Wikipedia

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikipedia Awards/Archive 20

< Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikipedia Awards
Latest comment: 12 years ago by Mabdul in topic Barnstars 2.0
Archive 15←Archive 18Archive 19Archive 20Archive 21Archive 22→Archive 25

Barnstars of National Merit templates

Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

There appears to be a number of duplications of barnstar awards at Category:Barnstars of National Merit templates. Could someone please review and merge identical awards. Regards Newm30 (talk) 00:06, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

This is because the original versions and the 2.0 versions are currently separated (in different templates, and listed on different pages). However, merge of the list pages should be underway sometime (see #new proposals), at which point i would suggest merging the templates as well (using the |alt= parameter, like the other barnstars use). Thanks for pointing this out though, benzband (talk) 11:12, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

2 new proposals

Latest comment: 12 years ago18 comments7 people in discussion

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

Possibly this section isn't precisely identical to the one above that was closed in the same way. Just let it die of old age with a long beard and false teeth, please ? Penyulap ☏ 13:24, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

 
You should comment on this proposal / give a Barnstar / eat more fibre / Meh, whatever.
proposal 1 amendment, can we include the pic with a caption that the barnstar is an american invention ? we could be cheeky and say uncle sam is a barnstar man, after all, barnstars are about fun and lighthearted recognition of each others work, so a smile won't go astray.

Hi, two things, there is this uncle sam the barnstar man, and I'd like to know does anyone object to him going in, like "You should give someone a barnstar today" or "you need a barnstar" or whatever you guys come up with, whatever. I just worry if there are objections on WP:Bias that people feel aren't overridden by humor, or if anyone considers it offensive.

[[:File:Penyulap all-stars.gif|thumb|left|120px|link=http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Penyulap/Barnstars%7CA curated visual gallery of Wikipedia Barnstars
proposal 2]] There is also a visual gallery, like a short-cut short-circuit to finding a not crap barnstar in a hurry, it is on commons, but can be curated as it's in userspace, please go ahead and add or subtract from it everyone, it's multi-lingual, so everyone can enjoy / use it. It's here so the little pic might be useful towards the top of the page so that people who want to do a visual search can do so in a hurry. Penyulap ☏ 07:13, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

  • My only concern is that it is a purely Western-American image, even the flashing colors are that of the flag. Are people in UK, Canada, Australia of wherever really moved by it? Although I suppose the whole concept of "barnstar" is originally American. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 10:56, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 
I'll not be animated ! it is the work of the devil I tell you !
    • Perhaps someone should find a free image of Jimbo pointing in a similar style, or Wiki-tan (or whatever they call that thing)}. I do have a problem with the inherently pro-American message of it. Johnny Canuck and John Bull can point just as easily, y'know. Achowat (talk) 12:14, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

100px|left|thumb|I'm lost for words on this proposalCertainly it is unspeakably American, but the humor of it is priceless I think. The policy I quote the most of all is anglo-american focus, it's part of the NPOV FAQ. But this uncle sam has a barnstar on his hat already, when I noticed that, I was sold, and knew he'd turn up in the project over and over again because of it. (both the in-your-face attitude and the barnstar hat, I mean Americans who see this will never look at uncle same in real life, they'll be in the bus or on the street and will see him and be thinking 'that is a barnstar on his hat') This is probably not the image to hate as it will inevitably turn up everywhere, but I agree this may well not be the place. I found John Bull pointing, but I haven't found Johnny Canuck pointing, does he? Penyulap ☏

  • Oppose they are animated and blinky. :( mabdul 12:36, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
    • That is quite true, I was trying to impress the number of barnstars in the visual gallery without taking up much space on the page, so I did go far too Las-Vegas with it. I expect a slower, smoother transition would lose the effect, but not emphasize the numbers. Maybe just a few slow morphish type transitions and a written tally would be much better ? I agree that it is too flashy. It disrupts the feel of the page. I'll change it to something else. Do you think that a slow muted anim is ok, or would a picture with a lot of tiny stars in it be a better proposal (I'm not asking if you want it on the page, just if you think it would be a better proposal to make). Penyulap ☏ 07:08, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
    • Here is an image I hope will be less offensive.

inserted proposal 3 (something along these lines, appropriately cropped to fit the page in a pleasing manner)

 
 

(new) proposal 3, something along these lines might not be as visually offensive, but still lets visual-oriented editors know what is going on, where to find what they are looking for in a hurry without the problems associated with cat searching comms. Penyulap ☏

  • It isn't that many would be offended by either Uncle Sam or indeed John Bull, it's just that this is a global project which started in the US; So we are consciously trying to globalise things and not make it seem like a US project where Uncle Sam is an appropriate image. The galleries could be useful for those who prefer a visual lookup, but would they be easily maintainable? ϢereSpielChequers 21:10, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Can I ask a favor ? can you give me feedback on the current state of the gallery. This is the link. Do you think it'd be an idea to cover the awards given in other parts of the 'wik on the barnstar page ? Outline what is given where and why sort of thing ? I don't think either of the guys are seriously offensive either. I popped them into waste of time, that page needs a lot of work. Penyulap ☏
Personally I probably wouldn't use it, but that doesn't matter, the question is whether some editors would use that either because they vaguely remembered a particular barnstar and wanted a quick way to find it, or they wanted to pick barnstars based on their look. As for associating Wikipedia with particular national icons, it isn't a matter of how offensive an image is, its the idea of hijacking Wikipedia for one country. So either icon would be OK for a Barnstar associated with that country, but not a general barnstar. There is a Wikiproject USA and if they want Uncle Sam in their barnstar then good luck to them. ϢereSpielChequers 09:59, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
About the gallery being easy to maintain, I had kind of wanted to know if you'd answer that question by yourself by looking at the gallery itself, down the bottom of the gallery is a visual 'FAQ' that says 'you can add barnstars' to the gallery. That is why I had answered your question with a request, sorry about that. The answer is that anyone can assist (although it might be more helpful if it says that in words, for text oriented editors). I realized it helpful myself, as searching through the cats on comms is omg terrible, there are just so many, and a great portion are simple one image placed over a standard barnstar. They do the job they are meant to, are easy to make, and so why search for them, as the artist can make on in a split second. What the gallery is for is to find the hard to find ones that stand out, took a lot more time or skill to make, are inspiring muses and suggest new tangents to follow. There are _just so many_ that get in your way when you go searching. Naturally people will add junk, but who cares ? not me, it's easy to scroll past, and a year or two later an editor with an eye for it may well spruce things up, or substitute their own gallery, it's all good.

I'm looking at a "could be useful"(ϢereSpielChequers) as well as "Personally I probably wouldn't use it, but that doesn't matter", and a "not sure"(extra999) sort of response here, which is cool. If there are no major objections (and please say if there are) I'd like to trial it on the page, to see if it is simply uncontroversial, or if someone notices it there and feels like it's a bad idea, then I'll know it's a total flop. Also, if it's not a bother, I'd love to get some feedback if I do put it in (provided there are no objections) because I don't want it sticking out, or disrupting the look of the page, or getting in the way. I'd much rather get a few comments like "it sucks in that position", "too big", "too small" sort of thing so I can fix it up. Mabdul, you're best at spotting the stuff that is too flashy, are the little stars   in the pic ok ? I suspect they are kindof subdued. I'll try to think of a way to work in a cropped portion of the not very animated prop 3 kind of pic, I'll try in like a few days, so long as nobody thinks that's a really bad idea. Penyulap ☏ 21:34, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to be dismissive again, but sounds a little like fait acompli in works. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 21:44, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
How can you say that when you yourself had no opinion on the gallery link, and nobody seems too fussed about that one. Uncle Sam the barnstar man is ironically headed to the department of fun rather than the barnstar page (whatever), and the first suggestion IS too Las Vegas. At least some people grasp the concept of visual based searching and searchers versus text based searching and editors, and can see the value. But I'd sooner not bother here and do some work someplace else than be made to feel unwelcome. If everyone thinks the page is now at it's epitome, then let's leave it as such. Penyulap ☏ 00:41, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm sorry that you feel that way and took my comment the wrong way. But you are trying to place this onto the main page before consensus and basically saying "I'll put this onto the main page and hope no one reverts". If I had reverted, would you be OK with that? You said you would be, but the way you overreacted about my simple observation suggests otherwise. I haven't seen a version of now 3 proposals that would really help without cluttering the main page. An animated .gif isn't that helpful because you can't click individual stars, and country specific idols aren't good for reasons listed before. I don't mind there being another subpage that looks like commons:User:Penyulap/Barnstars, where one could quickly find an award visually; but that has almost nothing to do with the main page and I never said I oppose that. I actually support that idea and endorse that you make it so. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 09:04, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
Well that's not quite it, Yes of course I am half way trying to pop it on before wide consensus, as I certainly am bold, but that's not it either, I'm taking in and changing the proposal and the work itself as I go to improve it, that is quite obvious from the additional image and v.small animation that I made. I want something that everyone is quite satisfied and happy with and is helpful to everyone. Still, bold creative people are often mistaken for naughty people, especially where there is no AGF. Don't take that the wrong way, I like and take on board your ideas, but you have to see that I am not shoving something in here, I'm pouring water so it soaks through the feedback and becomes something better. Seriously I think you should all take advantage of the opportunity to make wishes while I am here, cause I'm not a bad artist and have some technical abilities. If you come up with a good idea in 6 months it may well be too late because the opportunity is long gone. So I think you should take a look at the page and start making wishes. Unless of course you take the dreary outlook that there is no room for improvement until the end of time. sigh. Penyulap ☏ 11:21, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
@Penyulap: no that four small animated stars are ok. That reminds me turning animated images off again ^^, but I still don't understand the reason to create such a "mass image" containing so many barnstars... mabdul 13:56, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
 
The is the small portion of the good stuff that we can get at with this temporary measure (sorry about the messy, hasty, diagram)

Thank you for being on board with that, but thank you for pointing it out in the first place, that first anim I did was horrible. The collaboration makes it SO much better.

Sorry about the pic which has been done in such haste. It's a bit of a 'paper napkin at the cafe' diagram. And no the irony of explaining visually is not lost on me :) but I counter the argument with "I'm not talking to idiots" and you guys get what I'm saying I am sure, not that you agree, but you do understand.

Well the page is set up for 'readers', people who choose according to 'what the barnstar is intended for' which is written beside the barnstar in a box. This is all cool. Especially for readers, then they know which one is appropriate. There are other kinds of editors as well, visually based searchers who choose according to the visual elements and visual message of the barnstar, and maybe make barnstars, or adapt barnstars.

So those artists are right now not really able to search commons for all the good stuff. In a way we can search this page for the 'good stuff' that text-based and visually-based readers have agreed on, or there is the frustration of searching Category:barnstars on commons, or other methods, but how do you search for the good stuff, there is no category for crap or not crap, and it's just as well, as it's a person to person subjective thing. It's like I made a barnstar so I figure, yeah it's great, and for me it is. (not talking about me here, I don't even put my own barnstars that I've made into my own gallery. 'I' is just general).

But how does an English speaker search for the 'good stuff' on french wikipedia ? Their gallery would be the same as this one, judged by text descriptions as well as visually. So you miss out on good french works you can adapt for use here, because you can't search for it visually.

 
I still say it's the work of the devil.

So the Visual gallery transcends language and just goes for visual appeal, allowing us to exchange with the German, French, Spanish-speaking, Russian, and so on editors. There is no category on commons for this, but I see there is a use for it for me, and I think it's possible other editors might find it useful as well. There is a lot of good stuff out there that is not on this page :) let's not miss out. If there were 5 fantastic looking barnstars that never made it onto the french page because they were all for a french award category that already had a barnstar, how could we possibly find them ? I have no idea, and I am a pretty good searcher for images, so if I can't do it, I feel other people may struggle at the task. That would be a shame.

The gallery is no good on here as a subpage of barnstars, as other language editors cannot use it or add their best work to it. So you get the same fragmentation. We would create language barriers in an area where language is truely irrelevant. Has to be on commons, and I figure link from each language with docs on the local page, so I figure the caption for the link would have a link to a documentation sub page here. I don't know if we can transclude out of commons just yet, so I guess the way I am proposing is rough for sure, but it's a good temporary measure. Penyulap ☏

Of note (at least to me) is that both "galleries" include Barnstars that failed to gain consensus. Achowat (talk) 16:16, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
The proposed "Visual Gallery" provides a solution the same as the userboxes, they simply go into userspace to avoid the need for consensus. Penyulap ☏
Just a stupid question: why do we have Commons:Barnstar and Commons:Category:High-resolution barnstars? Isn't that exactly what you want to create? mabdul 17:42, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
The only stupid questions are those that go un-asked.
The problem is   and   and   and   and   and   and    
The gallery avoids repetition (read mind-numbing boredom to a visual-oriented editor) because technically it's curated, if of course the quality of the curating deteriorates, the link loses the consensus, same as userboxes. I'm not suggesting that I'll be throwing out anyones work, it makes no difference if there are a few extra that get in there and stay for a year or two, until someone, possibly not even me, cleans up. Sure I'll do it, sure I'll assist editors in balancing the need for good quality against the need not to wp:bite, but generally if you build it they will come. I expect it will take a while until there is much interest, maybe I can spice it up with 'wings' of the gallery. They'll showcase other things like userboxes. Although I am certain that almost none of my own barnstars are up to scratch, some of my userboxes will certainly make it into a different wing of the gallery. Like this one.
 TrainsSmokeSteam engineTenderCoachesBandits
 

That one has had quite positive reception, I think it would make it. (getting off topic, but some others which suck, and a few that might not are here I'd like to know what you think of them on my tp) if you care to comment (it's off topic here)Penyulap ☏


barnstars from ip addresses?

Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

this ip address is giving out barnstars, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/66.87.4.17 does that make sense? people can then give themselves barnstars. what is the point then? thanks, James Michael DuPont (talk) 08:58, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:ANI#IP range from Wichita spamming Talk pages with illogical barnstars and creating other vandalism.. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 09:24, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
Yes, you can't give flowers to yourself, but then again, I guess some people do. Anyhow, when someone went giving out flowers to all the strangers he/she passed on the road, the ANI crowd didn't know what to make of it, and started to vote on banning him/her. Luckily someone stepped in and quenched that before it got out of hand, but there is a solution to that particular case written in there if you care to look. Penyulap ☏ 21:31, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikiproject MonmouthpediA Barnstar

Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
 

Lots of people are doing amazing work on MonmouthpediA, many people are writing a substantial amount of articles, would really like to have a barnstar associated with the project. Mrjohncummings (talk) 21:13, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

You'll see no objection from me. Would we list this as a WikiProject Award...or where? I think it should be listed, just no where seems to make sense. Achowat (talk) 17:43, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
I'd say Awards by WikiProject as it can be associated with the MonmouthpediA [sub]project and part of the broader GLAM project. — Preceding unsigned comment added by benzband (talk • contribs)
Yes this seems the most sensible place to put it, thanks. Mrjohncummings (talk) 19:55, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

The OPSEK Barnstar

Latest comment: 12 years ago7 comments4 people in discussion

This barnstar is proposed now and may be commissioned in the 2020s. I don't know to design, so I need a editor. Can we make an OPSEK barnstar?These may be awarded to those editor who have made appreciable contributions to the OPSEK article in wikipedia.Mir Almaat Ali Almaat ☏ 06:26, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for the Orbital Piloted Assembly and Experiment Complex?
I doubt that an award for a specific article warrants it's place at Wikipedia:Barnstars as it's too restrictive so maybe a spaceflight or spacestation-specific award might be more appropriate (however it can always be created as a personal award). Note that there's already {{The Space Barnstar}}, and that WikiProject Spaceflight could be a relevant place to bring this up too.
As for the 2020s "commissioning", that sounds pretty crystal ball-ish. Who knows where Wikipedia, or even yourself, may be in 8 years time? benzband (talk) 10:18, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Ditto above. This is basically too specific of a topic for a main-page barnstar. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 10:21, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

I'll be 27.Mir Almaat Ali Almaat ☏ 10:29, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

What i meant was you may not be editing Wikipedia anymore. benzband (talk) 10:41, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
off-topic but opsek is in orbit now, being constructed, sortof like on that new star-trek movie redo of the old story, the one where they are building federation ships or commissioning them in orbit or whatever, it's being built up there now. Some parts are up there around the assembly site, and most will be assembled in the next, um, 5 years or so. I had been thinking of having a barnstar blast off, but i think you'd understand better if you saw palz's hamster's trip to space in the userbox i made to get what I'm talking about there, but it's not uploaded yet.
anyhow, the space barnstar is seriously outdated, the ISS hasn't looked that way for like what, 8 years ? more ? I don't know I haven't looked, but it is outdated. but meh to fixing squat at the moment. Penyulap ☏ 11:09, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

I had a chat with palz.Mir Almaat Ali Almaat ☏ 11:47, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Proposed additions to Awards by WikiProject

Latest comment: 12 years ago19 comments7 people in discussion

Teahouse Barnstar

  Teahouse Barnstar
So here's the template

Any objections or should i add the {{Teahouse Barnstar}} to Awards by WikiProject Barnstars 2.0 by WikiProject? (for now, until the pages are merged - see #Barnstars 2.0 and #new proposals) benzband (talk) 14:20, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, was this discussed at the Teahouse. I mean, do they want it? I took a look at WT:TH and so no such conversation. Achowat (talk) 03:28, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
There should be multiple barnstars in Teahouse, have you discussed it in WP:Teahouse? --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 09:02, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Yep, the discussion is here: Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Host lounge#Barnstar..W00T. I didn't introduce it, just thought of listing it as it has only received positive comments. benzband (talk) 09:50, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
It should be upto the wikiproject than here.Lucia Black (talk) 09:54, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Given the overwhelming consensus at the Teahouse, it'd be wrong for us to do anything but go ahead and list it. Achowat (talk) 13:23, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
  Done (diff). benzband (talk) 13:49, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Discussion moved down the page so as to group Awards by WikiProject related-discussions. benzband (talk) 09:06, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

OWS Barnstar

  The WikiProject Occupy Wall Street Barnstar
So here's the template.

This barnstar is officially recognized by WikiProject OWS on their project page. If that's no problem i'll list it at WP:Barnstars 2.0/Awards by WikiProject. benzband (talk) 09:33, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

If you write the full name, it may struggle to fit in some monitors, by the way the project is known as OWS not by the full name. extra999 (talk) 13:46, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
While some editors dislike the inconsistency...it can, and has been refered to as "Project Occupy". Whatever is decided works for me!--Amadscientist (talk) 21:48, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
Extra999, it can be done using line break, animation. --Tito Dutta (Message) 09:04, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
You won't like a barnstar spread out in two acres (i mean two lines). Would you? extra999 (talk) 13:52, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Punk Barnstar

  The Punk music Barnstar
{{{1}}}

WikiProject Punk music has a barnstar but no template. Shall i list it? (i can create the template if that's required) benzband (talk) 09:01, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

New barnstars are ugly and uncreative

Latest comment: 12 years ago32 comments6 people in discussion

It is really sad to see that the guidelines for barnstar 2.0 designs enforce a dull, boring, and unoriginal design where the only difference is an icon in the middle of the standard barnstar. What happened to creativity? Does no one appreciate the originality of the 1.0 rescue barnstar? Or appreciate the creativity of the 1.0 guidance barnstar, the curator barnstar, the rosetta stone barnstar, or the highly original chemistry barnstar? Add to this that the new designs look like polished plastic, while the 1.0 version actually do look like rusty iron. Now before you are going to tell me that I can freely choose which version to take, the problem is that you are effectively forcing every designer to follow the 2.0 guidelines! Nageh (talk) 17:38, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Could I ask what leads you to believe we're 'forcing' designers into the 2.0 scheme? Achowat (talk) 17:41, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
While I agree BS 1.0 are better in several aspects, most of which you list, I don't think the BS 2.0 scheme is being forced. So ditto above, can you clarify how it's being forced? —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 18:07, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
It's the 2.0 guidelines, which I am criticizing here. They essentially tell a designer that the only accepted/acceptable design is one which takes the standard barnstar and places an icon in the middle. It doesn't do this in words, but by showing the same picture repeatedly it essentially implies this (especially the last comparison in the guideline). The all-the-same looking 2.0 designs listed is testimony to this. Nageh (talk) 18:49, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
You bring up a good point of the usefulness of the 2.0 Guidelines. Our guidelines should be descriptive, not prescriptive. And just this February we listed a 2.0 star that does not follow those "guidelines" (File:Science2.png). Perhaps we should nix the entire set of Guidelines. Achowat (talk) 18:55, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
I hadn't really looked at it before. I agree the guideline is very basic at best and doesn't really help unless you already know what to do; so it's not technical at all, which is what would be really needed. I can also see that it is biased by showing the rasterized versions at non-100px and listing the wording "wrong". —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 19:48, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
I made A curated visual gallery of Wikipedia Barnstars for the sole purpose of inspiring artists to create and think outside the box. The docs, guidelines and so very many things about these pages make me despair, and as demonstrated in sections above, nobody cares to allow artists to help, but demand instead that they lecture and teach. Bah ! I say give up now.
But Nageh, I do invite you to go and have a play in the visual gallery, as the every-language FAQ at the bottom suggests, viewers may do as they please there. I hope it helps someone. Penyulap ☏ 21:01, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Today if someone makes a barnstar, they may very well put it on the barnstar page, where it's subject to the BRD process, that's bully, regret, despair, and somehow that's seen as a good idea. Penyulap ☏ 21:27, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
If you don't like the way things work around here, there are things you can do. For instance, start a thread. You've started 3 and hijacked another two. Seriously, drop it. Achowat (talk) 12:15, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
The visual 'guidelines' have to be dumped, they are restrictive, the last image is the worst offender in a page of offensively stifling images, translated into text, they say give up now, unless you amputate your imagination you're violating the guidelines. Penyulap ☏ 23:22, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
The Rosetta Barnstar was destroyed by the process, it's lost the whole idea under 2.0, same for The "Articles for Creation" Barnstar, The Motivation Barnstar, The Socratic Barnstar is an alternate and does that mean the original is bad ?, and The Real Life Barnstar just can't exist. The Guidance Barnstar didn't come from an army disposal shop, it came form a cereal box. The word "Wrong" is wrong, the word "Guidelines" is wrong it should be something like png tutorial, not parading like it was a new standard to be followed. Penyulap ☏ 23:38, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
So, how would we go about removing those "guidelines", since it looks like consensus is against it? Achowat (talk) 04:57, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
" consensus is against it?" what consensus ? this is a conversation with 4 people talking as far as I can see. The guideline page isn't some huge multistory bank building made of stone that's been around for 100 years. Just because something has been around a long time is meaningless as far as consensus is concerned. Penyulap ☏ 09:15, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
All the half-empty columns on wp:star, that's ugly, nice orderly ugliness, empty boxes make you think something belongs there, as if it were some work in progress, many of them will simply never be filled. there are better ways to present the same information that doesn't involve a table filled with empty boxes. Penyulap ☏ 11:04, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
WP:LOCALCONSENSUS; decisions are made by those who decide to involve themselves in the conversation, and it seems that everyone who has decided to be engaged in the conversation about the BS2.0 "guidelines" is opposed to it. As for the empty boxen, they actually should be filled in. If Barnstars and Barnstars 2.0 are to be used (and judging by how often each is used, they both should be), then ideally there should be an |alt version of each. Achowat (talk) 12:08, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict x 2)Argh ! stop confusing me ! You resist help with visual documentation like direction to the right places where the barnstars go, go at it half-hearted and then just let things trail off, then confuse me with just drop it, till I'm all back to front. argh! this is worse than arguing with myself. Penyulap ☏ 12:37, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey guys, just putting in my two cents. :) Take all this with a pinch of salt since I've been away from Wikipedia for a while so I might just have a slightly different view being from possibly a different era. :)

  • For what it's worth, I also think that the template of Barnstars 2.0 will result in highly uncreative barnstars. One needs only compare the 1.0 and the 2.0 columns at WP:STAR to see this. Aside from the examples already mentioned, look at the Press Barnstar, the Categorisation Barnstar and the Curator Barnstar, among others. Barnstars used to be a celebration of creativity and wit; why limit this using guidelines that in my humble opinion are quite arbitrary?
  • I understand the argument that you guys aren't actually forcing anyone to use the 2.0 template. However, look from an outsider's point of view: I suspect that a new barnstar creator with a great new idea that doesn't fit the 2.0 template will have one of two responses: (1) "oh, what are these 2.0 templates? I'll just ignore them" or (2) "oh... I'm supposed to use this new restrictive template? sigh." In other words, I think a barnstar creator will either ignore them or be limited by them, so the 2.0 template will not fulfill its goals... whatever its goals were.
  • Come to think of it, what *are* the goals of this new template? (Just curious :) )

- Well-restedTalk 12:32, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh and just a quick suggestion. Having this new template up is perfectly fine IMHO as long as it's made clear what purpose it serves and that it's entirely optional. :) And... relax guys. No need to get so heated over a WikiProject that is about making people happy. :) -Well-restedTalk 12:34, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Oh. Wow. Looks like my perspective may really be from a different era. These days barnstars have to be approved via a support/oppose AFD-like thing? Times have really changed. In this case feel free to ignore what I wrote since my perspective might be a bit different here. Have a great day, all! :) -Well-restedTalk 12:48, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Propose renaming the 2.0 guidelines to PNG tutorial or png tutorial (for barnstars) if you must. Penyulap ☏ 12:41, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

plus why should the section '2 new proposals' be archived and closed like it is ? it's had like two or three grumpies and not enough editors to say hey that sucks, or you know, not ! I think for exactly the reasons here, that it should be reconsidered (the visual gallery) it inspires. more than the wp:star page in fact. Penyulap ☏ 12:44, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Eh? Proposals? What happened to friendly discussion about the best thing to do on a talk page? Times really *have* changed. I'll bow out of this discussion - probably shouldn't have gotten involved since I think my perspective is quite different from most. Take care all. :) Well-restedTalk 12:48, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Sorry I didn't mean to scare you off, it's just really frustrating, I originally proposed the edit template, and I wish to god I haven't because the purpose has been completely turned around/forgotten and the message has been so mangulated and filled with fluff I have no idea what is going on, plus they're like 'oh go ahead and change it' and it's edit protected, and I make suggestions, and they're not tried out, they're just like 'oh go ahead and prove it first before we try it' it's like argh !!! it's like spending all day on the telephone to microsoft. Nothing gets done, everything is closed, and like how does this page work ? I was thinking proposals were an idea to help work things out, but it's like give up now is the only course that will work. Penyulap ☏ 12:56, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Well, I can't really comment on that because I've never been involved in the Barnstars WikiProject, but hey, relax! Remember that Wikipedia is a labour of love on the part of editors (or at least it should be, as far as I'm concerned), and that people do appreciate your efforts at improving it. IMHO, no one can fault you if you act in good faith. Ok, heading out to do other stuff. *waves* -Well-restedTalk 13:10, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Wait ! wait ! don't leave me in this mausoleum, with these, these LIBRARIANS !!! I'm getting out of here, until daylight at least ! (yeeek) Penyulap ☏
I agree wholeheartedly that those conversations (really, no conversation) should ever be "closed". The page is archived when discussions die natural deaths, and that's the system we should use. Achowat (talk) 13:18, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

RFA

This request for apathy is now closed, (people who do not wish to add further comments are may go ahead and not do so). Result overwhelming support (4 people were determined not to make a comment, 1 editor was going to type something, but reconsidered, and two editors typed part of a response, but then moved away from the page without saving, bringing the tally to 7-0). An editprotect request will now be added for anyone who can be bothered updating the edit notice. Penyulap ☏ 00:16, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

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

I think everyone doesn't like the guidelines so far, so I propose we do nothing about it, in this request for apathy, please indicate you can't be bothered to comment or do anything at all by not doing anything or commenting at all. All those in favor, say nothing. Penyulap ☏ 00:07, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

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

Please remove the text "There is a guideline at Wikipedia:Barnstars 2.0/Guidelines how to create a Barnstar 2.0." from the edit notice, the removal of this text is not controversial, whilst a complete solution for the notice hasn't been finished, people either suggest it's removal #!Vote Discussion or mention how much the Guidelines suck (this section). Penyulap ☏ 00:16, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

  Done per above and I also replaced the red text with black. ;) mabdul 02:30, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

!RFC

To repeat my former cheekiness, I propose adding the text "Consider adding new barnstars to the Personal User Awards page." with the " Personal User Awards " linked to that page, and please choose the most mind-numbingly boring text colour possible, as people get very excited about things that are very boring, ... yes, they do, around here anyway. Penyulap ☏ 22:27, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

  Done I added the PUA notice, but what do you mean with "and please choose the most mind-numbingly boring text colour possible"? Black? mabdul 11:34, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Black ? BRILLIANT darrrling, it's the new Gray !
Do you realise I shall run out of three letter acronyms starting with R long before running out of ideas ? There are only like 650 combinations if you avoid the eeew ones. Penyulap ☏ 12:18, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK

Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Shouldn't there be a Barnstar for DYKs??? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 10:35, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

What is DYK anyway?Mir Almaat Ali Almaat ☏ From Trivandrum, Kerala, India(UTC+5:30) 10:37, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

WP:ORA has {{The DYK Medal}}, as well as the purely numerical File:Dyk25.png, {{The 50 DYK Medal}}, {{The 100 DYK Medal}} and {{The 200 DYK Medal}}, though the numerical ones seem to have been replaced by WP:DYKLIST. Achowat (talk) 12:08, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Curator's Barnstar

Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

There is another curator's barnstar image at File:Curator's barnstar.jpg.Smallman12q (talk) 11:08, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

{{The Curator Barnstar}} already uses Historical Barnstar.png (original version) and Historical Barnstar Hires.png (alt "2.0" version). However i do really like this new picture maybe we could find a way of inserting it into the template as a 3rd alternative? benzband (talk) 12:16, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

A username barnstar

Latest comment: 12 years ago11 comments7 people in discussion

I don't really know how to design a barnstar, but I want to know if there is any support for an Awesome Username Barnstar? If so, maybe someone else can design the icon. AutomaticStrikeout (talk) 22:46, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

This sounds far more like a Personal User Award than an "According to Hoyle" Barnstar. Achowat (talk) 19:23, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Would make a good PUA. extra999 (talk) 02:45, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
I think that would be a bad idea as it would lead to competition between people to come up with the best username, which is not the purpose of Wikipedia (although it would add much needed humour). Simply south...... coming and going for just 6 years 12:28, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
Very bad idea! Barnstars are awarded to people for exceptional contributions to building WP, not for trivial nonsense like clever usernames. Roger (talk) 14:07, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
And specially it is not easy to change username (if specially one has lots of edits from an account already)!--Tito Dutta ✉ 15:24, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Right there is where I can see an improvement. WP:Star needs improvement just the same as an article can use some improvement. WP:Star is not telling people clearly what a barnstar is for. It's not going down the line of, what for an article would be called WP:Lede, it's not saying to new editors this for example is a circumstance in which you give a barnstar and this is a circumstance where you give a PUA, and by the way this is what a PUA is and so forth. Basically the WP:Star page is a big pile of crap ! People get confused and for some reason editors here prefer to explain these things on talkpages instead of the actual wikipage, WHY is known only to a hunchback living in a bell-tower in Ciudad del Este in Paraguay near the border with Argentina and Parana, Brazil, but he will only tell you why on tuesdays through thursdays if he is not hungry.

I would like to propose some improvements to the WP:Star page, so that absolutely fair questions like the difference between a Barnstar and a PUA and a cookie (Yuk to cookies btw, The Donut of DOOM is my preference right now) can be explained to just anyone who wants to know. Of course there are people who will lecture "Ohhh Oh we can't go explaining that to people, wikipedia is not this and not that and blah blah de GAk*%$ GAAAaK CKHhH" (I'm strangling them right here, because the WP:Star page should explain what a WP:Star IS, Durr)

But OMG to just get some tiny little thing done around here, OOOhhhh the Drama, you should have seen trying to get an edit notice fixed up, (and it's still not done you know, it's barely passable). Someone said that every thread has to be a Jim Carrey movie, it's either that or an argument and I'm not into conflict, just ask anyone, tell me if they disagree and I'll go pummel them.

We need to know what kind of awards there are, and what is for when and why, and we need to know it Now ! I tell you NOW NOW NOW ! (stamps foot)

P.s. if everything around here is so perfect why did I just make a redirect for WP:Star ? huh huh ? Blah ! this place isn't the second death star half built orbiting the Ewoks moon, it's just some NASA proposal that will never get off the ground. All TALK, no ACTION ! Penyulap ☏ 11:46, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

You can't, in the same post, complain about how much Drama is necessary to make a change and then threaten to choke people who disagree with you. But that's not the point. You are, as it turns out, correct. WP:WPWPA doesn't have a page to explain what each of the pages we administer do. So let's make one. A WP:WPWPWA Subpage seems to make the most sense right now. Explain what Barnstars are, what WikiProject Awards, what Barnstars of National Merit are, PUAs, ORAs, etc. Then add a link to each of those pages. Sounds like a decent idea. Achowat (talk) 12:54, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
Quite true, I need to put those in separate messages, but who has the time, I'm in too much of a hurry, better to thank someone as you are choking them and giving them helpful tips on the best awards.
Just like articles need to stand alone, the star page must at least in a brief manner, explain if the editor has found the right page or not and which kind of award to use. If it can't be done in 30 seconds, you taking too long. Penyulap ☏ 19:22, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
It seems like the best course of action now that you've identified a problem is to ::ahem:: Fix it WP:BB. Achowat (talk) 19:24, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
At some point for sure, but probably not today. But what about this cool name award, it's a good idea. Is there a list of really good usernames somewhere ? just curious, because I am thinking to see if it is a good idea/easy to make such an award. Penyulap ☏ 19:40, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Proposed addition to the list

Latest comment: 12 years ago22 comments10 people in discussion

Following a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Teahouse, the following barnstar was created ({{The New Editor's Barnstar}}):

  The New Editor's Barnstar
This award may be presented to very new Wikipedians who have contributed positively to Wikipedia (especially for users who have made under one hundred edits). May their future hold many more barnstars! Mlm42 (talk) 22:53, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Could it be added to the list? I wasn't able to find a barnstar that was specifically for new users.. I've already given it out to over 10 new users who have made great contributions. Thanks, Mlm42 (talk) 22:53, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

For example, I don't see a barnstar which would have been appropriate to give Omnis73 (talk · contribs); but that user appears to be off to a pretty good start, so I gave them The New Editor's barnstar. Your concern is that some new users might be offended by receiving this barnstar? That seems like a silly concern to me.. Mlm42 (talk) 16:05, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
Welcoming newbies is fine and well worthwhile. If someone starts by writing an interesting referenced article then why not submit it for DYK? But if someone isn't really deserving of a barnstar for anything they've done, but you give them a new editor's barnstar anyway, then yes you risk offending some people who might consider that you are patronising them. You also of course devalue the whole concept of a barnstar. ϢereSpielChequers 21:17, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
I see.. I guess I'm not familiar with the consensus opinion here regarding when other editors "deserve" a barnstar. It appears there is a fear of devaluing the concept of a barnstar (which I think is sad, because there's something else which is actually being devalued: new productive editors.. but anyway..).. I hope nobody has a problem with me continuing to give out this barnstar as I feel appropriate, even if it isn't added to your list. Mlm42 (talk) 22:05, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Hmm, I didn't notice the {{The Exceptional Newcomer Award}}.. I guess my intent was not only for "exceptional" newcomers, but for newcomers who clearly are here to improve the encyclopedia (by the way, such new users are in the minority), and who show potential for becoming a good editor. I believe giving them a barnstar increases the likelihood of them staying around - which is what we all want from our competent newcomers. Mlm42 (talk) 15:58, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
If New Editors who are here to improve the Encyclopedia are the minority, than they must be the Exception to the rule (the most new Users are not here to improve the Encyclopedia) and as such are, by that reasoning alone, Exceptional. Achowat (talk) 16:03, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
So if I started giving The Exceptional Newcomer Award to a third of all newcomers, you would be okay with that? Mlm42 (talk) 16:07, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
I have a problem with Redundant Barnstars being listed. If you would like to continue handing out this award, feel free to add it to the list of personal user awardss. I prefer to give out older, more seasoned awards because I think there's a benefit to receiving them. "Look, I've been given the same Barnstar as Influencial User: X " would draw me in far more than a new-ish award. It's easy enough to check, for instance, who has received the Exceptional Newcomer Award and think "Well, if Mlm42 thinks I'm as good now as Current Admin/Crat/FA Contributor was when s/he started, I must be on the right track". Just my $.02, though. Achowat (talk) 16:11, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
(short addendum) That image is gorgeous and striking, though. Good work on that! Achowat (talk) 16:14, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
Don't you think this is a wonderful alternative to The Exceptional Newcomer Award, that's OUA, and this could be a general barnstar with a better reach. extra999 (talk) 15:56, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Indeed. benzband (talk) 14:56, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Support. Welcoming people who are doing a good job appears to be a win-win. It appears to be an appreciated gesture which keeps people around. See this write up[1] which is based off of this recent study: doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0034358 I came here looking for a barnstar because I thought a beginning editor was making good contributions, and I think this one is the best match. I would feel uncomfortable awarding an "exceptional" newcomer barnstar to the user at this point. Biosthmors (talk) 18:28, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
  • Support Excellent idea! --Tito Dutta (Send me a message)
  • Weak oppose as not seeing the necessity. Why not give a specific award that represents the user's contributions? This is why we have so many varied ones for different areas/topics. Surely, acknowledging the specific contributions is more rewarding that a general "you're a clueful newbie" barnstar. If none of the specific stars fit, we can always give a regular original barnstar. Merely being a new user isn't an achievement, even if you are resourceful enough to do edits well. I don't mind this as Barnstar 2.0 that much, but even then the graphic is minimalistic at best compared to others. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 17:56, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
(are any barnstars necessary?) I guess I believe that being a new user whose edits are semi-useful (e.g. not vandalism, self-promotion, incoherent, etc) is an achievement on its own. And it's something I think should be recognized by more veteran editors (however grumpy they have become!). :-) Mlm42 (talk) 21:33, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
"Being a new user whose edits are semi-useful" is a requirement. Otherwise, the edits are unconstructive and require more work to redo. I can't believe our guidelines and policies have become so convoluted that merely not messing up as a new editor is classified as an achievement. Anyway, just my opinion. I would give a new user either the original barnstar with my wording or a specific one. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 07:32, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Crying-I've have made less than 100 contributions in my first week, and I've not got it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mir Almaat 1 S1 (talk • contribs) 07:27, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

The Commonwealth Barnstar of Merit

Latest comment: 12 years ago11 comments6 people in discussion
 
 
 

I hereby propose the Commonwealth Barnstar of Merit or Commonwealth Barnstar of International Merit for users who have fine contributions to articles related to the Commonwealth of Nations like Commonwealth Games..Commonwealth Youth Games..etc..

Perhaps just steal the design of all the other National Merit stars (barnstar hanging from a ribbon of that country's flag). All-in-all, a good idea. Achowat (talk) 13:17, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
Yeah.....  StrikeEagle ✈ 13:24, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
Tried it but messed up....the image looses transparency.... any idea of how to fix it? StrikeEagle ✈ 13:28, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
Well, the depends on what image editing software you're using. Achowat (talk) 19:15, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
Also on the file type: jpg doesn't support transparency but png for instance does. benzband (talk) 19:18, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
Equazicon and I have created images. Penyulap ☏ 16:29, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Scotland BoNM

Latest comment: 12 years ago15 comments6 people in discussion

I am proposing the creation of a Barnstar of National Merit for Scotland, to parallel the one for England at 2.0.

  The Scotland Barnstar of National Merit
Your reason here

--SabreBD (talk) 19:15, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

I think this would belong more in Wikipedia:Barnstars/Barnstar of National Merit because is isn't a 2.0 barnstar (however this will be irrelevant if the proposal for merging the original/2.0 pages takes place). benzband (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Potentially redundant to the UK Barnstar of National Merit, but it doesn't really bother me. Achowat (talk) 20:13, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Alternatively to projects#geographical similar to the US states-related barnstars. (better see the sandbox and cleaned up version at Wikipedia:Awards by WikiProject/sandbox#Geographic WikiProject Awards) mabdul 20:23, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Clicking on the talkpage for Wikipedia:Barnstars/Barnstar of National Merit redirects to this page, so I assumed this was the place to post this. Really not redundant to the UK star given that we have them for England and, hey Devon. It could possibly go with Wikiproject Scotland, but someone will have to let me know if that is normally adopted by a wikiproject first as I am a newcomer in barnstar adoption.--SabreBD (talk) 21:20, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
This is the right place, right now we're just figuring out where to put it, though it should be obvious. Achowat (talk) 04:30, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
Support extra999 (talk) 01:53, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
for what? on which page? mabdul 02:32, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
to add it on the BoNM page, as a BoNM. extra999 (talk) 08:47, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
though I would prefer quality improved. extra999 (talk) 08:50, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
I take the point about quality and have tried improving the image from the one I found on the Commons. Not sure if I have pulled that one off, so I would appreciate it if editors could take a look and give any advice.--SabreBD (talk) 08:20, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
The quality of the body of the barnstar, however, remains the same. In your first post you mentioned the one for England at 2.0. You could always make a 2.0 version for the Scotland Barnstar (see instructions here on doing so). The following is an example of a 2.0 update done on the UK BoNM:
  •  
    before
  •  
    after
Notice that not only the flag has changed but the barnstar bit also, using the 2.0 "Hires" barnstar. benzband (talk) 08:32, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
The flag certainly has changed. The one on the left is a Union Jack, so that would do for the UK. What is the one on the right with only four blue triangles instead of 8? ϢereSpielChequers 23:14, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
lol ~ the triangles are all there if you look closely. If you prefer are some other 2.0 BoNMs, i was only trying to illustrate with the UK because Scotland's part of it. Have it your way, here's my country's BoNM :) benzband (talk) 15:33, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
  •  
    Before
  •  
    After

And England's:

  •  
    England

Where's Wales?

I actually did update both parts, but for some reason it doesn't show in the sample barnstar. This seems to be the best I can manage with my skills and tools.--SabreBD (talk) 16:21, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Rookie Barnstar

Latest comment: 12 years ago11 comments7 people in discussion

Why not have a Rookie Barnstar? It's a barnstar where you give to Rookie Wikipedians (Those who have registered under a year or less) who has done the most improvement or most helpful contributions.

Note: I cannot design it on my own, I would ask some veteran users to design it instead. GTAjaxoxo (Discuss) 06:40, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

A nice idea but there are many Wikipedians who have been here for less than one year but have exceptional contributions and many user rights.So, Rookie Star for them wont look nice. Thanks! StrikeEagle ✈ 06:49, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Maybe we can make it Most Improved Within One Year Star. GTAjaxoxo (Discuss) 06:57, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

But a similar barnstar exists now...one which is given for learning from mistakes and moving on.So..I don't think you would garner support(though I support) StrikeEagle ✈ 07:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I would oppose it. We have many of such awards. extra999 (talk) 10:00, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
Agree as above.....there are plans by people to discontinue many barnstars which are similar..so I don't think it will succeed. Thanks! StrikeEagle ✈ 10:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

We have a new proposal for a new editor barnstar above.Mir Almaat Ali Almaat ☏ From Trivandrum, Kerala, India(UTC+5:30) 10:42, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

It comes as no surprise that a rookie can't find a rookie barnstar (not referring to GTAjaxoxo in particular, just noting an example of the Barnstar page being in disarray, as new editors can't find simple barnstars and GTAjaxoxois certianly not alone) Penyulap ☏ 11:10, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm not trying to earn this barnstar, I've been in Wikipedia for over 2 years GTAjaxoxo (Discuss) 03:48, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Consider {{The Exceptional Newcomer Award}} and {{The New Editor's Barnstar}}. benzband (talk) 14:50, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Consider {{The Exceptional Newcomer Award}}; the {{The New Editor's Barnstar}} failed to gain consensus. Achowat (talk) 13:54, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

South Ossetian Award of National Merit

Latest comment: 12 years ago9 comments5 people in discussion

I have proposed this thing.

  The South Ossetian Barnstar of National Merit
Mir Almaat Ali Almaat ☏ From Trivandrum, Kerala, India(UTC+5:30) 10:39, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Discuss it yourself. South Ossetia is a 22 State recognized non-UN Nation claimed by Georgia. I will only be back in 2013 or 2014.Mir Almaat Ali Almaat ☏ From Trivandrum, Kerala, India(UTC+5:30) 10:39, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Support extra999 (talk) 07:00, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Support StrikeEagle ✈ 09:07, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Like it --GTAjaxoxo (Discuss) 09:32, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
{{like}} it? ^^ benzband (talk) 14:45, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Support addition to BoNM 2.0 benzband (talk) 14:45, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

I've not made the template! I don't know how!Mir Almaat Ali Almaat ☏ From Trivandrum, Kerala, India(UTC+5:30) 04:07, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

  Done created {{The South Ossetia Barnstar of National Merit}} and added to Wikipedia:Barnstars 2.0/Barnstar of National Merit. benzband (talk) 17:14, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Propose the addition of a edit notice to the barnstar page

Latest comment: 12 years ago39 comments5 people in discussion
  Done - not a big deal. Feel free to improve it at Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Barnstars. mabdul 10:53, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

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

I'd like to propose the addition of an edit notice to the Barnstar page. There seem to be quite a few editors who have added Barnstars to the Barnstar page, without pre-approval, it would help as the written text on the page is not sufficient to slow down many editors, it causes embarrassment and useless busywork cleaning up. This defines the purpose of an edit notice. Penyulap ☏ 10:28, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

discussion.

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

  Reopened should this be extended to all the barnstar pages (as listed in {{Barnstarpages}})? benzband (talk) 11:02, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

support re-opening as the picture is wrong. Penyulap ☏
yup, and it's only editable by admins (so much for the "feel free to improve it" :-) how about changing the image to the classic File:Original Barnstar.png? or it's 2.0 version? benzband (talk) 11:28, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

that would suck just as much. People already know they are on the barnstar page.

propose a picture like this, which is related to the message. Penyulap ☏

" There is a guideline at Wikipedia:Barnstars 2.0/Guidelines how to create a Barnstar 2.0." is not part of the message, I took that out too. Penyulap ☏

Hmm. I quite like that, but i'm not sure if everyone is as keen as yourself on graphic depictions. Also i've modified your text a bit, below:
The text above is OK, but keep the barnstar, not the blinking traffic lights. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 12:11, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
I give up. What does a barnstar have to do with the message ? I can understand that people will miss reading text buried down the page somewhere, but if they don't know it's the barnstar page there is simply no point to putting a barnstar there, except to totally miss the whole point of the message. Why a barnstar ? what can it possibly say that is not already obvious ? Penyulap ☏

Non-essential, guaranteed to catch no fish at all.

Essentialist

If the graphic is no good, you could use a flat hand, palm visible, fingers upright. Penyulap ☏

I really oppose to the idea that we "approve" barnstars; we discuss them and work on improving them and put them in the correct list. We're far more librarians than an editorial board. The visual, any visual even "just" barnstar, tells the reader "no no, please read this", so I'm fine with just the OBS image. Achowat (talk) 13:14, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

So when you give a barnstar, you're really saying slow down ? This is like winking at someone in a dark room, you know what it is you are trying to say, but everyone else has no idea at all. Penyulap ☏
Plus I think it's more of a mausoleum, 'cause I've seen libraries, and approval, omg my previous experience...., well. Penyulap ☏
(edit conflict) Yup yup i agree with Achowat that this isn't a censorship/approval more of "librarians" (or "mausoleumists"). And no, the picture of a barnstar doesn't convey a "slow down" message but it's directly linked with the content of the page… As i said before, some people may not be very inclined to the graphic depiction of a "stop" signal, that's all. benzband (talk) 13:44, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
It is perfectly acceptable for a librarian to say "Well, thanks but no thanks; we already have over 200 copies of Huck Finn out in circulation, we don't need another one just because you designed a new dust-jacket that you prefer." Achowat (talk) 13:49, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
(insert) the librarian doesn't say 'we don't want new books, we like books that are old and tired, we resist anything new or updated, and computers, in libraries ? GET OUT you naughty little girl, and take your laptop with you.' Penyulap ☏

(edit conflict)(inserted at correct point)

  • (Reverted to revision 485719194 by Achowat: rm undiscussed addition per Wikipedia:Barnstars#Adding_a_Barnstar. (TW))
  • (Undid revision 475788373 by Tsikerdekis (talk) Reverted because addition was not first discussed on the talk page. User has been notified.)
  • (Undid revision 467281279 by Sp33dyphil (talk) please do not add barnstars to this page without discussing on the talk page first)
  • (continuing removal of barnstar that wasn't discussed before being added here)
  • (Undid revision 466626968 by SMcCandlish (talk) please do not add barnstars to this page without discussing on the talk page first)
  • (→‎Topical Barnstars: remove Black Belt Barnstar, because it wasn't discussed on the talk page. It needs to be discussed before adding it here. Thanks.)
  • (Reverted to revision 443352634 by OlEnglish: please discuss the addition first, as per page guidelines. (TW))
  • (Reverted to revision 434540380 by H3llkn0wz: rm barnstar added without consensus, see #Adding a Barnstar section. (TW))
  • (Reverted to revision 432957236 by CommonsDelinker: addition was not discussed. (TW))
  • (Reverted to revision 428904162 by H3llkn0wz; remove barnstar added without ocnsensus; will leave talk message. (TW))
  • (Reverted to revision 420975708 by TheFarix; remove two added without discussion. (TW))
  • (→‎General Barnstars: rm new barnstar not added with discussion)
  • (m non-consensus added barnstars: R&B and Soul Project; The Liberty Walking; Portal; Reviewer's; Featured Article; InTheNews; WikiProject Slipknot -- please propose them first per page guidelines)
  • (Reverted to revision 393885937 by H3llkn0wz; same issue, barnstar addition was not discussed beforehand. (TW))
  • (Reverted to revision 391625419 by Waterfox; remove barnstar without consensus to add discussion; propose it on the talk page first. (TW))

I object to the objection that barnstars are rejected only where there are objections. I may be visually based, but there is no way you lot cannot see a pattern emerging here, turn around and pull your pants down and smack your own bottoms the lot of you. You're all naughty if you think this isn't an approval process. Penyulap ☏

Hey, most of those barnstars were later added, once discussed. benzband (talk) 14:02, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
....And once the editors work had been reverted. do you guys enjoy reverting people ? I don't think so, and do those editors enjoy having their work in the wrong place or reverted ? I don't think so either. I didn't like the embarrassment, a link to PUA would have bypassed this entire few days of discussions, take that as a good thing or a bad thing as you will :P The whole point of the edit notice is to catch editors who are visual or fast workers, obviously those who orient themselves through textual clues don't need it, but obviously visually oriented users do use images to navigate the wik. I think the template might include a rfc so that we can get a broader idea of how to assist the people who are being reverted, unless you guys like reverting and assume they do as well. Penyulap ☏
Being a "visual worker" (whatever that means) does not exempt someone from needing som cluefulness before editing. Achowat (talk) 15:54, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm just trying to 'clue' some editors in on why they are doing so much reverting. If you think you know why there is an endless stream of reverts to the page, please share. I'm seeing the problem, am I wrong ? Do you have any other explanation whatsoever ? Penyulap ☏
Would you like me to prepare a similiar list of reverts for every single page on the Project? That's the nature of the Wiki. In fact, there's a pretty well-used essay that suggests reverting a bold addition and then discussing that change is one of the ideal ways to build the Project. Achowat (talk) 17:08, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
[2]
Yes please, I can assist in their analysis. Lots of reverts is the hallmark of a badly written article or page. In this case the page is an epic fail to point out it is more about history than showcasing each editors work. If it does mention PUA, it's very effectively hidden from those many editors who have been reverted. Looking at your comments, it's becoming somewhat apparent to me, and correct me if I'm wrong, that you seem to think this long stream of reverting is somehow helpful to the project. It's not. It's an inconvenience, it's embarrassing, it discourages good editors making any further contributions. I can see just why some editors may want clear instructions in the edit notice hidden away and hard to find. Penyulap ☏
I'm sorry, by BRD works. It works in every facet of the project, even this one. Achowat (talk) 18:11, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Agree 100% it works just fine. That's not the issue here, poor documentation is. We could just delete all docs on wiki, and the new process of trail and error would be a boon to BRD, wouldn't it ? This is not about BRD, if someone is experienced enough to be capable of writing a barnstar then they can obviously read instructions, IF YOU DON'T HIDE THE INSTRUCTIONS from them. The barnstar page is an epic fail for describing exactly what it is. Heck, I've been chatting a week and I can see how people would be quite understandably confused. Where is the summary of the sub-(articles)(pages) ? If it was an article it'd be a bit on the split side of things.
Probably what is a good idea is a rfc from the people who got reverted, an analysis on why they got reverted. Penyulap ☏

I concur; that's why we should try to fix the edit notice. Achowat (talk) 18:41, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

I disagree. This is why we need to make sure we are fixing the right problem first. If you are fixing the wrong problem, then obviously the problem doesn't get fixed. You've just got a bunch of fluff over the top of it. You'll still get reverts on that page, which for reasons beyond me, people think is a good idea. If experienced editors are adding ducks to the list of apples page, it's not because of BRD, it's because your (*&$%#$%%^ apple page looks like a bunch of ducks ! Penyulap ☏

Getting back to the point(s)

  • Should all pages listed at {{Barnstar pages}} What pages should have an editnotice?
  • What should the editnotice look like/say?

Let's keep existentialist essentialist questions about the project in a different section please. benzband (talk) 13:57, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes to everywhere that discussion is required first, no to the barnblerk image, if it's not going to say slow down, then use that lovely flower barnstar, as it looks nicer I think. the text will need more work, the edit notice needs links to the place people should be putting things title to give a twitter-text size summary of the message please. 'Are you in the right place' or 'slow down' like that. Penyulap ☏
Can I just ask you guys why it is, according to your best guesses, why it is that there is a long line of reverts to the page ? Penyulap ☏
Because this is a wiki and reverts happen. I don't agree with your assessment that it is a problem. The numbers of Barnstars is growing, it's not stagnant like you claim, so I see no problem with the current system. Achowat (talk) 14:29, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
WP:PUA should most definitely not have any sort of edit notice. Achowat (talk) 14:29, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
I didn't think of that. I totally agree, of course. benzband (talk) 14:36, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Put a link to PUA in the barnstar edit notice. Penyulap ☏
 
                    This is not a personal attack. Most definitively. -- benzband (talk) 14:15, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

@benzband, no, you don't have to be a sysop; but you need (at least) the Account creator flag. And I agree with the editors above: PUA shouldn't have any edit notice (at the moment, CCC) and the other pages should not have the same message as WP:*. mabdul 13:17, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Well i don't have that flag anyway :-) Also, about the PUAs as i mentioned earlier i forgot but of course they shouldn't have an editnotice. benzband (talk) 14:56, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
Btw, I wasn't talking about existentialist questions before, I was talking about essentialist questions, essentialism is the topic of your subsection here. I wouldn't mind having another crack at improving the edit template to the barnstar page. It still could use some improvement. Penyulap ☏
Sure, have a go by all means but you don't have the flags and anyway nobody is listening so… I'd just towel it :/ benzband (talk) 09:44, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Yes, next time I see something that is missing here, something that would be speedily approved, but I know I'm the only one who can see it then :P (raspberry the lot of you) :)
I can clearly see the reason why it is needed, which is why I brought it up. Now everyone pretends they can see it too. I don't believe that for a moment because the point has been partly overlooked. Still. Penyulap ☏
And please don't take raspberry smileys as a personal attack. they are only personal attacks if you have to wipe them off. Penyulap ☏
So, what to change now? I see no consensus on the image nor on the additions/modifications which is needed. Wikipedia:The Right Version. mabdul 11:48, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
and I see no agf and no desire to improve anything, so why would I want to help ? Penyulap ☏
  I am lost here. benzband (talk) 14:15, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

!Vote Discussion

  • !comment well this one bounces a few more, it's a bit more to the point. Plus they stand there barnstar on clipboard, not knowing what to do, and end up throwing it in the garbage bin. SHAME SHAME SHAME. Penyulap ☏
  • !comment what idiot wrote this ? it's a flashy piece of crap that will only talk to people who are into flashy stuff, still, meh. What it does need is something like hands, one can say stop, like if people really hate anim that much, and the other can point to a link (yes a few boring barnstars stacked behind each other) in the lower right hand corner, linking to PUA. But who can be bothered going to that much trouble to make such a thing ? I mean it's not like anyone wants the improvement, or even thinks it is an improvement.
  • Still it would help divert those editors who are posting their Pesky Unimportant Awards on the Whatever Passed Some Twisted Approval Request process page. Penyulap ☏

I like the try it and see how it goes principle, I always liked that. Cause how are we going to know if it works if we don't try it ? I should add the little hand thing though. Penyulap ☏ 20:22, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

I dunno, what I usually do is compare new things I'm going to do to things that have been successful or unsuccessful in the past and, y'know, learn from those things. A big blink-y red light, in my experience anyway, has always meant "Go no further; it is a bad idea for you to do what you were going to do before you saw this light". And since what those people were going to do when they saw the edit notice is, y'know, edit...I see that as poor form and not in keeping with the ideas behind a Wiki Encyclopedia. Achowat (talk) 20:25, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Here is something I suggest we go ahead and try. Penyulap ☏ 21:04, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

well ? anyone ? Penyulap ☏ 05:02, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Achowat, does the extra green light and direction help offset the poor form ? Penyulap ☏ 11:23, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
I still fail to see the value of anything that screams "Stop!" at someone, even if it says "Go" immediately thereafter. A static image, in my opinion, would draw the eye of most contributors without such problems. Achowat (talk) 12:26, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
I have to second that although this version now is much better as the initial proposed one. The special thing on edit notice is: the people who will stop adding a barnstar by reading edit notice, will stop by both/all versions... and there is the other group of contributors... mabdul 12:48, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Still oppose per images and animation, excessive formatting mismatch, broken paragraph and demanding language. The original text (without BS2.0 "instructions") in black should be more or less OK. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 13:00, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Is it a fair summary to say that there are multiple editors in multiple sections that object to the 2.0 text and concept, and that unanimously everyone wants it removed from the edit notice ? would that be correct ? Because call me cynical, and I am, I see this unanimous accord against 2.0 text being archived unless 'Omg is that penyulap dragging things on as usual'. Why do I need to be the one who keeps bugging when everyone has already said they don't like the 2.0 text and a week has gone by and it is still there. You all call me a jokester, but I didn't come up with "Feel free to improve it at Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Barnstars." now did I ? Penyulap ☏ 23:25, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
 
Here is a suitable image

While it may look a little strange at first, consider that if this one is unnecessary whether or not a barnstar image is also unnecessary. Penyulap ☏ 15:40, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

I can vanish the background colour in a jiffy. Penyulap ☏ 15:41, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Too Many Barnstars?

Latest comment: 12 years ago21 comments5 people in discussion

Does it seem like we have a few too many general Barnstars for arbitrary things? I believe so. There's the Original Barnstar, and the special Barnstar that have no specific contribution so, don't see why we are compelled to make more specific Barnstars. but when read the description, notice there are Barnstars that fit almost the same description as the other. Actually some of these are rather vague when u start reading them. I believe we should remove some of them. and choose which ones we should keep. And to give an example just so that this doesn't sound like wild accusations for the sake of limiting. Ones typed in Red are the ones that are the ones that share nearly the same description. The ones in Purple will be the ones that seem to be odd description that don't really have much specific use to actually be an award.

  • Working Wikipedian's Barnstar - The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
    • Both focus on editing "tirelessly" and seem to be the man point of both Barnstars or work on something very time consuming.
  • The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar - The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar - The Anti-Spam Barnstar-
    • Spam is vandalism. I don't see why we need one specific for spam if its basically the same thing. As for Defender of the Wiki Barnstar, is also using both specific type of vandalism and some that other vandalism the other Barnstars don't cover (which means it wont be used because anti-vandalism already takes care of it)
  • The Anti-Flame Barnstar - Civility Barnstar - The Barnstar of Diplomacy
    • Seems all three are barnstars to promote peace and civility during discussions.
  • Graphic Designer - The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
    • This one seems pretty self explanatory already.
  • The Surreal Barnstar
    • This one is rather vague. I can't possibly imagine what this "special flavor" is.
  • The Invisible Barnstar
    • A barnstar for people who make contributions who aren't expecting an award?

Well this is what I found. And yes, I understand there is specific wording that separates certain ones but they all share the same message.Lucia Black (talk) 00:27, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

A bit of diversity can't hurt. I strongly oppose deleting 'em. Anyway, there is nothing compelling you to actually use any if you don't wish to… Also, was it not you who wanted to create a whole system of awards entirely redundant to the actual barnstars? ;-) benzband (talk) 09:04, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
Sounds like a pretty fair idea really, What is the the method by which stars have been making it onto the list anyway ? as far as I can tell it's dangerously close to 'whatever has been there a long time stays there' which sounds a lot like 'some mistakes were built to last' if you ask me. Better to clean up the list. Do some analysis too.
I would suggest putting the most looked for barnstars at the top, do something of a transclusion count weighted for age, list the alternatives much smaller right under the main theme and have more alternatives. The similar ones like you mention need grouping, that's perfectly sensible.
The Graphic design scandal is a perfect example of how this list has no end of problems to it. What have you talkpage lurkers been up to ???? HUH ? reverting everyone no doubt.
I'd like to write some new formats specifically to address issues like that, I mean, why on earth have two pictures for civility ? Just choose one and clean up the other one. For "Articles for Creation" Barnstar, yeah, sure, makes sense to have two pics, but CLEAN UP this mess. Penyulap ☏ 12:12, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 12:12, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
While I agree that there are some obvious redundancies (The Graphic Designer('s) Barnstar), I disagree that Spam is Vandalism, or that the Defender should be given to anti-vandals. That's not the point on them. There's a difference between being a "Working Man" and being a "Tireless Contributor". They may be minor differences to some, but important, nonetheless. Achowat (talk) 13:15, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
1)I only mentioned which ones are common. I did not propose which ones i personally favored 2) Spam is vandalism, It's just a specific form of vandalism. How can Spam "not" be vandalism? 3)"minor" has the sense of not that important. they both send the same message, that's the point. And the problem is, they're arbitrarily specific to not be merged. Another example, is making some more general. We can "merge" the specfcs to gether to make a more general barnstar to have more use. For example, interlink, redlink, and redirects, could be one barnstars relelatng to "linking" in general.
On another note, I proposed the wikimedals for an alternate award system that could satisfy those to be awarded. (if they do not like barnstars but still want wikilove. instead of homemade creative rusty stars, they are shiny gold medal of honor.) Because personally, think there should be an alternate system equal to barnstars. So wont be talking about that now. I think Penyulap understood perfectly.Lucia Black (talk) 18:57, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
When we say "Spam", what do we mean? Do we mean drastically changing the POV of an article? Adding External Links that are Spammy? Making an article about a product my company works on? Some of this is vandalism, it isn't all. "Minor" does not mean "insignificant"; All diplomats are civil, but not everyone who is civil is a diplomat, for instance. Achowat (talk) 19:04, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
Whether some should be merged or not (probably some should be) there is still the grouping and organising. Why on Earth are we asking people to spend an hour studying Barnstars just so that they can do it right ? Do we not want them used ? Lets organise the whole page so it's a 3 minute operation for a new user. Defender, spam, vandalism, it's all about cleanup. defender gets listing in more than one group, maybe one of the five pillars sort of thing, but arrive at the page and find what you want as fast as possible. Yes history is important, for history buffs. Organize.!! make it fast, make it easy. Penyulap ☏ 19:11, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
Would you be willing to sandbox this idea, to show us what you mean? Achowat (talk) 19:14, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
I guess so, but it can be your job to copy it in along the way, and I want comments people, comments !
I figure it would need quite a few copies along the way, none of this wait until it is perfect crap, because as soon as it is better than what we already have, it should be put in, also it's a huge job, so it's good to get help along the way filling sections. Think of a Jazz band, just follow my lead, I listen where everyone is going and we change as we go along. Penyulap ☏ 19:35, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

When i imagine spam i see intentional large number of unnecesary or unhelpful text on either the article page or talkpage. Defender of the wiki, anti vandalism, and anti spam focus on cleaning on "intentional" damage to articles/talkpage or intentionally changing what wikipedia isnt about. Which intentional damage is in a sense "vandalism". The defender barnstar has two options.

I'm subtly trying to show what Wp:award should really be about. And we have other barnstars that dont make sense. Like surreal barnstar, and barnstars that seem to be made just to be made such as invisible barnstar. Barnstars are slowly changing from symbol of exceptional contribution to "general edits".Lucia Black (talk) 20:39, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Do you have any evidence to suggest that barnstars have lost their prestige, or that the number or barnstars, the redundancy of barnstars, or the barnstars that "don't make sense" to you are leading to this loss of prestige? (And please note that the Surreal Barnstar was the 7th Barnstar created, and has been a part of the Project since summer 2004). Achowat (talk) 20:46, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
History means precisely nothing at all to new users, or to be more precise, most users, look at how long the average editor has been on wikipedia, I'd have a guess and figure it's not since 2004. The history is history, it's cool, but it's also history. If the page needs to be shared by both editors who are looking for barnstar history as well as editors who want to thank someone, but are new to all of this (keep in mind users who have been here since '04 probably know which barnstar is which) well, lets think of who is the reader of this page, and how should the information be ordered and presented. Lets not go looking for references.
The page needs to explain what a barnstar is as opposed to a cookie or other award, without giving people the complete history of life the universe and everything since the beginning of time, they are just not interested in that, put it all in a section where they can find that stuff if they are looking for it. Most editors want to give someone a barnstar, or look at what kinds they are, seriously, the people who first awarded something or drew it, that's great, but I do not want to know, unless I want to know. I don't want to have to wade through all that crp just to find the appropriate barnstar to thank someone. It may be worth considering adding the detail of each award to the image description and the template itself, and keep it off the page altogether.
Blank columns we don't need it. The page goes on forever because so much room is wasted and will never be used. The page is a mess, and I'm not certain that assessing prestige of each one is the best way to look at fixing it, though, I'm more of a disruptive editor :) I like to improve overall order and the structure, rather than the data contained in the design. I still think the order should be based upon making the information people are looking for easiest to find, rather than thrusting history as wedge between them and what they are looking for.
Lucia is quite right on both counts, the page is a mess, and Barnstars are losing prestige and I'll tell you why, it's because no new editor has any idea what the difference between a cookie and a barnstar is, because the page gives them no clue. This comes up a lot, people giving out barnstars for what appears to be no particular reason or inappropriately, and lecturing them until the end of time on the history and prestige of a barnstar will not tell them to go and give someone a hamburger or whatever, all they will know is that the barnstar is in front of them, and they want to give an award. Penyulap ☏ 23:09, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
The loss of the barnstar's prestige is there already. Because we are already seeing more barnstars for general edits that any1 can do that can be given to anyone. We are seeing barnstars that are vague and have no real significance (invisible barnstar? Surreal Barnstar? i'm even questioning Barnstar of Diligence for its wording).Lucia Black (talk) 00:17, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I largely agree with Lucia and Penyulap on this.. it seems to me the (unfortunate) consensus regarding listing barnstars is that "historical significance" takes precedence over "usefulness to editors". As an obvious example, notice that the barnstar page is listed in chronological order - which is entirely unhelpful! A separate Wikipedia:History of the barnstar could be created for nostalgia purposes.. To me, WP:BARNSTAR should serve two purposes (on top of explaining what a barnstar is): 1) Letting users quickly and efficiently find the award they came looking for, and 2) Giving editors ideas for barnstars that we think should be given out more. Because really, what else is this page for? (and don't say nostalgia..) Mlm42 (talk) 01:02, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

 
this might help
right now consensus is slowly tipping to our reasoning. However its difficult to get more since WP:AWARD is pretty secluded.Lucia Black (talk) 15:44, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
Well the alternative is to go to a heap of effort to rearrange the page and that is certain to attract the attention of the idontlikeits, so bah! I don't know I should start messing with the page anyhow at some stage. Probably all of the pages like PUA and STAR should have a little compressed summary of AWARD to say what is for what, to direct people to the right page so there is a little bit less of the wrong awards turning up where they don't belong. Penyulap ☏ 16:55, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
Well, does any1 have a real reason to oppose merging barnstars? the idea of barnstars, shouldn't be just about a fancy name and design (though understand thats part of it). For now, a more direct proposal is to merge them and give them a whole new name (or strikingly similar name) to the new given barnstar (so that we don't pick favorites). Of course, new barnstar designs might be needed to be made to compliment their new title. Here's the details to the proposal:
  • Working Wikipedian's Barnstar - The Tireless Contributor Barnstar(keeping Tireless contributor)
  • The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar - The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar - The Anti-Spam Barnstar = The Defender Barnstar (a shorter name that shows more status and achievement)
  • The Anti-Flame Barnstar - Civility Barnstar - The Barnstar of Diplomacy = The Peaceful Barnstar
  • Graphic Designer - The Graphic Designer's Barnstar (just keep one or the other in this case

For now, like I've mentioned before, these aren't concrete names but the idea of giving them a new name once merged. So if u don't like a current name proposed, suggest which one we should keep or suggest another name. that said, there's also the issue of these being used...so.... suggest not deleting the templates. but removing them from the list. It wont solve it completely for those who just like giving barnstars away who will find them, but it wont have much. Or maybe edit the template saying something like "no longer part of the barnstar list" to keep from being used. As heartless as it sounds, this may be more beneficial. the only ssue s think some are treating this wikiproject na WP:OWN-like way. even though t's not more than one editor. It does show less credibility.Lucia Black (talk) 04:46, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

I expect some of the doubles like graphic are a certainty. Although Defender of the Wiki Barnstar is a little different, some of it's purpose merges into anti-vandalism, but other facets see it being mentioned elsewhere in a different role, like policy enforcement in other areas. I should make an effort to provide something of a new format, if people want to see it. Penyulap ☏ 08:56, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
The real reason for not merging Barnstars is that: 1. Being a "Working Man" and a "Tireless Contributor" are different things, even if you think they're "too similiar". 2. By de-listing very popular Barnstars, we essentially strip awards from editors who have already been awarded them. 3. The Tireless Contributor was added to the list when there were only seven other awards, including the Working Man's Barnstar. I've heard no convincing argument to change the consensus that has served us well for 8 years. Consensus can change; but not without good reason. Achowat (talk) 13:58, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
They send the same message. Too different? one focus on daily tasks while the other is more vague, both key are "tireless". Yes all of the are "different" in their own way, however they are increasingly similar to send the same message. De-listing does not mean deleting them. Sometimes achowat, when i make a specific clarification or possible solution, you tend to skim through it. I wont repeat myself. I said a possible solution and i wont bother clarifying in text when you can just look back and read more carefully. And anti-vandalism could be policy enforcement as well... otherwise what would be vandalism without policy? You see, the message is the same they "defending" Wikipedia's name from things that don't belong in Wikipedia such as.
"consensus 8 years ago"? its a fresh argument, it really doesn't matter what the "consensus" was back then. especially since back then it was barely starting. In fact, maybe back then they didn't even see the potential of the issue and we are seeing it now. As others have said, you'll let the nostalgia affect the benefits. Or maybe you purposely ignore these factors. you aren't exactly giving a strong reason why we should keep them other highly subjective reasoning (as always). Technically consensus s tipping onto the favor of the proposal unless more editors come in and make it a much more controversial argument.
Another possible solution is redirecting barnstars while somehow keeping the text added in. Or creating a barnstar exchange. For barnstars that are marked "no longer listed" can be traded for one that fits the corresponding one. Also, there's the high possible fact that people just wont care because they either a) don't bother to check their awards. or b) they no longer contribute to Wikipedia. There are many possble ways to go around it.Lucia Black (talk) 02:05, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Seems, now that the answer s here, no one wants to contribute anymore. regardless...'ll keep ths discussion alive until we get a consensus on a solution.Lucia Black (talk) 04:01, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Islamic State of Afghanistan Bonm

Latest comment: 12 years ago12 comments3 people in discussion
  The Islamic State of Afghanistan Barnstar for National merit
I propose this. Mir Almaat Ali Almaat ☏ From Trivandrum, Kerala, India(UTC+5:30) 07:53, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

I've already made the template.Mir Almaat Ali Almaat ☏ From Trivandrum, Kerala, India(UTC+5:30) 07:54, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

But we already have: {{The Afghanistan Barnstar of National Merit}}. extra999 (talk) 14:08, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

That is about Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, which is the present country. I proposed this award about the Islamic State of Afghanistan which existed from 1992-1996(as the real government of Afghanistan) and 1996-2001(as the country which controlled the provinces which were not controlled by the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is the Taliban Afghanistan.Mir Almaat Ali Almaat ☏ From Trivandrum, Kerala, India(UTC+5:30) 04:54, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Oh, extra999 (talk) 05:49, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

And do you agree?Mir Almaat Ali Almaat ☏ From Trivandrum, Kerala, India(UTC+5:30) 06:02, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

How many articles apply to that former government? My only concern is that this may be "Too limited in scope" to be an effective BONM. Achowat (talk) 13:45, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
That's my concern as well. extra999 (talk) 01:00, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

I think Islamic State of Afghanistan and Burhanuddin Rabbani(President), Northern Alliance , War in Afghanistan(1996-2001) and a few others. Mir Almaat Ali Almaat ☏ From Trivandrum, Kerala, India(UTC+5:30) 04:43, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but with such a limited scope, I think using Afganistan's BONM for all Afgan history is probably the better option. Achowat (talk) 13:18, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

And many other articles too...Mir Almaat Ali Almaat ☏ From Trivandrum, Kerala, India(UTC+5:30) 05:07, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

But many different regimes have come in many different countries,we dont need to have a bonm for every of these. Their scope is limited even if it's important and as it is in this case. In my view around 15 article you have in the topic. We can use the country BoNM. extra999 (talk) 05:39, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Barnstars 2.0

Latest comment: 12 years ago36 comments12 people in discussion
  Done - Sandbox merged with the actual page. mabdul 08:28, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

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

Previous discussion: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikipedia Awards/Archive 16#Barnstars 2.0

Alright, I've come across a pretty big issue with the way we list the Barnstars. The problem is with the Barnstars and Barnstars 2.0; namely that (by having two different lists, they don't line up). I have no earthly idea how to rectify this situation. Maybe a seperate column on the page with the 2.0 graphic present, I'm not sure. The big problem is that there are Barnstars that exists as BS2.0s but not on the standard Barnstar list, and to make matters worse, many of the Barnstars on the standard list are in 2.0 form! Now I don't mean to deride the good work that's been done by the BS2.0 people; they're useful alternatives. But I just spent 45 minutes creating a "Mediation Barnstar", only to find that one existed, but only as a 2.0! Am I the only one who sees a problem with the current scheme? If so, what can be done to fix it? Achowat (talk) 19:39, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I've wondered about that too. We could think about a merge, with the 2.0 images replacing the older images if 2.0 images are available. Pinetalk 07:00, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
I think that because Barnstars 2.0 were included in the program shell of the English Wikipedia, it is long past time to do Barnstars 2.0 as the basic barnstars and the 1.0 as the alternative.

  Upgrade. --Antonu (talk) 09:49, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

OK, I'm nearly finish with merging; Here are some observations:

todo list

  • merging the last 17 banrstar of WP:BS2 to the sandbox
  • fixing the actual table and check if the listed ones have alt versions
  • merging and updating some barnstars (as described above)
  • create an SVG barnstar for the SVG barnstar (lol)
  • discuss what to do with the topic/project related ones

mabdul 18:29, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

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

new proposals

I want to merge in a similar way now

Proposal 1
Vote
Discussion


Proposal 2

Reorder the Barnstars either:

  • chronological ("actual" state, not all have dates given)
  • alphabetical
  • any other order

mabdul 08:28, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Vote
Discussion
  • We need to discuss if and which Barnstar should get moved. For example: there is the AFC barnstar in the 'General Barnstars' section although it would be better to include it only in the WikiProject related table. mabdul 08:28, 4 April 2012 (UTC)


Proposal 3

Merge the WikiProjects barnstars and the 'Topical Barnstars' since many of these template can (and are) listed in both tables. mabdul 08:28, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Vote
Discussion
  • See, I'm more weary of this scheme than the others. And most of this is our fault (or, really, the fault of the wiki system; luckily and can get fixed by the wiki system!). It seems like Topical Barnstars grew out of general Barnstars, and then when WikiProjects started Templating their own members. Since Barnstar Proposal was MFD, there's been no standard for inclusion. Judging from the discussions I've seen the inclusion standards are pretty clear, just no one's written them down. WP:PUA is, more or less, a free-for-all; inclusion on that list requires a consensus of 1. For all other lists: An Award must be unique (not redundant to other awards), widespread (an ArbCom barnstar would have a hard time passing muster, because it can be given to so few users), and beneficial to the project (not disruptive, etc). For all the talking, what it gets me to is the idea that WikiProjects are more-or-less given carte blanche to create their own awards, per WP:LOCALCONSENSUS. I don't think the two lists (Topical and WikiProject) are as merge-able as you think
    •   Topical Barnstars need a wider consensus than WikiProject Awards, and as such, merging the two lists isn't ideal. Achowat (talk) 13:25, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
      • Yeah, but there is a overlapping of many templates, and many wikiproject don't list there barnstars there although they are categorized correctly! I still think we simply should merge them and move them to a separated page (so renaming the actual project page) mabdul 16:14, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Topical Barnstars

to do - list
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Wikipedia_Awards/Archive_20&oldid=1146666788"