This blog assignment uses the critical thinking skills we discussed in class. I want you to search the internet and find a website you consider to be UNRELIABLE. To do this you need to evaluate the site according to the criteria we covered. Comment on the accuracy, authority, currency, coverage and objectivity of the website and the information it provides. Remember to check the About Us tabs if one is provided on the web site. Be thorough, make sure you add as much information as you can to support your evaluation.
The deadline for this post is Thursday Nov. 26
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Wikipedia is an unreliable website because who ever has an idea about a certain subject can write under it. No one checks if the information is true and people rely on these information. These informations are not accurate. Whoever enters the site can write on it and these informations are subjective, one writer can defend his own idea and the other can defend the opposite.
ReplyDeleteEsra Anadol
ReplyDelete149.22
I think Genchukuk.net is unreliable website.Firstly this website is the fake of Genchukukcular.com.Then ıf you want to be member in this website,you must write on the forum of this website.Although I'm member of genchukuk and dont write for 4 months,my member goes on and nobady doesn't ask me why ı dont write something.I can't find what I want to learn when I search something the search motor of this website.I don't believe that the information of genchukuk are currency and objectivity.Because usually same informations are in first page of this website.It can be understood easily if you read these informations carefully.Although the authority of website claims 'a good turkish' from all of memmbers,the website has a lot of the falses of turkish grammer.Thatswhy I don't advise Genchukuk the people who interested in law
Sidal Karaman
ReplyDelete149.22
Korea-fans is an unreliable website because, it hasn't real information about Korea.When I research other website about giving information for korea, I definitely find the right information,so,korea-fans isn't accuracy to find information.And it doesn't give the new information, it always show the same information and it sametimes add new news or change old news so ,showing new news on website to take lots of time,therefor,it isn't reliable because of wrong information.After, a few people visit this website it can be showed us it is an unreliable website.Nobody knows who prepare this website but, I think they don't care about their job,because of this situation their web site isn't popular like the other korea site, these result show us it isn't reliable web site
Sevgi Akyol ÇEVİRİR
ReplyDeleteLAW 149.21
Wikipedia is an unreliable website because everybody can add informations under a specific topic. The website doesn't have a publisher and there is no one who checks the informations added by people. So the author is the people. You can be an author of the website,so can I. There's no accuracy because we can't know if the person who wrote the information has the extensive knowledge or not. People are not paid when they add informations. Informations can be subjective when they contain ideas. To contrast when i search "the most unreliable websites" on the internet,i find an article on Wikipedia: "QuackSites:Most Unreliable Health Websites." There is a conflict for sure. Wikipedia is an unreliable website and it gives QuackSites as unreliable websites. For me,health websites are unreliable too. These websites are untrustworthy and much of their information are highly suspucious.
"In fact,they are so misleading that those who trust them and regularly use them as sources of information are at great risk. Such people may soon lose trust in all reliable and authoritative sources of information, and consider them to be part of a vast conspiracy. Even solid scientific research that disagrees with these unreliable sites becomes suspect. This ties them even closer to these unreliable sources of information and they become immune to rational discussion, and willing victims and customers." This is what someone wrote into Wikipedia. Altough Wikipedia is already unreliable,it is also proclaiming the unrealibility of the other sites,so that makes me doubt the accuracy of this information too.
Murat Can Pehlivanoglu
ReplyDeleteLaw 149.22
“http://sozluk.sourtimes.org/ is a collaborative hypertext dictionary based on the concept of Web sites built up on user contribution.It is currently one of the biggest internet communities in Turkey with over 260,000 users.” Although its creator and the blog writers are known, it is still an unreliable website. Members of this site comment on subjects without showing a source, based on their own knowledge, subjectively. They use informal language. Every member has different thoughts on subjects. They explain subjects just like it is in a dictionary or in an encyclopedia. Readers of this site commonly read those comments to have fun, or to see what other people think about a certain subject, but plenty of them also believe in things that they read on this site.
http://sozluk.sourtimes.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ekşi_Sözlük
ESRA MANZAK LAW 149.23
ReplyDeletewww.eksisozluk.com is an unreliable website. Most people (especially young people) choose eksisozluk to get general information, which is not even right. So they get a wrong idea about something. For example, eksisozluk defines wikipedia as the best way to get full information. We already know that wikipedia makes mistakes about numbers and dates because those informations are written by people who are not experts. Like wikipedia, every paragraph in the eksisozluk is written by random people. So we can not talk about the accuracy because how we can trust a subjective opinion of a stranger? In addition, the website warns people that the informations provided, might not be true. The authority is the people because they are able to write whatever they want and the website doesn’t take responsibility of these informations which might influence children in a bad way. As the matter of the fact that the authority is the people as expected there are swearing and other improper words in the website. The informations are composed of bunch of comments so there are no currency and no objectivity. Everybody writes based on his/her knowledge or they are just doing comments which are the most subjective way to talk and most of the informations contradict with each other. So it’s impossible to count on eksisozluk about any information. In the other hand, eksisozluk has a large coverage; we are able to find information about almost every single subject. Well, that is not enough to make eksisozluk reliable. At least eksisozluk doesn’t hide his unreliability like Wikipedia which looks like a very serious and trustable website. Finally, eksisozluk is not a good choice to get information. Seeing that many people use this website, I have trouble to answer this question: if this site doesn’t give accurate information, than what is the point of using it as a source?
KIVILCIM AKSÜT LAW 149.23
ReplyDeleteUnreliability is a very big problem in universities.İt is effecting universities like students to teachers. Normally teachers know and understand which sources are reliable and which is not but when they search for newest events which they don't know they are in greater risk then students because students doesn't have chance to influence everybody in that classroom but teachers have that risk. İf we generally look on what sources are reliable or not, internet is the most unreliable and dangerous source of all. Despite it easiness to know what is going on earth it could be dangerous because of unreliable source on it. Everybody have chance to reach and search in internet by using different ways also everybody have chance to put something on internet to. When we look at especially to websites , there are two different types of websites gets the glory of unreliability these are forums and blogs. When we look at blogs there is very big problem with objectivity , authority , accuracy, currency and coverage because these blogs are generally created by one person who believes his/her ideas unconvertible truths. So when you read these blogs and use blogs ideas on your assignments it will be probably wrong. İn the other hand forums not a place like one man writing and others reading , forums are place of questioning and answering but it is unreliable to. Most forums wants membership for writing in forums and some of them wants membership for even reading. They try to be mysterious but they are not the are not even true. İn forums there is very big problem you can write answers for some questions which you don't have any idea or you can give wrong answers also your answer or question can be erased by admin if they don't like your answer. Also another problem in forums is after someone ask some question and answer some they start to believe and act like they are authority even in some subjects they don't have any idea. Also another big problem is when forum people doesn't like the answers or ideas of someone they attack to them and many times they succeed to get rid of that guy and they know he/she won't write at that forum anymore. All these subjects tells are why forums are unreliable(because it has all reasons of unreliability). After all if we need to write one specific site which is unreliable i would say answers.yahoo.com. İt is based on questioning and answering like forums. You have to have Yahoo İD for asking and answering questions. You can ask anything you want anf if you are lucky someone will answer your questions. And after you got answers you can select which is best answer for you to proud of a owner of answer and make it easy to all internet users which have same question with you to get answer. Why this website is unreliable because it is not objective many times you can get few answer and they will be probably from someone normal not from authority and your answer wont be objective. Many times owner of these answers show like them answers accurate but when you read there is not a even answer. And one of the biggest problem you have limited space for question and answer so you wont get any big specific and enlightening answer because of space limit. This website is very good for daily use but it is unreliable for any assignment or serious problems.
İrem Peker
ReplyDelete149.23
I think www.itusozluk.com is an unreliable website. The authority is the people who became members of this website. When you become a member you can write everything about a topic. People who writes on this website don’t have lots of information about the topics and they are not experts.Most of the information has accuracy but ofcourse not everyone of them. People use this website to get an general idea about a topic. People in every age use this website. Curency is not a special feature of this site because lots of different people write to this site. The coverage of this site is so weide .You can find information about everything. Maybe not so real but you can find lots of different things.This site avoids objectivity because of it’s structure. Everybody writes their own idea. For example I searched about Armenian Genocide and one person wrote: “We should write “in the abstract” on front of it.” This means that this person doesn’t believes that there was an Armenian Genocide. And lots of people wrote cussung words in their blogs.
Yiğit Nuhoğlu
ReplyDelete149.23
www.uludagsozluk.com is a blog page which people can search anything that he/she wants to learn. There are lots of people who uses this page.But is it reliable?I don’t think it’s a reliable page.I only search topics through this page, which are not important. For example there are things about our school too. Everybody writes what they want. There are some swearing words too.The authority is the members. They are not very logical and knowledge people so this website is not accure.This site hasn’t got curency too because everbody writes different things about the same subject.You can find everything in this site, and you can add the topics that you want.People can read your comments about a topic.Ofcourse it is not objective because people write their own ideas.
After my resarch i found that health information on internet is often unreliable.Generally these sites aim is advertising a medicine they produced and even doctors found that products dangerous for people,these sites don't emphasize the danger.The ınformation given in these sites are not accurate and they don't give enough scientific results or examples.While i was researching, i saw many articles warning people about these dubicious health sites. i think doctoryourself.com is an example of these unreliable sites.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.fiction-writers-mentor.com/ is a website which is all about mentoring and helping you to become an author of fiction. ı think this website is an unreliable website, beacuse of criterias that ı am going to write down. fırstly, the authority of this is everyone,and everyone can write on to become a published author. addition to this the site has a table contest when we check it we realize literary devices. when the new author decide a literary device that can be a wrong determination and no one else notices it. the other way that makes it unrealiable you can easily add new fiction and you can easily delete the thing that someone has written before. as every kinfd of people create their own fiction the accuracy is unclear beacuse it contains every kind of information every kind of creation which can not good for children. it does not say the age of that someone writes on or the age of you can read the fiction. as we know all fictions are not suitable for kids.about the currency it says there's no content written by $5-per-article freelancers. the coverage of this website is huge. because of that everyone writes on their ideas,commentary and thought. this shows there is no objectivity. it contains 'contact me' If you have any questions about writing or getting published.there is 'about me' part, the owner is Tracy Culleton, but it doeas not show that she check whole fictions including literary devices,quotes, definitions,plots, character creation, writing mistakes etc. As a result, according to these criterion this website is an unreliable site.
ReplyDeleteI think http://www.gm.com/experience/education/blog/about.jsp is an unreliable website. The reason that makes it unreliable, people who is a teachear can write their ideas on this website but no one check these people are real teachear or not so the authority is everyone. They just put their profile pictures and write "I am a 7th grade teachear in Arizona" and try to give information about education of environment but how do we know these are correct? Actually informations which is written by unknown teachers is not enough to show the realibility of website. Shortly everyone can write their ideas by writing under the information "I am a teachear" Thats why I think accuracy and objectivity are unclear. Also there is an 'about us' part but only write about educators which can share their tips and inspirations for teaching lessons about the environment.In addition, this a kind of blog site so this also make the site is not currency. Actaully if the url finish with gov or edu this mean that this site is reliable however this website does not finish with them.The coverage of this site is limited since you can find information about education. Shortly because of all these reason it is an unreliable.
ReplyDeleteAfter my research www.gittigidiyor.com is an unreliable website. The main reason is many people try to buy something but they don't know they are original or not so the informations which is written under the product are not accuracy an currency. Also the authority is everyone and the coverage is huge. You can find everything in this site but no one can give you guarantee that products are original or not so this site is unreliable.
ReplyDeleteÇiğdem Yılmaz Law 149.14
ReplyDeleteMy example of unreliable websites is "www.dhmo.org/".It's one of the most unreliable websites according to many people and analysis. The URL looks legitimate but there are wrongs with that website.
accuracy:No author is listed.It looks authentic but it's said it's a joke website. You can send feed back but there is a note which is confusing. "Due to the high volume of email we receive, we may not be able to reply to every letter. However, we do read them all."
authority:There is no credentials listed. It's misleading. Even though it looks valid with its url, it's not.
objectivity:There are ads for his products.
curency:Last updated today. So it looks current. But there is a note in the website which is confusing again "Note: content veracity not implied" There is no dead link or outdated information.
coverage:Pres kit is a hoax. It's not available to put in name or password. It's available in several languages. There is a balance of images and text.
http://grove.ufl.edu/~idh3931/evaluating_web.html
infolit.wikispaces.com/file/view/DHMOwebsitethoughtsrevised.ppt
http://www.library.nd.edu/howdoi/media/Cacao_4-14-04.swf
Accuracy,authority,currency,coverage and objectvity. These facts must be criticized before making a decision about realibility. According to my research I think that www.egitimciler.com is an unreliable website. With this website lots of educators come together. They can write and share their knowledge but it is wrong to use this website as a source. Because we don’t know that they are experts on their subject. Writers can be ordinary people and they can write their own ideas. Coverage of this website is huge but it doesn’t mean that it is a reliable source. Accuracy of this website is weak also because no one checking it. In every topic and in every information this website is subjective. But in reliable websites it must be objective. Objectivity is maybe the most important fact about a reliable source. So in this website everybody can write something,everybody can change information based on their own point of view because no one checking it.. And these facts makes his website unreliable.
ReplyDeleteWe read a lot of news on the internet. Some of them's reliability is debatable. We cant trust those news directly. I found a website which is absoluetly unreliable because editor and other writers make false news.These news are deprive of accuracy.For example according to www.orjinalhaber.com TRT has a new canal which name is TRTplayboy. As you can see it is ridiculous and imposible new.But that is the point because this website make ridiculous and imposible news.There is a editor who check the writing and be sure the writing is ridiculous . The language is checked by the editor.
ReplyDeleteI think http://sites.google.com/site/tubiap/ is an unreliable website. This website is said to be owned by “Turkey Scientific Enlightment Platform” which is a non-existent platform and it contains information about a hypothetical chemical element called “Feomidium”. In reality this element doesn’t exist. However, according to this website this element can simply be described as “super magnet” and it is so extraordinary that it can change the future of the world.
ReplyDeleteAccuracy: The information in this website is not accurate because even though it contains scientific information, it doesn’t use a scientific way of explaining it. There are no evidences proving the real power of this element.
Authority: The author of this website is “Turkey Scientific Enlightment Platform”. However, there is no such platform in reality. We don’t know the exact names of the people who are members of this website. There is also an e-mail address in the website, from gmail.com.
Currency: There is no date showing when this website was created. However, there is a counter at the bottom of the page. It shows that this website has been visited by 26645 people since it was created.
Coverage: This website doesn’t cover much information about the element. It only contains a little unscientific and fake information. Also it uses the language in a bad and unprofessional way. This shows that the people who have created this website are not professionals.
Objectivity: This website is not objective because first of all it contains fake information. Secondly, it supports this fake information in a fanatical way. It says that this element cannot be used because USA doesn’t allow other countries to do so.
This website doesn’t have any About Us tab.
Serra Böhürler
ReplyDeletelaw 149.22
Ekşisözluk(sozluk.sourtimes.org) is an unreliable web-site. Actually the site is based on unreliability. It is kind of platform, on which everyone can write and figure out one’s own idea. Despite of hard steps to become a writer on “dictionary”, writers consists of every social-statue from turkish society. The “Truth” or “Reliability” is not important for this site, the thing that makes the site populer is different comments and explanations under subjects. The information that we reach is probably a reflection of prejudiced sensations. We can’t use any definition from this site as a scholar knowledge. Informations are not written by experts. These informations are written by average people. Thats why we cant rely on these informations. These are just like as a comment on something. We already know that in this site some given important details are sometimes wrong. For examples dates numbers or names. And also sometimes some given informations must be updated but by whom? And how can be checked? There is no way to check all of informations about all of things in this site, because it s very general site and there is no limit to write. Some informations can be political or lie or just writers’ idea on something. So it shows that we can learn the writers’ ideas on something. These facts mekes this website unreliable.
http://site.mynet.com/gevdanasireti/hakkari/ is a website which is totally unreliable. First, the site is full of wrong information and it never gives the source of the information. Even when it says how many gewdan there are, the number is wrong and exaggerated. Also the site is not objective, it looks from only one family in the tribe, and when they give the total number of each surname, they exaggerate the total number of that surname. The site is not enough in terms of coverage because it does not give information about all tribe. Its name is gewdanlar but it does not cover all tribe, also the family tree is just about one family. Even the site is being updated recently, it does not give current information. So this site is totally unreliable and full of wrong information.
ReplyDeleteI think www.uludagsozluk.com is an unreliable website. This is a dictionary but every member can write whatever they know and whatever they want as a definition under the titles. It is not important for this website that those ideas are really true or false. So while we are reading comments on this website, we can not say "I've learnt the real thing about what I searched " without reading something about same subject from another place. So this is uncertain situation. Also It is not suitable for being a dictionary.
ReplyDeleteÇağrı Ceylan
ReplyDeleteLaw149.21
theforgotten.org is not a reliable website. this site contends that Armenian genocide came true. Actually, there are numerous argument about this topic. However, this website's numeral datums contradict real sources. According to Ottoman's archives, 1.221.850 Armenian was living in Ottoman Empire in 1914. But, This website puts forward that over 1.5 million Armenian lost their life in 1915. İf we accepted these informations as true, nowadays, any armenian couldn't be found in Turkey and in some Middle-East Countries. Also, a lot of Armenian immigrated to U.S.A and some European Countries during the World war I. İf this site's informations were true, couldn't be found Armenian who will immigrate, too. The arguments which is related to Armenian Genocide are complicated.So, I avoid to remark about Armenian Genocide, but I think that numeral informations in this site are incorrect.
http://www.cumleceviri.com/ is a unreliable website which needs to be closed. When you enter the sentence, you can't have a result.
ReplyDeleteThe sentence which you entered is not have the same meaning with the result. This website hasn't got any feature although it is known in Turkey. It can translate 42 different languages to turkish but it is useless because it always translates wrong. If you can trick yourself, you can enter the website and write your sentence. Anyway, you have 42 different languages which wait you under your hands! Also, when you enter the site, ignore the advertisements of google which are really ridiculous. If you don't want to wait a long time, don't use this site because I remember that I had waited 5 minutes for one sentence.
http://www.cumleceviri.com/ is a unreliable website which needs to be closed. When you enter the sentence, you can't have a result.
ReplyDeleteThe sentence which you entered is not have the same meaning with the result. This website hasn't got any feature although it is known in Turkey. It can translate 42 different languages to turkish but it is useless because it always translates wrong. If you can trick yourself, you can enter the website and write your sentence. Anyway, you have 42 different languages which wait you under your hands! Also, when you enter the site, ignore the advertisements of google which are really ridiculous. If you don't want to wait a long time, don't use this site because I remember that I had waited 5 minutes for one sentence.
Bensu Aydın
ReplyDeleteLaw 149.02
http://www.zamane-sozluk.com
This website is an unreliable website. Nowadays, there is a dictionary trend in Turkey where everyone put his/her personal thoughts or information which they believe to be true, but in reality these dictionary entries have no reliability. They are not scientific or based on any evidence. Usually these web-dictionaries are there to have an idea of that topic but not to gather important information. This website is an example of it.
Accuracy: This web site is not accurate at all. People put some entries just to be funny or weird. You just have to laugh and pass them because there is no guarantee that the guy wrote the truth or not. Everyone puts his/her own point of view in these definitions.
Authority: The author of this website is simply everyone. There is a procedure that limits the number of people who writes definitions, but it is reliable. You don’t know who is writing these definitions since all of them have nicknames. There is a “rules” link at the top but they are not enough and they are not about anything that goes with reliability.
Currency: You can see when the definitions were written but since you cannot edit what the members wrote, the currency is not qualified.
Coverage: The coverage of this website is REALLY big. It has things that are not even necessary of appropriate in a so-called dictionary.
Objectivity: You cannot trust the objectivity because everyone writes those entries from their point of view. (and I don’t believe that anything can be objective in this world)
There is an “about us” link which doesn’t seem to work. You can see the head writers of the websites but since they also have nicknames, you cannot be sure who it is.
Halis İPEK Law149.21
ReplyDelete" http://www.turkspor.net/ " is one of the unreliable websites.The sport site publishes false news everyday.Whenever I open this website, I absolutely see false news about football.Especially they make lie about club transfers.As an example,I was online on facebook Galatasaray fan page and anyone said that one of te biggest English footballer have been transferred by Galatasaray.But, "we will explain the name of the big star at 2.30a.m., after the plane landed in istanbul." is written on turkspor.net.We are so excited and we had waited until the new day and they had written who is he but it is one of their big lies.That player still plays for the same team.
On this website,there aren't any information who the website is managed by and we people can't be informed about the editors or authors.
Another point is that there isn't any information about the authority of the website.Even there is nothing under the news about the author.But it says on website "Each author is responsible for their own news".
Also,this website absolutely isn't an objective sport news website and isn't giving the correct and accurate sport news.They always write big lies which draws more attention and how can we being read more?And on the next day, it is certain that their big news becomes a big lie.
About the website currency, there are dates of all news when they were written and also when the comments are put under the news with their nicknames.So it also provides that the coverage of the website.These can just be said as possitive comments for this website.
I came across a site called youdebate.com and this site seems unreliable. This site does not have any information about the author or the editor of the page. Also if you like to add a comment on the debate topic it is very easy, you don't have to be a member or anything. It does not include any date which shows when it was last updated.
ReplyDeleteThis site also seems unreliable because the information that was put on the page wasn't well written or supported by facts. It seems to reflect objectivity however the writing shows the side the writer is supporting.
The web page is filled with advertisements which lowers the seriousness of the site. The site does nor provide any background information about the subject therefore it is not a reliable site to do research.
http://islamifikir.com is a muslim oriented web site whose contents are all about islam (even the cartoons) . In the “about us” section, creators of this site says that the other web site’s “filthiness and vulgarity” make them uncomfortable so as a “solution” they create this site. Almost every information in this web site contents islamic elements, we can’t say that it has a neutral point of view.
ReplyDeleteAccuracy: Many of these informations and news are exaggerated and all of them contains religious views.
Objectivity: In this web site every information is related to islam, information’s sources aren't indicated. When we look at the categories there’s a lot of them but every single categorie is about İslam for exemple the cartoon section. All the cartoon characters are religious and their primary purpose is to taught children the religion. In the listed news many of the incidents hadn’t told as they’re told in the news papers, most of them written by an anonymous who impose his/her views.
Authority: Information’s and news sources aren't indicated. We don’t know who wrote any of those. Authors are anonymous.
Coverage: There’s a table of contents but every category is related to İslam for exemple in the science section there’s an article which says that a CHP deputy who supports the evolutionary theory is an enemy.
Currency: They stated when they wrote these informations and news but they didn’t indicate when those incidents had happened.
Erkan Yücel Öztürk Law 149.22
ReplyDeletePresently the reliability of the websites is debatable. Lots of websites are used as an offical source or as an encyclopedia. But this kind of websites may contain lots of wrong informations. This is why we need to be careful about accuracy, authority, currency, coverage and objectivity of a website. For example, www.sourtimes.org . This site is very popular in Turkey especially for young people. It is used as an offical source. But the authors are unknown, they are not liable to render account about their knowledge. The coverage of the website is huge. The objectivity can not be controlled because everyone express their own idea.
I will not trust a site witch www.wikipedia.org. Because of this reasons;
ReplyDeleteAccuracy: Everybody who wants to add a information for a topic can make easily. As a result, we can not find a reliable topic. For example, I hate Hitler and I add a lot of disparaging comments about Hitler.
Authority: After all, people in the world consider wikipedia and use it. Because wikipedia has a lot of topics and information about topics.
Currency: Wikipedia is a currency web site. A person who wants to add a topic, he/she can make easily and He/she can make whenever he/she wants. Wikipedia have used by all people in the world for every bad things.
Coverage: In wikipedia, we can find a topic easily. This website is useful. We can find politicians, films, highlights, actors and actress.
Objectivity: This is the most important trouble about wikipedia. Because everybody can add a specific comment. For example, a man who a rightist can add a comment about an important man about extreme lefty. As a result, we can not understand which is true. If there are an officer who check this information, wikipedia will be better a web site.
Eylul Topanoglu
ReplyDelete149.22
I think wiki.answers.com is not a reliable source since it directly copies answers from various sources. It also does not provide any citations for the answers and we can't be certain who puts those answers to the site or whether they do a detailed search before answering.
Some of the answers were directly copied from wikipedia which is worse since most of us know that wikipedia is another unreliable source on the internet.
Another thing that makes this site unreliable is that there is a section as "Can you answer these Wikianswers questions?" which is directed to the site visitors. It means that visitors are also able to answer the questions. We can't be sure if they answer the guestions correctly besides they also don't give any citations for their answers.
I also checked About us section which says the site is a creation of a "global knowledge community" which made me think who this global knowledge community is.
Oğuz Savaş Law 149.22 said...
ReplyDelete"http:/sozluk.sourtimes.org" is one of the unreliable websites because:
Accuracy: Informations are not true and not genearlly postulated.Everybody writes everything about any topics so that there is complication of information.
Authority: Real sources of informations are not specified and authors of this website aren't expert on their sides because; all authors can write on every topics and we don't know how authors are determined.
Objectivity:There are no objectivity or rather this website's system isn' based on objectivity. Because, website want to write everything about every topics from authors, even if they don' know anythinh about which topics they write.Also, some authors give very prejudiced information; and also some authors want to direct poeple by this way. Consequently, people who enter this website in order to find a objective information are mistaken.
Currency:Ekşi Sözlük isN' a currency website because, they write everything they want; sometimes they writes wrong thinhgs so that no currency there are.
Coverage:The coverage of ekşi sözlük is very useful. You write in spacae what you want to learn and you find much of results . And interfaces of website are organised exellently.
Sabahat Elif İPEK
ReplyDeleteLaw 149.02
www.gsusozluk.net is a typical unreliable website. It is a web-dictionary, and like every other it contains not information but rather opinion about almost every topic. Firstly, it is not accurate. There are editors, but they do not correct the information. They are there to make sure no extreme opinions are written. If there are, they fire the one who wrote it from the dictionary. Also, the authority is vague. The web publisher seems to be Galatasaray University but the site does not contain a "contact us" button. The authors' identity are secret. The coverage is a problem too. The site does not focus in one topic; it contains a lot of subjects from too many different fields of study. In addition, a table of contents can not be seen in the website. Most important of them all is the objectivity. The sources in these kind of sites are only the mind of the writers. So naturally, the entries form with opinions and point of views and when people search something, their ideas on this topic gather on what the authors wrote, even though they might be wrong. The entries can not be changed, nor can be edited. To sum up, people are not aware of these; they rely on the information. But the information has major problems. It all makes the site and these kind of web-dictionary sites unreliable,wrong and self-righteous.
Mehveş Erdem Law 149.22
ReplyDeleteThe unreliable web site that I found is www.odevturk.com. This web site is designed for public but especially students to download homework on every subject. The author does not have a specific agenda or point of view. The communication part of the site has a telephone number when a member needs to ask a question, it’s like customer service but they have not stated any name, address or sponsors. The contact information is not clear. Secondly, homework does not state the name of the author and they do not consist work cited, no documentation is available. Additionally, homework does not state any publication date, so we can not be sure that the information is up to date. Bearing in mind all of these defects we can never rely on this web site.
Salih Benna Saraç. Law 149/23.
ReplyDeleteI think http://www.netsozluk.net is an unreliable website. Most people choose like this blogs to get general information. Anyone can be a writer in this site. Even you has no idea about a topic, you can write what do you want. Members of this site comment on subjects without showing a source, based on their own knowledge.
Accuracy: We can not trust the information in this site. Because, anyone declare of an opinion even he/she has no information about the topic. Everyone puts his own opinion of view in these definitions.
Authority: The author is this website briefly anyone. In addition, People who write in this site aren’t answerable for their entries. Because, they aren’t use real name. Generally, they use a nickname. This makes it impossible to accountability.
Currency: Netsozluk is a currency web site. A person who wants to add a topic, they can make easily and they can make whenever they wants.
Coverage: In this respect this sites are useful. You can find a topic easily. You can find what do you want. Interfaces of website are organised excellent.
Objectivity: It’s the biggest problem of this sites. From people’s ideology their entries are untrustworthy. Some authors give very biased opinion.
Efe Zengin Law 149.23
ReplyDeleteI guess fotomac.com.tr is a one of most
unreliable web sites. This site gives some news about sport activities from Turkey and sometimes world wide but in general these informations are not reality. This web site has no accuracy. We can understand that from the denials of every club which the site make a new about. They always making imaginary transfers, reportages, estimations. Just to attract the attetion of people and make them to read their sites. I can say that this site has a big currency. It is very popular way of having fun with their lies. You can visit it whenever you want to laugh. The authors are not professionals of their branches. Aspecially the bet forecasters. And also they have some real fanatic authors and they loose their objecticity because of them. For example Selcuk Yula is a real fanatic Fenerbahce fan and he hates Galatasaray and also Galatasaray fans hate him because of his writings. We see that this site is dangereous for sport clubs, for fans and for the sportives also.
Demet Gecebegi LAW 149.21
ReplyDeleteAfter my research, I deduce that www.seslisozluk.com is an unreliable website. This site is a multilingual dictionary, primarily English to Turkish and Turkish to English, which was established in 1999. The site, defines itself as a “non-profit user-supported online dictionary”. As the tag-line suggests the site cannot be trusted with blindfolds on since it is not set up by professionals. It cannot be fully trusted in both its accuracy and content.
Accuracy: Seslisozluk cannot be relied upon since there is no guarantee whether users adding definitions have a good command of the language. The risk of misinterpretation should not be overlooked. Users run the chance of being mislead and misinterpreted.
Authority: A contribution system lets users add new translations. So, the author of the site is everyone. With this system, we can’t rely on the definitions in the dictionary. We don’t know that if the users know the correct definition of a certain word. All users are authorized to add definitions.
Currency: There is no automatic date modification in this website. Since, it’s a dictionary site, there is no need for currency because the meanings will never change.
Coverage: There is no table of context in the site. The site covers definitions of words primarily English to Turkish and Turkish to English.
Objectivity: We can say that this web site is not very subjective. Finally we can deduce that this site is not a very objective one, since, civilian uploaded definitions may be misleading.
Meline Çilingir
ReplyDeleteLaw 149.22
diziport.com is an unreliable website. The currency of this website is questionable though the final update date is not precised on any pages. Also, it is the same website as www.diziport.com which was ended by the the turkish government so it is not related to a very trustworthy authority. The accuracy of the website is also another point that can be argued: it contains many links that doesn't actually any new sources. However, the website covers many of the searched sources and it is hard to discuss the objectivity og this website.
Demet Gecebegi LAW 149.21
ReplyDeleteAfter my research, I deduce that www.seslisozluk.com is an unreliable website. This site is a multilingual dictionary, primarily English to Turkish and Turkish to English, which was established in 1999. The site, defines itself as a “non-profit user-supported online dictionary”. As the tag-line suggests the site cannot be trusted with blindfolds on since it is not set up by professionals. It cannot be fully trusted in both its accuracy and content.
Accuracy: Seslisozluk cannot be relied upon since there is no guarantee whether users adding definitions have a good command of the language. The risk of misinterpretation should not be overlooked. Users run the chance of being mislead and misinterpreted.
Authority: A contribution system lets users add new translations. So, the author of the site is everyone. With this system, we can’t rely on the definitions in the dictionary. We don’t know that if the users know the correct definition of a certain word. All users are authorized to add definitions.
Currency: There is no automatic date modification in this website. Since, it’s a dictionary site, there is no need for currency because the meanings will never change.
Coverage: There is no table of context in the site. The site covers definitions of words primarily English to Turkish and Turkish to English.
Objectivity: We can say that this web site is not very subjective. Finally we can deduce that this site is not a very objective one, since, civilian uploaded definitions may be misleading.
Emre Sert LAW 149.23
ReplyDeletewww.sigortasorgulama.net is not a realiable site. This site is about insurance. It's a new website, so it hasn't got a lot of members. If we talk about accuracy, the information on the website is not accurate, although it gives logical information, it doesn't give written resources. The authority seems good, there are authors that inspect site, and only these authors can write on this site. These authors are also the admins of the site. Members can comment on the articles. But on the other hand members can't communicate with the editors, there is no "contact us" section. This site is not up to date site, there is no info about the found date. The latest update is on November 2009. The URL offers to provide information about insurance, but the content of the site on my opinion is not satisfactory. This shows us the insufficiency of the coverage. Lastly we can't talk about the objectivity of the site, because it just gives information, the authors don't make any comments.
ne bicimmm ingilizce cumleler bunlar yaziklar olsunnnn. kim sizinnnn ingilizce hocanizzzz
ReplyDeletewww.fanatik.com.tr is an unreliable , sport news website. The site is not fully accurate: the contents of the news are mostly based on public-attraction which will eventually turn out that they are lies. The currency of site is another arguemant.It's obvious that something can come out from past without any relation of present time.On the other hand , the authors of the subjects and contents are unknown and there is free space for "members" of the site -who can be basically anyone- can comment on anything.I didn't understand the logical reason of that. Authors tend to pick a side while writing their subjects which is not comply with the objectivity rule. Coverage is better than most sites but still , is not realiable.
ReplyDeleteElif KOCA law 149.22
ReplyDeleteI think www.bilgisozluk.com is an unreliable website because anyone who is a member can write what he wants and nobody check these sentences.it is very bad because if we want to look and learn something, we can learn wrong things. The website hasn't got a publisher.The website always show same informations and nobody check these items and this website is fake of the www.eksisozluk.com.
Fatih Bakırcı law149.21
ReplyDeletehttp:// www.sourtimes.org
This website is an unreliable website. Nowadays, there is a dictionary trend in Turkey where everyone put his/her personal thoughts or information which they believe to be true, but in reality these dictionary entries have no reliability. They are not scientific or based on any evidence. Usually these web-dictionaries are there to have an idea of that topic but not to gather important information. This website is an example of it.
Accuracy: We can not trust the information in this site. Because, anyone declare of an opinion even he/she has no information about the topic. Everyone puts his own opinion of view in these definitions.
Objectivity:There are no objectivity or rather this website's system isn' based on objectivity. Because, website want to write everything about every topics from authors, even if they don' know anythinh about which topics they write.Also, some authors give very prejudiced information; and also some authors want to direct poeple by this way. Consequently, people who enter this website in order to find a objective information are mistaken.
Authority: The author of this website is simply everyone. There is a procedure that limits the number of people who writes definitions, but it is reliable. You don’t know who is writing these definitions since all of them have nicknames. There is a “rules” link at the top but they are not enough and they are not about anything that goes with reliability
Currency: www.sourtimes.org is a currency web site. A person who wants to add a topic, they can make easily and they can make whenever they wants.
Yücel Araç law149.21 said...
ReplyDeleteeksisozluk is an unreliable website because if we are searching for something we can't learn the truth one at this website.we can't use it to search whatever we want to know.forexmple if I want search about somebody's life ı never use that site.it sometimes doesn't give the truth about everything.there are too much site like that forexample wikipedia.i never believe it and never search from there. it contains lots of incorrect things.because people who don't know anything about your search write them. you can sometimes see the truth..but i can say that wikipedia is better than other sites although not reliable..
Buket Aydın law 149.21
ReplyDeleteI think www.sozluk.web.tr is an unreliable website.Actually this site is based an unreliability.Because the website can't translate truely.A lot of people who research the subject can not find true information but people may not understand which is true.Many people choose this website for translation.Result of translation is not reliable. I don't recommend this site.
I think www.itusozluk.com is an unreliable website. First of all people can easily be a member of the site and then they can write information about everything on the site. So people who write the information don't have to be an expert. Also the authority of the site is those members who are not expert.
ReplyDeleteIf we look at the accuracy i can say that most of the information have the accuracy but i can't be sure about all of them. Also there are many topics to have fun and information about these topics haven't got the accuracy.
We can talk about the currency of the site because so many people of all ages enter the site everyday and write informations about the topics but we can say that there are some topics that have not updated for a long time but i think people already don't look them now.
The coverage of the site is wide because people can find about everything in it.
At last as we talk about it's objectivity i can say that the site generally objective because everyone can say his/her own ideas there are no limits for the information but these people who write the informations are not objective. So we can say that the informations are not objective but generally by looking at the subjuctive informations people can reach an objective idea on their minds..
Didem Şahin law 149.21
ReplyDeleteAfter my research i think www.uludagsozluk.com is an unrealiable website.The author of this website is members.this website includes the information which members personal thoughts or information which they believe.is a currency web site. Uludagsozluk.com is currency site because a person who wants to add a topic, they can make easily and they can make whenever they wants.In this respect this sites are useful. You can find a topic easily. You can find what do you want so this site has large coverage.There are no objectivity or rather this website's system isn' based on objectivity. Because, website want to write everything about every topics from authors, even if they don' know anythinh about which topics they write.Informations are not true and not genearlly postulated.Everybody writes everything about any topics so that there is complication of information.So it's not accuracy.
This website is an unreliable website.
Merve Eyüboğlu law 149.21
ReplyDeleteI think http://sozluk.sourtimes.org/ is an unreliable website.
accuracy:the informations in site is not reliable,because everyone can write something about a topic,they write their own opinions,so it is going to be changed person to person.
editors:the people who writes something about a topic is going to be editor of the web site.
authority:the authors of this web site is the person who writes some definitions which is reliable.every person have some nickname in web site.
objectivity:there is no objectivity in this web site.Because it is a web site that you can find some description for every word,every topic...I think it is not for an objectivity.
currency:the site indicates the dates and the times that someone adds something new about a topic.so its a currency web site.
coverage:there is a table of contents in the left side of the web site.So you can see all of the tittles that people writes about.
You can see a lot of definition or opinion for some subject or topic,but eventually you can't trust.
Serkan Temizel
ReplyDeleteLaw 149.21
My example of unreliable websites is 'www.htspor.com'. This website was created to publish the sport news. Actually, 'htspor.com' is a subsidiary company of 'haberturk.com'. htspor is not totally accurate, sometimes they fiction wrong news, because they want more hits. this websites currency is not bad, they have huge sources and often update their websites. Seven authors work for this websites, this authors mostly respected people. so, there is no problem with this subject. they have many sport branch -football, volleyball, basketball, motorsport, tennis etc. So the coverage is wide, but there is no equal attention between every sport branches. This website is not objective, mostly they take side which is powerfull team or club.
My example of unreliable websites is www.itiraf.com.
ReplyDeleteAccuracy: İnformations in that site is unreliable, because everyone can write something about their thoughts and experiences.
Authority: The author is the website is everyone.There is not any limits to the writers about topics. There are just nicknames for the writers, they can hide their names.
Objectivity:There are no objectivity in this site, because the website's systm is not based on objectivity.
Coverage:There is a table of contents on the top of the page. So people can see the titles of that peoples writes about.
Yasemin Kıvrak Law 149.22
Aybüke Çakırel
ReplyDeleteLaw 149.21
I choose ‘’zargan.com’’ for checking reliabilty of a website. Zargan.com is a multilangual dictionary which anybody can add meaning of any word.
So, here is my review with createrias.
Accuracy; Even if there are lots of words with their true meaning, there are also lots of examples for wrong translations.
Authority;There is nothing about authority although there are some moderators, they can’t change all the wrong entries and there is no way to contact with writers.
Currency; When you google about ‘’dictionaries’’ zargan will be on top five. And also zargan have 425.493 entries with nearly 6000 visitors .Since today, website is used for 921.418.545 times to search some meanings. So that make website popular.
Coverage; Zargan has lots of meanings and actually having more entries than its rivals. But on the other hand its because of user-based entries like wikipedia.
Objectivty;There is no bias because you have to write only one or two words that explain meaning of the word.
So we can say that even zargan have huge number of words, we can’t say that it’s reliable web site. Because of user based database and missing moderation of needed levels, it’s better to choose dictionarys that written by academics , universities or institutions realated to language.
Sıla Öztürk
ReplyDeleteLaw 149.21
I like spending my spare times in the cinema thats why I'm interested in movies.For the decision of which movie I'm going to watch,'imdb' is one of my favourite websites that I visited.
People are voting the movies with their own criterias.But mostly it's the favourite website of people really interested in movies.So we can say that the ratings are up to opinions of almost expert people.But the subject is not objective itself.It ofcourse has some defined evaluation criterias.But still liking a movie or not subjective and as the people who are voting have their own pleasures on their comments.Because of this topic doesn't have accepted and specific points,we can't basicly talk about the accurancy of the information on the website.
Because of the people don't have an official licence or competence we can't say that an authority of movies or cinema is marking the movies.
As we can see from the parts of like 'opening this week','coming soon' and 'on TV tonight' the website is updating everyday.Probably more than once in a day.
With different styles of evaluating movies,because of everybody has a different opinion about a movie we can basicly say that the coverage of the website is wide and we can find out from from imbd Top 250 films most of the movies which are presented could be find on the search part.