“Those who seek the truth, seek Wikipedia.” - anonymous
Since the dawn of mankind, we have perpetually sought out the answers to life’s questions.
Who are we? Why are we here? What does the future hold? How many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop?
For thousands of years we have searched high and low. We have crossed continents. We have cured diseases. We have even landed on the moon. We have accomplished more than ever thought possible. Yet, the more we achieved as a species, the more we yearned to know.
In the early years, we looked toward philosophers to provide us with the answers we sought. These brilliant minds gave it their all, but could never quite figure it all out.
As time passed and society progressed, we resorted to almanacs, encyclopedias and atlases as our primary sources of information. These books were good, but not good enough.
The World Wide Web was brought to the masses in the 1990s, and along with it a new hope. An almost bottomless pit of information quickly became available at our finger tips. Powerful search engines such as Yahoo, Google, and Ask Jeeves quickly scoured the internet for whatever we asked. We were on the right track, but not even the charming Jeeves had all the answers.
On a winter’s day in 2001, the flood gates finally opened.
I speak of the historic moment we were dared to, “ask not what your World Wide Web can do for you, but what you can do for your World Wide Web.”
I speak of the glorious moment when people all over this great earth threw their Encyclopedia Britannicas in the dustbin of history.
I speak of the historic moment when high school and college textbooks became obsolete.
I speak of the glorious moment when thousands of years of knowledge became consolidated into one ultimate source.
This moment that I speak of is when wikipedia.org went live.
No iphone is complete without it.
I love Wikipedia. I probably trust it more than I should.
… and the world became dark when wikipedia closed shop…
Hi FlyingLlamaFish,
This is funny as I used a definition from Wikipedia in my post today. I try to be careful as I’ve heard their information isn’t always accurate and up to date.
I like Wikipedia, but I’ve become a little wary of it. When video game characters have bigger pages than US presidents, then that tells me there’s a little bit of bias going on!
Wikipedia is a powerful source of finding information. I tend to trust it (maybe more than I should). Hey, I guess I’m just a trusting sort of guy. Plus, they make it so easy to find information (and I like easy too).
There’s an idea for a television show…Mutual of OMG’s Wild Wiki Kingdom.
i do love wikipedia myself. i quote it often. it’s very simple and has a lot of info, all right there.
It is a bit like an Akashic Record, isn’t it? Or in Ghost in the Shell, they refer to it as “our external memory.”
ari
i love wikipedia. i never quote it directly, but i frequently use the citations on the bottom to verify the info (and find new stuff). it’s especially great for trivia.
I always start with wikipedia, but I never trust it solely. I look around at other sites to see if there is substantiating or conflicting information.
I go to Wikipedia to get a general idea of a topic and then I double check with other sources. I’ve come across several Wikipedia entries that are great, well written, lots of information looked at from several different angles, and so on. I’ve also come across a few that don’t make much sense. So I guess you just have keep your common sense antennae up when you visit.
So true – I go straight to it when I want to know anything. That was a fun read!
I use Wikipedia more than I used to. And it is being referred to on a lot of blogs now. In fact, I refered to it in my last post. It is much easier than flipping through pages in a book.
I use Wikipedia a lot but judging from the feedback given here, realise that I should not. Your post is hilarious!! I enjoyed reading it!
Wikipedia: The Holy Grail it should really be Google: The Holy Grail
Wikipedia is roaringly successful, true….but there is a problem with it. The problem is that you won’t find original innovative research on it, (see this brief essay for an explanation of why: Why the Holy Grail can’t be found on Wikipedia This is one subject of many which cannot be revealed through Wikipedia. Thanks for the entertaining post, Alex.