Note: This was a draft that was never proposed. WP:DTQ does the same thing, and this is simply historical.
The Midas award rewards editors who not only make edits to save articles or other Wikipedia content from deletion, but then further improve them to meet another selected content guideline.
1. The content must have been nominated for deletion via an XfD, PROD, or speedy process.
1a. The nomination must be unconnected to the editor receiving the award.
2. The editor must have made his or her first substantial improvements to the content during the deletion discussion or within the same day as declining a speedy deletion or PROD template.
2a. Clearly hopeless XfD nominations which were WP:SNOWed keep before any improvements were made will not meet eligibility criteria.
2b. Content which has been deleted is eligible if the article is re-created, successfully addressing the issues which led to its initial deletion, within one month of its most recent deletion. The intent of this clause is to reward those who arrive "too late" to save an article, without creating incentives to simply fish through deleted content.
3. The editor must have made substantial improvements which resulted in the article being selected for one of Wikipedia's recognized content guidelines: Good Articles, Did you know?, and Featured Content.
3a. This is the only limitation to the types of content eligible for a Midas award.
4. The same editor must have made edits that both rescued or restored the article from deletion (section 2), and resulted in it being selected as recognized content (section 3). There is no time limit between the two required categories of edits, but neither does a distinction need to be made if one editor's work accomplishes both steps simultaneously.
Content recognized at WP:FOUR is not compatible with WP:MIDAS, since the Four Award requires that content be improved by its creator, while this award requires that content be initially improved during the deletion process.
