Fundraising 2010/Messages/Project specific

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search


Information

We are no longer taking banner suggestions through these pages. Please see Talk:Fundraising to discuss current banner messages.

Navigation
ALL banners Newly submitted By Language Vista-keditbookmarks.pngTesting Queue Tested
By type
Mission Based Informative Technology Jimmy Appeal Traditional Fundraising
Testimonials Humor Chapter Specific By Geography
Project-specific
Wikipedia Wikimedia Commons Wiktionary Wikibooks Wikinews
Wikiquote Wikisource Wikiversity Wikispecies MediaWiki

By project[edit]

Messages which apply to a project but not other.

Wikimedia Commons[edit]

Statistics[edit]


Proposed by:  ono . On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.


Proposed by:  ono . On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
  • I like the quantification, however it's lacking a call to action. --dgultekin 17:16, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
    Yeah, the donation appeal needs to be more evident. Maybe try adding something along the lines of "Help us keep it growing" linking to the donation page? Tempodivalse [talk] 20:27, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
  • The "and counting" was supposed to be that The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mono (talk • contribs) .

Worth a thousand words[edit]


Proposed by: Pruneau. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.


Proposed by: Pruneau. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
  • I like these two. --Nemo 08:10, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
  • I like the thousand-pictures one. Pictures are especially pertinent to Commons. --Pi zero 12:14, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
  • I like both, but especially the latter. Nice idea. Tempodivalse [talk] 14:15, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

It's all on Commons[edit]


Proposed by: Pruneau. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
  • Inspired by proposed banners for Wikipedia. Maybe we can find better images, or have an animated banner which rotates between the three descriptions, with a thumbnail of the image. Pruneau 09:32, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Too long and not very inspiring. Perhaps POTY are better? --Nemo 08:10, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
    • I give you a gift: «Quale struttura connette il granchio con l'aragosta, l'orchidea con la primula e tutti e quattro con me? E me con voi? E tutti e sei noi con l'ameba da una parte e con lo schizofrenico dall'altra?» («Which structure connects the crab to the lobster, the orchid to the primrose and all four to me? And me to you? And all six to the amoeba on one hand and the schizophrenic on the other hand?», Gregory Bateson, Mind and nature), quote of the day on it.wikiquote and a good performing one: find the original quotation and add images. ;-) --Nemo 21:58, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Make it possible[edit]


Proposed by: Pruneau. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.

Every picture tells a story[edit]


Proposed by: Pruneau. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.

Wiktionary[edit]

Wiktionary gives you...[edit]


Proposed by: Lexicografía. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.

Submitted on: 2010-09-24
Comments:

  1. Same idea as #Most dictionaries..., but made a little more concise. Still has representatives from Wiktionary's four major components - dictionary, translations, thesaurus & phrasebook. Lexicografía 19:45, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
  2. In general I really like this for Wiktionary though I'm not sure about the non donation links. In general I think it's best to only have that link at the end though part of me thinks it may be an interesting test if we have the time. Jalexander 20:01, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
  3. Very nice. --Yair rand 19:40, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
  4. I'm fond of this. I'd prefer not to give links to anything but the donation page, though, because I'm afraid people will get distracted by them and go there, rather than funneling where we want them... the donation page.  :) Philippe (WMF) 19:30, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
  5. Agree with Philippe, and also like this concept. Gigs 00:56, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
  6. Agree with Philippe. I like the concept but not its length. How about dividing it into 4 versions and give only a link to the landing page? --Aphaia 19:24, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
  7. Yes, avoid addiotional links. Aphaia may be right, but we could just try it for a day. --Nemo 07:30, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
  8. I'm with Philippe here. The slogan is long, but makes a good appeal, I think. Better not to distract the reader with excess linkage though. Tempodivalse [talk] 14:17, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Most dictionaries...[edit]


Proposed by: Lexicografía. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.

Submitted on: 2010-09-23
Comments:

  1. Neat format. Needs a link to the donation page. Still runs the risk of losing readers to the sub-links. Ocaasi 01:33, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
    That's what I was afraid of. Is there a way to make the sub-links the same color as the other text so as not to be quite so obvious? Lexicografía 02:18, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
    You could try just bolding the phrases instead of linking them. They'd look the same as they do now (actually that might confuse link-clickers). You can link the entire ad text, which has the benefit of uniformity, but kills the sub-links; that said, you could link the whole thing and add some visual distinction by putting the currently linked content in italics or something to change its appearance. Ocaasi 06:52, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
    Donation link added, as well as italics and an underline. I don't know if I like the italics. Lexicografía 14:17, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
    Yeah, it looked better before. Italics plus two-tone plus underline gets busy looking. Not sure what the best fix is. What about keeping the underline but losing the italics? Ocaasi 10:50, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
    Like zees? Lexicografía 12:13, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
  2. Way too long, probably one of the longest banner suggestions yet. I think people might not have that long of an attention span, but I really like the idea. Consider shortening it to 1-2 small questions or removing the opening line- "Most dictionaries won't tell you what......" just "do you know how to.....".Theo10011 18:09, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
    Yeah, I know it's long, but I was trying to cover four main aspects of Wiktionary — dictionary, translations, thesaurus & phrasebook. I'll see about making a shorter one. Lexicografía 18:35, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
  3. Shortened variation posted at #Wiktionary gives you.... Lexicografía 19:45, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
    Which is much better. I don't like this one. --Nemo 07:36, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
  4. Funny but way too long, and I'm afraid it only passes to the English Wiktionary. I bet e.g. Japanese Wiktionary lacks all these. --Aphaia 09:06, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
  5. Too long. Are there some shorter topics to choose?  fetchcomms 03:02, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
  6. Actually I like this one, although it doesn't quite work as well as the inverse slogan (#Wiktionary gives you...) above. If we're going to use it, it's better to remove the extra links or make them less obvious (or else the reader will see "ooh! linky", click something, and be distracted from the fundraiser). Tempodivalse [talk] 14:20, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Wiktionary statistics[edit]


Proposed by: Lexicografía. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.

Submitted on: 2010-09-20
Comments:

  1. 17,000 odd words for a dictionary is shamefully low, the urban dictionary probably has more definition. Theo10011 18:38, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
    It's a variable. When used on Wiktionary it'll say 2,000,000 something. Lexicografía 18:41, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
    oh sorry, didn't notice the variable tag earlier.Theo10011 13:35, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
    I've surrounded the NUMBEROFARTICLES with <nowiki> to make it clearer. --Yair rand 21:57, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
  2. I like this one, although for small wiktionaries it will need to be modified (because they won't necessarily have 400+ languages in them). Tempodivalse [talk] 14:22, 10 October 2010 (UTC)


Proposed by: Yair rand. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
I like this one. Other Wiktionary ideas could be playing up the multilingual stuff... specific words in different languages, talking about different Wiktionaries... Cbrown1023 talk 14:46, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
  • I like it. Short and to-the-point. Tempodivalse [talk] 14:38, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Nice. A simple goal with breathtaking scope. Just the thing to stir idealistic enthusiasm. --Pi zero 13:26, 4 October 2010 (UTC)


Proposed by: Dominic. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
  • Under most circumstances, one would think, it's not optimal for a plea for donation to emphasize the giving-up-something aspect of donation. --Pi zero 13:26, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
    • The concept was just to deliver the idea of donating to a dictionary in the form of dictionary definition. Maybe we should change the "definition" (which is just a shortened version of wikt:donate) to emphasize the contribution-to-a-cause aspect over the giving-away-of-money aspect. Dominic 23:58, 4 October 2010 (UTC)


Proposed by: Dominic. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
I mostly made up this number, but with 8.5 million articles, I think this is a conservative estimate. The English Wiktionary alone has about 3 million definitions with only 2 million articles. Dominic 07:29, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Any specific number should be very solidly founded, and probably very specific; asking for donations based on a vague figure doesn't feel right. Either specify exactly what has already been delivered, or describe the goal instead (above: "All words. All languages."). --Pi zero 13:26, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
    • Well, it's a concept. In theory, someone should be able to get a rough count of all definitions just like en.wikt has done on their project. Dominic 23:58, 4 October 2010 (UTC)


Proposed by: Dominic. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
  • This would work better with the interrogative changed to an imperative: "Words want to be free. Help them. // Donate now." --Pi zero 13:26, 4 October 2010 (UTC)


Proposed by: Dominic. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
We could add other more humorous ones, like "fork out," "shell out," and "cough up" if desired. (I think I like this text least, of the four.) Dominic 07:29, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Perhaps the words "synonyms" should be worked into this? --Pi zero 13:26, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikibooks[edit]


Proposed by: Yair rand 06:55, 19 August 2010 (UTC). On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
  1. I like this for Wikibooks, especially since it fits in directly with the new slogan. :-) Cbrown1023 talk 14:46, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
  2. I like this a lot too.  :) Philippe (WMF) 00:54, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Seamless. It will be hard to top this one. Adrignola 01:18, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. I love this, although it's a bit please-donate-we're-running-out-of-money-ish. But then again, it's impossible to create one that isn't. :) Well done. Kayau WP WB ZHWB WN 09:53, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikinews[edit]


Proposed by: Fetchcomms. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
Honestly, makes me think of Burger King. ;P Cbrown1023 talk 14:46, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
  • I like this one. Tempodivalse [talk] 14:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
  • I'm concerned that the "your way" sounds a bit like an invitation to editorialize. --Pi zero 09:04, 27 September 2010 (UTC)


Proposed by: Fetchcomms. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
I like it. Cbrown1023 talk 14:46, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
This one is good and catchy! Jopparn 20:12, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Short and to the point, makes a strong donation appeal. Tempodivalse [talk] 14:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Good. --Pi zero 09:04, 27 September 2010 (UTC)


Proposed by: Fetchcomms. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
  • Well, we don't get paid to broadcast ANYTHING, actually.... Philippe (WMF) 23:33, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
  • My first thought was that you meant that we will do it for free... Jopparn 20:12, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
  • LOL ... Jopparn, I was thinking the same thing, depends on what word you accentuate. I think it's a bit too ambiguous for comfort. :-) Nice thought though. Tempodivalse [talk] 14:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Alas, the word "propaganda" is probably going to weigh down any slogan that uses it. --Pi zero 09:04, 27 September 2010 (UTC)


Proposed by: Fetchcomms. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
I like the idea of this notice, but not really that Community-driven is the link... maybe we could add in a "Donate today" or "Support Wikinews"? Cbrown1023 talk 14:46, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
  • You got a good point there Cbrown1023. I to think it should be added, or else it becomes a bit confusing with the link. Jopparn 20:12, 11 September 2010 (UTC)


Proposed by: Fetchcomms. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
  • Where's the ask for money? :) Philippe (WMF) 23:33, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
  • I keep stumbling over "We are history." --Pi zero 09:04, 27 September 2010 (UTC)


Proposed by: BarkingFish. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
A little too political, I think. :-) Cbrown1023 talk 14:46, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I am not comfortable with this. Philippe (WMF) 23:33, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Strongly oppose this one - NPOV is extremely important in WN and this implies that WN is biased.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kayau (talk)
  • Yeah, this is too political. I think there might be more neutral ways to say the same thing. Tempodivalse [talk] 14:42, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


Proposed by: Mikemoral (talk) en.wn. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
  • Probably run into some trademark issues here. Philippe (WMF) 23:33, 3 September 2010 (UTC)


Proposed by: Mikemoral (talk) en.wn. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
  • I'm not sure it connects to an ask cleanly... Philippe (WMF) 23:33, 3 September 2010 (UTC)


Proposed by: Brian McNeil. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
Can you explain this to me? :-) Cbrown1023 talk 14:46, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
This is actually a well-used quote among Wikinewsies to highlight news is time-sensitive. Might not be the best fundraising slogan though, because it's not completely clear, and doesn't (IMO) directly appeal to the reader why we need money. Tempodivalse [talk] 14:29, 14 September 2010 (UTC)


Proposed by: Diego Grez. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
  • Not bad, although I'm not sure it's a powerful enough appeal. To me it doesn't really "connect" somehow. (At the same time though, I'm having trouble thinking of anything better.) Tempodivalse [talk] 14:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC)


Proposed by: n:Brian McNeil. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
  • Really? The ONLY non-profit? Are we sure? It seems to me that there are community-based local news coops... Philippe (WMF) 23:33, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
  • I have to second this, there are many non-profit citizen journalist projects out there. --dgultekin 17:15, 14 September 2010 (UTC)


Proposed by: Mikemoral (talk) en.wn. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
  • I renew my concern about trademarks. Philippe (WMF) 23:33, 3 September 2010 (UTC)


Proposed by: Mikemoral (talk) en.wn. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
  • This one of is quite catchy. I like it! Jopparn 20:12, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
  • I like it too, though I'd add do that. "And only you can help us do that". –Krinkletalk 05:38, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
  • But you can also report, and that participatory option is important. --Pi zero 09:04, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
  • I agree with Pi zero (as usual). Kayau WP WB ZHWB WN 12:19, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikiquote[edit]

If a man empties his purse into his head[edit]


Proposed by: Intelligentsium. On scope? yes. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
  • This one took me a few seconds to get. I'm not sure it's quite "pithy" enough. Philippe (WMF) 23:38, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Actually I really like this one, it may take a second but for a quote project I think its perfect (and may not actually be bad for others)> James (T C) 09:37, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
  • I like it. Slightly lengthy, but a great appeal. This would work well for a lot of projects, but especially fitting for Wikiquote. (I wonder if there's some way we can attribute it to Franklin?) Tempodivalse [talk] 14:37, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I prefer this one. It's meaningful. :) Kayau WP WB ZHWB WN 09:58, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Change[edit]


Proposed by: sonia. On scope? unsure. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
  • Barack Obama, naturally; no idea how to attribute him in the banner, though. sonia 20:56, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
  • i doubt that it's a good idea to adapt a controversial politician for a slogan, reflecting our values as a neutral NGO; best regards --Jan eissfeldt 22:28, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Well, "We need to be the change we wish to see in the world." is actually Gandhi :) Philippe (WMF) 23:38, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
  • I agree with Jan eissfeldt. Kayau WP WB ZHWB WN 09:58, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
  • I share Jan eissfeldt's concerns, it might be rather controversial to include this. I'm also not sure it will "connect" to the reader as an appeal for donations effectively. Tempodivalse [talk] 17:37, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Quoth the Wiki[edit]


Proposed by: Ningauble. On scope? yes. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.

Submitted on: 2010-09-12
Comments:

  1. New project-specific suggestion for Wikiquote. This is a play on a quote of Edgar Allan Poe that may or may not be famous enough for use in non-English Wikiquotes. ~ Ningauble 15:35, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
    • Alternatively, if shorter messages are testing better, one could drop the second line and just link "Evermore" to the landing page. ~ Ningauble 17:18, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
  2. evermore wouldn't work in german and i'm unsure about dutch and even more about the specific meaning in spanish (imho: eternamente (?)) but it seems fine in general --Jan eissfeldt 18:43, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
  3. 'tis the Raven I seek....... "Evermore" alone might not be notable enough for English Wikipedia or reminiscent of Poe but def. should be considered for Wikiquotes. Theo10011 03:03, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
  4. I love it for English Wikiquote. Even for other language sisters, it wouldn't work, but the basic idea I love greatly - they could find fine quotes to stimulate their readership in their own classics. --Aphaia 07:01, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
  5. If you've never heard or read "The Raven" then this would make absolutely no sense. It's too audience-specific. — CobraWiki ( jabber | stuff ) 19:54, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
  6. This would work on Wikiquote, but I don't know about on any other site. (Someone versed enough to be looking something up on Wikiquote would probably be versed enough to recognize this quote??) Lexicografía 21:56, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
  7. I like it, but I don't like 'posterity'. I suggest 2nd line of just "Keep knowledge free" or something. Chzz 01:01, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
  8. I do like this; but, let's face it, a lot of people will make no sense of it. Tyrol5 [Talk] 01:26, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
  9. I like this, but I'm afraid many of today's literature-ignorant readers will probably not understand it. Maybe stick with something a little easier to identify with. Tempodivalse [talk] 23:26, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
    The Wikiquote community displays a curious mixture of literary and pop culture interests. I think the poem works for both: generations of American schoolchildren could scarcely escape exposure to it, and the producers of The Simpsons thought it sufficiently resonant in popular culture to base an entire segment on it (featuring a memorable reading by James Earl Jones). ~ Ningauble 16:58, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
    Hm, interesting point. I don't recall hearing Poe being consistently referred to in the mass media, but then again I'm not really "into" today's pop culture, so perhaps I'm not in a position to judge that. If we decide most people can understand the quote, that's fine (and I personally think it's quite a creative slogan); I'm just cautious about confusing our overall audience. Tempodivalse [talk] 00:31, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Food for Thought[edit]


Proposed by: Ningauble. On scope? yes. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.

Submitted on: 2010-09-12
Comments:

  1. New project-specific suggestion for Wikiquote, though it might be worth testing community-wide. This is a play on a quote of René Descartes that is famous enough for use in most language wikis, but "food for thought" needs to be translated colloquially. ~ Ningauble 15:40, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
    • Alternatively, if shorter messages are testing better, one could drop the second line and just link "Wiki" to the landing page. ~ Ningauble 17:18, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
  2. Cogito ergo sum- nice play on the words but the literal translation would be "I think, therefore wiki", needs to be corrected.Theo10011 03:03, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
  3. It sounds a bit, well, artificial to me -- "Wiki" just doesn't really fit here (no rhyme, different parts of speech). —Pill (talk) 12:36, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
    • That is a fair criticism. Some contributors use "wiki" as a verb, but I forgot that the readers to whom we are appealing would not get it. ~ Ningauble 16:04, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
    Not a comment, just a small anecdote: There's a "Wikipedia song" in German, which is famous in the Community. The singer complains he's not notable for Wikipedia, therefor questions his own existence and claims that "Wikipedia ergo sum" :) --Church of emacs talk · contrib 17:03, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
    • Uh, wiki is a single person perfect present hence a verb, meaning "edit a wiki", so it means "I exist then I've edited a wiki." (joke). It's a fair criticism, Theo10011 and Pill. But still I love it. --Aphaia 07:06, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
  4. OK for Wikiquote, but I'd remove Help provide Food for thought. Chzz 01:04, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
  5. I agree with Chzz. This would be great for WikiQuote, or an animated one with this one, and others for en-wiki --WolfnixTalk • 01:56, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
  6. (Warning! Grammar and language freak here.) It's a nice concept, but from a grammatical point of view it doesn't make any sense (literally, "I think, therefore wiki"). What exactly are we trying to convey to the reader? As-is, I'm not sure this connects to a donation appeal effectively. Tempodivalse [talk] 23:18, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

To wiki or not to wiki[edit]


Proposed by: Ningauble. On scope? yes. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.

Submitted on: 2010-09-13
Comments:

  1. Project-specific suggestion for Wikiquote, though it might be worth testing community-wide. This is a play on one of the most famous quotes in the English language, but may not be suitable for use in non-English wikis. (Disclosure: ulterior motive to instigate a viral campaign for using "wiki" as a verb, as has happened with "Google.") ~ Ningauble 20:44, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
  2. As far as modifying quotes go, this has to be my favorite so far.Theo10011 23:05, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
  3. I don't think using "wiki" as a verb is a good idea, because a. it's not commonly used that way, and b. wiki != Wikipedia. Wikipedia is a wiki, but not all wikis are Wikipedia, and this is a very common misleading misconception. Getting people to say "wiki it" is not the same as "Wikipedia it", which sounds clunky.  fetchcomms 01:12, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
    • (a) Yes, "verbing wierds language." It's a good thing. (b) Um, yes, not all wikis are Wikipedia. This was a suggestion for Wikiquote. ~ Ningauble 13:01, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
  4. I like it ... you twisted the original quote in a witty way, Ningauble. But the former part is hard to be translate ... I'd say "to be a wiki or not, that is a question" instead, if I made a translation into Japanese. --Aphaia 16:17, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
  5. oooh, I like this one. DarkoNeko 15:57, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
  6. I really like this for Wikiquote --Deniz (WMF) 22:18, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
  7. Support. Recognizable, succinct, prompt flows easily to the action. Paulmnguyen 17:25, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
  8. I like the second line. The first line seems a bit... obvious, maybe. — CobraWiki ( jabber | stuff ) 20:01, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
  9. Love it! Although the "to be or not to be" part is quite cliché, it's a good cliché. Lexicografía 22:06, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
  10. OK for wikiquote; not good elsewhere Chzz 03:04, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
  11. I like a parodied quote, but focusing on the drive, "To donate or not to donate", well, that actually is the question. My76Strat 05:02, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
  12. I like this one; it's a cliche but with a nice twist that gives it freshness. Probably not too suitable for non-WQ projects though. Tempodivalse [talk] 21:28, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

2010: All these words are yours[edit]


Proposed by: Phantomsteve. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.

Submitted on: 2010-09-30
Comments:

A play on words from the "ALL THESE WORLDS ARE YOURS" text from the novel 2010:Odyssey Two -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 10:03, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
Incidentally, although translation of the message would be required, the book article is also on the Czech, Spanish, Farsi, French, Italian, Japanese, Polish, Portuguese, Russian, Slovak, Slovenian, Swedish, Ukrainian and Chinese Wikipedias -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 10:22, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
  1. It'd be funnier if I understood the reference... Lexicografía 12:05, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
  2. Vague reference, I think 2001:A space odyssey is the most famous book in the series, on top of which the line seems obscure to those who haven't read the novel.Theo10011 12:47, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
    My thinking was that as this is the year 2010, anyone who has read the book by Clarke (or seen the film) of 2010 would understand the reference and the play on words; those who haven't will read it as meaning something like "All the words in Wikipedia belong to you" - a double-meaning for both people who understand the reference and those who do not -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 13:00, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
    The thing is, the double-meaning part doesn't work if more than half the people don't get the reference, a similar issue was mentioned above with "all your base are belong to us" meme not being notable enough as evident from the comments. I was trying to point out that you chose the lesser-known book and quote from the series, its popularity might be the issue. With that said, the the quote is quite clever and works in the context considering this it's the year 2010, Bravo for that. Theo10011 14:40, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
    I agree with Theo10011. You may propose this for Wikiquote. --Nemo 07:12, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
  3. I thought it was a Captain Planet reference. --88.130.160.172 10:34, 1 October 2010 (UTC)


Italian[edit]

French[edit]

Wikisource[edit]


Proposed by: Pi zero. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
Found this on Wikiquote (of course :-). Attributed to E. P. Whipple. --Pi zero 14:34, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Added "Please donate", to make it clear that we're asking for something. --Pi zero 22:18, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
  • This is great. I was thinking for a long time for a good WS slogan, but this is the best of anything I've come up with so far. Tempodivalse [talk] 23:22, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
  • I like this, however we need a landing page appeal to complement it. An appeal from Wikimedia Australia take the opportunity to explain a bit about Commons. An appeal about Wikisource should explain the project a bit. I'd love to run an appeal which informs Australians about Wikisource, as most people have never heard about it. John Vandenberg 06:44, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Wikiversity[edit]


Proposed by: Adrignola. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
This is based on the main page slogan. Feel free to tweak it. Adrignola 01:14, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
  1. I like this one. Short and to the point. Tempodivalse [talk] 02:13, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikispecies[edit]


Proposed by: Fetchcomms. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.
  1. I like this one. Very fitting. Tempodivalse [talk] 17:35, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

MediaWiki[edit]


Proposed by: Adrignola. On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.



Proposed by:  ono . On scope? n/d. Tested? n/d. Income: n/d. Discarded: n/d.

Submitted on: 2010-09-07
Comments:

  1. For mediawiki.org.  ono  22:18, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
  2. I like the text, but it needs a donate link and I think this could be used elsewhere, too, perhaps modified for Wikipspecies using the concept of "free in the wild" or something animal-based.  fetchcomms 02:04, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
  3. What does "free" mean? Free licence, no charge or not captured? I imagine all sorts of issues in translating this. And again: How can it be free if I have to donate for it? V85 13:57, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
  4. I would like to test that one. I would just add two things: "Wikipedia: Because ideas want to be free. Donate now!" Maybe we could test that one aswell "Wikipedia: Because knowledge wants to be free. Donate now!". Till Mletzko (WMDE) 15:25, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
  • This is simply ripping off the MediaWiki tagline... Free means a lot of stuff; you ought to know that:
  1. Free as in no charge
  2. Free as in open source
  3. Free as in the very idea of a wiki
  • That sort of stuff.  ono  00:47, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
  1. I think this needs a donation link, right now it might not be obvious to the average reader that it's a fundraiser. I like the concept though. Tempodivalse [talk] 23:20, 10 October 2010 (UTC)