since that is the most recent xkcd, you may be thinking of the recent http://xkcd.com/545/ "Neutrality Schmeutrality" or http://xkcd.com/214/ "The Problem with Wikipedia" or http://xkcd.com/446/ "in Popular Culture"
not to mention the classic http://xkcd.com/285/ "Wikipedian protestor" On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Dan Rosenthal <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Feb 24, 2009, at 12:52 PM, Al Tally wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:09 PM, David Gerard <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> http://xkcd.com/547/ >>> >>> >>> - d. >>> >> >> Eh I'm sure this was discussed somewhere already... anyway, it >> brought a ton >> of new editors in, which was both good and bad (we desperately need >> more >> good editors, but not vandals!) >> >> -- >> Alex >> (User:Majorly) > > That's good; considering that Simple had someone running on their 9th > or 10th failed RFA with no intentions of giving up, it could probably > use more than the same 15 people. > > -Dan > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > -- David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
