Encyclopedias are finished. All encyclopedias combined, including the redoubtable Britannica, have already been surpassed by the exercise in groupthink known as Wikipedia.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
The core of Wikipedia is something people really believe in. That is too valuable for the world to screw it up.
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.
Wikipedia has a way of compiling compendiums of information on subjects.
Wikipedia was a big help for science, especially science communication, and it shows no sign of diminishing in importance.
Wikipedia is kind of extreme, where a very, very small group of people contribute pretty much everything.
When my generation grew up, our only sources of knowledge were books, teachers, parents and friends. The encyclopedia was an item of luxury. We faced big limits in what we could learn, where we could be and who we could reach.
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.
Most of my work is, I get an idea, and, with the help of Wikipedia, I can write. I don't have to leave my apartment.
My original concept was to provide a free encyclopedia for every single person in the world.
It's fair to say that Wikipedia has spent far more time considering the philosophical ramifications of categorization than Aristotle and Kant ever did.
No opposing quotes found.