Imagine you are reading an article about the goals of the national archives to reduce its energy use. what two facts could you know that this source is reliable and credible?
a. the information relevance to politics
b. the information statues as primary or secondary
c. the information creator and date of publication
d. the information topic and tone

Correct  

C. The information's creator and date of publication.

The information's creator and where the article is published should be reputable and solid.  A random blog by some guy is different from an article published in an established periodical and written by someone with credentials in the topic.  As to date of publication, you'd want to make sure the article was up-to-date with any current policies or actions being taken by the National Archives.

Some general  thoughts about how to assess sources of information you use:

Always examine the sources of information that the person or book or website uses.  Do they have actual sources of information or are they just presenting material without giving any backing or citations?  

Also examine the credentials of the author and publisher/website.  Is the author someone with training and a track record in the subject being covered?  (Example: A university professor in that subject area.)  If a website, does the website get cited by other agencies? If a book, has the book  been noted with any awards or strong reviews by knowledgeable people?

Does the person or site seek to offer objective information, or is it biased toward the support of only a particular position or agenda?  It's fine to take notice of sources that are biased, but then give attention to sources on BOTH sides of that bias, not just one side, so that you as a researcher can remain objective.

Read more on -

your stuuupid lolz

explanation: