Source Criticism
Internet Source Criticism * WWW.DKIEL.COM
The source that I’ve chosen for this assignment goes under the URL www.dkiel.com. I found this source by googling a specific event during the early modern period rather than the whole topic itself and then I found this source by googling reformation early modern period. I came directly to an article (http://www.dkiel.com/Reformation/EnglishReformation.html) that was under the possession of www.dkiel.cOM.
The source’s top level domain is .com, which means the owners geographical position is unknown, as well as that the site is most likely not an organization. According to the site the owners are two retired persons Don and Elizabeth Kiel, now according to the site living at “a wonderful retirement community. No information to go on to decide if these two are authorized to write about history, (Don was a match teacher at CAU) However the only contact information they leave are Don’s inactive Facebook page. Which shows that if they post false or distorted information you cannot directly contact them, and they do not need to stand for what information they post on the internet. They have a lot of information on the site, I cannot find any reasons for them to distort the information, or make out a financial use of it, since it is free to use as well as no ads or sponsors, their purpose is mainly to inform. Although they have not written out where they get their information from, so their articles could be filled with a lot of wrong information. Also we cannot know for sure if the information they have is original or if it’s copied from somewhere else. As expected the specific article about reformation in England (the article I got directed to) has information that’s not consistent with other trustworthy sources, e.g.: NE, where DKIEL and NE’s years differs with around 5 years and NE is considered a trustworthy source.
The use of history at least on the article about reformation in England, is a mixture of political
The source that I’ve chosen for this assignment goes under the URL www.dkiel.com. I found this source by googling a specific event during the early modern period rather than the whole topic itself and then I found this source by googling reformation early modern period. I came directly to an article (http://www.dkiel.com/Reformation/EnglishReformation.html) that was under the possession of www.dkiel.cOM.
The source’s top level domain is .com, which means the owners geographical position is unknown, as well as that the site is most likely not an organization. According to the site the owners are two retired persons Don and Elizabeth Kiel, now according to the site living at “a wonderful retirement community. No information to go on to decide if these two are authorized to write about history, (Don was a match teacher at CAU) However the only contact information they leave are Don’s inactive Facebook page. Which shows that if they post false or distorted information you cannot directly contact them, and they do not need to stand for what information they post on the internet. They have a lot of information on the site, I cannot find any reasons for them to distort the information, or make out a financial use of it, since it is free to use as well as no ads or sponsors, their purpose is mainly to inform. Although they have not written out where they get their information from, so their articles could be filled with a lot of wrong information. Also we cannot know for sure if the information they have is original or if it’s copied from somewhere else. As expected the specific article about reformation in England (the article I got directed to) has information that’s not consistent with other trustworthy sources, e.g.: NE, where DKIEL and NE’s years differs with around 5 years and NE is considered a trustworthy source.
The use of history at least on the article about reformation in England, is a mixture of political