The Mastodon Tamer Barnstar may be awarded to those that assume good faith, show civility, and work tirelessly to help transform angry mastodons into helpful contributors.
I propose adding a "Mastodon Tamer" barnstar for contributors that work tirelessly to help others, even if they are initially angry or openly hostile to the editorial process.
Background: I was initially very frustrated with Wikipedia's editorial process and by, what seemed to me at the time, arbitrary interpretations of policy. This resulted in my transformation into an "angry mastodon" for a short period. Just as I was about to delete my account and give up, several kind editors appeared and worked with me despite my angry rhetoric.
My guess is that this might be a common story here, so I would like to create this barstar in honor of those that are willing to walk into the "mastodon pen" and help users, even if it means enduring a bit of goring. --Xyzerb (talk) 21:53, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Indeed. Many of the existing barnstars could be classified as awards for helping people. This would be a unique award because, unlike any of the other awards, it indicates a willingness to help users even when they are angry or highly resistant to the editorial process. --Xyzerb (talk) 05:29, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Checking in to see how things are moving along. Do I need to submit this design to an approval committee of some sort? Xyzerb (talk) 19:17, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Full disclosure barnstar?
I'd like to be able to reward someone for disclosing a conflict of interest (by posting on an article's talk page or on the talk page of a project covering that article) instead of simply going ahead and starting editing. I used the 'Integrity' barnstar for this recently, but was wondering if this is such an unusual act of integrity that it deserves a dedicated barnstar? I think the temptation to edit an article for which you have a COI must be a really big temptation. Plus sometimes someone who discloses but goes ahead and edits afterward doesn't really deserve the integrity barnstar but maybe at least still deserves to be recognized for the disclosure. valereee (talk) 12:33, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
If it's unusual, then I think it's a bad candidate for being a Barnstar. Part of the standards that should be used for Barnstars is whether or not a lot of different kinds of people. Maybe a Personal User Award is more in keeping with such a limited awardee base. Achowat (talk) 03:35, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Well, I meant unusual as in 'particularly deserving' not as in 'particiularly uncommon,' but I get your point. I've seen it twice in the past week, hadn't really been counting before that. In one case the person disclosed and asked someone else to edit (gave her the integrity barnstar), in the other case the person disclosed but edited non-neutrally. The integrity barnstar didn't seem quite right, but I felt as if this user should be at least rewarded for the fact he'd disclosed. :) valereee (talk) 12:21, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
@Softlavender: I just downloaded the hi-res version of the original barnstar and used Paint.NET to edit it. It seems that if it's a general barnstar, propose it here on this talk page. If it's a barnstar related to a WikiProject, first discuss it on that project's talk page and then propose it here if the project wants it. I'd be happy to answer questions about image editing on my talk page if you like. EvergreenFir(talk) Please {{re}} 17:31, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
I might alter the colors a tad, but this is the basic idea. Tried to choose colors that are contrasting enough and distinguishable to people with colorblindness. EvergreenFir(talk) Please {{re}} 02:15, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
@Pigsonthewing: Colors updated to yellow/blue. I used the Colour Contrast Analyser program to view with protanopia and deuteranopia (stays about the same). Yellow appears pink for tritanopia but seems contrasty enough. Grayscale seems okay. The dark borders of the inner blue circle make the border distinct enough and the human figure is easily distinguishable. (May need to clear cache by doing ctrl-F5). EvergreenFir(talk) Please {{re}} 19:06, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
If the goal is to use this as the award for WP:WCAG, the right place to start this discussion is at WT:WCAG, to see if the editors there even want an award like this. Achowat (talk) 05:08, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
I propose the COI Editor Barnstar with the following descriptive text: The COI Editor Barnstar may be awarded to those editors who, having a conflict of interest in an article or topic, meticulously follow the WP:CONFLICT guidelines and best practices in contributing to that article or topic.
Pretty much all the time in the circles I run in. I've given out three barnstars to COI editors in the last 2 weeks and had to use the generic barnstar for all of them. And I didn't notice Valereee's suggestion until you mentioned it so that seems to indicate this is exceedingly common if we spontaneously had two identical suggestions within a short period of each other. LavaBaron (talk) 08:35, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
So, those of you who Watchlist WP:STAR probably saw the disagreement MarnetteD and I had over whether some WikiProject Awards (specifically Autism, Feminism, Disability, and Women's History) should be listed both there and on WP:WPPA. And, well, WP:BRD. I removed them for two main reasons: 1. Redundancy (and, specifically, by listing some, but not all, WikiProject Awards on WP:STAR, I fear a push for every single WikiProject to want to get their award on the "Big, Important Page") and 2. That there was never any consensus to add them to that page at all (I remember the Disability and Autism discussions; nothing like that was ever mentioned). So I'm hoping to build a consensus around the idea that awards that are specifically WP:WPPAs (their description referencing only work with a WikiProject) should not be listed twice. Achowat (talk) 08:48, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
To put it simply barnstars are for fun. They are a way for editors to acknowledge each others work. They are all equal in value. To claim that some belong on the "Big, Important Page" and others don't misses these facts. They have been in one place for at least a decade and this makes it far easier for editors to access them. Editors should not have to search for different pages to find them but if the consensus is to split them to separate pages then it should be made abundantly clear, at the top of the page, in prose, that there are barnstars available that are not seen on this page. Any separate pages should also be added to the hatnote at Barnstar. MarnetteD|Talk13:12, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
I agree that none of the awards pages are any better or worse than any other, and I think listing some WikiProject Awards here and others on a separate page could lead to that belief. But the idea that they are in only one place is simply not true. They are kept at no fewer than six pages. The consensus, simply put, already exists. And I don't know what evidence you have that people are having a hard time finding the other five pages. But I'd be more than happy if an explanation of WikiProject Awards and Barnstars of National Merit, perhaps in the 4th graph. Achowat (talk) 04:32, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Cascadia barnstar
Cascadia barnstar
So sorry, I just noticed the instructions to get consensus before adding a new barnstar to the list. The Cascadia Barnstar is presented for discussion. The barnstar idea originally was discussed on the Cascadia Wikimedians User Group mail list earlier this month as an award for the stub contest, that could be awarded for that and other Cascadia-related contributions. Other Wikipedians who were involved in its execution include Happybluemo. — Brianhe (talk) 06:00, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Support Just out of curiosity, Brianhe, what constitutes a Cascadia-related contribution? Any article related to WA/OR/BC/NorCal, or specific topics? LavaBaron (talk) 16:33, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Support the idea, but the image is quite difficult to distinguish. Perhaps making the tree a light color to enhance contrast, or the star behind it? EvergreenFir(talk) Please {{re}} 21:33, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, I wholeheartedly disagree. It would be a little ridiculous is every set of 10 articles had their own award. Simply put, I don't see any value to creating an award for such a narrow list of articles. (Also of note, we don't have any indication as to what makes an article a Cascadia article). Achowat (talk) 04:34, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Barnstar proposal: SAARC
I propose Barn Star BarnStar of SAARC for users who have made important and extraordinary contributions to SAARC
Proposal for: Editor Tip-Of-The-Day barnstar
Greetings, I propose the Editor Tip-Of-The-Day Barnstar with the following descriptive text:
The Editor Tip-Of-The-Day Barnstar may be awarded to those editors whose contributions of new tips and improvements to existing tips have helped guide the Wikipedia editor community with relevant and useful information.
The Wikipedia:Tip of the day department and the Wikipedia:Tips library are undergoing major updates and cleanup.
After viewing a number of barnstars, thought to ask here for another (expert) editor to create a TOTD barnstar.
The existing graphic image, [[File:Simple light bulb graphic.png]] (larger) could be placed in the center of one of those barnstar blanks.
It's been a long time since I've done any graphics, so if another editor could create, that would be great!
I joined Wikipedia in the spring of 2014 and recently active with TOTD. Once completed, I would like to award this barnstar to other editors who are contributing.
Also, once this TOTD barnstar is available it might encourage additional editors to join the project.
Editor awards - topic for November 12 Tip-Of-The-Day
Greetings! On November 12, the Tip-Of-The-Day is about awards. The tip is Giving editor awards and mentions barnstars as well as including a link to the Wikipedia awards page.
I'm proposing the Barnstar of the Week as a way to promote Barnstars. What you have to do is place this code on your userpage or talk page: {{User:Peter SamFan/Barnstar of the Week}} and you'll get User:Peter SamFan/Barnstar of the Week, which I will update every week. (I didn't post the template on the talk page: You have to click the link) Thoughts? Peter Sam Fan |talk20:30, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
I have noticed that there is a lot of Wikimedia stuff. Maybe add a barnstar for being of value to all of Wikimedia? :) A creeper won (talk) 17:09, 8 June 2016 (UTC) =-)
I would like to propose to introduce a gender gap barnstar on Wikipedia, for Wikipedians highly contributing to diminishing the gender gap. Ellywa (talk) 20:57, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
So, for those who are unlikely to click the link above, Kevin has, sadly, passed and there is some movement to rename the Wikipedia Ambassador Barnstar in his honor. For those of us who never ran into Kevin in his WikiCareer, could someone explain why this would be a fitting tribute? Achowat (talk) 07:18, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
The discussion above ended up with a consensus against renaming the existing barnstar, and instead, with the creation of a new barnstar, designed by Rhododendrites. It is called the Kevin Gorman Education Program Barnstar (and its documentation is at that link), and this is what it looks like:
Kevin Gorman Education Program Barnstar
{{{1}}}
I am opening a discussion here, hopefully to get consensus to add it to the Barnstar page (probably as a Wikipedia-space barnstar). The discussion at Kevin's talk page has yielded a strong consensus in favor of this barnstar. Editors unfamiliar with Kevin's work at Wikipedia, and his connections to the Education Program, can get a lot of information at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2016-08-04/Obituary. Thanks. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:36, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Support - Kevin came to Wikipedia through the education program and was an on-wiki and off-wiki proponent of Wikipedia in education. — Rhododendritestalk \\ 20:51, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
I'm presenting to the attention of the Editors the Party Barnstar - the star of joy and gratitude to the Wikipedians, who worked hard as a team and achieved a good result.
The Party Barnstar may be awarded to the editors co-workers to mark successful completion of the project, article, etc.Chris Oxford (talk) 14:20, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello Achowat,
Thank you for your reply and question. This Barnstar differs from the Original one due to the absence of the celebrative decorations on the surface of the Original Barnstar. Usually Original Barnstar is used as a base for creation of newly designed Barnstar, where new design is supported by the new idea on how to award hard working Wikipedians. You can have a look on the list of the already approved Barnstars and you will see, that all of them contain different images superimposed on the image of the Original Barnstar. In many cases the author of new Barnstar also changes the colour of the Original Barnstar to a chosen one, as I did in Party Barnstar to stress the celebrative and joyable motif of this Star, as this Star is devoted to award the successul completion of the projects, achieved by the Wikipedians, who work as a team. All the best. Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 09:17, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
I'm aware of the graphic differences; I'm asking about the award criteria. Under what circumstances would this new barnstar be awarded where The Original Barnstar wouldn't work just as well? Essentially, what I'm saying is that it doesn't make sense to have a Brand New Award that simply replicates a much older, more established award. Achowat (talk) 08:54, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello again, Achowat,
glad to hear from you, and I should admit, that you went ahead of me: just minutes ago I wanted to add to my explanation what you are asking about in your second reply. So, how different is the idea of the Party Barnstar to the idea of the Original Barnstar: it is written, that the Original Barnstar is given to recognize particularly fine contributions to Wikipedia, to let people know, that their hard work is seen and appreciated. The Party Barnstar is much more the invitation to celebrate the finalizing of the important project by the Wikipedians, who had been participating in this project themselves on the level of large or small magnitude. So, it means, that as opposed to the idea of Original Barnstar, in case of Party Barnstar, we are talking about the situation where a group of Wikipedians participated themselves in this work and do not need to let them know by someone, that the work was hard - they know it themselves, and also they know, that their work was successful, that is what they would like to celebrate.
The Party Barnstar is much more an invitation to celebrate success by Wikipedians, who already know, that their work was a success. Of course it doesn't mean, that somebody, who has seen the process of work from the side, cannot send this celebrative Star as an appreciation. So it will be like to compare two things: the official award (Original Barnstar) and an invitation to celebrate successfully completed work to all participants by one of them or by other Wikipedians, who are seeing this work as a long hard way with the fruitful result, which deserves to be celebrated with joy. To be completely precise, I would like to say, that the Original Barnstar is more designed to appreciate hard work of the Editors during a long period of time, what included many successful contributions - projects, articles, etc., and the Party Barnstar is designed to celebrate a single successful important event, so in some cases both Stars can be given to some Wikipedians in parallel. I will be happy to hear from you and to continue our discussion; just to let you know - I will be away for the next 10-12 days from now and then will be ready to continue. All the best. Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 11:03, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
I'm not totally on board with a barnstar that awards 'completion' after all Wikipedia can never be finished. I think putting a stamp on something, even as small as a Project, adds a mark of 'this is done' that would be, largely, unhelpful to the Encyclopedia as a whole. Achowat (talk) 19:29, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Achowat,
Thank you for your reply. I apologize for delay in responding. I respect your point of view and will familiarise you with the arguments, supporting my own one, in a detailed way; just need some time to complete several businesses, and then to put the words into writing, to make all points in the discussed subject totally clear. Will send my detailed reply as soon as possible.
All the best.
Regards, Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 20:44, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Achowat,
I would like to attract your attention to several points in your reply, which are clearly showing, that some misunderstanding has occurred.
First of all, I have never offered the Party Barnstar as the demand to Wikipedians to stop work on the project / article, even on successfully completed AT THE TIME.
All Barnstars are given not for the job, which the Editors just are imagining and planning to do, but for the completed part of the job, which they can continue, if they are willing to do so.
From your statement: "I'm not totally on board with a barnstar that awards 'completion' after all Wikipedia can never be finished.'" , - it is possible to make only one conclusion: Barnstars (which should be given for accomplishment, achievement, what can’t be reached without completion of a certain part of the work, as without completion it is impossible to achieve accomplishment) can’t award completion of any part of work, as the Wikipedia paramount concern is to keep work in progress and it can’t accept completion of any kind, and even if the one of the Editors or group of them, achieved their goals and completed their part of job, this work has no right to be awarded, because it is completed, but it can’t be completed because the rule is saying, that work can newer be completed fully, to encourage other Editors to add their valuable contributions, but when they will do and will complete their part of job, they also can’t be awarded due the same reason, what finally means that there is no place here for such things as Barnstars, as every next Editor inevitably will complete his/her part of contribution to the collective job and, according to your statement, will automatically loose the right to be awarded by any kind of Barnstar during their life time and later, as "after all Wikipedia can never be finished."
My point is: All Barnstars have been given for the completed by Editors part of the job, but I never asked Editors, who completed successfully a certain part of their work and who have been awarded for that PART OF JOB by any of Barnstars, to stop working on Wikipedia projects.
And the Party Barnstar definitely wasn’t designed to "adds a mark of 'this is done' " in the meaning, that after award the work should be stopped once and forever: I thought, that it is unnecessary to announce the well known law of Wikipedia — 'Wikipedia is a work in progress', and to add, that Editors, who received the Party Barnstar are welcome to continue their work on this project/article later, when they will be in possession of more valuable materials; I thought, that it goes without saying and does not need to be mentioned continuously, when dealing with Wikipedians, like in case, when you are talking to Editors about our planet Earth, there is no need to remind them constantly that It is round.
Work of the Editors is totally voluntarily one and, sure - you know from your own experience - not always a very easy one, so the bright approach (politeness, sense of humour) to this job is creating a good mood, what is always helpful for any kind of work, including the most serious and responsible ones, and The Party Barnstar is the one of nice sparkles, which I intended to add to many already existing ones in Wikipedia, which all together are giving more of liveliness and vivacity to the Wiki space, because the more environment of Wikipedia will be friendly, the more enjoyable Editors’ voluntary job will be, which in turn, will be largely helpful to the Wikipedia "as a whole."
And what about the situation, when the nominated article have met the criteria for featured articles?
This is totally completed action, and there is something here for sure, what should be celebrated by all participants.
The Party Barnstar was intended for such occasions as well; but just several days ago I had spotted The Teamwork Barnstar, which escaped my field of vision from the beginning, and it convinced me that these two Barnstars are designed to perform pretty much similar work.
It means that in your remark: "New Award (Party Barnstar) that simply replicates a much older, more established award Original Barnstar.", - it should be mentioned The Teamwork Barnstar, not The Original Barnstar.
I do not think, that The Teamwork Barnstar, as well as The Party Barnstar, "replicate" The Original Barnstar, but The Party Barnstar have enough similarity with The Teamwork Barnstar to leave the mission, intended for The Party Barnstar, for The Teamwork Barnstar only.
And probably, you will see your statement: "something, even as small as a Project", as a subject to review, because a project, in many cases, can be a business of a lifetime of its author, and then to be developed for many years by the followers of the project (scientific, humanitarian, environmental) founder.
Wikipedia itself is a Project, contains 2000 different significant projects, and it is not small.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject
I am creating the Wikipedian On Fire Award for an esteemed co-editor and I need to know how to generate a border around my image and the accompanying text. I consider myself to be a C student when it comes to this sort of thing, so the simpler the explanation the better. Or perhaps you can point me to a place where the answer to this question already lives, because I know it is here somewhere Thanks Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 19:18, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
Your question confused me at first, as I wasn't sure what you meant, and was trying to think what you could be trying to describe in GIMP or Photoshop. Then I realized you were asking about WikiMarkup, when you're sharing the image;
Use the markup code Ribbon Substitute for the Wikilink Barnstar, made 20 Dec 2013.
[[File:Wikilink Ribbon Shadowed.png|thumb|Ribbon Substitute for the Wikilink Barnstar, made 20 Dec 2013.]]
which would then look like the preview block on the right side. Let me know if this is what you needed, or if I've horribly misunderstood!--k2trf (talk) 01:25, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
Self Barnstar Proposal
For those editors who work in so small a field that no one really notices what they do, they can give themselves a barnstar. This would likely be overused, but it'll have to be small and have partly preset text so everyone knows the user is rewarding themselves. This can be useful. Also, if someone's going to reply or add to this, please ping me to this. My watchlist is huge from twinkle reverts and I don't use it anymore. Adotchar| reply here01:44, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
@Adotchar: I kind of like this idea. I mean, as brought up in the section below, anybody can give themselves a barnstar anyway, but there's something to be said for a self-conscious self-barnstar. It's a sad reality that many kinds of contributions and subject areas have people doing so much unrecognized or underrecognized good work. BTW you can make it so Twinkle doesn't add to your watchlist by default, you know. :) — Rhododendritestalk \\ 14:54, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Apparently there are a number of people who buy themselves trophies, and if it makes them feel more confident, more power to them. However it would be a bit presumptuous to herald them in public. In a similar note, the true value of a barnstar is knowing that someone else out there appreciates your efforts. Giving yourself a barnstar is your announcing to everyone that you appreciate your own work, which is a bit of a truism. isaacl (talk) 16:10, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The Mineralogy Barnstar is awarded to appreciate the contributions of users to the coverage of mineralogy subjects on Wikipedia.
I would like to propose the Mineralogy Barnstar.
Mineralogy is a very important field of science, which deserves to the nth degree to have its own Wikipedia Mineralogy Barnstar.
Support I think a barnstar for editors who have made significant contributions to articles about minerals is a good idea. GeoWriter (talk) 12:59, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Deletionist barnstar proposal
Image for proposed deleter's barnstar
I see that in Archive 12 there was a brief discussion regarding creating a deleter's barnstar to award to admins who delete articles. The proposal was killed when it was pointed out that we already have a "dilligent admin" barnstar for such individuals. I am here to propose a barnstar for those who are NOT admins but who work just as diligently to hold back the tidal wave of nonesense that would come to occupy the pages of Wikipedia otherwise. I don't just mean new page patrolling, I mean being willing to stand up and say, "I think this article should be deleted", and standing behind that statement, and making a worthwhile argument for the deletion. It's hard to nominate articles for deletion! It's hard to nominate an article and then have other editors come along and say you are "clearly wrong" for whatever reason. It's hard to watch your nomination fail, even if you are wrong, and then pick yourself up and try to do it again when you feel you are right. Saving articles is all well and good, but if we save garbage, what then is the point? I believe we also should acknowledge and reward those who work against infinite odds to keep the garbage/ trivia/ promotional hoo-ha out! We should encourage them to keep doing what they do in order to keep Wikipedia an encyclopedia and not a collection of indiscriminate information. I am not talking about admins here— they can delete at will. I am talking about the editors with the courage to brave the slings and arrows and insults (and they are many) for daring to propose that the wheat be separated from the chaff, a barnstar for those who are willing to consider the references and actually figure out if they are bogus or not. It is easy to create a Wikipedia article! Getting one deleted is not nearly so simple. It is a thankless and often bitter job. It is also crucial to the project's operation. And I do not see any other suitable barnstar at the moment. Thoughts? KDS4444 (talk) 08:19, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Guess I should have created an image first. Anyhow, now there's an image. KDS4444 (talk) 07:18, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
I am sensing at least no opposition to this idea, and no indication that there is another barnstar that already serves this purpose. I am going to go ahead and make the barnstar "official", others are welcome to undo the edit and respond to my proposal here if that seems premature or inappropriate. KDS4444 (talk) 14:59, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
@KDS4444: My only real objection would be using "deletionist", which is a loaded, messy term. Deletion in general is messy, really, and I imagine there are plenty of people who would not want to receive an award for deletion. There's a lot of ill will directed towards people who tag pages for deletion (usually due more to being unfamiliar with Wikipedia policies/guidelines/norms) and I imagine any negative impact deletion might have on, say, a new contributor, could be exacerbated by the person doing the deletion receiving an award for it. For whatever that's worth. But even if I truly objected (which I don't), I don't see much of a point to standing in the way of an award -- it's a pro-community activity and, after all, anyone can create a graphic and post it on a page themselves without it needing to be legitimated (people can always remove what they don't want, and MfD exists for particularly problematic templates -- of which this is not one). — Rhododendritestalk \\ 15:17, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
What about something a little more subtle: Sanitation Department Barnstar, Sanitation Engineer Barnstar, Waste Management Specialist Barnstar, Wheat-Chaff Barnstar... — Rhododendritestalk \\ 15:24, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
(Also, @Rhododendrites: I have to admit you are right regarding the loaded nature of the term "deletionist" or "deleter". I maintain my belief that it is actually very difficult to stand by a deletion nomination, and that Wikipedia is only useful to the world specifically because people bother to take out the stuff that doesn't belong here, but I also agree that deletion is a loaded business, and that especially for new users it is a shocking and painful thing to have experienced, and is NOT the thing such a user then wants to see someone actually rewarded for! I am just thinking about the other side of that coin, and I know that I have watched other editors nominate pages for deletion and then get put through the ringer for it and never come back, which is ALSO a bad thing. And I do not know that there is a real answer for the situation... I know that it sounds great to give awards to those who work hard to save pages from the dustbin, but the dustbin is there for a reason, too. I dunno now... More thoughts?? ) KDS4444 (talk) 19:30, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Hey, how about a "Winnowing fan" barnstar! "To thank those who take the time to separate the wheat from the chaff." KDS4444 (talk) 10:53, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
Support - I agree with what you're saying above. I'm very familiar with the pains of deleting what needs to be deleted. Part of why I don't like the term "deletionist" (at all -- not just for a barnstar) is that it creates a false and dichotomy that taps into the off-wiki world for connotations. "Inclusion"=friends, fairness, affirmations; "deletion" (or, relative to inclusion, "exclusion")=destruction, discrimination, dismissal... So no, there's not enough love shown to those who engage in the necessary task anyway. :) This one looks great to me. — Rhododendritestalk \\ 16:38, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
Consensus Then given the above, I am going to interpret this as meaning we have community consensus and move this barnstar over to the official list of barnstars page. Thank you for your help in guiding the process! If it had gone ahead as I had originally proposed it, I think it would have been too controversial and never-used. Now, I think it says what it is meant to say and should serve its purpose without making anyone upset or offended (or at least so I am now hoping!). KDS4444 (talk) 11:08, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Verifiability of Barnstars
Should there not be a system to ensure that barnstars can be verified back to the person awarding them. In the present case, we can add as many barnstars to our own user page and add a user name without the link back to the awarding user's pager. Or better still attribute it to a user who has since been blocked. The date can be an old date and nobody will suspect whether the barnstar was really given. PierceBrosnan007 (talk) 14:38, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Support I came across an incident once where a new-ish user opened up a few sockpuppet accounts and then began awarding himself a series of barnstars in an attempt to make himself appear more legitimate and involved than he really was. The account eventually got blocked, but it was messy figuring out what was going on. While each edit to a user's page is, of course, recorded, this is only visible if someone looks at the page's edit history. A more upfront tracking system seems like a good idea to me. KDS4444 (talk) 11:59, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Many people indeed to this -- new users in particular. I don't think you'll find much support for formalizing such processes. Barnstars are a way of fostering community and showing gratitude. The value in someone's gallery of barnstars isn't in the barnstars but the sentiments behind them, and that value is much more for the user him/herself than it is for outsiders. A barnstar is a way to show people recognition for their volunteer efforts [so that they will continue to participate and continue their enthusiasm for the project]. That said, if there's reason to look into someone's standing in the community, and someone has been giving themselves barnstars to mislead others, any positive impression formed upon seeing them would be more than shattered upon realizing they're... [inauthentic?]. In your example above, you forged someone else's signature, however, which is not ok in any context -- even as an example you should replace it with, say, User:Example. — Rhododendritestalk \\ 14:50, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
The example user name part is valid and I have changed it. But how do you expect people to know the forgery of barnstars so as to remove their positive impression. I really don't think people would search the user's history page. And if you mentioned in the edit summary that the barnstars were moved from an old page to a revamped user page, most people would not go searching anymore. And maybe a barnstar can be used to start off the next barnstar. People are usually reluctant to award an unawarded writer. However if we see a good edit and go to the user's page to see a host of barnstars already awarded (albeit forged), you might be tempted to give him an award of your own. Just my thoughts. PierceBrosnan007 (talk) 15:58, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Personally I would lean more towards recognizing someone who hasn't gotten a lot of previous thanks, to help spread the appreciation around. isaacl (talk) 16:06, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Project page is getting unwieldy
Has anyone noticed that the barnstar awards project page is getting a bit unwieldy? No matter how slowly I try to scroll through the list, the barnstars flip by super fast because a.) there are a lot of them, and b.) the column for the barnstar's description is so narrow that any text placed here quickly makes the overall table very long in appearance and difficult to review. Is there something we can do to shorten it visually? What if we put all of the description text in "small" font? Other ideas? KDS4444 (talk) 12:07, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Shogi barnstar
Awhile back I made a proposal to start a new WikiProject for shogi-related content on Wikipedia. There was some support, but things are still basically in the proposal stage. Anyway, I was wondering if it would be possible to create a barnstar for shogi (similar to Template:Chess Barnstar) that could be added to the talk pages of editors who have been regularly working on improving shogi's coverage on Wikipedia, even if there is no WikiProject specifically devoted to the subject. The barnstar does not have to be anything fancy, and there are a number of images in c:Category:Shogi which could be used for the central image. Would something like this be OK to try and do? -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:57, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Seems fine to me. My only recommendation is to consider WP:COLOR. Make sure it's visually distinct and readable to those with low vision, color blindness, or using interfaces where the image is small. EvergreenFir(talk)05:45, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Islamic Barnstar 2.0
This is simple, I wish to update the Islamic barnstar. It features the star and crescent which has been historically used, and I have incorporated these historic symbols into a barnstar in order to suit it.
Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red is a well-established and thriving project which produces redlists of women for whom wikipedia lacks a biography, and which organises IRL and virtual editathons. We now desire to have a Women in Red barnstar (WiR talk: Barnstar), such that we may selectively reward wikipedians who are conspicuous in trying to close the pitiful gender-gap on wikipedia. The image to the right is our current proposal - it features the WiR logo. We know of no similar or otherwise appropriate barnstar. Grateful for feedback so that we can go ahead without concern about WiR barnstars later disappearing. thanks --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:01, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Support I love the idea of us having our own barnstar. There is often a time I want an award and can find none that is appropriate. SusunW (talk) 15:41, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Support: WikiProject Women in Red has been an active WikiProject since July 2015. According to the WikiProject Council, we are, in fact, one of the most active WikiProjects on en-wiki. We've given out barnstars to each other from time to time, using the ones already in existence. I guess we've been too busy to think about creating something unique to us, that is, until yesterday. This barnstar incorporates our logo (c:File:Women in Red logo.svg), set against a light blue background (the color #ABCDEF), which is also unique to our branding. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:46, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Support Women in Red is a well-orchestrated and very active WikiProject. It has contributed hundreds of articles on notable women across disciplines, nations, cultures, and centuries. There is significant teamwork on the project with the common goal of raising the inclusiveness and over-all quality of the encyclopedia. Netherzone (talk) 17:40, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Support: Nicely designed Barnstar for good Project, what is not only lively itself, but liven up others WikiProjects, including Wikipedia Awards Project as well. As the author of two articles about notable women, I’m gladly giving my support to Women in Red Barnstar.Chris Oxford (talk) 12:37, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Comment: I uploaded the newer version of the barnstar after discussion on the Women in Red talk page. It was decided a red star, rather than a brown star was more aligned with the vision and image of the WiR WikiProject. Netherzone (talk) 02:53, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
@Antonu and Aspro:Hi! I desperately want to give somebody (who shall remain nameless) a barnstar for Bravery. The person "took the bull by the horns" and acted bravely while the person's peers simply looked on. I think this one is perfect! Comments? DennisPietras (talk) 21:59, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
I actually dislike this barnstar very much. It shows a human involved in an act which could be described as animal cruelty, not bravery. There must be better images out there. DrChrissy(talk)20:49, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
@DrChrissy:I'm embarrassed to write that the thought of animal cruelty never occurred to me. My wife and I are bunny people. I actually viewed this more like an MMA bout, after which the combatants shake hands. But, you're right. People could see it that way. I had hoped to find an image of a firefighter rushing into a burning building, but couldn't find a good free one. So, I withdraw this image for discussion as a barnstar. Thanks, DennisPietras (talk) 21:11, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
@DennisPietras: Hi Dennis - not a problem. We all lose sight of other perspectives at some time. It does not make us bad people. Pity you could not find the image you wanted. Did you see this one over at Commons? DrChrissy(talk)21:47, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
The vision I had in my mind was not a back view of firefighters, but a side view of someone rushing into the front door of a building while fire was coming out of windows. Don't bother spending any more time on this. Thanks, DennisPietras (talk) 01:01, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
DennisPietras (talk·contribs) I couldn't find a 'going into a burning building' picture, but here's a sea rescue that might suit a bravery barnstar, in case you'd still like to make one: . I tried mocking up a barnstar image with it but I don't really have the graphical skills. Mortee (talk) 21:31, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Comment: Usually a photo overlain on a barnstar doesn't look too good. I think that a graphic would be better, and perhaps something like the art off of Greek Pottery of young men leaping over the horns of a bull or something -- or just a fire extinguisher and a flame... or something... Montanabw(talk)20:47, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Comment: A classical symbol of bravery is the lion. A more contemporary symbol is the iron cross. I agree a simple photo should be avoided. --Mindfrieze (talk) 23:01, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
@DennisPietras.
Please, have a look at the following implementation of your much appreciated idea: Bravery Barnstar with the image of Celtic shield, which is universally used, as a symbol of protection from danger, thus it will designate the courage of defender, manifested in any sphere of human activity.
Here I totally agree with Editors Montanabw and Mindfrieze, that the Bravery Barnstar should be done without visual concretisation of the courageous defender occupation, but should be presented by abstract symbolic image.
Chris OxfordChris Oxford (talk) 12:24, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
The idea of Bravery Barnstar belongs to Dennis Pietras and design by Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 13:15, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Bravery Barnstar with the image of Celtic shield, which is universally used, as a symbol of protection from danger, thus it will designate the courage of defender, manifested in any sphere of human activity.
@DennisPietras.
Very good to know, that you choose the version of Bravery Barnstar with the image of Celtic shield.
In this case I should open a new discussion, where the editors will be welcome to
consider already completed version of the Bravery Barnstar, containing the Celtic Shield as a symbol of protection from danger — as a symbol of bravery.Chris Oxford (talk) 21:10, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I like it too. Well done Chris Oxford. Very professional looking . Also, well done to DennisPietras for his persistence. All we need now is to get it vetted (ho ho) by DrChrissy --Aspro (talk) 19:31, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
I like this new Barnstar as well. BZ on the artwork, Chris Oxford
What's the intent behind this barnstar? To whom would it be awarded and for what? I think the design is fine -- I'd like to more about the rationale behind it before I offer an opinion about it.
@Billmckern,
Thank you very much for your reply and for the appreciation of design. Thing is, that a complete description of the meaning of the Star and to whom it should be awarded and for what, is in the open discussion in the end of the same page. The place, where you left your message was more for the discussion of the design between the author of idea - Editor Dennis Pietras and Editors, who offered him different version of designs, as I did. Then Editor Dennis Pietras decided to choose the version of the Bravery Barnstar, which I offered.
So in the end of the same page you will see the discussion open for voters.
It's your file, delete it if you like :-) I think the Chris Oxford design is really great so I'd stick with that and delete your version as an earlier draft, myself. Either way, I'm glad to see a 'bravery branstar' inaugurated. I think it could have several deserving recipients. Thank you for suggesting it. Mortee (talk) 19:38, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Barnstars for work on various religions, but not for atheists/humanists/agnostics?
I am not even sure if/how such an award would be earned, but while there are Barnstars for beliefs including (this list is probably not exhaustive) Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, Jewish/Judaism, Hinduism, Jainism, and Zoroastrianism, there do not appear to be any awards for editors who make outstanding contributions to content that is atheist, humanist or agnostic in nature - or deliberately anti-religious.
Is this a solution in search of a problem? Is it an overstretch to ensure that there is balance in The Force (which in fact brings to mind an idea for another award, but I will leave that to others), or should there be such awards?Ambiguosity (talk) 04:40, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
This historical barnstar privileges an image of an atom, which is references a biased view of science, energy, technology, and nuclear legacy --- these are not the same as atheism at all; nor are they neutral in relation to belief systems. A revision of the barnstar is in order, at least to a way of thinking about atheism. Netherzone (talk) 02:49, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Bravery Barnstar is awarded to appreciate the contributions of Editors to the coverage of subjects, related to the theme of bravery and courage, including moral courage, on Wikipedia.
I would like to open discussion on the Bravery Barnstar. The idea of Barnstar belongs to DennisPietras, design completed with Celtic Shield, presents a symbol of protection from danger - as a symbol of bravery, proposed and executed by Chris Oxford.
Bravery Barnstar is awarded to appreciate the contributions of Editors to the coverage of subjects, related to the theme of bravery and courage, including moral courage, on Wikipedia.
Can be also awarded to appreciate the personal moral courage of Editors, demonstrated in the course of contributing to Wikipedia.Can be also awarded to appreciate the personal moral courage of Editors, demonstrated in the course of contributing to Wikipedia.Chris Oxford (talk) 21:27, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Support: Will serve as a useful barnstar to award to those that suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous editors. To take to the keyboard against a sea of verbiage, And by opposing end them. To die: to log-out; No more. --Aspro (talk) 20:13, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
Support As a way to acknowledge personal fortitude when it comes to dealing with trolls and those who make unhelpful edits. It may seem trivial, but I think it's taking on increased importance in the era of "alternative facts".
Support It takes courage to continuously deal with malcontent editors. A specific barnstar for this is a great way of letting someone know their efforts are both noticed and appreciated.KMJKWhite (talk) 01:21, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Minor Admin's Barnstar
A barnstar for minor administrator activities.
I just made the Minor Admin's Barnstar, any comments? Also, it is my first upload to commons, so it would be nice to know if I have violated copyright or something. Thanks! RileyBugzYell at me|Edits00:20, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
I don't see any value to it. If it's a minor action performed by an admin, just use the minor barnstar. If it's a specifically admin action worthy of praise, make it the Admin's barnstar. I mean, if this is to believed, shouldn't there be another version of every barnstar, just with a mop? Achowat (talk) 22:06, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
It is for an admin action that is routine, like checking ANI occasionally and deleting articles with speedy deletion templates. It isn't like the Admin's Barnstar, which is rewarded for difficult decisions or backlog clearing and such. RileyBugzYell at me|Edits22:22, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Minor edits are not routine. And making minor edits is something that can be recognized. There are no 'minor' things that Admins do that aren't just "click that button," that aren't just 'routine.' Achowat (talk) 01:07, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
This looks like it's literally the same as File:Administrator Barnstar Hires.png but shrunk down and with whitespace around it. I don't really see the point when we could just display the main one at any size. Hi-res version, resized In regards to using it, I tend to agree with Achowat, though I don't mind if it's made with a unique design and is added to WP:PUA. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK16:04, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
We have a lot of stuff at WP:PUA. But we don't have a specialized "trophy" group. The barnstars are essentially the trophies on Wikipedia. I don't think there is any merit in adding an additional group. Would it serve any additional purpose that barnstars don't? — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK12:59, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Barnstar etiquette: 4/4/17 UTC
Hi! I wanted to ask a couple of questions about what someone are allowed to do if someone gives them a barnstar.
Can they place the barnstar on their user page or a subpage of it?
If the barnstar was given out as a result of a GOCE drive or similar effort, in which barnstars are given out methodically, does this affect either of the above questions?
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 would like to propose the Worcestershire Project Barnstar.
The Worcestershire Project Barnstar may be awarded to an editor who contributes significantly to expand or improve Wikipedia's coverage of subjects related to Worcestershire. It may also be awarded to those who created a fine article about particularly this county and this way contributed to the development of WikiProject Worcestershire - WP:WORCS. Chris Oxford (talk) 21:49, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
WORCS Barnstar (new version).
I think a Worcestershire barnstar is a good idea. I like the 3D texturing but perhaps not on the coat of arms which currently isn't very clear. You could also try making the circle larger, as in this template, so more of the horizontal striping is visible, particularly if you keep the shield the same size. Most county barnstars are stars with ribbons (Template:WikiProject Bedfordshire Barnstar, Template:WikiProject Cornwall Barnstar, Template:Dorset Barnstar) so if you want some consistency, you could experiment with that. It's all good though, whatever you decide and I'll happily support any barnstar for this Wikiproject.--Ykraps (talk) 09:20, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
@Ykraps,I know what you mean: I thought about it myself and the first version of Worcestershire Barnstar has been designed exactly in the way described by you: clear lines, without any 3D “medal” look, which - I agree - in this particular case, is giving too much additional details, what is destructive for the visual perception of the image. So now I’m convinced, that the first version was correct and I will work on it and then will replace current version with the first one. Great thanks for the right suggestion.Chris Oxford (talk) 12:08, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
I support the creation of a Worcs. barnstar, and I like the idea of it being consistent with the examples given by Ykraps. — dukwon (talk) (contribs) 10:08, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
Great thanks to all Editors, who discussed, appreciated and supported the WORCS Barnstar. Due to the absence of objections I am closing the discussion. Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 10:21, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Non-free image use
I occasionally come across a barnstar which uses a non-free image. Most of these appears to be one-time things created for a specific purpose, but non-free content is only allowed to be used in the article namespace per WP:NFCC#9. Is there any guidance given to using images in barnstars? Can something be added to it about non-free image use if it's not already mentioned? -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:39, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Should I get approval for a new barnstar?
Well, specifically in Wikipedia Arabic. The guideline page there is unclear, the talk page inactive, and if I did a wrong move a hundred Islamist admins will be after my blood, as I am highly controversial there. I want to make a barnstar called "Neutrality and Rationality". please mention me using {{ping|SammyMajed}}. thanks. • Sammy Majed • Talk • Creations • Wikipedia Arabic • 09:57, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
@SammyMajed: Thanks for asking! I have no idea what the policy is on the Arabic Wikipedia, but here's what I can find on the English Wikipedia:
If you would like a barnstar to be added to the list, please discuss it at WikiProject Wikipedia Awards talk page. Please don't add it without a consensus! Barnstars without consensus will be removed. There is a guideline at Wikipedia:Barnstars 2.0/Guidelines how to create a Barnstar 2.0.
If you have a design for a new award, you can propose the award on the project talk page
It is recommended that new Barnstars be shared at the talk page; many users have posted Barnstars at WP:BS without realizing that their Barnstar idea had already been in place.
In case it can be useful to others: User:PaleoNeonate/Awards/Custom seems mostly ready. If not considered redundant with another similar template in official Template space, it could eventually be moved to something like Template:Custom_user_award or the like. It appears to work, here are two awards posted using it (substituted): first and second. Thanks, — PaleoNeonate — 04:41, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
This template looks great, PaleoNeonate! I haven't found a similar template so far, but if I do, I'll let you know. Again, great template! I look forward to using it. Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 22:43, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
I'm glad if it can be useful. I'm surprised if it didn't already exist, because we have a similar template for userboxes, {{Userbox}}. I have improved the template to more closely look like that userbox template, but it still requires some more testing. I meanwhile noticed that {{Custom award}} already exists (although unrelated), so will also have to find an alternative name for the final result . — PaleoNeonate — 03:33, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi, Creeper Ninja! Thanks for asking! In reply to your questions:
To give someone a barnstar, you can use the following text (in wiki-markup):
{{subst:barnstarname|1=message ~~~~|2=alt}}
Parameters:
barnstarname should be replaced with the name of the barnstar you want to give.
message should be replaced with the message you want to accompany the barnstar.
2 is a parameter that, when set to alt (2=alt), makes the barnstar appear as a Barnstar 2.0. If the parameter is omitted, the barnstar will appear as a Barnstar 1.0.
Now to answer your other question: As for suggesting that another person receive a barnstar, usually no suggestion is necessary. As Wikipedia:Barnstars says:
To give the award to someone, just place the image on their talk page (or their awards page), and explain why it was given. If you are sure the barnstar is appropriate, don't be shy!
In this case, Widr, the user you seemed to be nominating for a barnstar, has all of their awards on their user page, which is currently fully protected. This means that only administrators can edit Widr’s user page. However, you could try dropping a barnstar on Widr’s talk page, with a note (not in the message slot) asking Widr to move it to their user page.
One final note: Before giving out a barnstar, you might want to consider whether you should give a barnstar, or instead give some smaller token of appreciation. Other types of ways of showing appreciation towards other users' efforts include Personal user awards (such as WikiCookies), the Thanks feature), and simple talk page comments stating appreciation. However, as Wikipedia:Barnstars says, and I quoted earlier:
If you are sure the barnstar is appropriate, don't be shy!
@Noah Kastin:, thanks for putting this here. May I suggest you move it to the actual article page? I'm about to give someone a barnstar, and if I hadn't thought to look here I might have missed your instructions. I was concerned / confused about the "2=alt" business, and wasn't sure what, if anything, I needed to put there.
Thanks for the suggestion and for the compliment, Septegram! I would be happy to place the text on whichever article you are suggesting that I put it on. However, I'm not quite sure which article you are suggesting that I add the text to, or which text you are suggesting that I add. If you could clarify this, I would greatly appreciate that! Thanks! Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 23:04, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
Arg. Sorry, @Noah Kastin:; I was looking at the article Wikipedia:Barnstars and clicked on the talk page, which apparently redirects here. I was suggesting that instructions on how to give a barnstar be posted there (unless they are already there and I missed them).
This could be useful, Jjjjjjdddddd. However, for those who do not understand WP:IAR, they might think that the barnstar encourages people to intentionally break the rules, rather than rewarding people who ignore the rules when the rules get in the way of helping the encyclopedia. For that reason, the barnstar might be detrimental rather than useful. Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 23:13, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
I can see how it could encourage people to break the rules for its own sake, but I still think we should recognize people who use IAR well. Maybe a "think-outside-the-box"-type barnstar would solve the problem without encouraging people to go out of their way to break the rules. Jjjjjjdddddd (talk) 23:18, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
@Jjjjjjdddddd: I just realized that the barnstar that you want may actually exist! See below (emphasis added):
The Home-Made Barnstar is awarded to people who do a lot of work in difficult areas and do it well. Recipients are able to think outside the box, the original intention of the WP:IAR principle, and their interventions are always, or almost always effective in resolving or progressing difficulties and disputes.
I’m bringing to attention of the Editors the Dedication Barnstar.
The Dedication Barnstar is awarded to Wikipedians, demonstrating strong dedication to providing contributions of outstanding quality to Wikipedia.
The Dedication Barnstar is awarded to Wikipedians, demonstrating strong dedication to providing contributions of outstanding quality to Wikipedia.
“Any job very well done that has been carried out by a person who is fully dedicated, is always a source of inspiration.”, - as noted Carlos Ghosn; that is very true, and I think, that invaluable work of dedicated Editors, who are setting the standard for Wikipedia in any of its many fields and inspiring others, is worthy in the highest degree of being awarded by a Barnstar designed specifically to reward efforts of creators of the face of Wikipedia, who are making it a source of quality information, which is used up to 10 000 000 000 times monthly:
https://tools.wmflabs.org/siteviews/?platform=all-access&source=pageviews&agent=all-agents&start=2016-06&end=2017-05&sites=en.wikipedia.org
The Barnstar of Diligence may be awarded in recognition of a combination of extraordinary scrutiny, precision and community service.
The "dedication" part seems to match with "extraordinary...community service", and the "outstanding quality" part seems to match with "extraordinary scrutiny [and] precision".
@Chris Oxford: I mean, it's nice-looking and all, but I agree with @Noah Kastin: that it does overlap a little with some others (The Editor's Barnstar comes to mind as well). But look, the more the merrier. I am sure some editors would like some different shinies than the same ones repeated. Cas Liber (talk·contribs) 00:01, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
That's very pretty. Would it be possible to have a transparent png image of it such that it could be used over various background colors, like for other barnstars images? Thanks, —PaleoNeonate - 03:10, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
@PaleoNeonate: I tried to upload a version with a transparent background, but that didn't come out with a transparent background, which .jpeg seems to not support. I'm going to upload it as a separate file, since I had to turn it into a .png file to make it have a transparent background. Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 03:24, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
Yes it indeed would need to be PNG for the bitmap to support alpha transparency. If you're working out of the jpeg image, unfortunately compression artefacts caused some quality loss already, and to have a clean border you may also need to use a type of small blur around it, so that it will "fade" correctly on top of the background instead of seeming to have been scissor-cut. My hope was for the original creator to also produce a non-lossy and transparent PNG image. Thanks, —PaleoNeonate - 03:27, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
It's probably because of the high level of detail caused by the bump mapping... Probably that changing the contrast and brightness via a filter would help. If that doesn't, altering the large image to have more yellow surface before rescaling it might alternatively work... I can't try this immediately but if you don't get to it until then, I could try to experiment with it eventually during the week. —PaleoNeonate - 06:54, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
I actually could work on it today. I didn't know that when uploading a new version it'd override the other one under the same name, now I know... so I did "upload new version" on yours, and the above test was immediately updated. I'm not sure if it's really better or not. It seems to be a little brighter. There also was some attempt to make the cup more visible at this size. —PaleoNeonate - 10:42, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
@Noah Kastin, thank you very much for your reply, which contains an interesting comparison, and comments of Editor Cas Liber and PaleoNeonate are very welcome as well and I thank you both for appreciation of design.
Of course your comments are helpful: it makes it possible to accurately delineate the boundary, which these two Barnstars approach from two opposing sides, but which they do not cross, and thus each of them "illuminates" its own territory with its own individual light.
Certainly, I am familiar with the fact of the existence of The Barnstar of Diligence and with a description of its functions; I agree that you can draw generalized parallels between many definitions, but if you look closely at each of them separately, you can see that synonyms are not unambiguous, but an opportunity to give a more voluminous characteristic to any subject under consideration, but still the closest of them in meaning give us the right direction.
For complete clarity - a bit of history:
Origin of the word Dedication & History for Dedication:
'late 14c., "action of dedicating," from Old French dedicacion (Modern French dédication)
general meaning:
to devote wholly and earnestly, as to some person or purpose:
"consecration of a church or chapel," or directly from Latin dedicationem, noun of action from dedicare Meaning "the giving of oneself to some purpose"
to set apart and consecrate to a deity or to a sacred purpose'.
Synonymous: devotion, dedication, loyalty, fidelity, allegiance, attachment;
a feeling of very strong support for or loyalty to someone or something.
Conclusion: Exact sense of the word Dedication = spiritual, sublime, elevated tone, the highest point of bestowal, the assignment of one's maximum effort to a high goal.
Sublime style.
Dedication can inspire.
Origin of the word Diligence & History for Diligence Origin:
'1735-45; short for French carosse de diligence speed coach'.
Diligences of that time were famous for their punctuality.
general meaning: accuracy, proper attention or care.
Obsolete.— caution.
Qualities worthy of respect, but not having the strength to inspire.
So, Dedication can inspire and Diligences can not — this is the difference, and huge.
That is why, from my point of view, Dedication Barnstar is completely separate and independent of The Barnstar of Diligence: they both shine equally, without interfering, but complementing each other.
It is possible in different occasions to give both of these Barnstars to the same Editor.
Now about technical details: there is no need to worry about transparency of background, it is already there and hidden under the white mask to make presentation of the Barnstar better, than it will look on a checkered background. Image is ready for any use and has been processed in the same way as images for several created by me Barnstars (Mineralogy Barnstar, Bravery Barnstar, etc), which have been uploaded to the different sections of Barnstars table and successfully used by different Editors.
Therefore, an exact copy of Dedication Barnstar, uploaded on Commons, looks very strange and such uploading, in my point of view, have absolutely no sense.
I don't think "dedication" is sufficient distinction for a whole new barnstar. When we have to invoke a dictionary to separate barnstar roles, it's clear they are overlapping. It would have been better to propose a clear purpose for a barnstar first; after all, we already have so many different ones, including WP:PUA and such. As for the design itself, I'm not sure I like it. It's got neither the rusting original barnstar feel, nor is it a clean looking 2.0 barnstar. Sorry for putting it bluntly, but it looks like an excess use of Photoshop filters rather than guided design. The trophy itself is tiny and hardly visible. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK14:36, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
@Hellknowz, Thank you very much for letting us know your point of view. As I see, I couldn't provide enough evedence, which could assure you, that still these two Barnstars are pretty different from each other, but this is a respected priviledge to have own opinion, so the most important thing is that you visited this page and took part in a discussion. About quality of the image: I am sure, that you ment the Barnstar marked 'Test' - this version has been copied from original Dedication Barnstar by Editor Noah Kastin, what resulted in significant loss of quality, taht is why I would like to ask Noah Kastin to kindly delete this unneccessary copy from the page and from Commons. This is very good, that you noted that. That is why an active discussion on the talk page Wikiawards is so valuable, it allows us to note all the negative and positive sides of the subject of discussion, to learn a lot and finally to make an objective conclusion.
Regards, Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 15:10, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
The second version is better. Your request to "kindly delete" it is the opposite of collaboration and "objective conclusion". — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK
@Hellknowz. The opinions of each of us, when we talk about design, is always subjective.
And especially Better/Worse does not exist when it comes to the level of contrast of the same image.
This is a matter of personal taste and it's fine: you can successfully change this on the screen of your computer, but increase in the level of contrast always leads to a deterioration in the technical quality of the image, because it's destroys small details and shades.
The level of the contrast of the Dedication Barnstar original image has been increased as result of attempt of other Editors to create a transparent background, while it’s already existed.
Thus, the goal set had no meaning at first. I have already explained this above. (Please take another look at the phrase starting with the words: “Now about technical details:“.
So, it is not clear what your phrase “opposite of collaboration” means in this particular case.Chris Oxford (talk) 22:06, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
@Chris Oxford: I have restored your barnstar to its original version (File:Dedication_Barnstar.jpg, the second one was the same but a failed attempt to make it transparent). The transparent one is a derived work at File:Dedication_Barnstar.png, in which there were two versions, the original transparent one Noah Kastin made, which was updated by another lighter and higher contrast transparent one I made. I tried to clearly attribute the second to your work and to point to the second one in the original's page. So nothing is lost, but we have two versions at current time. I'll update the above test/example to include both. —PaleoNeonate - 16:36, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
@ PaleoNeonate. This is ok, but was all of this really necessary? In this image a transparent background, disguised in white, already exists, as I explained previously, and thus technically this image was ready for use without any additional manipulations.
Although this was done too hastily and without prior consultation with me, I understand, that it was a result of sincere desire to make the image more applicable, and that is nice. I appreciate it very much.Chris Oxford (talk) 22:06, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
It may not matter for a "1.0" barnstar possibly, although Wikipedia:Barnstars_2.0/Guidelines section 3 suggests: Use the PNG format with transparent background, which allows to use the image over various background colors... The other problem is that while your current image really looks great in my opinion when large enough, at the typical size showed in barnstar awards it becomes darker. The cup becomes almost invisible. So the efforts were to:
@ PaleoNeonate. Usually, at least in the last few years, this page has been used solely for discussion of the Barnstars proposed by their authors. It was always place for the discussions and never - for the experiments with the designs of the Barnstars, offered for discussion. Of course, comments and suggestions were made, and they were very welcome, but these changes were usually suggested to be made by the author of the design, and it worked perfectly.
So, what we are seeing now is quite a new style, but I personally do not attach much importance to this matter (in this case) in view of my understanding, that this has been done out of good motives... but some people do, therefore in the future, preliminary consultations with the authors of Barnstars will be appreciated, as it will benefit Wiki Awards Project in general.
About transparent background: you are absolutely right, but this relates only to Barnstars, officially approved by majority of Editors, involved in a discussion. Usually, during the procedure of approval, Editors write the word ’Support:’ and explain in the short words why they are supporting this Barnstar. Only after such approval the Barnstar is added to the appropriate section at the Barnstars table, where it should be placed with its background transparent. Before that this is considered just as a sketch, which should be presented in the best way: on the neutral white background.
Again, I'm glad, that you think that the Dedication Barnstar’s “current image really looks great”. Thank you.Chris Oxford (talk) 21:55, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
The current barnstar should be moved over to being a Barnstar 1.0.
(optional) A new barnstar, with the barnstar centered and behind the stork, and with the stork at a more moderate size, should be created as a barnstar 2.0.
Please let me know what you think of these suggestions.
Hi, WikiSquirrel42! In response to your question: I think that "barnstarfish" is a good pun! However, more practically, as barnstar descriptors (those pieces of text which say what type of barnstar a barnstar is - I think that just coined the term) currently always come before the word Barnstar, I think that having any descriptors after the word Barnstar might be confusing. Also, since there different Barnstar versions (currently Barnstar 1.0 and Barnstar 2.0), this could cause confusion if Barnstars as a whole were updated, but Barnstarfish were not.
Example: Barnstars get updated to 3.0. Barnstarfish do not. Later, Barnstars get updated to 4.0. So do Barnstarfish. Is the Barnstarfish which is a Barnstar 4.0 a Barnstarfish 4.0, despite never having had a third version, or is it a Barnstarfish 3.0, since this is its third version (despite being a Barnstar 4.0)?
Oh. I meant the image. The name can stay the same, and it's still a barnstar. Also, each barnstar's image should, in my opinion anyway, be updated separately.
@WikiSquirrel42: Thanks for the clarification! Are you suggesting that the Fauna Barnstar (maybe 2.0) should somehow resemble a starfish, rather than its current amalgam of animal patterns? Thanks again for the clarification! Noah Kastin (talk) 02:43, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Yes, that's what I meant. I can see why that might be a bit confusing. This was actually just meant as a pun, but I'm still really glad it was taken seriously! This should definitely be a thing. WikiSquirrel42 (talk) 01:45, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the update, WikiSquirrel42! Now I suppose that the next question would be: How would the barnstar resemble a starfish? I can think of a few ways that it could do that:
It could be starfish-colored (and maybe starfish-patterned) and have a hole through its center to indicate that it is a barnstar.
Alternatively, it could have a starfish mouth in its center instead of a hole.
It could have a picture of a starfish in its center.
What do you think of these suggestions?
If you would prefer another design that I haven't thought of, please let me know!
Definitely the first one. Also, thanks again for taking me seriously - you're actually the first person who I've gotten into a real Wikipedia conversation with, since I've only had an account for a few weeks! WikiSquirrel42 (talk) 22:12, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
@WikiSquirrel42: About the barnstar: Thanks for picking a barnstar design! By the way, I just realized that starfish come in many colors, so if you want a particular color of barnstarfish, please let me know.
About taking you seriously: You're welcome! I enjoy seeing people come up with new ideas and trying to help people make their ideas work.
I also wanted to let you know that I added an Outdent connector bar in this edit. Outdent is a handy little thing that lets you outdent from a conversation, reducing clutter, while still being able to track the conversation flow. This may be the first time I've used it, but it looks very useful!
Thanks for the color choice! By leather, do you mean a leather-like color? Maybe something like this would fit the description of "leather": ••••••••••••••••
If you would like a barnstar to be added to the list, please discuss it at WikiProject Wikipedia Awards talk page. Please don't add it without a consensus!
I'm not sure if consensus can be reached in this discussion, but if it can't, then I'll start a new discussion proposing the Fauna Barnstar 2.0 patrern. (I'm also not sure if adding new images for barnstars requires consensus, or how broad consensus has to be. However, I'm sure we can make it work somehow.)
Thanks for the update, WikiSquirrel42! I did not realize that leather stars existed. Looking at pictures of them, it seems that they are somewhere between these two colors:
••••••••••••••••
••••••••••••••••
Was one of these the approximate color you had in mind? If not, can you help me figure what color you do want?
I was thinking of simply using the starfish's pattern, or just a picture of the starfish, with a hole in the middle. The pictures I got when I did a Google Images search for "leather star" are what I was using as a reference. Sorry for being so picky. WikiSquirrel42 (talk) 01:06, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply, WikiSquirrel42! Don't worry about being picky; after all, the barnstar has to look exactly one way, so figuring out exactly how the barnstar should look is useful.
I am working on finding an adequate image for the leather star. I'll let you know when I find one.
I bet the Wikimedia Commons has some good ones. If all else fails, you can always just do what I did and use Google Images. Thanks! WikiSquirrel42 (talk) 21:42, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
@WikiSquirrel42: Thanks for the suggestion to search Wikimedia Commons! I just did a quick search there, and while I couldn't find any images for leather stars, I did find this nice starfish picture:
We can use that. Just be sure to turn it right side up and put in the hole, so people know it's a barnstar. Oh, and it should be a Barnstar 2.0, so people can still use the old version if they want. WikiSquirrel42 (talk) 23:12, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the suggestions, WikiSquirrel42! I will see if I can turn the image into a barnstar with your changes in mind; however, if anyone wants to turn the image into a barnstar before I get around to doing so, go ahead! Thanks! Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 00:42, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
@WikiSquirrel42 and PaleoNeonate: I tried to turn commons:File:Reef0297.jpg into a barnstar, and had great difficulty doig so. However, I drew my own barnstar, taking commons:File:Original Barnstar Hires.png, re-coloring it, and adding circles, making it look similar to a leather star (based on commons:File:Leather star fish.jpg). The effect is, I think, approximately the same effect that WikiSquirrel42 had originally requested, albeit obtained by different means. Once I can figure out how to upload a picture to Wikimedia Commons, I will upload my self-drawn picture, and see what you think of it.
Please let me know if this abrupt change in plans is a problem, or if you have any other questions or suggestions.
I suppose we'll know whether or not it will work when we see it! And Noah, if you need help with uploading you could always ask the Teahouse or one of the other places Wikipedia has for answering questions. WikiSquirrel42 (talk) 00:52, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the update, PaleoNeonate! I like your barnstar picture, although I think that it would work better as a barnstar 1.0 than as a barnstar 2.0. It would definitely be useful for other types of awards, such as placing on users' user pages as a personal user award.
I'm glad that you like my picture! I'm not quite sure how much it looks like a leather star or a barnstar 2.0, but for those questions to be answered, I think I would need input from WikiSquirrel42 and Antonu, respectively.
Thanks for the link to the Starfish discussion on my talk page! Should it be changed to a link to the section on my talk page (rather than a revision of my talk page) for accuracy?
The permalink includes the section anchor and makes sure that the link will remain available despite future archival, but if you leave the thread there forever, or if you archive it, a more conventional link pointing exactly where it'll remain would be fine too of course... For clarity I've updated the link to show that it's from your user page. —PaleoNeonate - 02:25, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
No offense, Noah, but that doesn't exactly look like a starfish, although I can see where you were going with it. What we need to do is Photoshop the picture of the starfish onto a barnstar-shape. Or we could just have a starfish with a hole in the middle - it doesn't even have to be a leather star. As long as it has five arms and looks sufficiently starfishy, I'll settle for it. The leather star was my first choice, though.
Thanks for the reply, WikiSquirrel42! I can see why my barnstar does not look much like a starfish.
I like the idea of Photoshopping the starfish onto a barnstar; I tried to do that myself, but found that difficult. I can try again, though.
As for making a starfish with a hole through the center: I think that I could do this fairly easily by putting a hole through commons:File:Reef0297 award.png (PaleoNeonate's award). While this would make a nice barnstar, it probably would not qualify as a barnstar 2.0, due to it not being the exact same shape as the other barnstar 2.0s. If anyone is interested in me putting a hole through PaleoNeonate's award and uploading it as a separate file (or overwriting the current one), please let me know.
If anyone has any other questions or suggestions, please let me know.
I have not tried this, but it may possible to pickup a bitmap pattern from the starfish (Reef0297), transform it into a tillable pattern for use with fills, then create the barnstar outline and fill its inside with that pattern... I'm not sure what the end result would be, but the shape would be certain to have been predefined. Another idea would be to paste/draw a barnstar outline on top of the starfish image and to use the erase tool manually around that border, then use blur/smudge tools to enhance the border's antialiasing against the background... For the award version I've made (using Gimp on a BSD OS), what I did was fuzzy-select the star, copy/paste it into a new image, resize it, as well as its canvas to 1024x1024 and center the image into that canvas (which was then a transparent layer). I fixed irregularities with some blur and smudging, then added a background layer filled with the background color of barnstars. I then adjusted the colors of the foreground/star layer until it was properly contrasting against the background layer, using the color envelope filter. Finally, I deleted the temporary background layer and exported the result to a transparent PNG image. —PaleoNeonate - 03:04, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
That might work, Paleo. Can we see it? It may be our only option if we want this to be a Barnstar 2.0, which we do (see first part of discussion). WikiSquirrel42 (talk) 15:46, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Here is one created using both the reef image and the original barnstar image which have been masked/overlayed. —PaleoNeonate - 09:44, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
@WikiSquirrel42: As far as I know, there isn't any official approval process or specific people who we're supposed to ask. I think that, since this post has been up for a couple of days and nobody has commented on it, we should just go through with the barnstar change (making PaleoNeonate's award the Fauna Barnstar 2.0). Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 23:55, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Super! I have now scaled the image up a bit because it appeared abnormally small compared to the non-alt/1.0 one. —PaleoNeonate - 04:26, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the image scaling, PaleoNeonate! I like the way that the image is centered on its background.
The image looks a little bit too small at Wikipedia:Barnstars, due to the image having a larger transparent border around it than File:Wildlife Barnstar (V5) Alt.png does. I will see what I can do to make the border on this image smaller. However, if you can figure out how to make the border appropriately small, I would greatly appreciate that!
I think that this was fixed when I scaled it, but you may need to "purge" the page for the new version to be showed on the barnstars page. —PaleoNeonate - 05:33, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
@PaleoNeonate: As it appears in my browser, when your version is displayed, it appears too small; however, when I tried to remove some of the border, it appeared too large (and the wrong shape, due to my edit turning it into a rectangle). I'm not quite sure what should be done... Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 05:41, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
I can see a minute size difference here but nothing that worries me. It seems that the original barnstar image which I used as model is not a square either: it is 2000x1900. The reef starfish image was also far from a barnstar shape, so some compromises needed to be made. —PaleoNeonate - 06:15, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
@PaleoNeonate: The new Fauna Barnstar looks about right now. I realized that the old Fauna barnstar has a rectangular frame, which could be causing the formerly perceived problem. However, like I said, the new Fauna barnstar looks about right now, so we probably shouldn't have to change it again due to size-related issues. Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 06:22, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
— I'm sure that someone can be found eventually. There are biology and animals (fish etc) related WikiProjects that may be a place to look for participants. To see who were awarded the v1 version it's possible to check Special:WhatLinksHere/File:Wildlife_Barnstar_(V5)_Alt.png. But you could also look at your favorite animal articles and look at the history to find who contributed the most to that article, etc. In the "user contributions" page of users, at the bottom is a counter link, this will also display the articles edited by that user sorted by the most edited, that can be a way to evaluate quickly the contributions of users found in WikiProject participants lists... Just ideas, —PaleoNeonate - 06:44, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
I saw the new Fauna Barnstar on the Barnstars page, and it looks great! Great job to all! I'm happy to have done something other people will see and use instead of just fixing grammar mistakes. WikiSquirrel42 (talk) 17:49, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Hi! I have a number of projects that I want to work on, all of which are related to this project. However, I am not sure whether I should post these in userspace, on this talk page, or in another location (such as the project page that this talk page is attached to). If anyone has any suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 05:31, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
If they are collaborative projects, perhaps that subpages of the WikiProject (in Wikipedia: space) would suit, but I'm not very familiar with how this project normally proceeds. —PaleoNeonate - 13:40, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
Hi! I noticed that many Barnstar 2.0s either have fancy backgrounds or clipart behind the barnstar. I'm not sure if such barnstars still count as barnstar 2.0s. If someone can let me know, I would greatly appreciate that! Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 03:44, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
Note: I have already made a plain black barnstar, located at File:Black Barnstar Hires.png, which I was planning to use for the Emo Barnstar 2.0—until I discovered the conflicting barnstars. However, if editors want a barnstar with a face on it, one could be attached to my file.
If anyone has any opinions on either or both of my two questions, please let me know. By the way, @IllaZilla: You might have an interest in this discussion, as you created and implemented File:Emo barnstar.png.
Hi! I am requesting help on making a version of my Black Barnstar 2.0 picture. Mainly what I would like help with is making the dark gray parts of it (brightness = 5%) somewhat brighter, so that they stand out more. I would also like help creating a visible depression in the center of the barnstar, which barnstar 2.0s usually have, but which I forgot to add.
If I do not get help, I may try to implement the proposed changes myself. However, I would appreciate any help I can get.
Hmm actually it doesn't really look that much different when small, I should have checked what the zoomed-out result would be before uploading, probably. —PaleoNeonate - 12:06, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
If you'd like to retry a similar thing, what I used was The Gimp, I first used the color curves tool to change the contrast, then the blur tool with a medium cursor which I ran around the borders (making sure to only pass once everywhere along the border). I then used the ellipse-selection mode in fixed-ratio mode to select a circle around your center circle. I then used the color picker to get the black and gray as foreground/background colors and then used the gradient fill tool in radial mode in that circle until I had what seemed to be a depression. This also filled the erased/transparent circle, so I then used the ellipse selection mode again to make a smaller circle inside, with the erase tool to erase that one so it gave a transparent hole. I then applied the blur tool on that circle's border. The same could be done again but with even more color contrast and a larger hole-border so that it's visible when small... —PaleoNeonate - 12:17, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
@PaleoNeonate: Good work on the barnstar! It definitely looks much better than my version.
Something that I didn't realize until you made your version is that the lighter colors look higher up, or closer to the screen, than the darker lines. This means that the borders and spikes sticking out from the center should be lighter than the rest of the barnstar. However, I hadn't realized that, and as a result, the borders and spikes sticking out from the center look lower than the rest of the barnstar. To make this work properly, the black parts would probably have to be turned a somewhat lighter gray, and the gray parts would have to be turned black (or a very dark gray).
A somewhat easier method than attempting this might be to simply take File:Photographer Barnstar.png and make the center the correct color in relation to the rest of the barnstar. Note that this would probably have to be a new file, due to licensing incompatibility (my Black Barnstar 2.0 is licensed under CC-BY, while File:Photographer Barnstar.png is licensed under CC-BY-SA).
I'll see what I can do on the barnstar improvements. However, if you can make an improved barnstar, that would be greatly appreciated!
If what you're looking for is a black version of the original barnstar under the same license (public domain), I have just modified the original one by removing saturation, which converted it to black and white, then using the Gimp color curves filter to make it dark (which only took a few minutes to do). This of course could also be modified to have overlay art depending on context for other barnstars... Here's a test using it:
@PaleoNeonate: That barnstar looks amazing! Let's go with that one.
By the way, if we're going to use your barnstar, it should probably be moved to File:Black Barnstar Hires.png, while mine should probably be moved to something like File:Black Barnstar Hires 2.png. If you think that this is a good idea, I will request that the files be moved at Commons.
Oh a detail perhaps: moving without the page mover right doesn't allow to delete the redirect which is automatically created from the old entry to the new one, but it's possible to tag the old redirect for deletion. I don't have that page mover right myself... —PaleoNeonate - 10:12, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
@PaleoNeonate: I don't have the page mover right either (though I wish I did), but I don't think that leaving around old redirects would be a problem. If it would be, we can probably ask in the move request for the page mover to move the page without creating a redirect. Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 10:14, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
I propose Barn Star BarnStar of SAARC for users who have made important and extraordinary contributions to SAARC
(larger) could be placed in the center of one of those barnstar blanks.
It's been a long time since I've done any graphics, so if another editor could create, that would be great!
I joined Wikipedia in the spring of 2014 and recently active with TOTD. Once completed, I would like to award this barnstar to other editors who are contributing.
Also, once this TOTD barnstar is available it might encourage additional editors to join the project.
. No need to reinvent the wheel...
Done Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 17:57, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Done. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:35, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
You deserve a barnstar for patrolling both recent changes and New pages! 68.233.214.74 (talk) 21:47, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
DrChrissy (talk) 21:47, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
Resolved
. Interestingly, it appears to be less shiny at this size. —PaleoNeonate - 03:35, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
Partly done The change to Wikipedia:Barnstars has been made (in this edit). However, I can't figure out how to change Template:The Fauna Barnstar so that it makes the new barnstar appear with the 2 parameter set to alt. If anyone can figure out how to do that, please let me know. Thanks! Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 00:06, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
_Alt.png){kind=link}
_Alt.png){kind=link}
