Wikimedia's transparency report is a joy


Originally published at:


That’s the people who bother asking.


I love the mashup of the Wikipedia icon and the Hitchhiker’s Guide crazy planet!


“Hand over the pennies from that ‘Give a Penny, Take a Penny’ jar or by God you’ll be sorry. Your feeble human brain cannot possibly imagine the power I wield!”


So you are saying YouTube should hire 100,000 people to watch all video before it is posted?


No, the complaining parties should.


" […] not by asking the Lords of the Internet […] "

It’s The Elders of the Internet, duh.


The elder gods, you mean. With the tentacles and alien malevolence.


I have yet to see someone in an online discussion who trashes Wikipedia as a basic go-to source who wasn’t full of crap. Its up there with people who call the SPLC a hate group or call CNN a left wing organ (while citing from Breitbart or WND)

As much as there is the occasional error or self-serving page published by a given author, they are still very good at policing their content and pointing out to readers that certain citations or statements may require further verification.

Sure, you can’t use them for a school paper, but for an online discussion they are perfectly adequate as a quick reference to a given subject.


This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.