1. Authority and Reputation – which organisation developed the site? Who wrote the document/page? Are they an authority in this field? Do they have a good reputation? Check the credentials of any source you use – look for an 'About Us' section. If peer reviewed literature is available, give it priority. If pages are anonymous treat them cautiously. If claims are made, is the methodology of the research/study given?
2. Open authoring – by this we mean who wrote the information? Can anybody go in and change it (e.g. Wikipedia) for his/her own purpose? Does it change strangely and often? Is it peer reviewed and checked? Be careful of open authored sites like Wikipedia that have no obvious author and can be altered easily.
3. Preferred domain (.edu, .gov, .org, .net, .ie) – anybody can get a .com site and set it up so be careful with some of those; but a .ie site must prove a connection with the domain name and so will have more credibility; .org or .net are usually organisations and these may have their own agendas.
4. Purpose (agenda?) – what is the purpose of the site? Are they selling something? If so, beware of that as for academic independence you will want objectivity. [Change 'thy' to 'they' following] Do thy have an agenda? If so, be careful also as their claims may be unproven. You are probably looking for academic information, not baseless opinions. Check everything.
5. Coverage and objectivity – is this a one issue site? If so, what level of coverage or perspective will they contain? Also if they have a specific purpose or agenda, will the information be objective or balanced?
6. Accessibility and currency – is the site and its information up to date? Check this. Does the page give a 'last updated' date? Does it show copyright? Is it easily and always accessible?
7. Presentation and appropriateness – does the site look good or 'home made'? Be careful here as the best looking site may still give bogus or unproven information. But how does the site 'feel'?
References:
