There is a picture. It's from Wikipedia, though indirectly:
I found it quite amusing, along with the 99 other variations you can click at Notabilia.
More on that in a second. The reason I found it so intriguing, is because I've been backstage at Wikipedia. I was an early adopter there, back in the early 00s, I contributed to quite a few articles, and tried my damnedest to correct some of the nonsense on the highly volatile Columbine page.
In those days, anyone could change anything, without even creating a user ID, and with no audit trail on who did what. It was just a mess, and some of the articles reflected it.
In most cases, I think most people had the right idea, and would look for legit sources. But it didn't take many ignorant know-it-alls who would plunge right in "correcting" something based on hearsay they had never bothered to check anywhere. (If they had heard it somewhere, that version must be true.)
I witnessed a lot of that firsthand.
The reason Wikipedia got so popular so fast, though,
More on that in a second. The reason I found it so intriguing, is because I've been backstage at Wikipedia. I was an early adopter there, back in the early 00s, I contributed to quite a few articles, and tried my damnedest to correct some of the nonsense on the highly volatile Columbine page.
In those days, anyone could change anything, without even creating a user ID, and with no audit trail on who did what. It was just a mess, and some of the articles reflected it.
In most cases, I think most people had the right idea, and would look for legit sources. But it didn't take many ignorant know-it-alls who would plunge right in "correcting" something based on hearsay they had never bothered to check anywhere. (If they had heard it somewhere, that version must be true.)
I witnessed a lot of that firsthand.
The reason Wikipedia got so popular so fast, though,















