Wikipedia Quotes

Wikipedia Quote of the day

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.

Wait, Wikipedia isn't working? Why hasn't someone invented a paper version of it? A set of books organized alphabetically by topic?

Does anything really matter? We all end up in the same place. All that's left is our Wikipedia entry.

The definition of marriage cannot be disputed. It's right there in black and white and it's been the same since the start of Wikipedia.

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

The proselytisers for man-made global warming have long exercised a tight stranglehold over the contents of Wikipedia.

Citizendium is based on the failings and unreliability of Wikipedia.

Take it from someone who's read the Wikipedia entry: this is how the Ottoman Empire was won: madden horsemen fueled by lethal jet-black coffee-mud.

Wikipedia was offline after an overheating problem at one of its data centers. It was pretty bad. For a while there, people had nowhere to go for phony, inaccurate information.

Free services like Wikipedia I don't think benefit anyone - they don't benefit the professional because they're not paid.

If you really want the truth of anything, don't use Wikipedia.

I know Wikipedia is very cool. A lot of people do not think so, but of course they are wrong.

We have lived in this world where little things are done for love and big things for money. Now we have Wikipedia. Suddenly big things can be done for love.

Everybodys saying, be skeptical of Wikipedia. That is true. They should also be skeptical of everything. We should all be critical consumers of the media.

I do not need wireless access to Wikipedia. I would prefer to stir-fry my own small intestines than to have continual access to a site where the entry for Klingon is longer than the entry for Latin.

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.

Wikipedia is a victory of process over substance.

You can't retrieve you life (unless you're on Wikipedia, in which case you can retrieve an inaccurate version of it).

Wikipedia is forcing people to accept the stone-cold bummer that knowledge is produced and constructed by argument rather than by divine inspiration.

I get so sick and tired of Wikipedia. People write their own crap on there.

...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 flourished partly because it was a shrine to altruism.

Wikipedia is just an incredible thing. It is fact-encirclingly huge, and it is idiosyncratic, careful, messy, funny, shocking and full of simmering controversies - and it is free, and it is fast.

The notion of collective contribution, like the Wikipedia, is a very powerful one.

I guess there should be somewhere on the Internet that feels like a source of sacred truth. But Wikipedia sure isn't it.

Wikipedia gets a lot of things wrong.

Go ahead and make up a ton of lies about me. That's way more interesting than pretending Wikipedia has any real information.

I'm actually an optimist about what lies ahead. Are wikis reliable? It depends on the specific business. Is Wikipedia reliable? You bet. Wikipedia is a researcher's dream.

I racked my brain trying to remember the names of all of Nut’s five children. Bit difficult without my brother, the human Wikipedia, around to keep track of such trivia for me.

A lot of stuff in Wikipedia is not true, and that goes for a lot of people. I sometimes think, "How can that happen?" But Wikipedia is maintained by people, and everybody can add stuff to it.

There are other sources, but Wikipedia is a good start.

When you consider the magnitude of how many people use Wikipedia globally, there is a potential here for really creating some noise and getting some attention in the U.S.

Wikipedia only works in practice. In theory, it's a total disaster.

If it were a choice between putting ads on Wikipedia or shutting down Wikipedia, we would then very reluctantly consider putting ads on Wikipedia.

Wikipedia, eh? Must be accurate then.

I love the Wikipedia link chain because it has led me into some strange articles. Wikipedia is one of my favorites.

I've been reading a lot of books on history, and watching a lot of educational TV. Wikipedia too, even though it is not reliable.

Wikipedia will be small, disreputable, and unimportant compared to CZ in a few more years. Uh, ;-)

I do not go on my Wikipedia page. There's just too much weird information on there for me to pick apart.

People rely on Wikipedia, and a lot of it is wrong. But because there it is on the Internet, they assume it's right. Rumor gets printed as fact. We may have lost our critical facility as a nation.

The strange thing with Wikipedia is that the first article that ever gets written about you will define your Wikipedia page forever.

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

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

Wikipedia celebrates its 12th birthday today. Of course, I have no idea if it's true. I read it on Wikipedia.

I dont know how to add things to my own wikipedia page.

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

Everything's wrong on Wikipedia.

Wikipedia is a non-profit. It was either the dumbest thing I ever did or the smartest thing I ever did.

People take issue with individual aspects of Wikipedia all the time. But it's kind of hard to hate the general idea of a free encyclopedia. It's like hating kittens.

Given enough time humans will screw up Wikipedia just as they have screwed up everything else, but so far it's not too bad.