Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Single/2015-08-12

The Signpost
Single-page Edition
WP:POST/1
12 August 2015

 

2015-08-12
Superprotect, one year later; a contentious RfA



Reader comments

2015-08-12
Related articles
paid advocacy

How paid editors squeeze you dry
31 January 2024

"Wikipedia and the assault on history"
4 December 2023

The "largest con in corporate history"?
20 February 2023

Truth or consequences? A tough month for truth
31 August 2022

The oligarchs' socks
27 March 2022


More articles

Fuzzy-headed government editing
30 January 2022

Denial: climate change, mass killings and pornography
29 November 2021

Paid promotional paragraphs in German parliamentary pages
26 September 2021

Enough time left to vote! IP ban
29 August 2021

Paid editing by a former head of state's business enterprise
25 April 2021

A "billionaire battle" on Wikipedia: Sex, lies, and video
28 February 2021

Concealment, data journalism, a non-pig farmer, and some Bluetick Hounds
28 December 2020

How billionaires rewrite Wikipedia
29 November 2020

Ban on IPs on ptwiki, paid editing for Tatarstan, IP masking
1 November 2020

Paid editing with political connections
27 September 2020

WIPO, Seigenthaler incident 15 years later
27 September 2020

Wikipedia for promotional purposes?
30 August 2020

Dog days gone bad
2 August 2020

Fox News, a flight of RfAs, and banning policy
2 August 2020

Some strange people edit Wikipedia for money
2 August 2020

Trying to find COI or paid editors? Just read the news
28 June 2020

Automatic detection of covert paid editing; Wiki Workshop 2020
31 May 2020

2019 Picture of the Year, 200 French paid editing accounts blocked, 10 years of Guild Copyediting
31 May 2020

English Wikipedia community's conclusions on talk pages
30 April 2019

Women's history month
31 March 2019

Court-ordered article redaction, paid editing, and rock stars
1 December 2018

Kalanick's nipples; Episode #138 of Drama on the Hill
23 June 2017

Massive paid editing network unearthed on the English Wikipedia
2 September 2015

Orangemoody sockpuppet case sparks widespread coverage
2 September 2015

Paid editing; traffic drop; Nicki Minaj
12 August 2015

Community voices on paid editing
12 August 2015

On paid editing and advocacy: when the Bright Line fails to shine, and what we can do about it
15 July 2015

Turkish Wikipedia censorship; "Can Wikipedia survive?"; PR editing
24 June 2015

A quick way of becoming an admin
17 June 2015

Meet a paid editor
4 March 2015

Is Wikipedia for sale?
4 February 2015

Shifting values in the paid content debate; cross-language bot detection
30 July 2014

With paid advocacy in its sights, the Wikimedia Foundation amends their terms of use
18 June 2014

Does Wikipedia Pay? The Moderator: William Beutler
11 June 2014

PR agencies commit to ethical interactions with Wikipedia
11 June 2014

Should Wikimedia modify its terms of use to require disclosure?
26 February 2014

Foundation takes aim at undisclosed paid editing; Greek Wikipedia editor faces down legal challenge
19 February 2014

Special report: Contesting contests
29 January 2014

WMF employee forced out over "paid advocacy editing"
8 January 2014

Foundation to Wiki-PR: cease and desist; Arbitration Committee elections starting
20 November 2013

More discussion of paid advocacy, upcoming arbitrator elections, research hackathon, and more
23 October 2013

Vice on Wiki-PR's paid advocacy; Featured list elections begin
16 October 2013

Ada Lovelace Day, paid advocacy on Wikipedia, sidebar update, and more
16 October 2013

Wiki-PR's extensive network of clandestine paid advocacy exposed
9 October 2013

Q&A on Public Relations and Wikipedia
25 September 2013

PR firm accused of editing Wikipedia for government clients; can Wikipedia predict the stock market?
13 May 2013

Court ruling complicates the paid-editing debate
12 November 2012

Does Wikipedia Pay? The Founder: Jimmy Wales
1 October 2012

Does Wikipedia pay? The skeptic: Orange Mike
23 July 2012

Does Wikipedia Pay? The Communicator: Phil Gomes
7 May 2012

Does Wikipedia Pay? The Consultant: Pete Forsyth
30 April 2012

Showdown as featured article writer openly solicits commercial opportunities
30 April 2012

Does Wikipedia Pay? The Facilitator: Silver seren
16 April 2012

Wikimedia announcements, Wikipedia advertising, and more!
26 April 2010

License update, Google Translate, GLAM conference, Paid editing
15 June 2009

Report of diploma mill offering pay for edits
12 March 2007

AstroTurf PR firm discovered astroturfing
5 February 2007

Account used to create paid corporate entries shut down
9 October 2006

Editing for hire leads to intervention
14 August 2006

Proposal to pay editors for contributions
24 April 2006

German Wikipedia introduces incentive scheme
18 July 2005

The Atlantic examined "The Covert World of People Trying to Edit Wikipedia—for Pay".

The article first discusses medical editing and the experiences of Dr. James Heilman (Doc James), a Canadian physician who is currently on the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees. (Heilman discussed his opinions on paid editing in a Signpost op-ed earlier this year.) In 2013, Heilman was editing the Wikipedia article for kyphoplasty, a popular back procedure of disputed effectiveness. When Heilman reverted changes to the article that he thought were not "supported by existing research", he found himself drawn into a contentious debate with employees of Medtronic, a medical equipment company which sells a kyphoplasty kit. He was emailed by a physician who was a consultant for Medtronic and the resulting email thread was cc:ed to over 300 others, including one of Heilman's medical school professors. Heilman was intimidated by the contact. Elsewhere, he wrote "having 'representatives' from an 28 billion USD company email 300 of your colleagues to inform them how misguided you are is disconcerting."

The Atlantic puts this incident in the context of the conflicts between the motivations of company employees and volunteer editors.

The Atlantic writes that these issues are exacerbated by the shrinking ranks of active editors, the small number of administrators, and the growing number of articles. Heilman told The Atlantic that undisclosed advocacy edits "often distract the core community of editors away from more important topics." The Atlantic notes that Wikipedia's wide reach makes these issues important ones. According to Wikipedia's medical articles likely have a larger readership than WebMD and are used by 50-70 percent of doctors. Wikipedia information has even turned up in medical books themselves. As recounted by Heilman in the Signpost earlier this year, Wikipedia was plagiarized by a contributor to an Oxford University Press medical textbook.

The Atlantic discusses what public relations companies are and are not doing. It mentions in passing the 2014 pledge by a number of PR firms to adhere to Wikipedia's terms of use by disclosing their conflict of interest. (William Beutler (WWB), a paid editor who spearheaded that effort and wrote an op-ed in the Signpost about paid editing last month, called that a "big missed opportunity".) Despite this, undisclosed advocacy editing persists, ranging from the high profile, such as this summer's Sunshine Sachs controversy (see previous Signpost coverage), to the low profile, like the abundant ads on Elance advertising the services of Wikipedia editors and even administrators. Patrick Taylor, one of the duo at the head of Wiki-PR, which was blocked from editing Wikipedia for operating an army of sockpuppets (see the Signpost's Wiki-PR series), told The Atlantic that "Undisclosed paid editing, especially on the part of the largest PR firms, is rampant on Wikipedia."

The Atlantic talked with two paid editors, Gregory Kohs, founder of MyWikiBiz and longtime Wikipedia critic, and Mike Wood, who runs Legalmorning. The Atlantic failed to note that both have been banned from Wikipedia for policy violations. Both refuse to disclose their advocacy editing and claimed to The Atlantic that they did so because of Jimmy Wales, an odd, self-serving justification. Wood said "As soon as Jimmy Wales adheres to Wikipedia guidelines, I will adhere to Wikipedia guidelines," though the only specific act of Wales cited by The Atlantic was Wales editing his own Wikipedia article back in 2005. (Aug. 11)

Wikipedia traffic from Google drops 250 million visits

The last three months of Wikipedia traffic, from the August 2015 WMF Metrics & Activities Meeting

Business Insider reports that Wikipedia traffic from the search engine Google has experienced a significant drop. It recounts analysis from a July 28 blog post by Roy Hinkins, head of search engine optimization for SimilarWeb, a web analytics company. Hinkins writes:

Business Insider speculates that the drop is due to Google's growing "preference for inserting its own content above the content of other non-Google web sites, even when those sites may be better resources than Google itself", though it notes " there is no evidence that Wikipedia's traffic loss is due to Google".

The drop in traffic was noted at the Wikimedia Foundation August Metrics & Activities meeting (see graphic at right), though the meeting did not discuss a potential cause. Elsewhere, a number of experienced editors are attributing the drop to the normal summer decrease in Wikipedia traffic. (Aug. 12)

Nicki Minaj complains about her boyfriend's Wikipedia article

Nicki Minaj is displeased

Music news outlets noted that singer Nicki Minaj took to Instagram, where she has 31.2 million followers, to complain about the Wikipedia article for her boyfriend, rapper Meek Mill. Whenever she posted Mill's birth name, Rihmeek, she was inundated with complaints and mockery on social media for "misspelling" his name, because his Wikipedia article spelled it "Rahmeek". She posted a picture of herself with Mill and his family and wrote:

Neither Minaj nor the media outlets noted that the incorrect spelling in Meek's Wikipedia article was cited to a biography page on the website of his own record label, Roc Nation, where the error remains. (Aug. 8)

Editor's note: Emoticons in the above quote may not be visible on all computers.

Peter Dinklage is amused



Do you want to contribute to "In the media" by writing a story or even just an "in brief" item? Edit next week's edition in the Newsroom or contact the editor.



Reader comments

2015-08-12
Community voices on paid editing
Related articles
paid advocacy

How paid editors squeeze you dry
31 January 2024

"Wikipedia and the assault on history"
4 December 2023

The "largest con in corporate history"?
20 February 2023

Truth or consequences? A tough month for truth
31 August 2022

The oligarchs' socks
27 March 2022


More articles

Fuzzy-headed government editing
30 January 2022

Denial: climate change, mass killings and pornography
29 November 2021

Paid promotional paragraphs in German parliamentary pages
26 September 2021

Enough time left to vote! IP ban
29 August 2021

Paid editing by a former head of state's business enterprise
25 April 2021

A "billionaire battle" on Wikipedia: Sex, lies, and video
28 February 2021

Concealment, data journalism, a non-pig farmer, and some Bluetick Hounds
28 December 2020

How billionaires rewrite Wikipedia
29 November 2020

Ban on IPs on ptwiki, paid editing for Tatarstan, IP masking
1 November 2020

Paid editing with political connections
27 September 2020

WIPO, Seigenthaler incident 15 years later
27 September 2020

Wikipedia for promotional purposes?
30 August 2020

Dog days gone bad
2 August 2020

Fox News, a flight of RfAs, and banning policy
2 August 2020

Some strange people edit Wikipedia for money
2 August 2020

Trying to find COI or paid editors? Just read the news
28 June 2020

Automatic detection of covert paid editing; Wiki Workshop 2020
31 May 2020

2019 Picture of the Year, 200 French paid editing accounts blocked, 10 years of Guild Copyediting
31 May 2020

English Wikipedia community's conclusions on talk pages
30 April 2019

Women's history month
31 March 2019

Court-ordered article redaction, paid editing, and rock stars
1 December 2018

Kalanick's nipples; Episode #138 of Drama on the Hill
23 June 2017

Massive paid editing network unearthed on the English Wikipedia
2 September 2015

Orangemoody sockpuppet case sparks widespread coverage
2 September 2015

Paid editing; traffic drop; Nicki Minaj
12 August 2015

Community voices on paid editing
12 August 2015

On paid editing and advocacy: when the Bright Line fails to shine, and what we can do about it
15 July 2015

Turkish Wikipedia censorship; "Can Wikipedia survive?"; PR editing
24 June 2015

A quick way of becoming an admin
17 June 2015

Meet a paid editor
4 March 2015

Is Wikipedia for sale?
4 February 2015

Shifting values in the paid content debate; cross-language bot detection
30 July 2014

With paid advocacy in its sights, the Wikimedia Foundation amends their terms of use
18 June 2014

Does Wikipedia Pay? The Moderator: William Beutler
11 June 2014

PR agencies commit to ethical interactions with Wikipedia
11 June 2014

Should Wikimedia modify its terms of use to require disclosure?
26 February 2014

Foundation takes aim at undisclosed paid editing; Greek Wikipedia editor faces down legal challenge
19 February 2014

Special report: Contesting contests
29 January 2014

WMF employee forced out over "paid advocacy editing"
8 January 2014

Foundation to Wiki-PR: cease and desist; Arbitration Committee elections starting
20 November 2013

More discussion of paid advocacy, upcoming arbitrator elections, research hackathon, and more
23 October 2013

Vice on Wiki-PR's paid advocacy; Featured list elections begin
16 October 2013

Ada Lovelace Day, paid advocacy on Wikipedia, sidebar update, and more
16 October 2013

Wiki-PR's extensive network of clandestine paid advocacy exposed
9 October 2013

Q&A on Public Relations and Wikipedia
25 September 2013

PR firm accused of editing Wikipedia for government clients; can Wikipedia predict the stock market?
13 May 2013

Court ruling complicates the paid-editing debate
12 November 2012

Does Wikipedia Pay? The Founder: Jimmy Wales
1 October 2012

Does Wikipedia pay? The skeptic: Orange Mike
23 July 2012

Does Wikipedia Pay? The Communicator: Phil Gomes
7 May 2012

Does Wikipedia Pay? The Consultant: Pete Forsyth
30 April 2012

Showdown as featured article writer openly solicits commercial opportunities
30 April 2012

Does Wikipedia Pay? The Facilitator: Silver seren
16 April 2012

Wikimedia announcements, Wikipedia advertising, and more!
26 April 2010

License update, Google Translate, GLAM conference, Paid editing
15 June 2009

Report of diploma mill offering pay for edits
12 March 2007

AstroTurf PR firm discovered astroturfing
5 February 2007

Account used to create paid corporate entries shut down
9 October 2006

Editing for hire leads to intervention
14 August 2006

Proposal to pay editors for contributions
24 April 2006

German Wikipedia introduces incentive scheme
18 July 2005

Smartse

It is impossible to lump all paid editing together, since it ranges from those deceptively using sockpuppets to evade scrutiny and create promotional articles on non-notable subjects to others who openly disclose and use high quality sources to write neutral content. In my experience though, paid editing is overall a net negative for the project as the few good paid editors are vastly outnumbered by the rest. The net effect is to decrease the neutrality and quality of the project as a whole. It also encourages others to create articles on the basis of other crap existing which leads to a vicious cycle (see for example Tuft & Needle and Casper). A considerable amount of volunteer effort is required to clean up the mess when we could potentially be creating other content.

Paid editing is inevitable so long as anyone can edit. Dealing with it requires the right balance of carrot and stick so as to tolerate and assist those who are open, while taking a hard line with those who are not here to write an encyclopedia. The bright line is good in principle, but there aren't enough volunteers who want to review paid edits, particularly if explaining the problems will take a substantial amount of effort. Further, our current terms of use, policies and guidelines don't provide sufficient punishment for those who fail to disclose or continue to edit mainspace. If we applied the principle of WP:DENY to undisclosed paid editors then it may encourage more to play by the rules. I'd also like to see a bot like cluebot that flagged edits to corporate and BLP articles that could be paid editing. Our methods of detection are inconsistent and haven't improved since I started editing 6 years ago.

SmartSE is a Wikipedia administrator and has been an editor since 2008.

SPhilbrick

I support the allowance of paid editing, but only with careful monitoring. All editors have the potential of bias with the possibility that their contributions might be more positive or negative rather than truly neutral. This is a challenge that applies to all edits and all editors. However, in the case of paid editors, we know there is a strong built-in potential for bias. Some paid editors will manage to provide new content, but others even if unconsciously, will lean toward a more favorable coverage of their client. If the position is known, their contributions can be scrutinized by others through that lens, and the resulting article can be a neutral article. Without identification of the status of the editor, it becomes much more difficult to ensure neutrality.

We have the concept of pending changes which applies to articles. Perhaps we should find a way to apply the concept to editors. If all declared editors were subject to a pending change requirement, it might be a useful way of allowing paid content while maintaining strict scrutiny of the content.

S Philbrick is a Wikipedia administrator and has been an editor since 2008.

CorporateM (paid editor)

Out of more than 100 assessments I provided to article-subjects, I found that their objectives were aligned with Wikipedia's content policies 30% of the time. I estimate that 10-20% of COI edits are useful, but less than 10% are acting in bad-faith. The majority of article-subjects are well-meaning, but make poor edits, because their motives for editing skew their point-of-view. This is also true of former employees, legal antagonists, etc. Most of the time they can be persuaded to abstain through patient and authoritative consulting, whereas in some cases there are borderline attack pages, factual errors, or other circumstances where their participation is desirable.

There is a lot we can do to improve things. An outreach and education program for article-subjects and their representatives with a focus on abstaining could target the bulk of cases. For a small number of cases (~1%) where there is a persistent and bad-faith violation of the Terms of Use, legal enforcement is needed. All the Wikipedia jargon that has made WP:COI incomprehensible to PR people is another issue and I think requiring a minimum disclosure, rather than an excessive one, would reduce drama, harassment and other nonsense, while promoting a focus on content instead of editors.

CorporateM has been a Wikipedia editor since 2009

Timtrent

If the edits are impartial, neutral and do not seek to pervert Wikipedia and its articles and have no WP:OWN connotations, either of edits or of articles, then I applaud all good quality edits and deprecate all poor quality ones, exactly as I do with amateur editing

The challenge is to enforce it. I favour the commercial editor declaring their interest(s) on their user page and their deploying {{Connected contributor}} with all parameters filled out on the talk page of each article they contribute to in their commercial persona. I do not support separate accounts for commercial and non commercial use unless they are properly declared on the user pages concerned. I favour strong but not draconian enforcement of declarations as a matter of policy.

Timtrent has been a Wikipedia editor since 2006.

FreeRangeFrog

I have no problem in principle with paid editing, as long as it is done honestly and in the open. But we must be more proactive in battling stealth paid editing. The for-hire creation or modification of articles by a person or company who would otherwise be unconnected to the subjects of those articles, without clear previous disclosure, is the type of activity we must endeavor to stop because it undermines the trust readers place on us. There is too much potential for abuse, and we have seen that recently where for-profit "editors" (I use that term lightly here) stoop to blackmail in order to keep the money rolling in. This reflects negatively on Wikipedia because often the victim thinks this is the norm around here, or that it is somehow done with the blessing of the community or the Foundation. The COI guidelines must be revamped and made into a policy with teeth and clear avenues of action for administrators and editors to follow. There are conversations we must have as a community and major changes to be made if we are to remain a truly free and truly neutral source of information that the world trusts.

FreeRangeFrog is a Wikipedia administrator and has been an editor since 2009.

Sportsguy17

Ever since I started editing on this site, my views about COI and paid editing have changed dramatically, primarily due to reviewing some GA nominations substantially written by CorporateM, who has openly admitted to being paid and having a COI. Unfortunately, I at first made the impulsive decision of quick failing one of the nominations simply because this editor was paid and there was a COI. I had made that poor decision because of my own ignorance and stereotyping. However, after requesting that it be re-reviewed, I agreed to look over it again more closely and found that not only was the article in question neutral, but very informative and well-written. From that day on, it made me realize that just because an editor is getting paid and/or has a COI doesn't mean that they are here to harm the encyclopedia (in fact, there are quite a few that are assets to this project). In conclusion, I don't have a problem with paid editors and editors with a COI editing this site as long as the site is being benefitted by their contributions and not harming/disrupting the project in anyway, shape or form. I really hope that this piece can help the community realize that not all paid editors and COI editors are here for their own benefits and be a bit more accepting as a whole.

Sportsguy17 has been a Wikipedia editor since 2013.




Reader comments

2015-08-12
Wikimanía 2015, part 2, a community event
The Wiki-wedding of Israeli Wikimedians Darya and Avner Kantor

Inter- and intra- were the applicable geographical prefixes, as meetups were intra-continental: WikiAfrica, Wikimedia Asia, Central and Eastern Europe Wikimedians, and the Canada and United States affiliates, intra-language/inter-continental: WikiArabia, WikiFranca, Iberocoop, and Turkic Speaking Wikimedians, intra-country: Wikimedia Deutschland (Germany) and the Mexican Wikipedians, and the inter-language, intra-country, and internationally diasporic Indic Meetup. Thematic meetups included the Wikipedia Education Program, LGBT and allied Wikimedians, OTRS volunteers, Wikidata editors, Wikipedia Librarians, the WikiProject Med Foundation, a Wikiwomen's Lunch, and a joint Wiktionary-Wikidata Meetup. There was even a meetup for a Wiki Wedding.

Meeting the WMF employees and board members

The Community Engagement subway map organization chart presented at the Q&A

Unless you hang out in San Francisco, you will seldom have a chance to meet Wikimedia Foundation employees. Wikimania is an excellent venue for meeting dozens of them. A prime spot for this was the WMF booth. The Wikimedia Design Research team also staffed a table in the Community Village as well where they conducted surveys and interviews about how editors contribute to wiki projects on mobile devices. Attendees could engage with reorganized Community Engagement team leaders in a mediated Q&A panel discussion, or go to a Wikimedia Engineering Management Q&A, a WMF Legal presentation on defending users and content, or a Q&A with the WMF Board. There was also ample opportunity to meet individual staff and learn from them. It was intriguing to learn that the WMF uses Apache Cassandra as a back-end database to deliver content used by VisualEditor to retrieve page HTML for editing or that the search tool now provides intitle: and incategory: parameters.

Programme sessions

Wikimania 2015 Attendees T-Shirt Design

The substance of Wikimania is in the sessions presented by editors and staff for the rest of us. The Programme included tracks on Education, GLAM, Community, Tech, and Legal issues. Of the plethora of sessions, below are just a few that stood out among those attended by this editor.

For more info

Videos

Despite the dearth of official videos of Wikimanía 2015 sessions, as reported by the Signpost, some individuals took the initiative to record session and other videos. These can be found at Wikimania 2015 presentation videos on Commons, Wikimania 2015 videos on Internet Archive, and miscellaneous "Wikimania 2015" videos on YouTube.

Slide decks
Elsewhere on the web
  • "Wikimania 2015 in Words, Images, and Tweets". The Wikipedian. {{cite web}}: External link in |work= (help)
  • Ziko's Mexican_diary
  • Iberty's blog on Wikimania, 12.07.15 - 19.07.15
  • "Wikimania 2015 At Mexico City, Mexico". seen.co.

Notes

  1. ^ Algeria, Armenia, Austria, Australia, Bangladesh, Belgium, Benin, Brazil, Catalonia, Costa Rica, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Egypt, France, Georgia, Germany, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Italy, Mexico, Namibia, Nepal, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Pakistan, Philippenes, Poland, Russia, Serbia, Spain, Sweden, Tunisia, Tanzania, Ukraine, the U.K., the U.S., and Uzbekistan. Whew!
  2. ^ Ancient Greek - grc, Arabic - ar, Armenian (Eastern & Western) - hy, Assamese - as, Bengali - bn, Bishnupriya Manipuri - bpy, Catalan - ca, Chinese - zh, Czech - cs, Dutch - nl, English - en, Esperanto - eo, Estonian - et, French - fr, German - de, Hebrew - he, Hindi - hi, Indonesian - id, Italian - it, Japanese - ja, Javanese - jv, Kannada - kn, Kashmiri - ks, Latin - la, Lithuanian - lt, Malayalam - ml:, Marathi - mr:, Nepali - ne, Norwegian - no, Oriya - or, Panjabi - pa, Polish - pl, Portuguese - pt, Russian - ru, Sanskrit - sa, Serbian - sr, Serbo-Croatian - sh, Slovak - sk, Spanish - es, Swahili - sw, Swedish - sv, Tagalog - tl, Tamil - ta, Ukranian - uk, Urdu - ur, Uzbek - uz, Venetian - vec, Vietnamese - vi, and Western Panjabi - pnb



Reader comments

2015-08-12
Fighting from top to bottom

The charts are led this week by UFC women's champion Ronda Rousey, who won her last match at UFC 190 (#9) in 34 seconds. And at the bottom of the top 10 is Donald Trump, the highly improbable leading candidate for the Republican nomination in the 2016 Presidential elections. Of course, the election is 15 months away, which is light years in politics. The Top 10 also saw two high profile deaths in British singer Cilla Black (#3), and American wrestler Roddy Piper (#8). Aside from American films, and another strong showing from Indian cinema, a few more American debate related topics appear further down the Top 25. (A bonus chart of the candidates ranked by views follows below.)

For the full top-25 list, see WP:TOP25. See this section for an explanation of any exclusions. For a list of the most edited articles of the week, see here.

For the week of August 2 to 8, 2015, the 10 most popular articles on Wikipedia, as determined from the report of the most viewed pages, were:

Rank Article Class Views Image Notes
1 Ronda Rousey B-class 2,049,053
UFC 190 fell on August 1, which was the day before last week's report was published, so the reaction to that match, during which the undefeated UFC women's bantamweight champion beat Bethe Correia in 34 seconds in Correia's home town of Rio de Janeiro, really only came through this week. Still, she managed to get on the list last week too. Apparently Correia had been trash talking Rousey prior to the fight, which strikes me as a rather odd thing to do to someone who a) has never lost a fight and b) won her last fight in 14 seconds, except as a ploy to get better ratings.
2 A. P. J. Abdul Kalam Good Article 933,223
The sustained surge of views this scientist and reluctant politician received upon his death last week at the age of 83 is merely a reflection of the regard in which he was held by his fellow Indians. A Muslim in a predominantly Hindu country, he rose to the very top of the political ladder, first as a developer of India's missile and nuclear programs, and then as President. Despite adhering to Islam, he considered himself an Indian and drew much inspiration from his country's Hindu heritage. As a result, his one term as President was one of the most popular in his country's history. A lifelong advocate of technology, he believed that India could become a developed country through embracing and expanding its knowledge base.
3 Cilla Black C-class 796,775
Topics of purely British interest almost never make the top 25 (Britain's population can't compete with America or India, even if you factor in countries that share its pop culture, like Australia) and when they do they rarely reach this high. So that should tell any non-Brits reading this just how popular Cilla Black, who died this week, was in her home country. A native of Liverpool, she began her career as a singer in the innocent days of early 60s pop and achieved great success thanks to promotion by her fellow Liverpudlians The Beatles. She then became a fixture in British households for almost four decades, hosting a series of variety shows, game shows and hidden camera shows, eventually becoming the highest paid female performer in British television. Part of her appeal was that, unlike many in her position, she never abandoned her Liverpool roots, retaining her accent and mannerisms throughout her career. (This entry summary helpfully provided by Serendipodous, as my vague non-British knowledge of Ms. Black is limited to recalling some Smiths connection or homage to her in the past.)
4 Deadpool C-class 793,190
The article on this fictional Marvel Comics antihero surged in popularity on August 5 with the debut of a trailer for upcoming film of the same name starring Ryan Reynolds (pictured), which will be released on February 12, 2016, in North America.
5 Fantastic Four (2015 film) Start-class 788,731
Another Marvel Comics movie, including Miles Teller (pictured) among the top-billed cast, the film premiered in New York on August 4 and was released in theaters on August 7. The film was panned by critics and audiences alike and underperformed at the box office, earning only $25.7 million in North America during its opening weekend. However, a sequel is already scheduled to be released on June 9, 2017.
6 Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation Start-class 719,059
Up from #19 and 340,226 views last week. The box office draw of Tom Cruise (pictured) may have flagged of late, but he can always return to his signature franchise, which has yet to let him down. The fifth installment in the Mission: Impossible series was released on July 31 and had a hefty $56 million opening weekend, all but ensuring a part 6.
7 Bajrangi Bhaijaan Start-class 686,399
Down from #4 and 948,650 views last week. Bollywood's Muslim-targeted counterprogramming to the raging box office tsunami of Baahubali: The Beginning, starring Hindu/Muslim superstar Salman Khan (pictured) and opening on Eid weekend, made Rs 200 crore ($31.2 million) in its first nine days, and earned support from legends like Shekhar Kapur. But Khan's tweets in apparent support of Yakub Memon have led to posters for the film being defaced in some areas.
8 Roddy Piper C-class 646,146
Down from #3 and 1,086,945 views last week. Wikipedia readers love their wrestlers, and so the death of "Rowdy" Roddy Piper, world-renowned WWF and WCW heel, at the relatively young age of 61, was bound to stir emotions. In the ring, "Hot Rod" played up his Scottish roots, affecting the rage of a Glaswegian football hooligan and entering to the sound of bagpipes, for which he was named (his real last name, incidentally, was Toombs, which you would think would be a perfectly acceptable wrestling name).
9 UFC 190 Stub-class 638,825
See #1. Performing better than UFC 189, which had 557K views when it appeared on the Top 25 a few weeks ago. And for whatever reason UFC 188 didn't make the list at all in June, but UFC 187 did in May.
10 Donald Trump B-Class 614,810
The larger-than-life real estate developer and media personality nicknamed "The Donald" continues to flummox the American media, as Trump stood center stage in the first major Republican candidates debate on August 6, and is the candidate currently ranked highest in the polls. Many thought the questions he received from the Fox News anchors, including Megyn Kelly (#15), were aimed at ending his reign, but subsequent polls suggest his lead is increasing. How do you explain this craziness? Well, first of all, it is almost 15 months until the U.S. presidential election. Outside the focused political media and hard core Republicans, no one cares yet! He won't be the nominee. As seen above, wrestling and UFC is more popular at this point, taking 3 of the top 10 spots. Second, a large core of Republicans fear illegal immigration, because they've been taught to fear it in order to draw votes away from Democratic candidates. Trump's frank talk on this issue (despite veering into likely racism) appeals to that base. Many Americans are simply watching Trump "for the lulz".

Bonus chart - US Republican Presidential candidates

Rank Candidate Views
1 Donald Trump 614,810
2 Ben Carson 403,620
3 Carly Fiorina 393,404
4 John Kasich 214,815
5 Jeb Bush 204,989
6 Ted Cruz 184,220
7 Marco Rubio 173,578
8 Rand Paul 131,158
9 Chris Christie 86,011
10 Bobby Jindal 66,431
11 Scott Walker 65,585
12 Lindsey Graham 58,671
13 Mike Huckabee 55,729
14 Rick Perry 37,395
15 Rick Santorum 33,657
16 Jim Gilmore 30,236
17 George Pataki 27,769




Reader comments

2015-08-12
Fused lizards, giant mice, and Scottish demons

This week we cover material promoted from 26 July to 1 August.

The Carina Nebula from the featured article Eta Carinae
Hu Zhengyan's Bamboo in snow from the Ten Bamboo Studio Manual of Painting and Calligraphy
Personnel from No. 450 Squadron RAAF in front of a Kittyhawk fighter, May 1945
In the tempestuous seas around Orkney you can find the nuckelavee, a featured article.

Fourteen Featured articles were promoted this week.

  • Ankylosaurus (nominated by FunkMonk and LittleJerry) The Ankylosaurus or "fused lizard' was an armoured dinosaur, extant about 68–66 million years ago. It walked on four legs and had a beak on its snout and a club at the end of its tail. The largest specimens were probably about 20 feet (6.5 m) long, 6 feet (2 m) wide and weighed about 6 tons.
  • Eta Carinae (nominated by Lithopsian and Casliber) Eta Carinae is a stellar system about 7500 light years away. It's reckoned that the system has at least two stars which together outshine our sun by a factor of five million. The brightness of the system is variable; between 1837 and 1856 it got brighter in what Victorian astronomers called the Great Eruption. During three days in March 1843, it was the second-brightest star in the sky (it was regarded as a single star until the middle of last century). After the 1850s Eta Carinae faded until in 1886 it was not visible to the naked eye. It brightened again, faded again and has since brightened considerably, doubling in 1998–1999. The brightening is reckoned to be due to the two major stars of the system passing close by, with a period of 5.54 years; the fading is due to ejection of gas and dust from the system which obscures emissions from the stars.
  • Giant mouse lemur (nominated by Maky) The giant mouse lemur is a small and rare nocturnal primate, native to Madagascar, with cute ears, eyes, and a long, bushy tail. Both species are living in the forest. The animals weigh approximately 300 g (11 oz). Sadly, they are listed as endangered due to habitat destruction and hunting. As our article states: "In 2012, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) assessed both Coquerel's giant mouse lemur and the northern giant mouse lemur as endangered." Sad news.
  • Halifax Explosion (nominated by Resolute and Nikkimaria) Early in the morning of 6 December 1917, two ships collided offshore of Halifax, Nova Scotia. Although the collision between a Norwegian cargo vessel, SS Imo, and the French vessel SS Mont-Blanc was minor, barrels of benzol stored on the deck of the Mont-Blanc were upset and breached, and the inflammable liquid poured out. As the Imo backed away from the Mont-Blanc, sparks from scraping metal ignited the vapours from the benzol, starting a fire at the waterline which quickly spread to the deck, producing thick black smoke. The crew took to the lifeboats and rowed as fast as they could away from the drifting Mont-Blanc, all the while shouting out warnings which remained unheard, such was the pandemonium. Many of the inhabitants of Halifax viewed the fire from their upstairs windows, and were killed or seriously injured when the ship exploded.
  • Hitler Diaries (nominated by SchroCat) The Hitler Diaries were 60 cheap notebooks in which memorabilia dealer Konrad Kujau faked what was purported to be a journal written by Adolf Hitler. They were accepted as such by journalist Gerd Heidemann who persuaded his employers at Stern to purchase them; additional verification was provided by British historian Hugh Trevor-Roper, who was told that the paper had been chemically tested and proven to be pre-war (it hadn't). Trevor-Roper was initially convinced by the range of supposed supporting documentation provided, and he wrote an article claiming they were genuine. This was published in The Sunday Times on 23 April 1983. By then he was already doubting their genuineness, and subsequent forensic testing showed their post-war origin.
  • Hu Zhengyan (nominated by Yunshui) Hu Zhengyan was a Chinese publisher, artist, and seal carver who lived in Nanjing from 1619 to 1674 CE. Here he established the Ten Bamboo Studio as a home, a meeting place for artists, and as the head office for his printing business. Hu employed ten artisans (including four family members) to publish reference works on a variety of subjects. He was a noted carver of personal seals, including ones for the emperor. Hu's usual artistic themes were bamboo, plum flowers, orchids, fruits, rocks, birds and animals. He also wrote books on calligraphy and painting.
  • JC's Girls (nominated by Neelix) JC's Girls, or "Jesus Christ's Girls", are an evangelical Christian women's organization in the United States. The JC's Girls evangelize to women working in the sex industry, and seek to help them in a non-judgmental way. The organization also helps both men and women to overcome pornography addiction.
  • Jeremy Thorpe (nominated by Brianboulton) British politician Jeremy Thorpe was leader of the UK Liberal Party between 1967 and 1976. Under his leadership, the Liberals gained or regained the support of many voters; in the first of two general elections held in 1974 the party received 19% of the vote. With neither of the two main parties (Labour and Conservative) having enough parliamentary seats to give them a clear majority, the Liberals were courted by the incumbent Conservatives to form a coalition government. Thorpe insisted that this proposed government have a commitment to electoral reform of the "first past the post" system.
  • Mary Margaret O'Reilly (nominated by Wehwalt) Mary Margaret O'Reilly was hired by the United States Bureau of the Mint as a temporary clerk in 1904. She was aged 38. By the time O'Reilly reached the mandatory retirement age of 70 she was assistant director of the Mint, with such an extensive knowledge of bureau affairs that she was granted a year's extension by President Roosevelt at the request of the Mint's director, Nellie Taylor Ross. O'Reilly was granted two further extensions, but a fourth extension lobbied for by Treasury Secretary Morgenthau was refused, and O'Reilly retired in October 1938.
  • Master of Puppets (nominated by Retrohead) Master of Puppets is the third album by the heavy metal band Metallica. Released in 1986, the album is regarded as a seminal album in the genre, and many cover versions of the "atmospheric and meticulously performed songs" have been recorded. It's also been credited with "consolidating the American thrash metal scene".
  • No. 450 Squadron RAAF (nominated by Ian Rose and AustralianRupert) No. 450 Squadron was a Royal Australian Air Force unit, established in February 1941. Initially it was staffed only with ground crew, who were to be joined by experienced pilots when the squadron had transferred to a theatre of active operations. No. 450 Squadron arrived in Egypt in May 1941, where it was combined with the pilots of No. 260 Squadron and their Hurricane fighters. The operational squadron, known as No. 260/450 (Hurricane), moved to Amman, Syria, in June 1941 where it flew missions to attack Vichy French airfields in Syria. This active phase lasted ten days; later in August the two squadrons were separated when No. 260 received its own ground crew—No. 450 became a training unit. By January 1942 the squadron had again become an active fighter unit, which served in the North African, Italian and Yugoslav campaigns, often in a ground attack role. It was disbanded in August 1945.
  • Nuckelavee (nominated by Eric Corbett and Sagaciousphil) The nuckelavee is the most horrible of the demons inhabiting the Scottish islands. When on land it appears as a horse-like creature with some human characteristics. The man's torso growing from its back has very long arms and a head as large as 3 feet (0.91 m) in diameter; some accounts say that the nuckelavee has two heads, one human the other equine. It has no skin, showing its black blood flowing through yellow veins. The nuckelavee's breath can wilt crops and sicken livestock, and it can only be controlled by the Mither o' the Sea, an Orcadian divine who keeps it confined during the summer months.
  • Stanley Price Weir (nominated by Peacemaker67) Stanley Price Weir (1866 – 1944) was an Australian Army officer who after his retirement became a public servant. Brigadier general Weir commanded the 10th Battalion of the Australian Imperial Force during the landing at Anzac Cove, the Gallipoli Campaign, World War I. For his efforts as a commander in the army, during these events and for participating in the Pozières and Battle of Mouquet Farm in France, he was awarded the Distinguished Service Order. He was actively contributing to several religious, charitable, and welfare organisations.
  • Youth on the Prow, and Pleasure at the Helm (nominated by Iridescent) The painting is by English artist William Etty and owned by the Tate Gallery in London. It is one of Etty's best-known works. It was inspired by Thomas Gray's poem The Bard about the misrule of Richard II of England. The poem describes a gilded ship drifting on the sea, but the storm is near. The occupants are unaware of an approaching trouble, a moral warning about the pursuit of pleasure. The painting was not uncontroversial, as our article states: "the reaction of the lower classes to these paintings caused concern throughout the 19th century."
Fair laughs the morn, and soft the zephyr blows,
While proudly riding o'er the azure realm,
In gallant trim, the gilded vessel goes,
Youth on the prow and Pleasure at the helm,
Unmindful of the sweeping whirlwind's sway,
That, hushed in grim repose, expects his evening prey.
Audrey Hepburn on screen and stage, here in Sabrina.

Four featured lists were promoted this week.

  • Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress (nominated by Birdienest81) The Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress is an anual award distributed by the US Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences since in 1937. The first winner of this award was Gale Sondergaard who won this award for her role in Anthony Adverse. As our article states: "It is given in honor of an actress who has delivered an outstanding performance in a supporting role while working within the film industry."
  • Audrey Hepburn on screen and stage (nominated by Cowlibob) Audrey Hepburn was a British actress, and one of the most charming and enchanting actresses ever to appear on screen. She was regarded as "both a film and style icon." Hepburn's experiences of living in the Netherlands during the German occupation in the Second World War were the seed for her devotion to humanitarian work through UNICEF.
  • List of awards and nominations received by Adele (nominated by Another Believer and FrB.TG) Adele is an English singer-songwriter who has received 86 awards. The first awards were the BBC Sound of 2008 and Brit Awards for Critics' Choice. As our article states: "She is the recipient of a BT Digital Music Award, 4 Brit Awards, an Academy Award, a Golden Globe Award, 10 Grammy Awards, 13 Billboard Music Awards, and 4 American Music Awards. Her 2007 song "Hometown Glory" was nominated for a Grammy Award in the Best Female Pop Vocal Performance category. At the 51st Annual Grammy Awards, she earned the Best New Artist award, with two additional nominations at the same ceremony. The song "Someone like You" won three Grammy Awards, and "Set Fire to the Rain" won 54th and 55th Annual Grammy Awards, respectively. There are many more awards: Adele was awarded several other accolades, including the Echo Music Award and Grammy Award for Album of the Year, and won in 12 Billboard Music Award categories. In 2012, she released "Skyfall", a song of the 2012 James Bond film of the same name."
  • Tabu filmography (nominated by Krimuk90) Indian film actress Tabu's first role was played as teenager in Dev Anand's Hum Naujawan (1985). After some less well received films she went on to greater successes. As our article states: "Her most critically acclaimed performances were in the films Maachis (1996), Virasat (1997), Hu Tu Tu (1999), Astitva (2000), Chandni Bar (2001), Maqbool (2003), Cheeni Kum (2007), and Haider (2014)." She played the leading role in Mira Nair's drama The Namesake (2007) that got some positive reviews from American critics. She also had a role in Ang Lee's adventure film Life of Pi from (2012).
Griffon vulture
Tectarius coronatus, some pretty sail shells.
Koshary
Frying the eggs, Velasquez.
Áron Szilágyi (left) is up against Nikolay Kovalev (right) in the semi-finals at the 2013 World Fencing Championships

Twenty-eight Featured picturess were promoted this week.

The Lidder Valley




Reader comments

2015-08-12
Tech news in brief
The following content has been republished as-is from the Tech News weekly report.



Reader comments

2015-08-12
The Hunt for Tirpitz
The following content has been republished from the Wikimedia Blog. The views expressed in this piece are those of the author alone; responses and critical commentary are invited in the comments section. For more information on this partnership see our content guidelines.


British Barracuda aircraft flying over a fjord shortly before attacking Tirpitz during Operation Tungsten on 3 April 1944.

This led to a series of operations between April and August 1944, of which only the first—Operation Tungsten—inflicted any significant damage. Mascot was much less successful, and involved a somewhat farcical attack in which the British pilots attempted to drop bombs on the ship by aiming at flashes from Tirpitz‘s guns through a thick German-laid smokescreen. Goodwood involved four separate raids over a week in August, but once again ended in failure due to smokescreens over the battleship during each of the attacks. Despite the lack of results, each of these attacks was a major battle involving thousands of personnel on both sides.

Inspirations

Over the last two years I’ve developed three featured-class articles about these unsuccessful attacks, but how did an Australian end up writing about little-known events which took place in the far north of Norway 70 years ago and involved very few Australians?

Ironically, my main inspiration for writing about this topic came from a museum located even further away from Norway—when visiting the Museum of Transport and Technology in Auckland, New Zealand, I was surprised to learn that New Zealanders made up a large proportion of the FAA’s aircrew during World War II (about 17% of the airmen involved in Operation Tungsten were from the country). The museum’s dramatic diorama depicting British Fairey Barracuda aircraft dive-bombing Tirpitz in a fjord interested me as well; I’d written articles on other little-known carrier aircraft attacks on important naval bases (like the Attack on Yokosuka) and World War II in Norway (Black Friday [1945] and Action of 28 January 1945), and recently reviewed a book about the British attacks on Tirpitz.

When combined, this looked like a topic I’d want to work on, and my initial research confirmed this. The series of British raids were major efforts which involved the bulk of the Home Fleet (the Royal Navy’s main combat force, stationed in the UK) and exposed the airmen to extreme danger from the hostile Norwegian climate and formidable German defences. Moreover, despite the British forces being considerably more powerful than the German units stationed at Kaafjord, they were unable to do much damage due to the limitations of the fleet’s aircraft, bad weather, and some ingenious German tactics.

Deeper research turned up more fascinating facts—for instance, the US Navy transferred an aircraft carrier from the Pacific to the Indian Ocean to allow Operation Tungsten to go ahead, and one of the Royal Navy’s carriers was so worn out it was withdrawn from service and retired halfway through Operation Goodwood!

My kingdom for a (comprehensive) source!

[[File:|800px|left|]]
Royal Navy crewman Bob Cotcher used chalk to write a message on a 1,600 pound (730 kg) bomb earmarked for Tirpitz.


My main challenge in writing these articles was the absence of a single source which covers all of the attacks in detail. While there are several histories which cover all the Allied attacks on Tirpitz, the amount of information they provide on each of the operations varies considerably. For instance, Mark Bishop’s recent book Target Tirpitz only goes into detail on Operation Tungsten and skims over the other attacks, and John Sweetman’s Tirpitz: Hunting the Beast is very useful for Operations Tungsten and (to a lesser extent) Goodwood, but only briefly mentions Operation Mascot. Stephen Roskill’s venerable official history of the Royal Navy in World War II also provided a useful overview of the attacks and the strategy which guided them, but was weak on the details of the individual operations.

As a result, developing these articles to FA standard was only possible by consulting many specialised sources. I’m fortunate to live in a city boasting several libraries with excellent military history collections, and I trawled their shelves on weekends. This really paid off—for instance, the Operation Mascot article probably couldn’t have come together without V.E. Tarrant’s rather obscure The Last Year of the Kriegsmarine, which provided the only detailed account of this attack I could find. Similarly, specialised works on battleships, naval aviation, and the naval war in the Arctic allowed me to fill in important details. Given the importance of these obscure works, I suspect that there are only a smallish number cities in the world—and possibly no other city in Australia—where it might have been possible for an amateur historian like me to develop articles on this topic without resorting to inter-library loans and/or expensive purchases.

Something that surprised me was the value of the British official history British Intelligence in the Second World War: Its Influence on Strategy and Operations, which was published during the 1980s and 1990s, in developing the articles. By assessing British wartime intelligence reports against what actually occurred, this work provided an important reality check at several points, and was particularly valuable when using sources which pre-dated the disclosure of the Allied success in breaking the German codes in the late 1970s. As a bonus, its authors had a good eye for interesting snippets about the military operations against Tirpitz which allowed me to inject some extra “colour” into the articles. This experience illustrated the value of reading widely around the topic, and I’d strongly recommend consulting this work when writing articles on World War II in Europe.

Despite these positive experiences, I wasn’t able to fill in some significant details in the articles. Most importantly, no source went into detail on the German experiences of the operations, with the available coverage generally being focused on Tirpitz and its crew. As a result, I couldn’t pin down the strength of the German anti-aircraft and air force units deployed to protect Tirpitz, or the casualties they sustained—which appear to have been heavy in several of the attacks. Second, while this part of Norway is sparsely populated, it would also have been good to have described the experiences of local civilians. Finally, while various unreliable or semi-reliable sources discussed commemorations of the raids, it was very difficult to source material on them to featured article standard.

Writing the articles, and some reflections

Part of the cost of war: one of Manxruler’s photos of the Commonwealth War Graves section of Tromsø’s main cemetery, where several of the Allied airmen who were killed in the raids on Tirpitz are buried.

I developed the three articles in their chronological order, starting by improving the already-existent Operation Tungsten article and ending by creating and developing an article on Operation Goodwood. This worked well, as I was able to re-use text and references in each successive article. I also adjusted the level of detail on the background and aftermath of the operations as appropriate—Operation Tungsten has detailed coverage of the background to these attacks, Operation Mascot discusses the several abortive raids which followed Tungsten in April and May 1944, and Operation Goodwood goes into greater detail on the successful attacks by land-based Royal Air Force bombers which followed the Royal Navy’s failure to seriously damage Tirpitz. To improve readers’ ability to navigate this topic, I also created a List of Allied attacks on the German battleship Tirpitz article which provides a summary of the various operations.

A Universal Newsreel in 1944 led with the sinking of Tirpitz, which after the failures of Tungsten, Mascot, and Goodwind, was eventually accomplished by the Royal Air Force.

The process of submitting each of the articles to Good Article, A-class and featured reviews also helped guide their development. The feedback from reviewers highlighted areas I needed to pay close attention to which were common to all articles, such as the need to ensure that the terminology used was suitable for readers who don’t have prior knowledge of the broad topic areas the articles cover. I also found that I could revisit the older articles as I went along and found new sources or useful facts I’d missed, with the happy result that the Tungsten and Mascot articles are—hopefully—in better shape than when they passed their featured article nominations!

I’d also like to acknowledge the valuable contributions of Manxruler, a Norwegian local and Wikipedia editor, who took photos of the graves of Allied airmen at the Commonwealth War Graves Cemetery in Tromsø and added some additional details to the text. This illustrated the power of Wikipedia to connect interested editors in different parts of the world to work towards a common cause.

Overall, I’d recommend the experience of writing a string of articles on related topics, and now understand why some editors tend to use this as their main editing style. It’s an efficient way to produce high-quality articles, and provides a great opportunity to write about a topic in detail. While I was worried about getting bored with the topic or burnt out, the small number of articles, fairly self-contained nature of the individual battles and the sheer novelty of the topic (aircraft carriers attacking a battleship in a fjord!) kept me interested, and I was pleased with the positive response from reviewers, which suggests that other editors also found the topic worthwhile.

I was also very pleased that Operation Tungsten appeared on Wikipedia’s front page to mark the 70th anniversary of the raid on 3 April 2014, which went a long way to making the whole project worthwhile.

This post was originally published in the Bugle, the monthly newsletter of the English Wikipedia's Military history WikiProject. It was edited and expanded for publication on the Wikimedia Blog and in the Signpost.



Reader comments

If articles have been updated, you may need to refresh the single-page edition.