Group items tagged

1) Content - The intent of the content was to demonstrate the encroaching illness of Rev Fred Phelps. 2) Credibility - This seems to be a fairly credible source as the write (Doyle Murphy) also writes for the New York Daily News. 3) Critical Thinking - I am familiar with Rev Fred Phelps SR. from watching the protests of his church group on the internet. That being said, I have also seen numerous false death reports. Because of his (and his organization') reputation it is possible that someone is lying to create disbelief. 4) Copyright - The site itself was copyrighted in 2013, but this article itself was uploaded Sunday, March 16, 2014, 1:53 PM 5) Citation - This article includes citations from where it received the information and pictures. They also provide links in the article to easily access the original text. 6) Continuity - This article can be updated but only by the site admins itself. That means that it most likely has the most accurate information. 7) Censorship - This article appears completely uncensored. It includes some graphic language and images. Because of these points I can deduce that the facts are not altered. Also there is a moderated comments section but those posts appear uncensored 8) Connectivity - The site was easy to find and navigate to. It can handle multiple users at a time without issue. It contains links to the other parts of the page depending on if you want to continue reading on a different topic. 9) Comparability - I checked a couple different websites to see if they had a similar article. And they do. By checking other sites I can confirm that this is most likely a fact. 10) - Context - The context in this article tries very hard to just be neutral and factual about a man with such a horrible reputation. It does so decently, but the comments at the bottom do not. They are as inflammatory as some of the protest signs Fred Phelps is commonly known for. Web Page Evaluation: Currency - 10, Content

1) Content - The intent of the content was to demonstrate the encroaching illness of Rev Fred Phelps. 2) Credibility - This seems to be a fairly credible source as the write (Doyle Murphy) also writes for the New York Daily News. 3) Critical Thinking - I am familiar with Rev Fred Phelps SR. from watching the protests of his church group on the internet. That being said, I have also seen numerous false death reports. Because of his (and his organization') reputation it is possible that someone is lying to create disbelief. 4) Copyright - The site itself was copyrighted in 2013, but this article itself was uploaded Sunday, March 16, 2014, 1:53 PM 5) Citation - This article includes citations from where it received the information and pictures. They also provide links in the article to easily access the original text. 6) Continuity - This article can be updated but only by the site admins itself. That means that it most likely has the most accurate information. 7) Censorship - This article appears completely uncensored. It includes some graphic language and images. Because of these points I can deduce that the facts are not altered. Also there is a moderated comments section but those posts appear uncensored 8) Connectivity - The site was easy to find and navigate to. It can handle multiple users at a time without issue. It contains links to the other parts of the page depending on if you want to continue reading on a different topic. 9) Comparability - I checked a couple different websites to see if they had a similar article. And they do. By checking other sites I can confirm that this is most likely a fact. 10) - Context - The context in this article tries very hard to just be neutral and factual about a man with such a horrible reputation. It does so decently, but the comments at the bottom do not. They are as inflammatory as some of the protest signs Fred Phelps is commonly known for. Web Page Evaluation: Currency - 10, Content

I would rate this article as 65 poor, the information is not very consistent , no copyright info, no author,no citations, all seems to be lacking depth.  

Content title no aut/.com/public site/ updated

Credibility/ no auth/title id/purpose to show public banding together online/sn posts

Critical thinkin/ saw tv recording..id publisher Citation/links direct to contributor's social network

1) Content - The content in this article is remarkably good. It seems fair and unbiased and is written as a serious post. It provides details on the facts and the mysterious circumstances surrounding the loss of this plane 2) Credibility - CNN by itself is a reliable source. But also they provide links to outside articles on the page to corroborate their posting of the story. 3) Critical Thinking - Based on the information in the article you can deduce a lot about the plane and the issues with the search. I helps you think by mentioning important details and providing links to search for more information. 4) Copyright - This page itself was copyrighted in 2014. This article itself was posted on Sun March 16th, 2014. Meaning that it was updated today. 5) Citation - This site cites its references and provides links to them for additional information. 6) Continuity - Because of CNN's informational network this site can be updated within hours if not minutes. This up to date information provides room for new information to enter the article. 7) Censorship - This is posted and maintained by CNN so there is most likely some degree of censorship. But the comments can be posted immediately. However, if your post is tagged as offensive they will remove it. 8) Connectivity - This site is vastly interconnected both with corresponding articles on CNN.com and outside articles. It's easy to use and Easy to navigate. 9) Comparability - This page can be compared to many other pages. In fact, this article is the center of many websites referencing its information for reposting. 10) - Context - The scope of this page in context is a little biased. It tries to hint at the fact that the plane could have been hijacked and focuses on that speculation only giving a slight reference that the Ministry of Transportation has said that they aren't pursuing it that way but are looking into all of the information on why it deviated. Web Page Evaluation: Cur

1) Content - The content in this article is remarkably good. It seems fair and unbiased and is written as a serious post. It provides details on the facts and the mysterious circumstances surrounding the loss of this plane 2) Credibility - CNN by itself is a reliable source. But also they provide links to outside articles on the page to corroborate their posting of the story. 3) Critical Thinking - Based on the information in the article you can deduce a lot about the plane and the issues with the search. I helps you think by mentioning important details and providing links to search for more information. 4) Copyright - This page itself was copyrighted in 2014. This article itself was posted on Sun March 16th, 2014. Meaning that it was updated today. 5) Citation - This site cites its references and provides links to them for additional information. 6) Continuity - Because of CNN's informational network this site can be updated within hours if not minutes. This up to date information provides room for new information to enter the article. 7) Censorship - This is posted and maintained by CNN so there is most likely some degree of censorship. But the comments can be posted immediately. However, if your post is tagged as offensive they will remove it. 8) Connectivity - This site is vastly interconnected both with corresponding articles on CNN.com and outside articles. It's easy to use and Easy to navigate. 9) Comparability - This page can be compared to many other pages. In fact, this article is the center of many websites referencing its information for reposting. 10) - Context - The scope of this page in context is a little biased. It tries to hint at the fact that the plane could have been hijacked and focuses on that speculation only giving a slight reference that the Ministry of Transportation has said that they aren't pursuing it that way but are looking into all of the information on why it deviated. Web Page Evaluation: Cur

The points listed below are exactly how I feel towards the internet and technology. Yes, we spend lots of time on the computer, hand held devices, and video games which are not helping in the way we speak, read, or write.  I feel it is actually making it harder on us humans that operate these systems. 

Note 1: Widespread access to the Internet and other electronic media has served as something of a double-edged sword with respect to plagiarism; the Web allows students to plagiarism with cut-and-paste ease, but also allows academics to more easily identify the source of the plagiarized material when plagiarism is suspected(Lyon, Barrett, and Malcolm 2006). Note 2: The Internet allow suspicious student writing to be more quickly compared to other sources using a standard internet search engine, leaving the detection of suspicious writing as the principle challenge. Note 3:  given that some systems now permit students to upload their own writing to check for plagiarism in advance of submitting assignments, rates of unintentional plagiarism may drop, making the remaining intentional plagiarism easier to detect. Note 4: Others argue that the adoption of a plagiarism-detection system will not only aid faculty in detecting plagiarism, but will serve as a deterrent to plagiarism in the first place. Note 5: For example, Kraemer (2008) has argued that students who are made aware that plagiarism-detection technologies are in use should, at a minimum, avoid intentionally copying from other sources because of the near certainty that they will be caught. Further, for those students who may unintentionally plagiarize out of ignorance about the rule of citation, the use of plagiarism-detection software may motivate them to better inform themselves about citations and to double-check their own papers for unintentional plagiarism.

This article can be used for internet collaboration or online etiquette. The article is credible because it was published in an academic journal, it includes citations, it includes detailed information about the author and it has well supported, researched content.

This article is credible because it contains good information, it was published in a professional journal, and it contains good references and citations.

It also provides a list of web-based tools that can be used by online professors.

This article is credible because it was published in a professional journal, it was written by faculty members who are identified appropriately, it has good use of citations and references, and it has good supporting charts and graphics.

Critical Thinking author id, publisher id,

copyright site

copyright contributor credited

100-exelent meets all criteria of evaluation scale Content,credibility,copyright and comparability

100-Exelent meets all criteria of evaluation scale most impresive is the comparability and writen article

Well presented article, easy to read and very credible, many sources to compare to and clear understanding of who the author is and date stamp. Conectivity, comparability and citations all present, multimedia and sharing options as well. in alll i thought this article to be very informative rating 100 Exelent

Citation:  The author cites that the entire article is a story told by Allison O'Kelly. The links within the article are functional

1) Content - The content on this page is good. It can be easily read and understood. The layout allows it to be read while still adding adds for other related articles. It was uploaded 3/15 and updated later the same day. 2) Credibility - The Author itself I'm not familiar with, but it also appears to be an article by Reuters. Reuters is an organization that a lot of news agencies use and are widely trusted. 3) Critical Thinking - Because of their references and ties to Reuters you can with most certainly use critical thinking to assume this page is legitimate. 4) Copyright - The website it's self only says 2014 for the copyright. But this article itself was uploaded 3/15/14. Because of their copyright it can be assumed that this article is covered by it. 5) Citation - They do use some outside images and the text itself is from Reuters. But they credit them on the page so there is no infringement. 6) Continuity - This page can only be physically edited by the Huffington Post staff. So the continuity is withheld without errors. 7) Censorship - Because this page is moderated by Huffington post themselves there is a chance that it is edited. Also the comments system seem to be moderated in the regard that you can post what you want but if you offend someone the site admin can take it down. 8) Connectivity - The connectivity to the page is good. Many users can access it at the same time and it can be used as a jumping off point to either paid supported products or additional articles written by Huffington Post. 9) Comparability - You could take the information on this page and check it against numerous sources. I checked Google and came up with many results that either cite the beginning article or copy this article directly. 10) - Context - The context of this page is really good. They maintain the stance that Heineken and Sam Adams are taking without passing judgment, in support or not, for either the companies or the parade organize