This week's Special report has highlighted the Wikimedia Conference 2014, to be held from next Thursday to Sunday in Berlin under the stewardship of the German chapter. In related news, the run-up to the conference has seen the unfolding of two fractious threads on the Wikimedia public mailing list, both of which may serve as background for the last session at Berlin: "Future of the Wikimedia Conference".
Former WMUK chair Fæbegan the earlier thread, entitled Cost of Wikimedia Conference 2014, questioning why the UK is sending "a massive party of 8 people", when he had understood that "organizations would send no more than 2 representatives plus one optional guest". / "Another consideration is past concern from smaller chapters that this meeting was being overwhelmed with the viewpoint of the larger and better funded chapters that found it easiest to travel to Berlin, or pay employees to attend."
In answer to claims that limits on attendance are "misplaced frugality", Fæ said: "For one chapter to break the rules and send significantly more representatives to this conference than the others when they are not even the host does not appear effective to my eyes." / "... we should take care to ensure appropriate transparency when using our funds. It is almost impossible to fully assess how many employees are attending in proportion to unpaid volunteers (which implies costs beyond travel and accommodation), or whether named representatives have any experience or interests in the Wikimedia projects, as many names are given no link or context."
This was met by comments both in support and against, revealing surprisingly different attitudes among chapters to the "ownership" of donors' funds: "Really Fae, as you are no longer the [WMUK] chair, why rule "from the grave"?" / "... it is for the chapter to decide if they spend their money wisely." This was then rebutted by another party: "It is not 'their money', but rather the money of donors—i.e. the general public—who are every year told that Wikipedia needs your help to survive. The 'movement' ... has a tendency to waste money on frivolous things such as travel and accommodation, as demonstrated last year by the Affcom attendancecontroversy at Wikimania 2013.
Former WMUK chair Fæ raised cost and attendance issues.
Fæ later wrote: "I am genuinely puzzled as to why, if nobody on the WMUK board (such as the CEO or the current Chairman) is sure what the purpose of the conference is, they should choose to invest the donor's money in sending 5 trustees and 3 full time employees to it (presumably the employees are being paid for their time rather than going as volunteers). / If the key benefit claimed is to do social networking, it should be recognized that all the same faces will be at Wikimania London in 4 months, and socializing is part of the defined benefits of Wikimania. / Considering the conference is a week away and it appears that flights and accommodation have been paid for, re-framing this as good news, rather than admitting it is a problem, appears to be replacing pragmatism with sophistry."
For one chapter representative, funds "[do] not belong to the relevant chapters, and as a result we need to respect that when spending our their money. / ... we should always be frugal with the funds that we have as a movement ... I think the guideline 2+1 really should be adhered to by all, and would wonder what value there is in sending more than this along to the conference on the dime of the donor. If it's acceptable for large chapters with large reserves, it potentially puts smaller chapters at a disadvantage or could be perceived as bias." Nicole Ebber, Wikimedia Germany's head of international affairs and the program manager for the conference, wrote that she was "baffled" that these questions are being asked only now, since they were raised months ago on Meta in the early planning stages; there is evidence on Meta that Ebber worked hard to get discussion going as early as August last year. In the end, she said, "we felt the 2(+1) rule is kind of outdated".
According to another participant: "... we have [a] strict rule – two representatives, 3 if you have ED. I also saw that some chapters have more than that, and I really don't know why." However, John Davies, CEO of WMUK, wrote: "this is a sensible use of our resources", suggesting among other functions that the UK delegates "can promote Wikimania London and learn about people's ideas and expectations", but that "we will certainly not be going round in a sort of WMUK gang trying to overwhelm small chapters – quite the opposite and I think we have a good record at WMUK of supporting others." One participant commented that in previous years the idea was "to keep the conference small as possible in order to have effective discussions, and to allow all the chapter to be equal." Chris Keating, chair of WMUK, pointed out that "there was no 'only 2 representatives plus an ED' rule mentioned in the registration process."
Wikimedia Germany's Nicole Ebber at last year's Wikimedia Conference. Ebber is the program liaison officer for the upcoming conference.
While emphasising that she was generalising and there are exceptions, Risker—a former arbitrator on the English Wikipedia who performs a number of volunteer roles for the movement—wrote: "... the place where leadership is most sorely lacking is on projects, while the majority of those participating in leadership activities at the chapter/thorg level are not doing a lot of work on WMF projects."
It's a heavily publicly discussed meeting to which 99.9998% of Wikimedians are unwelcome – and yes, that's the way it comes across.
The movement has failed if the only way to participate in group discussions on movement governance is to (1) create a chapter or thorg, (2) become an executive or employee of one and (3) be granted authority to attend this conference. Those are very big hoops to jump through in order for non-aligned Wikimedians and movement participants/supporters to participate in the discussion.
”
Controversy erupts among German-speakers
This strident discourse on the mailing list has been mirrored in the German-language part of the movement. While Wikimedia Germany is hosting an event at which determining the future purpose of WMF-affiliated entities is a major topic, the chapter is facing significant criticism from both the German editing community and within its own board on where the chapter's priorities lie. In a substantial post, Open Letter to Wikimedia Germany, posted on Saturday 5 April in the German Wikipedia's news outlet, Kurier, long-standing German Wikipedian Marcus Cyron has accused the chapter's leadership of being out of touch: "For a long time I have put a lot of energy into the development of Wikimedia Germany. ... I see it as an important tool for supporting volunteers at work on Wikimedia projects. But even as an active member I am seeing decreasing control [by members] of the chapter. Hardly a decision is made other than within the Berlin office, and even the chapter board often seems to be powerless. This I can no longer accept."
Cyron went on to complain about a lack of openness in the way Wikimedia Germany judged applications for Wikimania scholarships, and of "encrusted processes in the chapter. Unfortunately, many people do not dare to speak openly about these issues—there is a lot of frustration ...".
The open letter has unleashed a lengthy controversy on the Kurier's talk page that makes the English Wikipedia look polite—accusations that Cyron's letter comprises "intemperate attacks", "vain whining", and counterclaims that such comments are "rude and totally wrong"; "you have a problem, not me." There was support for the good work of chapter staff, but assertions that Cyron's letter "has brought long-standing problems to a head."
At the same time, Wikimedia Germany's treasurer, Steffen Prößdorf (User:Stepro), posted a blog, The essential question: What is the purpose of Wikimedia Germany?. The piece was billed as "an overdue look back at the Chapter Boards Training Session he attended in London last month, in which he recounts his shock at the "opinion of a prominent female Wikimedian at the workshop about the meaning of the movement and the role of the chapters: if we can buy free knowledge, we should do that [and] just forget about the communities. Or even quoted verbatim [in English]: 'Fuck the community, who cares'."
Stepro posed what he sees as the core question: "Is the Wikimedia movement in general and Wikimedia Germany in particular primarily there to generate free content to collect and make available, or to support the volunteers in these tasks?" He drew contrasts between the WMF's mission "to empower a global volunteer community to collect and develop the world's free knowledge", and the starting point of the chapter's stated mission, to "promote" this rather than directly supporting volunteers to conduct it. The chapter's board, he wrote, "must make it clear to all employees ... that the office was created in support of volunteers ... only under this condition is a partnership between all stakeholders possible—communities, members, the chapter office, the board, and the employees."
In brief
Should Russia create a Wikipedia alternative?: The ITAR-TASS newsagency reports that Anton Likhomanov, the director general of the National Library of Russia, told a public forum that it is "high time" that a Russian-language alternative to Wikipedia be created, claiming that Wikipedia is controlled from the US and thus vulnerable to American sanctions. Vladimir Medeyko of Wikimedia Russia told the Signpost that while there might be some bad PR for the movement, given that "foreign entities, especially American ones, are considered suspicious", there were obvious responses if it came to defending the WMF in Russia. "I'm very skeptical," he said, "and don't believe they would be successful."
Affiliate-nominated seats: Five candidates have been nominated for the two affiliate-selected (previously chapter-selected) seats on the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees. Editors are welcome to make comments and ask questions on the talk pages of each candidate's statement. Affiliated organisations will discuss the selection next Sunday morning at the Berlin conference, so prompt feedback would be advantageous.
New FDC round: The deadline for submissions for Round 2 of the twice-yearly funding cycle of the Foundation's Funds Dissemination Committee closed on 1 April. There are three applicants for funding: the Norwegian and French chapters, and the India-based Centre for Internet and Society (CIS). The community review period has begun, and will last until the end of April. All Wikimedians are encouraged to provide feedback and pose questions. The Belfer Center at Harvard University
The Belfer affair: Fallout over a Wikipedian-in-residence hosted by Harvard University in 2012 continued on the mailing lists this week. As we reported two weeks ago, "The position, advertised and promoted by the Wikimedia Foundation, was at Harvard University's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. ... This chain of events [came] after an inquiry from Liz Allison of the Stanton Foundation, an organization that had donated several million dollars to the WMF ... While the Wikipedian in residence would be funded by the Stanton Foundation and work at the Belfer Center at Harvard, they asked the WMF to act as a fiscal sponsor for administrative reasons." Since then, Sue Gardner (the Wikimedia Foundation's executive director) has issued an apology, and the Foundation itself has published a post-mortem investigation. From the document, "The WMF believes it is a bad practice for those in Wikipedian-in-Residence positions to edit Wikipedia as a core activity of their residency, and regrets that it constructed the Belfer project to include editing as part of the position's core work. The WMF has made a number of decisions, detailed below, designed to prevent similar situations from playing out like this in future." Nevertheless, the controversy has continued with comments from Greg Kohs and Fæ.
Typography update: Design magazine FastCompany has revealed that the recenttypography update could have gone much farther. FastCompany reporter Mark Wilson viewed the update as "conservative", saying that it was mostly "a new font for the section headers." Wilson continued, "[Wikipedia] fills your browser with a wall of end-to-end text that consumes everything, edging itself up against ever-tiny images that, for whatever reason, have been framed in a weak outline."
Quarterly update: The quarterly update consisting of all changes to the English Wikipedia's content policies has been published at Wikipedia:Update. Volunteers to restart updates of deletion and enforcement policies are requested.
Commons and the URAA: The saga over Commons' interpretation of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA) has continued with the closure of a consensus-building discussion: "URAA cannot be used as the sole reason for deletion. Deleted files can be restored after a discussion [at the undeletion requests page]." This result has been challenged in multiple places by Russavia, including edit warring on the Commons' global licensing policy.
Publishing scholarly papers with, and on, Wikipedia: Martin Poulter has authored a post on the Wikimedia UK blog examining the relationship between the open-access journal PLoS Computational Biology and Wikipedia. For example, PLoS has a competition where an individual improves an article over a four-month period. At the end, a committee of academics and Wikipedians review the changes; the top three articles receive cash prizes.
Anna Koval: The Wikimedia Foundation has announced its newest hire, following the recent departure of LiAnna Davis. Anna Koval spent the last eight months at the WMF as a community advocate. Her Serbian background and extensive experience in the classroom set her apart during the selection process: according to Rod Dunican, director of Global Education at the WMF, "Anna's Serbian background will be helpful to our team's efforts to support education program leaders in Eastern Europe. ... Anna is an award-winning educator, with a master's degree in education and more than a decade of classroom teaching experience, ranging from middle school through graduate school. She was a Walt Disney Teacher of the Year nominee, an American Library Association Emerging Leader, and was even featured on the cover of California Teacher magazine." Koval will be a Global Program Manager.
Two quarterly reviews: WMF Grantmaking has brought out its latest quarterly reviews. Notes and presentation slides from the WMF's quarterly review meeting on growth are now on-wiki.
Edit-a-thon at the Royal Society: New Scientist has covered an edit-a-thon hosted at the UK's Royal Society, which aimed to improve Wikipedia's incomplete coverage of women in science. Although coverage is more extensive in English Wikipedia than in other Wikipedias, significant work remains to be done to create a full selection of biographies of women scientists from English language sources, which can serve as a basis for articles in other languages.
If you'd like to see your project in a future WikiProject Report, leave a message at the Signpost's WikiProject Desk.
Frankfurt became the geographic centre of the European Union in 2013Bavarian countrysideGermany has the world's largest solar power and third-largest wind power capacityUnionskirche Idstein, photo taken by Gerda Arendt
This week, we visited WikiProject Germany. The project began in October 2006 and has grown to include 128 pieces of Featured material and nearly 400 Good and A-class articles. The project oversees a variety of task forces and subprojects covering the topics ranging from German cinema and German football to a vast array of geographic regions and historical nations. We interviewed Gerda Arendt, Kusma, and Agathoclea.
What motivated you to join WikiProject Germany? Do you or have you ever lived in Germany?
Gerda Arendt: I have lived in Germany for most of my life.
Kusma: I was a regular of the German speaking noticeboard when Badbilltucker founded WikiProject Germany and was quickly drawn into the organization of the project. While I was not living in Germany when I joined Wikipedia (and do not live there now), I have lived in Germany most of my life.
Agathoclea: Is it really that long ago? I got interrested as it gave me a link back home - a connection to the "Heimat", having a feeling I could contribute due to local knowledge while understanding it also from an international angle.
Have you contributed to any of the project's Featured or Good Articles? What is the most difficult hurdle to overcome when building an article about Germany to Featured status?
Kusma: I have written most of the Germany portal and brought it to featured status (many years ago now). Also, I have contributed to the FA Georg Forster, mostly by translating form German (together with Alx-pl), but also finding secondary sources in English. For me, an obvious hurdle is that my English isn't quite good enough to write brilliant prose.
Do you frequent the German Wikipedia? What can be done to improve inter-wiki collaboration and the sharing of content?
Gerda Arendt: I work for the German Wikipedia a lot, translating "my own" articles, articles of users who are not wanted here, and some just for fun, for example Little Moreton Hall, Grace Sherwood, Duck Attack!, Sorrow and Stargazy Pie. All were featured on the German Main page in the DYK equivalent SG (Schon gewusst?) section, the latest one, Gilbert Foliot, on 3 and 4 April.
Kusma: I read it every now and then and have written an article or two there, but I prefer contributing here. I used to translate from German quite a lot, but that was before inline citations and modern sourcing requirements (I think translating was easier back then).
Agathoclea: I was initially put off by deWiki due the ruder tone and some sillyness by deWiki admins (The windmillfight against interwiki links against bots comes to mind). Now I think I am more active there since I found a niche of interest inserting pictures in lists of listed buildings. Not that I am much active anywhere due to real-life constraints.
WikiProject Germany is the parent of over a dozen task forces and subprojects. Have you contributed to any of these? Are there ways that these smaller-scoped initiatives can be improved and revitalized?
Kusma: I have founded some of these task forces/subprojects and written the template code for most of them (the Mainz project was one I originally used to test various things) but others actually predate WikiProject Germany. The Frankfurt project, for example, has its origins in the very first Wikimania conference. All of these initiatives (as well as the near-dormant WikiProject Germany itself) can be revitalized; all it needs is someone who dedicates time to the project. It is not very difficult: you need to look at page histories, talk to editors who write good content, find interesting missing topics, talk to people some more, then find collaborative goals and motivate people to work on them. (I was originally drawn into translation by a huge list of red links needing to be filled when somebody else wanted to prep Sanssouci for FA). It is a lot of work, and I haven't had the wikitime to do it for several years. Fortunately others are still working :)
Agathoclea: While the taskforces do not have much of a obvious life they provide a good access point for someone who wants to contribute in a certain area to utilise the various bot generated lists to find a neverending supply of articles to work on.
What can Wikipedians visiting or living in Germany contribute to the project's photography? Are there any locations or objects that could be easily handled by anyone with a camera?
Do some geographic areas of Germany receive more attention than others? What can be done to improve Wikipedia's articles about overlooked locations in Germany?
Kusma: Probably yes. I would go for the systematic approach -- make a list of relevant articles and go through it, checking if every article meets the right standard. WikiProject Germany's scope is a bit too large for the amount of manpower we have available, though.
Agathoclea: Work on articles is usually polarized around clusters where local or ex-locals are active here. Like Kusma I think we need a systematic approach, but manpower is missing so very often we only have stubs with at least a good infobox. The frustrating thing about expanding from there is the task of maintaining it afterwards.
What are the project's most urgent needs? How can a new contributor help today?
Gerda Arendt: I don't like questions with a superlative ;) - A new contributor can look at "Things to do" on the project's featured portal, ask on the project's talk, ask project members. Another way is to look at the project's DYK archives, find articles of interest and fill their red links, or contact their authors.
Kusma: Start at the portal. Consider maintaining the news section. That also tells you what current topics should be improved. Check the open task list. Start maintaining that list and make sure it has interesting things on it for everybody who wants to help. Consider whether the project's structure is adequate and change it. Really, just be bold and do what you think needs to be done.
Agathoclea: People, people and people and for them to watchlist:
The annual Wikimedia Conference is about to start in Berlin, hosted by Wikimedia Germany, which won the bid to hold the event over three others. This will be the fifth time the chapter has hosted the Wikimedia Conference—it did so from 2009 to 2012, with attendance ranging from 100 to 180 Wikimedians. This year 160 people are expected at the four-day event, which is mainly for representatives of affiliated Wikimedia organisations. The conference has been built around two themes: Organisation, structures, and grants and Success and impact.
The conference will start on Thursday 10 April with an all-day meeting of the Foundation's volunteer Affiliations Committee and a half-day evaluation workshop. The first day proper, Friday, will see sessions on the "State of the movement", "Chapters dialogue", "Free knowledge", "From ideas to experiments", "Lessons learnt", "Conflict of interest", "FDC feedback", and "Community liaisons". The Saturday schedule will introduce the sessions "Re-imagine movement structures", "Best practice; sharing is caring", "User-generated advocacy", "Strategy in Wikimedia organisations", "WMF grant programs", and there will be a plenary "Meet the WMF Board of Trustees" session. On Sunday, chapters and the movement's only thematic organisation will meet to discuss the selection of the two affiliate-selected WMF trustees, due to take their two-year seats in July. There will be sessions on "How to measure blood, sweat and tears", "Your organisation and hiring staff", "Program evaluation", "Diversifying fundraising", "Learning, development and training", and "Wikimania". The last session of the conference will be devoted to the future of the Wikimedia Conference.
Wikimedia Germany's Wenke Storn, event manager for the conference
Last August, Asaf Bartov, the Foundation's head of WMF grants and global south partnerships, summarised the purpose of the conference:
An opportunity for Wikimedia movement organizations to meet face-to-face and share ideas about projects and practices and to discuss any unresolved issues that may have come up during the past year.
A venue for one of the quarterly Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees meetings and an opportunity for the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees and Wikimedia movement organizations to meet and talk.
A venue for the Funds Dissemination Committee to meet to assess the funding proposals for Round 2 of the current year and provide recommendations on those proposals to the WMF Board.
The only change this year is that the Board of Trustees will not conduct formal meetings of itself, freeing up trustees to attend sessions.
The Signpost asked the event manager for the conference, Wenke Storn, whether the costs have altered significantly from the estimates in WMDE's bid to hold the conference. She said:
Up to now, we are very well on budget and will stay below our estimate. The only position where we will exceed our estimate are the costs for the facilitators. The facilitators will support the program team in defining the conference themes, clustering the topics, creating the outline of the sessions, identifying speakers and session formats, as well as creating the schedule. They will brief the speakers, help coordinate the documentation, and work with the program team after the conference on the analysis and outcome of the sessions.
We have outsourced the flight costs directly to WMF. All chapters who have not budgeted for WMCON14 in their annual plan or via a PEG grant, are getting flight and accommodation costs paid. Flights are booked directly via the WMF travel coordinator. I don’t have an overview on the current amount at the moment."
The two facilitators are budgeted for just over €7000. Storn estimates that 80 people will need paid accommodation at €27 per person per night, and has booked a hotel where all participants can be under the same roof. For those without funding there will be triple rooms with ensuite at the same cost ("which I think is much nicer than four-bed hostel rooms with a bathroom in the hallway").
The WMF's chief of finance and administration, Garfield Byrd
The venue, Der Tagesspiegel, will cost €14,000. It has four rooms, all equipped with presentation technology and wi-fi: the main room seats 160 people, with three smaller rooms for sessions in theatre or U-shaped modes. Conference catering for the estimated 160 people will be €17,000. Dinner snacks at the chapter's head office will cost €4000, as will social events, with some €11,000 allocated to other costs.
Given the heat of the debate about attendance and the importance of some of the themes to the movement as a whole (see this week's News and notes), the Signpost asked Wenke Storn whether any sessions will be streamed: "There will be no live-streaming or video recording, but all sessions will be extensively documented (text, photos; supported by documentation volunteers and participants themselves), and will be shared publicly."
Storn assured us that the actual costs will be published after the conference. The financial auditing and transparency of events in which significant amounts of donors' money is invested has indeed become an issue. There has been a recent query by the Israeli chapter about absence of accounts from the Hong Kong organisers of Wikimania 2013, held last August; the Signpost has inquired three times about this matter since December 2013, given the three-month deadline for a financial report after such events. Last week we asked Garfield Byrd, the WMF's chief of finance and administration, about this matter and the staff costs for attending Berlin:
I currently have an understanding in place to have a report on Wikimania 2013 completed by April 15, 2014. If the report is not complete at that time, then WMF is reserving the right to have an independent accounting done of the Wikimania 2013 grant and expenses.
The budget for the Wikimedia Conference is included in the WM DE [Wikimedia Germany] proposal. With this grant, WMF has agreed to reimburse WM DE based on actual expenditures for the conference rather than give them a grant prior to the conference. In this case, they will need to provide a financial statement for the event in order to get reimbursed. Estimated WMF staff cost for attending the event are $30,000.
The Signpost understands that this does not include staff salaries paid for business hours during the period of their absence from normal work. The WMF also provided funding of US$30,000 through its PEG scheme, with post-hoc comments on the budget by members of the volunteer Grant Advisory Board.
WMF Trustee Jan de Vreede said last week: "I am grateful to the German Chapter for hosting us this year, and also to all the volunteers who are willing to donate their time to participate. Looking forward to seeing you all next week!"
Americae Sive Quartae Orbis Partis Nova Et Exactissima Descriptio:
When a map, dating from fifteen sixty-two, The Americas, precisely described, promised you, It might well be very good, I guess, But not for use in GPS. Still, to it, let's raise our flagons, For now we know: there be dragons.
This Signpost "Featured content" report covers material promoted from 23 March 2014 to 29 March 2014.
Featured articles
Having gunpowder hurled your way Is known for screwing up your day. Nor will there be a wondrous time If you are hit with flaming lime. As such, the Song's ships readily won Caishi, eleven sixty-one Pictured:Goodman, Beavers.
European Nightjar(nominated by Jimfbleak) This bird, Caprimulgus europaeus, is a nocturnal creature that is found in Europe and Asia. There are six subspecies. "Caprimulgus is derived from the Latin capra, "nanny goat", and mulgere, "to milk", referring to an old myth that nightjars suck milk from goats".
"Spinning Around"(nominated by WonderBoy1998) Australian artist Kylie Minogue had a disappointing reception to her sixth studio album, Impossible Princess. This song was recorded for her seventh studio album Light Years (2000) which was more favorably reviewed. The music video for the song was noted for the appearance of Minogue's gold hotpants.
Dishonored(nominated by Darkwarriorblake) This 2012 video game is set in the dystopian city of Dunwall. The main character is a bodyguard who is framed for the murder of the Empress of the Isles. The game is noted for allowing the player to choose several methods of accomplishing missions including nonlethal options. "During development, test players discovered methods of exploiting the available powers and abilities to achieve unexpected outcomes; instead of restricting these techniques, the designers attempted to redesign levels to accommodate them."
Formula, Vol. 1(nominated by Magiciandude) This debut album of American singer-songwriter Romeo Santos was released in 2011. Over 300,000 copies were sold and the album received generally favorable reviews including a Grammy nomination. "A deluxe edition of the album containing five extra tracks was released exclusively in Walmart retail stores in the United States."
Battle of Caishi(nominated by Khanate General) The Battle of Caishi (Battle of Ts'ai-shih; Chinese: 采石之戰) was a naval battle that occurred in November of the Western year 1161. Over 18,000 soldiers participated in the battle. The commander of the losing side, Prince Hailing, was assassinated by his men soon after the defeat.
Horrible Histories (2009 TV series)(nominated by Shoebox2) This children's sketch comedy television series was broadcast on CBBC. The television series is based on the book series of the same name. The television episodes continue "the franchise's overall irreverent but accurate focus on the dark, gruesome or scatological aspects of British and other Western world history..."
Goodman Beaver(nominated by Curly Turkey) The comics character Goodman Beaver first appeared in 1959. Beaver "was a naïve and optimistic Candide-like character, oblivious to the corruption and degeneration around him. The stories were vehicles for biting social satire and pop culture parody." Stories included "Goodman Goes Playboy", which Hugh Hefner found amusing but Archie Comics did not.
SMS Kaiser Wilhelm II(nominated by Parsecboy) This pre-dreadnaught battleship participated in training exercises and port visits from 1902 to 1906 as flagship of the German High Seas Fleet. In World War I, the ship served in coastal defense until its age and crew shortages resulted in it being reassigned to duty as a command ship.
Featured lists
I like big butts, and I cannot lie. You other brothers can't deny, When you see a man getting out of his bath And an artist draws his gaff You got art.
Wadi Bani Khalid(created by Richard Bartz, nominated by Tomer T) In the nomination of this gorgeous image, there was a complaint that people's knowledge of geography wouldn't stretch to this valley. We at the Signpost trust in our reader's intelligence more than that
Holy Trinity, Sloane Street(created and nominated by David Iliff) A church in London. I'm uncomfortable poking fun of that, so just click to see the very pretty picture and move on, please.
The arms of this spiral gallery, NGC 4414, are rich in dust, an indicator of stellar nurseries – and, indeed, are full of young, blue stars. So remember, when sweeping up with your light-year-sized broom, it's best not to clean too much, lest you make the universe too sterile. (Created by NASA, nominated by The Herald)
The mysterious fate of MH370 still tops the list, but in all other respects our readership has retreated from the real world into its pop-cultural happy place: TV, movies, music, Reddit and Google Doodles all made an appearance.
For the full top 25 list, see WP:TOP25. See this section for an explanation for any exclusions.
For the week of 23 to 29 March, the 10 most popular articles on Wikipedia, as determined from the report of the 5,000 most viewed pages, were:
Interest has barely waned in this ongoing event that is as frustrating as it is tragic. Three weeks in, we still don't know precisely what happened to this flight, or to its 239 passengers and crew, but, gradually, a drip of hard facts is beginning to replace occasionally wild speculation. Leads are coalescing around a violent region of the sea off the coast of Australia, but it seems unclear as to where it is.
This article is veering wildly around the view graph, in a pattern that is making me suspicious. Still, no reason to assume people aren't interested in Amazon's decision not to launch a video service.
There aren't that many landmasses left unclaimed on Earth these days, so modern territorial disputes have an air of Gulliver's Travels about them. But people still take them very seriously. This tiny submerged island, which was claimed by Britain when it last emerged from the waves in 1831, was claimed by Sicily when divers placed a flag on it in 2000, just in case it ever emerged again, as noted in a popular Reddit thread this week.
Disney's Oscar-winning juggernaut got a shot in the arm thanks to its release on DVD on March 18. Despite this, it is on course to overtake Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest as Disney's highest-grossing film.
Another attempt to turn a girls' action novel into a film franchise, ala Hunger Games, this one is a Brave New World rework in which individuals are sorted into 5 classes- the honest, the selfless, the brave, the peaceful and the intelligent- and those who don't fit into those categories are targeted and killed. Question: How could anyone not fit one of those categories? Anyone who is not honest, selfless, brave, peaceful, or intelligent is probably in prison. Still, it made $76 million in 8 days, so it's obviously hit a nerve.
Darren Aronofsky's high fantasy take on the Book of Genesis has been ambivalently received for its Biblical fidelity, but has opened with a solid $15 million in one day, so obviously people are curious about it.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_9M-MRO_-_MSN_28420_404_(9272090094).jpg)
.JPG)
.jpg/Nom_2){kind=link}