Finding and Evaluating History Websites

Searching for Good Websites

General search engines are not as comprehensive as they may seem. Also, they use mechanical and commercial means to set and apply their priorities and criteria.

Rather than a search engine, you can use a directory. Directories are searched in the same way as search engines, and often offer special search features such as classifications and controlled vocabulary. Most importantly, directories are built by human reviewers of the listed sites. Though your searches will give you smaller sets of results, you will find few if any sites in your results that can't meet minimum standards.

For basic instruction on searching for websites go to the "Finding Quality Websites" section of the Lake Effect Research Challenge.

Some Directories

• INFOMINE. http://infomine.ucr.edu/
• Librarians' Internet Index. http://lii.org/
• The WWW Virtual Library. Use http://vlib.iue.it/history/index.html to go directly to the WWW-VL History Central Catalogue site which can be searched, or can be browsed by topic, country or eras.
• A more complete list of directories is available at SUNY Albany Libraries http://www.internettutorials.net/subject.html . This site also includes tutorials and other guides to using the Internet.

Features of a Website

• Several webpages providing content
• Homepage that describes and links to the other pages
• Information about the persons or institution that are producing and sponsoring the website
• Links to other sites that the authors have reviewed and want to recommend to others.

Remember the Four Big Criteria

• Useful or Relevant. Does the site present information about your topic, and can the site tell you something new about your topic?
• Timely. Does the site include a date of posting or most recent update? Obviously whatever happened in the past will not change, but what we know and think about it does change. Also, recent updates to a site indicate that someone cares about the site, and absence of a date indicates an unprofessional attitude.
• Appropriate. Who appears to be the target audience for the site? Is it a scholarly or general audience? How does that audience overlap with your own target audience?
• Authoritative. Who wrote or takes responsibility for the information on the site? How do they know what they claim to know? Is contact information available on the site?
  
  • Methodology. Do they cite sources? Do they explain the process for any research they report? Do they present clear and sound logic in their arguments? Do they have a bias, and what difference does that bias make?
  • Expertise. Do the author or authors present relevant credentials? Do they have education or experience that is relevant to the topic? Have they written other materials on the topic?
  • Review. Is there a reputable agency supporting the site? University? Association? Museum? Library? Has the site been included in a directory or in links from other sites? Has the site been reviewed?

Wikipedia and Other Encyclopedic Sources

Please note what Wikipedia says about itself as a source. Sometimes Wikipedia is a perfectly good source, depending on what you want to use it for.  Its main problem is the uneven editing.  Its biggest assets are the lists of references and external links that appear at the end of most entries.

Many encyclopedias that were first produced in print are now also available electronically through Penfield Library. See our "A-Z List of Online Encyclopedias and Dictionaries" and our resources for "Biographical Information".

by Jim Nichols, History Librarian, Penfield Library, SUNY Oswego, NY; jnichol1@oswego.edu ; Home