credible Vs. non-credible

historical myths I know it is a non-credible source because:
1. A ".com" web domain-meeting that anyone could have purchased it.
2. A description that tells you the website is not focused on your topic area.
3. No clear author and can be edited by anyone . (about) Author who is not credentialed or experienced in the topic they are writing about.
4. The sources of information are not footnoted or explained

The 300 spartans I know it is a credible source because:
1. These usually end in ".edu" which means it is a university. ".gov" which means it is a government organization can also be acceptable. ".org" website are non-profits and can sometimes acceptable.
2. Few, if any ads on the page
3. A description and healing that indicates the website the is fouces on your topic area.
4. Authors who are clearly named and who have credentials or experience in the topic they are writing about.


The battle of Thremoplae I know it is a non-credible source because:
1. A ".com" web domain-meeting that anyone could have purchased it.
2. A description that tells you the website is not focused on your topic area.
3. No clear author and can be edited by anyone . (about) Author who is not credentialed or experienced in the topic they are writing about.
4. The sources of information are not footnoted or explained

Spartans History I know it is a credible source because:
1. These usually end in ".edu" which means it is a university. ".gov" which means it is a government organization can also be acceptable. ".org" website are non-profits and can sometimes acceptable.
2. Few, if any ads on the page
3. A description and healing that indicates the website the is fouces on your topic area.
4. Authors who are clearly named and who have credentials or experience in the topic they are writing about.