Wikipedia:Barnstar and award proposals/Archive8

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

Nominations for WikiMedals is a proposed scheme for positive recognition of Wikipedia contributions.

This proposal is not intended to replace barnstars, but as an addition to them. (This note is intended to clear up a matter raised in several votes below.)

I would anticipate creating a single medal at first, with the option of creating others later. A volunteer graphic artist would need to create something suitable. The community would elect a panel of judges to study nominations, which would be for one or more edits, not an editor. Any user could nominate another user, and discussion would involve the entire community. Awarded medals would be added to user (talk?) pages in a template form. Democratic votes might also work, but I worry that they might be divisive. - Jakew 11:56, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

How about this? Zscout370 (Sound Off) 14:00, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Some clarifications, as a result of comments and questions on the talk page:

1. The idea is to reward editors for particularly good work (which must obviously be edits). It is not to say "I think Bob's a really good guy". The former, with luck, creates warm, fuzzy feelings among those awarded the medal, which is good in itself (positive feedback is a wonderful thing). In theory, those not nominated may be inclined to think "I can do better", and strive to do so. The alternative, rewarding editors for their whole conduct, risks creating ill will.
2. I made an error above. When I said "involve the entire community", I meant those interested could comment.
3. Wikipedia:Great editing in progress and especially Wikipedia:Barnstars on Wikipedia are highly relevant to this proposal. I see the latter as an individual compliment, which I think is a wonderful thing. I see this as a compliment and vote of thanks from the community, as elected. It's good to be thanked by a friend, but - speaking personally - to be given a card expressing thanks from a group has brought me to tears. - Jakew 19:03, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

This is a temporary section to determine whether there is support for this proposal. Please sign below to indicate your general agreement or disagreement with the proposal. Sign with # ~~~~.

1. Jakew 11:56, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
2. ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ 12:56, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
3. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 14:01, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
4. Antandrus (talk) 15:24, 23 August 2005 (UTC) Something like this is needed; good start.
5. Lomedae 15:53, August 23, 2005 (UTC)
6. A nice break from the edit warring and ranting. JFW | T@lk 21:36, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
7. We've already got some mechanisms for this, but the more the merrier. --fvw* 01:58, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
8. Sounds good - would this work alongside or in place of the barnstars? Grutness...wha? 02:21, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
9. As long as it doesn't replace user-issued Barnstars. Wikipedianinthehouse 23:26, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
10. Great idea. Complements barnstars nicely. ~~ N (t/c) 01:33, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
11. Yeah, go on. Dmn € Դմն 22:34, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

1. Lupo 16:03, August 23, 2005 (UTC). See talk page for my reasons.
2. JesseW 01:57, 25 August 2005 (UTC) sorry, but I think this should be a possible expansion of barnstars, i.e. suggesting that people can sign an existing barnstar, rather than giving a seperate one, is a better idea. This is too heavy.
3. Deryck C. 12:13, 25 August 2005 (UTC) This idea seems to be overlapping with the current barnstar system, while abolishing the current barnstar system will greatly lower the giving out of awards (the current giving-out rate is too low already)
4. We are not a bureacracy and barnstars address the same issue. Let us instead encourage more barnstars and encourage the multiple signing of barnstars. —Theo (Talk) 10:47, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

1. ...until somebody explains to me what the difference is between this and barnstars. Radiant_>|< 15:04, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

What springs to my mind is that this would be a community barnstar rather than one from an individual. This is neither a vote nor an abstention :-) Cormaggio 16:54, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

From discussion page

I have a proposition myself, a modification of this medal stuff. Let say, a controversial subject, there are a lot of debates in the talk pages to finally have a neutral article..., if a controversial article get neutral and factual after intense discussions between the two sides, those that were able to present their arguments in a civil Wiki way, and obtain a consensus. those get a group award. It could be voted by the community. In controversial subjects, people will be ready to compromise, to as a group get a distinction to work in the community. It could be called something like the WikiCup, and could be given to the same group for the same article more than once. It will encourage people to work in group and compromise and be civil with each others. Fadix 19:36, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Like it. Since you see it being granted by a group, perhaps "WikiMedal for Collaborative Editing" is a good name. Or perhaps not. ;-) - Jakew 19:47, August 29, 2005 (UTC)

I think both sides should be given this barnstar (hope so) if they can reach concensus peacefully or one side will give up its idea. Deryck C. 15:25, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

That's the spirit. It is about giving it to both sides... because of their capacity to work with eachothers. Fadix 20:50, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

User:Nickptar, could you clarify what you mean by this? I think we need to have group awards, which will award more than just a person. Writting of articles are the result of dozens of hours of discussions, debates, compromise and solutions..., I can't see how awarding for this, could be bad. Fadix 23:56, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

We should have wikimedals (I support proposal #1). We should not award medals to those who win article content disputes. Proposal #1 should be sufficient to cover every case in which Wikimedals are warranted. ~~ N (t/c) 23:58, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

A large part of the articles in Wikipedia were the result of a hard work by a group of people. This includes featured articles like World War I... those have nothing to do with winning content disputes. Awarding people with different POV about a subject, that can work with eachother on an article, is I believe an excellent idea, users should be influenced to contribute as a team and not adversaries. Fadix 00:09, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Those medals should certainly exist, but that's not what this proposal says. The proposal here says the group that gets consensus would get a medal. ~~ N (t/c) 00:14, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

See talkpage. Fadix 00:22, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

1. Jakew 12:11, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
2. Deryck C. 15:25, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

1. I feel the actual result would be to create more competition to have one's own version accepted. ~~ N (t/c) 22:38, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

I will abstain voting, because I don't like voting on my own propositions. Fadix 16:10, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

This is a refinement of Proposal 1. Some people dislike the formal nature of that proposal. Instead, people sign up to assess nominations, and these people thus form the WikiMedal team.

1. Jakew 12:11, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

1. Deryck C. 15:29, 30 August 2005 (UTC), not sure about the new nature of this proposal

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. The result of all of the following discussions was Create Wikiproject Award

This is a proposal for a category barnstar. It will be awarded to whoever makes a great contribution to articles in the field of manga and anime. Since there's already a personal award called the 'Pokestar', and possibly more similar ones will be created, why not have an official manga and anime barnstar?

To the right is an image I've come up with.

-- Ynhockey 18:04, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

I like it. The image looks quite good as well, so why not. --dionyziz 08:47, 30 October 2005 (UTC).

First off, the category barnstars are for the actual categories listed on the Main Page {e.g Culture, History, Science etc.) So this barnstar wouldn't fall into the class of Category barnstars, but rather topical ones. Secondly, what images did you use for the 'star? I ask this only because if they are copyrighted anime images, there might be a copywrite issue in using the barnstar. Bratsche^{talk | Esperanza} 15:41, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

I used an old picture from Dragonball (Z) that's been circulating around the net for years. Thought it would constitute as fair use whether or not the image was copyrighted. However, if you think this is an issue, the image can be changed easily since I have the PSD/CPT files. What kind of image are we looking for in order to not be copyright infringement for sure? Is a screenshot OK? Would a fan colouring of a B&W page be OK? Because I don't think there are many non-copyrighted anime or manga images. Oh yeah and, I did mean topical barnstar. Sorry. -- Ynhockey 00:17, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Discussion on the Manga and Anime Barnstar has been at a standstill for about a month. If no attempts at reviving it are made within a week, it will be archived. Thanks, Sango123 (talk) 15:18, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

• I think we should let it go: it simply isn't "broad and general" enough (I just skimmed the guidelines again), and I think we would be better off to avoid creeping barnstarism in general. – ClockworkSoul 15:55, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

I think anime/manga is pretty broad - it has hundreds if not thousands of related articles. It definitely has more articles than Spoken Wikipedia, which already has a barnstar. -- Ynhockey 07:30, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Good idea however the barnstar image looks like a copy vio. --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 10:19, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

As I said before, I took it from an anime image that was floating around the web for years. IMO it constitutes as fair use since the use was limited and non-commercial, but if you disagree, please clarify what kind of images are valid to not constitute a copyvio. Without this clarification, I cannot use another image because you might just say it's copyvio again. -- Ynhockey 07:30, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

I support the existance of this barnstar, though the image needs work. Question is what makes Anime special? Image of that should be on the barnstar or on the background etc... --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 14:13, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

We don't need barnstars for every Gosh-darned thing. Ashibaka tock 02:04, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes we do. This is wikipedia, remember..? :) -MegamanZero 19:06, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Agreed, <shameless ripoff>barnstars are like voltron, the more you can hook up, the better it gets.</shameless ripoff> --Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 22:29, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm all for a manga/anime barnstar.--Mitsukai 14:27, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I oppose this, since it uses copyright images, and Wikipedia policy is not to use copyright images outside of article space. Hiding talk 22:52, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I made a copy that doesn't use any copyrighted/fair use material. -- Y Ynhockey || Talk Y 19:37, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

While I like the idea of an anime/manga barnstar, here's a question: note the Wikiwings bit below for aviation articles. In short, does it have to be a barn star? We're talking about anime and manga here, folks - we could award an anime fish sausage, or taiyaki, or something else. I say we go with something original that defines us as otaku/anime fans/whatever.--み使い Mitsukai 20:07, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I like the idea of something original in principle, but somehow it seems to make the award seem less 'official'. Unless the image is really well-made, like the Wikiwings. Any ideas? -- Y Ynhockey || Talk Y 20:17, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, there's my suggestion of the taiyaki (yeah, I'm stuck on it - blame it on Kanon), or maybe a henshin wand. Something that is defining as an anime or manga award, but doesn't quite specify a particular series. Here's my thoughts on it; maybe someone else can come up with some as well:

• taiyaki
• henshin wand
• fish sausage
• magatama
• a sakura blossom (looks close enough like a barnstar, yet without the actual barnstar-ness)

Any other ideas, guys?--み使い Mitsukai 23:17, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Moving to left
I support an anime/manga sakura tree. Only problem is where to get a non-copyrighted/fair use image for it. -- Y Ynhockey || Talk Y 07:24, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I'll see if I can come up with something. I've got that "barnstar"-like sakura blossom in Adobe Illustrator; I can see about a tree as well.--み使い Mitsukai 08:01, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

The barnstar-like blossom would be great. I probably won't be able to participate in this conversation for another 2 weeks (although I'll be home tonight), you know, army stuff, but hopefully you will find something nice and more users will participate in the discussion before I return. -- Y Ynhockey || Talk Y 08:48, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

• I was told the Comics barnstar was too narrow an award and should be made a personal award rather than a barnstar. On that basis I would say this should also be a Topic-related award. Hiding talk 20:22, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

That depends on whether you consider manga as a part of comics. While technically it is (and in Wikipedia, manga is under Category:Comic books), whoever voted for the barnstar might've not realized this. There are currently about 1000 articles under the parent category 'manga' alone, with 28 subcategories. The comic books category, not including manga, is much smaller. Spoken Wikipedia has even less articles (although I admit its potential scope is as large as that of Wikipedia itself). -- Y Ynhockey || Talk Y 07:24, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

• You are somewhat mistaken. The comics awards is for edits to articles regarding comics, not comic books. The category of comics is much larger, I'm sure you would agree. Hiding talk 09:04, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Yesterday, after some debate, the scouting barnstar was moved from the barnstar page to the PUA page. As an adherent to that discussion, I believe that this should be a PUA. On an entirely different note, I was wondering if this GFDL image can be used, after relevant modifications, for this award. --Gurubrahma 19:56, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Wow, someone must have spent a fair bit of time on that! I like the idea; since it refers to Wikipedia, it doubles the meaning of the award. I agree; this is a great award idea, but too limited for a barnstar. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 19:59, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm for it either way, though I don't know that the image necessarily works. To me it reminds me of Internet sock puppets and WP:sock, something that we don't want a connotation with.--み使い Mitsukai 15:47, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

UPDATE: Finally have some time to work on it. Should have a prototype of the "BarnSakura" here in the next day or so.--み使い Mitsukai 05:41, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

BarnSakura draft 1.png "BarnSakura" draft image

Okay, folks, here's the draft of the BarnSakura. Note I said draft; I'm going to tweak it based on what suggestions I get here (one thing I do want to do is mute the colors a little more). The question for you all is do you want a more realistic design (which is sort of what I have here) or a more stylized design (leaning more towards pop art)?--み使い Mitsukai 03:05, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I have two suggestions: 1) The design inside the leaves should be more intricate, maybe apply an appropriate texture. 2) Mute the colours, like you said.

Thanks for your ongoing involvement in this award :) -- Y Ynhockey || Talk Y 09:46, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

BarnSakura.png "BarnSakura" draft image, round 2

Okay, here's the second round of the BarnSakura. I fringed the inner petals a bit to give it a bit more of a realistic and textured look, and muted the colors to a little closer to natural. Gave it flares, both for "The Shiny look" as well as softening the overall appearance. Let me know what you all think.--み使い Mitsukai 23:11, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

The new image definitely looks better. I have only one comment left: in the new version, the inner outline (it's light blue now?) somewhat melds with the rest of the picture but stands out at the same time. Maybe making it more pronounced (darker, different hue) could help. If you want me to attempt something also, maybe send me the file of the image? I'm assuming it's vector graphics, but any format is OK. -- Y Ynhockey || Talk Y 08:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

It's actually 11%gray, one step short of the off-white tones. I can see about thinning out the stroke, if need be, but I already tried some different colors and they didn't seem to work well. Let me see if a thinner stroke will do the job.--み使い Mitsukai 02:15, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Still working on it.--み使い Mitsukai 16:36, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, tried varying the inner stroke, and changing the color a bit, but it doesn't make much of a difference, and darker colors look a bit too garish. This is probably as good as we're going to get, but if anyone wants to give it a shot, I'll be more than happy to send them the Illustrator file.--み使い Mitsukai 06:47, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Please send the illustrator file to: ynhockey at gmail dot com; I'll see what I can do :) By the way, have you tried Corel Draw? -- Y Ynhockey ^(Talk) Y 11:54, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

No, can't say I have, though I may have to look into it. And I'll be sending the file now.--み使い Mitsukai 01:27, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

• This award has taken five months. evrik 18:54, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
• Can we all agree this is a topic award, associated with Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga, accept it on that basis, and let the tweaking of the image happen live? Hiding talk 15:27, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. The result of all of the following discussions was Create PUA Award

I'd like to see something like "Honourable Order of the Wikipedia Stub Rehabilitation Society", which could be awarded to people who rescue items from AFD and similar lists by making comprehensive rewrites duing the voting period. I've one particular recipient in mind, but I know of several whom this could easily be awarded to. Grutness...wha? 05:30, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

• 
  Second Draft
• 
  Third Draft

Just took a stab at it, a lot of directions we can go from there. I especially want to do some creative changes to the Barnstar in the background, just unsure exactly what would be best to compliment the helicopter, or if we want a RedCross instead; and/or I could make the helicopter a brown barnstar color scheme and do something bright in the background, such as a RedCross (second draft) but inside a Barnstar outline (didn't look good when I tried it). (also I don't like the blue roter blades... but making it look cool might be beyond my skills) - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 18:25, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Maybe I could change the basket to a Wikiglobe... or better yet a Wikipedia "W" puzzle piece to represent the article being rescued. - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 01:50, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

For some reason, my browser's not letting me see your designs, but if I get the drift of them right, what about simply a rescue helicopter with a small barnstar hanging from the end of a rope below it? Grutness...wha? 02:14, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

I definitely thought of that too, yeah we can do that. Now to cut down drafts, what color scheme for the copter (original, or barnstar?), what barnstar should be used... the original makes sense given creating/rewriting articles is the very essence of the barnstar... or could it be the Working man's barnstar. Although each article is different, rescuing poor articles from the AfD is a constantly needed, tireless task. (and the tireless barnstar would add more color if we went with the barnstar color scheme on the copter) - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 15:31, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Then most importantly the size of the barnstar... it could be proportational to the copter and so it fits inside the frame, or I could keep the barnstar the normal size and it would go outside the boundaries of the image (that would emphasize this is a big deal). - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 16:23, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

I like proposal 3 - I think the brown and red get a bit lost against each other in the other two. Grutness...wha? 08:57, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

I also like the third one, it's much better than the other two overall. However, you should probably improve the rotors. -- Ynhockey 14:43, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Coo, which rotors... the top ones? If so... that may be the limit of my artistic ability, if you can do it... or recommend someone I'd be more than happy to copy and paste their improvement and credit them in the final upload. If you mean the tail rotor, just in case its too small... its the WikiGlobe!:"D - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 20:06, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

How's this? (I cheated and used a real helicopter image. ;-) Sango123 (talk) 15:35, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Looks good. What's the source (or copyright status) of the original helicopter image that you used? --Deathphoenix 17:28, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

*plays M.A.S.H. theme* Looking good... --AllyUnion (talk) 20:02, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

I used Image:Chc bell 206.jpg, which is licensed under the GFDL. So what shall we name this award? Sango123 (talk) 22:19, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm... this would be tough now. We need a balance between wit and information. A nice name that is also informative. Red Cross Barnstar, or M.A.S.H. Barnstar, for example, don't really emphasise that the awardee rescued articles from AfD. How about something like Operation: AfD Rescue Barnstar? Granted, that's slightly unwieldy, but I'm just brainstorming here. My brain has a lot of rubbish in it. --Deathphoenix 17:48, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, I suggested a (somewhat flowery) title originally, but it could be shortened - how about "Article Rehabilitation Barnstar", or just "Stub Rescue Barnstar"? That means it doesn't have to be for AfD, just for turning something hopeless into somethig encyclopaedic. Grutness...wha? 23:02, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm sorry to come in late and be a wet blanket, but I'm not so sure about this star. We have so many barnstars already, wouldn't a "Working Man", "Editor", or "Diligance" star be just as good? At 25 stars and counting, we're starting to suffer from serious barnstar creep. – ClockworkSoul 07:40, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

I really like this idea, and I think article rescue is a unique enough activity to merit a separate accounting. It's not unheard of for something to be deleted just because folks on AFD aren't familiar with the topic, and this barnstar would award a much-needed service. The 'hanging barnstar' is also a great graphic concept.--Pharos 13:50, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

I do like the current image more than the old ones, but would it be possible to get a helicopter that looked more like a Search-and-Rescue machine? Possible source images with compatible licences: 1, 2, 3, 4. Sorry they're all American; the British, Canadian, and Irish ones I found don't allow derivative works... -User:Lommer | ^talk 06:31, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

I prefer image 3 and it is a great barnstar; what I've been noticing more is "good users being fed up" creep. Too many barnstars is not high on my creep list... simply put there are a large number of specific ways people make a real positive impact on this encyclopedia. Acknowledging them specifically for those efforts, as I see it, can only be a good thing. - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 23:30, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with Royboy and am already feeling lonely with three afd rescues and nothing to show for it ;-) --Gurubrahma 12:25, 13 December 2005 (UTC) (sorry just couldn't resist the temptation of attrating people to my userpage)

Support. I'm not concerned about what this barnstar will look like, but I think it is a good idea in general. I like the idea of making it a broader "stub rescue" star as well where serious verification must be done. Crypticfirefly 22:37, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Support, but why not use a M*A*S*H* helicopter? Those old Bells looked really cool... Guapovia 10:53, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Strong support for this barnstar as long as the final graphic maintains the general image 3/image 4 concept of a chopper airlifting the barnstar. That really makes me smile for some reason. --Aaron 21:20, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Any progress anyone? Shall we have a straw poll on the third and fourth drafts?? It has been way too delayed. --Gurubrahma 14:05, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I think a heli is to much, perhaps a somethig smaller:

Barnstar rescue 05.png

I think this new draft is better than all the past ones... Deryck C. 14:51, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Just to be contrary, I far prefer the helicopter designs to this. It looks icky :) Grutness...wha? 07:11, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I love the Helicopter! Hurricanehink 02:11, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, the band-aids don't really represent the barnstar as well IMO. Makes me think more along the lines of cleanup or something. -- gakon5

• This award has taken four months. evrik 18:54, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

• Supported the fourth version. The band-aids, while cool, aren't quite right, and the 4th has the best heli IMO. Staxringold 22:03, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

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

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Image:Olympic Barnstar.png The Olympic Barnstar. For excelling work in sports-related articles. Hi, while we're discussion in the topic above the appearence of our "Citizen of the World Award" (as suggested by Rama), I realized by looking at our Barnstars template that we had no award for efforts in one of the most popular themes on Wikipedia (and anywhere): sports, or more appropriately, efforst in sports-related articles/themes. So I'd like to submit this image I created myself from two other images we had here on Wikipedia (you tell me if I got it right). I call it "The Olympic Barnstar" (obviously). Regards, Redux 16:00, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

(I'm not sure whether you got it right. It's very tempting to put the black ring around the hole, but it kind of makes it disappear from the Olympic Emblem. Did you try how it looks with the two outer rings having their centers on the middle lines of the rays? Also, did you intentionally choose a white background? Aliter 01:36, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC))

Well, the black ring seems quite clear to me, especially since the barnstar is brownish ("rusty"), which makes the contrast sufficient to distinguish the two. The black ring is also made clear because of it's intersection with the two inner rings. I did take it into consideration, since I noticed that the black ring would be the only one of the five to be completely "contained" in the barnstar. This layout appeared optimal to me because I didn't want either the barnstar or the rings to be disproportional in size in relation to the other image, and having the rings centered in the barnstar provides a sense of simetry (which in my opinion wouldn't exist if the rings were higher or lower in relation to the barnstar). As for the background, actually it was the software I used to merge the two images that implemented the white background. I did notice it, but since the idea is that the barnstars have no background, I did not consider it an issue (besides, if the image is not framed &#150; as in a thumb &#150; in a page, it guarantees that it blends perfectly into the page, so that we only see the barnstar, and not the "edges" surrounding it). I do believe that this design is quite satisfactory. Regards, Redux 02:53, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure that this is such a good idea. The five coloured rings are a trademark of the Olympic Committee. We should not be using their trademark without permission. GeorgeStepanek\^talk 02:57, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The image of the rings that I used to create this image came from Wikipedia itself. As stated in its Image page, it falls under the fair use parameters. This is the tag that's in the image's page. It's used in quite a few pages (use this link to see the page → Image:Olympic-rings.png), and it has not been contested (I believe, or maybe it was, but there was a consensus about it being ok &#150; especially in 2004, since it was an "olympic year", which puts everything related to the Olympics in the spotlight). I don't believe that this is going to be an issue here. Regards, Redux 04:13, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Not to say the ring was undiscernable, just that it no longer seemed part of the emblem, more an inner ring of the barnstar. Symmetry I feel only with three rings showing in the hole; YMMV. The white background on the usually non-white user-page is indeed what I saw as a problem.

But I agree with GeorgeStepanek: The Olympics Rings were not part of human culture before De Coubertin created the Olympic Emblem, and in this case the rings are not used to refer to something Olympic. Hence, in my opinion this would not be fair use. Aliter 18:10, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Putting aside any issues concerning the design itself, I'd like to go back to the "fair use or not fair use" point. As I've said in my previous comment, I used an image of the rings from Wikipedia, which apparently had already been established as fair use. If we are considering the possibility that it is actually not, the issue would transcend the creation of a wiki award, since the image is being used in a boatload of articles (see the image's page). Unless you meant that it is not fair use only to use them in the image as I've done. I don't see how this could be though, either it's fair use to use the rings or not, and then they couldn't appear at all in the website. By what I've seen in the image's page, it appears that the community accepted it as fair use under our policy (at least I believe it's a policy...) that a trademark logo can be used as fair use (again, that's what the tamplate tag that's in the image's page says). In my opinion (and I emphasize that), in light of all that I've just said, I still believe that it's not a copyright issue. Regards, Redux 20:42, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Mmmm. I'm not convinced... AFAIK, the uses of the Olympic rings on Wikipedia until now have related directly to the Olympics movement. In those contexts such usage definitely falls within the bounds of "fair use". But what is being proposed here is to use the rings in a situation which does not directly relate to the Olympics. As such, I'm not sure whether fair use covers this particular instance, even if it does elsewhere on Wikipedia. In a way, it's an analogous situation to the medals controversy elsewhere on this page - pictures of medals are perfectly acceptable as illustrations on pages about those medals or on pages relating to medals in general, but using them on Barnstars poses problems in that we are using them for a different purpose to that for which they were intended. Grutness|^hello? 00:17, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

So the point is whether or not the rings can be used in this context. Well, if I had to analyse it, I'd say that the Olympic Emblem, although integrated in this new image, still stands for exactly what it does when seen alone: the Olympic Movement, as the highest symbol of sports, and not just any given event, but sports in general. Its presence in this image aims to create exactly this association with sports in general by evoking the so-called "Olympic spirit", which pertains to sports, not Greek mithology or the real mountain in Greece (might have gone a little overboard with the "philosophy" of it all?). It's not as though we were, for instance, trying to use the rings as a symbol for Wikipedia ("the sportive encyclopedia"?). Considering the comparison with medals, if you think about it (or overthink it), technically they weren't conceived to illustrate an encyclopedic article, or to represent directly the event or situation in which they were given, they are prizes given to athletes that participate in the sporting events that awards them. What I mean by this is that, if you spend enough time and energy, you can always find a loophole in any theory, and if you're well-spoken enough, you can make it convincing enough for others. Bottom line is, it appears (to me) that it stands to reason that, if using the image of the rings is fair use in pages about the Olympics, athletes and even sporting events (in the list of pages of the Image Page, we see links to all those sorts of pages), it would be the same with this image, which embodies sports (and not, as I said, any other thing for which one could be trying to make them a symbol).
But maybe we could remove the polemics quicker (although it might be good if we could somehow establish a consesus to serve as a guideline, so that in the future similar situations can be dealt with faster, or even avoided altogether): we could try to come up with some other image, using some sort of sports-allusive image that we already have in Wikipedia, maybe a football? I did like that image I came up with, but it's really not that important, especially if we're going to spend zions discussing the "technicalities" (although a copyvio is not a technicality, but still) of it. I'll try to find something else (unless we somehow establish that the rings are ok). Regards, Redux 02:23, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

All right, if the rings won't do, how about one of these two?

Both the images used to compose the models with the barnstar had tags of being released in the public domain, so there shouldn't be any copyright issues. Personally, I think that the Model 1 is better &#150; Model 2 is a little rough around the edges, but I've said before I'm no graphic wizard (but if this is preferred, someone could improve the quality of it...). If someone has other suggestions, I'm open for it. Regards, Redux 03:26, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

How about reversing image 1, putting a smaller soccer ball (or a tennis ball, or...) in the centre of a barnstar, so that the five arms stick out (a bit like the globe image further up the page)? Grutness|^hello? 09:16, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It's a good idea. In fact I already tried it, but I was unable to get rid of the football's image's white quadrilateral background, which was then interfering with the barnstar image and making the collage somewhat "ugly". It would be nice if someone could give it a try though. It will probably look better than my original Model 1. Regards, Redux 22:23, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Why not try it with a tennis ball? It's as international a sport as soccer, and the yellow-green and "U" shaped seam should make it stand out more clearly. Grutness|^hello? 00:09, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Sounds good to me too. Do we have this image of a tennis ball here on Wikipedia? Or maybe you have (or can get) one? If you can compose the image and post it, so we could see how it looks, it would be great. It will probably do the trick and we'll have our sportive award. Regards, Redux 03:01, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

no I dont :/ and there isn't one on Wikipedia as far as I know - not even in Commons. Grutness|^hello?

Yeah, I couldn't find a free image either. But how about this alternative: instead of a ball (any ball), what if we put in front of the barnstar a checkered flag &#150; like one of those we see at the end of car races? It's a symbol generally associated not only with winning, but also with completing a "mission" (in races, completing the race, but here it could be the task of improving an article related to sports). For the same reasons, it's also a symbol highly associated with sports, and for our award objective, it would also have the additional advantage of not obscuring the barnstar. Our article on the item only offers a view of what would be the "cloth", but it should not be too complicated to engineer a pole to go with it. Although for a better display it would be more interesting to have the flag slightly tilted and with the cloth part "waving in the wind". Can someone come up with that? If that's possible to do, I imagine it could solve the problem. Regards, Redux 05:42, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

How about putting a stick figure of someone running to the front of a barnstar? I think running (or track and field) is a pretty universal symbol of sports. --Deathphoenix 04:35, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Definately worth taking a look at. Can you come up with that design? Regards, Redux 05:33, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Sure, here's what I have in mind, shown on the right (I'll be back after a while. I'm headed to bed - for real this time). --Deathphoenix 08:15, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It looks good to me. But just to avoid any future questioning, I'd like to ask if you can verify that the image you used over the barnstar (the running man in the yellow circle) is indeed free, that is, not under any coyright restriction. Regards, Redux 23:38, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

A perfectly reasonable request. I can say with all certainty that the image I used over the barnstar is absolutely free of any copyright restrictions, because I drew it myself. :-) --Deathphoenix 02:25, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

That being the case, this could be it. I'd like to have some other opinions on the award though, so that we can have a consensus on it. Also, Zscout370 was going to upload a design of his combining the barnstar with a checkered flag. If he does, we can have a choice between the two also. Regards, Redux 03:40, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I was also thinking of going with a gold-coloured barnstar, kind of like with The Barnstar of Diligence. This would be easy enough to do in Photoshop (remove the original Barnstar layer, add the Barnstar of Diligence layer), but I'd have to wait a few hours to get on my home machine. --Deathphoenix 16:59, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I like the gold idea too: it think it would go well with "the running man". Also, I know its late, but that gives me an idea for a for a different name: The Go For the Gold Barnstar, or simply The Gold Barnstar ? At the very least, it's more poetic than Sportive Award. – ClockworkSoul 17:02, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Let's see then the gold barnstar. What worries me is that the running man is also on a yellowish background (although not gold), which could sort of blend the running man with the barnstar a little too much. But we'd have to see it to evaluate it. As for the name "sportive award", it was just the title of this discussion, meaning that it was aimed at creating an award for efforts in sports-related articles. I haven't gotten around to thinking of names yet, but I guess the word "barnstar" would have to be there, since it will feature a barnstar, and it would be interesting to have it make some sort of reference to sports. I don't know if "gold" is allusive enough. Off the top of my head, I could think of "Barnstar of WikiSport" (or maybe drop the "wiki" and call it "Barnstar of Sports", simple and straight to the point). Or maybe: "Barnstar of Sportmanship"? Regards, Redux 19:41, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I thought about that too, and my thought is to try and see (which I will do in a few hours). If the yellow looks bad against the gold, I'll use another colour. If it turns out the gold star doesn't look good, we can just stick with the original barnstar colour (assuming we decide to stick with "the running man"). --Deathphoenix 20:42, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I made the barnstars with a gold star. It doesn't look too bad with the yellow face, but I also included a darker brown to contrast with the lighter yellow colour for comparison. --Deathphoenix 01:21, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The second image looks reasonably good, but I didn't quite like the third. I would have to say that, of the three images, the original one still looks best though. Have you tried painting the barnstar in silver? We must be clear that this award, although it will relate to sports, is not a mimicry of a medal (namely, an olympic medal), and thus I don't see it as necessary or even important that it be painted in gold. Silver is a color used in many other sportive paraphernalia (such as throphies), and would be (if it looks good) just as suitable a color as gold, with the additional advantage of not blending with "the running man". If it doesn't look good, I'd say we should stick with the original image. Regards, Redux 03:19, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I made a barnstar with the silver star (#4), but I don't really like the way it looks with the yellow face, so I made one with a white face (#5), which I think looks a lot better than 4. My apologies for the poor image placement. --Deathphoenix 04:04, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I really like the running man and gold star ideas... but the colors so far just aren't quite right. What do you think of this: a gold star that looks like the running man is stamped into the medal, so that it looks like one solid piece of metal? I wish that I had some imaging talent, so that I could help out. :/ – ClockworkSoul 04:23, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hi. I took the liberty or repositioning your last two images. You're right, #5 does look better than #4. Here's an idea: why not take image #5 and paint the running man in gold? It might create an interesting effect (or it might ruin the whole thing). So far, however, I still think that the original image looks better (my own suggestion of having the barnstar painted silver did not yeld a superior result, in my humble opinion). As for ClockworkSoul's suggestion for a new design, if someone can create the image, it'd be worth taking in consideration. And indeed, it could be that the problem is that the colors may be a little off. Regards, Redux 04:54, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I agree with ClockworkSoul that gold seems to be a better idea. It's not just the Olympics but most other sporting tournaments that use the gold-silver-bronze award system, and I don't think it looks like a specific medal of any sort, so it's safe. I don't know about the stamping, though, because I don't think the running man will really stand out. I'll see what I can do with the gold star. --Deathphoenix 04:37, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Attempts to make it look like a stamped (sports) medal didn't turn out too well at all. I have to say that I don't mind the gold star with the yellow face (#2), though. If you want to make that look like a one piece, I could put a bit of "barnstar shading" on the face as well, but I kinda like the star the way it is now. Thoughts? --Deathphoenix 05:55, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Version #2 would be acceptable, but if you ask me, I still think that the original (#1) is the better looking one. If it's between the already posted images, I vote for Image #1. Regards, Redux 13:57, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Here are a few attempts by me. The color I used came from an HTML color chart which called it "Gold - old" which sounds like it should be the right color, but it can be easily changed. I'm still figuring out how to make it look raised or stamped into the medal. --brian0918&#153; 14:52, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Impressive. I think the image on the top right could be it. It's also pretty close to what ClockworkSoul had proposed. As an alternative, the image on the left is also interesting (but I vote for top right). Regards, Redux 15:37, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

That's very, very nice! I personally like Image:Barnstar-goldrun2.png (top right) the best by far, but the one on the left (Image:Barnstar-goldrun1.png) is good too. Nice work, brian0918! – ClockworkSoul 20:11, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Oops, I realized that I forgot to desaturate the original barnstar image, so the "old gold" color was way off. Here is a more correct version, although if you like the originals, go with it. Here is the site where I chose the colors; they list 3 different "gold" colors there:

Looks like we all like the gold star idea, and are getting very close to closing in on an image, but now what do we call it?

• I personally like "The Go-For-the-Gold Barnstar" because it's meaningful, descriptive, and fun.
• "The Gold Barnstar" is pretty good too, I think (maybe we can make a "minor" version someday that's bronze ;) ). I just worry that it may be too reminiscent of Gold Star.
• "Sportive Barnstar" is okay, but I think it's just a little awkward and plain.
• "The Barnstar of Sport" is just ugly...

What do you guys think? – ClockworkSoul 20:35, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

My vote is for The Gold Barnstar. It reminds me of the gold medal presented to the top competitors at the Olympics. Zscout370 20:50, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I like Gold Barnstar, but here are some other suggestions: Gold Medal Barnstar, Barnstar Medal (redundant?), Golden Barnstar, SportStar, or the not-so-popular Cheddar Cheese-Colored Barnstar (C³star for short :)) --brian0918&#153; 20:59, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I like Gold Barnstar, followed closely by Go-for-the-Gold Barnstar. I don't think it's too close to the Gold Star because it's a barnstar, and it's gold. I don't think anyone can claim plagiarism. in this case. --Deathphoenix 21:59, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Not so keen on "Go-for-the-gold", for the simple reason that in a lot of countries the phrase is simply "Go-for-gold"! How about "Sport champion barnstar"? A play on words, both as in someone who is a champion at sport, and someone who champions (i.e. supports) sport. Grutness|^hello? 23:54, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Are we going for the Image:Barnstar-goldrun2.png proposition? ClockworkSoul and I have already manifested our predilection for it. As for the name, since Deathphoenix introduced the parameter for the image, we started refering to a certain aspect of it by an "affective nickname", so I can't resist the urge to suggest: The Running Man Barnstar, or The Running Man's Barnstar, or even The Barnstar of the Running Man. "Running" does relate to practicing sports (or, for our particular case, we could correlate "running" to contributing vigorously to sports-related articles), plus it is the image that appears on the Barnstar and we can add an explanation to the award's page as to how the name (if it's chosen) came to be. I thought it would be worth suggesting this. Regards, Redux 01:24, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I like it, (the first one) and I'm sure Ahhhhnold would agree with it. -- BRIAN0918  01:28, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hey, that's an even better idea! I like The Running Man Barnstar. It certainly brings Ahhhhnold to mind. --Deathphoenix 01:32, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Geez.. next it'll be the "Starinator". Seriously, though, I still prefer the The Go-for-the-Gold Barnstar. While I don't hate "Running Man", it feels kind of stolen, you know? – ClockworkSoul 07:09, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

What about something in the vein of Moving Man Barnstar ? Rama 07:28, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I must say, I wasn't thinking about the "Governator" when I proposed the name. It was only when I read Brian's and Deathphoenix's posts that I made the connection. I don't know that most people would make any connection to Schwarzenegger because of that movie from the 80's. We started calling the image "the running man" because that's what he is "doing". As it turns out, it would work for the award name, because running (or jogging) is an activity closely associated with practising sports. I still think it would work. But I must insist that we agree on the image for the award before we get too much into name choosing (unless we've already settled for Brian's proposed gold image). Regards, Redux 17:01, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• I personally think the second image is better, since that reminds me of the shade of gold for the Olympic gold medals. However, if the Running Man Barnstar is what yall want to go with for the name, that is fine with me. Zscout370 17:21, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

You mean Image:Barnstar-goldrun5.png? If so, it would be just as good, since the only difference between these two is the shade of gold. If it is the case of approaching the look of an olympic medal (color-wise), that would have to be the one. Regards, Redux 18:45, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I thought that color looked good too, but the medal looked pretty bleak, so here's a slightly shinier version. Want more shine? Just ask :)  BRIAN0918  19:21, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Brian, I think the shine is good enough :) Zscout370 19:36, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I liked Image:Barnstar-goldrun5.png as soon as I saw it, but upon further reflection, I actually prefer Image:Barnstar-goldrun2.png because it's not too bright. Most of our barnstars look a little rusty, and I think even our gold barnstar should look slightly tarnished. The discussion is getting a little long. --Deathphoenix 19:24, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I meant to add "maybe we should add a table" to the above comment, which looks to be rather impolite. My apologies if my comment came out that way. I'm going to clean up the table a little, and make my vote. I would also suggest a similar table for names. I'll do that in a bit too. --Deathphoenix 22:12, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I don't know, I thought this latest shinier version of the award is the better (looks more like a gold medal and stuff). But anyways, I think I have a democratic solution for this. I put together this (totally) improvised board for us to vote in (feel free to perfect the code). So we just add our signature under the award that we prefer. Today is Tuesday, so let's say by Saturday (meaning, "late Friday") midnight (GMT) we "close the polls" and the most voted becomes the award image. Is that acceptable? That's off course assuming that we've settled for the general parameter introduced by Deathphoenix and are going to use one of Brian's designs. I thought this would help settle this. For the first vote in each award, just replace the "no votes" sentence with your signature, to cast a second, third (and so on) vote, just copy and paste the code column and replace the appropriate (be careful not to vote in the wrong image). Sorry if this is a little rudimentary, but it was the best I could come up with (maybe someone could improve the quality of this?). If the community rejects this idea to vote for the image, feel free to delete this board. Regards, Redux 21:55, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I added the name selection table below. I only added the four names that had support from someone else. If you want to vote for another one, feel free to insert a new entry. --Deathphoenix 23:36, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Dead line for voting: Expired. No more votes, please

Hey, Brian, no voting twice allowed! :P – ClockworkSoul 00:53, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I swithced my vote. Zscout370 12:04, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Dead line for voting: Expired. No more votes, please.

PS - remember that for some of us Saturday Midnight GMT is actually "early Saturday"!

Well, the predefined period for voting has expired, and the results are plain to see. I'm posting here the new sportive award as it was chosen by the community. Any last comments? Regards, Redux 01:55, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• You may want to split the Barnstar mainpage into two sections, one for "general barnstars" (probably all of the current ones would go in this category), and "topical barnstars" for each of the topic barnstars being created on the proposal page. The running man barnstar would go in the topical section. -- BRIAN0918  02:07, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I've added the award to the project page, and I have also updated the template board to include the award. Regards, Redux 02:11, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Question, should we move the BoNM to the Topical Barnstar section? Zscout370 02:20, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I think so, so I already did it. – ClockworkSoul 02:44, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Congrats to all and to all a good toffee! Thanks for the kind mention. :-) --Deathphoenix 03:33, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This is a beautiful star – brilliant work! – ClockworkSoul 04:01, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. The result of all of the following discussions was Inconclusive

This is my suggestion for an Olympic Barnstar. There are a lot of people (me inclusive) who are working very hard to create a better Olympics community of pages. They deserve this award because it is specific to their work on Wikipedia. It would be my honor to commend certain people with this award. Suggestions? Is it a good idea? --Jared ^[T]/_[+] 19:45, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

• Firstly, the IOC are very careful about copyright infringement, so there can't really be any reference to rings involved. Secondly, we have the The Running Man Barnstar for sports articles, and since it is very firmly established (I think it was given to several people for Olympics-related work), should do fine. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 20:00, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
• Is this part of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Sports Olympics? I would say that you should use the runnign man barnstar, but if there is a groundswell of support it could be considered a a barnstar ... but there should be a lot of support. evrik 20:31, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
  • I see where you're coming from, but this running man seems to encompass a lot of sports that wouldn't necessarily involve running at all. I hadn't considered it a part of the said project but it may be possible. --Jared ^[T]/_[+] 21:09, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

One of the original options for the Running Man Barnstar originally was for us to use Olympic rings, but there were a few reasons it wasn't used. I don't remember, but I'm sure trademarks copyrights were a factor, as was the fact that we wanted to make this star for use with all sports, not just Olympic sports. While I may seem biased, since I helped create that barnstar, I'd say the Running Man Barnstar should be sufficient. --Deathphoenix 22:06, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I remember it perfectly. I was the one who proposed the sports Barnstar, which eventually became the current Running Man Barnstar, and I also proposed the first draft for the award's image, which included the Olympic Rings. The main point was that the Rings could not be used in our award due to copyright restrictions. Nothing has changed since then in that regard. And there's the excellent point about not limiting the award's scope too much: I mean, we already have an award that is specific for contributions pertaining to the world of sports, both Olympic and otherwise. That's already a very specific Barnstar, since efforts in sports-related articles could also be acknowledged by a number of other awards (such as the Original Barnstar, The Working Man Barnstar, The Tireless Contributor Barnstar and so on). No need to go more specific than that; it'd be overdoing it. Regards, Redux 02:51, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

• I suggest we take some of this over here Wikipedia_talk:Barnstars#Barnstar_Summit, because if sy, we decide that a wikiproject wants to develop something on their own, and it gets vetted by the group, it may not be redundant. Having said that, i think the running man may be good enough. evrik 21:41, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. The result of all of the following discussions was Positive

The Olympics Barnstar is awarded in recognition of excellent contributions to WikiProject Sports Olympics. Further discussion on the award proposal can be found here. Sango123 20:42, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

• There is another discussion about this Wikipedia:Barnstar_and_award_proposals/Archive8#Olympic_Barnstar. --evrik 20:46, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• Support as a Wikiproject Award. --evrik 20:55, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• Project Award, however, you will probably need a different symbol; the IOC protects the torch as fiercely as the rings. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 21:37, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment - I believe Sango made the torch - the other thing is that there is a different torch for each olympics.Blnguyen | rant-line 23:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment - I tried to make the torch as generic as possible and didn't superimpose an image of a real Olympic Torch over the barnstar. If you have any suggestions on alternative symbols or ways to tweak the current proposal draft, I'd be more than happy to implement them. Thanks, Sango123 00:23, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

• 
  Alternate proposal #1
• 
  Alternate #2 ... Colors made more closely to actual Olympics colors.
• 
  Alternate #3

• Comment How about something like Alternate proposal #1, using the colours, but not the rings or symbols. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 15:04, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• I do like that Alternate #4...I'll see if I can make one whose colors more closely match the Olympics colors. → JARED ^(t)  15:14, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Done. → JARED ^(t)  15:33, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Looks like you beat me to it, Jared. ;) Here's what I came up with. Sango123 15:43, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
    • I like the (+ rotated version of) Sango's more; it's a bit lighter, but both look great! smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 17:15, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Yeah, lighter does look better. Here's mine...I just rotated Sango's so that it reflected the actual placement of the rings.
      • Is there anyway to get the colour to a more standard red, yellow, green? The Running Man Barnstar is standard yellow.Blnguyen | rant-line 00:17, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
    • How's the fifth draft? All five colors are more standard and web-safe. Sango123 03:38, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
    • I like both the 4th and 5th drafts. Oh hello again Sango. -- Riffsyphon1024 06:03, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Eh, I think it may be a little too light, or off-color perhaps. I guess I really don't care, but I think that the one you made, then I rotated, is the best choice so far. → JARED ^(t)  14:36, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
• Support I like #4 South Philly 02:33, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  • • Could someone put one ring around each arm of the barnstar? GangstaEB 14:33, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Note: I've removed one of the images (#7) as it was deleted on Commons at the request of the creator/uploader. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 13:41, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

• I like the new #5 most now; it seems closest to the proper colours. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 15:41, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
• Support version #4. —SHININGEYES 08:33, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
• Support prefereably 5 but also 4.Blnguyen | rant-line 01:19, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
• Support 2 or 4. 5's colors are a bit too loud. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gray Porpoise (talk • contribs)

• 
  Alternate #4 - Sango's rotated to reflect placement of rings.
• 
  Alternate #5 - more standard colors

• Comment. So it seems like its mainly between 4+5. I personally like 4 better (not because I made it) because the colors are a little darker and maybe a little more accurate, but both are good. → JARED ^(t)  14:14, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
• #4 --South Philly 00:49, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

The following discussions are an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. The result of all of the following discussions was Inconclusive

I already awarded it to Condem. General Eisenhower 22:11, 14 April 2006 (UTC)