Wikipedia:Barnstar and award proposals/Archive15

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Image for proposed Joe Paterno Barnstar for contributions made to WikiProject Pennsylvania State University. Thoughts? —xanderer 04:34, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

• Comment I would support this as a WikiProject Award for that WikiProject. I don't think it warrants its own barnstar, though. --WillMak050389 01:27, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
  • I'm not even sure this is wide enough for a wikiproject, let alone a project award... Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 14:02, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Joe Pa is a pretty important character for Penn State, why would you not support as a WikiProject Award for the Penn State WikiProject? --WillMak050389 20:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
      • I don't know who Joe Paterno is, so I can't answer that. My issue was with the narrow scope of the Wikiproject itself - but Badbilltucker informs me that it is active and two years old, so I'm cool with that. Any established successful wikiproject should have its own award. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
        • Here is a link to Joe Paterno, just in case you wanted to know about him. I'm sorry I misunderstood your last comment about the scope of the WikiProject. --WillMak050389 21:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Support as project award only - as project is so small that to create a full barnstar for this comparatively small project would only devalue the existing more general barnstars. Badbilltucker 17:42, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment - Is it just me, or does anyone else think that the two lenses aren't exactly centered on the middle of the barnstar? It is a minor point, but I would appreciate knowing if this is in some way intentional (if it is, fine) or whether it is accidental. If the latter, maybe straightening the glasses out would be in order. Badbilltucker 22:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Support as WikiProject Award. NauticaShades 13:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Is this really broad enough to merit its own award?--evrik ^(talk) 16:00, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment - I note that there is not yet a barnstar for the state of Pennsylvania itself, although it is a broader field, and actually encompasses several projects. I'm personally not completely convinced that one state is itself broad enough scope, but I am sure it would receive a lot more support if it was proposed, particularly from all the other projects associated with the state. Badbilltucker 14:09, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Currently there are several wikiproject relating to Pennsylvania. WP Pennsylvania, WP PA Highways, WP Pittsburg & WP Philadelphia. There is a WP Award for Philly, and a PUA for Pittsbur. I don't think WP Pennsylvania has thought of developing an award, though if it did, it would probably involve a Keystone. --evrik ^(talk) 19:24, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

How about an award gven automatically (by bot, something or someone) for achieving 5000 edits? Guidelines?

Simply south 11:48, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• Support. It would be nice to have a few more awards that have objective criteria instead of being reliant wholy on the opinions of the presentor. I recommend this be coordinated with Wikipedia:Service awards also as they have several defined levels of contribution. Johntex\^talk 15:55, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose this promotes edit countitis. --evrik ^(talk) 19:20, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose same as above. --WillMak050389 21:13, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose per above. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose per above. Gizza^{Chat ©} 21:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment - "edit countitis" has never been proven to exist, much less proven to be a bad thing. While focusing on anything in the extreme can be a bad thing - there is no good reason why we can't have a few awards based purely on undisputable measures of contribution - such as number of edits. Johntex\^talk 21:47, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Oppose - obsession with edit counts is in no way a good thing, and the fact that this design so dramatically emphasizes it indicates to me that it might become a factor here. I wouldn't mind seeing a similar award for edit counts, and believe that we already have one such service award, but I personally have very strong reservations about the styling of this one possibly emphasizing the number too much. Badbilltucker 21:52, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah, but a few awards based on edit count would hardly seem to be an obsession - certainly not compared to the dozens and dozens of awards that can be given out for no concretely defined reason.

Do you think you might consider supporting if the design were changed? The text could be smaller and turned into something more of a statement. For example, "Here's to your first 5,000 contributions to the community" or "Thanks for making 5,000+ contributions"... Johntex\^talk 22:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment I think by the time you make it to 5000 edits, you don't give a damn about getting an award. I'm only 900 away, and I sure don't care if I get an award when I hit 5000. I'm not doing this for the kudos. What's the point of this award? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 22:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment This page contains the images for the existing service awards which are already available. Badbilltucker 22:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Strong oppose. We don't want users to think that they would get an award at 5000 edits, which could lead to massive balant edits by users to increase their edit count and damage this encyclopedia. Johntex, we award users a barnstar for making quality edits, and not for specific edit count. Michaelas10 (Talk) 21:37, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose Let us not confuse quantity with quality. Barnstars should be about quality. Nick Thorne 00:37, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose edit count does not exactly signify an editor with an exceptional amount of contributions.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 00:04, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. Am I the only one who finds a bit odd the argument "No one would care to have this award, and editors will deliberately warp their editing to get this award"? Some other comments: (1) If you don't like the award, don't display it. (2) It's just a barnstar, doubtful that anyone would deliberately make lots of minor edits just to get this award, but if they do, so what? Minor edits are useful too. (3) People are motivated to achieve goals. That's just human. If you're not, then bully for you, but you're unusual. (4) Having 5000 edits is an achievement of some sort. Whether it is important or not is up to the individual user. Any editor is welcome to view this award on another editor's page and choose to disregard the information it displays. All that being said, I myself prefer the WP:SERVICE awards (naturally, since I wrote them) because they also require a certain amount of time in harness. However, the WP:SERVICE awards were deemed by the No Fun Brigade too controversial to be included in the roster of awards and hence their existance is not known to most. Herostratus 02:58, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
  • I believe I should explain myself better. Although a large edit count as a goal for a barnstar might seem useful for this encyclopedia, it is completely against the purpose of barnstars. Barnstars are awarded for quality edits, which are truly an achievement, rather than for a certain count. I know some Wikipedians with a lower edit count which contributed and helped much more than some other users with a very high edit count. This is not "if you don't like it, don't display it", the award selecting process should be very limited, and if people oppose it then there is no reason for it to be on PUA, and especially not on the barnstars page. Michaelas10 (Talk) 17:02, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Oppose, this award will encourage wikipedians to edit more, maybe by adding nonsenses, vandals on articles. --Jacklau96 11:55, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Right. I mean, God forbid we should encourage editors from editing even more. Increased editing means increased vandalism, and our goal should be to get editing (and therefore vandalism) down to zero.... sheesh. Herostratus 17:28, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
      • This isn't a good arguement, nobody will manage to vandalize his way up to 5000 edits. The problem is that although these edits might not be vandalism, they might be very low-quality or duplicates. Michaelas10 (Talk) 16:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose Quality not quantity my friends :D. BTW the tireless contributers barnstar already exists and is more diversive. — Arjun 01:24, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The Hinduism WikiProject Award, introduced by User:Srkris, is an award, granted by a member of WikiProject Hinduism to any editor who makes valuable contributions to Hinduism related articles. Gizza^{Chat ©} 07:55, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

• Support though I'd like a better image if you can think of one. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 08:14, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

• Strongly support the award concept, although the image needs work. I wish this was around long ago, as I know someone who really deserves it. --Gray Porpoise 18:03, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Support - Many users have worked hard on Hinduism related articles and this is a great motivation as well.Bakaman _Bakatalk 22:47, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

• Super Strong Support, I think there is one for Islam and since the Hindu community is very strong here (Hindus and non-Hindus alike) this barnstar is something that could be shared. Great idea.__Seadog ^♪ 23:36, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

• Support. Looks good. NauticaShades 13:58, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Support Is there any way to make into an easy syntax like India project barnstar?--D-Boy 18:37, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

• Support - with question. Would the award also be available to members of the Hindu mythology, Hindu philosophy, Saivism, and Vedanta WikiProjects? I know they're listed as descendant projects, but just want to be sure of their possible inclusion as well. Badbilltucker 01:27, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

yes--D-Boy 05:06, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

• Support as a WikiProject Award, though I think the image needs work. --evrik ^(talk) 15:25, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
• Comment - I do have to agree that the image is right now rather less than eye-catching. Is the green required or called for by circumstances, and might the color of the barnstar be changed to complement whatever color the central icon has? Badbilltucker 14:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

*Support and Comment Great Award - I've added another version of the medal for people to consider. ॐ Priyanath 06:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment Is there consensus from the WikiProject on the Award they want? --evrik ^(talk) 16:03, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Reply to Evrik's Comment Well Priyanath just created the second barnstar quite recently so I doubt many of the editors would know about his new design. I'll post messages at the WikiProject talk page and on Talk:Hinduism. I prefer the second because the Aum (the symbol in the middle) is slightly bigger and the colours are more "Hindu". Gizza^{Chat ©} 06:42, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

*Support I like the first image better than the second one. Hkelkar 19:47, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment I just added a third proposed image, with similar colors as #2. I can tweak if need be, but not until next week - any suggestions? ॐ Priyanath 05:28, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

The third one is even better. Good work Priyanath! Gizza^{Chat ©} 05:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment I've just added a fourth possibility. Because it's hard to change a barnstar later on, I think it's good to get the Hinduism WikiProject Barnstar to be the best we can from the start. Looking at the other Barnstar discussions above, I think it's a good approach to get more feedback - and also see if others have ideas they'd like to upload for discussion. I'm definitely not stuck on my own versions - I just want to see this done more consciously. I'm happy to work on any of these, when I get back to a computer in a few days. ॐ Priyanath 22:10, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
• Wow good job Priyanath! I particularly like Image 3 and 4 but they are all very good. — Seadog 22:29, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
• I must say, I think Version 4 looks fantastic. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 22:31, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
• Agreed. I'm torn between the first and fourth images. The fourth one seems more canon, though. Hkelkar 22:35, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Agreed. 3 and 4 appeal the most to me, but I'm not really "affiliated" with Hinduism in any way, so I can see how, if other colors were more appropriate symbolically, I could go with whatever symbolically works best. Badbilltucker 22:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment - I like the design of the first one but I think the colors should be changed and the circle and symbol should be bigger.--D-Boy 03:00, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Support definitely. For some reason the 4th one isn't appearing on my browser but the 3rd one looks quite good. Nobleeagle ^[TALK] [C] 04:41, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
• Support per all above. s d 3 1 4 1 5 final exams! 17:10, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment I fixed an image formatting problem with version #4 - some people couldn't see it. ॐ Priyanath 00:28, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks, I definitely prefer 4 over the rest now. Nobleeagle ^[TALK] [C] 04:20, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

4 looks good but the symbol needs to be bigger.--D-Boy 23:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment:I added a new version with a bigger symbol, per D-Boy's suggestion, and called it #4a. ॐ Priyanath 00:32, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment:I'm feeling the love for 4a!--D-Boy 05:51, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Priyanath, every new design is an improvement from the previous one! We should use your tenth version :) Gizza^{Chat ©} 06:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

That's why it's so helpful getting people's feedback. Once there's a strong consensus on one of these (1, 2, 3 , 4, 4a), I have a couple more color and shading variations to try for that particular one. I'm not sure about ten, though! I hear two votes for 4a since I added it - any other comments? ॐ Priyanath 21:07, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Strong Support of 4A. The luminosity I think is really appropriate for a barnstar dealing with religion, and the bigger "aum" doesn't hurt either. Badbilltucker 16:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment: Support the concept. Somehow the Aum just doesn't blend with the barnstar at all in any of these. Looks like it's been forcibly superimposed. Is it because of the different coloring schemes? Sorry if I'm not very clear, but it looks like the Aum and the Star are two separate things kept on top of each other, and not one entity. Can this be fixed? deeptrivia (talk) 06:29, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The South Indian Cinema and Music Award is awarded to Wikipedians who tirelessly foster or contribute to the improvement of articles relating to Indian cinema, particularly South Indian cinema and music. Gizza^{Chat ©} 10:45, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

That is a very narrow award, isn't it? Is there a WikiProject for it? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 00:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The project associated is WikiProject Indian cinema. I also have reservations about the scope of the "field" for this award as well, but with 572 listed stubs, not counting longer articles, I could go with it, I guess, IF the current barnstars for India were described as insufficient. Also, is there any idea of the total number of articles in the category? Also, isn't the reference to South Indian cinema more than a little limiting itself. Why the additional specification? Badbilltucker 01:23, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The other barnstar of the project is for Bollywood related articles, which is located in Bombay and is the dominant cinema in North India. Bollywood is the cinema which is also popular outside India. But in South India, many people have a limited understanding of Hindi, the main language used in Bollywood and so they still enjoy watching films in their respective South Indian languages. Gizza^{Chat ©} 06:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose the award already exists. --evrik ^(talk) 15:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Comment I am sorry. The award which already exists is for Bollywood Films. The award which is proposed is for South Indian Films. Hence I am afraid that your point of contention is far from reality  Doctor Bruno  17:31, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose as redundant, second barnstar in what is basically a comparatively small field. Badbilltucker 15:28, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Comment The fact is that Bollywood is a comparatively small field than South Indian Films. Hence I am not able to understand your comment, which, I am afraid is not in agreement with the present facts  Doctor Bruno  17:31, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

• Merge I'm the one responsible for the first barnstar, and it was my dumb choice to name it the Bollywood Barnstar. I just liked the sound of it but ... that meant it left out all the other regional film industries of India. I suggest that we have one barnstar for all the Indian film industries. You can use my image, if you want (it's colorful at least) and retitle it. The All-India Cinema Barnstar? I apologize for making the mistake in the first place. Zora 09:01, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

That image is the one here. I think it would be a good idea to create one blanket barnstar for both groups, and think the name given by Zora is fine by me (it echoes All-India Radio, which is at least a similar name). I think there might be some disagreement about which image to use, though. Would it be possible to superimpose the picture from the first onto the second? And I really don't like hearing people apologize for doing good work, like you did here. Badbilltucker 14:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose-Bharatveer 15:30, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Reason ????  Doctor Bruno  17:31, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment. May be we should have an Indian Cinema barnstar, instead of Bollywood barnstar or South Indian cinema barnstar. utcursch | talk 15:37, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
  • That's incredibly narrow, isn't it? What about a general cinema barnstar? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 16:00, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Much better. utcursch | talk 16:45, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

• Support: It seems absolutely fine to have a barnstar for South Indian cinema. Bollywood is so different from all other industries. This would promote editors from contributing to this template/category more because it brings satisfaction to editors who help correct the notion that Indian film industry isn't Bollywood, but is a conglomeration of films made in almost 15 languages. South Indian films are the maximum in number and the sum is more than the combined total of all other regional language film industries put together. Having the tag Indian Cinema sort of dilutes it and having a tag for 'Cinema' seems to be too broad of a definition! I strongly agree having a separate barnstar. Thanks Sudharsansn (talk • contribs) 16:59, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment The proposed barnstar is for South Indian Cinema and Music and that means this barnstar is needed for recognition of contribution related to Carnatic Music which the Bollywood barnstar cannot cover. May be we have a barnstar for Indian Cinema and Music as a whole.  Doctor Bruno  17:31, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

• Sorry for the ambiguity, but I should have given more thought to wording when I named the award; by music I actually meant film music. AppleJuggler 02:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Support: Kollywood/Tollywood industries are different from Bollywood Industries.Barnstar with the name of Bollywood is not appropriate for these industries. Separate Barnstar can be considered.Otherwise name of the existing Barnstar to be modified as Indian films Barnstar--Indianstar 04:46, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: Indian regionalism strikes again. Since many directors, actors, and music directors work in several industries, wouldn't it be right to stress the UNITY of the film industries, not their differences? As for combining music and cinema -- strange choice. I know that many musicians make a living as music directors (it's the only way, if any CDs they issue are copied and on sale in the bazaars even BEFORE the official release), but there are classical musicians who won't have any truck with cinema. Have a separate star for Indian music? All-India Music Barnstar? I'm dealing with regionalism on the non-Roman scripts issue, and now we have to have a whole panoply of barnstars for the different film industries? Zora 05:07, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: Though everybody works together, ultimately outside of India people think that there is just one Bollywood or atleast that is how IFFI and other Indian film festivals project it. It would great to stress on the identity of South Indian films as the artistes are almost shared between the industries. North and South share very few people, whereas Tamil/Telugu/Malayalam and also Kannada industries share the common pool of artistes. Sudharsansn (talk • contribs) 09:15, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment What about A. R. Rahman? Madhavan? Siddarth? Mani Ratnam? Kavita Krishnamurthy? Balasubramaniam? Naming just a FEW. There's lots of back and forth. What about having a barnstar -- IN COLOR, not a .png -- for contributions to articles relating to South India? All articles, not just cinema. Zora 19:06, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: This barnstar was conceived as an incentive for the development of the numerous South Indian cinema-related articles/stubs that I came across here on Wikipedia, and to acknowledge the work of a fair number of contributors who toil silently in the background to improve these articles. It is useful to understand that this barnstar was envisioned as a complement to the Bollywood barnstar. Now, having a single barnstar that can represent the two would doubtlessly be more efficient, especially taking note of the scale of this Wikiproject. The suggestion that these barnstars be merged under a common banner (e.g., the Indian Cinema Star) appears apt, and I would endorse it. The design and creation of such a barnstar I would leave in the capable hands of other experienced Wikipedians or volunteers (I am not much of a graphic arts person as you can tell). Separately, I must say that I was blissfully ignorant of the passionate simmer that I notice about 'regionalism'. This unawareness may not be surprising considering the fact that I am neither Indian nor hail from India. But I felt it harmless in acknowledging, or even celebrating, differences and diversity stemming from the various cultures and mores in different regions of India, which is something that I've always admired about the country. My apologies for any awkwardness caused. Best wishes, AppleJuggler 08:44, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment - I could certainly see having a barnstar for South Indian articles as well. I guess the question would be how to define "South India". Would only a few specific states be included, and, if so, which? Badbilltucker 17:39, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

South India Means Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. The predominant languages being Tamil, Malayalam, Kannada and Telugu  Doctor Bruno  17:43, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Would anyone oppose dropping this existing proposal and instead moving to propose a barnstar or project award specific to South India, as defined by  Doctor Bruno  above? Badbilltucker 18:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I think a South India barnstar, per states as defined above, would be a great idea. I'm not the best person to design it, but I would be glad to help by criticizing (those who can't do, become critics). I'd suggest something elaborate, colorful, and elegant. Zora 02:48, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment I think one award for all Indian cinema is appropriate. --evrik ^(talk) 16:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I concur. The personalised text that accompanies a barnstar awarded may then make mention, if desired, the specific area of Indian cinema in which a recipient had contributed to significantly (e.g., to whichever Xxx-woods, actor, etc.) AppleJuggler 04:06, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• Merge No point in having more than one. We will point out that the barnstar is not just for Bollywood but for all Indian cinema industries. Gizza^{Chat ©} 06:46, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Shall we retain the colourful Bollywood barnstar and change its name to reflect this merger? It looks attractive as it is and using this barnstar is easier than creating a whole new barnstar. AppleJuggler 16:11, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Keep it and change the name. It has no sign being exclusively for Bollwood so it is easier to use the same one. Gizza^{Chat ©} 03:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

• Merge per above. Besides, it would be hard to make such a pretty one again. deeptrivia (talk) 05:51, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

(Barnstar with telephone) Trial Banstar for Discussion Award suggestion	(Barnstar with bubble) - Improved, simplistic Barnstar per advice for Discussion Award suggestion	(Da barnstar trial 2) Disasterous attempt 2	(Barnstar bubble 2) An edited version of the first bubble version. Has cream and blue.
See left (without border)	An attempt at making a barnstar for those who show excellance in the editing of the musical arts. (Feel free to edit it, and shape it into a better image, but consult me first before posting it).

I was just thinking that there are awards out there for tireless contribution in article mainspaces. Also, at certain times, editors comment that other editors have not done much discussion. Therefore, how about an award for being a comunicative (and possibly thought-provoking) editor? I was thinking for general use. Simply south 20:34, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Support - I do see this as being a useful Barnstar/award. All too often, editors make major changes to articles without discussing them, or even checking the talk page to see if that change has already been discussed. This would be a nice means of positive encouragement to do that. Unsigned comment posted by 14:27, 2006 November 25 Jeffpw

Strongly Support but suspect it will rarely be awarded. I've been watching some edit wars where there is no debate--even a Wikipedia administrator involved in these edit wars simply reverts and leaves the talk page completely blank. I would love to see this one awarded to someone, and yes, it's a postive means of encouragement. KP Botany 21:39, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Comment: should there be another design for this? Am i allowed to comment on my own proposal? Simply south 00:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

• Mild Oppose - Discussion isn't what we want on talk page per se, but what we seek is discussion of the article. If this award were to reward comments which are similar to those found elsewhere in chat rooms, I would oppose it, as those comments are not the ones we're really looking for here. Please define what you are referring to a bit more specifically. Badbilltucker 01:30, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes, good comment, must be well-defined. The idea, I think, is to reward people for using the Discussion Page attached to the article for a useful purpose. KP Botany 02:53, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose other awards exist that can be used for this subject, and I'm not thrilled with the image. --evrik ^(talk) 15:27, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Sample list: The Original Barnstar, The Working Man's Barnstar, The Barnstar of Diligence, The Tireless Contributor Barnstar and The Barnstar of Good Humor

Comment: I open up the floor. What are these other awards? Anyway it is a trial barnstar and i welcome a better design or suggestions for one. Simply south 15:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The others are very broad and some only seem to cover article mainsapce, as before, and the latter is specialised to humourous comments. I was proposing an award to cover suggestions and ideas and to show the editor is contributing to discussions in a helpful way, perhaps. This will also be based, but not only, on the number edits they make to discussions of articles and maybe users. I hope this does not encourage vandalism but is a form of encouragement to new and existing editors. However i am not trying to replace other awards. Simply south 16:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I have uploaded a new image per advice but am keeping the old one up as well, just in case. Simply south 19:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

• Support Award, Oppose Image. NauticaShades 15:32, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Mild Support After review, I am reasonably confident that the above award proposal is not in fact specifically redundant to any other awards. I am still dubious that the proposal will ever receive wide use if approved, or will be even be widely known, but do think it addresses current weaknesses wikipedia has and that any way to address those pronounced weakness might be useful. Also, I would like to see some of the other proposed designs introduced on this page. My favorite is the one with the word balloon inset. Badbilltucker 19:01, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I think it does address a weakness in Wikipedia, namely that even administrators ignore discussing issues in preference to reverting and edit warring. Edit counts can't have anything to do with it, though. Again, an instance of administrator abuse shows a problem with this, an administrator who added reqests to expand tags on articles outside of his area of knowledge, including many articles that were already categorized as stubs, in order to simply increase his edit count. This is, imo, a quality, not quantity award, an award for someone who has enhanced the community of Wikipedia and improved an article by leading a useful discussion of content. As it is on Wikipedia now, if you ask a question on a talk page to an article, people assume you're attacking them personally. Discussion is taboo, it seems, an award that recognizes the original intent of talk pages and honors those who do this, is much need, imo. KP Botany 19:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

There is the third image i have uploaded or should i create others? Should this one be edited? Simply south 19:27, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

• Support now that the description is more elaborated on I'll submit a vote of support. It is true that editors that encourage use of the article talk page in a prolific manner can inspire very good article edits.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 22:19, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

• Support the award itself, but not crazy about images. —xanderer 04:39, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Title

I couldn't also ask for suggestions for a name of this award could i? Or would Discussion Award\Barnstar do? Simply south 19:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Why not? I suspect someone will have a clever title, the Discussion Award Barnstar sounds kinda blah, although it is to the point, and sometimes that matters more than being clever. Don't like the color choices, the purple over grey. KP Botany 20:35, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Image	What to type	Description
	{{subst:Discussion|message ~~~~}}	The Discussion Barnstar is awarded to editors who make significant use of an article's Talk Page in order to discuss changes to the article and achieve consensus, rather than simply making wholesale changes, especially to controversial articles. The award was created in order to encourage editors to discuss, rather than engage in edit wars. This award was introduced by Simply south

how is this for a rough idea? Jeffpw 21:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I like it, again it makes the point, imo, especially emphasizing controversial articles. Now, the only question remains, is there anyone to give it to? KP Botany 21:12, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

• I think the description shows that the other awards can cover this area. --evrik ^(talk) 21:36, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Closing discussion

Looking at this the current results are as follows
AWARD

• six people are in favour of the award
• one person opposes

IMAGES
The original image was opposed by one person and after discussion with other users it seems that the the design of a Barnstar with a speech bubble\balloon was preferred. Only one user has requested the Barnstar with bubble (Design 2, NOT 2, 4 or 5) i.e design 2 be used, although design 1 has beem given as a rough idea.

discussion

Final discussion and voting is needed for the decider of the image.

Also, is the title okay or does that need to be changed? Simply south 22:32, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

• I think the title is fine. It, along with the accompanying text makes the Barnstar very clear in its purpose. It seems to me that clear consensus has emerged among those interested in the Barnstar proposal page. I look forward to using this Barnstar in thevery near future. Jeffpw 22:39, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
• I was about to archive this award proposal. There is not enough support to justify making this a barnstar. Six people is awfully thin. This would be fine as a PUA. --evrik ^(talk) 05:17, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

With all due respect, evrik, there are 6 supports and only 1 oppose (you). That seems consensus to me. I would personally oppose the idea of the only person who opposed this award archiving it in spite of clear consensus. Jeffpw 08:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to be neutral. I've seen everything now in barnstars, one of the nastiest point of view editors was awarded a barnstar, apparently by mistake, but displays it with pride. Barnstars mean nothing. KP Botany 15:33, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• I would not mind seeing this as a barnstar but I believe that this may be justified as PUA at this point. I also do not mind leaving the title the same either. As far as the image, I guess the barnstar with blue bubble is fine, however it would not hurt to post a few more alternatives.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 16:36, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
• Six votes means nothing ... and this isn't supposed to be about voting. I don't see the point of this award, or how it is remarkably different from other awards. Compare this award with the Fauna award that just passed and you see a marked difference in support. I say we archive this proposal. --evrik ^(talk) 19:30, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
• I'm stongly against the designs of the barnstar, which all seem to be some low-quality copypasting through paint. Compare this to the other barnstars we have, look at the fauna barnstar for example. This isn't a vote, and two opposers in a barnstar proposal are enough not to accept it. This might be fine as a personal user award though. Michaelas10 (Talk) 17:11, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The image at the left is the current version, the one to the right my proposed change. This is an existing award, albeit only a personal user award at this time. This is called the "Purple Barnstar" and is located at Wikipedia:Personal user awards#WikiProject Kindness Campaign and Dispute Resolution, where it is described as "The Purple Star given to Wikipedians who have been hurt by others, for example by having their user pages vandalised, being mistakenly blocked (for too long, or affected by range blocks), being personally attacked, etc.".

I have given this award three times myself, once to a good editor who was blocked, and twice to good editors who just felt poorly used, related to the quick changeover to the new, more stringent, fair use policy for images.

I don't know why it is called the "Purple Barnstar", but I assume it is related to the American military decorated commonly called the "Purple Heart', which is awarded to all servicemen who are wounded. (It may be related to the color of a bruise, but I don't think so). But this is not clear enough, hence I have placed the decoration at the center of the star and also suggest a name change

True, this is somewhat USA-centric, but I don't see this as insuperable. Just as most educated people in the English-speaking world know what a Victoria Cross is etc., I'll bet that lots of non-Americans know what a Purple Heart is. And anyway, it's already USA-centric, and even less clear, in its present state.

So I would ask for input on these three questions:

1. ) Should the current graphic be replaced with the one with the decoration at the center.
2. ) Should it be renamed from "Purple Barnstar" (of which the meaning is rather obscure) to "Purple Heart Barnstar", "Wounded in Action Barnstar", or some other name (suggestions welcome).
3. ) Should it be promoted from being just a personal user award to being a barnstar. I think that it should.Herostratus 18:39, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

---

1) I prefer the one with the decoration, as it is slightly more obvious in its meaning.

2) I like the Purple Heart Barnstar as a name, even if it is US-centric, because of the clarity of the name. WiA is I think less appealing. Maybe other name could include the Personal Sacrifice Barnstar or something similar.

3) I'd like a really well-defined set of criteria before going with a regular barnstar, as it might be too easy for someone to say "I'm a victim" and be awarded this otherwise. Badbilltucker 19:10, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

OK, well, changed the image and left everything else as is. Herostratus 17:24, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Would still opt for some more specific parameters. Just about everybody has had their userpage vandalized, for instance, and I don't think we would want all people who have had vandalized pages get the award. Several other individuals qualify as having been "personally attacked" at least once who might not specifically deserve specific recognition for having been attacked. Maybe if it were something to be given out by the mediation or arbitration groups to encourage those who have been victims of attacks, or to somehow honor editors who have endured after repeated attacks of one sort or another? Badbilltucker 17:51, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• Comment where is the new image? --evrik ^(talk) 20:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Image	What to type	Description
	{{subst:The Copyeditor's Barnstar|message ~~~~}}	The Copyeditor's Barnstar The Copyeditor's Barnstar is awarded for excellence in Copyediting. speling grammer, and punctuacion are, important! Spelling, grammar, and punctuation are important. This award was suggested by Trusilver; it was designed by Kathryn NicDhàna with input from members of the League of Copyeditors. It was introduced on date, year.

This is my first proposal, so bear with me. Members of the League of Copyeditors agreed there should be an award specifically for copyediting, and we have worked together to come up with this design. If consensus is that copyediting is not specific enough for its own barnstar, and already covered under general editing (ie, if this proposal fails), we'll instead propose this as a WikiProject award. However, enough people seemed to think that this might be worthy of a barnstar, so we're starting at the top :-) ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 00:08, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• Support Copyediting is different from editing. The barnstar, however, shouldn't be limited to WikiProject members. By the way, I copyedited your "Spelling, grammer and punctuation are important." phrase; see if you can find the difference (comma after grammer) :-) | AndonicO ^{Talk | Sign Here} 00:34, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support as another WikiProject member. :) Gzkn 00:43, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support - Copyeditters must be awarded for their skills in copyediting, project members or not. I totally support this! --Tohru Honda13^{Sign here!} 00:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support Copyediting is definitely different from normal editing. It is important. BTW, I'm fairly sure Kathryn didn't intend this barnstar to be solely awarded to members of the League of Copyeditors. I think she meant she was speaking generally for the League's agreement about wanting such an award available. --Pigman^{talk • contribs} 01:17, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Support I could name a dozen of users who deserve this! Of course it shouldn't be limited to just project members. — Arjun 01:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Comment - The intention, as far as I am aware, has always been to have this as a barnstar for use by the entire Wikipedia community. What I meant is that, if for any reason there was not sufficient support for it to be a barnstar, that we could then re-propose it as a WikiProject award. As so far we're getting good support for it as a barnstar, I'll rephrase a bit above to clarify this :-) ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 01:26, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• • Oh, ok. It's clear to me now. :-) | AndonicO ^{Talk | Sign Here} 01:36, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support, although somewhat redundant with the standard editor's barnstar. Still worthwhile though, as copyediting is important and deserves a method for recognition. Herostratus 12:58, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support spelling is very important. Grammar is too. Badbilltucker 16:26, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support as an other related award. Excellent designing but I don't feel it falls under any of the categories in Wikipedia:Barnstars. The other parts of the award are also too distracting for it to become a so-called pure barnstar. Michaelas10 (Talk) 12:00, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Support copyeditors are indeed an often overlooked but vital part of Wikipedia and do deserve some form of more recognition. I'm not so sure about the proposed barnstar design however, it would be nice to see some alternatives; regardless of design though I would really like to see this award's creation come to fruition.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 00:25, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support, with the disclaimer that I am a member of this WikiProject. :o) Galena11 07:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose Redundant to exisiting barnstars, image not well done. -evrik ^(talk) 20:28, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

I believe that linguists need a separate honour for their work on Wikipedia, because their field of work is of interest, as they add pronunciations to obscure terms or names, like myself, amongst other things. Their interest and pursuits must be rewarded appropriately so this is why I introduce the Linguist's Barnstar proposal. RJL 23:38, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

• Comment - Sounds like a good proposal. I think this award could also apply to people who have responded well and consistently to calls to help editors with articles that include terms from other languages. This comes up a lot on some of the articles I've worked on, often when not only pronunciation is needed but, for example, when the term is needed in both Irish and Scottish Gaelic, and the proper plurals in both languages need to be checked. But is there something wrong with me that I keep picturing a big tongue with a star on it? (or a big star with a tongue on it?) ;-) ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 02:53, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I had a Barnstar with several symbols from obscure languages, like Cherokee and suchlike, in mind. Any other comments?

• The only objection to Kathryn's proposal I see is that it sounds from her phrasing almost like The Rolling Stones logo, which I don't think would necessarily be appropriate here. I do like the lower proposal, as long as the characters aren't so obscure that they aren't recognizable as written characters. Maybe including some of the characters from some of the better known languages not used in English might work as well. Badbilltucker 19:24, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

• • Clarification - Eeek! I wasn't serious about the tongue thing. All apologies. I was in a weird mood and probably being too informal for this page. I think the actual proposal ;-) of symbols from a variety of languages, is very good. Perhaps it could be a star on a field of diverse symbols and characters? Maybe with something in IPA in the center? Maybe symbols for the same sound in many languages, with the IPA version of it central? Or maybe we could write "Wikipedia" in a variety of languages and put it in IPA in the center? Or, as there's no word for "Wikipedia" in many languages, perhaps the word "linguist"? ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 21:24, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - Would this be intended for spoken languages, writing systems, work on translations, or... all of the above? I'd prefer an inclusive version as there is alot of overlap in these areas. The different symbols works for writing systems, having them all represent the same thing works for translation, and thus what they refer to might be chosen to cover spoken languages/linguistics in general. Using 'linguist' makes sense except that it is fairly long (even moreso in some languages) and thus would be difficult to show in multiple scripts/languages. Something like 'word' or 'speak' might be more compact in most systems... or we could just use a single sound (though that leaves out ideograms). Alternatively, the tower of Babel is a common motif in linguistics... something like a tower being built with bricks labeled in different symbols might be viable. --CBD 12:12, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

  Though... suddenly it occurs to me that my 'incomplete tower of babel bricks' idea would look an awful lot like the Wikipedia logo. Just in tower rather than sphere form. --CBD 12:14, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

• Comment don't the existing awards already cover this? --evrik ^(talk) 20:20, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The WPMIXBarnstar is an award to be presented to WikiProject Mixed Drinks Participants or any other editors who have made significant improvements to articles within the scope of the WikiProject and to those who have made meaningful contributions to the WikiProject. It may also be awarded by one Participant to another as a thank you for going above and beyond the call of duty on behalf of the WikiProject.

This is my first proposal, and I hope it will be added to the Wikipedia:WikiProject awards list quickly. I plan to start using it right away for someone who has been doing a great job for the WikiProject. I almost didn't even see this area or that we had to have awards approved before giving them out. Thanks. --Willscrlt (Talk|Cntrb) 15:05, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

• SUPPORT - As per nomination of course. :-) --Willscrlt (Talk|Cntrb) 15:05, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support as WikiProject Award. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 16:33, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
• Neutral Is there a lot of support for the award? --evrik ^(talk) 20:17, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Response - Support for it? I don't know. Need, definitely. This WikiProject is growing. Since December, we grew from only one recently active member to several. People are getting involved by taking on specific projects, participating in decision-making discussions, and working on article improvement. As our membership numbers increase, the quality of articles within our Project's scope is greatly improving. It would be nice to award both Project participants and the other editors who regularly contribute in them this for their efforts and recognize their contributions. A generic award could be used instead, but since it would be given for work specific to the WikiProject and its scope, it make senses to have an award just for that purpose. I originally created this within our WikiProject space (not in template space), but when I discovered other Projects have similar awards, this seemed the better way to go. It makes the award a little more special. --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 02:30, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
    • There are seven members to this group. Perhaps the award should wait a bit ... --evrik ^(talk) 04:33, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
      • Seven members who became active so far in only one month, and still growing. :-) I'm sorry, but am I missing something here? Is there a policy or guideline about creating new awards that I missed? I happened upon the WikiProject Awards Page, thought "Oh cool! I should list our new award here." Then I saw the note to announce and discuss it here before adding it to the page. I'm not sure what the fuss is all about. This is really just intended as a thank you award to members or from members for work done to improve Wikipedia and/or the WikiProject. To me, it makes sense that it should be listed on the WikiProject Awards Page based on that definition. I know that Wikipedia prefers wait for large-scale consensus to build-up before taking any actions, but unless there are some policies about not showing Wiki-love to others who deserve it within your WikiProject, I'm confused about the "wait a while" attitude. There are people who deserve recognition now, including non-Project editors who do great work on related articles. This award should also help encourage others to become more active. That would help the Project grow and improve, and that only helps Wikipedia. If it's a huge deal, I can withdraw the request to place it on the WikiProject Awards page, move the template out of main template space and back into our WikiProject space if there is a concern about it not being up to snuff for the mainspace. I'd rather have it listed with the rest of the WikiProject Awards, but it's not a requirement. I just think it would be a nice extra touch. Thanks. --a confused Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 13:44, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

• Comment Anyone can creat any award. The vetting porcess here is to see what awards get placed on these pages. For example, you could post anything on the PUA page, and then later come back to get the award listed on the other pages. --evrik ^(talk) 17:09, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
• I don't think this is an active enough WP. I'm going to list it on the PUA page. --evrik ^(talk) 22:12, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The WikiGnome award may be a general personal user award. It may be awarded to a wiki user who makes small (but still useful!) edits without clamoring for attention or otherwise falls into the criteria listed at wikignome. Please note, there is a Template:Wikignoming that has been awarded to one person. Also, people may identify themselves as WikiGnome's using :{{User wikipedia/WikiGnome}}, but that is not the same as another person awarding the Wikignome award. -- Jreferee 01:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

• Support as an "Other Award." --evrik ^(talk) 02:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - Thank you for the support. Although I nominated it as a personal award, I would be happy if this award were an "Other Award" such as to honor specific actions or events. -- Jreferee 19:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose. We already have the minor barnstar. The designing also doesn't resemble anything close to a barnstar or an award, and was originally created as a fair-use image replacement. Michaelas10 (Talk) 19:33, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

The fact that it will be nominated as a PUA still doesn't qualify this as an award, there really isn't a need to have two awards with the same purpose in different categories. Michaelas10 (Talk) 21:04, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• Comment - Of the four types of awards (Barnstars, WikiProject awards, Other Related Awards, and Personal User Awards), I am seeking approval have this award be used as a Personal User Award, not a Barnstar award. I believe the design resembles a Personal User Award but would be happy to entertain any changes to the award. The image is from Wikimedia Commons and this use does not violate any of the existing guidelines governing the use of images in Wikipedia. The Minor Barnstar is awarded for making minor edits of the utmost quality. This award would be for making minor edits that are useful without clamoring for attention. As a personal user award, it would have less status than The Minor Barnstar. Approving this award as a personal user award would create more opportunity to encourage WikiLove and WikiCivility. In view of this, would you support this award as a Personal User Award? Thanks. -- Jreferee 20:22, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support as other award, per evrik. | AndonicO ^{Talk · Sign Here} 23:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose Practically the same thing as minor award Claidheamohmor 04:02, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The Film Barnstar has been in use since November 22, 2006. I intended to include it in the Project Awards table, when I noticed that we should have had it approved first, so this is a very belated request for approval. Hoverfish Talk 22:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

• Support - WikiProject Television Barnstar exsists, therefore I would agree that a WikiProject Films Barnstar exsist. Hpfan9374 23:05, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
• Neutral I would support it as a wikiproject award, but not as a barnstar --evrik ^(talk) 18:44, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support as creator. (though, not of the image :-P, Pegship did that) Cbrown1023 22:34, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support Certainly a large enough and a significant enough project to merit its own barnstar.--Supernumerary 22:42, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support as per nomination. Hoverfish Talk 23:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support Since several of us have already received the award, I'm sure it would be better if it was official. --Nehrams2020 01:19, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support This barnstar is unique enough to exist as an official barnstar. --PhantomS 07:12, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I disagree. This would be a good fit on the WikiProject Award page. --evrik ^(talk) 17:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
    • After looking over current barnstars and awards, I agree with Evrik. However, since this is an WP award nomination anyway, I'm still in support. --PhantomS 20:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support per the above comments. ← ANAS ^Talk? 12:48, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support. WikiProject award only. Michaelas10 (Talk) 20:26, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support Looks nice, good job guys/gals! -- UKPhoenix79 22:28, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Clarification: We named it "WP Films Barnstar" (if we may), but I nominated it for a WP Award, not a Wikipedia Barnstar. Hoverfish Talk 23:08, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support - I like it! Corpx 14:19, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support As Film and Media Barnstar. | AndonicO ^{Talk · Sign Here} 23:52, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Railroad – Railroad, railway & rolling stock

{{subst:The Railway Barnstar|message ~~~~}} The Railway Barnstar The Railway Barnstar may be awarded to an editor who makes particularly fine railroad-related contributions. This award was introduced on January 14, 2007 by VVVN.

• Oppose --evrik ^(talk) this award [ inspired by the stop position target sign] is redundant. We already have The Railroad Star on the PUA page. 18:59, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
• Comment: I am finding it hard to understand how the above image relates to railways. Simply south 19:59, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
• Comment: Sorry, I do not know it. Does this award in Japanese Wikipedia need to be replaced? -- VVVN 12:59, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
• No, this is simply what gets listed on the wiki pages. You could always list this as a PUA. --evrik ^(talk) 17:18, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

I'm proposing one of these as a WikiProject Award for the Doctor Who WikiProject:

TARDISbarnstar1.jpg, a proposed design for the Doctor Who WikiProject Award.

TARDISbarnstar2.gif, an alternate design for the Doctor Who WikiProject Award.

Both of these were created by Smomo (talk · contribs). My preference is for #1. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 07:39, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

• I Support a Doctor Who WikiProject Award, but the designs aren't that good. For now I'd go with Design 2. The image of the police box is a free one, right? ← ANAS ^Talk? 15:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Ooh, I'd assumed so, but forgot to confirm with the creator. I'll do so now. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 17:51, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Withdrawn — it turns out the police box image is derived from a BBC copyright image. My bad — I should have checked that before submitting it. I'll be back if someone can create an award from a freely licensed image. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 22:20, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Doctor Who WikiProject Award (take 2), with a question about image

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The Middle-earth WikiProject Award, a.k.a. "Barnstar of the Dúnedain" (or Tolkien Barnstar - see below), may be awarded to any user for his or her contributions regarding Tolkien-related articles and/or to the WikiProject itself. Designed by User:Uthanc (using graphics by User:Aranel which were released to the public domain). Uthanc 09:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

• Support - nice simple design. Will help encourage contributions. Can we award retrospectively? I'd like to go back and award something like this to those involved early on in this WikiProject. Carcharoth 11:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support - Very nice and thematically relevant. No copyright issues. By way of more info for other reviewers; the symbols in the middle are Tolkien's Tengwar characters and spell out the word Arda, which in the stories was a name for the world and surrounding skies... thus implying that the barnstar is for work on articles related to Tolkien's world. --CBD 14:02, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support Great image, very relevant yet no CopyVios as said above. --WillMak050389 22:17, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support - Lovely award! ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 23:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
• Comment. The black background is very distracting, mind switching to white? Michaelas10 (Talk) 12:44, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

  Says the guy with a black background for his sig. :] --CBD 13:40, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

  I like the black background, since its a white and grey star. Gives the effect of light shining out from the darkness, or a star in the night sky - both apt Tolkein images. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 21:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

  Okay, how about

  

  

  this? I only changed the background with Microsoft Paint, so the border looks a bit messy, though. The black background is, as has been said, for contrast (otherwise the edges would be disappearing), and besides, Tolkien himself used silver/white-on black imagery. I think the original is more apt. For the record, I did the original with Microsoft PowerPoint, Print Screen, and Paint. Uthanc 00:44, 10 January 2007 (UTC) ‎

  Nah, the original is much better :-) ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 20:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

• Lovely! I love this award (the one currently displayed here - black background) The Barnstar of the Dúnedain is a wonderful idea.  :) --Tim4christ17 ^talk 08:53, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Support Okay by me as a WP Award. --evrik ^(talk) 20:19, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support - as WikiProject award. Badbilltucker 20:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support, but could we change the name to "The Barnstar of Eärendil"? Irongargoyle 22:31, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment:That I didn't think of... How about just calling it the "Tolkien Barnstar"? Then we'd be free to identify them with any name-associated star we prefer. Uthanc 08:57, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
• Does this image have a consensus? --evrik ^(talk) 22:10, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Looks like it. How do things work around this page anyway? Carcharoth 18:21, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. Maybe a "Barnstar" for those who have uploaded/converted a lot of bad jpg/gif/pngs to SVG? I for one have spent many a day on such an activity and I'm sure there are others like me. --Indolences 06:01, 31 January 2007 (UTC) Edit: The barnstar would of course be in SVG format.

• Oppose --evrik ^(talk) 22:45, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. I was interested in setting up a contest for the best pictures personally taken by wikipedia members that had been released into the public domain and added to important pages (such as core topics or featured articles) within a period of time (such as 2007). The winner would be selected by a panel of wikipedia individuals (perhaps administrators) that had some expertise in photography. The winner would be awarded a barnstar and given some amount of money (like $100 which I would put up). I was wondering if anybody had done anything like this and what the community thought about it. Remember 12:47, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

• We do have the pic of the day on the front page. Greeves ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:33, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose --evrik ^(talk) 22:45, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. This is an award for users who make outstanding contributions to articles covered by the college football wikiproject. See Template:College football barnstar.

Original image:

		The College football Barnstar
		message BigDT 23:56, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Alternate image:

		The College football Barnstar
		Image created by CJC47

If there is anyone out there who is more artistic than I, please feel free to be bold and improve the image. --BigDT 23:56, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

• Support - This is a good idea since our Wikiproject is pretty active. VegaDark 00:03, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support - active WikiProject deserving of a registered award. Johntex\^talk 03:17, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support Strongly. I know some people who deserve it. I think there could be a better image though. — Arjun 04:11, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support - It's a good way to reward the tireless effort of the WP:CFB General125 04:24, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support - Very good barnstar for the niche CJC47 15:31, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - I have added an alternate image that was proposed at the WP:CFB talk page. Please consider it as well. --BigDT 05:13, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support award, prefer alternate image. Badbilltucker 16:25, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose both due to designing issues. I would support the alternative version as a WikiProject award but just in case the football would be color-corrected. Michaelas10 (Talk) 11:37, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
• Neutral Support the concept as a WikiProject Award, don't like the design. --evrik ^(talk) 20:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
• Neutral per evrik. ← ANAS ^Talk? 12:30, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support - I like it Corpx 14:18, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
• Some work needs to be done on the image or one of the two will be placed on the PUA page and the proposal will be archived. --evrik ^(talk) 21:50, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. The Barnstar of Random Edits should become a barnstar because its not the same as the random acts of kindness barnstar, because this one deals with people that go to different pages, that are on different topics and contribute helpfully towards them.

This is one. This is the other. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zazzer (talk • contribs)

I don't know if this has been done yet but if not i support the concept. HOWEVER, the image definately needs work. Its great that you put effort into wikipedia and we love to see people contributing; however, barnstar images should be much more polished and refined than a mspaint program could do. I support the concept like i said, but OPPOSE this barnstar image. I believe that if you deny someone an addition to wikipedia you should do it yourself, if this barnstar concept is approved and you are unable to make a more professional image, i will attempt to do so myself. thuglas^talk|edits 20:12, 31 January 2007 (UTC) How about this one then, thuglas^talk|edits

• Oppose Poor image quality. I also don't think the idea is innovative enough to qulaify as a barnstar. Perhaps a PUA? --evrik ^(talk) 22:44, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose people who make contributions that are helpful in general usually receive the Original Barnstar.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 00:28, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. Neuroscience barnstar

Original: Neuro barnstar	Edit 1: Neuroscience barnstar	Edit 2: Neuroscience barnstar	Edit 3: Neuroscience barnstar
Edit 4: Neuroscience barnstar

I tried. I'm not too sure if i like it. if anyone wants me to modify it (colours, etc.) let me know - i couldn't find any. If there is already a neuroscience barnstar someone let me know. Looks better when its smaller, but im too tired to change it. thuglas^talk|edits 06:46, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar looks good, but what do you have to do to receive one? --AAA! ^(AAAA) 07:43, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Contribute to neuroscience or psychology/neuroscience articles. thuglas^talk|edits 14:04, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmm... my advice is to photoshop the original Barnstar and add the other effects on it aswell to give it that special look (As you can see with the other barnstars). --AAA! ^(AAAA) 22:04, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually I was thinking the exact same thing this morning, when i took a look at the purple heart barn star. I'll do that right away. thuglas^talk|edits 01:20, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I changed it to the original barn star, made it the proper size, made the dendrites and axons much more clear by adding some stroke stroke. Thanks for the feedback AAA, I would have given up on it, and now i really like it. thuglas^talk|edits 02:30, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Your welcome! Another piece of advice is you should upload it to Commons, so it can be used all around Wikimedia. And maybe make those sparks around the star blue like on the original one (I find that easier to see). Oh, and one more thing, Support. --AAA! ^(AAAA) 06:26, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

There. I'll re-size them if we figure out which one will be used. - im not really sure why my images are going into the other posts... if someone could help it would be great. thuglas^talk|edits 15:11, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

What I meant was, keep the Barnstar red, but make the sparks blue. Sorry for sounding like a bother. --AAA! ^(AAAA) 22:25, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I like, I like... --AAA! ^(AAAA) 23:46, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Alright, awesome... so how do i do this vote thing? noone seems to be helping but you haha.. thuglas^talk|edits 23:50, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I deny everything! Those members were already dead when I found them! --AAA! ^(AAAA) 23:52, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

haha so you're the culprit. im heading out ill frig around tomarrow or somethighn thuglas^talk|edits 10:54, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, being serious for a moment, all we can do is just wait for other people to take notice. That's how the voting thing works. --AAA! ^(AAAA) 00:02, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I like the red star color of #4, the dendrites and axons formatting and shapes of #3, with the blue color from #2. There, is that picky enough for you? :-) I just think the cyan color (the lighter blue of #4) gets a little lost. #2's color stands out the most boldly (though that might be because the star is darker color and that might get lost a bit against the brighter red in #4). I'm happy to offer my support once the criteria of the award is clarified a bit more. Who is giving this out and to whom? What are the requirements? Is this a topical Barnstar or a WikiProject one? Nice job. --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 01:43, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I dont really know what it should be i just made the star. I figure its just a way to show people who contribute to neuro articles some recognition. i dont know how much i can do about the colors, i could alter the color of #4's dendrites.... #3 actually has the same shaped neurons as #4 thuglas^talk|edits 13:38, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose This is already covered by the science star. Is this supposed to be a WikiProject Award? --evrik ^(talk) 22:40, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

• Its just a picture man ill make it whatever anyone wants it to be. thuglas^talk|edits 14:42, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Also, evrik - your opposition based on that premise is certainly flawed. If it was a valid point, any edit could be covered under the original barn star - people expand upon barn-stars to make a more suitable barn-star thuglas^talk|edits 14:30, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

• My point exactly, it is too specific and is already covered. If there is a wikiproject that wants to adopt it as their award, I have no problem with that. Also, this award does not have broad support. --evrik ^(talk) 16:02, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Since only two people support this award it should get archived soon. --evrik ^(talk) 16:04, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

New Discussion

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

• Could a more "star-like" shape be generated? Perhaps by using a full Shift-JIS character set? --tjstrf talk 23:47, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Done., but I'm not so sure about the Shift-JIS thing. I suggest you contact Tra, who did most of the work. Oh, and I made it brown to reflect the original Barnstar. --AAA! ^(AAAA) 00:05, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
• Support - I have created a different version of the barnstar, which reflects the original barnstar. Hpfan9374 02:00, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I prefer the original, as it is more clearer and has the hole in the middle. Good version, though... --AAA! ^(AAAA) 03:15, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I kinda like the 2nd one more, cuz it looks more like the original version. Dark Ermac 12:44, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I can't really see how it's like the original Barnstar. It's also a bit faint to see properly. --AAA! ^(AAAA) 13:07, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Like this:

  S
SSSSS
 SSS
S   S

In fact, I was originally going to use the '*' to make the text star, but it didn't turn out right.Dark Ermac 14:33, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

• • Oh right. But the star is actually supposed to reflect the original Barnstar, not the text star. *Sigh*, I need some milk... --AAA! ^(AAAA) 22:27, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
• Neutral I'm not really sure what this award is trying to accomplish or why it is different from exisiting awards. --evrik ^(talk) 22:37, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. The barnstar for this award implies (given that it prominently features the hammer and sickle) that ironfistedness and abusiveness is characteristic of Communism. From here, one can gather that the hammer and sickle are "symbols of the peasantry and the industrial proletariat; placing them together symbolises the unity between agricultural and industrial workers." I do not see how this relates to the "keen ability at offending or otherwise dominating vandals and trolls with an iron fist.". It is misleading and reflects poorly of the Wikipedia ethos of accuracy and informed learning. I propose that this barnstar be either be replaced or modified to incorporate a more appropriate design. AppleJuggler 15:31, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

• (Aside: "Abusive Admin" Award... surely a misnomer...?
  Also, from its accompanying explanation, "...can be awarded to admins who demonstrate a keen ability at offending ... vandals and trolls ...": While vandals and trolls not welcome, suggest offense an unsuitable (troll-like?) tool...?  Surprised to come by this Award, David Kernow (talk) 07:06, 18 November 2006 (UTC))

  I believe we have a rouge admin award... hammer and sickle is not exclusive to communism anyways. Communist china do not use it as a symbol today now do they? --Cat out 11:22, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

• Surely the key point is that the use of the hammer and sickle for this "award" is anachronistic, backhandedly offensive (what self-respecting admin would want to be awarded such a thing?) and weirdly specific in context (what does Soviet communism have to do with this?). Celebrating authoritarianism seems very counter to the wiki ethos, doesn't it? Pinkville 20:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

• I agree, it could be considered at least moderately offensive - and all of this "It doesn't represent communism" BS is ridiculous (if I put a swastika on a good award and argued that it's also considered to be a good thing all of you would be calling me out - same thing if a user called himself "Swastika"- but who actually uses this reward anyway?--Daniel()Folsom ^T|_C|^U 03:47, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

"To be awarded for continued drive and injection into automotive-related topics. The Steel Wheel Barnstar thanks those users who exhibit Valiant effort in assembling or restoring such articles!"

I didn't see a barnstar specifically dealing with automotive articles - that is - articles encompassing subjects specific to automotive design, history, vehicles, media, popular culture, etc.

If you've looked at any articles specifically dealing with cars and the like, you may notice that a lot of them are in disrepair; You may also notice that there are a great many dedicated Wikipedians whom have taken it upon themselves to invest the time and effort to create and restore said pages. How about it Wikipedia? Hows'about a Barnstar for us Gear, Machine, Motor and Petrolheads?! (unless one already exists! ^_^/*)

Your ideas/suggestions about this concept (alright! enough with the auto-puns!) and the attached image will be greatly appreciated! Hnatiw 06:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

• • This award was introduced on January 24, 2007 and was designed by Hnatiw^talk
    • On closer inspection, this award appears to exist under the monicker "Automotive Star", good stuff! Hnatiw 06:35, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Yours is nicer. SUPPORT. thuglas^talk|edits 15:15, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose --evrik ^(talk) 22:42, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

I started to think about this for a while. So, I created a barnstar that is awarded to people who make many edits to Disney articles or do outstanding on the ride quiz. The name it gets is from Figment, the purple dragon star of the Journey Into Imagination rides (aside from Journey Into YOUR Imagination.). It's not totally flawless; Figment's left hand should be completely erased. However, it is accompanied by a sightly black etching on where it's supposed to be. 01kkk 22:36, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

• There may be copyright issues with this award ... --evrik ^(talk) 16:08, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
  • The image just went bye -bye. --evrik ^(talk) 20:51, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Proposal A

Proposal B

Proposal C

I have found several other portal barnstars such as Portal:Star Wars, Portal:World of Warcraft, Portal:Pokemon, therefore the creation of a Portal:Harry Potter Barnstar, should be made. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hpfan9374 (talk • contribs)

• • Support as a PUA. I was all for this as a WikiProject award but the designing seriously needs work. Michaelas10 (Talk) 09:45, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

• • That's fine, I just didn't have any idea.. or what could represent Harry Potter, a wizard hat, a scar, a wand, a time turner. But, sure, what do you propose the Portal:Harry Potter Barnstar include, as I am very interested with these barnstars..? - 19:32, December 22, 2006 - —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hpfan9374 (talk • contribs)

Would there be any way to use just the lightning-bolt scar image, maybe by placing it down the center of the barnstar? Badbilltucker 19:05, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Good Idea. We could simply use the original barnstar, and place a lightning bolt scar in the centre.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hpfan9374 (talk • contribs)

• How about something like Barnstar B?--theblueflamingo^Speak 08:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

• • Well I like Barnstar B, though I don't think it follows the 'barnstar design.' I think we need a barnstar for this WikiProject, although I am uncertain of the creation of a graphic. The Original Barnstar, with a lightning-bolt scar..? Hpfan9374 10:49, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

• • • I have now included a third proposal graphic, though I would like to make the scar bigger, and in the center of the barnstar. Hpfan9374 ^{( u t c w a g c s c r)}

• Oppose The images here need a lot of work. --evrik ^(talk) 20:38, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

• Neutral Designs need a lot of work, but I support this as a WikiProject award. ← ANAS ^Talk? 12:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

• Comment - I agree with both, evrik and Anas Salloum, they do need work, so we should discuss the colors, should it be the same color as The Original Barnstar award? And, then I can simply lay a lightning-bolt scar in the center of the new-color barnstar? - What are you thoughts on the design, they are now simply there as a promotional image, we need to create other designs, colors and variations of the barnstar. Hpfan9374 ^{(utcwagcscr - sguwwtwssuq)}
• This proposal needs to develop or it will be archived. --evrik ^(talk) 21:46, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Okay, thanks evrik, I will get right away to creating a good proposal. Thanks. Hpfan9374 06:26, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
    • This proposal needs to move forward.--evrik ^(talk) 16:40, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
• Most stern oppose for Barnstar, feel free to use it for wikiproject or PUA.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  01:30, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. Hi, I'd like to propose a barnstar for WikiProject Gender Studies as a Wikiproject award. The text along side would read: For editors who make significant contributions to gender studies articles that expand Wikipedia’s knowledge about gender, gender theory, feminisms, masculinities and/or sexuality studies.--Cailil 02:01, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

• Support. thuglas^talk|edits 04:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
• Suspect sexuality studies could probably be covered by the LGBT Barnstar, but Support for the rest. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 11:35, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support as WikiProject Award. --evrik ^(talk) 22:54, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support - the Wikiproject is broad enough and the design of the star isn't half bad. So I would support this as a Wikiproject Award.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 00:30, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support Is there any other colour instead of purple? -- Szvest - ^{Wiki me up ®} 14:03, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Comment We've used purple for other templates and I thought it best to keep some graphics harmony. I'm open to any suggestions though.
• Support. Good idea, nice design. --Candy-Panda 04:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support. Gender studies isn't necessarily the same as LGBT. Durova^Charge! 04:30, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support --South Philly 13:46, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support--Hu12 21:37, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support - Aleta 20:42, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  01:29, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

		The Martial Arts Star

A lot of work is going on at the martial arts related wiki's these days and especially some people put in a lot of effort. I think a barnstar would be apprioriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kbarends (talk • contribs) 03:37, 8 February 2007

• Support. Awesome idea, the design is pretty cool too. --Candy-Panda 04:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
• Comment I would oppose this as a barnstar. Is there a wikiproject it could be used for? --evrik ^(talk) 14:15, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
• If there is no support, this should just be a PUA. --evrik ^(talk) 16:45, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Agreed.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  01:28, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

		The Non-Copy Violation Barnstar
		The Non-Copyright Violation Barnstar is awarded to users who stop copyright violations.

I thought this would be a great barnstar. - Patricknoddy 20:46, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

• Comment This is not a star. We have awards that cover this area. --evrik ^(talk) 20:51, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose per evrik (picture) but what awards covers dealing with copyvios?-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  01:26, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. Image:Dented Barnstar.png

For well-intentioned edits that unfortunately left some need of cleanup, but still deserve recognition for the amount of work put into it. The "'A' for Effort" barnstar. This image can be considered a mockup, it still needs transparency at the very least. --Random832(tc) 14:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC) I thought of this after seeing User:Γνώθι Σεαυτόν's efforts to properly sort the categories of by-year pages.

• Oppose This backhanded compliment does not promote wikilove. --evrik ^(talk) 18:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
  • How is it a "backhanded compliment"? AGF. The point is to award effort even when the results didn't work out. All the other awards are for results; people who put lots of work in for something that doesn't turn out right get no recognition. --Random832(tc) 14:41, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
• There are plenty of awards that can be used to award people - whether or not the results work out. I don't see a lot of support for the idea. --evrik ^(talk) 20:09, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose Agree with Evrik (for a change). Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:39, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose The purpose of all Wikipedia is to create edits that aren't in need of cleaning up, and, if they do, to not put the blame on people. 01kkk 15:36, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose This is subtly insulting. While someone who cleans up mediocre edits deserves a reward, users who need to be followed around with a mop do not deserve rewards. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 01:44, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose a bit bite-ish in my opinion, especially if it is ever awarded to a new user. Somehow the compliment may come off a bit rude by telling the user "the edit you left needs some major cleanup and improvement but good show for making it anyway." There are plenty of barnstars which could merit the compliment better.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 01:48, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose - this would be insulting. Aleta 20:43, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose per above.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  01:25, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

		Sherlock Holmes deductive reasoning award
		I hereby award User:Durova with the Sherlock Holmes deductive reasoning award in the Case of the Complex Vandalism at Joan of Arc. WAS 4.250 00:25, 6 December 2006 (UTC)]]

From User:Durova/Complex vandalism at Joan of Arc, an unofficial award that got made up and given to me after I sleuthed down one of Wikipedia's long term vandals. Seems like a good idea. How about making this a regular site award for investigative work? Durova^Charge! 04:28, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

• There are already two barnstars for fighting vandalism. --evrik ^(talk) 16:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

To expand a bit. There are cases where considerably more effort goes in an investigation by an editor, beyond the normal scope of what traditionaly is seen. Complex Vandalism, can span over months or years may and require days or even weeks to uncover entirely the scope of the dammage done to Wikipedia by an vandal. I think its worth considering, because most of this type of investigative work goes mostly unoticed or recognized, as the bulk of the effort goes into reading through hundreds of articles, doing research, screening ect.--Hu12 20:34, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose as barnstar, support as PUA.--evrik ^(talk) 21:15, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Comment I'm thinking of this as a PUA. To give an example of the sort of investigation this would recognize, see this discussion. This would thank editors for solving cases that require old fashioned gumshoe detective work. Durova^Charge! 21:37, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
• If it is a PUA, just go ahead and slap it up on that page and archiove this proposal. --evrik ^(talk) 21:47, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
• Agree with evrik.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  01:26, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
• I say we put it here Wikipedia:Personal user awards/Special Circumstance. --evrik ^(talk) 04:58, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
• Comment Perhaps I am wrong, but isn't something like "Case of the Complex Vandalism at Joan of Arc" actually based in inductive reasoning? After all, "Deductive reasoning is the kind of reasoning in which the conclusion is necessitated by, or reached from, previously known facts..." Similarities in editing patters are not technically valid premises for a deductive argument. Dar-Ape 20:09, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

I have a proposal to add the "Barnstar" Personal User Award. This is an award for users who have given out so many barnstars and other awards to users. I came up with the idea after I awarded Persian Poet Gal a barnstar. I like awarding barnstars to users (of course, I don't hand barnstars out as though they were candy), and think that users who have given out several awards should be given this award.

However, I am concerned about uploading the image I have created. The award is made up of six barnstars integrated into one, and I am worried about any violations if I upload this image. If people want to see the image anyway, I will upload it: I'm just concerned that's all. Despite the fact that the award is made up of six barnstars, it does look like a completely new image. I worked hard on the image, and I don't really want to see it wasted.

I think this award is a good idea. It promotes WikiCivility, and users who have given out many barnstars but received very little or none would get an award. However, this award should not be used as an excuse for a user to give awards out to anyone. :) Acalamari 19:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Is it like this award from the PUA page?

• Oooohhhh, I didn't realize there was already one! No, my award looks much different to that: mine has many more colors (no insult to the creator of that barnstar). Acalamari 20:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
• Do you want me to upload the image anyway? Acalamari 20:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
• It's up to you. --evrik ^(talk) 20:25, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

		The "Barnstar" Personal Award Star
		This is the award. This is how it would look in one of these rectangles. Acalamari 22:32, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I like the image, don't worry about using the other images, just link to the ones you used on the image page. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 23:04, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll do that soon. Just what do we do about the award itself? Acalamari 23:26, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

• Support it has grounds enough for a PUA.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 23:26, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

• Question Is "The Barnstar Star" for people who create awards? In other words, is that award for people who suggest new types of awards? My proposed award is for users who actually give awards to other users. Acalamari 23:34, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
• An award for people who give awards? I'd have to say that we have plenty of existing awards for that. --evrik ^(talk) 16:47, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I didn't know that, but as I said, I don't want my image to be wasted. Surely there's something we can do with it? Anyway, from what I've seen, this actual award that I'm proposing doesn't exist. Acalamari 21:47, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

• It looks alot like an exiisting award, Image:Olympicstar4.png. --evrik ^(talk) 04:35, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

• I object to that statement, Evrik: I didn't know that star existed either. I thought I was being creative by using different existing stars to create a new one. Acalamari 17:35, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

• What we need, surely, is an award for people who create awards for giving people awards, no? You'd be first in line for that one – Qxz 05:17, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

• That is a good idea. However, I think one already exists for that. Acalamari 17:35, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
• In fact, the first star Evrik mentioned, the "The Barnstar Star." I believe that is the one that users get if they create awards. Acalamari 17:41, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

{{subst:The Editor's Barnstar|message ~~~~}}

The Editor's Barnstar Occasionally known as the Deletionists' Barnstar. Sometimes, text removal is the most effective editing. This barnstar is awarded to individuals that display particularly fine deletions, omissions, reductions, reversions, blocks, bans, and other removals. This barnstar was introduced by Guanaco on June 18, 2004.

Proposed new text: "... editing and is awarded for excellence in copyediting."

For a long time I have felt that this barnstar didn't necessarily promote all the virtues of wikilove. I think that it also was very close in nature to The_RickK_Anti-Vandalism_Barnstar and The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar. Finally, there is no really good award for copyediting. As such, I propose we keep the name, but edit the description. Thoughts?

• Support --evrik ^(talk) 05:22, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose - This star has an established basis for awarding. Leave that as is and let the proposed new copyediting star fill the role for which it was created. --Aleta 05:46, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
• Misatribution Me designed The Editor's Barnstar? No, this homange should go to the other. I imported this to the Japanese Wikipedia community under the name of "tirelessly working editor's burnstar" and then uploaded to the Commons but it was from the English Wikipedia. I think I put the information about the original author on Commons description page. I feel sorry for him or her ... --Aphaia 05:34, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I will remove the text! --evrik ^(talk) 06:01, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - The responses in the first round of discussion for the Copyeditor's Barnstar (or Award, whatever we decide) were pretty solidly in the camp that there should be two awards - one for general editing and a different one for copyediting. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 06:11, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Yes, but many of the stars here can be gioven for general editing. Why don't you write a new description for copyediting? --evrik ^(talk) 14:14, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
    • I did. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 03:24, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
• There are many awards for different types of editing. Actually most evry thing on wikipedia is editing. This should really be for copyediting. --evrik ^(talk) 23:38, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support; this barnstar at the moment also appears to encourage taking large chunks out of articles without discussion on the talk pages, while blocks and bans should be covered by the anti-vandalism star. Laïka 11:35, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

• Support - if Wikipedia wants to have a deletionist barnstar then they should have it - but this barnstar (as titled) is the editor's barnstar - and it wrongly suggest that editors should just delete things, when in fact there is another aspect to editting that is just as important to Wikipedia - adding information (you add information to improve/clarify the article therefore it is editting - someone raised that point with me in an earlier discussion and I just want to make sure there's no question here). I really think that this change has to be made.Daniel()Folsom |\^T/|\_C/|\^U/ 15:17, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
• There has only one vote opposing this ... I'd like to speedy the proposal. --evrik ^(talk) 21:23, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

  Comment - There was only one oppose vote (yours) for the proposed new Copyeditor's Barnstar, which had more support than this, and rather than speedy it you archived it and declared it dead. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 03:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose. This is not the "copyeditor's barnstar". Feel free to propose such a thing. This barnstar was specifically designed to recognise deletions that are necessary and beneficial to the encyclopedia. These actions are worthy of separate recognition and it should continue to be awarded for such. WjBscribe 19:39, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
  • What exactly is a deletion? How is it different from editing? How does it promotoe wikilove? --evrik ^(talk) 19:52, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
    • How do anti-vandalism actions promote Wikilove? There's a barnstar for those... There is no requirement that barnstars promote Wikilove! Barnstars are to reward actions that are beneficial to the project. The "Editor's barnstar" in its present form does just that. WjBscribe 21:47, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
      • There is a proposal on the table for a Copyeditor's Barnstar. It received strong support in both the League of Copyeditors and its first round of proposal. Discussion is continuing about which design to use, and even though it hasn't been approved yet, I've discovered that some users have gone ahead and started awarding it. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 03:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose - I feel this Barnstar should be for general editing. As noted in my comment above, discussion around the proposed Copyeditor's Barnstar has been that there be seperate awards for general editing and copyediting. Therefore, I propose this wording for the General, "Editor's Barnstar"

Proposed New Text: "The Editor's Barnstar is awarded to individuals who display particularly fine decisions in general editing."

Or I'd be ok with leaving this barnstar the way it is. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 03:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

• Comment I'm okay with that text. --evrik ^(talk) 18:33, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it.

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

		The Commons Ambassador Barnstar
		The Commons Ambassador Barnstar is awarded to users who make exceptional contributions to the synergistic relationship of .en Wikipedia with Wikimedia Commons. For instance, searching through Commons to find suitable pictures to add to .en Wikipedia. Or finding free-use images on .en Wikipedia and moving them to Commons.

I don't know if anything exists like this already, and my minor amount of digging into the subject returned nothing.What I propose is a Wikimedia Commons Barnstar that would be given out to users who provide an exceptional amount of content for Commons.

I'm not sure what other people think about this; I'm just throwing it out there. How about it? Smomo 22:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

---

• ...Why isn't this proposed on the Commons? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 11:27, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
• Comment Maybe you could tailor the proposal to fit a group that does work here on the english wiki for the commons? --evrik ^(talk) 16:53, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
• Question Where would I propose this on Commons? evrik, I like your idea, and as I understand it you are a member of the only (as far as I can tell) group to be dedicated to Commons on wikipedia, do you know anymore groups? Or should we propose it for your group? Smomo 21:26, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Answer Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons, Wikipedia:WikiProject Moving free images to Wikimedia Commons. --evrik ^(talk) 16:26, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Question Don't you think it would be better to have this as a general barnstar, as not very many people would be able to take advantage of it if it was just for that group? Smomo 22:05, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Yes. --evrik ^(talk) 22:16, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
• So how do we make it an 'official' star? I'm sorry, I really don't know what I'm meant to be doing with this :S Smomo 11:07, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
  • build support for it, though I don't really see it. --evrik ^(talk) 16:04, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support - I suggest that the award be given on the .en Wikipedia for contributions reltated to both Commons and .en. For instance - taking an existing eligible .en image and moving it to Commons, or adding images to Commons AND working them into .en articles. It would be helpful in raising the profile of contributing to Commons. Johntex\^talk 20:18, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support: Its a good idea, a lot of users do a lot of work for commons that never really gets acknowledged much in Wikipedia but, nonetheless, contributes significantly to the project.A mcmurray 21:16, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  • If you like the commons star I would suggest writing a better definition, perhaps tie it to a WikiProject and improve the image. It also needs more support. --evrik ^(talk) 20:24, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
• Conditional support per evrik. Advertise on commons if it hasn't been already...-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  01:27, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - OK, I re-wrote the description to align with this new thinking. Johntex\^talk 05:08, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support per discussion and new description - could be a good motivator. Aleta 05:12, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
• Conditional support I think we need to see an outpouring of support on this one. --evrik ^(talk) 14:54, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
• Comment: Is the foundation aware of the use of the copyrighted wikimedia commons logo? Bryan 17:37, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I have left messages for Jimbo, Danny, and Brad. If the Foundation objects, I'm sure one of them will let us know and we can redesign the image. I have also left notices concerning this discussion at the Village Pump and at the Commons Village Pump, as well as at a few relevant WikiProjects. Johntex\^talk 17:55, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I note its use in a userbox. Has this issue been addressed before?A mcmurray 17:58, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

• Comment -- great idea, but isn't it a little odd to be using a non-free image for this? Jkelly 18:13, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it is any odder than the very idea that the Commons logo is non-free to begin with. As I mention above, the foundation has been notified so if they tell us to switch the image we will certainly do so. Johntex\^talk 18:34, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. Jkelly 18:38, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

If the foundation is happy with i, I am glad to see a Commons barnstar. But only if it is in some higher quality than this one. Bryan 19:00, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I am happy with the current image myself, but I have posted a request to Wikipedia talk:Graphic Lab to see if someone can improve upon this image. Johntex\^talk 19:04, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

• Today is the two-week mark. I say we leave it up until next week to see iof there is any major opposition. One question, what kind of Barnstar is this, or is it a WikiProject Award? --evrik ^(talk) 18:46, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

That sounds good. That will allow time to ensure the image is OK. If no major opposition arises, then this should go in Wikipedia:Barnstars#General_barnstars. It is analogous to The Rosetta Barnstar and The Rosetta Barnstar, both of which are giving for a particular type of tireless work (translation and technical work, respectively) for the benefit of the whole of Wikipedia. Johntex\^talk 19:00, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you meant the second "Rosetta" to be, but it should presumably be some other award. :) Aleta 00:18, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

• Support. I love the idea of this and I hope that seeing this barnstar on other people's pages will inspire more people to do cross-wiki work. The image needs improvement though. I suspect that a thin white border around the commons logo will make it stand out enough against the star. The problem right now is that it's too dark where they overlap; people unfamiliar with the commons logo won't even be able to pick out the image. — coelacan talk — 20:32, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
• Comment. I would prefer a name like "Commons Ambassador Barnstar", something that would make the co-development aspect clearer.--Pharos 21:32, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Good idea! I like that name. Aleta 00:16, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
    • Yes, I like it too. I have changed the name. Johntex\^talk 22:06, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

This new Barnstar for contributing usable images to the Commons is a fine idea. When I look at images in the Commons there is not much there. S. M. Sullivan 00:04, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

• Support Of course I'm biased having found and uploaded over 140 images to Commons. Quadzilla99 13:44, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Someone suggested to me (Johntex) that the logo needed a white border to make the logo stand out a bit more... I have done this and put in a box below so you can all see what it looks like. The colour and opacity of the border can be changed, if necessary. Smomo 18:12, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

		The Commons Ambassador Barnstar
		The Commons Ambassador Barnstar is awarded to users who make exceptional contributions to the synergistic relationship of .en Wikipedia with Wikimedia Commons. For instance, searching through Commons to find suitable pictures to add to .en Wikipedia. Or finding free-use images on .en Wikipedia and moving them to Commons.

• There has been no opposition to this idea. What is needed now is a clear consensu about which image is desired ... --evrik ^(talk) 14:58, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

• I could accept either, but I like the second image (with the white border) better. Johntex\^talk 08:01, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

• support --South Philly 02:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
• Support Second version (white border) ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 10:12, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
• Comment I prefer the second. Aleta 02:12, 2 March 2007 (UTC)