This is the talk page for the page "Wookieepedia:Wookieepedian of the Month."

This space is used for discussion relating to changes to the article, not for a discussion about the topic in question. For general questions about the article's topic, please visit Wookieepedia Discussions. Please remember to stay civil and sign all of your comments with four tildes (~~~~). Click here to start a new topic.

A description of the process might be nice, rather than just nomination and administrative decision. --SparqMan 17:08, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • It's really that simple. What would you like a description of? What makes a good Wookiepedian? WhiteBoy 18:11, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Oh sorry, when I read it I missed the explanation that you two just pick who you'd like to appreciate. --SparqMan 06:09, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • Hehe... Glad you see that now. (hmm...if I didn't know better I'd sense a little sarcasm there.) ;) WhiteBoy 21:49, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • How do y'all think it should work? I just see it as the admins taking the nominations, looking at the work that the users have done for the month, and choosing one. I think that admins should be excluded from the nominations since we're the "judges." And, while I'm on it...this in no way detracts from Riff's work AT ALL. I've told him before, but this site would not have worked if it weren't for all his efforts. He's the Wookieepedian of the Year/Decade/Whatever as far as I'm concerned! I have not had the time to put into this project that it would have taken to get it off the ground. But he's gotten in there and made it successful. He's been out there editing articles, spreading the word about the site, and being involved with the SWW community. He's an admin for a reason, and that reason is because he's dedicated to the site and making it run well. Here's a heart-felt pat on the back for Riff! WhiteBoy 21:49, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

We need a graphic[]

Can someone create a cool graphic we could post on the user page? Maybe a medal of some kind? WhiteBoy 18:14, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)


If you're going to waste time like this, why not at least make it democratic? Seems peculiar that Riffsyphon1024 gets to pick the winner. --SparqMan 19:17, 1 Jul 2005 (UTC)

  • Actually, WhiteBoy emailed me earlier on this and recommended Aidje, and I agreed. Also I looked at the requests page and there was only a tie for 2 votes. We need more vote if you'd like it to be more democratic. (Btw, I've been considering you for next month, its just that Aidje was here in the very beginning and helped out alot on Wookieefication). -- Riffsyphon1024 19:21, 1 Jul 2005 (UTC)
    • I might add that only administrators choose the WOTM, and frankly there's only me and WhiteBoy. We will create more in the future. -- Riffsyphon1024 19:23, 1 Jul 2005 (UTC)
  • Although it's not a purely democratic thing (just count the votes), personally I do take into consideration the number of votes a person gets. But other things come into it like how many articles the person has created/edited, the quality of the work they have done, the sheer effort they apparently have put into making the site better for all, the person's attitude, and maybe a few other things in there (like bribes) :p. WhiteBoy 02:48, 3 Aug 2005 (UTC)
    • Bribes, eh? :P -- Riffsyphon1024 15:02, 3 Aug 2005 (UTC)
      • Oh, didn't you get yours??? Sorry. :D WhiteBoy 05:45, 4 Aug 2005 (UTC)

A tie[]

Move to Wookieepedia:Wookieepedian of the Month?[]

Surely this feature is now popular enough not to be a subpage of the Community Portal? --Azizlight 05:43, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)


Can we institute a policy of one vote per user? It seems that it sort of defeats the purpose of voting if users can vote for more than one individual. I understand it can be hard to choose. Thoughts?--DannyBoy7783 19:34, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

  • I agree. Isn't the whole point of Wookieepedian of the Month for each user to choose one Wookieepedian that stands out above all others? --Azizlight 22:36, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
  • [crickets]
    • Though i guess it doesn't really matter ;-) --Azizlight 08:26, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
      • Can we some others to weigh in on this issue please?--DannyBoy7783 00:43, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
        • It makes sense. CooperTFN 00:47, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Can we also make a rule saying you can't nominate or vote for yourself? Everyone seemed to be following that rule up to a few months ago, anyway. — Silly Dan 02:16, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Yes to both the one-vote-per-person and no-self-nom proposals. --MarcK [talk] 02:20, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
    • I also agree with the no self-nom rule. It seems we have a handful of people in favor of this so if an admin could update the project page that would be great. It seems more official if they do it as opposed to me. Should the new rules stand for this WOTM or not take affect until next month?--DannyBoy7783 03:05, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
      • To avoid removing votes, I'd suggest we wait to make both changes (both of which I support) until next month. In the meantime, I'd prefer to keep my vote split for February so I don't have to un-vote for someone. (At least this is a short month.) — Silly Dan 03:08, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
        • Sounds reasonable to me.--DannyBoy7783 03:25, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
  • While I sorta agree, it seems my votes this last month could go either way but right now the vote is too close and would result in a tie between CooperTFN and Jaymach. May I suggest another double award? -- Riffsyphon1024 15:02, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
    • I removed my Cooper vote. Not because he deserves it less, but because Jaymach has been nominated for several months and I want to avoid another double award. --Imp 15:20, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
      • Oh, shoot. I put my vote back in again when I saw that removing it would lead to a draw of sorts. Meh, I suppose a double award is the only way out of this... :P --Imp 15:23, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


Is the award meant to be tied to the last month, ie is the voting on the contributions for the last month or for successive months? --Eyrezer 04:44, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Kinda like a featured article, it's not necessarily their work for just the prior month. It's featuring an outstanding Wookieepedian. WhiteBoy 20:25, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Interesting. Looking back, looks like that is something that's evolved in my mind over time. Looks like originally we were trying to pick who the best Wookieepedian the prior month was. But now, at least to me, it's what I stated above: "featuring" a Wookieepedian this month. There's so many good ones now that it'd be tough to pick who the best one was this past month. :D WhiteBoy 05:28, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
      • Interesting. What does that mean in terms people receiving the award twice? --Eyrezer 06:03, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
        • I think the "six months" rule is still valid, though we've not had any repeats yet, which is better IMO. :p WhiteBoy 19:03, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Post for Nominees[]

If you are nominated do you recive a post on your talk page? -Lord vader1414 17:03, 25 July 2006 (UTC)


Isn't it time to update the WOTM? --Eyrezer 05:21, 3 August 2006 (UTC)


Does it need to be an admin to roll this over? --Eyrezer 20:54, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Unlike other things, I believe so. At least that's what I gather from reading the main page; admins have final say over who is WOTM. I see it's been rolled over; I don't know who did it. - breathesgelatinTalk 00:52, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Determine by a Poll[]

Why not jsut leave everything nice, clean, and without really long blurbs from people. It also leaves a real proffesional feel to the whole thing. Every Nominee would be put in one giant poll box and everyone would just click on the User they wanted.

What do people think?

  • Polls are evil. They encourage obscurity and private voting, while not giving the users a chance to specify their reasons for support or opposition. - Sikon 08:25, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Ditto —Xwing328(Talk) 16:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
  • It is interesting though. Perhaps for something less important, where you don't have to put specific answers down.--IG-Prime(IG-2000)17px 16:29, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
  • We need reasons why they voted. Do this elsewhere. -- Riffsyphon1024 21:10, 6 February 2007 (UTC)


Hi, my question is, I can be autonominate for Wookieepedian of the month? Starkiller1996 11:20 5 Febraury 2007 (UTC)

  • If you mean can you nominate yourself as WOTM, the answer is no. StarNeptuneTalk to me! 19:30, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


It's March 2nd and we haven't found out who won for February yet-the feb votes are still up too. I'm not sure who is "in charge" of this, but I'm just giving a heads up.Korsa3 05:18, March 2, 2011 (UTC)

  • never mind Korsa3 05:19, March 2, 2011 (UTC)

No winner for December[]

I'm pulling rank as a Bureaucrat and declaring no winner for December. One of the stated responsibilities of a BC is to determine consensus in difficult cases, and I think this qualifies. We don't have clearly defined rules for how many votes are needed for someone to win WOTM, but it sure as heck should be better than a 2 supports-to-1 oppose voting turnout. The support votes from AV-6R7 and Corellian Premier don't even count because they voted past the Dec 1 cutoff. Three votes in total is in no way representative of a community's opinion of a user's merits, and no one should ever be highlighted on the Main Page under these circumstances. If you want to re-nominate Cevan for January's WOTM, go ahead. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 02:05, December 1, 2014 (UTC)

WOTM April 2017[]

Are we going to nominate somebody? It's been a while since anyone has. --Nostalgia of Iran (talk) 22:02, March 24, 2017 (UTC)

  • I think it's a little too late at this point. Let's keep an eye out, buckle down, and look for a good choice to nominate for May 2017. ProfessorTofty (talk) 20:12, March 26, 2017 (UTC)

How to nominate[]

How do I nominate, can someone tell me the source code for it?Unsigned comment by Cade999 (talk • contribs).

  • The source code is on the bottom of the page. Tommy-Macaroni 20:52, 4 January 2021 (UTC)