C- Currency 1. Has the information since been refuted?

No
2. Is it too recent? Date edited/ written unknown
R – Relevance 1. What does it have to do with your particular topic? This article explores the
aftermath of the genocide which views how the survivors changed.
2. If creating an argument, is it useful as a support or as something for your
counterargument? The article serves to support the argument.
3. Can you find better information for your purposes? Yes I can.
A – Authority 1. Is the person who wrote the article an authority on that topic? Doesn’t seem like
it because it is written from the Holocaust Memorial Museum.
2. Is it a scholarly source? Not really, it’s not written by one person.
3. Can you trust the person who wrote the article to remain bias-free, or are you
willing to acknowledge their bias in your writing? Seems to be bias-free as it
explains what the court ruled but does have perspectives present.
A – Accuracy 1. Is the information in the article overgeneralized? No, it is not, it specifies the
types of charges and what organizations took part in it.
2. Did the author take the information and make sweeping statements without
support? No, they do not make any sweeping statements.
3. If the article is a study, check if they acknowledge their limitations. They do not.
4. Do they cite their sources? no
5. Are you using another source that contradicts it? I will try if I find one.
P – Purpose 1. What was the intent of the article? (explore, explain, etc.) The intent is to inform
the audience on the event.
2. What are you planning to use it as? I plan to use it as maybe a perspective.
3. Does it fit with the rest of your sources? This is the first source so cannot say
right now.
4. Do your sources look at the topic from a variety of perspectives? It truly only
gave a few perspectives.

Citation of the Source:

“Bosnia-Herzegovina: Aftermath,” United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Accessed 23

Sept. 2019.
 C- Currency 1. Has the information since been refuted? Doesn’t seem like it
2. Is it too recent? No
R – Relevance 1. What does it have to do with your particular topic? It demonstrates a
cultural lens which is the lens that I am going to write my research paper
on.
2. If creating an argument, is it useful as a support or as something for
your counterargument? This information will support my argument.
3. Can you find better information for your purposes? I maybe I can but
the information in the article gives great information that will benefit my
paper.
A – Authority 1. Is the person who wrote the article an authority on that topic? No
2. Is it a scholarly source? Yes it is, the writers are historians from a
university.
3. Can you trust the person who wrote the article to remain bias-free, or
are you willing to acknowledge their bias in your writing? It remains to be
bias-free.
A – Accuracy 1. Is the information in the article overgeneralized? No it does not, the
article is broken up into sections and goes into detail.
2. Did the author take the information and make sweeping statements
without support? No, they provide enough evidence and cites them.
3. If the article is a study, check if they acknowledge their limitations.
4. Do they cite their sources? Yes
5. Are you using another source that contradicts it? No, they say the same
thing.
P – Purpose 1. What was the intent of the article? (explore, explain, etc.) The article is
used to inform.
2. What are you planning to use it as? Yes I am.
3. Does it fit with the rest of your sources? So far this is my second source
but by the looks of it, it does.
4. Do your sources look at the topic from a variety of perspectives? Yes
Citation of the Source:

Lampe, John R. et. Al. “Bosnia and Herzegovina,” Encyclopædia Britannica, Accessed 24 Sept.

2019.
 C- Currency 1. Has the information since been refuted? No
2. Is it too recent? No
R – Relevance 1. What does it have to do with your particular topic? It gives insight in a
mix of a political perspective and how it affected the cultural sides and or
perspectives.
2. If creating an argument, is it useful as a support or as something for
your counterargument? Use as a supporting argument.
3. Can you find better information for your purposes? Yes, I would like to
find an article to use as a counterargument.
A – Authority 1. Is the person who wrote the article an authority on that topic? yes
2. Is it a scholarly source? yes.
3. Can you trust the person who wrote the article to remain bias-free, or
are you willing to acknowledge their bias in your writing? A bit bias but
they are not enforcing it.
A – Accuracy 1. Is the information in the article overgeneralized? no
2. Did the author take the information and make sweeping statements
without support? no
3. If the article is a study, check if they acknowledge their limitations.
4. Do they cite their sources? yes
5. Are you using another source that contradicts it? I will try to find one.
P – Purpose 1. What was the intent of the article? (explore, explain, etc.) It is used to
inform.
2. What are you planning to use it as? yes
3. Does it fit with the rest of your sources? yes
4. Do your sources look at the topic from a variety of perspectives? yes
Citation of source:

Memišević, Ehlimana. “Battling the Eighth Stage: Incrimination of Genocide Denial in Bosnia

and Herzegovina.” Journal of Muslim minority affairs, vol. 35, no. 3, Sept. 2015, pp.

380-400. Accessed 24 Sept. 2019.

 C- Currency 1. Has the information since been refuted? No
2. Is it too recent? No maybe a little bit old
R – Relevance 1. What does it have to do with your particular topic? It gives a social
perspective on the genocide.
2. If creating an argument, is it useful as a support or as something for
your counterargument? Supporting argument.
3. Can you find better information for your purposes? Yes I most definitely
can; I really want to find a source that counter argues my claim.
A – Authority 1. Is the person who wrote the article an authority on that topic? Yes
2. Is it a scholarly source? Yes
3. Can you trust the person who wrote the article to remain bias-free, or
are you willing to acknowledge their bias in your writing? They seem to be
bias free
A – Accuracy 1. Is the information in the article overgeneralized? A little bit
2. Did the author take the information and make sweeping statements
without support? No
3. If the article is a study, check if they acknowledge their limitations.
4. Do they cite their sources? Yes
5. Are you using another source that contradicts it? No 
P – Purpose 1. What was the intent of the article? (explore, explain, etc.) the purpose
is to explain.
2. What are you planning to use it as? Yes
3. Does it fit with the rest of your sources? Yes
4. Do your sources look at the topic from a variety of perspectives? Not
really
Citation of site:

Markusen, Eric, and Martin Mennecke. “Genocide in Bosnia and Herzegovina.” Human Rights

Review, vol. 5, no. 4, July 2004, pp. 72–85. Accessed 26 Sept. 2019.
 C- Currency 1. Has the information since been refuted? As far as I know, no
2. Is it too recent? No
R – Relevance 1. What does it have to do with your particular topic? It gives a futuristic
point of view to the genocide it how it affects people to this day. It’s not
really much of my lens but it does bring psychology into the effects.
2. If creating an argument, is it useful as a support or as something for
your counterargument? It will be used to support my argument.
3. Can you find better information for your purposes? Maybe but this
source went more in detail of the current effects it has on people. The
sources that I read only mentioned it.
A – Authority 1. Is the person who wrote the article an authority on that topic? Yes
2. Is it a scholarly source? Yes
3. Can you trust the person who wrote the article to remain bias-free, or
are you willing to acknowledge their bias in your writing? It remains to be
bias free
A – Accuracy 1. Is the information in the article overgeneralized? No
2. Did the author take the information and make sweeping statements
without support? No
3. If the article is a study, check if they acknowledge their limitations.
4. Do they cite their sources? Yes
5. Are you using another source that contradicts it? No but I will
P – Purpose 1. What was the intent of the article? (explore, explain, etc.) The intent of
the article is to explore to psychological effects that the genocide has on
soldiers today.
2. What are you planning to use it as? Yes
3. Does it fit with the rest of your sources? Kind of, yes
4. Do your sources look at the topic from a variety of perspectives? Not
really
Citation of site:

Dzidic, Denic and Denis. “Bosnia Still Living With Consequences of War,” Balkan Transitional

Justice, 6 April 2012, Accessed 27 Sept. 2019.

 C- Currency 1. Has the information since been refuted? No
2. Is it too recent? No
R – Relevance 1. What does it have to do with your particular topic? It gives insight on
how cultural played a role in the genocide and how it was effect in result
of the genocide.
2. If creating an argument, is it useful as a support or as something for
your counterargument? Used to support my claim
3. Can you find better information for your purposes? Yes 
A – Authority 1. Is the person who wrote the article an authority on that topic? Yes
2. Is it a scholarly source? Yes
3. Can you trust the person who wrote the article to remain bias-free, or
are you willing to acknowledge their bias in your writing? Remains to be
bias-free
A – Accuracy 1. Is the information in the article overgeneralized? No
2. Did the author take the information and make sweeping statements
without support? No
3. If the article is a study, check if they acknowledge their limitations.
4. Do they cite their sources? yes
5. Are you using another source that contradicts it? No ugh
P – Purpose 1. What was the intent of the article? (explore, explain, etc.) The intent of
this article is to inform the audience on the cultural effects.
2. What are you planning to use it as? Yes
3. Does it fit with the rest of your sources? Yes
4. Do your sources look at the topic from a variety of perspectives? Kind of
Citation of site:

Walasek, Helen. “Ethnic cleansing, war crimes and the destruction of cultural heritage: not Syria,

but Bosnia twenty years ago,” Open Democracy, 22 Feb. 2016, Accessed 27 Sept. 2019.
 C- Currency 1. Has the information since been refuted? No
2. Is it too recent? No, but it is too old
R – Relevance 1. What does it have to do with your particular topic? It gives insight as to
how the United Nations tried to help and how even though the Muslims
tried to protest, the ‘cleansing’ got worse.
2. If creating an argument, is it useful as a support or as something for
your counterargument? It supports my argument.
3. Can you find better information for your purposes? No
A – Authority 1. Is the person who wrote the article an authority on that topic? Yes
2. Is it a scholarly source? Yes
3. Can you trust the person who wrote the article to remain bias-free, or
are you willing to acknowledge their bias in your writing? The article
remains to be bias-free.
A – Accuracy 1. Is the information in the article overgeneralized? No
2. Did the author take the information and make sweeping statements
without support? No
3. If the article is a study, check if they acknowledge their limitations.
4. Do they cite their sources? Yes
5. Are you using another source that contradicts it? No
P – Purpose 1. What was the intent of the article? (explore, explain, etc.) The intent of
this article is to explain how even though the Muslims tried to fight back,
their
2. What are you planning to use it as?
3. Does it fit with the rest of your sources?
4. Do your sources look at the topic from a variety of perspectives?
Citation of site:

Sudetic, Chuck. “In Bosnia Again, a Grim ‘Ethnic Cleansing,’” The New York Time, 17 Feb.

1994, Accessed 28 Sept. 2019