Wikipedia talk:Service awards

Simple English Wikipedia service awards ideas needed

These are the names and eligibility for each award as on the English Wikipedia. I would like to change the alternative names (in brackets) to something that is simpler, and something that reflects this wiki and its community. I would also like to make some minor adjustments to edit numbers, to make milestone edits on more rounded numbers. Suggestions for changes in a list below this one. Be creative. --Peterdownunder (talk) 06:14, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

English wikipedia names and numbers

• Novice Editor (or Burba) – 1 month and 200 edits
• Apprentice Editor (or Novato) – 3 months and 1,000 edits
• Journeyman Editor (or Grognard) – 6 months and 2,000 edits
• Yeoman Editor (or Most Excellent Grognard) – 1 year and 4,000 edits
• Experienced Editor (or Grognard Extraordinaire) – 1.5 years and 6,000 edits
• Veteran Editor (or Tutnum) – 2 years and 8,000 edits
• Veteran Editor II (or Grand Tutnum) – 2.5 years and 12,000 edits
• Veteran Editor III (or Splendid and Majestic Tutnum) – 3 years and 16,000 edits
• Veteran Editor IV (or Grand and Glorious Tutnum) – 3.5 years and 20,000 edits
• Senior Editor (or Complete and Perfect Tutnum of the Encyclopedi) – 4 years and 24,000 edits
• Senior Editor II (or Exhaustive and Pluperfect Tutnum of the Encyclopedia) – 4.5 years and 35,000 edits
• Senior Editor III (or Supreme Tutnum of the Encyclopedia) – 5 years and 50,000 edits
• Master Editor (or Illustrious Looshpah) – 6 years and 75,000 edits
• Master Editor II (or Almighty Looshpah) – 8 years and 100,000 edits
• Sovereign Editor (or Redoubtable Togneme) – 10 years and 250,000 edits
• Ultimate Editor (or Rocambolesque Bordonth) – 12 years and 500,000 edits
• Vanguard Editor (or Laureate Kipzock) – 15 years and 1,000,000 edits

Possible SEWP names and numbers

• Novice – 1 month and/or 200 edits -
• Apprentice – 3 months and/or 1,000 edits -
• Journeyman – 6 months and/or 2,000 edits -
• Yeoman – 1 year and/or 3,000 edits -
• Experienced – 1.5 years and/or 5,000 edits -
• Veteran – 2 years and/or 7,500 edits -
• Veteran II – 2.5 years and/or 10,000 edits
• Veteran III – 3 years and/or 15,000 edits
• Veteran IV – 3.5 years and/or 20,000 edits
• Senior – 4 years and/or 30,000 edits
• Master – 5 years and/or 40,000 edits
• Grand Master – 7 years and/or 50,000 edits
• Ultimate Editor – 8.5 years and/or 75,000 edits

Why?

Is there a real need to introduce such awards, and do the limits need to be so stringent? For example, I have 11k edits but i've only been here "about a year", so could only get the 1 year award.

Furthermore, such awards promote editcountitis because people will make pointless edits just to inflate their edit count for the next award. People shouldn't need shinys to reward them for editing; reward should come from people simply saying "Thanks!" and from the feeling that they may have helped someone learn something.

Completely pointless.

Goblin 10:46, 13 January 2010 (UTC) I ♥ Juliancolton!

Well put, the reward should come from people saying thanks, and that is what these are for, a recognition of a milestone. In regard to the other issues, I have suggested the "and/or", so that you (for example) would get the 10k edit recognition. Other editors, who don't have "editcountitis" get a recognition for length of service, wins all round. I went looking for something to celebrate Eptalon's 30,000 edits and found this. It is just meant to be a simple thanks for time and effort. --Peterdownunder (talk) 11:01, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

...but is 10k edits of "nothing" really worth thanking? 10k stub sorting, 10k word replacement, 10k discussions? Not really, no. Editors can get thanks and recognition through vandal fighting barnys, (V)GAs and DYKs. They don't need unfair "service awards" - awards the recognise nothing. Goblin 11:06, 13 January 2010 (UTC) I ♥ Kennedy!

That is the point, this just recognises time and effort. Although 10k discussions is a frightening thought. Peterdownunder (talk) 11:22, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

But why would we want to recognise the time and effort that doesn't help the wiki in the slightest? Why do people need recognition. I can see no benefits of this at all. Furthermore, why are we using editor's names...? That could easily cause offence. Goblin 11:57, 13 January 2010 (UTC) I ♥ Kennedy!

Editor names was an idea, but failed, so now removed. Might just stick with the basics Peterdownunder (talk) 12:08, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

• Dunno what I should say to this... I've mixed feelings. In the one way it could become something like an edit counti award. I think it is more important to give people awards when they contributed to good/very good articles and DYK. I think we already have awards for vandal fighting and so on. Every time when I closed a GA/VGA as successful in the past, I left the user at least a message that the promotion request was successful with congrats and some nice words. I think (at least I would like it) to see barnstars for this. We could use different barnstars for lets say 1 GA, 5 GAs, 10 GAs and so on as well as for 1 VGA, 5 VGAs, 10 VGAs. At all a thanks to people for their contribution and time they spent for the wiki is a good idea. We need sometimes to remember that all people work here voluntary and spend their free time here. Also we should at least from time to time assume good faith and don't always think the user does his edits just for the barnstars... I see a barnstar just as a very nice way to say thank you. Even if the minor edits (such as mentioned above: word replacements, etc.) are not that helpful, but they are still needed. I did during the last days hundreds of minor fixes, if they were needed or not. I don't care about my edit count. It doesn't matter for me if I just have 1k, 5k, 10k or 25k edits. Even if people just do stub sorting, they do something to help this wiki. I think a thank you from time to time isn't that bad to keep our regulars happy. In my point of view, it doesn't hurt to give a get a barnstar for edits/time you spent here or whatever. -Barras ^talk 14:16, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

• Our oldest active editor registered in 2005; most registered from 2007. If you are going for years, perhaps they should be updated to reflect this. — μ 14:48, Wednesday January 13 2010 (UTC)

• On en they use years and edits as a way to stop editcountitus to get the award. You need both to qualify for the award, its not an and/or. -DJSasso (talk) 15:08, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
• I agree with DJSasso. Change the and/or to and and perhaps change the numbers and time to be more accurate of this particular Wikipedia and I have no problem with it. ···Lauryn 15:20, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

• I would like to point out that Service Awards on enWP are undergoing a major revamp. See the talk page on enWP for more info. Griffinofwales (talk) 17:23, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

  Yeah I was all like wooo I achieved Master on en back in December when I moved past 5 years...then I got notified on my talk page on en today that I no longer qualify for Master...but because I achieved it while I did qualify I get to keep it lol. -DJSasso (talk) 13:32, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but I (personally) don't see the need for such rewards. I've always been of the mind that service is its own reward. I've been around WMF since 2003 (anon) and 2006 (declared username [fr33kman]) and have always edited because I believe in the projects of WMF (simpleWP in particular). I, personally, don't need kudos aimed at me; the fact I've been promoted to sysop, crat and CU are more than enough evidence that the community both trusts and respects me as an editor and a human being. I, personally, need no more. But, hey, that's just my opinion. :) fr33kman 06:20, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

• After more thought, reading the above, discussion on IRC, I think I have clarified my thoughts on this. This is a service award only. It says nothing about quality, that's what we have barnstars for - and we probably need a few more of those too (next task). These service awrds should be about what happens on this wiki, eg length of service, achievable edit count etc. Yes some people may make "unnecessary" edits to boost their count, but really, what does it matter. The important thing here is not to get the award, but to give it. It is a way to say thanks for the effort, thanks for your time. It should be possible for any regular editor to achieve the standard. Peterdownunder (talk) 11:04, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

New suggestion

SEWP names and numbers

• Novice Editor – 1 month and 200 edits -
• Apprentice Editor – 3 months and 600 edits -
• Journeyman Editor – 6 months and 1200 edits -
• Yeoman Editor – 1 year and 2,500 edits -
• Experienced Editor – 1.5 years and 3750 edits -
• Senior Editor I – 2 years and 5,000 edits -
• Senior Editor II – 2.5 years and 6,250 edits
• Senior Editor III – 3 years and 7,500 edits
• Master Editor I – 3 years and 10,000 edits
• Master Editor II – 3 years and 20,000 edits
• Master Editor III – 3 years and 30,000 edits
• Grand Master Editor – 3 years and 40,000 edits
• Ultimate Editor – 3 years and 50,000 edits

The edit count is set at a level that reflects a reasonable amount of activity, without having to do things to "inflate" the edit count. It also has more awards at lower levels to keep new editors interested and involved. It also shows that editors who have been working on the wiki for longer probably need less encouragement to keep going - and it will not be getting an award that is the reason. After three years, the edit count is set to award milestones. Peterdownunder (talk) 11:32, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

• Would look fine to me. As I already said above, I've no objections for this. However, I'd like to see awards for quality as well (see my post above). -Barras ^talk 11:50, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

  Barnstars is for quality. Griffinofwales (talk) 12:46, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

  Err, this ones proposed here are just for numbers and time... Quality is DYK, GA, VGA... Numbers are Quantity. -Barras ^talk 13:04, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Still no. Goblin 12:41, 14 January 2010 (UTC) I ♥ GoblinBots!

• Support, whynot? Griffinofwales (talk) 12:46, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
• I'd personally prefer this suggestion better than the last - but I've been here for almost a year and haven't attained 1000 edits yet. I have no problems with the awards. Nifky^{^} 12:52, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
• Looks good. These numbers/times make more sense to me. Lauryn 14:39, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

This proposal is probably more suited to userspace, not metaspace. — μ 20:30, Thursday January 14 2010 (UTC)

• This format seems to make a lot more sense. I'd support this no problem. :) fr33kman 01:40, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
• This is a very nice idea. Everyone feels really happy when they get a reward and they feel that their efforts are appreciated. These ribbons, I am sure, would make someone feel proud of being a part of Wikipedia. ···Classical Esther (혜란)
• Better than the previous one, but still, the year requirements are on the higher side. Not entirely opposed to this though. Pmlineditor ∞ 08:33, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
• Agree with PM: the year requirements are on the high side. Yottie ^=talk= 11:15, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

What if you've been here, for instance, 1 month, and you have done 1,000 edits? Are you still a novice? Classical Esther 03:15, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

It is an award for length of service, while achieving a reasonable number of edits. So yes at one month with 1000 edits you are a novice, a very busy novice. Peterdownunder (talk) 03:55, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Higher levels

Change: I know this discussion is over, but I think that at the higher levels (3 year), the time requirements should be increased. While I know that few have reached 3 years, it seems odd to put so many awards at the same time level. I suggest a 6 month increase per level. Thoughts? Griffinofwales (talk) 22:13, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

This is a wikipedia, discussion is hardly ever "over". I think my thoughts when designing this were that we only had a couple of editors ever stay longer than three years, and they might not have needed the motivation from an award. But thinking about your comment, without the increases in the time, it does become an "edit count" award rather than a "service award". Your suggestion at higher levels could look like this:

• Master Editor I – 3.5 years and 10,000 edits
• Master Editor II – 4 years and 20,000 edits
• Master Editor III – 4.5 years and 30,000 edits
• Grand Master Editor – 5 years and 40,000 edits
• Ultimate Editor – 5 years or more, and 50,000 edits

Peterdownunder (talk) 23:47, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. SS✞^(Kay) 09:34, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

• Just changed it this way as I had the same thought right now. Since no one commented after such a long time, I don't see a reason not to do it. -Barras (talk) 08:14, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Further time between awards

This wiki has been around since 2001 and more years or edits may be necessary. The last actual discussion here was 12 years ago. Maybe the time between edits being increased or adding more awards may be reasonable. MrMeAndMrMe_{Let's talk} 17:04, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Wow! I was part of that discussion. Get a proposal together and let's talk about it! Griff (talk) 17:07, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Griff. Good to see you again.

Current Situation:

• Novice Editor
• Apprentice Editor
• Journeyman Editor
• Yeoman Editor
• Experienced Editor
• Senior Editor I
• Senior Editor II
• Senior Editor III
• Master Editor I
• Master Editor II
• Master Editor III
• Grand Master Editor
• Ultimate Editor

New idea:

1. Novice Editor - 200 edits 1 month
2. Apprentice Editor - 750 edits 3 months
3. Journeyman Editor - 1500 edits 6 months
4. Yeoman Editor - 3000 edits 1 year
5. Experienced Editor - 4500 edits 1.5 years
6. Veteran Editor - 6000 edits 2 years
7. Senior Editor I - 9000 edits 2.5 years
8. Senior Editor II - 12000 edits 3 years
9. Senior Editor III - 15000 edits 3.5 years
10. Master Editor I - 23000 edits 4 years
11. Master Editor II - 33000 edits 4.5 years
12. Master Editor III - 43000 edits 5 years
13. Grandmaster Third-Class Editor - 55000 edits 6 years
14. Grandmaster Second-Class Editor - 67000 edits 7 years
15. Grandmaster First-Class Editor- 69000 edits 8 years
16. Ultimate Editor - 95000 edits 10 years

Journeyman-Veteran increments in 3000 edits per year(8 per day).

Senior Editor-Senior Editor III increments in 6000 edits per year(16 per day).

Master Editor I-III increments in 10000 edits per year(27 per day).

Grandmaster increments in 12000 per year(32 per day).

For ultimate editor, you need 13000 per year(35 per day).

This biggest part of this is that the time and edits between periods is more stable and less messy like the current situation. I don't know what the books, ribbons, etc. would look like, this is just something to get it going. MrMeAndMrMe_{Let's talk} 17:36, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

I like even numbers so how about, starting with Master Editor I..

• Senior Editor III - 15000 edits 3.5 years
• Master Editor I - 22500 edits 4 years (+7500 & 6 months)
• Master Editor II - 30000 edits 4.5 years (+7500 & 6 months)
• Master Editor III - 40000 edits 5 years (+10,000)
• Grandmaster Third-Class Editor - 50000 edits 6 years (+10,000)
• Grandmaster Second-Class Editor - 60000 edits 7 years (+10,000)
• Grandmaster First-Class Editor- 75000 edits 8 years (15,000)
• Ultimate Editor - 100,000 edits 10 years (+25,000)

What do you think? Griff (talk) 17:43, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

That sounds good! MrMeAndMrMe_{Let's talk} 17:53, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

This is the full plan(blank templates tbd):

Number	Name	Edit number	Length requirement	Ribbon
1	Novice Editor	200 edits	1 month	This editor is a Novice Editor and has the right to show this Service Badge.
2	Apprentice Editor	750 edits	3 months	This editor is an Apprentice Editor and has the right to show this Service Badge.
3	Journeyman Editor	1500 edits	6 months	This editor is a Journeyman Editor and has the right to show this Service Badge.
4	Yeoman Editor	3000 edits	1 year	This editor is a Yeoman Editor and has the right to show this Service Badge.
5	Experienced Editor	4500 edits	1.5 years	This editor is an Experienced Editor and has the right to show this Service Badge.
6	Veteran Editor	6000 edits	2 years	Template:SA-veteran I
7	Senior Editor I	9000 edits	2.5 years	This editor is a Senior Editor I and has the right to show this Iron Editor Star.
8	Senior Editor II	12000 edits	3 years	This editor is a Senior Editor II and has the right to show this Bronze Editor Star.
9	Senior Editor III	15000 edits	3.5 years	This editor is a Senior Editor III and has the right to show this Silver Editor Star.
10	Master Editor I	22500 edits	4 years	This editor is a Master Editor I and has the right to show this Gold Editor Star.
11	Master Editor II	30000 edits	4.5 years	This editor is a Master Editor II and has the right to show this Platinum Editor Star.
12	Master Editor III	40000 edits	5 years	This editor is a Master Editor III and has the right to show this Plutonium Editor Star.
13	Grandmaster Third-Class Editor	50000 edits	6 years	Template:SA-grandmaster III
14	Grandmaster Second-Class Editor	60000 edits	7 years	Template:SA-grandmaster II
15	Grandmaster First-Class Editor	75000 edits	8 years	This editor is a Grand Master Editor and has the right to show this Nobelium Editor Star.
16	Ultimate Editor	100000 edits	10 years	This editor is an Ultimate Editor and has the right to show this Meitnerium Editor Star.