▒→¢яε∂ίßℓε σ尺 иσи-¢яε∂ίßℓε← ▒

My first non-credible source is "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page" and it is non-credible is because:

1. The source is non-credible because anyone is able to publish information on the website. There is no author and can be edited by anyone. The author is is not experienced in the topic they are writing on.

2. The sources of information are not footnoted or explained.

3. The website contains a description that states the website is not focused on my topic.

My second non-credible source is: http://ibnlive.in.com/news/latest-casualty-of-recession-iim-placements/86952-7.html

1. The source has too many advertisements placed on the website.

2. The website contains a description that states the website is not focused on my topic.

3. The wesite's domain ends in ".com".


My first credible source is: "http://www.cjr.org/the_audit/nyt_charts_the_recession.php" and it is credible because:


1. The source is credible because the domain ends in ".org" and is a non-profit.

2. There is a description and heading that indicates the website is focused on the topic area.

3. The author is clearly named and has credentials or experience in the topic wrote about.

My second credible source is "http://recession.org/history" and it is credible because:

1. The source is credible because the domain ends in ".org" and is a non-profit.

2. The source has a few advertisements.

3. There is a description and heading that indicates the website is focused on the topic area.