they qualified to write on the subject? |
X |
|
|
|
|
Can you identify the
publishers and are they reputable? |
X |
|
|
|
|
Can you verify who is
responsible for the web page contents either through a link
to a page describing their goals, or a phone number
or postal address to contact (not
just an email address)? |
X |
|
|
|
|
Does the page claim to
have official approval of an organization and does it mention the national or local chapter? |
X |
|
|
|
|
Does it state the
organization’s name as copyright holder? |
X |
|
|
|
|
3. Objectivity - Is the Web page’s information been
biased, without clearly stated goals, and used for
persuasive advertising? |
|
|
|
|
|
Is the information given by
the author or organization claiming responsibility for the content unbiased? |
X |
|
|
|
|
Is the information
complete and void of misleading or incomplete data by excluding opposing views? |
|
X |
|
|
|
Is the information void of
persuasion? |
|
X |
|
|
|
Are the goals and aims or
the presenter clearly stated? |
X |
|
|
|
|
4. Currency - How current is the page (first written, placed on
Web, last revised)? |
|
|
|
|
|
Is the content of the Web
page up-to-date and the publication date clearly noted? |
X |
|
|
|
|
Is it clear which date(s)
are listed (first created, first placed on the Web, last revised)? |
X |
|
|
|
|
5. Coverage - Has the work’s topic been completely and clearly discussed for its purposes? |
|
|
|
|
|
What topics are discussed
and are they appropriate for the work? |
X |
|
|
|
|
Can you tell if the topics
have been clearly and completely discussed and to what depth of understanding about the
topic? |
X |
|
|
|
|
In other words, does the work
not express superficial opinions and it uses experts’ knowledge about the subjects? |
|
|
X |
|
|
Are the views expressed in
the work well supported by other documentation or organizational validation? |
|
|
X |
|
|
6. Copying Strategy - Has the copied version, or a
hypertext URL link, invalidated the work’s original
intention? |
|
|
|
|
|
Has the Web page been
copied accurately and still presents its intended
purpose? |
X |
|
|
|
|
If a search engine was
used to retrieve the document, is it valid and not viewed out of context from its original work? |
X |
|
|
|
|
Check the URL address for
the ending. Does it indicate what type of organization they are claiming to be? |
|
X |
|
|
|
If a hypertext link was
used to get this document, does it still represent the work’s original intention? |
X |
|
|
|
|
If the work was used for
marketing purposes, does it still represent the work’s original intention? |
X |
|
|
|
|
Can you return to the
original source from the Web page being viewed to verify its intention and validity? |
X |
|
|
|
|
7. Challenge - Has the original information been
left unaltered and not taken out-of-context from its source? |
|
|
|
|
|
Is the work unaltered from
the original and not affected by software requirements limiting its
completeness, altering its appearance, or taking it out-of-context? |
X |
|
|
|
|
Can you refer back to the
original source (not moved or diasappeared)? |
X |
|
|
|
|
Can you verify that the
advertising and informational parts are combined by the same person or organization? |
X |
|
|
|
|
Has the information,
entertainment, and advertising components of the “infomercial” been appropriately
blended without misrepresenting any of its original works? |
|
|
X |
|
|
Can you determine the
stability of your source from the search process? |
X |
|
|
|
|
Has the information been
left uncut and unaltered from the original work? |
|
|
X |
|
|
Can you verify the
information’s validity from other sources? |
|
X |
|
|
|
8. How to Apply the Strategies |
Total below |
Total below |
Total below |
Total below |
|
First, identify the type of page you are viewing
(research, news, commercials,
informative, entertainment, medical information, business advertising). |
Politically biased news articles |
|
|
|
|
Second, use your checklist to ask appropriate
questions. |
done |
|
|
|
|
Third, based on the number of “yes” or “no”
answers from the appropriate checklist
questions, give your Web page a quality rating (poor, fair, good, excellent). |
good |
|
|
|
|
Conclusion about Web page Quality (enter your
rating in any column) |
21 |
4 |
4 |
2 |
Final Evaluation Comments: Lew Rockwell lists
other people’s writings on his site (he copies them to his site) and it is
assumed that the material
Is unchanged or the authors would be upset. There is a way to verify the validity of the
material by the reputation of the author and a link to the
author.
The Web site is maintained daily so the information is current and
the dates should reflect that. There
were still some questions that had
vague answers though as seen by the “assumed true based upon
source” and “can’t be verified” so it did not get a better than “good” rating.