Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikipedia Awards

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          A Wikipedia ad has been created for this project page. Click [show] to view it.

How do you award?[edit]

Do you post in the user talk page or in the user page? Thinker78 (talk) 21:09, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello Thinker78. They should be placed on the user's talk page as a new message. They are then free to copy/move them where they wish. I hope this helps, —PaleoNeonate – 00:51, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Orphan New Page Reviewer of the Year award[edit]

I noticed that {{New Page Reviewer of the Year}} is orphan. There's probably a relevant place where it could be listed (I've not seriously looked yet, but this is a reminder, and others may know). It is still in use. Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Reviewers may be a candidate. —PaleoNeonate – 01:45, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Adding the Tropical Cyclone Barnstar to the list[edit]

Here's an example:

  1. fdffe7;"
Cyclone barnstar.png The Editor's Barnstar

Here's the general form:

  1. fdffe7;"
Cyclone barnstar.png The Editor's Barnstar
Care to differ or discuss with me? The Nth User 20:54, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
@The Nth User: If you're asking if you can add the Tropical Cyclone Barnstar to the list of topical barnstars over at Wikipedia:Barnstars, then my advice would be to go ahead with it, since we don't currently have any other barnstars even vaguely related to tropical cyclones. If, someday, we get a barnstar relating to meteorology in general, we might want to simply use that barnstar instead of this barnstar (since WP:WikiProject Tropical Cyclones is a sub-project of WP:WikiProject Meteorology), but until and unless something like that occurs, this definitely warrants a spot on the topical barnstars list.
If you were trying to communicate something other than the question of whether you could add this barnstar to the list or not, please let me know what you were trying to express.
Thank you!
Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 07:58, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
@The Nth User: Thanks for taking my suggestion and adding the barnstars to the barnstars list!
I just noticed that you added two separate templates to the list, one for each barnstar. Generally, one barnstar template is used, with a parameter entitled "2" which, if set to "alt", will make the barnstar act as a 2.0 barnstar, making it be a 1.0 barnstar if left out. Is it fine with you if I merge the templates into one and add the parameter like I suggested?
Also, I noticed a couple of problems with the wiki-markup, both at Wikipedia:Barnstars and at the tropical cyclone barnstar templates themselves. These problems include having a description of how to use the barnstar appear when you put the 2.0 one on a page, and having the start of a link at their listing at Wikipedia:Barnstars but not finishing the link, among other problems. Would you mind if I went in and fixed the problems in those places?
Thanks again for going ahead and adding the barnstar!
Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 11:39, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
@Noah Kastin: I'm not really sure what you mean, but if there are formatting issues, feel free to fix them. Care to differ or discuss with me? The Nth User 16:19, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
@The Nth User: Thanks! I'll try to fix those now. Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 10:51, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
@The Nth User: I fixed the problems with Template:The Tropical Cyclone Barnstar (in this edit), redirected Template:Tropical cyclone barnstar to Template:The Tropical Cyclone Barnstar (in this edit), and fixed the problems with the Tropical Cyclone Barnstar's entry at Wikipedia:Barnstars (in this edit).
Unfortunately, I wound up removing the "extension" parameter functionality over at Template:The Tropical Cyclone Barnstar when I added the "alt" parameter to that template. If I can figure out how to re-add that functionality, I will let you know, but until and unless I can fix it (or if someone else, such as you, can fix it), the barnstar's picture, as seen within the barnstar template, will have to stay in a .png format. I sincerely apologize for the inconvenience.
Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 11:24, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
@The Nth User: Thanks for restoring that functionality to Template:The Tropical Cyclone Barnstar! Now, in terms of images, it works perfectly!
I noticed one tiny problem that I can't figure out how to fix: When you insert the barnstar onto a page, the following text appears:
  1. fdffe7;"
If you can figure out how to fix that, that would be amazing! If not, don't worry about it. I just thought that I should mention this, just in case you hadn't noticed it and could fix it.
Thanks again for re-adding the extension functionality!
Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 17:07, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Three Running-related barnstars[edit]

Hi everyone! I have a proposition to make, but first I have to provide some relevant background.

About four months ago, a discussion (viewable here) occurred. Rather than paraphrasing, I'll simply quote the whole discussion here:

Any objections to adding Template:The Running Woman Barnstar to the list? It is based on the alt version of Template:The Running Man Barnstar. Hmlarson (talk) 07:45, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

@Hmlarson: Thanks for asking!
My personal opinion would be to avoid adding The Running Woman Barnstar to the list, for the following reasons:
  1. The Running Man Barnstar already exists as a barnstar for sports in general, so making a barnstar for sports specifically related to women seems somewhat redundant. (If sports actually is a large enough category that it should have sub-category barnstars like the proposed one, I would suggest adding this barnstar as well as one for sports specifically related to men, but I don't think that sports is a large enough category to warrant sub-category barnstars, so I would rather not add this one.)
  2. If the reason for making a new barnstar is that The Running Man Barnstar contains the word "man", and that that somehow excludes women, then I would suggest the following: Rather than making a new barnstar just to have a different name, Template:The Running Man Barnstar should gain a gender parameter like the one at Template:The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar, allowing The Running Man Barnstar to be written alternatively as The Running Woman Barnstar or The (gender-neutral equivalent) Barnstar.
Please let me know if you have any questions about my comment.
Thanks again for asking!
Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 09:38, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

As you can see here,[a] there was no response to the above discussion.

About a month ago, SMcCandlish added Template:The Running Woman Barnstar to the barnstars list (in this edit), with an edit summary reading "Gender neutrality". However, I still hold my former opinion regarding this:

Rather than making a new barnstar just to have a different name, Template:The Running Man Barnstar should gain a gender parameter like the one at Template:The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar, allowing The Running Man Barnstar to be written alternatively as The Running Woman Barnstar or The (gender-neutral equivalent) Barnstar.

As such, I think that gender neutrality can be achieved simply by adding this parameter, rather than by having two nearly identical barnstars existing in tandem.

I also noticed that there is a third Running-related barnstar, called simply Template:Running Man Barnstar (as opposed to Template:The Running Man Barnstar). This template seems to act exactly like Template:The Running Man Barnstar, except that 1) Template:Running Man Barnstar cannot create a 2.0 Barnstar, just a 1.0 Barnstar, and 2) the entire description of Template:Running Man Barnstar is included with the barnstar picture itself.

Due to all of this, I propose the following changes:

  1. Template:Running Man Barnstar and Template:The Running Woman Barnstar should be merged into Template:The Running Man Barnstar.
  2. Template:The Running Man Barnstar should be moved to some gender-netural equivalent (e.g. Template:The Running Wikipedian Barnstar).
  3. Template:The Running Man Barnstar (with whatever name it has by this stage) should gain a gender parameter, like the one found at Template:The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar, letting the barnstar have male, female, and one or more gender-neutral variations.

If no one objects to the changes that I proposed directly above this line of text, I will put them through. If anyone has any objections, however, feel free to mention them, and I will try to find some way that we can find consensus. Also, if anyone has any other questions, feel free to mention them here.


Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 09:13, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

I agree that combining this stuff into a single template with gender parameters, and just calling it, say, the Running Wikipedian Barnstar would get the job done. I say that from a WP:Template editor and WP:Templates for discussion regular; merging templates is standard operating procedure. However, I will raise a bureaucracy point in a subthread below. The fact that this is being discussed by a wikiproject which has effectively exerting control, in a WP:CONLEVEL-problematic way over a non-wikiproject page, instead of being discussed at TfD, is symptomatic of a broader problem.  — SMcCandlish ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ʌ<  10:40, 9 January 2018 (UTC); revised: 10:43, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
I would like all three options available. When I search for women-related barnstars, I want this to come up. When I search for a gender-neutral option, I want this to come up. If I want a male-specific option, same applies. Hmlarson (talk) 18:40, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
@SMcCandlish and Hmlarson: Thanks for the input!
@Hmlarson: I have an idea that might get you what you want:
First, combine The Running Man Barnstar, The Running Woman Barnstar, and Running Man Barnstar into one template with gender parameters, as I suggested. Then, create redirects to the template for the other gender versions of the barnstar. So if the actual template is, say, Template:The Running Wikipedian Barnstar, then there should be redirects at Template:The Running Man Barnstar, Template:The Running Woman Barnstar, and any other gender-neutral variants, all linking to Template:The Running Wikipedian Barnstar; however, the template itself, with all of the wiki-markup, should only be in one place (in this example, at Template:The Running Wikipedian Barnstar).
How does that sound?
Thanks again, everyone, for the input!
Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 11:17, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Noah Kastin - can you draft it up w/ the various parameters and share here for review? Thanks. Hmlarson (talk) 03:26, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
@Hmlarson: Sorry for taking so long to get back to you.
I finally made up a draft of the barnstar, which is viewable at Draft:The Running Wikipedian Barnstar. I created it by copying all of the code from Template:The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar, pasting it into a new draft, and changing all of the names from "Working X's" to "Running X". I also created documentation for the new barnstar, which is copied from Template:The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar/doc and is viewable at Draft:The Running Wikipedian Barnstar/doc.
Please let me know what you think of the Running Wikipedian Barnstar and its documentation. SMcCandlish, you might also want to look at the template to make sure that this is the template that you were initially agreeing should be made. Once we can all reach a consensus on how the template should look, I can move the template and its documentation from draft space to template space and create the promised redirects.
Thanks in advance for any feedback!
Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 11:41, 17 January 2018 (UTC)


  1. ^ This can be clearly seen because I quoted the discussion in full. If you don't believe that I actually quoted the discussion verbatim, please look at the original discussion here.

Barnstar bureaucracy[edit]

People (especially from this wikiproject) bureacratize way, way too much at Wikipedia:Barnstars and its talk page. I haven't created a barnstar in years, and the sole reason is the difficulty of getting any kind of consensus there, and the revert-happy zeal employed by people who stalk that page, which is actually in contravention of WP:EDITING policy (editors have a right to make improvements as they see fit, and reverts are used when the result is clearly not an improvement, not on some WP:IDONTLIKEIT basis or "you didn't get our permission first" one. WT:BARNSTAR is kind of the last vestige of an WP:Esperanza-style private club left on Wikipedia, and it really needs to stop. Just the fact that Wikipedia talk:Barnstars and even Wikipedia talk:Personal user awards now redirect to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikipedia Awards is not cool. That's not appreciably different from redirecting Wikipedia talk:Systemic bias to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red or something.

There is no practical reason that the various topical barnstars created by wikiprojects, and the various more imaginative user awards on the other page (aside from those controlled as So-and-so User's private award) cannot be merged into WP:BARNSTAR, those created by WP:WikiProject Kindness Campaign, and various others added; they're scattered all over the place. Have you all not noticed that the frequency with which people give each others barnstars has fallen through the floor? Guess why. No one wants to have to deal with something that feels like FAC or a drama noticeboard just to add a template to a page. Precisely zero of our other template index pages operate that way, for good reason. I'm of half a mind to start an alternative page without the "police squad", and then after it proves to be 10× more popular, MfD the old one as obsolete and either to be merged or to be wikiproject-spaced.
 — SMcCandlish ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ʌ<  10:40, 9 January 2018 (UTC); revised 10:50, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

  • Pretty much exactly this.^^^^ Barnstars were never meant to have any formal endorsement or mean anything and there should never be any body (especially self-appointed and self-regulated) which has any control over these or any awards. If that is happening, it needs to stop yesterday. --Jayron32 12:59, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Firstly, why are you not using WikiLove? It's created by WMF for all the reasons you are listing. Barnstars is--by your own definition--a "private club". Nobody is forced to be part of it. You can create and give whatever award in whatever form to anyone without having to discuss it with anyone (or create your own award page). If you really don't care about this page's bureaucracy, then it shouldn't matter if your award is on some arbitrary list. Just give out the award. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 15:13, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
    I do sometimes use WikiLove, but I often want to give a topical barnstar for the "traditional cachet" of it, rather than a wikicookie or whatever. I would have created dozens of topical and activity-specific b'stars by now, but my initial attempts were wikilawyered over, so I just said "F' it" and gave up. It's not a matter of giving them out, it's a matter of finding them. The last time I wanted to give one, it took about half an hour, and I ended up going with something generic, because no search term I tried on the page found anything; I had to read through them all and try to find something even vaguely related to the sphere of activity I had in mind, and there wasn't anything particularly appropriate, because this project has so sharply limited the number of available barnstars on the list. I know I'm not alone in this.  — SMcCandlish ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ʌ<  19:37, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Agree with SMcCandlish and thanks for raising this point. When Hellknowz writes, "Nobody is forced to be part of it." how did they get an invitation to this private club? By asking permission? Of who? Hmlarson (talk) 18:43, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
    And we most definitely are forced to be part of it. Try creating a barnstar and adding it to WP:Barnstars without going through this project's formal proposal process. You'll be reverted so fast your head will spin. Look at the participants list; at least one says their purpose for participating is "Watching the Talk Page to propose extant alternatives to new proposals", i.e. blockading people adding barmstars that editor thinks are too similar in appearance or purpose to another one (if a template is so redundant it needs to be merged, that's a WP:TFD matter).  — SMcCandlish ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ʌ<  19:37, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
    At this point the argument is that there is a process. So does almost every other process on Wikipedia from FAC to AfD from BRFA to RfA. It's all based on consensus and nobody is (or could) stop you (or anyone) from commenting here on anything from idea to a full-on RfC. And, yes, the standing consensus is to propose new barnstars first before adding them to the main list. Many editors agreed and no one really disagreed at the time. If you or anyone wishes to change this, then make a proposal to change this and editors can express their thoughts on it. May be in 2018 we don't want to have a formal process for addition of barnstars to the main lists anymore. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 22:20, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
  • To clarify: This wikiproject has a fine, albeit very internal, purpose to exist in designing barnstars and has done great work, with the "series 2" graphical upgrades and so on. But no community purpose is served in any way by gate-keeping who can add a barnstar for what to the index pages like Wikipedia:Barnstars and Wikipedia:Personal user awards. Those are community, not wikiproject, pages just like Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup, Wikipedia:Current event templates, Wikipedia:List of templates linking to other free content projects, etc., etc. These template management pages are intended to be comprehensive, not exclusive.

    The issue here to me is that several WP-wide template index pages are as heavily regulated by this project as stub templates and their categories are by WP:WikiProject Stub sorting. That thing is a very strange animal: being a formalized process since the early 2000s (e.g. WP:CFD and WP:TFD will not accept nominations of stub categories and templates, and they must go to WP:WSS), so it should no longer be at a "WikiProject" name. Having it there sends a very bad signal to other wikiprojects to behave in the same manner, even though WP:WSS is completely unique in having been adopted as an official process page. This project, WP:WPWPA, has no such imprimatur from the community to tightly regulate a series of templates. Doing it with this series in particular seems downright counter-productive.
     — SMcCandlish ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ʌ<  19:37, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

    Where are you getting all this conspiracy stuff? Go ahead and make a new page or category for all the awards/barnstars if you think there should be a full list (I'm sure others will find it useful too). WP:PUA doesn't need any approval to have things added (we can add this explanation to the page). You don't "join" any club here and nothing here is "exclusive", just discuss what you want on this page or form new consensus if you disagree (we had consensus before to discuss new additions). Other talk pages redirect so more people can see discussions (this was a problem; you can keep any new list's talk page unredirected). —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 22:20, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
    No one said anything about a "conspiracy" other than you.  — SMcCandlish ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ʌ<  20:25, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Barnstars are the equivalent of a student achievement award for playing in a schoolyard. There shouldn't be awards for engaging in what is essentially a personal hobby. And if anyone edits Wikipedia because they hope to get a hug for savoring their pastime ... they need psychotherapy. Pyxis Solitary talk 23:30, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
...and then we direct them to WP:NOTTHERAPY, of course  ;) >SerialNumber54129...speculates 06:55, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
  • I certainly hope Wikiproject members are not a police. It however only seems natural to have a central discussion page for more-or-less official awards, discuss quality and prevent duplicates. Everyone can create their own awards and use/give them independently of this project. I also support bold edits to the barnstars pages, which as necessary can be corrected or reverted, then as anything, discussed per WP:BRD. To answer Pyxis: they are for encouragement and recognition and to express appreciation; other than those which can be self-awarded when certain conditions are met (i.e. number of edits), I agree that they should not be expected, but gifts are always nice. —PaleoNeonate – 10:54, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Who is for starting the 'no barnstar bureaucracy wikiproject' - the only rule is no rules! Only in death does duty end (talk) 16:39, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

New proposal[edit]

Inspired by the current events:

Citation Barnstar Hires.png The Current Events Barnstar (see below)
You are "like, really smart" and indeed, a "very stable genius" {{{1}}} in dealing with with the issue of fake news on our platform. Face-smile.svg Thank you.
Presented by {{{2}}}

Proposed: {{subst:Current Events|recipient's username|~~~~}} Poeticbent talk 20:57, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

@Poeticbent: Thanks for the suggestion!
If you're proposing that we create a new barnstar called Template:Current Events, which gives the message above, I would like to make the following suggestion: Rather than doing that, one should use Template:The Current Events Barnstar, a barnstar which, according to Wikipedia:Barnstars, is supposed to be used for the following purposes:

The Current Events Barnstar may be awarded to editors who make substantial contributions to current events articles, helping accurate information get through when it is most needed.

Then you could take Template:Current Events Barnstar and insert your message, like so:
{{subst:Template:The Current Events Barnstar|1=You are ''"like, really smart"'' and indeed, a ''"very stable genius"'' in dealing with with the issue of [[fake news]] on our platform. {{P}} Thank you. <br> Presented by ~~~~|2=alt}}
Which, if I used it, would create the following barnstar box:
Current Events Barnstar Hires.png The Current Events Barnstar
You are "like, really smart" and indeed, a "very stable genius" in dealing with with the issue of fake news on our platform. Face-smile.svg Thank you.
Presented by Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 11:28, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Please let me know what you think of my idea.
Thank you!
Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 11:28, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
  • So, as I understand correctly User:Noah Kastin, you do like the idea, right? But the focus is different. The already existing Current Events Barnstar provides the user with the opportunity to write their own personalized message in a totally different spirit. My new proposal was a major departure from that. This is why I would rather rename my proposal as The Trump Barnstar. Here's the new look of my proposal. What do you think? Just asking... Poeticbent talk 17:10, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Special Gold Barnstar.png The Trump Barnstar
You are "like, really smart" and indeed, a "very stable genius" {{{1}}} in dealing with with the issue of fake news on our platform. Face-smile.svg Thank you.
Presented by {{{2}}}
Proposed: {{subst:Trump Barnstar|recipient's username|~~~~}}
@Poeticbent: Thanks for the new suggestion! This does look more polished than the previous proposition.
I noticed that barnstars generally allow the user to write whatever they want in the barnstar box, so having this as a barnstar might cause discrepancies between this and other barnstars. However, Wikipedia:Personal user awards has no such consistency, and in fact has a very wide variety of awards, which I think your award would fit in perfectly with. Therefore, I would suggest that, instead of trying to add this award to Wikipedia:Barnstars, that you instead add this award to Wikipedia:Personal user awards (possibly with "Barnstar" changed to "Award", so "The Trump Award" instead of "The Trump Barnstar", since most personal user awards end with "Award" rather than "Barnstar").
Please let me know what you think of this suggestion.
Thank you!
Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 10:49, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
I'm generally not interested in the barnstar stuff, but I think there are some serious issues with this one.
  1. When I first saw it, the phrase You are like, really smart and indeed, a very stable genius looked like a sarcastic insult. Yes, my fault for misinterpreting it. However I think it's easily misinterpreted that way. It would be really bad if a recipient or onlooker interpreted it as an insult, and it would be even worse if someone actually gave the barnstar with sarcastic-insult intent.
  2. Trump is a hot button topic. Some people hate him and expect other people to hate him too, and others love him and expect other people to love him too. We seriously don't need a barnstar inciting a political-blow-up if a recipient or onlooker has a differing view on Trump.
  3. This barnstar is topical for about 5 minutes. The 24 hour news cycle will very quickly roll on to the next thing-of-the-day. In the long run it will be as relevant as a Jimmy Carter barnstar (or the James Polk barnstar).
  4. Probably least important, but it's rather America-centric. Even if someone is cleaning up fake news in US politics it doesn't necessarily mean that they are American. They may find the America-centrism awkward.
Alsee (talk) 21:34, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
I agree with Alsee on all points. Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 14:47, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Decline Mostly because the WMF doesn't need a lawsuit for the unauthorized use of his name. Hmlarson (talk) 22:48, 14 January 2018 (UTC)