PorcelainPrincess Follow-Up 2

I would just like to thank everyone again for taking the time to read my blog post and make such detailed comments, it really helps me out so much, thanks a bunch!

After reading a few of your posts as well as comments written on my previous posts I realized how different people read different articles and take points out which they feel are more important then others. It was interesting to see and read similar quotes used in different contexts. I not only learned more about Wikipedia by reading the articles, but I also learned more just by reading each other’s comments as well as blog posts.

A few of us had similar views about Wikipedia not being a credible and reliable source. I noticed that we used much of the same articles and even in most cases some of the exact same quotes. I’m happy I’m not the only one who has these views about Wikipedia. One of the comments mentioned how the editors are not getting paid. I agree with you when you said that basically eventually the creativity will die out and even the “want” to try and edit the posts will die too.

Another comment was based on my wording when I said the editors use creativity, by this I solely meant that if a writer is creative with wording, and even facts then what they wrote may appear to be more reliable and credible. I agree we only use Wikipedia for facts and knowledge; and not a story. But when creativity is at play, things seem to be more credible then they may actually be.

Now for the blogs written with the opposite position then that of mine, I found them to be a very interesting read. I learned more about different ways to use Wikipedia then for school purposes (personal use). Most of you mention using Wikipedia as a starting point to gain common knowledge on a certain topic, and then do further research. For personal use I can definitely see myself using it, for school assignments I would much rather stick the databases of articles that we each as university students get free access to.

I also received a post saying that things are not always incorrect, or even not completely false. That may be the case, but when I’m doing research I want to know that the information I’m finding is accurate. I know that anything on the Internet can be incorrect and not everything on the Internet is credible but when I know that a source has a high rate and chance of not being credible I personally would just rather avoid the site all together.

To the comment written by agirlthatfound love; be sure to read my next post later this week. I will be relating Wikipedia to women suffering with eating disorders, it will be an interesting read. For this post I was trying to focus more of the reading questions but thanks for the tip.

Thanks again everyone for commenting on my posts, I really enjoyed reading each one of your posts and I can’t wait to read the next.

Stay Happy. Stay Healthy. Until Next Time.



PorcelainPrincess’ Views on Wikipedia as A Reliable Source

What is Wikipedia? “Wikipedia is more of a socially produced documentation, than a value-free information source. It reflects the viewpoints, interests and emphases of the people who use it.” (Royal, Kapila, 2009). I first heard about Wikipedia back in high school, which was about 7 years ago now. I didn’t really understand what Wikipedia was, but all I was told was to avoid using it a source; since it was not credible. After being told that I tried to avoid using it when doing a search on google. Once I got to University, essay’s after essay’s; class after class; professor after professor, who continuously say “do not use Wikipedia, the information can be false.” After hearing this so many times I asked fellow classmates about this Wikipedia, what’s so bad about it? I was then told that although it can be useful for finding information, any individual could edit it at anytime; thus making it not credible. When I found out about that I never really used Wikipedia since I felt it was pointless as the information I was reading could be false. Therefore before doing all the readings and research for this blog I felt that Wikipedia was NOT a reliable source by any stretch of the imagination.

I found when reading the article What’s on Wikipedia, and What’s Not?… by Cindy Royal and Deepina Kapila, I was able to grasp a better understanding of how Wikipedia operates based on the philosophy of the people who run the site. I would have to say that I wouldn’t necessarily agree with the philosophy, which they choose. For example, “the philosophy of the site is that with so many people looking at the content, in the long run accuracy will prevail” (Royal, Kapila, 2009). I would say that yes, eventually and at some point the information on Wikipedia will, or would have been correct; but at any point someone could change the correct information into false information. That is not my only concern with the Wikipedia philosophy. I can only speak for myself but; when I do a search on the Internet either for personal use or when writing a paper for school, I usually only look up the topic at hand for a brief period of time. If it is for my own common knowledge I would look something up probably only once, thus making me believe I would have the basic knowledge on the topic. If I were to go on the philosophy of Wikipedia I would have to constantly keep look back on the site to verify that the information I was given days, weeks, or months ago was accurate. And to make things more complicated if the information is changed; how would I know (someone with little knowledge on the subject at hand) which information was reliable and which one isn’t.

Another quote from Royal and Kapila states, “This open-source project operates under the assumption that more writers and editors are better than fewer and the community will develop and monitor content in a manner that is improved over that of traditional information publishing” (Royal, Kapila, 2009). In most cases 3 minds are usually better then 1; but that is also usually only the cases when the 3 minds have greater knowledge on the subject then the 1 mind. The idea that Wikipedia allows anyone to edit any page does not prove they have the knowledge to back up what they write about. I could easily change a Wikipedia page on heart conditions; but I have no knowledge on the subject, in fact I actually have a very poor scientific background. All I would have to do to make my writing seem reliable would be to use big, fancy terminology that “could” make sense. In the article Wikinomics and its Discontents: A Critical Analysis of Web 2.0 Business Manifestos written by Jose Van Dijck and David Nieborg they state, “the authors of Wikinomics and ‘We Think’ assume that all users who contribute content are (equally) creative and that their motivations for contributing articulate the same expressive desire” (Dijck, Nieborg, 2009). I can somewhat agree with the statement in that the people editing the Wiki posts must be creative; but I would completely disagree with the notion of their motives for contributing to the page. I’m sure there are many people that edit Wikipedia pages because they have the knowledge behind what they are posting; but I also do know of people who have edited Wikipedia pages to completely change the information into false information just to see how long it would take Wikipedia to notice the changes and correct them. Thus making the motivating completely different.

Although people can make these changes to Wiki pages, Wikipedia has implemented “penalties” to those who make false changes to pages. “The severest penalty is a ban (exile) for a period of time, or permanent banning” (Jensen, 2012). I personally do not believe that permanently banning or temporarily banning people from posting within Wikipedia will stop people from posting false information. Just by the readings done last week, people can easily change “identities” and use different accounts to access Wikipedia if they really wanted to. Although it seems a little out there to go to such great efforts, my point is that it is possible.

After doing my reading and research I feel that it has just reaffirmed the idea that I had about Wikipedia; which is that it is NOT reliable. “Wikipedia is specifically intended as a work of reference, whereas using a search engine is not. A search engine’s purpose is to identify various cites as opposed to finding immediate content” (Royal, Kapila, 2009). Wikipedia should only be used when trying to reaffirm information and knowledge which a person already posses, if even then.

Stay Happy, Stay Healthy, Until Next Time.


Van Dijk, J. & Nieborg, D. (2009). Wikinomics and its discontents: a critical analysis of Web 2.0 business manifestos. New Media & Society. 11, 5. pp 855-874.

Royal, C. & Kapila, D. (2009). What’s on Wikipedia, and What’s Not . . . ?: Assessing Completeness of Information. Social Science Computer Review. 27, 1. pp 138-148.

Jensen, R. (2012). Military History on the Electronic Frontier: Wikipedia Fights the War of 1812. Journal of Military History. 76, 1. pp 1165-1182

PorcelainPrincess Follow-Up

I would like to start off by thanking everyone to take the time to read my post and write such positive feedback. It really allows me to enjoy writing these posts knowing that other people have similar views as I do.

I would like to first respond to the comment written by agirlthatfoundlove. I completely agree with your statement about people who are considered a support system; and actually communicating with then rather then just letting a massive amount of people via SNS. Usually, and I speak for myself, when I’m going through rough personal times I feel that it really is none of the business of most of the people I friend on Facebook, Twitter or Instagram. Because like you said the people who one would want to share these personal things with, will be in your life in the physical way. I also feel that I should perhaps do the same thing as you have done which is rid the people off my SNS that I do not frequent and haven’t frequented in a while; nor would I want to.

Next I would like to address the comment written by wrestlingirl. Through my blog posts my main purpose in what I would like to achieve is to express how readings and posts relate to my personal life and experiences. So thanks for the positive feedback; at least I know I’m heading in the right direction :). I agree with what you commented on texting; how yes it is more of a conversation then posting via SNS. But like you also mentioned it isn’t quite the same as a real conversation. Through texting its hard to really get the emotional connection to a person that one could through a face-to-face interaction. And also I agree with you when you say the conversation is usually kept to a minimum, less characters and texts are used.

Thanks for your comments Kathy Wasylenky. However, when I mentioned only posting happy things that happen in my life; I am only referring to the way I use SNS. I do however agree with you somewhat, because there are a few people who I friend via SNS and they do post negative things which happen in there life. A few friends post about deaths in the family and other hard times which they go through in life. Yes I do have sympathy for these people. I myself have gone through hard times such as these; but personally I don’t post these negative things. In fact when I’m going through rough times I usually avoid making any posts on my personal SNS accounts which I have friends and family on. Which is obviously different from this blog, considering most of this is very personal. Also, I wouldn’t say the youth thrive on negativity, personally I feel that they thrive on getting attention; positive or negative.

Lastly I want to thank Jenna Williams for the great feedback. I took the picture thinking it would perfectly match what I was trying to say in my post. I agree with you, most of my friends are in all different places in their lives, and i truly think if it weren’t for SNS I would have actually communicated with these people more, knowing that if I didn’t I wouldn’t know what was happening in their lives. But since we all use SNS we “think” we know what everyone is going through. It wasn’t until reading the articles that I noticed it myself.

Again, I would just like to thank each of you for taking the time to read my post and leaving such great comments.

Stay Happy, Stay Healthy, Until Next Time.


The REAL PorcelainPrincess

photoStaying connected seems easier than ever. Most people either have a phone which allows them access to the internet, a laptop or a tablet; and in most cases people tend to have 2 or 3 of the above mentioned. While reading an article titled The Flight From Conversation by Sherry Turkle it becomes evident that most of us yes are connected; but we tend to loose all forms of communication (Turkle, 2012). Yes I use Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc. therefore I too am guilty of this. It begins to make sense when thinking back to high school when I had many, many friends; Now I am almost in my mid-twenties thinking of all the friends I had, then I think to myself when was the last time I actually had a conversation with some of these people. Yes I know that Laura just came back from school abroad, Yes I know that Julia just got engaged. But I am lacking the true substance in which a real conversation has. Although I may know what is happening in these people’s lives I truly no longer know them. I don’t know any of the interesting stories that happened to Laura when she was at school in Australia, I don’t know the guy that Julia got engaged to, or even how he treats her.

When I really started thinking about the differences with staying connected and having a conversation I knew I had to have a better balance between public, the private and personal social media I use. As I stated above the main outlets for social media which I use are Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and obviously this Blog. When I think about the idea of public, private and personal social media it makes me ponder on the idea of which self am I on each social media outlet. When reading another article written by Sherry Turkle titled Cyberspace and Identity. In this article Turkle speaks about parallel lives which we all live when we are online, we are all able to create our own persona or have role plays (Turkle, 1999). When I’m using Facebook and Instagram I would consider it to be more of a personal use of social media. I consider it personal use for the simple reason that most of my family members are close friends are my “followers”.
When I think of it this way I can truly only be the REAL me. While I may have some tweaks added, for instance on Facebook I tend to only post happy pictures, pictures of me on vacation. By doing this it could appear to others that I live a happy life and I’m enjoying life on vacation with my boyfriend. While this is true I do live a relatively happy life, and yes I do enjoy going on vacation. That is not my everyday life. I am not always happy, I’m not always on vacation; but it’s a way of getting others to see me the way I want them to see me.
When I’m here writing on this Blog I consider this to be a public outlet. Although I would consider this a public outlet as Turkle puts it it’s “a place to ‘work through’ significant personal issues.”(Turkle, 1999). Which is exactly what I would love for this Blog to become; A place where I can work through my personal issues with the help of other individuals going through the same problems, but also a place where readers of my Blog can work through their own personal issues that may be similar to mine.
Therefore the balance which I try to obtain is considered to be the “Goldilocks effect” as Turkle describes it in an article titled Places We Don’t Want to Go. Turkle describes the Goldilocks effect as “giving people the right amount of attention, not too much, not too little, just enough” (Turkle, 2012). This to me is the idea of putting so much thought into something before posting, or sending a message. The idea of writing something good, then erasing it all together for the thought that it may be too much, might not be enough. Re-writing over and over until I consider it just right.

Stay Happy, Stay Healthy, Until Next Time.


Cyberspace and Identity Sherry Turkle Contemporary Sociology Vol. 28, No. 6 (Nov., 1999), pp. 643-648

Sherry Turkle. The Flight From Conversation. New York Times Sunday Review. April 21, 2012

Places we don’t want to go: Sherry Turkle at TED2012

Porcelain Princess Here to Help!

Throughout my entire life I was always thin, running the 800m in the track meet for my school, participating in cross country, and playing basketball on my school team. I was always fit and athletic, never a couch potato. Then University came along, I’m sure you’ve heard of the expression frosh 15, for me it was more of a frosh 35. I tried the whole eating healthy, working out at the gym, lifting weights, going for a run; nothing helped. I then began taking birth control, I gained another 25-30lbs. I then saw a picture of me at my “biggest” started to panic, I instantly got off birth control, by doing that alone the 25lbs was gone. I continued working hard to try to lose the remaining 35 lbs nothing was helping, I couldn’t even drop a pound. Then I got my wisdom teeth pulled. All 4 teeth were badly impacted, I looked like Quagmire (gigade- gigade), due to my wisdom teeth getting pulled, for a month I lived off of Campbell’s and Jello. All I would hear was how great I looked, everyone would ask how I managed to drop so much weight. That’s when a spark went off in my head; I enjoy eating food too much so I knew I would have to eat, they key was to make sure the food wouldn’t stay in my system. That’ s were it all began! I would praise and bow to the porcelain goddess and laxatives became my best friends.

The purpose of my Blog Porcelain Princess 101 is to talk about eating disorders, to let people know that they are not alone and can talk to people about all different types of eating disorders. In this Blog I will speak about personal experiences in relation to bulimia, and I will do my research to find facts about other eating disorders that I am not so familiar with such as Anorexia and Obesity. This Blog will not only serve as an outlet for me, but what I would love for it to become is a community, a community of people like me who would want to communicate about what they are going through, and also help center in the hopes that we can all get through this together. That being said I am not the only person Blogging about eating disorders, for those of you that want to look into other Blogs that have been around a while here is a list of 5 of my top eating disorder Blogs, I hope they help you, as they have helped me:






I am not a doctor by any means, I am not a psychologist either. I am just a women who has experienced bulimia in my life, I know the difficulties, I know the feeling of being alone. In all my Blog posts I will either write based on person experiences, or based on research I have done on the topics. Some of the Blogs I have listed about are based on writings of Doctors as well as Psychologists. When I felt most alone I did research on bulimia, as well as the consequences that come from bulimia, they were startling which is why I’m trying my best to recover fully. These sites include the following:






For Daily Tips feel free to follow me on twitter @PPrincess101. The hashtags that I will use most frequently, and that are also being used by others are #edrecovery , #EatingDisorders, #yourebeautiful , #RecoveryIsPossible, #BeProHealth.

Stay Happy, Stay Healthy, Until Next Time.