<p>I chose this (as I would say to an interviewer) because it is one of the greatest depositories of human knowledge. It is the actual equivilent of of the fictional Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy. It has done to general human knowledge what the Gutenburg press did to the written word.</p>
<p>I was considering wikipedia too, I completely agree with you on the above. My other option was google. My only concern is that both of them are too common? That, or wiki sounded a little pretentious. I mean, like I’m trying too hard to impress them. But I guess if your application brings out you are intellectually curious and love learning, wikipedia would be a fine fit there?</p>
<p>I thought it was a bit pretentious too, but given its height of popularity and the amount of people who use it, there is bound to be cross-overs of interest for it. </p>
<p>It is like Facebook, given many people use it, MANY people are obssesed with it. It is like disavowing any particular thing just because a lot of people use it. i.e. the iPod, A&F, or even a particular brand of guitars.</p>
<p>But I’m biased, I used to read encyclopedias for fun when I was little, then I found out about wikipedia. To me it was like being lost in a virtual candy land. My experiances are best summerized by this
<p>Truth is fine, but so is something that is more revealing. I might spend most of my time on Facebook, but that wouldn’t have told the adcoms as much as The Sartorialist, which I put and on which I spend a great deal of time.</p>
<p>In other words, Facebook, Google, and Wikipedia are all totally fine. But you have limited space on an app, and you might want to put down a more revealing (though by no means false) second or third favorite.</p>