I saw that and thought it was fairly idiotic. The public has this notion that Wikipedia represents the pinnacle of unorganized collective action, without realizing either that the Egyptian revolution wasn't unorganized, or that Wikipedia's results are not nearly so good as people like to believe they are.
The notion of a revolutionary movement with a cellular structure is not new; if anything the Egyptian revolution reminds me of the UK Vodaphone protests
that the Nation wrote about recently. I'd say both are demonstrations of how modern technology has enabled decentralized collective action.
Wikipedia is also an example of decentralized collective action, but Wikipedians are not all seeking a common cause, or working in concert (even if without realizing it) toward a common goal. Instead, they are all working toward different goals in a single forum, which is why we get so many squabbles.