Examining Sources about the Japanese Occupation in Malaya

1. Amir's source It was written by John H. Drabble, who was a professor of history from University of Sydney, Australia. The facts in the source matches the one in our resource package. It is reliable as it was not written with a point of view but simply nrrating the events that happened.

2. Ianzo's source on The treatment of malays: Content is from NIE, a reliable source as NIE(Normal Instituite of Education) is a well known institute. Also, if we compare this with our resource package, the information matches, meaning that this source is reliable. His tone is also neutral, even when he tells the reporter a real life incident that happened to him during the Japanese Occupation. The terms he uses do not exaggerate anything he said. He also does not use extreme language to get our sympathy.

3. Basil's source is reliable because the article was written by an author who has released many books and therefore is well known. The article is mostly a factual recounts and therefore there is no exaggeration which makes it reliable. Our group read the source and google its author and different books.After knowing his background we were able to determine that he is a published and a trust able source.

4. Tim's source on Social Restrictions is reliable as it is from a book, of which has a reliable author, Dr Ang Cheng Guan. The article does not include any personal bias and takes a neutral stance. Furthermore, the source is clear, concise and is mainly factual so we can get the most information out of it. The source/extract is also rather recent.

5. Faizal's source is reliable as it was not an opinion but factual. Another source had the same facts such as the changes the Japanese made to Singapore such as changing the national anthem Majulah Singapura to the Kimigayo, national anthem of Japan. Other than that, our resource package has also similar facts as his sources which makes it reliable due to the same points said in cross reference. The points stated in the source Faizal has given us may not be true as the editor is a member of the public and not a trusted source. However, he did not exaggerate much which makes it reliable and also, he did not use words of extremity. His tone is also quite neutral.

6. Clarence's source is reliable in terms of the actions taken by the Japanese affecting the economy of Malaya as our contextual knowledge matches those in the source and proves that the source is true in some ways such as the destruction of rubber and tin industries. Moreover, the tone of the source is not exaggerated and no opinions and feelings were indicated in the source as well as feedback given by readers were mostly positive. However, the source can be unreliable as no specific references were made. also the date of upload was a few years ago and might be outdated.

7. Rui Rong's source is unreliable as it was vague, written by unreliable people, as well as contextually incorrect. The source were written by two bloggers with no major education in history