Wikipedia:Barnstar and award proposals/Archive10

• 1
• 3
• Archive 5
• 6

Nature-related Barnstar

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

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

I haven´t found any Barnstar that merits an important contribution in the Natural history, paleontology, zoology, botany and other biology sciences' articles. I would like to propose either a barnstar for each of the biology sciences or a common one for all biology articles. --Francisco Valverde 08:27, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

• The The E=MC² Barnstar was created as a barnstar for all fields of science and mathematics. It specifically lists, but is not limited to "astronomy, biology, geology, mathematics, medicine, minerology, and physics". – ClockworkSoul 14:27, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

• but that field is a very general one. Couldn't there be a more specific barnstar? --Francisco Valverde 15:03, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
  • The reason we have the general barnstars is so that we don't end up with a massive foam of specific barnstars on every conceivable topic. I know that it may seem unfair, but the community came to the conclusion a while back that it was a reasonable solution to the potential problem of overwhelming "creeping barnstarism". However: you do have the option of proposing a wikiproject barnstar for one of the biology-related wikiprojects. – ClockworkSoul 22:40, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
    • I agree in what you say. But in this case, I believe, it would be a good proposal, taking in account that the wikipedia has had to create the separate wikispecies sister project. In any case, I will propose as you say a barnstar for biology at the biology wikiproject.--Francisco Valverde 08:17, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
• I am confused. Would this be a topic-related barnstar or award, or would it be for the Biology WikiProjects? I would like to see more support for the concept. evrik 15:52, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

First Bio Proposal

Image	Name	Description!
	The Bio-Barnstar	Bio-Barnstar - suggestion for a new barnstar given in recognition of exceptional article contributions in the life sciences.

• I agree with Francisco in that I would like to see a bio-barnstar. The life sciences are still an enormous category. I drafted a graphic file for the bio-barnstar using different authentic images from biology.

  I see your point, ClockworkSoul. You would like only big categories for barnstars. Life sciences not sufficiently big? Ultimately, I don't mind whether this goes onto the main barnstar page or somewhere in the biology wikiproject.

  I really like the E=mc2 design, but I would be surprised if after writing about cell division, I would be awarded this physical-looking barnstar. I would prefer to give something like the graphic proposed to outstanding bio-authours.

  Hope you like it and I hope fellow wikipedians agree to introduce this barnstar. Jasu 14:45, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

• Support If there is a way to vote yes for this nature-related barnstar to be created/accepted, I vote yes. Kukini 00:20, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

• I have proposed the bio-barnstar at the Portal talk:Biology. Let's see how much support we can gather for this barnstar.--Francisco Valverde 17:04, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

• Totally support the idea! Even is we did create a barnstar for physics, mathematics and biology, for example, I still don't think that would lead to an excessive number of barnstars. Biology is arguably the widest topic of the 3 (from genetics, physiology, human anatomy to entomology and ecology, that's a lot of articles!), and could easily have its own barnstar. I'm not sure if I like Jasu's proposal though, if we decide to make this barnstar I'd like to see different ones to choose from. IronChris | (talk) 15:07, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose until the design is shown to be biologically meaningful. All I see is randomly selected patterns. Biologists deserve better. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 15:20, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

• I love the idea, but (like Samsara) do not like the implementation. I'm forced to vote oppose. Perhaps make it out of a sea star? - UtherSRG (talk) 16:39, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

• Support the idea, but oppose the design above - what is it meant to be again? SP-KP 16:48, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the comments. I see, I didn't make the design sufficiently clear and I didn't explain it properly. It's meant to represent different areas of biology from 12 o'clock: neurons, leopard fur (for mammals), yeast cells, EM of cell, light microscopy of cell. The centre is blastocyst injection. Maybe part of the problem was the shrinking which made some nice pictures, like the neurons almost unidentifiable. Please suggest what you would like to see and I will make a 2nd draft. All the best, Jasu 14:02, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Yes, the images are very unclear due to reduction and the chopping needed to put the pieces together. Perhaps use fewer images. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:57, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

• SupportOppose I love UtherSRG's idea of a sea star. It could look really good, of course there is the problem of getting a suitable image of one. It would have to be really flat, and be of about the same shape as the others. --liquidGhoul 14:09, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Or it could just be the typical barnstar given a "skin" of a sea star. Or a sea star superimposed on top of the typical barstar. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

• • • I like the seastar idea too SP-KP 20:13, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

2nd Bio Proposal

Image	Name	Description!
	The Bio-Barnstar	Bio-Barnstar - suggestion for a new barnstar given in recognition of exceptional article contributions in the life sciences.

• Support Here is what I came up with from Uther's suggestion. It is from Haekel's print on the sea star article (PD old license, so it is alright). I took out the prettiest one, and cleaned it up slightly. It still needs some cleaning up round the edges, but I am really tired (1am). If someone wants to clean it up, I would really appreciate it! I have left it at a large size so people can edit it before shrinking it. Thanks --liquidGhoul 14:56, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

• support very pretty! It's not the one I would have picked from that print, but it's quite a remarkable star! - UtherSRG (talk) 15:02, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

• I was originally going to pick either 11 or 12 as they resemble other barnstars more, but they were boring. I also think this represents that biology is complicated. --liquidGhoul 15:08, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

• Excellent material. Support. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 15:37, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

• Support Beautiful... I had in mind something completely different but after seeing this one, I have changed my mind.--Francisco Valverde 16:26, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

• Support, very nice proposal, simple and pretty. IronChris | (talk) 16:37, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

• Support also like the simplicity of the idea.
  Samsara pointed out that the 1st draft was more a molecular biology barnstar - he's right there. Another ideas was: 5 star edges - 5 kingdoms. But it will be hard to fit that into the little space available in a 110x110 PNG. I can assure you the pictures I used for the 1st one are great photos but they are mostly robbed of their beauty when shrunk to icon size - as I also realised from your comments.
  Worked on the graphic file and uploaded a small PNG with transparency, slightly increased contrast, and somewhat reduced brightness to be more visible on the typical white background of the wikipedia. Jasu 16:58, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the edits, I like it! The one on the right below is the better of the two, but I still like the wavy one. --liquidGhoul 13:44, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

• Support - really like this one - although, of course, a plant would be better ;) Guettarda 19:48, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support - We can really use a bio barnstar, and I think the above would serve well to do this. I also like the two stars below. Kukini 12:34, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support the 2nd bio-proposal. JoJan 16:43, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

• Here are the other 2 for your consideration. They are no. 11 & 12 pointed out above. Jasu 17:13, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

• Perhaps (with a little editing) the following photos (from the Commons) could be considered : JoJan 18:11, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

• Nice pix, JoJan. I especially like the middle and the right one. Here's a little caveat: to make them into 2D star icons will be difficult with the ones that are not photographed from the top down, like the one on the left & right. But we could of course leave them shortened by perspective and deviate a little from the average barnstar look. Jasu 08:32, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

• What about this edited version of the first photo ? JoJan 13:25, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

• I don't really like the idea of a photo, they are a bit too complicated (very hard to get a perfect photo!). Below is the best photo, but an illustration is still better in my book. --liquidGhoul 13:44, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

• I much prefer your original 2nd proposal Bio-Barnstar sea-star . The others are nice but can't compare with this one. --Francisco Valverde 16:26, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

• What is the next move?

There was much talk lately about the bio-barnstar proposal, but these past 5 days there hasn't been more said. What is next? What is there to be done? Can we move this foward...? It is the first time I involve myself in a barnstar proposal and I do not know what is the procedure. I seem to read there is quite a support for a bio-barnstar and a considerable preference for the second proposal... Please, could someone tell me what next? Thanks. --Francisco Valverde 17:32, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

finalising the bio-barnstar proposal

Dear all, here are my suggestions for finalising the bio-barnstar proposal. Please add your suggestions & comments.

1. We should count supporters & encourage more comments, possibly by putting up a link on the biology portal talk page.
2. We should put the chosen design - looks like the seastar so far - under other awards - Wikiproject awards.
3. We should start identifying users that made great contributions in biology and honour them with the new award.

1. My rough count of people that commented positively above (please add or remove yourselves): Francisco Valverde, Jasu, Kukini, IronChris, SP-KP, UtherSRG, liquidGhoul, Samsara, Guettarda = 9 in support; JoJan, you were also involved in the discussion. What's your final vote? (I just gave my support - see above JoJan 16:43, 11 May 2006 (UTC)) No, clear votes in opposition, as far as I can see.
2. I think we could go ahead with the seastar. It's seem to be the majority opinion. Agree/disagree? ClockworkSoul & evrik pointed out correctly that there shouldn't be endless category barnstar on the main barnstar page. They suggested instead to make this a project barnstar. Let's make it the Wikiproject biology barnstar. Agree/disagree?
3. That's up to you. I've seen Samsara has already awarded one. Well done.

Let's finalise it and get it out there. Jasu 15:13, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

We already have a link on the Portal Talk:Biology page (that is how I found it). I second finalising it, and moving to the WikiProject awards. I will do it in a few hours if it is not already done (gotta go to uni). --liquidGhoul 00:24, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikihalo

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

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Image	Name	Description!
	The Wikihalo Award	The Wikihalo Award There are no particular requirements for this award. However, as it is the community that chooses who receives the award and who does not, it is unlikely that a user will receive the award if he/she does not appear to be of the highest standard. This award was introduced by The Neokidon 21 January 2006.

• Wikipedia:Barnstar and award proposals/Delist Wikihalo - March 9, 2006

Mfd?

The Wikihalo appears headed to the dustbin. Does anyone (especially those that voted for its deletion) mind explaining why they didn't list it here if they had issues with it? it seems like the process was short-circuited. evrik 23:04, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

• I'm sure that most of the people, if not all of them, who voted to delete the award at the MfD didn't realize that this page existed, and they probably weren't aware of the procedure and praxises that we use concerning awards. As I see it, it was a simple misunderstanding. I'm sure the award will not be deleted. Let's hear now what people think is wrong with the award and how any problems can be fixed. Regards, Redux 03:41, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
  • As I mentioned clearly on that page, I am all for retaining the award as a PUA but not for having an elaborate process of nomination, voting etc. I believe that the MFD page is the right place - the delete votes that I saw were all against the forks of the page and the instruction creep, but not against the award per se. AFAIK, the image is not up for deletion and the image description page can still be used for retaining the award. --Gurubrahma 04:01, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
• If we can agree on changes that would improve the award, and if under this new format there is consensus to maintain a "wiki award" status, then there'd be no need to move it to PUA. It'd be listed with the other wiki awards that are not Barnstars (the Other Related Awards, which are the same as Barnstars, except that they don't feature a Barnstar in their image). It's only a PUA if the award comes into being (and continues to exist) without community consensus. Regards, Redux 04:22, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
  • My bad, I meant the other related awards - however, I am not fully convinced about voting etc. --Gurubrahma 08:00, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Here I am, one of the inconsiderate narrow-minded users who voted to delete the award before discussing it here. ;-) I knew I had seen some cool new improvements at Wikipedia:Barnstars on Wikipedia lately, but I had no idea about this page. And I had no idea how organized this project was. Anyway, I came here to discuss the wikihalo award. I am concerned about the RfA-like process of voting for the recipients. I think it would be fine to keep the award, but I don't like the idea of stratifying the community. I acknowledge that there are several users who have (at least at one time or another) held a tremendous amount of influence in the community. The board members, some of the developers, most of the bureaucrats, and several other dedicated or otherwise notable users come to mind as Wikipedia "god-kings" who really do deserve something more meaningful than an ordinary barnstar. But I have doubts about this voting process. It's hard to imagine that anyone could possibly vote oppose in good faith without hurting the nominee's feelings or starting an unnecessary conflict. Such unfortunate events are common in RfA's and even in RfB's, but in those cases they are collateral damage in a process that is necessary for identifying trusted users to whom special sysop privileges may be granted. So, since a failed wikihalo nomination could be potentially disastrous if someone were to sincerely oppose it, I don't think we need to take the risk. On the other hand, if no one ever does oppose wikihalo nomination, then the voting is pointless. How should recipients be chosen? I don't know. But voting is probably a bad idea. Does anyone else have any thoughts about this? --TantalumTelluride 04:35, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

• From what has been said both here and at the MfD, it would seem that the following aspects of the award need reviewing: 1) Voting is not appropriate: a voting process seems to be rejected as the method for attributing a wiki award. So far, opinions are divided, some would like to make it just like other awards (anyone can give it to anyone they like), whereas others would prefer to find a third way, so as to retain a "differentiated" award; 2) Regardless of the specific process, instruction creep and several subpages as part of the "bureaucracy" are not a good idea. The idea would be to simplify as much as possible the "inner workings" of the award. Subpages would be deleted. I suppose we can take it from those two points. Goals: 1) Either elaborate a new attribution process or decide that the award is going to be just like all the others (anyone can give it to anyone); 2) Establish a set of very simple ground rules for the award to function. Regards, Redux 12:39, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Proposed Changes

I've come up with a general idea to change the voting procedure. In some ways, it is similar to Esperanza's user page award, but it is much more simplified. I have a draft of a suggested page in my sandbox. Feel free to edit it or make suggestions here. If you don't like the concept at all, just let me know and we can start all over. But I doubt anyone is trying really hard to come up with anything better. Of course, this is just a very basic first draft. We should probably discuss the award process thoroughly before we implement any new designs. --TantalumTelluride 21:08, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

• How it works: Only one wikihalo is awarded each month (the exact length of time can be changed) in order to maintain the award's prestige. Five nominations are made each month by whomever shows up first. A voting method is used to determine the winner, but only positive votes are allowed. This prevents unnecessary conflicts. The nominee with the most positive votes at the end of the round receives a wikihalo. --TantalumTelluride 21:14, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
• After seeing all the instruction creep, I am beginning to rue why I opposed the originally proposed editcountitis and agecountitis norms of Wikihalo - it was one year, 10K edits, exemplary behavior, period. That seemed to be much better and simpler in comparison to this proposal - I mean, we have 800 admins, the ppl who are judged to higher standards than others; even if only half of them lived up to that promise, it would take 400 months and I am not even counting other exemplary editors who decide not to become admins. --Gurubrahma 03:14, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
• I'm not familiar with any previous discussions about this award (I just got involved while making the rounds through MFD), but I think the system in my proposal is significantly less complicated and less bureaucratic than the current system. Do you mind explaining the original "simpler" suggestion, or can you give me a link to the relevant discussion? --TantalumTelluride 03:43, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Wikipedia talk:Wikihalo and a glance at the history of Wikipedia:Wikihalo should be of some help. The problem of creating a hierarchy of awards is that it creates a implicit hierarchy of users, which is not a very good sign. btw, I just realised that the image of Wikihalo is linked to several userpages, and on closer observation, found that it is part of the user box wich states "This user assumes good faith." --Gurubrahma 04:07, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
    • I was concerned about that, too. I don't like the idea of making some users "better" than others by giving them a community award. Of course, there are several users who are held in very high regard by the rest of the community, but I think there is a problem with trying to identify them individually. We really need some more feedback from users who are experienced with designing awards. In its current form, the award is already divisive, as evidenced by the somewhat tactless comments in the MFD discussion. So it probably needs to be changed. How can we change it to address the concerns that you (Gurubrahma) outlined above? --TantalumTelluride 20:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
  • The other problem with Wikihalo that many people at SFD MFD picked up on is that - whereas barnstars are awarded spontaneously for good work by one editor to another - the wikihalos are voted on. I for one don't like the idea of saying "no, this user doesn't deserve an award". It creates a far greater divide between those awarded and those not awarded that barnstars which are done in the spirit of fun. Seems very much like "let's organise some spontaneity". Grutness...wha? 12:52, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Since there seems to be no serious effort here to reform the award, I'm inclined to vote for its deletion at MfD because it is too problematic in its current state. --TantalumTelluride 19:21, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

• I'd support delisting this or deleting it but suspect that an actual deletion discussion may not be the most pleasant discussion! ++Lar: t/c 19:41, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
  • In case you missed it, the discussion is already going on at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Wikihalo. And you're right; it's not exactly the most civil discussion ever. --TantalumTelluride 19:55, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
• This award was created without input from the community. Is there any consensus? evrik 18:34, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
• is there any consensus about what to do with this page? --evrik 14:36, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Ray of Sunshine

You are a Ray of Sunshine!

File under PUA, or course. You know how sometimes you hate checking your watchlist, especially when you see that certain someone or an IP has edited your favorite articles? The Ray of Sunshine is bestowed on that person that, when you see their name at the top of your watchlist, you know that all is right with the world, you can relax, and do something besides cleaning up another mess. May be awarded to any person who consistently brightens your day, but especially where their involvement in something that is bothering you lightens your load. Thatcher131 13:47, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

• Support Pretty funy idea! evrik 16:34, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
• Support Do we have to pass a PUA? Highway ^{Rainbow Sneakers} 15:42, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

The introduction is a bit contradictory. I wanted to get some feedback first just in case. Thatcher131 16:03, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

CVG Barnstar

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

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. Let's have a barnstar for articles in the (in Wikipedia) major field of computer and video games! In the absence of any other, I suggest the Mariostar (which I think is pd-ineligible). --Seahen 19:54, 28 March 2006

• Is this part of a wikiproject? If not I'd say that it is too narrow. evrik 15:09, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

  Yes, there is a WikiProject Computer and video games. Seahen 21:42, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

• If this proposal doesn't move forward by April 12, I recommend we archive it. evrik 17:35, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

  If nobody objects by then, I will be bold and add it. Seahen 03:06, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

• I brought this up a while ago, although after a couple messages it was archived. I still support the idea though. -- gakon5 01:58, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
• Support I like the idea, currently only the WP:PCP have a barnstar that could be awarded for video game contributions. He's cute anyway :P Highway ^{Rainbow Sneakers} 11:06, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
• Object, as using the Starman for a barnstar is not fair use, and we already have . Pagrashtak 23:17, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment, the CVG Star is only listed as a PUA as it did not go through the vetting process. -- evrik 14:54, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

2nd Proposal

What about this one? It's an imitation so the copyright problems are gone, and it's still similar enough to the original. Thoughts? Highway ^{Rainbow Sneakers} 08:33, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Its rather plain, and its rather Nintendo-centric. the CVG space is much bigger than one franchise. --larsinio (poke)^(prod) 16:32, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Then what about it for the Nintendo WikiProject? Nintendo is the father of videogames anyway, Highway ^{Rainbow Sneakers} 22:06, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

• Object to either Mariostars being used, support that other one that's a PUA now. --Rory096 22:33, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support I personally am a fan of video games, and I like the idea of paying homage to Mario and the fathers of vids, Nintendo. It's creative. The Person Who Is Strange 23:59, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

The Wikiproject Stub Sorting Award

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

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

To be awarded to diligent sorters in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting. This was proposed to me on my talk page by Kukini. I tried to create a graphic, but my free trial of Photoshop wore out.

If Stub-Sorting is too specific, then how about a barnstar for great contributions toward stubs? This would include the creation of ideal stubs, good catagorizing, the creation of stub templates and catagories. What do my fellow Wikipedians think about this?? --SBrools ^(talk)

• I think that one of the exisitng Barnstars would suffice. Especially the workigman's barnstar, or the Rescued from Deletion Award. evrik 16:49, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• ISTR there's also a barnstar for diligent and repeated minor edits, which is pretty much what stub sorting is. Grutness...wha? 00:55, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
• Hey y'all...I still think a barstar for Stub Sorting, which is an endless, challenging task, would be a great thing for us to have. Kukini 20:36, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

center|Template Barnstar

• Why not use the template barnstar? It's not quite the same, maybe the definition of the award can be tweaked? evrik 14:07, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
• Support. I think there should be a stub sorting barnstar, as this is a very specific type of work in which users can be of service. Kukini 12:31, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose, isn't this already the Template Barnstar? --Deathphoenix ʕ 02:42, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
• Weak support. A specialized barnstar is always good, but in this case we have several barnstars that do the job quite well. If sb designes a nice image, why not?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 20:21, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

---

A new take on this ....

Image	Name	Description!
	The Wikiproject Stub Sorting Award	The The Stub Sorting Award - To be awarded to diligent sorters in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting.

• Support evrik 22:22, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
• Support. I don't see the harm in it and well, it is a rather unique trade. Perhaps it should be extended to include sorters of categories as well? Valentinian ^(talk) 22:11, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
• I'm going to archives this proposal for lack of support. It can be resurrected again later. --evrik 15:20, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Editing and Programming Recognitions

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

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The da Vinci Barnstar

Image	Name	Description
	The da Vinci Barnstar	The da Vinci Barnstar may be awarded to anyone who has enhanced and beautified numerous Wikipedia articles with applicable, quality images of artwork.

(This award was created and designed by The Man in Question on May 15, 2005.)

I noticed there was an award for people who make good graphics, and one for people who contribute nice photos — but what about nice pictures? — The Man in Question 06:47, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

• The Graphic Designers Barnstar. --evrik 17:29, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
• Objection per evrik. Computerjoe's talk 17:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose, yeah, the Graphic Designers Barnstar is sufficient. However, I do like the design. Quite some time ago someone already beat me to a design based on the Vitruvian Man, but this one looks pretty good. Maybe this could be salvaged and used for another purpose? --Deathphoenix ʕ 02:48, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

  Although personally I'm satisfied with the present image for the Graphic Designer's Barnstar, which was created by Sango123, it is always possible to replace the award's image. It's not unprecedented, provided that we could establish a sufficient consensus for that. When I presented the idea for the Graphic Designer's Barnstar, a million years ago, there were almost no suggestions of images for it (only the present one and one other possibility), so we never really got to pick and choose the image. Fortunatelly enough, Sango was able to come up with a good image from the start, or else the award might have gotten stuck on not having a decent image. Redux 20:59, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

  I think there is no need to replace the GDB, but I agree it would be a shame to waste this nice design. Here are a few suggestions: 1) for Renaissance-related contributions 2) for inventor-related Renaissance 3) for Polymath-related contributions 4) for Italian-biograhies related contributions. Note that it is not unprecedented to have an award for several issues (for example the Barnstar of National Merit is given both for [any] specific-country AND geography in general contribs.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 20:12, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

• I am going to be bold and say that we use the daVinci image for programmers and bot builders. --evrik 02:59, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Image	Name	Description
	The da Vinci Barnstar	The da Vinci Barnstar may be awarded to anyone who has enhanced Wikipedia through their technical work (programming, bot building, admin, sysop, link repair, etc.)

• • Why not? :) Tentative support.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 15:51, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
• Why don't we add work as an admin or sysop? --evrik 19:31, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
• Support for bot builders/programmers (Leo was a great inventor), but oppose as an award for sysop activities - this should be a completely separate award. Misza13 ^{T C} 19:11, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Well, since I don't support a separate sysop award, I thought this was a nice compromise. -evrik 22:46, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Proposal to split Geography Barnstar from the Barnstar of National Merit and include the regional awards

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

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Old Gepgraphy Barnstar: Barnstar of National Merit

{{subst:The Barnstar of National Merit|message ~~~~}}

The Barnstar of National Merit Category: Geography (Geography and articles about nations) The Barnstar of National Merit may be awarded to an editor who contributes significantly to expand or improve Wikipedia's coverage of any given country. It may also be awarded to those who create a particularly fine article regarding Category:Geography. This barnstar was proposed by Redux on February 23, 2005, and was designed by Zscout370. See also, at the Commons, the national variations

I want to revisit the old discussion at Wikipedia:Barnstar_and_award_proposals/CategoryArchive#Geography. At that time there was some talk of making this the geography award.

• Suggestion: Ribbon features the country's (flag) colo/urs. David Kernow 11:15, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

• I think we certainly need a Geography Barnstar, but the National Merit one should stay as it is (without being used for Geography contribs when we have a new Barnstar for them).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 16:07, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

New Geography Barnstar Proposal #1: Blue Marble Barnstar

• 
  Blue Marble Barnstar

I think we need to have a geography award, and then a whole section, or page for regions and countries as people decide they want them. This would include the two proposals below. Thoughts? --evrik 03:54, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

• Suggestion re the Blue Marble Barnstar: Rather than a picture of the Earth as the center of the barnstar, color the barnstar with a two-dimensional image of the Earth...?  David Kernow 11:20, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Support, although this may be somewhat too general: I tend to think of Earth or planet, not geography here. Perhaps David's suggestion would be better? Plus the name 'Blue Marble' is perhaps too poetic.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 16:07, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
• Support Geography is super cool. You may quote that. Russian F 00:02, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

The Africa Award

Image	Name	Description
	The Africa Award	The Africa Award may be awarded to those who have done exemplary work on Africa-related articles. This award was introduced by Wikipedia:Africa-related regional notice board at the end of 2005.

• Question Is this a wikiproject? --evrik 19:34, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

• Support - Many editors feel that Wikipedia is sorely lacking in Africa-related content and this award recognises editors doing good work on Africa-related topics. --Jcw69 19:38, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• In response to evrik's question, it's a regional notice board. I would rather not get too hung up on definitions of WikiProjects versus boards. A group of editors with broadly similar editing interests came to consensus on this design and have been happy with it. Looks like almost two dozen awarded thus far before Jcw69 thought to make it official projectwide. The way awards are organized, I suppose that I support this as an other award. - BanyanTree 19:50, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• I too support the addition of this award to Wikipedia:Other awards. It is not a personal user award, as BanyanTree points out above. — mark ✎ 19:56, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support, as BanyanTree and mark said above, as well as the distinction for the lack of Africa-related articles as Jcw69 said. dewet|✉ 20:31, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support - of course. Though is this process really necessary?! SteveRwanda 20:32, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support as per the above. Elf-friend 10:52, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support, but only as a WikiProject award. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 18:52, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support as per the above, nothing much to add really. — Impi 21:18, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
• Neutral, this is already covered under the official Barnstar of National Merit, and they've already been awarded for excellent work in several countries: India, South Africa, Poland, Russia, Australia, Canada, Bangladesh, Bulgaria, Belarus, Brazil, New Zealand, Portugal, United Kingdom, Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, Argentina, Azerbaijan, Fiji, Hungary, Italy, Japan, The Maldives, Norway, Saint Lucia, Singapore, Rhodesia, Ukraine, Macedonia, Kenya, Tanzania (notice that this award has already been given for work on some African countries). Wouldn't it be nice if some other African countries got some representation? However, this would also be appropriate as a WikiProject award, so my vote is neutral rather than oppose. --Deathphoenix ʕ 02:56, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

  Africa is not a nation and several editors from the board have editing interests across national borders. - BanyanTree 03:25, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

  I never said African was a nation (if you think I did, please tell me where I said it was). However, I said it would be nice if some exceptional work related to other African countries (ie, countries in the continent of Africa) were rewarded with the Barnstar of National Merit. In any case, I have no objections to this being a Wikiproject Award, but there is no need for this to be made an official barnstar when the expressed purpose of the BoNM is to award exceptional work on any country. The BoNM was explicitly designed to recognise work on all nations so no one country gets treated above any other country. When we designed this Barnstar, we were very careful not to make it look associated with any one country. In fact, the ribbon itself is supposed to be "UN Blue". --Deathphoenix ʕ 04:32, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

  You ignored the second part of my sentence, or perhaps this is non-obvious to people who edit in fields with a lot of other contributors. For the most part, there are so few Africa editors that many people on the board spread themselves across multiple countries. For example, I am one of two regular editors on Uganda topics, along with Ezeu. I also am one of what looks like two people on the Sudan geo pages, of a few in Rwanda and feel like I'm the only one on conflicts in the eastern DRC, as well as dabbling in Burundi and Ethiopia. Ezeu also helps cover Kenya and Tanzania. Mark Dingemanse covers the entire field of African linguistics. A continent is simply too broad a topic to have a WikiProject and the number of editors too few (which requires common knowledge to be coordinated), but there is enough recognition of how pitiful the wiki's coverage of Africa topics that we're willing to help each other out where possible and make a point of telling new users about the board as the one place an Africa editor may get a relatively quick response. You could give me four BoNM rather than an Africa Award, I suppose, but that just ignores how the Africa editors are 'organized'. - BanyanTree 12:39, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

  Ah, yes I did, my apologies. In that case, you deserve the Africa Award, or multiple BoNMs for multiple African countries. That's up to someone else to decide what they want to give you. In any case, my neutral vote stands. I believe the BoNM is more appropriate, but that this award is still fine as a Wikiproject award. --Deathphoenix ʕ 15:30, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

• Support as Other award.--gozar 15:35, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
• weak support - whilst this award has its place due to the lack of information on African topics, is it not a bad precident to set to make an award for a specific geographic category? Most other barnstars are for "anti-vandalism", etc. and so appeal to the broader public. However, it is a good idea. -- Chris Lester ^talk 16:53, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support great idea -- Samir धर्म 01:01, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support Zaian 23:14, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support great idea.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 01:49, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support, per the above. - htonl 15:35, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
• I agree with Deathphoenix and Ynhockey. As an award for the WikiProject, it would be interesting. But generally speaking, it is redundant with the Barnstar of National Merit — unless the user were to have done great work in articles pertaining to the African continent in general, and not any specific country, but I suppose that'd be an exception, hardly warranting an award just for it. So, to summarize: yes, but only as a WikiProject award. And the image looks great, btw. Redux 21:22, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support per nom. Royalbroil 14:01, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
• Support. This is bigger then one country (national merit), a continent award is a good idea. I'd recommend splitting the geographic from national anyway, they are two separate issues.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 20:37, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

The Polish Barnstar of National Merit

• 
  The Medal
• 
  The Medal v2
• 
  The Ribbon

This specialized type of 'The Barnstar of National Merit' has been proposed over a year ago, when the image was uploaded to Wikipedia and discussed on userpages, but as far as I can tell it was forgotten, although interestingly a ribbon for it is already included in the Wikipedia:Ribbons. I have found the image while doing clean-up of Portal:Poland/Poland-related Wikipedia notice board and I think that we should formalize the use of this award (especially as the ribbon has been awarded for at least one year). I'd suggest adding a new smaller table listing various types of [Country's] Barnstar of National Merit at WP:BS, under the entry for the generic BoNS. To avoid cluttering the page with dozens (hundreds...) of those (are there any others?) I'd strongly suggest that they should be kept as small thumbnails (I'll leave the design of the table for specialists in that area).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 20:07, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

• Support per nom. Looks nice. Royalbroil 20:20, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Actually, the national variants of the BoNM are nothing new. They started popping up almost immediately after the original Barnstar was introduced, over a year ago. During the discussions for the creation of the original BoNM, it was decided that the Barnstar should not be country-specific, but rather be something general, that could be awarded for any country or nationality. When the variants appeared, we decided that they were okay as user awards, but not to be listed in the main Barnstar page. Since then, a number of variations was created. The full list can be found at Commons, at Barnstar#Barnstars of National Merit. They are all completely usable, and have been available for use for quite some time. I don't see any need to make any kind of change in that. It's all been discussed already. Redux 23:35, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
    • At the very least the commons page should be linked from the WP:BS BoNM ref section to avoid confusion like I suffered :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 16:34, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
      • Indeed it should. I thought it already was. I'll go over there now, and if it's not already linked, I'll do it. Redux 00:15, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
        • All done. There already was a link to the Barnstars page at the Commons, but to make sure that it would be noticed, I added a direct-to-section link at the BoNM description. Hopefully, it's to satisfaction, but please feel free to improve on it as seen fit. :) Redux 00:23, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
• I think we should rewrite the description to allow for people to substitute (a specific country's award into the BoNM). --evrik 20:08, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Substitute what?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 00:36, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Proposal to replace Atlas Award and Cool as a Cucumber Awardwith Zen Garden Award for Infinite Patience

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

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The Zen Garden Award for Infinite Patience, to be awarded to editors who remain calm in the face of turmoil

Here's a thought: I'm not sure, but I think the Sandbox is cleanup by a bot these days, making the original intent of this award obsolete. Also, the "Cool As A Cucumber" awards are not especially popular, despite the nobility of their intent. For these reasons, I propose that we "merge" the awards into the Zen Garden Award for Infinite Patience, to be awards to editors who remain calm in the face of turmoil. – ClockworkSoul 15:12, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

• Verified: User:Sandbot cleans it out every 12 hours. – ClockworkSoul 15:16, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
• Fine with me. evrik 15:33, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
• Merge per nom – it's a good idea. Regards, David Kernow 16:32, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support– I like the idea and the pic; much better than the Atlas or the Cool Cucumber.Rosa 00:47, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment -I think the phrase beneath the pic should be changed a bit because as it is now it only refers to the sandbox and I believe the Cool Cucumber didn't refer specifically to this case but was a general award for editors who remain calm in the face of turmoil.Rosa 00:52, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
    • Exactly right. Hang on... okay done. – ClockworkSoul 14:19, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
• Support per nom Highway ^{Rainbow Sneakers} 11:13, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
• The original intent was not made obsolete by the bot, look at the edit history of some of the award recipients. Some truly objectionable stuff is often removed by our helpful editors. However, I agree with the reasoning that makes the 'Atlas award' defunct, yes it is a copyvio, unless used in the Atlas article, so the image is no good, without the image the name is no good. Support the merge and I like the new image a lot, (with the minor quibble that it is not traditional to have an even number of stones in a zen garden). My vote is do whatever necessary as long as there is still an award to give people who manually repair the sandbox, this is a task done by new editors fairly often, and it's a good way to award them and encourage their continued contributions. Just because I created the award doesn't mean I'm hung up on keeping it, but there needs to be something appropriate to replace it.Pedant 17:46, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Here is the full writeup that I'm proposing: please edit the description mercilessly. – ClockworkSoul 15:42, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Image	Name	Description
	The Zen Garden Award for Infinite Patience	The Zen Garden Award for Infinite Patience may be awarded to an editor who has shown extraordinary patience in the face of toil or turmoil. This award was introduced on 31 March 2006 by ClockworkSoul.

• Only edit I'd suggest is removing "in the form of serene acceptance". If consensus is to keep, suggest sentence rephrased to avoid double "in the". Best wishes, David Kernow 21:30, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
  • You're right: it was a bit awkward so I removed as suggested. How's it look now? – ClockworkSoul 22:58, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
    • Now I like the "toil or turmoil" at the end of the first sentence. I imagine a disciple asking a Zen master something along the lines of "But what lies between turmoil and toil, O Master?" and being given the word/mantra "Urm" to meditate on, "to know that the expression of not knowing leads to satori", etc, etc. Gawsh, David 02:38, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
      • Actually, Zen Buddhists don't use mantras so much as koans. :) – ClockworkSoul 13:25, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
• Support as an excellent design and good idea for merging the abovementioned awards. Colonel Tom 12:32, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
• Support, looks very good. --Deathphoenix ʕ 02:39, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support, great image and idea--☆TBC☆ 02:11, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• There being no objection, I'm just gonna do it. --evrik 16:27, 6 July 2006 (UTC)