This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference. Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump.

Recently, I updated the category portion of the WP:BS page. It was overdue as it had not been in a while and there has been a realignment of the main categories. One thing that I noted as I was doing this is that the following categories have no barnstar:

• Health and fitness – Health, Health sciences and Self-care
• Philosophy and thinking – Philosophy and Thought
• Reference – Research and Library and information science
• Religion and belief systems – Religion and Belief
• Science, Natural sciences, and Nature - Science, Natural sciences and nature

I propose that we have a contest to design five new awards. We will post it on the Signpost and open it up to the community. Before you respond, please read this and this. Thoughts? -- evrik ^{( talk)} 19:05, 28 February 2007 (UTC) reply

• Comment Interesting idea. It should be fun to watch people compete for the honors. -- South Philly 02:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC) reply
• Comment isn't science covered by E=mc² star? Nevertheless, the other ideas sound interesting. I'll see if I can come up with anything. Laïka 16:39, 1 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Broadening the scope of the proposed star slightly to also incorporate spirituality, I've created this possible star, based on the fact that clouds are often used to represent the afterlife, which virtually all religions believe in in one way or another, as well as just the general role clouds play in meditation and prayer. Alternatively, I could create an image based on the candle, since most religions use candles at some point in their ceremonies. Laïka 17:14, 1 March 2007 (UTC) reply

• I like the image. I say we put this in a hgolding queue until we decide what we are going to do, but it is a nice image. -- evrik ^{( talk)} 21:16, 1 March 2007 (UTC) reply
• Very nice image thuglas ^{T| C} 22:37, 1 March 2007 (UTC) reply
• Fair enough; I'll withdraw the image for now. Laïka 19:23, 2 March 2007 (UTC) reply
• Suggestion - add some sunlight, probably coming through the clouds, possibly from the barnstar itself. Regards, Ben Aveling 00:11, 3 March 2007 (UTC) reply

• I like this idea. Perhaps as if the sun is shining behind the star and clouds, and shafts of light coming out, as happens when the sun breaks through the clouds. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦ ♫ 22:14, 8 March 2007 (UTC) reply

• Could it be used in connection with meteorology in some way? A mcmurray ( talk • contribs) 06:52, 3 March 2007 (UTC) reply

1. Support Looks real good. Dark Ermac 12:59, 7 March 2007 (UTC) reply
2. Support and second A mcmurray's suggestion on using this one for meteorology contributions as well.-- Hús ö nd 18:36, 19 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Strongly Support We need one of these. I'll back it to the end -- Sam 1123 21:50, 23 March 2007 (UTC) reply

• This Barnstar needs to gain more support before it can be accepted, otherwise it will be archived under no consensus. Smomo 22:56, 3 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Support - as religion and possibly meteorology barnstar. Some combination there, huh? John Carter 18:25, 10 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Support Good idea, even better it's not associated with a particular WikiProject which I find somewhat exclusionary. Aaron Bowen 06:49, 19 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Comment I really think that if meteorology doesn't come under science or geography, it should have its own star; it feels a bit cheap to say "this is a religion and weather star". Laïka 16:38, 22 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I don't like the idea of a merger either, I was thinking more along the lines of an alt proposal for its criteria, seems like there was some objection to it before. IvoShandor 16:50, 22 April 2007 (UTC) reply

		The Congressional Barnstar of Honor
		For substantal, notable, or significant work on Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Congress, or work of substantial interest to members of that WikiProject.-- Dr who1975 20:36, 8 March 2007 (UTC) reply

This is a proposal for the Barnstar award for Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Congress. The title is a play on words of "The Congressional Medal of Honor", in this case, the word "Congressional" means dealing with Congress and not that it is actually awarded by Congress. The Award shall be given by members of the associated wikiproject. I'm open to alternate images if anyone wants to propose one.-- Dr who1975 20:36, 8 March 2007 (UTC) reply

• Support Ok. Here's my next iteration. It now looks nothing like existing medals. I have further ideas but I really like this concept I think it's a very creative award idea. I think a creative, eye catching, intriguing concept like this promotes WikiLove and the Kindness Campaign by making contributors feel apreciated and it'll show what a great community we have here at wikipedia to those people visiting the pages of recipients who display it. I hope people agree.-- Dr who1975 20:36, 8 March 2007 (UTC) reply
• Alas, DrWho1975, I don't agree. Your points are all valid, but I don't agree in general with the principle of specialization/categorization among Barnstars. Either you earn a Barnstar or not. All this despite my being a active participant in Wikiproject U.S. Congress. Specialized stars diminish the importance and value of barnstars. I disagree with the part of the Wikipedia:Kindness Campaign that suggests use of "chronically underused barnstars". If I were to earn a barnstar, I would prefer it to be the Barnstar.— Markles 21:55, 10 March 2007 (UTC) reply

• Comment The nature of my Barnstar submission is not a new concept. Please go look at the main page for Wikipedia:WikiProject Awards and you'll see that there are literally dozens of specialized Barnstars. In the case of my submission: this is meant to be an award for the U.S. Congressional Wikipedia Project. If you look at Wikipedia:WikiProject awards you'll see that many other Wikipedia Projects (such as the Military History Project, the California related wiki projects, and The Doctor Who projects) have there own awards. The basis for your objection is not valid. As to your statement that "Barnstars have to be earned" ... of course they do.... this Barnstar would have to be earned like any other.-- Dr who1975 00:09, 11 March 2007 (UTC) reply

• I reread your comments and see that you pobably knew most of this infornation. In any event, I'll leave me response there for those who didn't know that.-- Dr who1975 00:25, 11 March 2007 (UTC) reply

• Comment Markles, obviously I understand the point your are trying to make with reference to policy on Barnstars, but this it not the time or the place to assert your view on this policy. The question we are debating here, whether you agree with the general principal or not, is does this WikiProject deserve a Barnstar. Seeing as many other WikiProjects also have their own Barnstars, you must decide if this one should have one as well not on your own opinion on the policy, but your own opinion on the WikiProject and the proposal. Smomo 00:43, 11 March 2007 (UTC) reply

• Support. Fair enough comments. I think that the proliferation of barnstar categories a problem. I would be so much more proud to get a Barnstar than to get a Project Barnstar. It's like the Oscar for "Best Picture" is better than "Best Foreign Language Film." That's my only reluctance regarding your otherwise sufficient proposal. Let me be clear: if Project Barnstars must proliferate, then your proposal for one involving Project Congress is fine with me. Therefore I agree that, despite my objection to the concept of the proliferation of categorical barnstars, this proposition is nonetheless worthy of categorical barnstarification. Bon chance!— Markles 01:03, 11 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Neutral. I still think the image is far too similar to the real Congressional Medal of Honor, even with the changing of the ribbon color from blue stars to green. An upside down star is the central part of the medalion in the Medal of Honor. I'm afraid that it is still too close that it might raise objections among military recipients of the Medal of Honor. Having said that, I will not oppose the creation of the barnstar -- with the caveat that it the image be open to future changes in case any major objections are raised against it. Dcmacnut 21:52, 11 March 2007 (UTC) reply

• Support - There is a ton of work to be done relative to Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Congress and those that do should be recognized. Smee 20:41, 13 March 2007 (UTC). reply
• Commment Ugh, that 'Of Honor' stuck on the end still makes my stomach turn. It still seems too much like the original award. In my opinion, perhaps just a simple renaming is in order? Smomo 21:15, 13 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Comment I may as well redesign the entire award if you take the "Of Honor" off.-- Dr who1975 01:07, 14 March 2007 (UTC) reply

• Support: The image does look a bit similar, but the green ribbon and the barnstar dangling from the ribbon do set it apart enough for me. Besides, the spirit of the award is completely different. I don't think anyone is going think it is a military award. Just my two cents. IvoShandor 22:49, 13 March 2007 (UTC) reply
• Abstain What about us wikipedians who don't live in the US? Can we have a Union Flag in the backgound instead? -- Sam 1123 20:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC) reply
  • Comment I would suggest against that; as this is a specific award for WikiProject U.S. Congress, the award should be US themed. Smomo 21:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC) reply
  • Comment Sam1123, you should look into creating wikiproject awards for Wikipedia:WikiProject British Government, Wikipedia:WikiProject England, Wikipedia:WikiProject Scotland, Wikipedia:WikiProject Ireland and Wikipedia:WikiProject Wales. Also look here for other British wikiprojects you may want to suggest awards for.-- Dr who1975 23:18, 21 March 2007 (UTC) reply
    • Comment You forgot Wikipedia:WikiProject Northern Ireland Dr Who1975, on which both the Scotland and and Ireland wikiprojects were based. -- 90.197.80.66 ( talk) 16:18, 6 March 2008 (UTC) reply
• Strong Oppose Because of the image. Howard Cleeves 08:49, 27 March 2007 (UTC) reply
  • Comment The name is terrible also, any mention of the Medal of Honor should be left out. Let's not trivialize that honor. Howard Cleeves 11:02, 28 March 2007 (UTC) reply
• Oppose because of the use of the Medal of Honor comparison. First, it isn't the "Congressional Medal of Honor". It is the "Medal of Honor". I must agree with Howard Cleeves on this. I also don't think that this WikiProject needs a barnstar. There are few users who contribute enough within the project to warrant one. Markles would end being the only person to get it. -- Daysleeper47 23:12, 28 March 2007 (UTC) reply

That's ironic because I was going to give you one. Just because you think only Markles deserves one doesn't mean others will agree with you. People are supposed to be BOLD with their Barnstar awards. If somebody wrote an excellent article on something that I thought was great. That alone would be enough for me to award one. Considering that none of us are paid to do this I think people should be bold with these awards.-- Dr who1975 16:53, 30 March 2007 (UTC) reply

You ignored the central point both of us brought up Dr. I'm going to assume I don't have to point it out to you. Howard Cleeves 20:55, 31 March 2007 (UTC) reply

I thought my earlier arguments stood on their own. I was actually tying to let the debate run it's natural course with regards to those points because I'm actually interested in seeing what other users think without letting this turn too much into a point by point argument. However... since you asked... I do not agree that the image looks like an existing medal. We have several similar images already in use. As for the wording; I view this as a colorful play on words that pays homage to the term Congressional Medal of Honor... since the Congressional Medal of Honor is not the official name of the Medal of Honor, then surely there can be no offense. It's clear that the name doesn't readily bring about musch opposition... after all it took you an entire day before you realized you did not like the name after you had already viewed the award once. Your initial complaint was just regarding the image.-- Dr who1975 14:41, 1 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Cleeves... I haven't heard back from you. What do you think?-- Dr who1975 16:54, 4 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Jeez, just take away the 'Of Honor' and everything will be fine. Smomo 15:10, 1 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Cleeves doesn't like the image either. Besides... as I said before... if the concept isn't approved I'm starting from scratch completely. It's almost been a month. Who decides the outcomes of these debates? I doubt it'll get approved at this point anyway (despite several comments in support). Smomo, we'll get this sorted out soon enough. I just hope that if the award is approved that you will accept the decision just as I will if it is not approved.-- Dr who1975 17:50, 1 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Like most things on Wikipedia, the discussion is left to mature until some sort of consensus is reached, or the discussion just dies, and at that point the Barnstar is either accepted or rejected by one person who is bold enough to make the decision that it should stay or go. This person normally has quite a bit of experience in these sorts of matters, but obviously, it can be anybody and, like anything else, it can be contested or reverted. I don't think that a consensus has been reached yet, so this debate isn't over, as far as I see. Now, a few people are opposed to the name or the image, but a few are also in support. Is there anyway parties from either side would be willing to compromise? Smomo 23:06, 1 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I have ideas. Let's wait a bit and see if there are more votes.-- Dr who1975 00:11, 2 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I'm sorry I don't like the image or the name. Any refeence to the medal of honor in any way is inappropriate for me. Now others may disagree, but I have very strong views on this. My adoration for soldiers in general, and World War II veterans in particular, is boundless. I don't really need to get into details I hope. Howard Cleeves 11:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I support both the image and the name. While I understand Howard's concerns I think this is being overly sensitive for no real good reason. IvoShandor 08:19, 8 April 2007 (UTC) reply

There are so many other innocuous possibilities, I really don't see why trivializing a national honor like this is so important. Please just come up with some new design it's not like there are no other possibilites. It's almost as if people love it because it resembles the Medal of Honor, which I find disconcerting. Howard Cleeves 13:33, 15 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Like I said. I understand your reasoning but completely disagree with it. IvoShandor 18:26, 15 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Like I said, you obviously have a lack of historical perspective or respect for what people have done for that medal or you'd agree with it. Howard Cleeves 10:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Now hold yourself there, my good man. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and to say another persons opinion is wrong is going against some Wikipedia policy or another. Smomo 11:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Wow, that's a nice response. Since you don't know anything about me perhaps you should hold on your judgements until someone declares you god. IvoShandor 15:11, 17 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I'm still trying to find the time to design an alternative (I've got this greate idea called the "Congresional Barnstar Resolution" that I'm mulling over). Life is keeping me busy. Cleeves, I understand your concern, but please be aware that many of us who are in favor of this award feel that, if anything... we are actually honoring our soldiers with it. Yes... I know you vehemetly disagree, but I hope you can at least beleive in our intentions. I will either come up with something new and/or archive this discussion within the next few weeks.-- Dr who1975 19:32, 18 April 2007 (UTC) reply

It clearly triviallizes the honor. People here aren't soldiers and they should never confuse themselves with them even slightly. I would help come up with one but I'm not computer savvy. Dr. Who can perhaps come up with one. Howard Cleeves 04:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Oppose because of the comparisons to the medal of honor. There has to be some better alternative than this people. Aaron Bowen 06:48, 19 April 2007 (UTC) reply

There is no way you can know who here is/was a soldier/Marine/sailor etc. I simply feel that its more than a bit absurd to say that we shouldn't have this award because it trivializes an honor meant for "soldiers" in combat situations. No way could this award ever been seen as even slightly comparing itself to that honor, at least in my mind. Anyway the Medal of Honor is a piece of metal, what it represents is an idea that no Wikipedia Barnstar could ever infringe upon. No soldier joins the military, fights and dies simply so they can have shiny pieces of metal on their chests and colorful ribbons. These honors are more important to civilians (in many if not most cases) than they are to the combatant who actually receives them. Anyone who has been in combat would tell you its about the guy next to you, not about medals or ribbons or freedom or democracy or anything but surviving and making sure your friends survive. IvoShandor 16:57, 22 April 2007 (UTC) reply

All that being said, I am willing to ignore and forget anything Cleeves may have said in anger and move on. If someone has compromise in mind I am likely to accept it, so as not to hold up this process any longer. IvoShandor 09:28, 24 April 2007 (UTC) reply

The Semester's ending in a week. Barring major work or baby issues I should have more time to tackle this soon. Cleeves, Ivo has a point... you don't really know who is or is not a veteren here. But don;t worry, I've heeded your words.-- Dr who1975 18:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I think that the extra life Starman from Mario should be awarded to high contributers to computer and video game articles. Comments, please.--Averross ( u♠ t♠ c) 12:21, 21 March 2007 (UTC) reply

That sounds like a great concept for a wikiproject award for WikiProject Nintendo or WikiProject Video games. You should post something to those project's discussion boards as well.-- Dr who1975 17:41, 21 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Though they may stone you if you call Starman an "extra life." ; ) IvoShandor 22:06, 21 March 2007 (UTC) reply

I designed this Barnstarman:

File:Barnstarman.jpg Pengwiin 22:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC) reply

There is already a CVG project Barnstar at Wikipedia:PUA. Smomo 17:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Nice, but maybe you should consider a different design. (e.g. a yellow barnstar with two black lines and a happy expression since that's what newer starmans look like) Ry Guy 17:16, 3 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Maybe this concept could replace the Nintendo star personal user award. Currently, it uses the same image as the CVG Star and doesn't do much to diffrentiate itself. Although... considering the suggestor appears to have a made a "hit and run" appearance; there doesn't seem to be much support for this star. Maybe I'll be bold and replace the Nintendo Star with this. I also agree with RyGuy's comment about th image.-- Dr who1975 03:39, 7 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Sorry I never posted any responses, I was on a Wikibreak during Spring Break. I appreciate the good feedback and the initiative in making it, but I do agree that the color scheme should be changed. --Averross ( u♠ t♠ c) 14:15, 11 April 2007 (UTC) reply

File:ArtBarnstar.png This is a proposal for a new barnstar. It should be awarded to editors who have made good contributions to art related articles. Pengwiin 22:32, 22 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Suggestion Maybe a good award for WikiProject Arts. You could call it "Tha Artstar".-- Dr who1975 03:12, 23 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Possible. Though the image needs improvement (or maybe it's just an issue of impressionism vs realism ;-)). - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦ ♫ 19:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC) reply

How about this? It was designed to look like it was painted. Pengwiin 21:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC) reply

• Support It's a nice, constructive star. Acalamari 16:43, 26 March 2007 (UTC) reply
  • Though I do mean the second image. I like that one. Acalamari 16:47, 26 March 2007 (UTC) reply
    • Thanks, I like designing barnstars. that was my first good comment towards a design. Pengwiin 19:13, 26 March 2007 (UTC) reply

• Oppose - Barnstar of High Culture already covers this. Greeves ^{( talk • contribs)} 22:48, 26 March 2007 (UTC) reply
• Oppose: Don't like the images presented. IvoShandor 08:21, 8 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Oppose per Ivo. Aaron Bowen 06:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC) reply

		The Wizard Shazam Barnstar
		For accomplishments as a mentor to a new Wikipedian.

ClaudeReigns 19:37, 24 March 2007 (UTC) reply

How does the barnstar's title correlate to its purpose.   ~ Step trip  _{You raise me up}''' 22:12, 24 March 2007 (UTC) reply

Maybe it does because in the comics, the Wizard Shazam serves as a mentor for Billy Batson or Captain Marvel. Am I right? Pengwiin 22:33, 24 March 2007 (UTC) reply

You got it!! ClaudeReigns 19:43, 30 March 2007 (UTC) reply

• Comment: I am also not so fond of the name. Pengwiin's explanation though clears up some of the purpose, I think this is better suited as a PUA as opposed to a barnstar. ¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 19:27, 26 March 2007 (UTC) reply

• Weak Oppose: Support the idea, oppose the implementation. Relies too much on an obscure reference. — Daniel Vandersluis^{( talk)} 19:38, 26 March 2007 (UTC) reply
• Oppose Too obscure a reference, very few would actually use it. It's like me proposing an Aunt May Barnstar or Alfred the Butler Barnstar for someone who helps to raise a wikipedia super hero. Half the people who see it are going to think it's some sort of Gomer Pyle award (SHAZAM SARGE!!) Criteria too vaugue to be worth it's own award... a regular Barstar could suffice. Neat concept and image though.-- Dr who1975 20:44, 27 March 2007 (UTC) reply

• Oppose

I agree with dr who1975. I only knew that cause I'm obsessed with old comics. It is a pretty wierd name.  Pengwiin  /  talk 

I hear what everyone is saying. Yes, it's an incredibly obscure comic reference. I still stand behind the function of the award, that there should be praise for good mentoring, as an opposite corollary for WP:BITE. ClaudeReigns 19:47, 30 March 2007 (UTC) reply

• Comment Excellent idea. However I was caught out by the reference (although now I understand it makes perfect sense). I know Dr who1975 is opposing but I really like the idea of "raising a Wikipedia super hero", it's tongue-in-cheek but a genuine recognition of good mentors ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ ^Speak _Sign 20:58, 3 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Oppose This is far too much of an obscure reference to be used as a name. The idea is a good one; someone else suggested it at the WikiProject Awards talk page, but not in its current format. Smomo 13:31, 4 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Oppose name - You all know that Shazam is dead now, right? See Shazam (comics)#Day of Vengeance. So not only is it obscure, it's now dated. John Carter 18:29, 10 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Oppose name. Too obscure, for those of us who aren't into comics. Wal ton ^{Vivat Regina!} 19:36, 12 April 2007 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose. It is an odd title, few would get. I am also opposed to the idea of anyone else wearing out the word "obscure"! ---Without Wax Chrishy man 02:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Comment: It seems to me if you just changed the title a lot of the "oppose" comments would switch sides. The image is cool. IvoShandor 09:19, 24 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Ok, we could change the name, that sounds fine. It could be the Mentor Barnstar. ClaudeReigns 12:32, 24 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I thought this was a good idea becuase there aren't any barnstars like this around. Its purpose is to thank Wikipedians who put much time and effort into expanding stubs.

Thekittybomb 02:21, 31 March 2007 (UTC) reply

I like the idea of this barnstar. Crested Penguin 06:21, 1 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Given the amount of stubs floating about I'd support a recognition of people who repeatedly put effort into expanding them Suriel1981 19:06, 1 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Seems to cross criteria slightly with the new article proposal below, perhaps they should be merged. IvoShandor 20:45, 6 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Designed and introduced by Aboutmovies to spread the wikilove around our active project, encourage our members and help the project grow. It's got the gold guy from the top of our capitol, it's original, it's shiny, it looks good, and it should be made official. Katr67 06:25, 3 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Support - Wikiproject big enough to warrant its own barnstar, and it looks good. VegaDark 07:33, 3 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Support - The Oregon wikiproject is large-ish, well organized, and is comming along well. Though I live in Oregon (source of bias), I think that the work that has been done is really good and dedicated editors should have at least a small .jpg / .png to show what they have done. My only suggestion would be that on the picture of the barnstar itself have something more blantantly "Oregon" on it. TommyMoullet 20:59, 3 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Comment - Can't see a problem with the WikiProject having an award, but it would be better if the image were smaller and more obvious as to what the award is for. Smomo 22:08, 3 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Kinda Support - I love the idea of WProj:Oregon having a barnstar. It's a large project that certainly warrants it. However, I have to agree that the proposed image is a little obscure. I know it's something that is featured on the capital building, but I think something that screams "Oregon" a little better would be more appropriate. -- ${\displaystyle {\sqrt[{\tfrac {_{32^{\circ }\mathrm {F} }}{^{0^{\circ }\mathrm {C} \;\;}}}]{_{\infty }}}\approx {\tfrac {\sin('d)^{\underline {\flat y}}}{\mathbb {Z} y+\Re _{\varnothing }\!{n!}}}\otimes }$ user| TALK 02:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC) reply
  • Additional comment Possible image suggestions could be a beaver, specifically the beaver from the back of the flag (nearly everyone knows Oregon as the beaver state). Symbols of the Oregon Trail are also good for incorporating those unfamiliar with the state but familiar with US history and the state's origins (an aerial view of the star in a circle of wagons, for instance). I agree that landmarks should be avoided (with the possible exception of Crater Lake which gives the state planetary notoriety and appeared to represent the state on US currency) because they are divisive and generally unrecognizable to those outside specific geographic areas. One last possible image is to use the state seal, an image in the public domain. -- ${\displaystyle {\sqrt[{\tfrac {_{32^{\circ }\mathrm {F} }}{^{0^{\circ }\mathrm {C} \;\;}}}]{_{\infty }}}\approx {\tfrac {\sin('d)^{\underline {\flat y}}}{\mathbb {Z} y+\Re _{\varnothing }\!{n!}}}\otimes }$ user| TALK 14:08, 8 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Oppose the image. Support the barnstar. There's something odd with the image... the way the star is juxtaposed with the statue (something strangely yonic about it... i.e. the opposite of phallic... i.e. YOU GAVE THE GOLD PIONEER A VAGINA!!!!... hope I didn't offend... I'm not trying to be mean in saying that). The statue itself is also somewhat obscure. The height relative to width of the image is far too long. Couldn't somebody come up with a more artful image?-- Dr who1975 03:04, 4 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Comment-Since I made it I will refrain from voting, but a few comments: 1) I don't think proportions should be a legitimate concern as I doubt there is any sort of guideline judging from the vast array of shapes and sizes for barnstars and other awards (plus the size is easily adjusted). 2) What image better represents Oregon? I’m not saying the Oregon Pioneer is the best image to go with and we at WPOR are happy to go with another, but give a suggestion of what is a better image. However, please keep in mind that whatever image is chosen will not make everyone happy as the state can be very divided over things. For instance using Mt. Hood will tick off most people outside of Portland, few people would recognize Haystack Rock, and putting the star over a map of the state wouldn’t help judging by the repeated reports of a lack of geographical knowledge by the American public. Crater Lake might work, but again not sure if everyone would know what it is. There is not going to be a perfect image to represent any state, heck at WPOR we can’t even agree on if we want to collaborate on Portland or Oregon for an FA push. 3) What the award is for becomes obvious when text is written into the caption.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aboutmovies ( talk • contribs)05:11, 4 April 2007 (UTC). reply

Support: I have created several Oregon related articles and ran into several project members along they way, there are some dedicated Wikipedians working there, they deserve an award. Oppose: Image. Suggest maybe something to do with the state's heritage, perhaps logging or forests, maybe a barnstar with a typical Oregon forest superimposed over it. I swear, about half the state is National Forest land ; ) And for the record, I also know what Crater Lake is. And it has a Wizard Island if not mistaken. : ) IvoShandor 05:32, 4 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Comment I should think that if you're worthy of being awarded the barnstar, you will know what the image is. Not to be insular and isolationist, but does the image need to please anybody outside the project? Like AM said, any added text will show what the award is for. The gold guy is a pioneer, he's holding an axe (symbolic of logging), schoolchildren save their pennies to get him regilded every so often (how symbolic of the wiki and how everyone pitching in a little creates a great thing--cheesy, but true), and I think that's about a good compromise solution as a symbol of the state as any (the pioneer heritage meme is quite prevalent here), except for the fact it leaves out the Native American people, but that's a whole other can of worms. I think it also makes sense because it's in our capital, and that is where everything comes together here, at least in terms of legislation that affects the whole state. An image of a forest would leave out much of the eastern half of the state. As my pals at WPOR know, I'm a stickler for consistency, but I don't know why our image has to conform to everyone else's idea of what an image should be. That seems pretty boring. We're known for being mavericks around here. Also, I'm female and I don't see anything remotely yonic about the position of the star... Katr67 16:06, 4 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Comment The award can be given to anyone by anyone if they felt the other party made a substantial contribution to Oregon related articles in general. Membership by either party should not be necessary. In any event, I understand your point. My opposition to the image is not so much opposition to the statue, I think it's mildly obscure but that was not my main point at all. My big point is that somebody should make a more artful image (this image looks like a simple cut and paste job). For instance, a stylized rendition of the statue inside the star (maybe standing on top of the dome) would look better. Also (lets call this a medium point of contention) I feel the image is just a bit too long relatvie to it's width (which is why I suggest the statue by inside and the same size as the star). Lastly (and this is another minor point... as was the obscurity of the statue), the way the star is lined up with the statue is a bit odd.-- Dr who1975 16:43, 4 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Comment "We're known for being mavericks around here." Haha, mavericks you may be but if you don't follow community consensus then you won't get anywhere here, and the community consensus seems to be, at the moment, to try a different image or make modifications to it. Smomo 19:52, 4 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I don't know if you can tell that I meant that statement to be (mostly) tongue-in-cheek. I don't think any of us have any intention of bucking community consensus. Though I don't think there's been enough input to say that there truly is a consensus yet. Katr67 20:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC) reply

No, you're probably right, but the consensus so far is that the image must go. Try and get more people from your project to comment. Smomo 20:16, 4 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Altenratively to that, see if you can get somebody to put forth another image. There are a lot of members of this group who art computer artists and would probably like to help you out.-- Dr who1975 21:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Idea for the picture of the barnstar, could be a barnstar with an Oregon state quarter in the center. I think that would be obvious and I imagine it would look alright. And also it would be more 'square-y' to go along with the shape of other barnstars. TommyMoullet 01:33, 5 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I agree with Zytron's last comment but can't stand Zytron's signature. IvoShandor 14:47, 8 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Oppose I don't know if a WIkiProject needs a barnstar that's kinds of exclusionary also the image is jarring. Aaron Bowen 06:46, 19 April 2007 (UTC) reply

A barnstar for anyone thanking a person for their clever barnstar design.WikiLove is given for the hard-working people making barnstars.It should be created because you can't be properly thanked for your barnstar with an award.

Any thoughts? The Wiki Whippet (deeds) 03:10, 5 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Comment I can't comment on the award concept either way. However, I am having difficulty with these images for awrds that look like simple cut and paste jobs. Surely we can come up with something better.-- Dr who1975 17:05, 5 April 2007 (UTC) Oppose because perhaps people might be able to do something without receiving an award every five minutes. Sure, I've even made a few awards in my time, but I don't think that for every one I should deserve an award of my own for it. No, I don't like this idea, but good work coming up with an idea anyway. Smomo 19:05, 5 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Support. I think it's a good idea. We need more awards. Wal ton ^{Vivat Regina!} 19:38, 12 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Comment. There is already a Barnstar Star. It's at Wikipedia:Personal user awards Herostratus 22:16, 19 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Oppose per all comments above. Ling.Nut 23:11, 20 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Oppose The image is rather mediocre as well. Howard Cleeves 12:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply

A barnstar for those who work to create new articles, because creating new articles is just as important as fixing old ones. I think a good image for this would be a crossed out red star with a non crossed out blue star next to it to show that we lose a red link and gain a blue link. I hope you like the idea -- David Cat 18:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Could you do a rough image in Paint to make it a bit clearer? Smomo 20:28, 6 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I dont know how to put images on wikipedia ^{D A V I D} _{C A T}

No, wait found out how. here is the vert rough example image

of course the finished image will be much nicer than this, but i can't make it (i suck at art) ^{D A V I D} _{C A T}

Support - It's a good idea. I belive I could help with the image too. I can have a pretty good looking image (resembling the above) to show you by tommorow. Ryan ^{Got something to say?} 17:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Support. Love the idea! Like this rough draft Mach 2?

Chrishy man 21:05, 16 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Comment Hmm, I would suggest that the scope of this Barnstar be broadened to include new contributions generally. Smomo 00:08, 17 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• I would also suggest a small image, something like: Smomo 00:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Yes, thank you for the smaller image. And I guess it wouldn't be new articles, but anything that changes a red link to blue! Heh heh. Chrishy man 01:08, 17 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Comment Nice pictures guys. better than mine. lol.

I also disagree with Smomo's comment about broadening it; creating new articles is quite broad enough to warrant a barnstar ^{D A V I D} _{C A T} 15:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Comment I agree with David. It's too broad. You should add some criteria to it. (Does the article have to achieve at least B-class? Adding images to the article that you created? Add references to majority of the stats?) OhanaUnited 22:22, 17 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Comment. I defiantly. It must have some criteria, or you could just create a random article, and get a barnstar for nothing. B-class sounds good. And you have to be a main contributor, not just create it, and have someone else provide information. Chrishy man 03:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Comment I don't think you have to be a major contributor. You don't have to be person that provided more than half of the information on the article. Otherwise, that's just "hogging an article". In fact it's better to have more contributors so that POV is balanced. On the other hand, having references should be emphaized. Any length of an article without reference is not a good article. OhanaUnited 06:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Remember that Barnstar's themselves can be given out by memebers of the community at any time, to recognise any effort. Criteria are not needed for other Barnstars, so why this one? Smomo 11:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC) reply

By major contributor, I mean that citations/references were inevitable. You also don't have to hog the article. Just post a reasonable amount of information, and cite sources. I know that other Barnstars don't have criteria, but they are used sparingly, right? You don't give someone an original Barnstar whenever they make any kind of contribution. You give them one when they make many exceptionally good contributions that make Wikipedia a more accurate encyclopedia. So, we should only give someone a New Contribution Barnstar if it is exceptionally good, and makes Wikipedia a more accurate encyclopedia. You don't have to call it a criteria. Just an award-giver's responsibility to make sure it is a nice new article. Chrishy man 18:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Well, yes, thats fine. Just talking about criteria you can get really bogged down with exact details. Smomo 23:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Nope. I think there should be no exact criteria. At least, I think thats the consensus... Chrishy man

Comment Why, oh why, didn't I take the blue pill? Chubbles 22:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply

WikiProject Video games has been recognizing this as their barnstar for some time. I just looked into it and this is not an official WikiProject Award. So I propose that it is listed. Greeves ^{( talk • contribs)} 16:55, 7 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Support Greeves ^{( talk • contribs)} 16:55, 7 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Support Smomo ( talk · contribs) Yep, I would support this move, as long as you have the blessing of the WikiProject. If you don't, just tell them to head over here and see what they think. Smomo 17:09, 7 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Support This has been used in practice for a while and should be canonized. -- ${\displaystyle {\sqrt[{\tfrac {_{32^{\circ }\mathrm {F} }}{^{0^{\circ }\mathrm {C} \;\;}}}]{_{\infty }}}\approx {\tfrac {\sin('d)^{\underline {\flat y}}}{\mathbb {Z} y+\Re _{\varnothing }\!{n!}}}\otimes }$ user| TALK 14:03, 8 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Support: Should be made into the type of award it is used as. As a side note....I do miss SNES, which is what I think the controller is representing, if I am not mistaken. IvoShandor 07:09, 13 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Support per all the other supports. Acalamari 16:42, 16 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Can we see a bit more support from the project, please? Smomo 00:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Support Here you go Smomo. ;-) · AndonicO ^Talk 12:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Supportt Sure thing. I also like BarnStarMan cause it's so creative. You may want to condsider that one.-- Dr who1975 20:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Wikipedia:WikiProject Classroom coordination offers guidance to educators who incorporate Wikipedia writing into classroom assignments. The WikiPen recognizes outstanding instructor or student efforts at article improvement within the context of formal class assignments. Durova ^Charge! 22:23, 12 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Comment: Is this meant as a Project award or something broader. It wouldn't seem to me that, at 12 members, the project is isn't active enough to merit its own award. I will withhold my opinions until a response is made. IvoShandor 07:06, 13 April 2007 (UTC) reply
  • This is meant as a Project award. Bear in mind that this project is one day old and already has 13 16 21 members. I've been in contact with a professor from Virginia Commonwealth University and anicipate others soon. There's been a rise in this sort of assignment - see the December Signpost Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2006-12-26/Wikipedia and academia so I doubt there's any need to delay establishment of a formal project award. Durova ^Charge! 15:45, 13 April 2007 (UTC) reply
  • Update: a professor from the University of Minnesota has gotten in touch with our WikiProject regarding an ongoing classroom assignment and I've suggested our project volunteers give this award to the best student contribution(s). Durova ^Charge! 02:03, 14 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Support as WikiProject award.--  _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus |  talk}  04:03, 15 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Support per Durova. That's good enough for me. Acalamari 16:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Comment This award is definetely going to stand out in front of others because it's not a barnstar lol. OhanaUnited 06:02, 18 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I think that there should be a barnstar created for users who work to sort out articles and place them in as many categories as possible for the sake of convenience and to make those articles more accessible to other users. Being an encyclopedia, Wikipedia should be a neat and tidy area for users to easily search out the pages they are looking for. Categories help in that process. I believe that if a single article were placed in as many categories as possible, more users can access it, allowing more editors to reach and edit the page to a better standard. Therefore, I think Wikipedians who sort out and place articles into multiple categories should be rewarded. While I don't have an image for this proposed barnstar, I would suggest a barnstar in front of a library or sets of drawers as those are areas where one would expect the contents to be neat and organised. ( Iuio 23:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)) reply

• Comment Perhaps this could be included into the New articles proposal above? Smomo 00:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Support, though I strongly disagree with the suggestion that this should be for placing articles "in as many categories as possible". Category clutter is a major problem with many articles, and redundant or inappropriate categories really help no one. That said, I think the idea of an award for outstanding work in the categorization of articles is an excellent one. And not just because I vaguely hope to earn one of these someday—I actually wanted to award this exact barnstar to someone recently. Xtifr _tälk 21:14, 25 April 2007 (UTC) reply

We in the Simpsons WikiProject have discussed having a barnstar for editors who make contributions to Simpsons-related articles and we decided to submit a proposal. It will basically be for all Simpsons editors, but will be controlled by the Simpsosn WikiProject. We think it should be an award because there is a large database of Simpsons articles on Wikipedia, and a lot of editors have worked very hard on those pages. The proposed design can be seen on the right, and I will make any requested changes to it. There are other potential designs, which can be seen here. -- Scorpion 16:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Support - Nice, it's also a good idea. Ryan ^{Got something to say?} 17:59, 17 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Support good lookin' donut! ^{D A V I D} _{C A T} 20:26, 17 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Get more people from your WikiProject to come here and show their support. Smomo 21:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Support, it was my suggestion to have a barnstar in the first place, and Scorpion's done a great job making it. Gran ² 21:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Support: Love the image, the project does a lot of cool work, even if it is just about a TV show. ; ) Keep it up. IvoShandor 11:52, 20 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• I came up with some alternate titles: "The D'ohstar", "The Simpsons Barnstar of D'oh" or "The [Annoyed Grunt]-Star". Thoughts? -- Scorpion 13:26, 20 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Support Mmmm donuts... ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ ^Speak 13:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Support Greatness!-- Ğavin Ťing 13:53, 25 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I'm not sure if a barnstar like this exists, and if it does, im sorry. I also know that this immediately seems in violation of the rule about wikilove and charity and stuff, but it is about recognising contributors who are active in removing content not suitable for wikipedia. The barnstar would be awarded to users who need recognition for their work in AFD related areas, recognising content that should not be on wikipedia and taking action, and generally taking an active stance on content not appropraite for the project and removing it. I do not have an image design, so if anyone else thinks this is a good idea, an image will have to be created. A basic idea for the design might be something that looks sort of destruction-like, or a black barnstar with big, crossed-through circle on top. I don't know; I'm open to ideas. To re-iterate, I think the barnstar is a good idea because of the amount of people out there who could be and should be recognised for their work in removing and deleting content such as vanity in biographies and nominating articles for deletion that just shouldnt be on wikipedia. Thanks, —ÅñôñÿMôús _{Dîššíd3nt} 07:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Image please. OhanaUnited 15:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Hows about ➪ HiDrNick! 05:53, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply

• Mixed. I suppose that I'd be considered a deletionist since most of my comments are usually "delete", but I'm not entirely digging this. How about broadening the scope of the award? Rather than saying "you get this for deleting stuff", how about saying that it's not just for people who are active in deleting, but also for those who act positively in order to save articles at AfD as well? There are some discussions where people have made some pretty good remarks in either direction, either cutting down an article by proving that all of the sources are unusable or by saving the article by knowing where to look for those reliable sources. There are also a lot of people who see deletionists in a bad light, so it might be better to broaden the scope of this just so it doesn't become something that could open the door for potential harassment. By this I mean that people might see this and assume that the editor will predominantly vote delete in everything. Tokyogirl79 ( talk) 08:38, 16 March 2012 (UTC) reply
  • Tokyogirl79, this proposal is from 2007. Please see the note at the top of the page: "This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference." Current discussions are at Wikipedia talk:Awards. You'd be very welcome to join the discussions there. Pine ^(talk) 08:53, 16 March 2012 (UTC) reply

I would like to propose this as an official WikiProject Award, the Good Article Badge, meant for WikiProject Good articles to be handed out for good work/contributions etc at Wikipedia:GAC, Wikipedia:GAR, the project or to any user, non project included for great contributions to Good articles on Wikipedia. IvoShandor 11:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Comment-Altering the original proposal to broaden to general GA barnstar per discussion and comments below. IvoShandor 06:06, 23 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I have completed a temporary template, I just figured use the GA symbol but if anyone has a better idea feel free to substitute a different image. User:IvoShandor/WikiProject Good articles award

User:IvoShandor/WikiProject Good articles award

• Comment I'm surprised there isn't one of these already. I very much hope this gets accepted as there can be a lot of hard work put in to get an article to GA status. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ ^Speak 13:37, 20 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Comment I am also surprised. Would this award be for people who have contributed to several GAs, people involved with WP:GA AND people who have reviewed a lot og GAs or just one or the other? Also, couldn't the design be made so that there is a barnstar in the iddle, or designed to be a Barnstar with the GA symbol in the middle? -- Scorpion 13:41, 20 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I figured the criteria could be tweaked here, there can be a minimum limit or whatever. I think that the award should be for all of the above, individually or collectively, just cover the gamut of offshoots of Wikipedia:GA, something like reworking the criteria, (happened recently) or contributing to a lot of GA reviews or GAs, improving the GA WikiProject or whatever. As for the design I am open to anything, I am just not good at that stuff with Photoshop, and it would look awful if I did it, a green star with the plus sign somehow incorporated into it? I don't know, whatever's clever. Let's here some rattling supports! ;) IvoShandor 13:45, 20 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I would also support this as a barnstar if consensus concluded that was necessary because of its wide criteria. IvoShandor 13:46, 20 April 2007 (UTC) reply

It sould either have a barnstar behind it, or it should be a barstar with GA colours. The "badge" look is to plain in my opinion. Tarret 22:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Thought of in making it as a flag:

Good Article Award Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

_{→ Aza Toth} 22:24, 20 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Comment: This should only be for outstanding participation in the relevant Wikiproject; not for bringing an article to GA.

Barnstar version:

Ling.Nut 23:09, 20 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Doesn't matter either way to me, I don't see why it shouldn't be broader, any reasoning? IvoShandor 01:52, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Reasons:

1. Working in the GA project is much much much much much harder than writing a GA article. I've seen GAs knocked off in less than four hours.
2. Moreover, you have to put up with a TON of sh*t from... </end rant>
3. Editors who write GAs can use the userbox, e.g.:

This user helped promote Taiwanese aborigines to good article status.

-- Ling.Nut 02:23, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Well obviously it couldn't be just for writing an article that gets promoted to GA, writing 20 articles that do? I don't know, seems like a userbox isn't quite enough to recognize that kind of contribution. Just my opinion. Like I said I just support the award, the details I will just leave up to the result of this discussion. IvoShandor 02:27, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Additionally I don't want to be subject to some of the problems with the Oregon proposal above, because anybody can give an award for anything. IvoShandor 02:29, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Meaning people will award this for GAs probably too, we could head it off by making a ridiculous requirement, say 50 GAs or improving, making good contributions to the WikiProject, GAR, or GAC. IvoShandor 02:31, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply

(undent) Yeah... I'd feel OK about having a barnstar for a large-ish number of GAs written (I'm thinking 5? or 10?) or valiant contribs to the project... but not for 1 GA. Ling.Nut 02:41, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I'd personally be happy with different grades to the award, maybe the barnstar for 10 GA contribs and that userbox or maybe medal-type-thing for one GA (as raising just one can mean a lot of hours put in). One possibility could be an award that is placed in a relevant section on a WikiProject's page noting group collaberation resulting in article status promotion. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ ^Speak 12:00, 21 April 2007 (UTC) reply

So if we say outstanding contributions to the Good article process, meaning, ten articles added to Wikipedia:GA, Wikipedia:GAC (meaning nominee reviews), Wikipedia:GA/R (meaning good article reviews), Good article project or Wikipedia:WIAGA, (criteria), what does that make this? IvoShandor 17:13, 22 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Support: As barnstar with broadened criteria, per me above. As WikiProject Award with solely Project contributions qualifying (which what is a project contribution, reviews? articles?) Hmm. I am starting to confuse myself, suggest barnstar. What do others think? IvoShandor 17:13, 22 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I dunno. I don't think it should be too complicated, that is, it shouldn't have a long checklist of possible scenarios under which the star could be awarded... but on the other hand, it should be for something more significant than a single GA. Ling.Nut 19:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Unless you are suggesting adding this as a Wikihalo-type award (bad idea), you can't give Barnstars strict criteria like this, where you can only be awarded the Star after you've done certain things. That isn't the way the Barnstar system works. Users give awards out basically when they feel like it, and you can't moderate who gets an award in this way. Sure, say something like 'this Barnstar is for continued contributions that significantly increased Wikipedia's Good article count' but you can't say 'You may only give this award if the user has 15 or more good articles'.

Further, I do support this award, I think we are long overdue a Barnstar like this, but I do not think it should be a WikiProject award. It should be a regular Barnstar, that people can give out to other users who they see have worked hard on raising many Good Articles. Smomo 22:59, 22 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Not to worry... Perhaps there should be two awards? I could make something different/better looking, to be used along the lines of Template:Featured Article Medal but for GA. I dunno ... and a second could be for contributions to the project itself (as a reviewer)... I am just convinced that 1 GA should = 1 userbox and not 1 award. :-) Ling.Nut 23:51, 22 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I don't think anyone is wedded to the criteria, it was more a discussion about how to make sure the award wasn't given arbitrarily to someone who had there pal promote an article to GA only to have it delisted two weeks later. Whatever wording makes the award less arbitrary and more meaningful, I will support. I like Smomo's wording. IvoShandor 06:01, 23 April 2007 (UTC) reply

As a general note, while I like the gist of the barnstar image above, I do wish we had something that was a little less copy and paste, no offense to whoever did that one, but maybe Ling.Nut has some ideas? IvoShandor 06:03, 23 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Also I agree with you Ling.Nut that one GA should not equal a GA barnstar, unless a user wants to do that, it is true we can't really stop anyone from doing that. We can suggest it though as Smomo said, I think that would be best. IvoShandor 06:08, 23 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I agree that for those people who write good article should get a medal: I however think that the barnstar should only go to people who have exceptionally contibuted to the good article process through reviewing, counting, and sweeping the list. Tarret 22:20, 23 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Comment: I don't think there is anyway we can put a Good article award/barnstar out there and expect people not to award it for Good articles written. IvoShandor 09:16, 24 April 2007 (UTC) reply

(undent) Oi! Someone superimposed a globe over the GA Barnstar and came up with a new one! (see "Environmental barnstar" below). :-) OK, let's see if we can make something nicer... I'll try but I am far from the best at this.... Ling.Nut 16:18, 24 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Yeah I am horrible at it as well, my girlfriend says she's a photoshop wiz, maybe I can get her to do something for us. IvoShandor 16:49, 24 April 2007 (UTC) reply

OK, this is the best I can do:

Ling.Nut 16:00, 28 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• So let's go with Ling.Nut's template then. Is this a barnstar now or how does this work? IvoShandor 16:52, 28 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I think we still need a name for it. Might I suggest the Good Article medal of reviewmanship? Tarret 00:58, 8 May 2007 (UTC) reply

• This is a great idea. I was actually looking through the barnstars a few days ago and was surprised there wasn't one for GA contribs. I fully Support this. I think the barnstar would be best used for those who have worked to bring several articles to GA standards. The metal for those who greatly contribute to the project. LaraLove ^Talk/ _Contribs 04:44, 11 May 2007 (UTC) reply

After voting, the project chose to use . The award is for Wikipedians who contribute significantly to environment articles or the project itself. Right now, the name of the barnstar is either "Environment barnstar" or "Environmental barnstar". Suggestions on picking which name are welcome.

The description will say "The environment barnstar (or environmental barnstar) is awarded to Wikipedians who have made significantly contributions towards environment articles or Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment. OhanaUnited 02:41, 24 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Environmental Barnstar sounds right to me. Colon el Tom 03:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Support: as Environmental Barnstar, of course the project can still use it as their award. IvoShandor 16:47, 24 April 2007 (UTC) reply

How long does it have to wait before officially becomes a recognized barnstar? OhanaUnited 00:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Support Good image, although it looks vaguely familiar (above). · AndonicO ^Talk 00:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply

The Bluegrass Barnstar I award this Barnstar to [user] for their outstanding contributions for articles relating to the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

I propose this barnstar for use as described. I think it would assist our WikiProject by encouraging users to contribute and allow users to be recognized for their contributions. The image is symbolic in that on the left side of the state, there is a horse farm, on the right side, the Louisville skyline. Also, the star itself is a blue and white gradient, the colors of the University of Kentucky. I hereby request approval for this barnstar. Steven Williamson ( HiB2Bornot2B) - talk 16:07, 24 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Comment: Maybe consider naming it the "Bluegrass Barnstar," or something of that ilk, otherwise support. It would be a great addition to WikiProject Kentucky. Acdixon 16:42, 24 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Ditto. Ling.Nut 16:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Comment: I think I agree with "Bluegrass Barnstar" or something to that wit. Steven Williamson ( HiB2Bornot2B) - talk 16:50, 24 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Support: I like your image. IvoShandor 16:47, 24 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Comment Maybe it would be better as a WikiProject award. · AndonicO ^Talk 00:46, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Comment How specialized do these awards get? Are there awards for each state? Aaron Bowen 12:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• I don't know really, specificity is a pretty subjective idea anyway, Kentucky may well be specific compared to the United States but it's not when compared to Paducah. I usually just support whatever the proposal is unless I don't like the image or the award is mean-spirited, I leave it to others to sort out where it goes. IvoShandor 12:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply
• Clarification: It is intended for use by the WikiProject Kentucky, to be awarded to contributors for commonwealth related articles, regardless of whether they are members of the WikiProject or not. I had originally named it the WikiProject Kentucky Barnstar, but it sounded better as the Bluegrass Barnstar. But as I said, it is intended for control by WikiProject Kentucky. I hope that clears things up. Steven Williamson ( HiB2Bornot2B) - talk 13:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Yes, it sounds dorky at first, but I think that those who take the time to read articles, find out who contributed to them and give them the credit they deserve should recieve some credit themselves. This should not be an award for giving out the most barnstars, but for giving the most due and appropriate barnstars. I don't have a graphic, but a star inside a star might be appropriate. Anyone talented with graphic design is welcome to propose an image. JoeyETS 05:17, 29 April 2007 (UTC) reply

Comment. How about an animated image of a star zooming in of a star (and continues indefinetely) like the HP printer ad where a person is holding a picture, inside that picture is another person holding a picture. The ad zooms into the picture and then the picture inside the picture... How about that? OhanaUnited 15:49, 29 April 2007 (UTC) reply

That would be great, can you or someone else design the image? JoeyETS 04:06, 5 May 2007 (UTC) reply

This was originally requested and discussed within the Wine Project a couple of months ago. I designed it but never got round to proposing it. Without wishing to sound ungrateful, when I did receive a barnstar for my WP:WINE work it was the default Food & Drink Barnstar of Life.. pretty, but not really winey enough for me ;o). I'm proposing this because we need it there (there's lots of work to do) and to avoid future similar gift horse situations. mikaul ^talk 12:33, 29 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Support: Great image. I also must say that I've received the Barnstar of Life as well and had similar feelings. ◄ scharks ► 13:26, 29 April 2007 (UTC) reply

• Support Love the image! Smomo 21:55, 29 April 2007 (UTC) reply

This may seem a bit stupid, but the Grand Theft Auto articles take a bit of work and some people tirelesly contribute to it and help deal with vandalism on these articles. There are some users who deserve a reward for their efforts and I think a barnstar or some sort of reward would be appropriate. I don't have a proposed image but a good idea would be to have it styled as a GTA Wanted Star. .:Alex:. 16:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC) reply

I would like to propose a new barnstar. It would be for those situations you want to award someone for a special thing, and you feel no other barnstar covers exactly that. Would it be possible? Rhanyeia 13:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC) reply

I don't know graphic design, so I don't know how to get a picture for my proposal. I could try if someone gave me good instructions, or is there someone around who would like the idea and make one? I believe that The Special Barnstar could be very good for some situations. It sounds different than the The Original Barnstar, which seems to be for general good work. Rhanyeia 15:12, 11 May 2007 (UTC) reply

I made an image, it's still incomplete because I'm not good drawing with computer. I drew part of it with my hands and scanned it. I'm not sure what is the best place to save it to get it appear here. And I would need help to correct couple of things in it. Could someone advice me please? Rhanyeia 18:41, 11 May 2007 (UTC) reply

Because there was left a note that this page is inactive, the conversation is here. Rhanyeia 13:28, 13 May 2007 (UTC) reply