Comment I would support this as a WikiProject Award for that WikiProject. I don't think it warrants its own barnstar, though. --WillMak05038901:27, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm not even sure this is wide enough for a wikiproject, let alone a project award... Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 14:02, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Joe Pa is a pretty important character for Penn State, why would you not support as a WikiProject Award for the Penn State WikiProject? --WillMak05038920:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't know who Joe Paterno is, so I can't answer that. My issue was with the narrow scope of the Wikiproject itself - but Badbilltucker informs me that it is active and two years old, so I'm cool with that. Any established successful wikiproject should have its own award. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Support as project award only - as project is so small that to create a full barnstar for this comparatively small project would only devalue the existing more general barnstars. Badbilltucker17:42, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Comment - Is it just me, or does anyone else think that the two lenses aren't exactly centered on the middle of the barnstar? It is a minor point, but I would appreciate knowing if this is in some way intentional (if it is, fine) or whether it is accidental. If the latter, maybe straightening the glasses out would be in order. Badbilltucker22:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Comment - I note that there is not yet a barnstar for the state of Pennsylvania itself, although it is a broader field, and actually encompasses several projects. I'm personally not completely convinced that one state is itself broad enough scope, but I am sure it would receive a lot more support if it was proposed, particularly from all the other projects associated with the state. Badbilltucker14:09, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Comment Currently there are several wikiproject relating to Pennsylvania. WP Pennsylvania, WP PA Highways, WP Pittsburg & WP Philadelphia. There is a WP Award for Philly, and a PUA for Pittsbur. I don't think WP Pennsylvania has thought of developing an award, though if it did, it would probably involve a Keystone. --evrik(talk)19:24, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Award 5000
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
How about an award gven automatically (by bot, something or someone) for achieving 5000 edits? Guidelines?
Support. It would be nice to have a few more awards that have objective criteria instead of being reliant wholy on the opinions of the presentor. I recommend this be coordinated with Wikipedia:Service awards also as they have several defined levels of contribution. Johntex\talk15:55, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Comment - "edit countitis" has never been proven to exist, much less proven to be a bad thing. While focusing on anything in the extreme can be a bad thing - there is no good reason why we can't have a few awards based purely on undisputable measures of contribution - such as number of edits. Johntex\talk21:47, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Oppose - obsession with edit counts is in no way a good thing, and the fact that this design so dramatically emphasizes it indicates to me that it might become a factor here. I wouldn't mind seeing a similar award for edit counts, and believe that we already have one such service award, but I personally have very strong reservations about the styling of this one possibly emphasizing the number too much. Badbilltucker21:52, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Ah, but a few awards based on edit count would hardly seem to be an obsession - certainly not compared to the dozens and dozens of awards that can be given out for no concretely defined reason.
Do you think you might consider supporting if the design were changed? The text could be smaller and turned into something more of a statement. For example, "Here's to your first 5,000 contributions to the community" or "Thanks for making 5,000+ contributions"... Johntex\talk22:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Comment I think by the time you make it to 5000 edits, you don't give a damn about getting an award. I'm only 900 away, and I sure don't care if I get an award when I hit 5000. I'm not doing this for the kudos. What's the point of this award? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 22:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Strong oppose. We don't want users to think that they would get an award at 5000 edits, which could lead to massive balant edits by users to increase their edit count and damage this encyclopedia. Johntex, we award users a barnstar for making quality edits, and not for specific edit count. Michaelas10(Talk)21:37, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Comment. Am I the only one who finds a bit odd the argument "No one would care to have this award, and editors will deliberately warp their editing to get this award"? Some other comments: (1) If you don't like the award, don't display it. (2) It's just a barnstar, doubtful that anyone would deliberately make lots of minor edits just to get this award, but if they do, so what? Minor edits are useful too. (3) People are motivated to achieve goals. That's just human. If you're not, then bully for you, but you're unusual. (4) Having 5000 edits is an achievement of some sort. Whether it is important or not is up to the individual user. Any editor is welcome to view this award on another editor's page and choose to disregard the information it displays. All that being said, I myself prefer the
WP:SERVICE awards were deemed by the No Fun Brigade too controversial to be included in the roster of awards and hence their existance is not known to most. Herostratus02:58, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
I believe I should explain myself better. Although a large edit count as a goal for a barnstar might seem useful for this encyclopedia, it is completely against the purpose of barnstars. Barnstars are awarded for quality edits, which are truly an achievement, rather than for a certain count. I know some Wikipedians with a lower edit count which contributed and helped much more than some other users with a very high edit count. This is not "if you don't like it, don't display it", the award selecting process should be very limited, and if people oppose it then there is no reason for it to be on PUA, and especially not on the barnstars page. Michaelas10(Talk)17:02, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
Strong Oppose, this award will encourage wikipedians to edit more, maybe by adding nonsenses, vandals on articles. --
Right. I mean, God forbid we should encourage editors from editing even more. Increased editing means increased vandalism, and our goal should be to get editing (and therefore vandalism) down to zero.... sheesh. Herostratus17:28, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
This isn't a good arguement, nobody will manage to vandalize his way up to 5000 edits. The problem is that although these edits might not be vandalism, they might be very low-quality or duplicates. Michaelas10(Talk)16:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Strong Oppose Quality not quantity my friends :D. BTW the tireless contributers barnstar already exists and is more diversive. — Arjun01:24, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Hinduism WikiProject Award
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Super Strong Support, I think there is one for Islam and since the Hindu community is very strong here (Hindus and non-Hindus alike) this barnstar is something that could be shared. Great idea.__
Support - with question. Would the award also be available to members of the Hindu mythology, Hindu philosophy, Saivism, and Vedanta WikiProjects? I know they're listed as descendant projects, but just want to be sure of their possible inclusion as well. Badbilltucker01:27, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Comment - I do have to agree that the image is right now rather less than eye-catching. Is the green required or called for by circumstances, and might the color of the barnstar be changed to complement whatever color the central icon has? Badbilltucker14:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Reply to Evrik's Comment Well Priyanath just created the second barnstar quite recently so I doubt many of the editors would know about his new design. I'll post messages at the WikiProject talk page and on
Comment I just added a third proposed image, with similar colors as #2. I can tweak if need be, but not until next week - any suggestions? ॐ Priyanath05:28, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Comment I've just added a fourth possibility. Because it's hard to change a barnstar later on, I think it's good to get the Hinduism WikiProject Barnstar to be the best we can from the start. Looking at the other Barnstar discussions above, I think it's a good approach to get more feedback - and also see if others have ideas they'd like to upload for discussion. I'm definitely not stuck on my own versions - I just want to see this done more consciously. I'm happy to work on any of these, when I get back to a computer in a few days. ॐ Priyanath22:10, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Wow good job Priyanath! I particularly like Image 3 and 4 but they are all very good. —
Agreed. 3 and 4 appeal the most to me, but I'm not really "affiliated" with Hinduism in any way, so I can see how, if other colors were more appropriate symbolically, I could go with whatever symbolically works best. Badbilltucker22:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Comment - I like the design of the first one but I think the colors should be changed and the circle and symbol should be bigger.--D-Boy03:00, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
That's why it's so helpful getting people's feedback. Once there's a strong consensus on one of these (1, 2, 3 , 4, 4a), I have a couple more color and shading variations to try for that particular one. I'm not sure about ten, though! I hear two votes for 4a since I added it - any other comments? ॐ Priyanath21:07, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Strong Support of 4A. The luminosity I think is really appropriate for a barnstar dealing with religion, and the bigger "aum" doesn't hurt either. Badbilltucker16:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Comment: Support the concept. Somehow the Aum just doesn't blend with the barnstar at all in any of these. Looks like it's been forcibly superimposed. Is it because of the different coloring schemes? Sorry if I'm not very clear, but it looks like the Aum and the Star are two separate things kept on top of each other, and not one entity. Can this be fixed? deeptrivia (talk) 06:29, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
South Indian Cinema and Music Award
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
The South Indian Cinema and Music Award
The South Indian Cinema and Music Award is awarded to Wikipedians who tirelessly foster or contribute to the improvement of articles relating to
WikiProject Indian cinema. I also have reservations about the scope of the "field" for this award as well, but with 572 listed stubs, not counting longer articles, I could go with it, I guess, IF the current barnstars for India were described as insufficient. Also, is there any idea of the total number of articles in the category? Also, isn't the reference to South Indian cinema more than a little limiting itself. Why the additional specification? Badbilltucker01:23, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Comment I am sorry. The award which already exists is for Bollywood Films. The award which is proposed is for South Indian Films. Hence I am afraid that your point of contention is far from reality Doctor Bruno 17:31, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Comment The fact is that Bollywood is a comparatively small field than South Indian Films. Hence I am not able to understand your comment, which, I am afraid is not in agreement with
Merge I'm the one responsible for the first barnstar, and it was my dumb choice to name it the Bollywood Barnstar. I just liked the sound of it but ... that meant it left out all the other regional film industries of India. I suggest that we have one barnstar for all the Indian film industries. You can use my image, if you want (it's colorful at least) and retitle it. The All-India Cinema Barnstar? I apologize for making the mistake in the first place. Zora09:01, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
That image is the one here. I think it would be a good idea to create one blanket barnstar for both groups, and think the name given by Zora is fine by me (it echoes All-India Radio, which is at least a similar name). I think there might be some disagreement about which image to use, though. Would it be possible to superimpose the picture from the first onto the second? And I really don't like hearing people apologize for doing good work, like you did here. Badbilltucker14:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Comment. May be we should have an Indian Cinema barnstar, instead of Bollywood barnstar or South Indian cinema barnstar. utcursch | talk15:37, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Support: It seems absolutely fine to have a barnstar for South Indian cinema. Bollywood is so different from all other industries. This would promote editors from contributing to this template/category more because it brings satisfaction to editors who help correct the notion that Indian film industry isn't Bollywood, but is a conglomeration of films made in almost 15 languages. South Indian films are the maximum in number and the sum is more than the combined total of all other regional language film industries put together. Having the tag Indian Cinema sort of dilutes it and having a tag for 'Cinema' seems to be too broad of a definition! I strongly agree having a separate barnstar. Thanks Sudharsansn (talk • contribs) 16:59, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Comment The proposed barnstar is for South Indian Cinema and Music and that means this barnstar is needed for recognition of contribution related to
Sorry for the ambiguity, but I should have given more thought to wording when I named the award; by music I actually meant film music. AppleJuggler02:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Support: Kollywood/Tollywood industries are different from Bollywood Industries.Barnstar with the name of Bollywood is not appropriate for these industries. Separate Barnstar can be considered.Otherwise name of the existing Barnstar to be modified as Indian films Barnstar--Indianstar04:46, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Comment: Indian regionalism strikes again. Since many directors, actors, and music directors work in several industries, wouldn't it be right to stress the UNITY of the film industries, not their differences? As for combining music and cinema -- strange choice. I know that many musicians make a living as music directors (it's the only way, if any CDs they issue are copied and on sale in the bazaars even BEFORE the official release), but there are classical musicians who won't have any truck with cinema. Have a separate star for Indian music? All-India Music Barnstar? I'm dealing with regionalism on the non-Roman scripts issue, and now we have to have a whole panoply of barnstars for the different film industries? Zora05:07, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Comment: Though everybody works together, ultimately outside of India people think that there is just one Bollywood or atleast that is how IFFI and other Indian film festivals project it. It would great to stress on the identity of South Indian films as the artistes are almost shared between the industries. North and South share very few people, whereas Tamil/Telugu/Malayalam and also Kannada industries share the common pool of artistes. Sudharsansn (talk • contribs) 09:15, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Comment What about A. R. Rahman? Madhavan? Siddarth? Mani Ratnam? Kavita Krishnamurthy? Balasubramaniam? Naming just a FEW. There's lots of back and forth. What about having a barnstar -- IN COLOR, not a .png -- for contributions to articles relating to South India? All articles, not just cinema. Zora19:06, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Comment: This barnstar was conceived as an incentive for the development of the numerous South Indian cinema-related articles/stubs that I came across here on Wikipedia, and to acknowledge the work of a fair number of contributors who toil silently in the background to improve these articles. It is useful to understand that this barnstar was envisioned as a complement to the Bollywood barnstar. Now, having a single barnstar that can represent the two would doubtlessly be more efficient, especially taking note of the scale of this Wikiproject. The suggestion that these barnstars be merged under a common banner (e.g., the Indian Cinema Star) appears apt, and I would endorse it. The design and creation of such a barnstar I would leave in the capable hands of other experienced Wikipedians or volunteers (I am not much of a graphic arts person as you can tell). Separately, I must say that I was blissfully ignorant of the passionate simmer that I notice about 'regionalism'. This unawareness may not be surprising considering the fact that I am neither Indian nor hail from India. But I felt it harmless in acknowledging, or even celebrating, differences and diversity stemming from the various cultures and mores in different regions of India, which is something that I've always admired about the country. My apologies for any awkwardness caused. Best wishes, AppleJuggler08:44, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Comment - I could certainly see having a barnstar for South Indian articles as well. I guess the question would be how to define "South India". Would only a few specific states be included, and, if so, which? Badbilltucker17:39, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
South India Means Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. The predominant languages being Tamil, Malayalam, Kannada and Telugu Doctor Bruno 17:43, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
I think a South India barnstar, per states as defined above, would be a great idea. I'm not the best person to design it, but I would be glad to help by criticizing (those who can't do, become critics). I'd suggest something elaborate, colorful, and elegant. Zora02:48, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
I concur. The personalised text that accompanies a barnstar awarded may then make mention, if desired, the specific area of Indian cinema in which a recipient had contributed to significantly (e.g., to whichever Xxx-woods, actor, etc.) AppleJuggler04:06, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Merge No point in having more than one. We will point out that the barnstar is not just for
Shall we retain the colourful Bollywood barnstar and change its name to reflect this merger? It looks attractive as it is and using this barnstar is easier than creating a whole new barnstar. AppleJuggler16:11, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
Discussion award\Barnstar (or better title needed)
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
(Barnstar with telephone) Trial Banstar for Discussion Award suggestion
(Barnstar with bubble) - Improved, simplistic Barnstar per advice for Discussion Award suggestion
(Da barnstar trial 2) Disasterous attempt 2
(Barnstar bubble 2) An edited version of the first bubble version. Has cream and blue.
See left (without border)
An attempt at making a barnstar for those who show excellance in the editing of the musical arts. (Feel free to edit it, and shape it into a better image, but consult me first before posting it).
I was just thinking that there are awards out there for tireless contribution in article mainspaces. Also, at certain times, editors comment that other editors have not done much discussion. Therefore, how about an award for being a comunicative (and possibly thought-provoking) editor? I was thinking for general use. Simply south20:34, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Support - I do see this as being a useful Barnstar/award. All too often, editors make major changes to articles without discussing them, or even checking the talk page to see if that change has already been discussed. This would be a nice means of positive encouragement to do that. Unsigned comment posted by 14:27, 2006 November 25 Jeffpw
Strongly Support but suspect it will rarely be awarded. I've been watching some edit wars where there is no debate--even a Wikipedia administrator involved in these edit wars simply reverts and leaves the talk page completely blank. I would love to see this one awarded to someone, and yes, it's a postive means of encouragement. KP Botany21:39, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Mild Oppose - Discussion isn't what we want on talk page per se, but what we seek is discussion of the article. If this award were to reward comments which are similar to those found elsewhere in chat rooms, I would oppose it, as those comments are not the ones we're really looking for here. Please define what you are referring to a bit more specifically. Badbilltucker01:30, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes, good comment, must be well-defined. The idea, I think, is to reward people for using the Discussion Page attached to the article for a useful purpose. KP Botany02:53, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Sample list: The Original Barnstar, The Working Man's Barnstar, The Barnstar of Diligence, The Tireless Contributor Barnstar and The Barnstar of Good Humor
Comment: I open up the floor. What are these other awards? Anyway it is a trial barnstar and i welcome a better design or suggestions for one. Simply south15:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
The others are very broad and some only seem to cover article mainsapce, as before, and the latter is specialised to humourous comments. I was proposing an award to cover suggestions and ideas and to show the editor is contributing to discussions in a helpful way, perhaps. This will also be based, but not only, on the number edits they make to discussions of articles and maybe users. I hope this does not encourage vandalism but is a form of encouragement to new and existing editors. However i am not trying to replace other awards. Simply south16:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Mild Support After review, I am reasonably confident that the above award proposal is not in fact specifically redundant to any other awards. I am still dubious that the proposal will ever receive wide use if approved, or will be even be widely known, but do think it addresses current weaknesses wikipedia has and that any way to address those pronounced weakness might be useful. Also, I would like to see some of the other proposed designs introduced on this page. My favorite is the one with the word balloon inset. Badbilltucker19:01, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I think it does address a weakness in Wikipedia, namely that even administrators ignore discussing issues in preference to reverting and edit warring. Edit counts can't have anything to do with it, though. Again, an instance of administrator abuse shows a problem with this, an administrator who added reqests to expand tags on articles outside of his area of knowledge, including many articles that were already categorized as stubs, in order to simply increase his edit count. This is, imo, a quality, not quantity award, an award for someone who has enhanced the community of Wikipedia and improved an article by leading a useful discussion of content. As it is on Wikipedia now, if you ask a question on a talk page to an article, people assume you're attacking them personally. Discussion is taboo, it seems, an award that recognizes the original intent of talk pages and honors those who do this, is much need, imo. KP Botany19:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Support now that the description is more elaborated on I'll submit a vote of support. It is true that editors that encourage use of the article talk page in a prolific manner can inspire very good article edits.¤~Persian Poet Gal(talk)22:19, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Why not? I suspect someone will have a clever title, the Discussion Award Barnstar sounds kinda blah, although it is to the point, and sometimes that matters more than being clever. Don't like the color choices, the purple over grey. KP Botany20:35, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
The Discussion Barnstar is awarded to editors who make significant use of an article's Talk Page in order to discuss changes to the article and achieve consensus, rather than simply making wholesale changes, especially to controversial articles. The award was created in order to encourage editors to discuss, rather than engage in edit wars. This award was introduced by Simply south
I like it, again it makes the point, imo, especially emphasizing controversial articles. Now, the only question remains, is there anyone to give it to? KP Botany21:12, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Looking at this the current results are as follows AWARD
six people are in favour of the award
one person opposes
IMAGES
The original image was opposed by one person and after discussion with other users it seems that the the design of a Barnstar with a speech bubble\balloon was preferred. Only one user has requested the Barnstar with bubble (Design 2, NOT 2, 4 or 5) i.e design 2 be used, although design 1 has beem given as a rough idea.
discussion
Final discussion and voting is needed for the decider of the image.
I think the title is fine. It, along with the accompanying text makes the Barnstar very clear in its purpose. It seems to me that clear consensus has emerged among those interested in the Barnstar proposal page. I look forward to using this Barnstar in thevery near future. Jeffpw22:39, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
I was about to archive this award proposal. There is not enough support to justify making this a barnstar. Six people is awfully thin. This would be fine as a PUA. --evrik(talk)05:17, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
With all due respect, evrik, there are 6 supports and only 1 oppose (you). That seems consensus to me. I would personally oppose the idea of the only person who opposed this award archiving it in spite of clear consensus. Jeffpw08:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm going to be neutral. I've seen everything now in barnstars, one of the nastiest point of view editors was awarded a barnstar, apparently by mistake, but displays it with pride. Barnstars mean nothing. KP Botany15:33, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I would not mind seeing this as a barnstar but I believe that this may be justified as PUA at this point. I also do not mind leaving the title the same either. As far as the image, I guess the barnstar with blue bubble is fine, however it would not hurt to post a few more alternatives.¤~Persian Poet Gal(talk)16:36, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Six votes means nothing ... and this isn't supposed to be about voting. I don't see the point of this award, or how it is remarkably different from other awards. Compare this award with the Fauna award that just passed and you see a marked difference in support. I say we archive this proposal. --evrik(talk)19:30, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm stongly against the designs of the barnstar, which all seem to be some low-quality copypasting through paint. Compare this to the other barnstars we have, look at the fauna barnstar for example. This isn't a vote, and two opposers in a barnstar proposal are enough not to accept it. This might be fine as a personal user award though. Michaelas10(Talk)17:11, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
Purple Barnstar -> Purple Heart Barnstar?
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
The image at the left is the current version, the one to the right my proposed change.
This is an existing award, albeit only a personal user award at this time. This is called the "Purple Barnstar" and is located at Wikipedia:Personal user awards#WikiProject Kindness Campaign and Dispute Resolution, where it is described as "The Purple Star given to Wikipedians who have been hurt by others, for example by having their user pages vandalised, being mistakenly blocked (for too long, or affected by range blocks), being personally attacked, etc.".
I have given this award three times myself, once to a good editor who was blocked, and twice to good editors who just felt poorly used, related to the quick changeover to the new, more stringent, fair use policy for images.
I don't know why it is called the "Purple Barnstar", but I assume it is related to the American military decorated commonly called the "Purple Heart', which is awarded to all servicemen who are wounded. (It may be related to the color of a bruise, but I don't think so). But this is not clear enough, hence I have placed the decoration at the center of the star and also suggest a name change
True, this is somewhat USA-centric, but I don't see this as insuperable. Just as most educated people in the English-speaking world know what a Victoria Cross is etc., I'll bet that lots of non-Americans know what a Purple Heart is. And anyway, it's already USA-centric, and even less clear, in its present state.
So I would ask for input on these three questions:
) Should the current graphic be replaced with the one with the decoration at the center.
) Should it be renamed from "Purple Barnstar" (of which the meaning is rather obscure) to "Purple Heart Barnstar", "Wounded in Action Barnstar", or some other name (suggestions welcome).
1) I prefer the one with the decoration, as it is slightly more obvious in its meaning.
2) I like the Purple Heart Barnstar as a name, even if it is US-centric, because of the clarity of the name. WiA is I think less appealing. Maybe other name could include the Personal Sacrifice Barnstar or something similar.
3) I'd like a really well-defined set of criteria before going with a regular barnstar, as it might be too easy for someone to say "I'm a victim" and be awarded this otherwise. Badbilltucker19:10, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
Would still opt for some more specific parameters. Just about everybody has had their userpage vandalized, for instance, and I don't think we would want all people who have had vandalized pages get the award. Several other individuals qualify as having been "personally attacked" at least once who might not specifically deserve specific recognition for having been attacked. Maybe if it were something to be given out by the mediation or arbitration groups to encourage those who have been victims of attacks, or to somehow honor editors who have endured after repeated attacks of one sort or another? Badbilltucker17:51, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
The Copyeditor's Barnstar is awarded for excellence in Copyediting.
speling grammer, and punctuacion are, important!
Spelling, grammar, and punctuation are important.
This award was suggested by
League of Copyeditors. It was introduced on date, year
.
This is my first proposal, so bear with me. Members of the
League of Copyeditors agreed there should be an award specifically for copyediting, and we have worked together to come up with this design. If consensus is that copyediting is not specific enough for its own barnstar, and already covered under general editing (ie, if this proposal fails), we'll instead propose this as a WikiProject award. However, enough people seemed to think that this might be worthy of a barnstar, so we're starting at the top :-) ~ Kathryn NicDhàna♫♦♫00:08, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Support Copyediting is different from editing. The barnstar, however, shouldn't be limited to WikiProject members. By the way, I copyedited your "Spelling, grammer and punctuation are important." phrase; see if you can find the difference (comma after grammer) :-) |
Support Copyediting is definitely different from normal editing. It is important. BTW, I'm fairly sure Kathryn didn't intend this barnstar to be solely awarded to members of the League of Copyeditors. I think she meant she was speaking generally for the League's agreement about wanting such an award available. --
Strong Support I could name a dozen of users who deserve this! Of course it shouldn't be limited to just project members. — Arjun01:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Comment - The intention, as far as I am aware, has always been to have this as a barnstar for use by the entire Wikipedia community. What I meant is that, if for any reason there was not sufficient support for it to be a barnstar, that we could then re-propose it as a WikiProject award. As so far we're getting good support for it as a barnstar, I'll rephrase a bit above to clarify this :-) ~ Kathryn NicDhàna♫♦♫01:26, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Support, although somewhat redundant with the standard editor's barnstar. Still worthwhile though, as copyediting is important and deserves a method for recognition. Herostratus12:58, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
other related award. Excellent designing but I don't feel it falls under any of the categories in Wikipedia:Barnstars. The other parts of the award are also too distracting for it to become a so-called pure barnstar. Michaelas10(Talk)12:00, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Strong Support copyeditors are indeed an often overlooked but vital part of Wikipedia and do deserve some form of more recognition. I'm not so sure about the proposed barnstar design however, it would be nice to see some alternatives; regardless of design though I would really like to see this award's creation come to fruition.¤~Persian Poet Gal(talk)00:25, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
I believe that linguists need a separate honour for their work on Wikipedia, because their field of work is of interest, as they add pronunciations to obscure terms or names, like myself, amongst other things. Their interest and pursuits must be rewarded appropriately so this is why I introduce the Linguist's Barnstar proposal. RJL23:38, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Comment - Sounds like a good proposal. I think this award could also apply to people who have responded well and consistently to calls to help editors with articles that include terms from other languages. This comes up a lot on some of the articles I've worked on, often when not only pronunciation is needed but, for example, when the term is needed in both Irish and Scottish Gaelic, and the proper plurals in both languages need to be checked. But is there something wrong with me that I keep picturing a big tongue with a star on it? (or a big star with a tongue on it?) ;-) ~ Kathryn NicDhàna♫♦♫02:53, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, I had a Barnstar with several symbols from obscure languages, like Cherokee and suchlike, in mind. Any other comments?
The only objection to Kathryn's proposal I see is that it sounds from her phrasing almost like The Rolling Stones logo, which I don't think would necessarily be appropriate here. I do like the lower proposal, as long as the characters aren't so obscure that they aren't recognizable as written characters. Maybe including some of the characters from some of the better known languages not used in English might work as well. Badbilltucker19:24, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Clarification - Eeek! I wasn't serious about the tongue thing. All apologies. I was in a weird mood and probably being too informal for this page. I think the actual proposal ;-) of symbols from a variety of languages, is very good. Perhaps it could be a star on a field of diverse symbols and characters? Maybe with something in IPA in the center? Maybe symbols for the same sound in many languages, with the IPA version of it central? Or maybe we could write "Wikipedia" in a variety of languages and put it in IPA in the center? Or, as there's no word for "Wikipedia" in many languages, perhaps the word "linguist"? ~ Kathryn NicDhàna♫♦♫21:24, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Comment - Would this be intended for spoken languages, writing systems, work on translations, or... all of the above? I'd prefer an inclusive version as there is alot of overlap in these areas. The different symbols works for writing systems, having them all represent the same thing works for translation, and thus what they refer to might be chosen to cover spoken languages/linguistics in general. Using 'linguist' makes sense except that it is fairly long (even moreso in some languages) and thus would be difficult to show in multiple scripts/languages. Something like 'word' or 'speak' might be more compact in most systems... or we could just use a single sound (though that leaves out ideograms). Alternatively, the tower of Babel is a common motif in linguistics... something like a tower being built with bricks labeled in different symbols might be viable. --CBD12:12, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Though... suddenly it occurs to me that my 'incomplete tower of babel bricks' idea would look an awful lot like the Wikipedia logo. Just in tower rather than sphere form. --CBD12:14, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
The Mixed Drinks Barnstar
{{{1}}}
The
the scope
of the WikiProject and to those who have made meaningful contributions to the WikiProject. It may also be awarded by one Participant to another as a thank you for going above and beyond the call of duty on behalf of the WikiProject.
This is my first proposal, and I hope it will be added to the
Wikipedia:WikiProject awards list quickly. I plan to start using it right away for someone who has been doing a great job for the WikiProject. I almost didn't even see this area or that we had to have awards approved before giving them out. Thanks. --Willscrlt (Talk|Cntrb) 15:05, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Response - Support for it? I don't know. Need, definitely. This WikiProject is growing. Since December, we grew from only one recently active member to several. People are getting involved by taking on specific projects, participating in decision-making discussions, and working on article improvement. As our membership numbers increase, the quality of articles within our Project's scope is greatly improving. It would be nice to award both Project participants and the other editors who regularly contribute in them this for their efforts and recognize their contributions. A generic award could be used instead, but since it would be given for work specific to the WikiProject and its scope, it make senses to have an award just for that purpose. I originally created this within our WikiProject space (not in template space), but when I discovered other Projects have similar awards, this seemed the better way to go. It makes the award a little more special. --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 02:30, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Seven members who became active so far in only one month, and still growing. :-) I'm sorry, but am I missing something here? Is there a policy or guideline about creating new awards that I missed? I happened upon the WikiProject Awards Page, thought "Oh cool! I should list our new award here." Then I saw the note to announce and discuss it here before adding it to the page. I'm not sure what the fuss is all about. This is really just intended as a thank you award to members or from members for work done to improve Wikipedia and/or the WikiProject. To me, it makes sense that it should be listed on the WikiProject Awards Page based on that definition. I know that Wikipedia prefers wait for large-scale consensus to build-up before taking any actions, but unless there are some policies about not showing Wiki-love to others who deserve it within your WikiProject, I'm confused about the "wait a while" attitude. There are people who deserve recognition now, including non-Project editors who do great work on related articles. This award should also help encourage others to become more active. That would help the Project grow and improve, and that only helps Wikipedia. If it's a huge deal, I can withdraw the request to place it on the WikiProject Awards page, move the template out of main template space and back into our WikiProject space if there is a concern about it not being up to snuff for the mainspace. I'd rather have it listed with the rest of the WikiProject Awards, but it's not a requirement. I just think it would be a nice extra touch. Thanks. --a confused Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 13:44, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Comment Anyone can creat any award. The vetting porcess here is to see what awards get placed on these pages. For example, you could post anything on the PUA page, and then later come back to get the award listed on the other pages. --evrik(talk)17:09, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
The WikiGnome award may be a general personal user award. It may be awarded to a wiki user who makes small (but still useful!) edits without clamoring for attention or otherwise falls into the criteria listed at wikignome. Please note, there is a Template:Wikignoming that has been awarded to one person. Also, people may identify themselves as WikiGnome's using :{{User wikipedia/WikiGnome}}, but that is not the same as another person awarding the Wikignome award. -- Jreferee01:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Comment - Thank you for the support. Although I nominated it as a personal award, I would be happy if this award were an "Other Award" such as to honor specific actions or events. -- Jreferee19:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Oppose. We already have the minor barnstar. The designing also doesn't resemble anything close to a barnstar or an award, and was originally created as a fair-use image replacement. Michaelas10(Talk)19:33, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
The fact that it will be nominated as a PUA still doesn't qualify this as an award, there really isn't a need to have two awards with the same purpose in different categories. Michaelas10(Talk)21:04, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Comment - Of the four types of awards (Barnstars, WikiProject awards, Other Related Awards, and Personal User Awards), I am seeking approval have this award be used as a Personal User Award, not a Barnstar award. I believe the design resembles a Personal User Award but would be happy to entertain any changes to the award. The image is from Wikimedia Commons and this use does not violate any of the existing guidelines governing the use of images in Wikipedia. The Minor Barnstar is awarded for making minor edits of the utmost quality. This award would be for making minor edits that are useful without clamoring for attention. As a personal user award, it would have less status than The Minor Barnstar. Approving this award as a personal user award would create more opportunity to encourage WikiLove and WikiCivility. In view of this, would you support this award as a Personal User Award? Thanks. -- Jreferee20:22, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
WP Films Barnstar
The
Project Awards table, when I noticed that we should have had it approved first, so this is a very belated request for approval. HoverfishTalk22:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Support - WikiProject Television Barnstar exsists, therefore I would agree that a WikiProject Films Barnstar exsist. Hpfan937423:05, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
After looking over current barnstars and awards, I agree with Evrik. However, since this is an WP award nomination anyway, I'm still in support. --PhantomS20:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
{{subst:The Railway Barnstar|message ~~~~}}
The Railway Barnstar
The Railway Barnstar may be awarded to an editor who makes particularly fine railroad-related contributions. This award was introduced on January 142007 by VVVN.
Oppose --evrik(talk) this award [ inspired by the stop position target sign] is redundant. We already have The Railroad Star on the PUA page. 18:59, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
I Support a Doctor Who WikiProject Award, but the designs aren't that good. For now I'd go with Design 2. The image of the police box is a free one, right? ← ANASTalk?15:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Withdrawn — it turns out the police box image is derived from a BBC copyright image. My bad — I should have checked that before submitting it. I'll be back if someone can create an award from a freely licensed image. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 22:20, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Doctor Who WikiProject Award (take 2), with a question about image
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
I need some advice from users here who understand the image policy better than I do. The image at right is adapted by Smomo (talk·contribs) from an image at http://www.interocitor-media.com/tardis/. The creator of that image says here that any use of the image (including adaptations) are permitted, as long as it includes his name and a link to his homepage. The assumption seems to be usage on websites, but that's not explicit. Since the proposal is for use as a barnstar, something which presumably would not be copied in any downstream usage of Wikipedia content, is this free enough for our purposes? I'm just confused by our arcane image use policy, and not certain how it's applied in cases like these.
If Geni's more free alternativeis free enough, I'd like to propose it for use as a WikiProject Award for the Doctor Who WikiProject. If not, Geni (talk·contribs) has created an alternative that's GFDL — but frankly I don't think it's as good an image as Smomo's. Any guidance would be greatly appreciated. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 15:30, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Comment No one here I know of is a copyright expert. My best advice to to document your image as best you can. Maybe post a comment at the well. --evrik(talk)22:18, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
The thing is that what's needed isn't a copyright expert, but a Wikipedia policy expert. And this is an area in which the Wikipedia policy is rather unclear (at least, to me). As far as copyright and the law are concerned, we're absolutely within our rights to use the image, because the creator has given blanket permission. What I'm unsure of is whether that's "free enough" for use outside the main namespace. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
IMPORTANT UPDATE TO THIS PROPOSAL After an e-mail from myself, Rob has agreed to de-copyright this image and release it under a free license. He also provided me with two other TARDIS renders, also free of license. This solves our copyright problems here, and with using his TARDIS images in the future! I have updated the image page accordingly. Smomo22:14, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Well, we've got 158 listed members, approximately 3 dozen of whom are regularly active on Project articles. If you're asking about number of articles, I don't feel like counting them right now but there's a list here. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 01:49, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Suggestion - I'd try putting the tardis (that is the tardis, yes?) and the star in different colors, or at least with more degrees between the shades. On small laptop screens the current images merge together too much. Isn't the original tardis red? ~ Kathryn NicDhàna♫♦♫06:16, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Nope, the TARDIS is blue and always has been. I've added another option that Smomo created from the same image — the one currently labeled "TARDIS #1" is the one that folks at the WikiProject seemed to like best. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 16:10, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Support - nice simple design. Will help encourage contributions. Can we award retrospectively? I'd like to go back and award something like this to those involved early on in this WikiProject. Carcharoth11:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Support - Very nice and thematically relevant. No copyright issues. By way of more info for other reviewers; the symbols in the middle are Tolkien's Tengwar characters and spell out the word Arda, which in the stories was a name for the world and surrounding skies... thus implying that the barnstar is for work on articles related to Tolkien's world. --CBD14:02, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
I like the black background, since its a white and grey star. Gives the effect of light shining out from the darkness, or a star in the night sky - both apt Tolkein images. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna♫♦♫21:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Okay, how about this? I only changed the background with Microsoft Paint, so the border looks a bit messy, though. The black background is, as has been said, for contrast (otherwise the edges would be disappearing), and besides, Tolkien himself used silver/white-on black imagery. I think the original is more apt. For the record, I did the original with Microsoft PowerPoint, Print Screen, and Paint. Uthanc00:44, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Comment:That I didn't think of... How about just calling it the "Tolkien Barnstar"? Then we'd be free to identify them with any name-associated star we prefer. Uthanc08:57, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Maybe a "Barnstar" for those who have uploaded/converted a lot of bad jpg/gif/pngs to SVG? I for one have spent many a day on such an activity and I'm sure there are others like me. --
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
I was interested in setting up a contest for the best pictures personally taken by wikipedia members that had been released into the public domain and added to important pages (such as core topics or featured articles) within a period of time (such as 2007). The winner would be selected by a panel of wikipedia individuals (perhaps administrators) that had some expertise in photography. The winner would be awarded a barnstar and given some amount of money (like $100 which I would put up). I was wondering if anybody had done anything like this and what the community thought about it. Remember12:47, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Oppose both due to designing issues. I would support the alternative version as a WikiProject award but just in case the football would be color-corrected. Michaelas10(Talk)11:37, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Some work needs to be done on the image or one of the two will be placed on the PUA page and the proposal will be archived. --evrik(talk)21:50, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Random Edits
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
The Barnstar of Random Edits should become a barnstar because its not the same as the random acts of kindness barnstar, because this one deals with people that go to different pages, that are on different topics and contribute helpfully towards them.
I don't know if this has been done yet but if not i support the concept. HOWEVER, the image definately needs work. Its great that you put effort into wikipedia and we love to see people contributing; however, barnstar images should be much more polished and refined than a mspaint program could do. I support the concept like i said, but OPPOSE this barnstar image. I believe that if you deny someone an addition to wikipedia you should do it yourself, if this barnstar concept is approved and you are unable to make a more professional image, i will attempt to do so myself. thuglastalk|edits20:12, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
How about this one then, thuglastalk|edits
Oppose Poor image quality. I also don't think the idea is innovative enough to qulaify as a barnstar. Perhaps a PUA? --evrik(talk)22:44, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Neuroscience barnstar
Original: Neuro barnstar
Edit 1: Neuroscience barnstar
Edit 2: Neuroscience barnstar
Edit 3: Neuroscience barnstar
Edit 4: Neuroscience barnstar
I tried. I'm not too sure if i like it. if anyone wants me to modify it (colours, etc.) let me know - i couldn't find any. If there is already a neuroscience barnstar someone let me know. Looks better when its smaller, but im too tired to change it. thuglastalk|edits06:46, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Actually I was thinking the exact same thing this morning, when i took a look at the purple heart barn star. I'll do that right away. thuglastalk|edits01:20, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
I changed it to the original barn star, made it the proper size, made the dendrites and axons much more clear by adding some stroke stroke. Thanks for the feedback AAA, I would have given up on it, and now i really like it. thuglastalk|edits02:30, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Your welcome! Another piece of advice is you should upload it to Commons, so it can be used all around Wikimedia. And maybe make those sparks around the star blue like on the original one (I find that easier to see). Oh, and one more thing, Support. --AAA!(AAAA)06:26, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
There. I'll re-size them if we figure out which one will be used. - im not really sure why my images are going into the other posts... if someone could help it would be great. thuglastalk|edits15:11, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Okay, being serious for a moment, all we can do is just wait for other people to take notice. That's how the voting thing works. --AAA!(AAAA)00:02, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
I like the red star color of #4, the dendrites and axons formatting and shapes of #3, with the blue color from #2. There, is that picky enough for you? :-) I just think the cyan color (the lighter blue of #4) gets a little lost. #2's color stands out the most boldly (though that might be because the star is darker color and that might get lost a bit against the brighter red in #4). I'm happy to offer my support once the criteria of the award is clarified a bit more. Who is giving this out and to whom? What are the requirements? Is this a topical Barnstar or a WikiProject one? Nice job. --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 01:43, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
I dont really know what it should be i just made the star. I figure its just a way to show people who contribute to neuro articles some recognition. i dont know how much i can do about the colors, i could alter the color of #4's dendrites.... #3 actually has the same shaped neurons as #4 thuglastalk|edits13:38, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Also, evrik - your opposition based on that premise is certainly flawed. If it was a valid point, any edit could be covered under the original barn star - people expand upon barn-stars to make a more suitable barn-star thuglastalk|edits14:30, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
My point exactly, it is too specific and is already covered. If there is a wikiproject that wants to adopt it as their award, I have no problem with that. Also, this award does not have broad support. --evrik(talk)16:02, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
I have unarchived this due to more support, (for psychology/biology) award. I do not know how to format the box. My description would be - This award has been granted for the improvement of many Psychology/Neuroscience Articles. I have also decided to use image 5.thuglastalk|edits03:35, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Support - Edit number 4 looks good. Looks like my brain on too much caffeine. Edit 2 is also good, but would need the sparkly bits moved in a bit so they don't get chopped off. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna♫♦♫05:31, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
I have posted it on their talk page. I did not want to place it on the main page because i don't know where to put it, but i will contact the main contributor to the wikiproject and let him know it is there. This section is no longer necessary, but i was just letting everyone know what the outcome was. thuglasT|C20:23, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Text Barnstar
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
I'd like to propose a new Barnstar, called the text Barnstar. It is usually given to people who have who have been writing many articles, finishing other people's work, or expanding stub-like articles to encyclopedia standards. Here's where I originated the idea. Tra is given the credit for creating the ASCII version of the star; all I did was change its colour and save it as a picture. Here is some more information.
Done., but I'm not so sure about the Shift-JIS thing. I suggest you contact Tra, who did most of the work. Oh, and I made it brown to reflect the original Barnstar. --AAA!(AAAA)00:05, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Neutral I'm not really sure what this award is trying to accomplish or why it is different from exisiting awards. --evrik(talk)22:37, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
The Abusive Admin Award -- inappropriate use of symbols on barnstar
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
"keen ability at offending or otherwise dominating vandals and trolls with an iron fist.". It is misleading and reflects poorly of the Wikipedia ethos of accuracy and informed learning. I propose that this barnstar be either be replaced or modified to incorporate a more appropriate design. AppleJuggler15:31, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
(Aside: "Abusive Admin" Award... surely a misnomer...? Also, from its accompanying explanation, "...can be awarded to admins who demonstrate a keen ability at offending ... vandals and trolls ...": While vandals and trolls not welcome, suggest offense an unsuitable (troll-like?) tool...? Surprised to come by this Award, David Kernow(talk)07:06, 18 November 2006 (UTC))
I believe we have a rouge admin award... hammer and sickle is not exclusive to communism anyways. Communist china do not use it as a symbol today now do they? --Catout11:22, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Surely the key point is that the use of the hammer and sickle for this "award" is anachronistic, backhandedly offensive (what self-respecting admin would want to be awarded such a thing?) and weirdly specific in context (what does Soviet communism have to do with this?). Celebrating authoritarianism seems very counter to the wiki ethos, doesn't it? Pinkville20:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
I agree, it could be considered at least moderately offensive - and all of this "It doesn't represent communism" BS is ridiculous (if I put a swastika on a good award and argued that it's also considered to be a good thing all of you would be calling me out - same thing if a user called himself "Swastika"- but who actually uses this reward anyway?--Daniel()Folsom
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
The Steel Wheel Barnstar Awarded for valiant contributions to automotive related articles.
"To be awarded for continued drive and injection into
automotive-related topics. The Steel Wheel Barnstar thanks those users who exhibit Valiant
effort in assembling or restoring such articles!"
I didn't see a barnstar specifically dealing with automotive articles - that is - articles encompassing subjects specific to automotive design, history, vehicles, media, popular culture, etc.
If you've looked at any articles specifically dealing with cars and the like, you may notice that a lot of them are in disrepair; You may also notice that there are a great many dedicated Wikipedians whom have taken it upon themselves to invest the time and effort to create and restore said pages. How about it Wikipedia? Hows'about a Barnstar for us Gear, Machine, Motor and Petrolheads?! (unless one already exists! ^_^/*)
Your ideas/suggestions about this concept (alright! enough with the auto-puns!) and the attached image will be greatly appreciated! Hnatiw06:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
I started to think about this for a while. So, I created a barnstar that is awarded to people who make many edits to
Journey Into Imagination rides (aside from Journey Into YOUR Imagination.). It's not totally flawless; Figment's left hand should be completely erased. However, it is accompanied by a sightly black etching on where it's supposed to be. 01kkk22:36, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Proposal A
Proposal B
Proposal C
I have found several other portal barnstars such as Portal:Star Wars, Portal:World of Warcraft, Portal:Pokemon, therefore the creation of a Portal:Harry Potter Barnstar, should be made. —Preceding
That's fine, I just didn't have any idea.. or what could represent Harry Potter, a wizard hat, a scar, a wand, a time turner. But, sure, what do you propose the Portal:Harry Potter Barnstar include, as I am very interested with these barnstars..? - 19:32, December 22, 2006 - —Preceding
Well I like Barnstar B, though I don't think it follows the 'barnstar design.' I think we need a barnstar for this WikiProject, although I am uncertain of the creation of a graphic. The Original Barnstar, with a lightning-bolt scar..? Hpfan937410:49, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
I have now included a third proposal graphic, though I would like to make the scar bigger, and in the center of the barnstar.
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Hi, I'd like to propose a barnstar for
WikiProject Gender Studies as a Wikiproject award. The text along side would read: For editors who make significant contributions to gender studies articles that expand Wikipedia’s knowledge about gender, gender theory, feminisms, masculinities and/or sexuality studies.--Cailil02:01, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Suspect sexuality studies could probably be covered by the LGBT Barnstar, but Support for the rest. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 11:35, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
The Martial Arts Star
A lot of work is going on at the martial arts related wiki's these days and especially some people put in a lot of effort. I think a barnstar would be apprioriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kbarends (talk • contribs) 03:37, 8 February 2007
For well-intentioned edits that unfortunately left some need of cleanup, but still deserve recognition for the amount of work put into it. The "'A' for Effort" barnstar. This image can be considered a mockup, it still needs transparency at the very least. --
There are plenty of awards that can be used to award people - whether or not the results work out. I don't see a lot of support for the idea. --evrik(talk)20:09, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Oppose The purpose of all Wikipedia is to create edits that aren't in need of cleaning up, and, if they do, to not put the blame on people. 01kkk15:36, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Oppose This is subtly insulting. While someone who cleans up mediocre edits deserves a reward, users who need to be followed around with a mop do not deserve rewards. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna♫♦♫01:44, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Oppose a bit
bite-ish in my opinion, especially if it is ever awarded to a new user. Somehow the compliment may come off a bit rude by telling the user "the edit you left needs some major cleanup and improvement but good show for making it anyway." There are plenty of barnstars which could merit the compliment better.¤~Persian Poet Gal(talk)01:48, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Sherlock Holmes deductive reasoning award
I hereby award User:Durova with the Sherlock Holmes deductive reasoning award in the Case of the Complex Vandalism at Joan of Arc.WAS 4.25000:25, 6 December 2006 (UTC)]]
To expand a bit. There are cases where considerably more effort goes in an investigation by an editor, beyond the normal scope of what traditionaly is seen. Complex Vandalism, can span over months or years may and require days or even weeks to uncover entirely the scope of the dammage done to Wikipedia by an vandal. I think its worth considering, because most of this type of investigative work goes mostly unoticed or recognized, as the bulk of the effort goes into reading through hundreds of articles, doing research, screening ect.--Hu1220:34, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Comment I'm thinking of this as a PUA. To give an example of the sort of investigation this would recognize, see this discussion. This would thank editors for solving cases that require old fashioned gumshoe detective work. DurovaCharge!21:37, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Comment Perhaps I am wrong, but isn't something like "Case of the Complex Vandalism at Joan of Arc" actually based in inductive reasoning? After all, "Deductive reasoning is the kind of reasoning in which the conclusion is necessitated by, or reached from, previously known facts..." Similarities in editing patters are not technically valid premises for a deductive argument. Dar-Ape20:09, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
The "Barnstar" Personal User Award.
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
The Barnstar Star is awarded to users who are bold in creating awards for the community. Introduced by cyde, designed by Sango123 and WillMak050389.
I have a proposal to add the "Barnstar" Personal User Award. This is an award for users who have given out so many barnstars and other awards to users. I came up with the idea after I awarded Persian Poet Gal a barnstar. I like awarding barnstars to users (of course, I don't hand barnstars out as though they were candy), and think that users who have given out several awards should be given this award.
However, I am concerned about uploading the image I have created. The award is made up of six barnstars integrated into one, and I am worried about any violations if I upload this image. If people want to see the image anyway, I will upload it: I'm just concerned that's all. Despite the fact that the award is made up of six barnstars, it does look like a completely new image. I worked hard on the image, and I don't really want to see it wasted.
I think this award is a good idea. It promotes WikiCivility, and users who have given out many barnstars but received very little or none would get an award. However, this award should not be used as an excuse for a user to give awards out to anyone. :) Acalamari19:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Oooohhhh, I didn't realize there was already one! No, my award looks much different to that: mine has many more colors (no insult to the creator of that barnstar). Acalamari20:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Question Is "The Barnstar Star" for people who create awards? In other words, is that award for people who suggest new types of awards? My proposed award is for users who actually give awards to other users. Acalamari23:34, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
I didn't know that, but as I said, I don't want my image to be wasted. Surely there's something we can do with it? Anyway, from what I've seen, this actual award that I'm proposing doesn't exist. Acalamari21:47, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
I object to that statement, Evrik: I didn't know that star existed either. I thought I was being creative by using different existing stars to create a new one. Acalamari17:35, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
What we need, surely, is an award for people who create awards for giving people awards, no? You'd be first in line for that one –
In fact, the first star Evrik mentioned, the "The Barnstar Star." I believe that is the one that users get if they create awards. Acalamari17:41, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Changes to The Editor's Barnstar
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Occasionally known as the Deletionists' Barnstar. Sometimes, text removal is the most effective editing. This barnstar is awarded to individuals that display particularly fine deletions, omissions, reductions, reversions, blocks, bans, and other removals.
Proposed new text: "... editing and is awarded for excellence in copyediting."
For a long time I have felt that this barnstar didn't necessarily promote all the virtues of wikilove. I think that it also was very close in nature to
The_RickK_Anti-Vandalism_Barnstar
and The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar. Finally, there is no really good award for copyediting. As such, I propose we keep the name, but edit the description. Thoughts?
Oppose - This star has an established basis for awarding. Leave that as is and let the proposed new copyediting star fill the role for which it was created. --
Misatribution Me designed The Editor's Barnstar? No, this homange should go to the other. I imported this to the Japanese Wikipedia community under the name of "tirelessly working editor's burnstar" and then uploaded to the Commons but it was from the English Wikipedia. I think I put the information about the original author on Commons description page. I feel sorry for him or her ... --Aphaia05:34, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Yes, but many of the stars here can be gioven for general editing. Why don't you write a new description for copyediting? --evrik(talk)14:14, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
There are many awards for different types of editing. Actually most evry thing on wikipedia is editing. This should really be for copyediting. --evrik(talk)23:38, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Support; this barnstar at the moment also appears to encourage taking large chunks out of articles without discussion on the talk pages, while blocks and bans should be covered by the anti-vandalism star. Laïka11:35, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Support - if Wikipedia wants to have a deletionist barnstar then they should have it - but this barnstar (as titled) is the editor's barnstar - and it wrongly suggest that editors should just delete things, when in fact there is another aspect to editting that is just as important to Wikipedia - adding information (you add information to improve/clarify the article therefore it is editting - someone raised that point with me in an earlier discussion and I just want to make sure there's no question here). I really think that this change has to be made.Daniel()Folsom |\
Comment - There was only one oppose vote (yours) for the proposed new Copyeditor's Barnstar, which had more support than this, and rather than speedy it you archived it and declared it dead. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna♫♦♫03:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Oppose. This is not the "copyeditor's barnstar". Feel free to propose such a thing. This barnstar was specifically designed to recognise deletions that are necessary and beneficial to the encyclopedia. These actions are worthy of separate recognition and it should continue to be awarded for such. WjBscribe19:39, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
How do anti-vandalism actions promote Wikilove? There's a barnstar for those... There is no requirement that barnstars promote Wikilove! Barnstars are to reward actions that are beneficial to the project. The "Editor's barnstar" in its present form does just that. WjBscribe21:47, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
There is a proposal on the table for a Copyeditor's Barnstar. It received strong support in both the League of Copyeditors and its first round of proposal. Discussion is continuing about which design to use, and even though it hasn't been approved yet, I've discovered that some users have gone ahead and started awarding it. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna♫♦♫03:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Oppose - I feel this Barnstar should be for general editing. As noted in my comment above, discussion around the proposed Copyeditor's Barnstar has been that there be seperate awards for general editing and copyediting. Therefore, I propose this wording for the General, "Editor's Barnstar"
Proposed New Text: "The Editor's Barnstar is awarded to individuals who display particularly fine decisions in general editing."
The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
The Commons Ambassador Barnstar
The Commons Ambassador Barnstar is awarded to users who make exceptional contributions to the synergistic relationship of .en Wikipedia with Wikimedia Commons. For instance, searching through Commons to find suitable pictures to add to .en Wikipedia. Or finding free-use images on .en Wikipedia and moving them to Commons.
I don't know if anything exists like this already, and my minor amount of digging into the subject returned nothing.What I propose is a Wikimedia Commons Barnstar that would be given out to users who provide an exceptional amount of content for Commons.
Comment Maybe you could tailor the proposal to fit a group that does work here on the english wiki for the commons? --evrik(talk)16:53, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Question Where would I propose this on Commons? evrik, I like your idea, and as I understand it you are a member of the only (as far as I can tell) group to be dedicated to Commons on wikipedia, do you know anymore groups? Or should we propose it for your group? Smomo21:26, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Question Don't you think it would be better to have this as a general barnstar, as not very many people would be able to take advantage of it if it was just for that group? Smomo22:05, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Support - I suggest that the award be given on the .en Wikipedia for contributions reltated to both Commons and .en. For instance - taking an existing eligible .en image and moving it to Commons, or adding images to Commons AND working them into .en articles. It would be helpful in raising the profile of contributing to Commons. Johntex\talk20:18, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Support: Its a good idea, a lot of users do a lot of work for commons that never really gets acknowledged much in Wikipedia but, nonetheless, contributes significantly to the project.A mcmurray21:16, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
If you like the commons star I would suggest writing a better definition, perhaps tie it to a WikiProject and improve the image. It also needs more support. --evrik(talk)20:24, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
I have left messages for Jimbo, Danny, and Brad. If the Foundation objects, I'm sure one of them will let us know and we can redesign the image. I have also left notices concerning this discussion at the Village Pump and at the Commons Village Pump, as well as at a few relevant WikiProjects. Johntex\talk17:55, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
I don't think it is any odder than the very idea that the Commons logo is non-free to begin with. As I mention above, the foundation has been notified so if they tell us to switch the image we will certainly do so. Johntex\talk18:34, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Today is the two-week mark. I say we leave it up until next week to see iof there is any major opposition. One question, what kind of Barnstar is this, or is it a WikiProject Award? --evrik(talk)18:46, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
That sounds good. That will allow time to ensure the image is OK. If no major opposition arises, then this should go in Wikipedia:Barnstars#General_barnstars. It is analogous to The Rosetta Barnstar and The Rosetta Barnstar, both of which are giving for a particular type of tireless work (translation and technical work, respectively) for the benefit of the whole of Wikipedia. Johntex\talk19:00, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you meant the second "Rosetta" to be, but it should presumably be some other award. :)
Support. I love the idea of this and I hope that seeing this barnstar on other people's pages will inspire more people to do cross-wiki work. The image needs improvement though. I suspect that a thin white border around the commons logo will make it stand out enough against the star. The problem right now is that it's too dark where they overlap; people unfamiliar with the commons logo won't even be able to pick out the image. — coelacantalk — 20:32, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Comment. I would prefer a name like "Commons Ambassador Barnstar", something that would make the co-development aspect clearer.--Pharos21:32, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
This new Barnstar for contributing usable images to the Commons is a fine idea. When I look at images in the Commons there is not much there. S. M. Sullivan00:04, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Support Of course I'm biased having found and uploaded
Someone suggested to me (Johntex) that the logo needed a white border to make the logo stand out a bit more... I have done this and put in a box below so you can all see what it looks like. The colour and opacity of the border can be changed, if necessary. Smomo18:12, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
The Commons Ambassador Barnstar
The Commons Ambassador Barnstar is awarded to users who make exceptional contributions to the synergistic relationship of .en Wikipedia with Wikimedia Commons. For instance, searching through Commons to find suitable pictures to add to .en Wikipedia. Or finding free-use images on .en Wikipedia and moving them to Commons.
There has been no opposition to this idea. What is needed now is a clear consensu about which image is desired ... --evrik(talk)14:58, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
(Barnstar with telephone)
(Barnstar with bubble) - Improved, simplistic Barnstar per advice for Discussion Award suggestion
(Da barnstar trial 2) Disasterous attempt 2
(Barnstar bubble 2) An edited version of the first bubble version. Has cream and blue.
See left (without border)
An attempt at making a barnstar for those who show excellance in the editing of the musical arts. (Feel free to edit it, and shape it into a better image, but consult me first before posting it).
.gif)
TARDISbarnstar1.jpg, a proposed design for the Doctor Who WikiProject Award.
TARDISbarnstar2.gif, an alternate design for the Doctor Who WikiProject Award.
Smomo's TARDIS #1
Geni's alternative
How about this one then, thuglastalk|edits
Original: Neuro barnstar
Edit 1: Neuroscience barnstar
Edit 2: Neuroscience barnstar
Edit 3: Neuroscience barnstar
Edit 4: Neuroscience barnstar
Proposal A
Proposal B
Proposal C
Hi, I'd like to propose a barnstar for 
