CreationWiki talk:Editor recognition

introduction - what is "editor recognition"
There's been discussion that we want to recognize editors for what they do around here. Continual lack of recognition is a good way to kill initiative of volunteers, so let's avoid that. This will generally follow the idea of the "barnstar" or other awards at Wikipedia, but of course we can deviate and innovate all we want. Note that WP also has a long list of personal awards for just about anything imaginable that isn't already covered. Here on CW we can use a "thanks" notice (like the prefab thankyou) for that.

If you have other ideas as to what should be incorporated in the concept or implementation of CW editor recognition award, please discuss them here. ⇔ ChristTrekker &#x1f4dd; 10:14, 31 March 2014 (EDT)

types of awards
Perusing the list of barnstars/awards at WP is a good start for deciding what types of awards we might want to give. Here is a list you may add to. Discuss each one individually.


 * general - for doing an all-around great job, without further qualifying specifically what was done
 * artist - for contributing new (non-photo) graphics to CW
 * citation - for those that seek out citations to back up the facts written about in CW articles
 * clerical - for the organizationally-minded who tirelessly categorize and list, making things easier to find
 * dialog - for participation in discussion on Talk pages to hash out problems, contribute suggestions, or discuss ideas
 * diplomacy - for helping resolve conflicts, and exhibiting civility and restraint
 * editor - for being a quality copy editor of existing content, without necessarily writing new material
 * guardian - for upholding CW guidelines and policies, and/or working to consistently improve them
 * idea - for coming up with great ideas, without necessarily implementing them
 * mentor - for those that help other editors, especially new ones, with suggestions to improve their wiki-editing skills
 * minor - for consistently good minor edits, which could easily be overlooked
 * motivator - for the cheerleaders who consistently offer encouragement
 * photographer - for supplying new photos to CW
 * technical - for the less-obvious behind-the-scenes work, with templates and Mediawiki "guts"
 * translator - for superlative efforts providing translations of existing material
 * writer - for supplying high-quality (new) content
 * videographer - for contributing new video clips to CW

Please review the naming of these, for consistency. For example, that terms are all noun form, or adjective form, etc. Should we have "photography" or "photographer"? "Motivator" or "motivational"? Which style matters not, but I prefer it be consistent. ⇔ ChristTrekker &#x1f4dd; 11:09, 1 April 2014 (EDT)

other parameters
Should awards be given specifying other information? For example, do we want to distingish outstanding student contributions, or contributions within a certain field of knowledge? ⇔ ChristTrekker &#x1f4dd; 15:30, 31 March 2014 (EDT)
 * I agree with the outline above. To reiterate, I think this is a great idea! Also before we get to specific, we should just implement the general awards listed above, before we focus in on excellence in a field of knowledge, etc --Tsommer 18:21, 31 March 2014 (EDT)
 * Okay, I'll just try to make sure the template will accommodate taking an additional parameter without goofing up any existing awards that are bestowed in the meantime. ⇔ ChristTrekker &#x1f4dd; 11:03, 1 April 2014 (EDT)
 * Exactly, I endorse views of  User:Tsommer. Nannadeem 02:51, 1 April 2014 (EDT)

when to award?
From what I'm hearing, and again paralleling WP, I see awards given for consistent patterns of behavior as opposed to one-time acts. Someone cleans up a typo, or restructures your article for better flow, leave them a thank-you note on their talk page. Use a "thanks" notice or thankyou, maybe. OTOH, when you see someone doing that kind of thing consistently over a period of time, that guy deserves an award. I envision people having a section on their user page, or a subpage thereof, for collecting these. ⇔ ChristTrekker &#x1f4dd; 18:09, 1 April 2014 (EDT)
 * Should be considered by all admins + general voting (if found necessary). However, it is to be specified "when to award/criteria for award" so as to make a policy or rule and not a discretionary power/option. Nannadeem 07:41, 2 April 2014 (EDT)
 * If you want to start fleshing out a policy, that would be great. Should have criterion for consideration, maybe a proposal stage, maybe deliberation/discussion phase, how the final decision is made, and who bestows. Open for discussion are: are all of these necessary, and anything else I missed? ⇔ ChristTrekker &#x1f4dd; 09:35, 2 April 2014 (EDT)
 * I agree with everything here. I also would like to nominate Nannadeem, if its OK with him, to construct a rough draft policy from which we can build from.
 * As far as granting these awards/badges/merits, I agree there should be some sort of discussion phase, a quick YES/NO and a reason why or why not from general community sounds good. Also, seems that this voting/discussion should happen on the user talk page? --Tsommer 20:51, 2 April 2014 (EDT)


 * Ok Draft for "award criteria" shall be submitted soon. Me reading like matters at other wikis (e.g. en-WP).Nannadeem 14:06, 3 April 2014 (EDT)

It is my pleasure to submit hereunder "Draft for Award Criteria" for further consideration and consensus:


 * General Recognition & Appreciation


 * Special Recognition & Certification


 * In professional activities, qualifications earned through training or multiple years of practice, guarantee for a person’s ability to maintain certain standards in his/her work. Online collaborations influence their extent and diversity to produce content rivaling that of professional production.


 * It is proposed that a concept of virtual school (University) of compiler/writer of essays for researchers may be considered. Ph.D scholars/students may be invited for review of essays. For this service Phdian student may be honoured by a certificate from CW.


 * To ensure content quality, a self governing community composed of volunteers must develop complex policies, practices and processes.


 * There should be a separate portal for Pseudoscience for counter defence against our opponents who are using Pseudoscience subject as their weapon.

Thanks. Nannadeem 16:14, 5 April 2014 (EDT)
 * Thank you, Nannadeem! I'll let someone else more involved in policy vet this, though. ⇔ ChristTrekker &#x1f4dd; 09:19, 8 April 2014 (EDT)

who can bestow an award?
IMHO: anyone. ⇔ ChristTrekker &#x1f4dd; 18:11, 1 April 2014 (EDT)
 * Well perhaps anyone who has already achieved some sort of award would be better, if that cannot be implemented technically, maybe just admins should be able to.--Tsommer 20:53, 2 April 2014 (EDT)

Awards
I believe that awarding users to encourage them seems to be a good measure. It is necessary that this measure be under control of the administrators for this measure may unlikely to have the opposite effect: stimulating competition and discouraging new users. God bless, Luiz Alexandre Silva 14:40, 19 April 2014 (EDT)
 * I also think there should be forms of recognition to new users so that they feel part of the group soon. Best regards Luiz Alexandre Silva 17:49, 24 April 2014 (EDT)


 * Please explain your idea so that I could understand and support you.Nannadeem 12:58, 25 April 2014 (EDT)


 * I would like to first of all say that I have some difficulty building sentences in English (sometimes I had to ask for help to Google translator). So I would like to clarify that my intention is to be as kind and polite as possible. This is a concern I have, because many times I write a sentence and do not know if what I had intended to write was understood as unpolished. I think it should be some awards for users who are starting, in order to motivate them and encourage them to join the group of editors of CreationWiki. I did not imagine a premium in advance. I just suggested that we think in some. God bless. Luiz Alexandre Silva 16:50, 25 April 2014 (EDT)


 * I understand that you want granting award to editors of a group. This can be done easily by users to user, but criteria should be his contribution not the inclusion to group. Nannadeem 07:32, 27 April 2014 (EDT)


 * I think this is a great idea. Its always good to recognize people for exceptional work.
 * Personally though, I don't think its necessary to involve the admins, and feel we could leave this open so that any editor can acknowledge another with these accolades. We do something similar with featured articles and featured images. Although the admins have placed most of these awards, there is no policy in place excluding others from doing so.--Ashcraft - (talk) 14:35, 5 May 2014 (EDT)

Bump
I would love to see this implemented. And basically agree with the outline provided above. I really don't have much experience in wikis and so am not familiar with how start this off. If somebody can point me in the right direction to a how-to kind of article I will take over and start creating these.--Tsommer (talk) 19:13, 2 August 2017 (EDT)