Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikipedia Awards: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎...: new section
Line 756: Line 756:


: Because this is a public wiki, and I saw this incident and had something to say about it. [[User:CT Cooper|CT Cooper]]<small><span style="font-weight:bold;">&nbsp;·</span>&#32;[[User talk:CT Cooper|talk]]</small> 09:37, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
: Because this is a public wiki, and I saw this incident and had something to say about it. [[User:CT Cooper|CT Cooper]]<small><span style="font-weight:bold;">&nbsp;·</span>&#32;[[User talk:CT Cooper|talk]]</small> 09:37, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

== ... ==

I was Added the Cast iron barnstar because for 3 original stars would get a cast iron barnstar.
[[File:Cast-iron barnstar.jpg]] Cast Iron Barnstar is First Jpg file format barnstar.
Cast Iron Used for 3 Original stars would award, but for get must have 3 original stars or more. Wikipedia had it but for me, it's too good. do not delete it because have consensus, so creator is [[User:Dr.K.]] is creator of that barnstar. you get it? Here ,So why i have powers. i protecting it because why? because, it's useful. give me a barnstar so i know! it's too good for me.

Revision as of 12:10, 14 June 2012

Barnstars 2.0

 Done - Sandbox merged with the actual page. mabdul 08:28, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]


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)[reply]

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)[reply]
      • 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)[reply]

Topical Barnstars

to do - list

Proposed addition to the list

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
(short addendum) That image is gorgeous and striking, though. Good work on that! Achowat (talk) 16:14, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
Indeed. benzband (talk) 14:56, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
(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)[reply]
"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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Propose the addition of a edit notice to the barnstar page

 Done - not a big deal. Feel free to improve it at Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Barnstars. mabdul 10:53, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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.

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
(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)[reply]
....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)[reply]
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)[reply]
[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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
WP:PUA should most definitely not have any sort of edit notice. Achowat (talk) 14:29, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't think of that. I totally agree, of course. benzband (talk) 14:36, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]

@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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

!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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

well ? anyone ? Penyulap ☏ 05:02, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Achowat, does the extra green light and direction help offset the poor form ? Penyulap ☏ 11:23, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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

Scotland BoNM

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
Potentially redundant to the UK Barnstar of National Merit, but it doesn't really bother me. Achowat (talk) 20:13, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
Support extra999 (talk) 01:53, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
for what? on which page? mabdul 02:32, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
to add it on the BoNM page, as a BoNM. extra999 (talk) 08:47, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
though I would prefer quality improved. extra999 (talk) 08:50, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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
    before
  • after
    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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
  • Before
    Before
  • After
    After

And England's:

  • England
    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)[reply]

Curator's Barnstar

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

{{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)[reply]

Too Many Barnstars?

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
Would you be willing to sandbox this idea, to show us what you mean? Achowat (talk) 19:14, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

A username barnstar

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)[reply]

This sounds far more like a Personal User Award than an "According to Hoyle" Barnstar. Achowat (talk) 19:23, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Would make a good PUA. extra999 (talk) 02:45, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

The Commonwealth Barnstar of Merit

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)[reply]
Yeah..... StrikeEagle ✈ 13:24, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Tried it but messed up....the image looses transparency.... any idea of how to fix it? StrikeEagle ✈ 13:28, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the depends on what image editing software you're using. Achowat (talk) 19:15, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Also on the file type: jpg doesn't support transparency but png for instance does. benzband (talk) 19:18, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Equazicon and I have created images. Penyulap ☏ 16:29, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rookie Barnstar

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]
Yeah, I would oppose it. We have many of such awards. extra999 (talk) 10:00, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

South Ossetian Award of National Merit

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

 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)[reply]

Changes to WP:STAR

  • It is the custom to reward Wikipedia contributors for hard work and due diligence by awarding them a barnstar.

Right here, first sentence is first problem, it equates a Barnstar with a cookie. If someone is looking for a cookie, they have found it right here right now and will look for a suitable barnstar to use as a cookie. I don't need suggestions for alternatives, just recognition that it is a problem. It will be pointless to fix problems like these, wasting my time if someone is going to revert with some summary like "I can't see the problem" if people want no help, I'll go do something else until Barnstars equate to cookies pervasively and then it'll be too late to do anything but smirk. Penyulap ☏ 09:12, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but what is the problem? Barnstars are like cookies! What do you think barnstars are for? mabdul 09:37, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
However..people value Barnstar more than they do for some cookie..or drink.Don't you think so? StrikeEagle ✈ 09:39, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Bleh. They are all just strings of 0s and 1s lurking in a server somewhere. More poetically, barnstars and cookies are simple tokens of gratitude… the first sentence you refer to states:

It is the custom to reward Wikipedia contributors for hard work and due diligence by awarding them a barnstar.


And that is all there is to know. Isn't? benzband (talk) 14:43, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What is the problem ? Zeros and ones ? Well to you, your local supermarket is just 'stuff on shelves' and that is that. In fact everyone in the store thinks the same way. It's a little more than that. There are qualified professional researchers Ph.Dorks, that arrange everything that you do, placing things in the best manner in the best position, with the most appropriate kind of labelling, omg labels, and then the store lighting in different areas for different reasons. A single display unit in the deli section just two meters wide will suck up more electricity than every lightbulb in every home of every person in the store and don't you wonder why they have such energy inefficient displays ? Do you realise that the supermarket freezer section, with the glass doors on it, those doors are heated ? The music that is played, there are teams of researchers spend more money on researching a single song than you spend on buying a car because the effect on mood it has on customers is supposed to put them in a mood to forget their budget, and dream with open pockets. Stuff on shelves, Zeros and ones, just words. This is like Do I frigging have to lecture until the end of time and paste up a long list of reverts to show there are reverts before putting in an edit notice, is it like that ? the edit notice is half done btw, the image is crap, but at least it is doing part of the job, as there are less reverts (but I still have to wait till there is another one to prove it still doesn't work with that crap image)
People complain everywhere on the noticeboards about the frivolous giving of barnstars, and this is where we are at ? with crap lack of support I don't know why I bother. Every freaking place on wiki it's the same, someone(Lucia Black, but it could be anyone) has started off a section above because they see a problem, and if they tried to change it themself, Hell no, they'd get reverted with the demand to lecture and teach and drag everyone kicking and struggling into enlightenment on something they have no interest in and don't want to know anyway. If it is so boring and menial like sportsfans and opera goers swapped places, then just get out of the way, or take a class in sports appreciation or marketing dynamics or visual design or whatever. Penyulap ☏ 16:29, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Normally I would write "TL;DR anybody want to summaries it for me?", but I read it and I'm still not understanding the problem. "everywhere on the noticeboards" - and (really) how do you want to prevent editors to give them away? The barnstars are popularized since the WMF invented such systems like wikilove.
"as there are less reverts (but I still have to wait till there is another one to prove it still doesn't work with that crap image)" - there are always people not reading notices and simply doing stuff although red signs yell at them. The edit notice fulfill its needs. Although this belongs in another section: Did I miss something to add or change you have reached a consensus? mabdul 17:24, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am not trying to stop people giving awards, I want them to choose the correct type of award for the appropriate situation, that's not what has been occurring in a lot of cases and I can improve the situation by directing editors to the award that they want.
There is nothing that needs change as I gave up of exhaustion on what would have been a simple task, I figure half a job done is better than none at all. If you'd like to improve it, take down that ridiculous barnstar and replace it with a hand, palm open, facing the viewer, fingers flat and finger tips to the top of the image. Penyulap ☏ 17:41, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no stopping anyone from giving away a barnstar (even if they never did anything to merit one. Even i still question how I got awarded with the special barnstar as it holds no specification) unless there's a large pattern of a certain user/IP giving them out. That said, the issue isn't to make users use them less, is to make users use them more wisely and carefully. The current format has too many specific barnstars that can be merged instead of having so many....in fact, there's so any, when is anyone ever going to use the original barnstar?Lucia Black (talk) 13:25, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So, Penyulap, if there is a problem (for the sake of argument, let's presume that I understand and support the idea that there is a problem) what solution do you propose? Achowat (talk) 13:52, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Organising with a view towards grouping the barnstars, possibly a table for the most popular type of awards given, Anti-vandalism table having the most popular antivandal barnstar banner as it will appear on a page, then the alternatives, if an alternative needs a full width display of how it appears on the page, it gets it, but otherwise just the image and a link to the star's page, this way you can fit a lot more in, including a few awards that are not barnstars, for smaller thank you's. So from the top of the page they can get the thing they are most likely after, and direct links away from the star page where they decide a barnstar is a bit over the top, rather than 'lock them in on the idea of a barnstar' because the alternatives are too hard to find (and they are too lazy).
after the groups for the most popular ones are done come the tables according to project and so on, dumping all the blank space from the current tables, otherwise retaining essentialist information. Less fluff.
I would re-visit the idea of the visual gallery too, it should exist somewhere, along with 'make your own' instructions. Possibly list somewhere the images in my visual gallery in a table with a number on each image, and a blank template editors can copy to the target page, enter the number, the title and the message and presto instant award. Makes giving a perfectly tailored award a 60 second task. Probably same sort of thing can be done for almost all awards so that it is fast easy and compact, with more variety despite no extra space, most importantly is the crosslinking from barnstars to wikilove awards so that editors don't cheapen the barnstar or give a small award when a large one was intended. Pretty sure the receiver of the award would like that too, people don't seem to like getting a barnstar for no good reason as much as they get disappointed by an award that they think doesn't recognise the scope of their effort.
The other award pages should have at least an opening that outlines what different awards are for, pretty much what should be on the award page, but as wp:star is often the first page they come to (or the only some editor go) it needs some consideration given to crosslinking. Penyulap ☏ 14:45, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We talked about this already, and I thought you were going to sandbox it out. Do that work; show us that your idea is better than what we have now. Achowat (talk) 15:12, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Me do all the work? how can you help as well, beyond critique ? can you help Lucia with groupings ? Penyulap ☏ 18:24, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sold on the vision, so, unfortunately, I wouldn't be a useful tool in having it come to life. Achowat (talk) 18:33, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly achowat, we don't need a sandbox just to see how organization could work. The issue is you want to be the spectator. instead of actually trying to see how this idea would work. However, on this case myself am 50/50 on the idea. re-organizing sees a lil early. It would be easier working on the most general barnstars to the most specific.Lucia Black (talk) 02:13, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • chronological ordering, has it become more chrono than logical

I'd like to know if the chronological ordering of the barnstars on the WP:STAR page is actually more important than listing the stars by the apparent probability that an editor is looking for that star, that is, listing the most popular (or likely to be) first, so it is easy-to-find by an editor arriving at the page. I'm not knowing or suggesting the ordering of the page, just examining the status quo. Penyulap ☏ 02:37, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Lucia, you're about 65% correct. I have no interest in doing the heavy lifting here. I think the Barnstars are fine as they are; I've seen no evidence to the contrary. But my more salient point is one that affects all non-profit, volunteer-style organizations, not just the WMF. We have volunteers who get excited with something like "Oh Oh! I have this great idea and it's going to be wonderful and efficient...someone should do that". Generally speaking, if you have an idea people expect you to implement it. This "WP:STAR Redesign" isn't the first time I've asked someone with a new idea to show their commitment to actually doing the work. The WikiMedals is another clear example. While organizing "by category" might make more sense in principle, I feel in practice it will be a far harder feat to organize. So, essentially, I'm asking for a sandbox because I'd like to know how Penyulap would like to group the stars, what s/he will do with the stars that don't fit Nice and Neat into that scheme, but also so that other editors have a clear, obvious example of what s/he means by "Group them By Category", before they discuss the merits of implementing such a proposal. Achowat (talk) 13:58, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Whilst I'm looking to see if there are enough people aware of new users giving out barnstars when they really ought to be giving out smaller wikilove gifts, and concerned enough about it to want to work together to make improvements which would address that situation and be uncontroversial enough that they don't cause discomfort to the nostalgic. It is a matter of whether or not there are enough people who think it is significant enough to work together to improve the experience for that many users. I, for one, want to help. Penyulap ☏ 15:30, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think we tread into dangerous waters when we start evaluating when and why users award barnstars. Achowat (talk) 15:31, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

extraordinary claims and section break

ok, so we may not need a section break, but it gives it that 'Ta daaa' sort of feeling, which I feel I deserve because ANI is so incredibly busy it is so incredibly hard to go back and find something there. but, here it is.

For 11 days, large numbers of editors were so incensed and upset that Barnstars might have been given out inappropriately they discussed banning / blocking the editor responsible.

They also wanted to change policy banning IP editors from giving out Barnstars at all here

The discussion was arbitrarily closed thankfully, before things got completely out of hand. Penyulap ☏ 16:16, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Still, this is just reactions from many editors to the action of a single editor, it doesn't really show just how many editors are giving out awards poorly. It would be pretty good to get input from more editors finding out how the barnstars are being awarded and how new editors are fairing in their endeavours. If there is widespread advice being given out to new editors across the project, then whatever that advice is, we could look to incorporating it into the docs.
How history of wiki barnstars, and guidance on their use should be combined or separated is a topic for discussion as well. Penyulap ☏ 15:51, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What is your proposed solution to this apparent "problem"? Achowat (talk) 15:59, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly we can get more input than just the editors here, how do you feel about a request for wider commentary ? Penyulap ☏ 16:37, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Request comments on what? If you have no solutions to offer, perhaps you should think a little bit harder about the causes of the problem. Achowat (talk) 17:10, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Think harder ? I guess if a sparrow thought hard enough it could tell me how to fly. Penyulap ☏ 22:09, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Bird flight. Achowat (talk) 03:15, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Achowat, please dont have that WP:OWN-ish tone. And Penyulap, could you give a more concrete plan (step by step) on what needs to be done.Lucia Black (talk) 03:58, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

yes, I will give it a go, though I wouldn't call it concrete, but I'll come up with something. Penyulap ☏ 04:31, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
@Lucia: OWN-ish? It'd be great to drop me a line on my talk about what you mean. Achowat (talk) 12:22, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It'd be best, you could figure things out on your own, instead of asking for constant elaboration for the simplest things. regardless, It would be great, If there was less judging and more elaborating or at least compromise. It would be great.Lucia Black (talk) 20:59, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Islamic State of Afghanistan Bonm

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)[reply]

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

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

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)[reply]

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

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

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)[reply]
That's my concern as well. extra999 (talk) 01:00, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

Barnstar - Countering Systemic Bias? Where Is It?

I have been poking about looking at barnstars and been a little surprised by the proliferation of nationalist - regional - and even politically linked barnstars.

I have no issue with awards that promote excellence in fields of knowledge, but there is a risk of adding to "Systemic Bias" by the promotion of barriers.

Systemic Bias is recognised as one of the most pervasive issues across wikiland - and yet there is no recognition of anyone who works to role it back - stop it even a little bit - anyone who is actually aware of the issue.

Thus, the idea of systemic bias is more troubling than intentional vandalism; vandalism is readily identified and corrected. The existence of systemic bias means that not only are large segments of the world not participating in the discussion at hand, but that there is a deep-rooted problem in the relationship of Wikipedia and its contributor editors with the world at large.

Wikipedia:Systemic bias#Why it matters and what to do

Am I being daft? Or is there a missing barnstar for one of the biggest issues there is - and does that absence indicate a bigger issue, and even Systemic Bias against Countering Systemic Bias.

It gets quite surreal, even thinking about it?
Media-Hound 'D 3rd P^) (talk) 14:05, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So what you are proposing you now? A new barnstar for/against 'Systemic Bias'? mabdul 18:26, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
True irony would be to propose one for those showing it. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 21:56, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fiddle Faddle It is truly ironic that the irony of your ironic comment could well an truly be lost on so many!
Media-Hound 'D 3rd P^) (talk) 22:17, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Systemic bias is one of en.wikipedia's biggest weaknesses. I think that a barnstar for those who help tackle it would be a great idea. bobrayner (talk) 12:12, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Do we have any idea what sort of actions or edits would be worthy of being awarded this Barnstar? Achowat (talk) 15:31, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Frankly - as a start point, anyone who even notices the issue should qualify! Fiddle Faddle and bobrayner should get one for even grasping the issue.

Maybe it should be a graded Barnstar - level one for noticing, level 2 for giving a fuck, level 3 for saying it's bad and editing with that in mind, level 4 for fighting the good fight, and level 5 awarded to Ghandi (Posthumously), and engraved on the tomb stone of any Wikipedian after that have passed away and someone(?) notices that they also edited against it .... or should that be the motif for the actual Barnstar itself? A tomb Stone. Systemic Bias RIP. How Ironic!

It is actually depressing and beyond Ironic that such a massive and vital issue has not got a Barnstar, and no one noticed ...... and it may be necessary to even consider how to educate people into why such a BStar is required, and why it's such an issue that it is still missing!

It seems you can get a Bstar for being a performing seal, reverting anything with a bot and even just turning up and being a Technocrat - but the BIGGEST and most corrosive issue across all of Wikiland has just been missed.

Have a cookie!

Media-Hound 'D 3rd P^) (talk) 03:35, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think anyone would doubt that systemic bias is a problem, but simply recognizing it is a hard thing to award a Barnstar for. We want to reward the edits, not the editor. And absent a clear understanding of what kind of actions do (or even could) combat that bias, it's hard for me to get behind such an award. We have a systemic bias towards current events and science/technology, two issues I couldn't care less about. Should I be awarded this star simply for maintaining the pages regarding Heraldry and Parliamentary Procedure? Achowat (talk) 13:15, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you covered Parliamentary Procedure on a Global basis - country by country - well that would qualify... wouldn't it? There is parliamentary procedures in all sorts of places. Australia - New Zealand - Japan even has a Parliament ... and last I looked Places like India had one too! In fact there are a vast number on countries that have parliaments. So many places and so much to cover. Is the subject getting full coverage or only some coverage focusing upon certain countries?

Heraldry? Which forms? Which national groups? Heraldry is after all just badges and distinctions - so does it also address the same activities globally? Some of those distinctions come in the form of actual images and mortifications of the body. Heraldry is a very detailed and intricate business, but it is not just reserved to one country or even one continent. It does raise wider global matters. Heraldry is a form of Visual communication - using Symbols - and yet so are many other badging activities where symbols are used in culturally significant ways as emblems. I remember a fascinating discussion about the use of Symbols such as heraldic badges and a carved Coconut. One place the Heraldic shield communicated information, and on the other side of the world they used carved coconuts. The coconut was covered in symbols which communicated rank - status - family/Tribal allegiance and was even used for diplomatic activity. They had the exact same function, but only one was widely written about.

So if someone has passion for certain subjects - looks at them from a global perspective - addresses them globally - I'm sure that would be activity consistent with "Countering Systemic Bias" and it would be recognisable and suitable for an award! It's easy for people to end up task focused and subject focused and by that missing the Global aspects and significance.

In one way - anyone acting as a Translator would qualify for the award - and it's odd how there is not Translator's Barnstar either. Oh Sorry there is The Rosetta Barnstar Hmmm... ? Maybe there needs to be an Heraldic notion taken to Barnstars so that a decal or helmet or crest gets added for the actual translation acting to counter Systemic Bias? Imagine it - a talk page voting for a Barnstar over a translation and if it has actually acted to reduce systemic bias or not.

I do worry about one poor Wikipedian from Mongolia. They started a Wiki page written in Mongolian Cyrillic. It was flagged up as an Rfc - so I went to look. It was hard work tracking down any form of translation that was coherent - for even single words on the page. There are no listed Wiki translators in the field. I said that I was going to employ specific communication techniques to establish some form of dialogue. I also called the Mongolian Embassy at 8.30 am and had a chat. I even had to locate any form of on-line translation system that could deal with Mongolian Cyrillic - and I even had to do quite a few word searches on Wikipedia Monglia to see if any of the words lead to relevant pages ..... and they did!

As I found out the page was the Full Dynastic History of Mongal rulers from Ghengis Karn onwards. It is quite a complex subject and it just aint covered here in Wikiland in detail and this Mongolian Wikipedian was providing it and in a way that allowed more and more knowledge to be be revealed. It was interesting to find someone reaching out and saying here is Knowledge you do not have! I was quite excited about a quality addition - and the person using Mongolian Cyrillic had even made sure that there were images of as many of these characters as possible in place - and they had all been tracked down in Wiki commons - and by cross referencing with Wiki Mongolia it was possible to see that there were yet more images there which could be brought from one place to another and gaps filled ... a nice visual way to cross reference info - again a known communication technique to address barriers.

So I go back to the page and find it had been redirected - and sent to the wrong subject. It seems that someone with a Wiki redirect fetish just decided what the page was about and made the original page which they could not even read Vanish. Hmmmmm.... now that was a loss and the actions were not correct - oh and it also prevented new valid input to Wikiland that would have addressed Systemic Bias.

More annoying was that the page had been tagged as to be translated with a 2 week time limit - and yet within 5 hours it was redirected to the wrong page and the Wikipedian In Mongolia has never been heard from again! In total it took only 38 hours for the matter to be dismissed and less time from it being raised as an Rfc! Hmmmm...and the page it has been redirected too does not even have the relevant language inserts in Mongolian Cyrillic, and the chance to actually add then has gone! Oh would adding those have anything to countering Systemic Bias - and improving content?

As they say "Systemic Bias" is corrosive - and worst of all so many people don't recognise it when it's their own. Am I mad and insane to wonder at the issues that just keep coming up? At times it's almost Orwellian "Redirect Good - Systemic Bias Bad" just like sheep! Chant the mantra for long enough and it just has no meaning anymore.

Maybe that is why someone forgot the Barnstar!

Media-Hound 'D 3rd P^) (talk) 22:50, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So it's your opinion that the only Systeic Bias worth countering is the pro-Western bias? I think that's folly. "Systemic bias" means that the kind of people who contribute are not an accurate cross-section of the world, or even the English speaking world. We are, largely, American, British, and Indian men with advanced education, disposable income, free time, and at least some interest and knowledge of computer programming. The things we are knowledgable about is not all of human knowledge. But there is, unfortunately, an insurmountable systematic (if not systemic bias) is that, for many (if not most) editors, the "sum of human knowledge" is inherently limited to "the knowledge published in English".


Rant aside, Systemic bias is an issue, a big one to be sure. But rewarding anyone who writes about non-Western things...it seems the scope of this Star is almost "too big". Systemic bias can be pointed to for any lack of coverage. "We don't have a page about the mayor of a small Belarussian town; systemic bias!" So now anyone that starts a new page or significantly expands a page is fighting that bias (because, if we weren't biased against 18th Century Sailboat Racing in present-day Nicaragua, then there would already be a page). I don't mean to poke fun, but I don't really see a defined area where this barnstar could be awarded. We have too many male editors, I signed up my female friend at a Meetup. Am I countering systemic bias? I'm sorry, but I really can't support a scheme without full understanding what, if any, edits or actions should be (and, as part of that, should not be) recognized with the award. Achowat (talk) 14:40, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've got a compromise for you. How about we ask the fine folk over at WP:CSB if they want this as a WikiProject Award. I'd have literally 0 problem with that. Achowat (talk) 19:52, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Achowat - You asked a question "So it's your opinion that the only Systeic Bias worth countering is the pro-Western bias?"

....and the answer is NO! I actually have a far bigger grasp of the subject to limit the matter to seeing it only in a narrow manner. P^)

I have no objection to asking the fine folks over at WP:CSB for views. I happen to be one of them! P^) Not sure why that would require a compromise? Does it need an Rfc?

It seems your concern is over quantifiable action over subjective perception. It's easy to assess action and hard to asses ethics. Maybe there is a need for a different type of award that assess ethics over action?

Media-Hound 'D 3rd P^) (talk) 00:24, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Let me explain why this is a compromise from a WPWPWA perspective. We maintain 4 major kinds of awards. "Barnstars and Other Related Awards", "WikiProject Awards", "Awards of National Merit", and "Personal User Awards". Each of them needs their own different kind of consensus. PUAs, for instance, only require one editor to use the award for it to be listed, and Barnstars and Other Awards (found at WP:STAR, and WP:ORA) need community consensus. Awards by WikiProect, essentially, just need a consensus of that project. Essentially, if WP:CSB builds an award, it's not really our place not to list it. Does that make a little more sense? Achowat (talk) 12:52, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Achowat Thank you for clarifying your views on procedure and consensus. You did say "I've got a compromise for you. How about we ask the fine folk over at WP:CSB if they want this as a WikiProject Award."... and I did ask by return "Does it need an Rfc?". Could you clarify what you think is the best way to proceed with what you see as a compromise?

Given that Systemic Bias is a wiki wide issue and not just a project issue, does it need opinion just from the WP:CSB members or wider comment from across Wiki Land? If there is to be an Rfc, it would be helpful to know the best place for that to take place. I have had a look at the list of awards at WP:WPPA, and the list is interesting. Given that you have said "it seems the scope of this Star is almost "too big", I'm not sure if it fits within the scope of WP:WPPA. To my mind, making it just a Project Award acts to minimise the issue and it's significance to all Wikipedians. Should such a Barnstar be awarded with assessment levels that go with other project barnstars - the Nintendo Barnstar - the "Weird Al" Yankovic Barnstar - The Middle-earth/Tolkien Barnstar? There is a Dissonance there which needs exploring. Media-Hound 'D 3rd P^) (talk) 14:11, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If a consensus for action is found at WP:CSB, then there's no need for RfC or any further action. And while there are small, top-based WPPAs, there's also {{Web Accessibility Barnstar}}, Template:TAAA Banstar, {{British Museum Barnstar}}, {{CVU Anti-Vandalism Award}}, {{Mind the Gap Award}}, and {{The Spoken star}}, which are a lot more in keeping with the style of award you're talking about. Achowat (talk) 14:22, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Right Achowat - to summarise your view, it is up to WP:WPPA to reach consensus on the matter and not Wikipedians in general. I have considered your view and believe it to be wrong. If it is to be treated only as a project award, it would prevent those who are not part of the project receiving the Barnstar. It is quite possible for individuals to be rolling back systemic bias and not be aware that they are doing it. There is the repeated focus on action such as reverting vandalism, or tagging pages etc - readily "Quantified" actions. Other barnstars are assessed as a Judgement call - Translation - The Feather Barnstar - The Philosophy Barnstar - The Barnstar of Integrity - all of which (along with others) require judgement and discernment and not simply quantitative assessment. So I grasp your compromise, but I believe it to be wrong. So would that make Rfc the best option? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Media-hound- thethird (talk • contribs) .

While I disagree with your assessment that my opinion is that WPPA is the only way to find consensus, I agree that an RFC would find a consensus as well. However, after a weekend of thinking about it, I think it is very important that a CSB Barnstar be added to WP:STAR. Do you have a proposed image? Achowat (talk) 14:39, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh! An image? Sorry, I'm not much of an artist. I was thinking something along the lines of the Escher water fall - Endless looping! Then I saw This and wondered if it was more appropriate? <Evil Grin }P^)>

Then I did think of a star and wondered if an Escher Pentagon wouldn't fit the idea. Small star inside the bigger issue - sort of getting people to think beyond the star!

If you google images connected with Systemic Bias you tend to get lots of scales and balances - a motif already used on a number of Barnstars, so it would need something relevant but outside of "The Box" - even Thinking Outside Of The Box? .. A Barnstar Outside Of The Box?

Media-Hound 'D 3rd P^) (talk) 16:10, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Alternate Image idea: Saw this over at wiki commons:

Was wondering about the feasability of literally turning it through 180 degrees - turning the whole idea upside-down - and using that.

It has a subtlety too it that could work! Media-Hound 'D 3rd P^) (talk) 19:59, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The tireless cybernetic contributor Barnstar

The tireless cybernetic contributor Barnstar
For wikipedians who greatly enhance their editing, through robots and automation, sustained over long periods
(average >300 edits a day for 200 days or >100,000 per year) first awarded by Penyulap, in June 2024_

(the green colours are about the monochrome origins of visual displays)

  • oppose as proposer, I view the barnstar page with contempt in it's current form. in accord with the observations of Nageh and Lucia Black. Penyulap ☏ 00:14, 4 Jun 2012 (UTC)
what you don't realise is it will be approved, so may as well pluck out your eyes now. (yes, I'm joking, put the fork down) Penyulap ☏ 04:40, 4 Jun 2012 (UTC)
Well if it is to be approved and there is no stopping it, can it come in different, lurid and psychotropic colour ranges with an option for it to also throb in and out? At least that way you can use if for self Psycho-flagellation when you need to stop looking at Wiki land!
If not, can we have a "Philip K. Dick" star for the electric sheep?

Media-Hound 'D 3rd P^) (talk) 12:26, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
BRFA ? nothing to do with them setting or saying anything, I never even thought of proposing it there actually, and that would spoil the fun really. The image is Green eggs and ham on this page, pretty much everything here is at the moment. Makes no difference to me if it's even this year, the artwork is the artwork and sticks and stones are completely meaningless. Think of the names of 10 dead artists, or think of 10 artworks by artists who are now dead. Easy right ? Now think of the name or the comment of a single dead critic. Ha! most people have to go look it up. Art goes on long after you're dead and gone, criticism dies by the time you stop talking. Penyulap ☏ 14:34, 4 Jun 2012 (UTC)
I mean this with all the respect in the world: What on Earth are you talking about? Bots edit counts are, in large part, decided by the parameters set at BRFA. Achowat (talk) 14:37, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's cool, I know you're not having a go at me, but seriously since when is this about building bots ? This is about enhanced editing. using all the bot tools and editing tools and so forth, not making them. Technical award doesn't need anything to do with enhancement, anyone can do that. Penyulap ☏ 14:40, 4 Jun 2012 (UTC)
The Technology Barnstar
if we are going to bring up redundancy, no comment. Penyulap ☏ 14:46, 4 Jun 2012 (UTC)
The Tip of the Day Barnstar
if we are going to bring up redundancy, no comment. Penyulap ☏ 14:46, 4 Jun 2012 (UTC)
Ok, so it seems the description is unclear. This is an award for a high semi-automated edit count, say using Twinkle, Huggle, or AWB? Achowat (talk) 14:47, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar point

Mention {{Barnstar point}} at WP:Barnstars? benzband (talk) 12:10, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • don't care given the state of the page and talkpage 'co-operation'. But ironically caring enough to point this out. Penyulap ☏ 13:26, 9 Jun 2012 (UTC)
I'm unfamiliar with that Template; is it an award? Achowat (talk) 08:53, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Barnstar points should always be awarded over trivial items. Use a barnstar point when you want to thank someone for something without (cough) degrading the value of the original barnstar."

benzband (talk) 14:25, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar misuse?

A user rewarded me the The Civility Barnstar regarding the this discussion here and left a message stating "for good humour despite being a bit outnumbered on the Ell and Nikki issue". The user then gave barnstars for these users 2 and 3. Although this user found the discussion hilarious by giving those who participated, I don't. Because I made a mistake on proposing it for deletion and now they've made bad assumptions about what I did which kind of upset me. Isn't this type of action against this policy [3]? What could I tell user so that this doesn't happen again? Bleubeatle (talk) 05:17, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are not really any policies that govern the use of barnstars, and having read those links, I would be inclined to suggest it was poor taste rather than battleground tactics. Whilst it may be uncivil, given the state of civility that I have come to expect, it kindof fades into the norm for many editors around abouts. 'Unfortunate' I would call the situation, where documentation doesn't exist, then the community should try to assist each other instead, rather than descending into chaos. Penyulap ☏ 05:42, 10 Jun 2012 (UTC)
I can find no evidence in the diffs provided of anyone accusing Bleubeatle of acting in bad faith; being critical of someone's actions is not an assumption of bad faith. What did Zymurgy mean with his barnstar? I don't know, but Bleubeatle is free to decline/delete the barnstar from his talk page if he doesn't find it funny. CT Cooper · talk 22:53, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I might be wrong. But when I saw the barnstar I thought it was ment as a friendly "cheer up" kind of comment. Considering the situation with the article and everything. Seems to be a storm in a teacup kind of situation and Bleubeatle hopefully will just move on from it.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:58, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My main point is, bringing this barnstar situation up here was totally unnecessary and an overreaction.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:58, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
" totally unnecessary and an overreaction " is the primary way to describe everything on this page.
plus, this is the right place to ask, as good as any and better than most. Penyulap ☏ 01:54, 11 Jun 2012 (UTC)
Lets move on from this non-issue.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:01, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Where to though ? I don't want to go with you if I don't like where you're going next, maybe you can move on by yourself and I can stay here and discuss things further, would that be ok ? you're not going to grab me in a headlock and drag me away are you ? Penyulap ☏ 02:51, 12 Jun 2012 (UTC)
You are funny.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:28, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry - but I do hope I have gotten this Dialogue "So Totally Wrong"?

Did, by any chance, anyone ... however small... however insignificant... however expendable under the Wiki Technocracy, report "Cyber Harassment".... and did they get "Dissed"? Disrespected - Disregarded - Disbelieved?

Sorry, if I'm seen as overreacting?

I just have so much experience of dealing with Bubbles, and using any prick who comes to hand in bursting them!

Media-Hound 'D 3rd P^) (talk) 03:26, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you guys following me around my contributions? Bleubeatle (talk) 05:40, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because this is a public wiki, and I saw this incident and had something to say about it. CT Cooper · talk 09:37, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

...

I was Added the Cast iron barnstar because for 3 original stars would get a cast iron barnstar. Cast Iron Barnstar is First Jpg file format barnstar. Cast Iron Used for 3 Original stars would award, but for get must have 3 original stars or more. Wikipedia had it but for me, it's too good. do not delete it because have consensus, so creator is User:Dr.K. is creator of that barnstar. you get it? Here ,So why i have powers. i protecting it because why? because, it's useful. give me a barnstar so i know! it's too good for me.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Wikipedia_Awards&oldid=497540749"