Exercise 7.6

1. a. not common knowledge
    b. common knowledge
    c. common knowledge
    d. not common knowledge

2 .I chose the argument , Patriot Act, to evaluate. The author cites factual information from the last date the Patriot Act was renewed. She does not have any information cited after 2009 and there could be some updated facts since then she could have used.
The facts are relevant to the topic of the paper. She cites information that can be connected to and supportive to the disillusionment that the Patriot Act is intrusive on Americans.
I found the paper to cite reliable sources. Some of the information given was facts from the Library of Congress and the American Civil Liberties Union.
The writings were clear and easy to understand. She did not need to paraphrase much.
I think when it comes to thoroughness, I would have to say that there was more potential to add more statistics and facts. I think the topic is very debatable and needs to provide more data to be convincing.
3. Paraphrase A is unacceptable because is it plagiarized. The writer does not acknowledge any author and gives no indication that the information was taken from Scott Wallace's article. It is written as though the ideas were his own.
Paraphrase B is acceptable.
Paraphrase C is unacceptable. The paraphrase is faulty because it has distorted the original idea by stating that "timber barons are murdering anyone who gets in their way".