Evaluating Web Sites - Example 2

Source:

Here we have a dot-com based in London (although it does not use the uk domain name). It is, in fact, an online journal.
But it is free, produced by volunteers. It has an "about" link with some information, and a link, "What is spiked?", which solicits donations. So it could qualify as a dot-org.
The author, Helene Guldberg, cannot be found in standard biographical sources (e.g., Biography Resource Center, accessible from OCC Libraries' articles page). However, a Google search reveals that "She specialises in issues of human psychology and child development" (http://www.thegreatdebate.org.uk/helene.html). Nothing indicates expertise in the practice of animal experimentation or the ethics (morality) of animal rights.

Content:

A review of articles in various sections of the journal shows that its tone is generally argumentative rather than objective, which is true of this particular article as well. The only relevant link (as the bottom of the article) is to other articles with the same point of view in the same journal.
Opposing viewpoints are given little consideration.
The article is dated 26 November 2004.
Neither articles databases nor the library catalog turns up anything else on this subject by this author.