Skip to content

How To Get The Best Value For Money When You Shop Women Clothing Online

Times have well and truly changed. Those who were born around 50 years would certainly be impressed at the way the internet and computer technology has taken the world by storm. Today it is becoming more and more difficult to think of a world without the internet. It has impacted almost each and every sphere of our daily life. What is extremely pleasing is that more and more women have started taking to online shopping. Today you can certainly come across thousands of women who make it a habit to shop women clothing online. This is because there are some obvious and unmistakable advantages and benefits attached with online buying of women’s items. However, as an online buyer you should understand a few important points if you are keen on getting the best when buying online. The next few lines share a few such points which we are sure will be very helpful for women who are keen on discovering the power and reach of the internet and make the best out of it.

Identify The Products Properly

While there is no doubt that there are thousands of online outlets selling millions of women’s products, you have to be carefully when you decide to shop women clothing online. Women’s clothing is a big subject and you should therefore know what exactly you want to buy. For example if you are keen on buying fashion apparels and dresses, you must narrow down your search only to these particular items. If you widen the search you will be flooded with outlets and will lose focus sooner than later. More importantly, you might end up choosing the wrong product because you could be in a state of confusion and indecision.

Importance Of Research And Gathering Knowledge

The next important point when you plan to shop women clothing online is the need to research and research hard. Most of the online websites and portals would look almost the same and therefore you should know how to separate the grain from the chaff. This can be possible only when you have the right knowledge and information about the products, the websites that sell it, the various brands that are in the market and other such information. It will also help you to broaden your horizon as far as the latest trends in fashion and designs are concerned.

Be A Member of Some Blogs

Lastly, it would also not be a bad idea to become a member of some good blogs and you can also contribute articles if you like. Even otherwise by being a member of such blog communities, it will help you to have clear knowledge of the latest trends. It will also help you to have a good idea about the various reputed ecommerce sites which stock and sell some of the best items. In fine, there is no doubt that if you take an informed and correct decision you will be able to get the best women’s clothing at the best rates and of the best quality.

cheap prom dresses

That was where things went awry

6But another, more compelling answer, has to do with trust. Kelly’s students, like all good con artists, built their stories out of small, compelling details to give them a veneer of veracity. Ultimately, though, they aimed to succeed less by assembling convincing stories than by exploiting the trust of their marks, inducing them to lower their guard. Most of us assess arguments, at least initially, by assessing those who make them. Kelly’s students built blogs with strong first-person voices, and hit back hard at skeptics. Those inclined to doubt the stories were forced to doubt their authors. They inserted articles into Wikipedia, trading on the credibility of that site. And they aimed at very specific communities: the “beer lovers of Baltimore” and Reddit.

That was where things went awry. If the beer lovers of Baltimore form a cohesive community, the class failed to reach it. And although most communities treat their members with gentle regard, Reddit prides itself on winnowing the wheat from the chaff. It relies on the collective judgment of its members, who click on arrows next to contributions, elevating insightful or interesting content, and demoting less worthy contributions. Even Mills says he was impressed by the way in which redditors “marshaled their collective bits of expert knowledge to arrive at a conclusion that was largely correct.” It’s tough to con Reddit.

The loose thread, of course, was the Wikipedia articles. The redditors didn’t initially clue in on their content, or identify any errors; they focused on their recent vintage. The whole thing started to look as if someone was trying too hard to garner attention. Kelly’s class used the imaginary Lisa Quinn to put a believable face on their fabrications. When Quinn herself started to seem suspicious, it didn’t take long for the whole con to unravel.

If there’s a simple lesson in all of this, it’s that hoaxes tend to thrive in communities which exhibit high levels of trust. But on the Internet, where identities are malleable and uncertain, we all might be well advised to err on the side of skepticism.

Sometimes even an apparent failure can mask an underlying success. The students may have failed to pull off a spectacular hoax, but they surely learned a tremendous amount in the process. “Why would I design a course,” Kelly asks on his syllabus, “that is both a study of historical hoaxes and then has the specific aim of promoting a lie (or two) about the past?” Kelly explains that he hopes to mold his students into “much better consumers of historical information,” and at the same time, “to lighten up a little” in contrast to “overly stuffy” approaches to the subject. He defends his creative approach to teaching the mechanics of the historian’s craft, and plans to convert the class from an experimental course into a regular offering.

There’s also an interesting coda to this convoluted tale. The group researching Brown’s Brewery discovered that the placard in front of the Star-Spangled Banner at the National Museum of American History lists an anachronistic name for the building in which it was sewn. They have written to the museum to correct the mistake. For those students, at least, falsifying the historical record may prove less rewarding than setting it straight.

How the Professor Who Fooled Wikipedia Got Caught by Reddit

4A woman opens an old steamer trunk and discovers tantalizing clues that a long-dead relative may actually have been a serial killer, stalking the streets of New York in the closing years of the nineteenth century. A beer enthusiast is presented by his neighbor with the original recipe for Brown’s Ale, salvaged decades before from the wreckage of the old brewery–the very building where the Star-Spangled Banner was sewn in 1813. A student buys a sandwich called the Last American Pirate and unearths the long-forgotten tale of Edward Owens, who terrorized the Chesapeake Bay in the 1870s.

These stories have two things in common. They are all tailor-made for viral success on the internet. And they are all lies.

Each tale was carefully fabricated by undergraduates at George Mason University who were enrolled in T. Mills Kelly’s course, Lying About the Past. Their escapades not only went unpunished, they were actually encouraged by their professor. Four years ago, students created a Wikipedia page detailing the exploits of Edward Owens, successfully fooling Wikipedia’s community of editors. This year, though, one group of students made the mistake of launching their hoax on Reddit. What they learned in the process provides a valuable lesson for anyone who turns to the Internet for information.

The first time Kelly taught the course, in 2008, his students confected the life of Edward Owens, mixing together actual lives and events with brazen fabrications. They created YouTube videos, interviewed experts, scanned and transcribed primary documents, and built a Wikipedia page to honor Owens’ memory. The romantic tale of a pirate plying his trade in the Chesapeake struck a chord, and quickly landed on USA Today’s pop culture blog. When Kelly announced the hoax at the end of the semester, some were amused, applauding his pedagogical innovations. Many others were livid.

Critics decried the creation of a fake Wikipedia page as digital vandalism. “Things like that really, really, really annoy me,” fumed founder Jimmy Wales, comparing it to dumping trash in the streets to test the willingness of a community to keep it clean. But the indignation may, in part, have been compounded by the weaknesses the project exposed. Wikipedia operates on a presumption of good will. Determined contributors, from public relations firms to activists to pranksters, often exploit that, inserting information they would like displayed. The sprawling scale of Wikipedia, with nearly four million English-language entries, ensures that even if overall quality remains high, many such efforts will prove successful.

Last January, as he prepared to offer the class again, Kelly put the Internet on notice. He posted his syllabus and announced that his new, larger class was likely to create two separate hoaxes. He told members of the public to “consider yourself warned–twice.”

This time, the class decided not to create false Wikipedia entries. Instead, it used a slightly more insidious stratagem, creating or expanding Wikipedia articles on a strictly factual basis, and then using their own websites to stitch together these truthful claims into elaborate hoaxes.

One group took its inspiration from the fact that the original Star-Spangled Banner had been sewn on the floor of Brown’s Brewery in Baltimore. The group decided that a story that good deserved a beer of its own. They crafted a tale of discovering the old recipe used by Brown’s to make its brews, registered, built a Wikipedia page for the brewery, and tweeted out the tale on their Twitter feed. No one suspected a thing. In fact, hardly anyone even noticed. They did manage to fool one well-meaning DJ in Washington, DC, but the hoax was otherwise a dud.

Reflections on the Back to School Fashion

We use various ways to express ourselves. We either use words or we use other symbols. We make use of signals, we make use of gestures and we also make use of fashion to tell the world what we want to say. When we put on our clothes for the day, it is like we are declaring to the world our attitude for the day. This is the reason why it is so interesting to observe the back-to-school fashion preferences of people. The back to school fashion preference of a person shows who he will be for the whole term in a nutshell.

There are those people who wear practically the same thing they did in the last term. The bad thing about this is that this could be an indication of little to no personal growth in the past term. This could be an indication that the person did not mature in the past year. What could make this worse is if that person had been wearing the same fashion for more than 5 years. That could be an indicator of a serious problem.

The positive interpretation of this could be that the person has matured enough to have found his or her identity in life. This type of back-to-school fashion could indicate that a person is already perfectly happy with the image that he or she presents and that they feel no urge to change. It could also be an indication that the person has had a great past year and wishes to recapture that year.
There are people who exhibit great changes in their back to school fashion. There is also a good side and a bad side to this. The good interpretation of this is that the person has experienced an epiphany. A change in back-to-school fashion could be an indicator that a person has reached a new level of maturity and is ready to face the world with a new attitude. He or she could be declaring to the world that he or she is a new person, changed for the better and willing to tackle the world head on.

There is also a dark side to this change in back-to-school fashion. A person could have suffered from an event so cataclysmic that it required the person to reject his or her old personality entirely. A drastic change in back-to-school fashion could be akin to a person screaming, “I am not who I used to be. It will not happen to me anymore!” not all changes are good and not all changes are bad. That fact must be understood.

There are students whose back to school fashion is based on what a certain group is wearing. The positive side to this is that it indicates social acceptance. A person who has this type of back to school fashion shows that he or she is sociable and knows how to make friends with at least a certain group of people. However, this could also be an indication of a lack of initiative. People who dress the way others do may do so because they don’t really have any idea of what to wear. They let their groups decide their fashion because without the group, they really have no idea who they are.

Now you know that back to school fashion is a great indication of who a person is.

celebrity dresses


11Apollo 13 launched on April 11, 1970 at 13:13:00 CST and experienced an oxygen tank explosion on April 13 at 21:07:53 CST. It later returned safely to earth on April 17.[6][7]
On Friday, October 13, 1307, the arrest of the Knights Templar was ordered by Philip IV of France. While the number 13 was considered unlucky, Friday the 13th was not considered unlucky at the time. The incorrect idea that their arrest was related to the phobias surrounding Friday the 13th was invented early in the 21st century and popularized by the novel The Da Vinci Code.[8]
In 1881 an influential group of New Yorkers led by US Civil War veteran Captain William Fowler came together to put an end to this and other superstitions. They formed a dinner cabaret club, which they called the Thirteen Club. At the first meeting, on Friday, January 13, 1881, at 8:13 p.m., thirteen people sat down to dine in Room 13 of the venue. The guests walked under a ladder to enter the room and were seated among piles of spilled salt. Many Thirteen Clubs sprang up all over North America over the next 40 years. Their activities were regularly reported in leading newspapers, and their numbers included five future US presidents, from Chester A. Arthur to Theodore Roosevelt. Thirteen Clubs had various imitators, but they all gradually faded from interest.[9]
Vehicle registration plates in the Republic of Ireland are such that the first two digits represent the year of registration of the vehicle (i.e., 11 is a 2011 registered car, 12 is 2012, and so on). In 2012, there were concerns among members of the Society of the Irish Motor Industry (SIMI) that the prospect of having “13” registered vehicles might discourage motorists from buying new cars because of superstition surrounding the number thirteen, and that car sales and the motor industry (which was already ailing) would suffer as a result. The government, in consultation with SIMI, introduced a system whereby 2013 registered vehicles would have their registration plates’ age identifier string modified to read “131” for vehicles registered in the first six months of 2013 and “132” for those registered in the latter six months of the year.[10] The main reason for this however, is to increase the number of car sales in the latter months of the year. Even though 70% of new cars are bought during the first four months of the year, some consumers believe that it doesn’t accurately reflect the real age of a new car, since cars bought in January will most likely have been manufactured the previous year, while those bought later in the year will be actually made in the same year.[11] This system continued after 2013, with vehicles registered in the first half of 2014 labelled “141” rather than “14”.

One answer lies in the structure of the Internet

5The second group settled on the story of serial killer Joe Scafe. Using newspaper databases, they identified four actual women murdered in New York City from 1895 to 1897, victims of broadly similar crimes. They created Wikipedia articles for the victims, carefully following the rules of the site. They concocted an elaborate story of discovery, and fabricated images of the trunk’s contents. Then, the class prepared to spring its surprise on an unsuspecting world. A student posing as Lisa Quinn logged into Reddit, the popular social news website, and posed an eye-catching question: “Opinions please, Reddit. Do you think my ‘Uncle’ Joe was just weird or possibly a serial killer?”

The post quickly gained an audience. Redditors dug up the victims’ Wikipedia articles, one of which recorded contemporary newspaper speculation that the murderer was the same man who had gone on a killing spree through London. “The day reddit caught Jack the Ripper,” a redditor exulted. “I want to see these cases busted wide open!” wrote another. “Yeah! Take that, Digg!” wrote a third.

But it took just twenty-six minutes for a redditor to call foul, noting the Wikipedia entries’ recent vintage. Others were quick to pile on, deconstructing the entire tale. The faded newspaper pages looked artificially aged. The Wikipedia articles had been posted and edited by a small group of new users. Finding documents in an old steamer trunk sounded too convenient. And why had Lisa been savvy enough to ask Reddit, but not enough to Google the names and find the Wikipedia entries on her own? The hoax took months to plan but just minutes to fail.

Why did the hoaxes succeed in 2008 and not in 2012? If thousands of Internet users can be persuaded that Abraham Lincoln invented Facebook, surely the potential for viral hoaxes remains undiminished.

One answer lies in the structure of the Internet’s various communities. Wikipedia has a weak community, but centralizes the exchange of information. It has a small number of extremely active editors, but participation is declining, and most users feel little ownership of the content. And although everyone views the same information, edits take place on a separate page, and discussions of reliability on another, insulating ordinary users from any doubts that might be expressed. Facebook, where the Lincoln hoax took flight, has strong communities but decentralizes the exchange of information. Friends are quite likely to share content and to correct mistakes, but those corrections won’t reach other users sharing or viewing the same content. Reddit, by contrast, builds its strong community around the centralized exchange of information. Discussion isn’t a separate activity but the sine qua non of the site. When one user voiced doubts, others saw the comment and quickly piled on.

Encyclopædia Britannica

9There are over five million articles in the English Wikipedia. These are the ones that Wikipedians have identified as being a bit unusual. These articles are verifiable, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia, but are a bit odd, whimsical, or something you would not expect to find in Encyclopædia Britannica. ia with these articles lest they make Wikipedia appear idiosyncratic. If you wish to add articles to this list, the article in question should preferably meet one or more of these criteria:
The article is something you would not expect to find in a standard encyclopedia.
The subject is an unusual combination of concepts, such as cosmic latte, death from laughter, etc.
The subject is an anomaly—something that defies common sense, common expectations or common knowledge, such as Bir Tawil, Märket, Phineas Gage, List of snow events in Florida, etc.
The subject is well-documented for unexpected notoriety or an unplanned cult following at extreme levels, such as Ampelmännchen or All your base are belong to us.
The subject is a notorious hoax, such as Sokal affair or Mary Toft.
The subject might be found amusing, though serious.
The article is a list or collection of articles or subjects meeting the criteria above.
This definition is not precise. Some articles may still be considered unusual even if they do not fit these guidelines.
To keep the list of interest to readers, each entry on this list should be an article on its own (not merely a section in a less unusual article) and of decent quality, in large meeting Wikipedia’s manual of style. For unusual contributions that are of greater levity, see Wikipedia:Silly Things. A star (Featured article) indicates a featured article. A plus () indicates a good article.

Swedish Wikipedia surpasses 1 million articles with aid of article creation bot

3Swedish Wikipedia hit one million articles, joining the club of English, Dutch, German, French, Italian, Russian and Spanish Wikipedias. The article that broke the barrier was the butterfly species Erysichton elaborata. There is, however, one fact that separates this million article milestone from almost all others.
The one milionth article was not manually created by a human, but written by a piece of software (a “bot”). The bot, in this case, Lsjbot, collects data from different sources, and then compiles the information into a format that fits Wikipedia. Lsjbot has to date created about 454,000 articles, almost half of the articles on Swedish Wikipedia.

Bot-created articles have led to some debate, both before Lsjbot started its run, and currently. First, there was a lengthy discussion on Swedish Wikipedia after the initial proposal by Lsjbot’s operator, science teacher Sverker Johansson. The Swedish Wikipedia community was wary, having learned the lessons from previous conflicts about article-creating bots, including rambot in 2002. But there was also curiosity, so a series of test runs was made to make sure that the articles were acceptable.
After review, the Swedish Wikipedia editor community said okay. Lsjbot started by creating articles about different species of animals and plants – articles that are largely uncontroversial and that can have a similar format without feeling mechanical.
Subsequent criticism has come from prolific article writer Achim Raschka on German Wikipedia’s Kurier. Here the main complaint was that article is short: only 4 sentences long. This is a valid complaint. Even if longer articles are not always better, they tend to contain more information.
Therein lies the rub. The bots use as many datasets as their operators can find, but many sources are behind paywalls or are incomplete across entire taxon (covering only selected species). The upside of this criticism is that each statement in articles created by bots is supported by references, something that doesn’t happen in many other articles. This means that more references are added to Wikipedia by bots than by humans. This is of course not in itself a sign of quality, but it is a start for human contributors to search for more information. As with any article in Wikipedia, the readers can also help make bot-created articles better.
Is this the future for Wikipedia, to let software create articles? With Wikidata, it is certainly becoming easier to use software to create articles, something that can benefit the smaller Wikipedias. But we still need more humans to help make the determination of which sources are high quality, what information is presented correctly and what qualifies as clear writing.

How to Successfully Submit Your Article to Wikipedia

2The following sources are not considered reliable and independent:

press releases, press kits, or similar works;
self-published materials;
any material written or published by the organization, its members, or sources closely associated with it, such as company newsletters;
advertising and marketing materials by, about, or on behalf of the organization;
corporate websites or other websites written, published, or controlled by the organization;
patents, whether pending or granted;
other works in which the brand talks about itself—whether published by the brand, or re-printed by other people.
Depth of Coverage

Trivial or incidental coverage in a source is not sufficient: It isn’t enough to just be mentioned a couple times. The coverage must provide information that can be used to add depth to a brand’s Wikipedia article. If the depth of coverage in a particular source is not substantial, then you must cite multiple sources. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject is not sufficient to establish notability.

Sources containing information considered to be trivial/incidental include:

sources that simply report meeting times, shopping hours or event schedules,
the publications of telephone numbers, addresses, and directions in business directories,
inclusion in lists of similar organizations,
the season schedule or final score from sporting events,
routine communiqués announcing such matters as the hiring or departure of personnel,
brief announcements of mergers or sales of part of the business,
simple statements that a product line is being sold, changed, or discontinued,
routine notices of facility openings or closings (e.g., closure for a holiday or the end of the regular season),
routine notices of the opening or closing of local branches, franchises, or shops,
quotations from an organization’s personnel as story sources, or
passing mention, such as identifying a quoted person as working for an organization.
Options for Getting Your Article in Wikipedia

If there are multiple sources about your brand that carry more than incidental coverage, congratulations! Your brand may qualify for an article. Unfortunately, being eligible for an article does not make it magically appear; somebody has to write it.

There are several options for making that happen: You can ask a member of the Wikipedia community to write it for you, you can hire a service to write it for you, or you can write it yourself. There are also other options that I recommend against, which I’ll identify later on.

Do It Yourself

Mellified man

8Honey has been used in funerary practices in many different cultures. Burmese priests have the custom of preserving their chief abbots in coffins full of honey.[4] Its reputation both for medicinal uses and durability is long established. For at least 2,700 years, honey has been used by humans to treat a variety of ailments through topical application, but only recently have the antiseptic and antibacterial properties of honey been chemically explained. Because of its unique composition and the complex processing of nectar by the bees which changes its chemical properties, honey is suitable for long-term storage and is easily assimilated even after long preservation. History knows examples of honey preservation for decades, centuries and even millennia.[5]
Antibacterial properties of honey are the result of the low water activity causing osmosis, hydrogen peroxide effect,[6] and high acidity.[7] The combination of high acidity, hygroscopic, and antibacterial effects have led to honey’s reputation as a plausible way to mummify a human cadaver, despite lack of concrete evidence.
Similar medicine practices
Both European and Chinese pharmacopeias employed medicines of human origin such as urine therapy, or even other medicinal uses for breast milk. In her book, Roach says the medicinal use of mummies, and the sale of fake ones, is “well documented” in chemistry books of 16th to 18th centuries in Europe, “but nowhere outside Arabia were the corpses volunteers”.[8][9][10][11]
Mummies were a common ingredient in the Middle Ages until at least the eighteenth century, and not only as medicine, but as fertilizers and even as paint. The use of corpses and body parts as medicine goes far back—in the Roman Empire the blood of dead gladiators was used as treatment for epilepsy.[12]
In his book, Bernard Read suggests a connection between the European medieval practices and those of the Middle East and China:
The underlying theories which sustained the use of human remedies, find a great deal in common between the Arabs as represented by Avicenna, and China through the [Bencao]. Body humors, vital air, the circulations, and numerous things are more clearly understood if an extended study be made of Avicenna or the Europeans who based their writings on Arabic medicine. The various uses given in many cases common throughout the civilized world, [Nicholas] Lemery also recommended woman’s milk for inflamed eyes, feces were applied to sores, and the human skull, brain, blood, nails and “all the parts of man”, were used in sixteenth-century Europe.[3]