→Updating large service ribbons for Grand Tutnum and higher levels: small ribbons done |
→Updating large service ribbons for Grand Tutnum and higher levels: color of ribbon on novice medal would also need changing |
||
Line 310: | Line 310: | ||
*{{ping|Mootros|Herostratus|VMS Mosaic}} I've updated the SVGs per the comments above. If these are acceptable to everyone, I will make the necessary adjustments to any templates and to the small ribbons so that they match the larger ribbons. — [[User:Jkudlick|Jkudlick]] • [[User_talk:Jkudlick|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jkudlick|c]] • [[User:Jkudlick/sandbox|s]] 03:47, 30 September 2016 (UTC) |
*{{ping|Mootros|Herostratus|VMS Mosaic}} I've updated the SVGs per the comments above. If these are acceptable to everyone, I will make the necessary adjustments to any templates and to the small ribbons so that they match the larger ribbons. — [[User:Jkudlick|Jkudlick]] • [[User_talk:Jkudlick|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jkudlick|c]] • [[User:Jkudlick/sandbox|s]] 03:47, 30 September 2016 (UTC) |
||
*{{ping|Mootros|Herostratus|VMS Mosaic}} Small ribbons are done. I've just noticed that the medal images for |
*{{ping|Mootros|Herostratus|VMS Mosaic}} Small ribbons are done. I've just noticed that the medal images for the first six levels will probably need updating if they are to remain visually similar to these new ribbon bars. I do not have the necessary graphics software to make those changes. — [[User:Jkudlick|Jkudlick]] • [[User_talk:Jkudlick|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jkudlick|c]] • [[User:Jkudlick/sandbox|s]] 03:37, 4 October 2016 (UTC) |
![]() | This page was nominated for deletion on 31 August 2015. The result of the discussion was keep but roll back to April version. |
This is the
talk page for discussing
Service awards and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
Archives:
Index,
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7Auto-archiving period: 180 days
![]() |
![]() | On 2012-02-16, Wikipedia:Service awards was linked from Reddit, a high-traffic website. ( Traffic) All prior and subsequent edits to the article are noted in its revision history. |
![]() | This project page was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Service awards page. |
|
Archives:
Index,
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7Auto-archiving period: 180 days
![]() |
The requirements (in time or edits) keep randomly changing, and have been for years. Just leave it alone. The recent massive expansion at Wikipedia:Incremental service awards (Ribbons) has introduced new date requirements that directly contradict those of Wikipedia:Service awards in some places, which is going to give some users the impression that others are falsifying their "editing credentials". Please fix this (by using the more stable requirements in the main page), and just let this lie as it is and quit monkeying around with it. After these requirements are normalized, any further changes should be done by RfC, or reverted, the same way unilateral additions to the main barnstars pages are reverted if they don't have consensus. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 00:30, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
requesting a deletion of the entire incremental system". Alex| The| Whovian 07:56, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
User:AlexTheWhovian, on this page a "Novice editor" needs 200 edits and 1 month. On the page that you worked on, it looks like the same "Novice editor" needs 400 edits and 1 month 15 days. Its rather confusing to call these sublevels levels. Either way, you should establish consensus that the "incrementals" should go up all the way. You have have altered the main idea that these incremental awards were merely to encourage new editors. You have unilaterally altered a long standing agreement of the community not to have a more fine-grading scheme---and with it more (sub)levels. If I remember correctly, the "incremental awards" were some sort of compromise over exactly the question whether to have a finer grading or not. Please revert and try to establish consensus. Mootros ( talk) 07:50, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
All of this looks like WP:BRD. AlexTheWhovian, you made a bold edit, then it was reverted. Instead of immediately restoring it and crying "disruption," it should be discussed to completion. Lost on Belmont 3200N1000W ( talk) 12:31, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Please see here: Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Wikipedia:Incremental_service_awards_(Ribbons)
Thank you for your input. Mootros ( talk) 06:49, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 September 14#Service award templates. JohnCD ( talk) 12:43, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
So, I have a question. Is there a penalty for displaying an award on your page you're not entitled to? Is there someone who goes around and checks? I'm just curious, is all. I Feel Tired ( talk) 17:13, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
I've noticed a very significant lack of respect in these titles: the title "Lord Gom, the Highest Togneme of the Encyclopedia". As any fule kno, the higher aristocrats absolutely insist on their "The" (with CAPITAL "T"). For example, long ago a newspaper referred to "Princess Margaret"; they promptly received a letter, not from the princess of course but a minion, pointing out in offended terms that the correct usage was "The Princess Margaret". Consequently we should rectify the reference throughout to "The Lord Gom, the Highest Togneme of the Encyclopedia". I haven't done this myself in case it might break something somewhere else (not there are many Lord Goms). Perhaps someone who knows if these terms can safely be changed will do this, if deemed acceptable? Best wishes Pol098 ( talk) 10:25, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
I've created the WP:Deletion to Quality Award.
This recognizes editors who've taken a page previously considered for deletion — to Featured Article or Good Article quality.
The award is inspired by the Wikipedia:Million Award, the Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron, and the Wikipedia:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement.
Please see Wikipedia:Deletion to Quality Award.
Thank you,
— Cirt ( talk) 10:27, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Can't find where or how my current number of edits is tallied. Any help will be greatly appreciated. Regards, DPdH ( talk) 05:04, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Instead of doing something useful, I decided to investigate an idle question I had: just how many people currently qualify for the highest service award, Grandmaster Editor First-Class? If one has the time, one can figure it out: at the moment I write this, 295 editors have made at least 114,000 edits, so all one would need to do is to find out how many of these folks have been editing 14 years or more.
After a couple of hours, having first gone thru the top 50 on the list (which allowed me to identify 5 Grandmaster Editors, 16 Master Editor IVs, 16 Master Editor IIIs, & several lesser awards), I skipped down to look for usernames in this group of 295 whom I remember being active when I joined in 2002. Doing that, I was able to identify a total of two editors who could correctly & properly add that award to their page. And neither one has bothered to do so. (Out of respect for their privacy, I won't mention their names here.)
FWIW, the only person who has the Grandmaster Editor First-Class template on his page claims to have been editing Wikipedia for over 15 years. A quick investigation revealed said person has a whopping 352 edits to his credit.
Not sure what my investigation shows. I did notice that while a lot of people will boast on their user page how many edits they've made, far, far fewer mention how long they've been on Wikipedia. And most of those folks simply indicate they've been here "over 10 years". Like me. -- llywrch ( talk) 22:24, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
If one reviews the various enWiki awards ribbons one can see that, in general, the small (72px) versions of the ribbons very closely match the larger (120px) versions of the ribbons. However, the large and small ribbons for service awards differ quite greatly from each other beginning at Grand Tutnum. In addition, the award stars used on the current large ribbons do not match the convention used in attaching service stars and 5/16 inch stars to medals and ribbons, viz. a bronze or gold star represents an additional award, while a silver star is used in lieu of five bronze or gold stars. I have taken the liberty of redesigning the large ribbons to use bronze and silver service stars, as those are more appropriate for service awards, as well as redesigning them to match the small ribbons. However, prior to uploading more than twenty images to Commons to create a table (which I have started here), I wanted to know if there was any desire to update those images. — Jkudlick • t • c • s 08:18, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
° | Level name | Current images | Proposed image #1 ( service stars) |
Proposed image #2 (match small ribbons) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Small Ribbon | Large Ribbon | ||||
1 | Registered Editor |
|
|
No change | |
2 | Novice Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
No change | |
3 | Apprentice Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
No change | |
4 | Journeyman Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
No change | |
5 | Yeoman Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
No change | |
6 | Experienced Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
No change | |
7 | Veteran Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
No change | |
8 | Veteran Editor II |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
9 | Veteran Editor III |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
10 | Veteran Editor IV |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
11 | Senior Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
12 | Senior Editor II |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
13 | Senior Editor III |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
14 | Master Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
15 | Master Editor II |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
16 | Master Editor III |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
17 | Master Editor IV |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
18 | Grandmaster Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
19 | Grandmaster Editor First-Class |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
20 | Vanguard Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Well, sure. This looks fine to me. Anybody have any objections? Herostratus ( talk) 02:04, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Dear Jkudlick, Thanks for doing this. It's an improvement in most places. However, I think it really needs a little bit more work! Basically, the design is inconsistent with the naming scheme. For instance "Senior Editor" has four (dark) stars and the next level SE 2 has one (bright) star. A more logical choice would be to keep the groups together, but differentiate clearly between groups while keeping the number of star relatively low. So, Senior Editor: 1 star, SE2: 2 stars, SE3: 3 stars. Followed by Master Editor: 1 star -- ME 4: stars but use thin gold colour marking around the purple or something like this .
For Grandmaster Editor and above, I am not happy that the wheels are supposed to be replaced. What is wrong with the current design? The solution you are proposing for the top three levels is not very elegant and makes these levels indistinct from the levels below. The current design really reflects the naming. Please don't change these. Many thanks! Mootros ( talk) 16:07, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
@ Herostratus, VMS Mosaic, and Mootros: Here is an updated table. I have converted all of the larger ribbons to SVGs with updated designs and proposed names for the higher levels to kind of match the Grandmaster First Class name. I'm not sure why the PNG preview for the Registered Editor ribbons renders that way, but if you look at the original file you can see what I thought I had uploaded; that first level may require a total redesign if SVGs are to be used. I changed the ribbon colors for the Yeoman and Experienced levels to match Journeyman, since it seems somewhat more rational to me. As always, feel free to comment. — Jkudlick • t • c • s 09:14, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
° | Level name | Current designs | Updated designs | Incremental awards | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Large Ribbon | Small Ribbon | Large Ribbon | Small Ribbon | Level 2 | Level 3 | Level4 | ||
1 | Registered Editor |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
2 | Novice Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
3 | Apprentice Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
4 | Journeyman Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
5 | Yeoman Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
6 | Experienced Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
7 | Veteran Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
8 | Veteran Editor II |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
9 | Veteran Editor III |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
10 | Veteran Editor IV |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
11 | Senior Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
12 | Senior Editor II |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
13 | Senior Editor III |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
14 | Master Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
15 | Master Editor II |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
16 | Master Editor III |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
17 | Master Editor IV |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
18 | Grandmaster Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
19 | Grandmaster Editor First-Class |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
20 | Vanguard Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A |
→Updating large service ribbons for Grand Tutnum and higher levels: small ribbons done |
→Updating large service ribbons for Grand Tutnum and higher levels: color of ribbon on novice medal would also need changing |
||
Line 310: | Line 310: | ||
*{{ping|Mootros|Herostratus|VMS Mosaic}} I've updated the SVGs per the comments above. If these are acceptable to everyone, I will make the necessary adjustments to any templates and to the small ribbons so that they match the larger ribbons. — [[User:Jkudlick|Jkudlick]] • [[User_talk:Jkudlick|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jkudlick|c]] • [[User:Jkudlick/sandbox|s]] 03:47, 30 September 2016 (UTC) |
*{{ping|Mootros|Herostratus|VMS Mosaic}} I've updated the SVGs per the comments above. If these are acceptable to everyone, I will make the necessary adjustments to any templates and to the small ribbons so that they match the larger ribbons. — [[User:Jkudlick|Jkudlick]] • [[User_talk:Jkudlick|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jkudlick|c]] • [[User:Jkudlick/sandbox|s]] 03:47, 30 September 2016 (UTC) |
||
*{{ping|Mootros|Herostratus|VMS Mosaic}} Small ribbons are done. I've just noticed that the medal images for |
*{{ping|Mootros|Herostratus|VMS Mosaic}} Small ribbons are done. I've just noticed that the medal images for the first six levels will probably need updating if they are to remain visually similar to these new ribbon bars. I do not have the necessary graphics software to make those changes. — [[User:Jkudlick|Jkudlick]] • [[User_talk:Jkudlick|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jkudlick|c]] • [[User:Jkudlick/sandbox|s]] 03:37, 4 October 2016 (UTC) |
![]() | This page was nominated for deletion on 31 August 2015. The result of the discussion was keep but roll back to April version. |
This is the
talk page for discussing
Service awards and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
Archives:
Index,
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7Auto-archiving period: 180 days
![]() |
![]() | On 2012-02-16, Wikipedia:Service awards was linked from Reddit, a high-traffic website. ( Traffic) All prior and subsequent edits to the article are noted in its revision history. |
![]() | This project page was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Service awards page. |
|
Archives:
Index,
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7Auto-archiving period: 180 days
![]() |
The requirements (in time or edits) keep randomly changing, and have been for years. Just leave it alone. The recent massive expansion at Wikipedia:Incremental service awards (Ribbons) has introduced new date requirements that directly contradict those of Wikipedia:Service awards in some places, which is going to give some users the impression that others are falsifying their "editing credentials". Please fix this (by using the more stable requirements in the main page), and just let this lie as it is and quit monkeying around with it. After these requirements are normalized, any further changes should be done by RfC, or reverted, the same way unilateral additions to the main barnstars pages are reverted if they don't have consensus. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 00:30, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
requesting a deletion of the entire incremental system". Alex| The| Whovian 07:56, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
User:AlexTheWhovian, on this page a "Novice editor" needs 200 edits and 1 month. On the page that you worked on, it looks like the same "Novice editor" needs 400 edits and 1 month 15 days. Its rather confusing to call these sublevels levels. Either way, you should establish consensus that the "incrementals" should go up all the way. You have have altered the main idea that these incremental awards were merely to encourage new editors. You have unilaterally altered a long standing agreement of the community not to have a more fine-grading scheme---and with it more (sub)levels. If I remember correctly, the "incremental awards" were some sort of compromise over exactly the question whether to have a finer grading or not. Please revert and try to establish consensus. Mootros ( talk) 07:50, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
All of this looks like WP:BRD. AlexTheWhovian, you made a bold edit, then it was reverted. Instead of immediately restoring it and crying "disruption," it should be discussed to completion. Lost on Belmont 3200N1000W ( talk) 12:31, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Please see here: Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Wikipedia:Incremental_service_awards_(Ribbons)
Thank you for your input. Mootros ( talk) 06:49, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 September 14#Service award templates. JohnCD ( talk) 12:43, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
So, I have a question. Is there a penalty for displaying an award on your page you're not entitled to? Is there someone who goes around and checks? I'm just curious, is all. I Feel Tired ( talk) 17:13, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
I've noticed a very significant lack of respect in these titles: the title "Lord Gom, the Highest Togneme of the Encyclopedia". As any fule kno, the higher aristocrats absolutely insist on their "The" (with CAPITAL "T"). For example, long ago a newspaper referred to "Princess Margaret"; they promptly received a letter, not from the princess of course but a minion, pointing out in offended terms that the correct usage was "The Princess Margaret". Consequently we should rectify the reference throughout to "The Lord Gom, the Highest Togneme of the Encyclopedia". I haven't done this myself in case it might break something somewhere else (not there are many Lord Goms). Perhaps someone who knows if these terms can safely be changed will do this, if deemed acceptable? Best wishes Pol098 ( talk) 10:25, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
I've created the WP:Deletion to Quality Award.
This recognizes editors who've taken a page previously considered for deletion — to Featured Article or Good Article quality.
The award is inspired by the Wikipedia:Million Award, the Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron, and the Wikipedia:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement.
Please see Wikipedia:Deletion to Quality Award.
Thank you,
— Cirt ( talk) 10:27, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Can't find where or how my current number of edits is tallied. Any help will be greatly appreciated. Regards, DPdH ( talk) 05:04, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Instead of doing something useful, I decided to investigate an idle question I had: just how many people currently qualify for the highest service award, Grandmaster Editor First-Class? If one has the time, one can figure it out: at the moment I write this, 295 editors have made at least 114,000 edits, so all one would need to do is to find out how many of these folks have been editing 14 years or more.
After a couple of hours, having first gone thru the top 50 on the list (which allowed me to identify 5 Grandmaster Editors, 16 Master Editor IVs, 16 Master Editor IIIs, & several lesser awards), I skipped down to look for usernames in this group of 295 whom I remember being active when I joined in 2002. Doing that, I was able to identify a total of two editors who could correctly & properly add that award to their page. And neither one has bothered to do so. (Out of respect for their privacy, I won't mention their names here.)
FWIW, the only person who has the Grandmaster Editor First-Class template on his page claims to have been editing Wikipedia for over 15 years. A quick investigation revealed said person has a whopping 352 edits to his credit.
Not sure what my investigation shows. I did notice that while a lot of people will boast on their user page how many edits they've made, far, far fewer mention how long they've been on Wikipedia. And most of those folks simply indicate they've been here "over 10 years". Like me. -- llywrch ( talk) 22:24, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
If one reviews the various enWiki awards ribbons one can see that, in general, the small (72px) versions of the ribbons very closely match the larger (120px) versions of the ribbons. However, the large and small ribbons for service awards differ quite greatly from each other beginning at Grand Tutnum. In addition, the award stars used on the current large ribbons do not match the convention used in attaching service stars and 5/16 inch stars to medals and ribbons, viz. a bronze or gold star represents an additional award, while a silver star is used in lieu of five bronze or gold stars. I have taken the liberty of redesigning the large ribbons to use bronze and silver service stars, as those are more appropriate for service awards, as well as redesigning them to match the small ribbons. However, prior to uploading more than twenty images to Commons to create a table (which I have started here), I wanted to know if there was any desire to update those images. — Jkudlick • t • c • s 08:18, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
° | Level name | Current images | Proposed image #1 ( service stars) |
Proposed image #2 (match small ribbons) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Small Ribbon | Large Ribbon | ||||
1 | Registered Editor |
|
|
No change | |
2 | Novice Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
No change | |
3 | Apprentice Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
No change | |
4 | Journeyman Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
No change | |
5 | Yeoman Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
No change | |
6 | Experienced Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
No change | |
7 | Veteran Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
No change | |
8 | Veteran Editor II |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
9 | Veteran Editor III |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
10 | Veteran Editor IV |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
11 | Senior Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
12 | Senior Editor II |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
13 | Senior Editor III |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
14 | Master Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
15 | Master Editor II |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
16 | Master Editor III |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
17 | Master Editor IV |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
18 | Grandmaster Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
19 | Grandmaster Editor First-Class |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
20 | Vanguard Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Well, sure. This looks fine to me. Anybody have any objections? Herostratus ( talk) 02:04, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Dear Jkudlick, Thanks for doing this. It's an improvement in most places. However, I think it really needs a little bit more work! Basically, the design is inconsistent with the naming scheme. For instance "Senior Editor" has four (dark) stars and the next level SE 2 has one (bright) star. A more logical choice would be to keep the groups together, but differentiate clearly between groups while keeping the number of star relatively low. So, Senior Editor: 1 star, SE2: 2 stars, SE3: 3 stars. Followed by Master Editor: 1 star -- ME 4: stars but use thin gold colour marking around the purple or something like this .
For Grandmaster Editor and above, I am not happy that the wheels are supposed to be replaced. What is wrong with the current design? The solution you are proposing for the top three levels is not very elegant and makes these levels indistinct from the levels below. The current design really reflects the naming. Please don't change these. Many thanks! Mootros ( talk) 16:07, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
@ Herostratus, VMS Mosaic, and Mootros: Here is an updated table. I have converted all of the larger ribbons to SVGs with updated designs and proposed names for the higher levels to kind of match the Grandmaster First Class name. I'm not sure why the PNG preview for the Registered Editor ribbons renders that way, but if you look at the original file you can see what I thought I had uploaded; that first level may require a total redesign if SVGs are to be used. I changed the ribbon colors for the Yeoman and Experienced levels to match Journeyman, since it seems somewhat more rational to me. As always, feel free to comment. — Jkudlick • t • c • s 09:14, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
° | Level name | Current designs | Updated designs | Incremental awards | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Large Ribbon | Small Ribbon | Large Ribbon | Small Ribbon | Level 2 | Level 3 | Level4 | ||
1 | Registered Editor |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
2 | Novice Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
3 | Apprentice Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
4 | Journeyman Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
5 | Yeoman Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
6 | Experienced Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
7 | Veteran Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
8 | Veteran Editor II |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
9 | Veteran Editor III |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
10 | Veteran Editor IV |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
11 | Senior Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
12 | Senior Editor II |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
13 | Senior Editor III |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
14 | Master Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
15 | Master Editor II |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
16 | Master Editor III |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
17 | Master Editor IV |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
18 | Grandmaster Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
19 | Grandmaster Editor First-Class |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A | ||
20 | Vanguard Editor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
N/A |