Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Barnstar Awarding

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was delete. The consensus is that such a WikiProject is not necessary. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 04:36, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Barnstar Awarding


I am a fan of barnstars. I like to give them out and I like to receive them. However, this seems a bit silly and it diminishes the prestige of a barnstar. In addition, it is extremely close to an old Esperanza section that was deleted for this reason. Guerillero &#124; My Talk  20:03, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep: The WikiProject is there to encourage members to hapily give out barnstars when they feel they are due. If you have a look at the talk page, you will see that there was a debate as to weather it deminished the presitge of a barnstar as the original idea was for peolpe to give as many barnstars as they could. However, the competitive side has been removed and I can no longer see how it demishes a barnstar. We simply encourage members to not be shy about giving credit when credit due. If you look at my contributions, you will see that while I happliy give out barnstars, I don't give them out to every other editor. However, we will proudly give them when we feel they are deserved insted of keeping the as some code sitting on a template page with nobody using them Oddbodz (talk) 22:11, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete I was one of the editors who expressed concern about the original objective of the project on the talk page. That first idea was to have a sort of contest where the participant handing out the most barnstars would get a barnstar. I think most would agree that this was grotesque but it's true that this structure has been abandoned. I still believe that the project should be deleted as contrary to the basic purpose of both barnstars and WikiProjects. I think barnstars were always meant to be awarded as part of an informal process which never set explicit and specific criteria for what was barnstar-worthy. I personally think that this is an essential feature of barnstars and project specifically concerned with awarding barnstars can only lead to barnstar guidelines. I suppose one might argue that there is no such guideline in the current project page but if this project is just going to be a passive list of people who like to give barnstars, then what exactly does that page accomplish? Which sort of brings me to my second point. WikiProjects are supposed to be groups of editors that want to work together as a team to improve Wikipedia. [They] often focus on a specific topic area or a specific kind of task. WikiProject Barnstar Awarding can't even qualify as a project unless one considers that awarding barnstars is a task. Pichpich (talk) 23:53, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per Pichpich. WikiProjects are generally meant to be improvements to Wikipedia. It's nice to get a barnstar, but it's supposed to be an informal gesture. Some of us can go millennia without getting barnstars, while other hard workers get mountains of them. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 07:29, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak keep I know what it feels like to not be acknowledged for what I do. I think there are others out there who feel the same. This Project is the only official collaboration which I can ask people to join instead of say "You must give some a barnstar ..." It is also where I can comfortable discuss to others about who deserves barnstars and whether we should award them one. If the WikiProject doesn't get a lot of people to join, then I'd agree to let it be deleted. But nobody has made an effort to ask others to join. --Sp33dyphil © • © 06:14, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep: harmless, encourages rewarding of contributors. The recent survey of Wikipedia contributors found that one of the things users respond most positively to is getting barnstars (and other forms of recognition); anything that encourages that activity is a good thing. As for 'it diminishes the prestige of a barnstar' - really? Do barnstars have some great prestige attached that I've been missing? The whole point of them is that they're informal and can be awarded by anyone, for anything they think deserves rewarding. There's nothing meaningful to diminish. Robofish (talk) 21:53, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * What it does diminish is the informal, spontaneous nature of barnstars. Pichpich (talk) 14:16, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * CommentI don't think you get the whole idea of the project Pichpcih. It is a group of people who give out barnstars informaly. The project is a place they can discuss the giving of a barnstar with others. The project also has an area where members can post a story about someone they really felt desrved some recognition so the community as a whole can see that and therefore increase the recognition of good editors. Wikipedia is full of pages about preventing the bad things and giving punishments but has barely any about rewarding and encouraging the good. In my opinion, praise for the good is better than punishment for the bad (but please don't inteprit this as I am against punishing vandals). Oddbodz (talk) 21:20, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I still think it's redundant to the Kindness campaign and its talk page which also has the same goals and values. WP:TEA is another page where editors give others praise and can post stories and suggest barnstars be given to others. I understand your intentions with this project, and wholeheartedly support the sentiment of wanting to organize people to reward others with barnstars. I just really feel that dedicating a project specific to barnstar awarding can still give those who join the idea that this is something that is a defined task instead of a random, happened-upon a user who you notice was doing good work type of action that the whole idea of wikilove and kindness in general is about. Trust me, there's users out there that do care about rewarding and encouraging other editors, just look and see ;) -- &oelig; &trade; 15:01, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per TenPoundHammer. An argument could be made that barnstars are not harmless, but I won't go there. . . . Let's just say the project was a mistake. -- Klein zach  03:44, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep tag historical, we have the "lovebutton" now anyway. Gnangarra 23:32, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Tag as failed Template:Failed with an explanation as to why this was rejected in the past and now (not a project geared towards improving the encyclopedia its self or to help editors) ..Keep and tag if not readers in the future will not understand why its not considered a project.Moxy (talk) 04:59, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Tag as failed with a warning banner that barnstars are not to be awarded frivolously or for no reason whatsoever. &mdash; Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 15:54, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Template:Failed is not for projects. This has been pointed out before. (Template:Failed is for proposals.) Moreover failure is not the issue here. It's a 2011 project, so 'historical' is not appropriate either. People, please read the nomination and check out WikiProject Barnstar Awarding. -- Klein  zach  03:55, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * We work with what we have -  Do you have a better template in mind. Moxy (talk) 06:46, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Delete. I agree strongly with 's above comments, especially "What it does diminish is the informal, spontaneous nature of barnstars". As noted by, "the project was mistake". It was neither a failed project, nor a historical one. It was a mistake from its 2011 inception. A review of the project page and its associated talk page indicates that the WikiProject did not gain traction. The sole two discussions on the page were:

Although I very much agree with the sentiment behind this and support encouraging users to give barnstars 100%, I do have some concerns about this particular project. I worry that, to organize users as if it's a competition, and indeed get them to log their progress as if keeping score, may devalue barnstars' worth. We should be giving altruistically, unconditionally, and not expecting anything back. When someone sees that part of the reason they've been given a barnstar is because it's part of an organized effort then that kind of cheapens the gift a little don't you think?
 * Needed?

The encouragement is good but it already comes from the existing WP:Kindness Campaign and the information here is redundant to WP:Barnstars. I think this project was well-intentioned but maybe it would be better as a redirect to WP:Kindness Campaign? -- &oelig; &trade; 08:37, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Just as an fyi, WP:Esperanza formerly had a project very similar to this one called the Barnstar Brigade. It was subsequently deleted along with the rest of Esperenza but the issues raised about "diminishing the value of a barnstar" were the same. See also. -- &oelig; &trade; 13:35, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Past projects
 * Agreed. Barnstars were always designed to be awarded informally and from a single editor and transforming that loose process into an organized formal one is a bad idea. Did this really get the green light at WikiProject Council/Proposals? It seems so antithetical to the purpose of barnstars, I'll be surprised if it got much support. Pichpich (talk) 15:07, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

None of the participants who signed up at WikiProject Barnstar Awarding engaged in discussion with and. This indicates that they either were discourteous or were not particularly attached to the project. I considered the suggestion to tag the page with Failed but rejected the proposal because there is little history worth preserving. Most of the page is a copy and paste from Barnstars. Because Template:Failed is inapplicable, because this project is an incarnation of Barnstar Brigade, which was deleted per Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Esperanza, and because there is no useful history to preserve, this page should be deleted. Cunard (talk) 08:56, 28 November 2011 (UTC) 
 * So this page should be deleted because of a consensus in a discussion almost four years ago? Consensus can change... although judging from the comments above, it would appear in this case that it hasn't. I agree that Failed can't be applied to wikiprojects, though. Robofish (talk) 17:59, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * A strong consensus in a four-year-old discussion can only be overturned by an equally strong consensus now. That has not happened here. Cunard (talk) 18:21, 30 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Could we use the tag Closed down as I do believe a record of this should be kept so it does not happen again.Moxy (talk) 05:08, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The discussion here serves as a sufficient record. Retaining this page will not deter editors from creating inappropriate WikiProjects and ignoring people who raise such concerns (see the unaddressed queries at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Barnstar Awarding). Cunard (talk) 05:22, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks like it was made because none could find the old one to look for why it was deleted...so it happened again. lets prevent that with a tag and 2 redirects.Moxy (talk) 1531, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The suggestion that retaining the WikiProject's history would prevent future consensus-violating iterations is unpersuasive, given that this MfD discussion serves as sufficient documentation. Editors who wish to ignore consensus and not heed fellow editors' concerns (see the lack of replies at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Barnstar Awarding) will continue to do so, regardless of pages' being tagged with Failed or Closed down. Cunard (talk) 18:21, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I see the MfD discussion is  there (linked)  on the deleted page -  I get it -  ok I see now!!Moxy (talk) 04:47, 1 December 2011 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.