what kind of sites are not credible because anyone can change the information on them?
ebooks
wikis
magazines
books
Among the options listed, wikis are typically the kind of sites that are not considered inherently credible because anyone with access can change the information on them. Wikipedia is the most famous example of a wiki, and while it can be a useful starting point for research, its open-editing nature means that its content can be modified by anyone at any time, potentially introducing errors or bias.
The credibility of content on ebooks, magazines, and books is generally more controlled, as these forms of media typically involve a publishing process that includes editing, fact-checking, and sometimes peer review (particularly in the case of academic books and journals). However, it is worth noting that the credibility of any source, including ebooks, magazines, and books, can vary based on the reputation of the author, the publisher, the publication process, and the content itself. Always consider the source and its reputation in the field when evaluating credibility.