Bibliography (sources used)

FIG 20.2:

This book is reliable as it would not have been published if the information was incorrect. Also, Simon Winchester would not have been very popular if the information was not right. There are many reviews on the internet that promote the book. On the front of the book, there is a quote from the Literary Review. It says, ‘Winchester has an unerring eye for detail – the grotesque, the significant, and the plain batty.’ This would not have been written if the information inside the book wasn’t reliable. His latest two books have been the best international sellers. They are ‘The Map That Changed the World’ and ‘The Surgeon of Crowthorne.’ This information is written by the BBC. The BBC would not have written it if it were not true. Also it is the NEW YORK TIMES bestseller. It must be therefore VERY RELIABLE! This was my main source.

I also used a tape recorded version that I could listen to, pause it, type up what it said, in my own words, and then continue. Sometimes this was easier than reading the text first. It is reliable as the book as the author has just read it out onto the tape.

I also used Google Earth. I used this to get images of Anak Krakatoa. This helped to illustrate Anak Krakatoa.

This is reliable as it is a product from Google. Google would not give bad information unless it may be in the search, but the program would not be wrong or Google would be largely discredited and no-one would trust them again. I believe that this Google Earth program is reliable.

Also as my teacher, Mr Langrish introduced me to it. He would not have done so if was not good.

I took 11 snapshot pictures with this software. They can be found at ' Anak Krakatoa Images.'

I also used a few websites as sources. Some of them had more information than the others and some were more reliable than the rest.

The first website i used, and which was very good was -

http://www.ees1.lanl.gov/Wohletz/Krakatau.htm

The next one I used was:

volcano.und.nodak.edu/vwdocs/frequent_questions/grp7/asia/question879.html.

This website gave a lot of facts which I could then use to create pages of information.

This website is reliable as it was a volcano world website which Mr Langrish also recommended. The URL is ‘.edu’ which means it is an educational site, not looking for profit and it menas that it will therefore be reliable as the company making the site is not looking to earn money. There are no adverts on that particular site, so there is no way for them to earn their money, proves they are non-profiting. You can write a question to them. This is what is happening here. Someone has asked a question and the service is answering them. They also recommend some books to read for further research.

I also used a website called http://ce.eng.usf.edu/pharos/wonders/Natural/krakatoa.html

It had a little information but it had some links at the bottom.

The links took me to some more information that I needed to complete this website. They were:

http://www.irfamedia.com/lampung/krakatau.htm - Which gave information about the explosion and what happened.

http://volcano.und.nodak.edu/vwdocs/volc_images/southeast_asia/indonesia/krakatau.html - which gave information about the location of Krakatoa and the Sundra Strait. It was another Volcano World website.

The above websites were reliable as they all had no adverts and the information matched that in the book I used and the other websites I used too.

I also used the following website:

http://www.geology.sdsu.edu/how_volcanoes_work/Krakatau.html

This website gave me the location of the island and the pictures and diagrams associated with the eruption.

The website is reliable as the URL is .edu. It is educational and there are no adverts. They are not trying to make money. It also had quotes from many people, some of which I have incorporated into my text.

I also used a website who’s URL is:

http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Volcanoes/Indonesia/description_krakatau_1883_eruption.html.

I used this website to obtain additional information on the subject of Krakatoa.

This website is reliable as the URL is .gov. it is a non-profitable website. It has no adverts or anything like that.

I think the websites I chose to use were reliable. I did come across some websites which were not reliable. I could tell this as they were packed with adverts, the URL was a .com and the information generally didn’t agree with the websites I listed above.

This was the list of sources I have used. I have evaluated the websites in this section and not the ICT Evaluation, which is the next page.