Jump to content

User talk:AndyJones

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by AndyJones (talk | contribs) at 19:32, 5 January 2023 (Archiving to 4). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Previous Talk is archived at:

Barnstars From Archive

The Original Barnstar
For truly awesome and inspirational work on List of Shakespearean characters I award you the original barnstar SilkTork 00:16, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


The Outlaw Halo Award
To Andy Jones, for salvaging great works on pop culture for later use....cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:16, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(about the award)


The Barnstar of High Culture
I commend your hard work on William Shakespeare. Choosing to edit such a high-profile, controversial and research-intensive article is a mark of patience, perseverance and dedication to Wikipedia that is rarely seen. We clearly need more editors, such as yourself, who are willing to dedicate their time and energy to writing articles about their areas of expertise. Awadewit | talk 04:41, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


The Barnstar of Good Humour
In small recognition of your consistently witty edit-summaries, which are a joy to read, please accept this Barnstar of Good Humour. --ROGER DAVIES talk 18:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


The Half Barnstar
For your very fine work on Hamlet with Wrad --ROGER DAVIES talk 19:25, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


The Editor's Barnstar
I award you this Barnstar for your tireless and fine work on Hamlet, while at the same time staying in good spirits. I haven't had the chance to work with you directly much, but your contributions deserve some recognition (though it looks like you've already got lots of it.) Happy Editing! Bardofcornish (talk) 22:57, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


The Original Barnstar
…for your amazing rewrite of the Romeo and Juliet Screen adaptations section. It was good but your rewrite is magnificent. If we can achieve that quality for the rest of the article it'll be FA in no time! --Xover (talk) 11:43, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]