Wikipedia Quotes

Critical for moving from polarization to productivity is that the Wikipedians who write these articles aren't actually focused on finding the truth. They're working for something that's a little bit more attainable, which is the best of what we can know right now. And after seven years there, I actually believe that they're onto something, that for our most tricky disagreements, seeking the truth, and seeking to convince others of the truth, isn't necessarily the best place to start. In fact, I think our reverence for the truth might have become a bit of a distraction that is preventing us from finding consensus and getting important things done.

Wikipedia gets a lot of things wrong.

It's fair to say that Wikipedia has spent far more time considering the philosophical ramifications of categorization than Aristotle and Kant ever did.

Wikipedia is the best thing ever. Anyone in the world can write anything they want about any subject. So you know you are getting the best possible information.

I looked up affirmative action once in Wikipedia, and it said, 'A measure by which white men are discriminated against,' and I got so mad.

The thing that Wikipedia focuses on is not truth nor facts, it's reliable, verifiable information. And what we would say is that as the world's consensus changes about what is reliable, verifiable information, the information for us will change too. […] If Wikipedia had been around a couple hundred years ago we probably would have had an article that says that the Sun revolves around the Earth because that was what we understood to be true. […] So we're not really in the business of truth or facts, we're in the business of what is known, and what has been determined through consensus—scientific consensus or otherwise. And I think that that actually provides some clarity on how to understand what information you're looking at.

Encyclopedias are finished. All encyclopedias combined, including the redoubtable Britannica, have already been surpassed by the exercise in groupthink known as Wikipedia.

Wikipedia's a collaborative experiment akin to Simon Winchester's account of the creation of the Oxford English Dictionary in 'The Professor and the Madman,' which outlines James Murray's mission to produce the tome in the 19th century.

If you're reading IMDB, half of it's made up. You can't trust it or Wikipedia, which is just lies, lies!

Wikipedia works because those who know the truth are usually more numerous and committed than those who believe in a falsehood.

We talked about the Internet and Wikipedia and how facts and history are being collectively created online.

...I can’t stop squirming. If fidgets were Wikipedia edits, I would have completely revamped the entry on guilt by now, and translated it into five new languages.

Wikipedia represents a belief in the supremacy of reason and goodness of others.

This is a perfect example of the power and ridiculousness of a website like Wikipedia. I did give a slightly contentious graduation speech, where I decided not to be funny as my classmates had hoped, which was why I was chosen. I was not valedictorian, that's for sure. Instead, I talked about the failure to communicate between the administration and the teachers and students. That's what was contentious about it. At some point, somebody wrote about that incident on my Wikipedia page. And then somebody added the bit about me exposing my genitals to the crowd.

Wikipedia is so dangerous.

To protect our independence, we'll never run ads.

I use Wikipedia and eBay; I look for singles for my 1950s jukebox.

Wikipedia was a big help for science, especially science communication, and it shows no sign of diminishing in importance.

Wikipedia has a way of compiling compendiums of information on subjects.

Wikipedia is the first place I go when I'm looking for knowledge... or when I want to create some.

I first met Jimbo Wales, the face of Wikipedia, when he came to speak at Stanford.

Wikipedia took the idea of peer review and applied it to volunteers on a global scale, becoming the most important English reference work in less than 10 years. Yet the cumulative time devoted to creating Wikipedia, something like 100 million hours of human thought, is expended by Americans every weekend, just watching ads.

Wikipedia [...] is the product not of collectivism but of unending argumentation.

Open-source encyclopedias such as Wikipedia and search engines such as Google and Bing, which people can tap into anytime and anywhere via computers and smart phones, put a world of knowledge at our fingertips at a lower cost than ever before.

Internet users, that blue screen of death you were looking at this morning? That's the sky. If you're still confused, look it up on Wikipedia tomorrow.