Should I accept authorship on large collaborations for which I have made little contribution?












3














I have just started a post-doc. So far all of my papers have had small author lists (4-5 people). I have just been invited as a co-author on several papers with hundreds of authors. The papers are pitched as community-wide collaborations: some being white papers describing a future experiment that the community plans to engage in, others being the results from first data from such experiments. My contribution, and the contribution of 99% of the authors whose names are already there, have been negligible. What are the pros and cons of agreeing to be on such a paper?






authorship collaboration mega-collaborations







share|improve this question


















  • 3




    Pros: papers for your CV; being a member of a collaboration; meetings. Cons (conditional): if you don't publish anything outside the collaboration, you are considered as a free-loader. Doesn't apply if you regularly publish papers not directly related to the collaboration.
    – corey979
    8 hours ago










  • If there are hundreds of authors, realistically how big a contribution can one author make? Be a part of it if you are in the field. The field will understand the level of contribution.
    – Jon Custer
    5 hours ago










  • @corey979 I'm not sure that meetings should always count as pro.
    – Andreas Blass
    2 hours ago










  • Keep you name on the paper - at least you made a contribution and therefore deserve the recognition... Unlike some of the other questions on here...
    – Solar Mike
    1 hour ago
















3














I have just started a post-doc. So far all of my papers have had small author lists (4-5 people). I have just been invited as a co-author on several papers with hundreds of authors. The papers are pitched as community-wide collaborations: some being white papers describing a future experiment that the community plans to engage in, others being the results from first data from such experiments. My contribution, and the contribution of 99% of the authors whose names are already there, have been negligible. What are the pros and cons of agreeing to be on such a paper?






authorship collaboration mega-collaborations







share|improve this question


















  • 3




    Pros: papers for your CV; being a member of a collaboration; meetings. Cons (conditional): if you don't publish anything outside the collaboration, you are considered as a free-loader. Doesn't apply if you regularly publish papers not directly related to the collaboration.
    – corey979
    8 hours ago










  • If there are hundreds of authors, realistically how big a contribution can one author make? Be a part of it if you are in the field. The field will understand the level of contribution.
    – Jon Custer
    5 hours ago










  • @corey979 I'm not sure that meetings should always count as pro.
    – Andreas Blass
    2 hours ago










  • Keep you name on the paper - at least you made a contribution and therefore deserve the recognition... Unlike some of the other questions on here...
    – Solar Mike
    1 hour ago














3












3








3







I have just started a post-doc. So far all of my papers have had small author lists (4-5 people). I have just been invited as a co-author on several papers with hundreds of authors. The papers are pitched as community-wide collaborations: some being white papers describing a future experiment that the community plans to engage in, others being the results from first data from such experiments. My contribution, and the contribution of 99% of the authors whose names are already there, have been negligible. What are the pros and cons of agreeing to be on such a paper?






authorship collaboration mega-collaborations







share|improve this question













I have just started a post-doc. So far all of my papers have had small author lists (4-5 people). I have just been invited as a co-author on several papers with hundreds of authors. The papers are pitched as community-wide collaborations: some being white papers describing a future experiment that the community plans to engage in, others being the results from first data from such experiments. My contribution, and the contribution of 99% of the authors whose names are already there, have been negligible. What are the pros and cons of agreeing to be on such a paper?






authorship collaboration mega-collaborations




authorship collaboration mega-collaborations






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked 8 hours ago









rhombidodecahedron

442215




442215








  • 3




    Pros: papers for your CV; being a member of a collaboration; meetings. Cons (conditional): if you don't publish anything outside the collaboration, you are considered as a free-loader. Doesn't apply if you regularly publish papers not directly related to the collaboration.
    – corey979
    8 hours ago










  • If there are hundreds of authors, realistically how big a contribution can one author make? Be a part of it if you are in the field. The field will understand the level of contribution.
    – Jon Custer
    5 hours ago










  • @corey979 I'm not sure that meetings should always count as pro.
    – Andreas Blass
    2 hours ago










  • Keep you name on the paper - at least you made a contribution and therefore deserve the recognition... Unlike some of the other questions on here...
    – Solar Mike
    1 hour ago














  • 3




    Pros: papers for your CV; being a member of a collaboration; meetings. Cons (conditional): if you don't publish anything outside the collaboration, you are considered as a free-loader. Doesn't apply if you regularly publish papers not directly related to the collaboration.
    – corey979
    8 hours ago










  • If there are hundreds of authors, realistically how big a contribution can one author make? Be a part of it if you are in the field. The field will understand the level of contribution.
    – Jon Custer
    5 hours ago










  • @corey979 I'm not sure that meetings should always count as pro.
    – Andreas Blass
    2 hours ago










  • Keep you name on the paper - at least you made a contribution and therefore deserve the recognition... Unlike some of the other questions on here...
    – Solar Mike
    1 hour ago








3




3




Pros: papers for your CV; being a member of a collaboration; meetings. Cons (conditional): if you don't publish anything outside the collaboration, you are considered as a free-loader. Doesn't apply if you regularly publish papers not directly related to the collaboration.
– corey979
8 hours ago




Pros: papers for your CV; being a member of a collaboration; meetings. Cons (conditional): if you don't publish anything outside the collaboration, you are considered as a free-loader. Doesn't apply if you regularly publish papers not directly related to the collaboration.
– corey979
8 hours ago












If there are hundreds of authors, realistically how big a contribution can one author make? Be a part of it if you are in the field. The field will understand the level of contribution.
– Jon Custer
5 hours ago




If there are hundreds of authors, realistically how big a contribution can one author make? Be a part of it if you are in the field. The field will understand the level of contribution.
– Jon Custer
5 hours ago












@corey979 I'm not sure that meetings should always count as pro.
– Andreas Blass
2 hours ago




@corey979 I'm not sure that meetings should always count as pro.
– Andreas Blass
2 hours ago












Keep you name on the paper - at least you made a contribution and therefore deserve the recognition... Unlike some of the other questions on here...
– Solar Mike
1 hour ago




Keep you name on the paper - at least you made a contribution and therefore deserve the recognition... Unlike some of the other questions on here...
– Solar Mike
1 hour ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















5















What are the pros and cons of agreeing to be on such a paper?




Pros




  • Your contributions to the collaboration are formally acknowledged, both incentivizing you to continue working on it as well as putting the candle under your butt to get up to speed on anything you should be getting good at.

  • Leaders in the collaboration see you listed as a contributing member, allowing your candidacy for the next round of projects that need attention by working group members. Generally, people reach out to include you going forward.

  • You will be put on mailings that automatically include all researchers on the paper, keeping you up to speed as developments happen in real time.

  • Your association with the project is beneficial to both your career (i.e., Look at this thing I worked on!) and the project itself (i.e., Look at this great contributor we have!).


Cons




  • None. Literally none.


There is a related problem in academia called illegitimate co-authorship, or sometimes authorship inflation, but that is a problem to be tackled by policy. If this problem bothers you, find ways to contribute to the policies and incentives that systematically reinforce this behavior. Boycotting it personally will only serve to harm your career and be a drop in the bucket of the larger problem.






share|improve this answer





















  • Cons: they will always be highly-cited papers which will inflate your citation count and other metrics. People will interpret your citation counts with more skepticism or a "correction factor", so your individual work may get lost in the noise.
    – user71659
    18 mins ago



















4














This sort of thing is common in many fields and unheard of in others. I suspect that in your field there are many such papers and, among other things, they establish your connection to a group of researchers who will, in the future, become leaders in the field.



So, yes, do that. And, as your career progresses your contributions will improve and increase.



There is at least one example of a paper in which the list of authors is longer than the paper itself. Possibly in a field like biochemistry, but I don't remember the details.






share|improve this answer





















  • Large particle physics collaborations used to have a full author list in the paper. Fortunately that did not count against the page limit in, e.g., Physical Review Letters. Now the ‘author’ of those is a ‘collaboration’, the members of which can be found online.
    – Jon Custer
    5 hours ago






  • 1




    @JonCuster You likely refer to the (current) champion with 5154 authors (journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.191803, open access). Which is set in context to a few other "hyperauthorship" papers in a nature publication (nature.com/news/…) -- equally accessible by open access.
    – Buttonwood
    1 hour ago













Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "415"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f122234%2fshould-i-accept-authorship-on-large-collaborations-for-which-i-have-made-little%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









5















What are the pros and cons of agreeing to be on such a paper?




Pros




  • Your contributions to the collaboration are formally acknowledged, both incentivizing you to continue working on it as well as putting the candle under your butt to get up to speed on anything you should be getting good at.

  • Leaders in the collaboration see you listed as a contributing member, allowing your candidacy for the next round of projects that need attention by working group members. Generally, people reach out to include you going forward.

  • You will be put on mailings that automatically include all researchers on the paper, keeping you up to speed as developments happen in real time.

  • Your association with the project is beneficial to both your career (i.e., Look at this thing I worked on!) and the project itself (i.e., Look at this great contributor we have!).


Cons




  • None. Literally none.


There is a related problem in academia called illegitimate co-authorship, or sometimes authorship inflation, but that is a problem to be tackled by policy. If this problem bothers you, find ways to contribute to the policies and incentives that systematically reinforce this behavior. Boycotting it personally will only serve to harm your career and be a drop in the bucket of the larger problem.






share|improve this answer





















  • Cons: they will always be highly-cited papers which will inflate your citation count and other metrics. People will interpret your citation counts with more skepticism or a "correction factor", so your individual work may get lost in the noise.
    – user71659
    18 mins ago
















5















What are the pros and cons of agreeing to be on such a paper?




Pros




  • Your contributions to the collaboration are formally acknowledged, both incentivizing you to continue working on it as well as putting the candle under your butt to get up to speed on anything you should be getting good at.

  • Leaders in the collaboration see you listed as a contributing member, allowing your candidacy for the next round of projects that need attention by working group members. Generally, people reach out to include you going forward.

  • You will be put on mailings that automatically include all researchers on the paper, keeping you up to speed as developments happen in real time.

  • Your association with the project is beneficial to both your career (i.e., Look at this thing I worked on!) and the project itself (i.e., Look at this great contributor we have!).


Cons




  • None. Literally none.


There is a related problem in academia called illegitimate co-authorship, or sometimes authorship inflation, but that is a problem to be tackled by policy. If this problem bothers you, find ways to contribute to the policies and incentives that systematically reinforce this behavior. Boycotting it personally will only serve to harm your career and be a drop in the bucket of the larger problem.






share|improve this answer





















  • Cons: they will always be highly-cited papers which will inflate your citation count and other metrics. People will interpret your citation counts with more skepticism or a "correction factor", so your individual work may get lost in the noise.
    – user71659
    18 mins ago














5












5








5







What are the pros and cons of agreeing to be on such a paper?




Pros




  • Your contributions to the collaboration are formally acknowledged, both incentivizing you to continue working on it as well as putting the candle under your butt to get up to speed on anything you should be getting good at.

  • Leaders in the collaboration see you listed as a contributing member, allowing your candidacy for the next round of projects that need attention by working group members. Generally, people reach out to include you going forward.

  • You will be put on mailings that automatically include all researchers on the paper, keeping you up to speed as developments happen in real time.

  • Your association with the project is beneficial to both your career (i.e., Look at this thing I worked on!) and the project itself (i.e., Look at this great contributor we have!).


Cons




  • None. Literally none.


There is a related problem in academia called illegitimate co-authorship, or sometimes authorship inflation, but that is a problem to be tackled by policy. If this problem bothers you, find ways to contribute to the policies and incentives that systematically reinforce this behavior. Boycotting it personally will only serve to harm your career and be a drop in the bucket of the larger problem.






share|improve this answer













What are the pros and cons of agreeing to be on such a paper?




Pros




  • Your contributions to the collaboration are formally acknowledged, both incentivizing you to continue working on it as well as putting the candle under your butt to get up to speed on anything you should be getting good at.

  • Leaders in the collaboration see you listed as a contributing member, allowing your candidacy for the next round of projects that need attention by working group members. Generally, people reach out to include you going forward.

  • You will be put on mailings that automatically include all researchers on the paper, keeping you up to speed as developments happen in real time.

  • Your association with the project is beneficial to both your career (i.e., Look at this thing I worked on!) and the project itself (i.e., Look at this great contributor we have!).


Cons




  • None. Literally none.


There is a related problem in academia called illegitimate co-authorship, or sometimes authorship inflation, but that is a problem to be tackled by policy. If this problem bothers you, find ways to contribute to the policies and incentives that systematically reinforce this behavior. Boycotting it personally will only serve to harm your career and be a drop in the bucket of the larger problem.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 3 hours ago









user1717828

2,83921024




2,83921024












  • Cons: they will always be highly-cited papers which will inflate your citation count and other metrics. People will interpret your citation counts with more skepticism or a "correction factor", so your individual work may get lost in the noise.
    – user71659
    18 mins ago


















  • Cons: they will always be highly-cited papers which will inflate your citation count and other metrics. People will interpret your citation counts with more skepticism or a "correction factor", so your individual work may get lost in the noise.
    – user71659
    18 mins ago
















Cons: they will always be highly-cited papers which will inflate your citation count and other metrics. People will interpret your citation counts with more skepticism or a "correction factor", so your individual work may get lost in the noise.
– user71659
18 mins ago




Cons: they will always be highly-cited papers which will inflate your citation count and other metrics. People will interpret your citation counts with more skepticism or a "correction factor", so your individual work may get lost in the noise.
– user71659
18 mins ago











4














This sort of thing is common in many fields and unheard of in others. I suspect that in your field there are many such papers and, among other things, they establish your connection to a group of researchers who will, in the future, become leaders in the field.



So, yes, do that. And, as your career progresses your contributions will improve and increase.



There is at least one example of a paper in which the list of authors is longer than the paper itself. Possibly in a field like biochemistry, but I don't remember the details.






share|improve this answer





















  • Large particle physics collaborations used to have a full author list in the paper. Fortunately that did not count against the page limit in, e.g., Physical Review Letters. Now the ‘author’ of those is a ‘collaboration’, the members of which can be found online.
    – Jon Custer
    5 hours ago






  • 1




    @JonCuster You likely refer to the (current) champion with 5154 authors (journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.191803, open access). Which is set in context to a few other "hyperauthorship" papers in a nature publication (nature.com/news/…) -- equally accessible by open access.
    – Buttonwood
    1 hour ago


















4














This sort of thing is common in many fields and unheard of in others. I suspect that in your field there are many such papers and, among other things, they establish your connection to a group of researchers who will, in the future, become leaders in the field.



So, yes, do that. And, as your career progresses your contributions will improve and increase.



There is at least one example of a paper in which the list of authors is longer than the paper itself. Possibly in a field like biochemistry, but I don't remember the details.






share|improve this answer





















  • Large particle physics collaborations used to have a full author list in the paper. Fortunately that did not count against the page limit in, e.g., Physical Review Letters. Now the ‘author’ of those is a ‘collaboration’, the members of which can be found online.
    – Jon Custer
    5 hours ago






  • 1




    @JonCuster You likely refer to the (current) champion with 5154 authors (journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.191803, open access). Which is set in context to a few other "hyperauthorship" papers in a nature publication (nature.com/news/…) -- equally accessible by open access.
    – Buttonwood
    1 hour ago
















4












4








4






This sort of thing is common in many fields and unheard of in others. I suspect that in your field there are many such papers and, among other things, they establish your connection to a group of researchers who will, in the future, become leaders in the field.



So, yes, do that. And, as your career progresses your contributions will improve and increase.



There is at least one example of a paper in which the list of authors is longer than the paper itself. Possibly in a field like biochemistry, but I don't remember the details.






share|improve this answer












This sort of thing is common in many fields and unheard of in others. I suspect that in your field there are many such papers and, among other things, they establish your connection to a group of researchers who will, in the future, become leaders in the field.



So, yes, do that. And, as your career progresses your contributions will improve and increase.



There is at least one example of a paper in which the list of authors is longer than the paper itself. Possibly in a field like biochemistry, but I don't remember the details.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 7 hours ago









Buffy

36.8k7116189




36.8k7116189












  • Large particle physics collaborations used to have a full author list in the paper. Fortunately that did not count against the page limit in, e.g., Physical Review Letters. Now the ‘author’ of those is a ‘collaboration’, the members of which can be found online.
    – Jon Custer
    5 hours ago






  • 1




    @JonCuster You likely refer to the (current) champion with 5154 authors (journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.191803, open access). Which is set in context to a few other "hyperauthorship" papers in a nature publication (nature.com/news/…) -- equally accessible by open access.
    – Buttonwood
    1 hour ago




















  • Large particle physics collaborations used to have a full author list in the paper. Fortunately that did not count against the page limit in, e.g., Physical Review Letters. Now the ‘author’ of those is a ‘collaboration’, the members of which can be found online.
    – Jon Custer
    5 hours ago






  • 1




    @JonCuster You likely refer to the (current) champion with 5154 authors (journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.191803, open access). Which is set in context to a few other "hyperauthorship" papers in a nature publication (nature.com/news/…) -- equally accessible by open access.
    – Buttonwood
    1 hour ago


















Large particle physics collaborations used to have a full author list in the paper. Fortunately that did not count against the page limit in, e.g., Physical Review Letters. Now the ‘author’ of those is a ‘collaboration’, the members of which can be found online.
– Jon Custer
5 hours ago




Large particle physics collaborations used to have a full author list in the paper. Fortunately that did not count against the page limit in, e.g., Physical Review Letters. Now the ‘author’ of those is a ‘collaboration’, the members of which can be found online.
– Jon Custer
5 hours ago




1




1




@JonCuster You likely refer to the (current) champion with 5154 authors (journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.191803, open access). Which is set in context to a few other "hyperauthorship" papers in a nature publication (nature.com/news/…) -- equally accessible by open access.
– Buttonwood
1 hour ago






@JonCuster You likely refer to the (current) champion with 5154 authors (journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.191803, open access). Which is set in context to a few other "hyperauthorship" papers in a nature publication (nature.com/news/…) -- equally accessible by open access.
– Buttonwood
1 hour ago




















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f122234%2fshould-i-accept-authorship-on-large-collaborations-for-which-i-have-made-little%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







-

Popular posts from this blog

Morgemoulin

Image
Morgemoulin — miejscowość i gmina — Państwo   Francja Region Grand Est Departament Moza Okręg Verdun Kod INSEE 55357 Powierzchnia 6,82 km² Populacja  (1990) • liczba ludności 75 • gęstość 11 os./km² Kod pocztowy 55400 Położenie na mapie Francji Morgemoulin 49°14′N   5°35′E / 49,233333   5,583333 Portal Francja Morgemoulin – miejscowość i gmina we Francji, w regionie Grand Est, w departamencie Moza. Według danych na rok 1990 gminę zamieszkiwało 75 osób, a gęstość zaludnienia wynosiła 11 osób/km² (wśród 2335 gmin Lotaryngii Morgemoulin plasuje się na 970. miejscu pod względem liczby ludności, natomiast pod względem powierzchni na miejscu 848.). Bibliografia | Francuski urząd statystyczny ( fr. ) . p   •   d   •   e Gminy okręgu Verdun Abaucourt-Hautecourt • Aincreville • Ambly-sur-Meuse • Amel-sur-l'Étang • Ancemont • Arrancy-sur-Crusne • Aubréville • Autré...
Read more

Scott Moir

Image
Scott Moir Tessa Virtue i Scott Moir w 2016 r. Reprezentacja   Kanada Data i miejsce urodzenia 2 września 1987 London Wzrost 180 cm Konkurencja Pary taneczne Partner sportowy Tessa Virtue Trener Marie-France Dubreuil, Patrice Lauzon, Romain Haguenauer Poprzednio: Marina Zujewa, Oleg Epstein, Igor Szpilband, Johnny Johns, Carol Moir, Paul MacIntosh, Suzanne Killing Klub Montreal International School of Skating Poprzednio: Arctic Edge FSC Ilderton Skating Club Lokalizacja treningowa Montreal Poprzednio: Canton Kitchener Rekordy życiowe ISU przed sezonem 2018/2019 Nota łączna 206,07 Igrzyska Olimpijskie 2018 Taniec krótki 83,67 Igrzyska Olimpijskie 2018 Taniec dowolny 122,40 Igrzyska Olimpijskie 2018 Dorobek medalowy Reprezentacja   Kanada Igrzyska olimpijskie Złoto Vancouver 2010 pary taneczne Złoto Pjongczang 2018 pary taneczne Złoto Pjongczang 2018 drużynowo Srebro S...
Read more

Souastre

Image
Souastre — miejscowość i gmina — Herb Państwo   Francja Region Hauts-de-France Departament Pas-de-Calais Okręg Arras Kod INSEE 62800 Powierzchnia 7,18 km² Populacja  (1990) • liczba ludności 352 • gęstość 49 os./km² Kod pocztowy 62111 Położenie na mapie Francji Souastre 50°09′N   2°34′E / 50,150000   2,566667 Portal Francja Souastre – miejscowość i gmina we Francji, w regionie Hauts-de-France, w departamencie Pas-de-Calais. Według danych na rok 1990 gminę zamieszkiwały 352 osoby, a gęstość zaludnienia wynosiła 49 osób/km² (wśród 1549 gmin regionu Nord-Pas-de-Calais Souastre plasuje się na 887. miejscu pod względem liczby ludności, natomiast pod względem powierzchni na miejscu 507.). Bibliografia | Francuski urząd statystyczny ( fr. ) . p   •   d   •   e Gminy okręgu Arras Ablain-Saint-Nazaire Ablainzevelle Acheville Achicourt Achiet-le-Grand Achiet-le-Pe...
Read more