I love the name for this. Bawolff 02:41, 3 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WikiLove for WikiLove[edit]

I love the concept, I love the name, and I love the mockups. Bravo! One cautionary thought that I'm sure you're already thinking about: Some of the whimsy/humor may not translate into other cultures. Is a cookie a meaningful form of gifting in African countries, for example? Really looking forward to seeing this experiment happen. --Eekim 04:58, 11 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I like the concept, though I see it as a measure of cheering up people who are increasingly fed up with things. All the other my do well without it. I am sure it will be possible to localise and not just internationalise this extension to be. On dewiki we use gummi bears instead of bickies. Do not ask me why. :) Cheers --[[kgh]] 10:19, 14 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Staying sincere[edit]

I think a key part of whether this improves Wikis will be whether it's perceived as sincere. In the best scenario, it's a tool that helps offer encouragement and praise - like a the "tool" of using a smile or a pat on the back in real life. In the worst scenario, it could devalue barnstars and other awards to something not much better than a random "like" click on Facebook.

I think a key to "keeping it sincere" would be to REQUIRE a personalised message. Don't allow automated "spamming" of "appreciation". And don't even suggest anything specific for the personalised message - just let people add some text as to why the award is given. That way, it won't feel like you just got praise from a bot. Cheers Ingolfson 06:29, 11 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am not thrilled when they look a tad generic. If you look at the award pages on English wikipedia, there are lots of unusual and quirky ones to bring a smile to wiki-faces...Casliber 13:34, 11 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree that a system like this should ultimately be designed with a lot of attention to tiny details and openness to the kind of creativity that's at the core of the current barnstar economy ;-) --Eloquence 22:57, 11 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please don't.[edit]

Come on. Just write an article. You'll understand. Or not. Thanks. --Mono 01:24, 12 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I disagree that apathy is a virtue here. Or anywhere, actually.--Jorm (WMF) 04:32, 12 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To play devil's advocate, do we really want people who are motivated mostly by external social "prizes". If someone is only contributing to get a cookie, a lot of time will be spent giving out cookies. Ideally people should be contributing because they enjoy doing so, or have some other internal motivation. The act of writing an article should be the prize. (Just a thought). Bawolff 18:20, 12 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]