Zachary Olson

Research Techniques
Leslie Drake
25 September 2015

Evaluations of Sources

First source, Article from an Academic Database

Cited- Works Cited

Verducci, Tom, Kostya Kennedy, and Mark Bechtel. "Five Strikes And You're Out."
Sports Illustrated 99.20 (2003): 23. MAS Ultra - School Edition. Web. 27 Sept. 2015.

Currency- This Article was posted on November 24th 2003. This article has not been revised
since it came out in sports illustrated in 2003. My topic does not require all new information
because this will show how the evolution of steroids in baseball is now compared to before. Old
sources will work to for my topic. My topic will also need current sources to but old sources will
work too. Yes the links for this are functional. I think this source will be a god one to use.
Relevance- This article will be very important to my work, because it when steroid tests first
really came out in baseball, its a lot different from how it is now. Yes it does relate to my topic it

tells the history of steroids in baseball and how baseball started testing for steroids. The intended
audience is baseball fans around the world, and any other sports fan. Yes the information is an
appropriate level for my needs. Yes I looked at a lot of other sources I really liked this one. Yes I
would be comfortable citing this source in my paper.
Authority- The authors of this source is Tom Verducci, Kostya Kennedy, and Mark Bechtel. They
are sports writers for sports Illustrated. Yes they are qualified because they deal with sports every
day. No there is no contact information except for contacting sports Illustrated and asking for
those authors. There is no URL because its in article a sports magazine.
Accuracy- The information comes from a article about steroid testing in baseball in August 2002.
Yes the evidence is supported by evidence from the pools and testing results. Yes it was reviewed
by sports illustrated people before it was released into the issue. Yes I can because I remember
having to read about it in high school and its a reliable source. I feel like the article is unbiased,
it doesnt come across as being biased. There is no grammar or spelling errors or typographical
errors because it was looked over before being published.
Purpose- It is used to inform the reader on the subject or testing for steroids in baseball. Yes they
do make their intentions clear. The information is all facts. The view of the article appears to be
objective. There are no biases in this article.
I would give this source a 3 because its a really good article but its not that long, if it had more
information and was longer it would be a way better source.

Second source- Article from an Academic Databases

Cite- FREDERIC J. FROMMER - Associated Press, Writer. "Mccain Criticizes Baseball
Over Steriods." AP Online (2004): Newspaper Source Plus. Web. 27 Sept. 2015.

Currency- This information was posted to the web. The information was revised by the
WASHINGTON (AP). No my topic doesnt require current information I can use old information
too. Yes the links are functional.
Relevance- Yes it does relate to my topic of steroids in baseball. The indented audience is fans of
baseball, and the head of baseball operations. Yes the information is at an appropriate level. Yes I
looked at a lot of different sources before picking this one. Yes I would cite this in my paper,
Authority- The author is Frederic J. Frommer, for the associated press writers. He is a writer for
the associated press. Yes he is qualified because he deals with sports and is a sports writer. There
is no contact information for the author. No it does not have a URL.
Accuracy- The information comes from a writer who writes about sports. Yes the information is
supported by evidence. I believe that the information has been reviewed. Yes I can verify it from
the other articles that I have read about steriods in baseball. The informations seems to be
somewhat biased but he supports it with proof. There are not any grammar errors.

Purpose- The purpose of the information is to show that baseball needs to test for steroids more
like other sports. Yes e makes his points very clear. The information is facts, but he also puts his
own opinions in there too. It appears to be Objective. There are a couple of personal biases thats
all.
I would give this source a 2 because its kind of biases and gives a couple of unbiased opinions
but it kind of goes on and on about the same thing. But all and all its a good source and I will
use it in my paper.

Third source- Book

Cited-

Moffi, Larry. The Conscience Of The Game : Baseball's Commissioners From Landis To Selig.
Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2006. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 27 Sept.
2015.
Currency- This book was published in 2006. Not since it was posted, but it was reviewed before
being published. My topic does not require current information you can use old information as
sources. Yes the links are functional.
Relevance- Yes it relates to my subject and my question. The intended audience is the fans of
major league baseball, and the professional baseball players as well as the coaches and managers.

Yes the information is at an appropriate level. Yes I looked at a bunch of different sources before
picking this book. Yes I would site this in my paper.
Authority- The author is Larry Moffi. The author is from the Lincoln: University of Nebraska
Press. Yes the author is qualified because he is a baseball writer and went to school for writing
and he got all of his work looked through before publishing it. No there is no contact
information. No there is no URL.
Accuracy- The information comes from baseball history and all of the information is from the
history of baseball. Yes the information is supported by evidence. Yes the work was reviewed
before being published. Yes I have seen the entire same if information before in baseball history
books and stuff like that. Yes the language sees like its unbiased and free of emotion. There are
no Grammar errors since it was looked over before being published.
Purpose- The purpose is to give the history of baseball and how steroids affect it; it is used to
teach us about it. Yes the author makes his intentions clear. The information is all facts. The view
seems like its objective. There is no personal Basis.
I would give this source a 4 because its a good source. It has the information I need.

Fourth Source- Article from the World Wide Web

Cited- "Anabolic Steroids - Abuse, Side Effects and Safety." Anabolic Steroids - Abuse, Side
Effects and Safety. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Sept. 2015.

Currency- It was published in November 2012. The last time the information was updated was
April 5th 2014. No my information does not need new information, however this was revised in
2014 so it isnt old at all. Older sources will work for my topic. Yes the links are Functional.
Relevance- Yes it related to my topic and it also helps answer my question. The intended
audience is anyone trying to learn about the effects of steroids on a person. It is a good for
anyone trying to learn about how steroids affect you physically. Yes the information is at an
apporpriate level. Yes I looked at other sources before using this one. Yes I would use this as a
source in my research paper.
Authority- The author of this is Leigh Anderson, PharmD. She is a doctor so she is a very
creditable source to be talking about steroids and its effects on people. No there is no way to
contact her. The URL is .com however some of the information is from URL of .org.
Accuracy- Comes from other articles about steroids. Yes it is supported by multiple sites and put
into this article. Yes the information has been reviewed. Yes I can verify it because Ive read
other stuff just like it. It does not seem like its bias. There are no Grammar errors.
Purpose- The purpose is to inform and teach people about the effects of steroids on the body. Yes
the intentions are clear, and the purpose is clear. This information is through facts. The point of
view seems to be objective. I dont see any personal bias to it.
I would give this a 3 because its very good information but it has been edited a couple of times.
Its good because it has information from all different places and its all put together.

Fifth source- Article from the World Wide Web

Cited-

"Juicin' In The Majors: A History Of Steroids In Baseball - NYU Local." NYU Local.

N.p., 18 Feb. 2013. Web. 27 Sept. 2015.

Currency- It was published February 18th 2013. No the information has not been revised or
updated since. No my topic doesnt require current information, and this will work because it
tells about the history of steroids in baseball. Yes the links are functional.
Relevance- Yes it is very relevant to my topic, one of my major topics is about history of steroids
in baseball and that what this articles about. The intended audience is anyone interested in the
history of steroids in baseball. Yes the information is at an appropriate level. Yes I looked at
different sources before picking this one out. Yes I would feel comfortable using this in my
paper and citing it.
Authority- The author/Publisher is Joshua Z. Lavine. He works for nyulocal and thats a good
publishing company. Yes he is because he is a sports writer for his company. No there is no way
to contact him. The URL of the website is .com.
Accuracy- It comes from his sources, and the information he found about it. Yes because the
same information is all over the web. No this article has not been reviewed, but it was before he
published it. Yes Ive read some of this stuff before. It seems to be unbiased to me. There are no
Grammar errors in this article.

Purpose- The purpose is to inform and teach us about the history of steroids in baseball. yes there
intentions are clear, and the purpose is clear. The work is fact with some opinion in it. The view
seems to me to be objective. There seems to be some personal bias thats all.
I would give this article a 3, I would use it because it has good information but it kind of scares
me that its a website. I think that I will use it in my paper though.