Memory Alpha

Memory Alpha:User projects/Awards committee

< Memory Alpha:User projects

Revision as of 17:04, October 22, 2007 by Sulfur (Talk | contribs)

40,407pages on
this wiki

This committee, of which anyone and everyone is a member, is a place where Awards are to be:

  1. Suggested
  2. Agreed upon
  3. Brought forth and Voted upon (if necessary)

Suggested Awards

Please put any suggestions bulleted with your signature underneath. Other users may agree or disagree with your suggestions, and they may be removed if disagreed with after a period of ten days, or placed in the Voting section (if necessary) after a period of five days if it has 5 votes and no disagreements.


  • This is a Wikipedia system that has been used at least once in the history of Memory Alpha. Broik gave the "Barnstar of Persistence" to Bgtribble on December 1, 2005, with some inspiration from Vedek Dukat. I'd like to propose instituting the continued use of Barnstars with some discussion on its viability and related suggestions.--Tim Thomason 09:59, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Archivist of the Month

  • Although the name might need to be changed, I suggest a continual practice of nominating and voting on the "best" archivist at the end of every month. A stipulation could be that this award be only given to a user once every 12 months. However, a realize a possible problem there, and am open to suggestions.--Tim Thomason 09:59, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Editor Of the Month

  • If it's possible, the person with the highest number of edits at the end of each month.--//Mac Lover TalkContribs\\ 02:10, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Chances are good that would be fairly reliably User:Renegade54 or myself on a fairly regular basis.  :) Admittedly, both of us make a lot of minor edits (ie, small typos, cleanup, lk adding, etc) but that still doesn't discount us making some serious edits. Or do you only mean major edits? And in that case, how would you count those?
Note, I do think that this is a bad idea. -- Sulfur 02:18, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree -- and although I don't disagree that this site needs a lot of grammarical and cosmetic fixes to it, the creation of some semi-pointless competition to get the most edits has the potential of being self defeating. That's not what these "awards" should be about. It should be for recognizing individuals for doing what they have been doing all along. As any award system should go, it should really be quality over quantity, unless we are referring to large quantities of high quality work. I, on the other hand, believe that any Joe Blow can make 100 edits a day doing minor grammarical work or formatting, but really not expand the content of the site any. I think the welcome statement on the front page says it all, in that respect: "to create the most definitive, accurate, and accessible encyclopedia and reference." I think it is those who take the time to do research and make an effort to create, by starting new, competant articles, or enhancing existing references, stubs, and pna's, or adding images is going above and beyond, and truely fulfills that mission statement. --Alan del Beccio 02:34, 26 August 2006 (UTC)


This space is for awards (usually recurring awards) already agreed upon by the committee, and are to be voted upon by other archivists.

Award Winners

This section is for current and former holders of the various MA awards.

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki