Difference between revisions of "Talk:906: Advertising Discovery"
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
:vice versa, the Wikipedia geeks all get a heart attack when reading What if? (or Explain Xkcd) for the first time. [[User:Dontknow|Dontknow]] ([[User talk:Dontknow|talk]]) 04:19, 13 April 2017 (UTC) | :vice versa, the Wikipedia geeks all get a heart attack when reading What if? (or Explain Xkcd) for the first time. [[User:Dontknow|Dontknow]] ([[User talk:Dontknow|talk]]) 04:19, 13 April 2017 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | <strong><em>THE FOOTNOTES AREN'T IN A VALID ORDER IF THE BIT SHOWN IN THE COMIC IS THE ONLY PART OF THE AD!</em></strong> <small>sorry, just needed to vent that annoyance.</small> | ||
Revision as of 00:35, 5 March 2021
It's only trained Wikipedia veterans who believe that. Most people have no idea what the square brackets mean. Davidy²²[talk] 01:45, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
- [citation needed] Promethean (talk) 02:17, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
- [Dubious:Discuss] 120.145.27.228 17:23, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- This just in. Wikipedia veterans are gullible idiots.
On the other hand, What if? has conditioned the readers to assume that anything with a [Citation Needed] sign next to it is an obvious fact and doesn't need a citation. Caeleste Alarum (talk)
- vice versa, the Wikipedia geeks all get a heart attack when reading What if? (or Explain Xkcd) for the first time. Dontknow (talk) 04:19, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
THE FOOTNOTES AREN'T IN A VALID ORDER IF THE BIT SHOWN IN THE COMIC IS THE ONLY PART OF THE AD! sorry, just needed to vent that annoyance.
