A noncredible source is graffiti.org because i want to know when was graffiti started but instead it tells me aboutn people art crimes. it shows images of graffiti but it dont answerany of the questions i have about graffiti.
Wikipedia.com is another non-cedible source because it tells some good information about what i want to know but i dont know if its true because any body can post a comment on there website so you dont know what you can believe on there.
A credible source was jstor.org this was a credible source because it didnt have any pop ups or nothing and eerything looked the part. the page had footnotes and i found this site through google scholar.
Wikipedia.com is another non-cedible source because it tells some good information about what i want to know but i dont know if its true because any body can post a comment on there website so you dont know what you can believe on there.
A credible source was jstor.org this was a credible source because it didnt have any pop ups or nothing and eerything looked the part. the page had footnotes and i found this site through google scholar.
.
a credible source i found also through google scholar was a book called Graffiti and the writing arts of early modern England. the book only has one author and there are no popups or advertisements on the page. juliet fleming is the author of the book. something i read from the book was "graffiti invites us to imagine a practice within which writing and drawing are not fully distinguish", thats why i say that graffiti is a frree minded art skill that people have.
thes are my credible and non credible sources i haved used. i haved learned that finding soures through the internet isnt easier than it seems wm=hen you have know if the source really telling you the truth or is it just something some body posted on the inter =net
Great examples, Andrew, but make sure you put your links in so we know where to go. And it looks like you have one more credible source to go.
ReplyDelete-Shakur