Talk:Logo
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
[edit] Older discussion
Would anybody object if I moved all logo pages here (as part of the Logo/ hierarchy)? There seem to be a ton of logo pages around, mostly past relevance and quite confusing. Sure, it's not a big deal, but it might be minorly useful for the small wikipedias. -- Kowey 12:49, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- Ok i tried to move stuff but realising the probably folly of my ways, I reveresed the changes and just focused on writing this index instead. Hopefully it will be useful. -- Kowey 12:28, 29 Nov 2003 (UTC)
[edit] Permissions statement (unofficial)
moved from main page on 2004-07-21. See Logos; more detailed descriptions of how logos can be used will be linked from there in the near future.
This permission statement is provisional. Nohat will remove this paragraph to agree with the permission.
All non-competitive publications in any medium may use this image in discussions of the Wikipedia itself or as an example of a wiki. Please use it freely. No individual permission requests are required. If your presentation guidelines favor a more colorful image, you may modify it a little using such things as overall color washes or graduated color. You may remove the text if you indicate that it is from the Wikipedia in some other way within your item.
As a courtesy to our designer, we request, but do not require, that you release any derivative work under the GFDL and/(or much less favored, but acceptable) provide a copy via email to david@nohat.net . You do not need to do this prior to publication, particularly if deadlines are looming, but, if able, please do it as reasonably promptly as your normal business processes allow. This email account uses TMDA as an anti-spam measure, so you will be asked to confirm that you're a human.
Competitive publications are competing encyclopedias and related publications, who may use the GFDL license, fair use, if applicable, or any other applicable right they may have under the copyright law of their jurisdiction.
[edit] Wikimedia button
Daniel Mayer proposed on foundation-l to put "A Wikimedia project" below the logo of each of our projects to avoid confusion whether a wiki is a Wikimedia project or not. [2] Jimbo suggested to put it in the place of the GNU FDL button because we already say "GNU FDL" in the text portion of the projects footer. [3]
Here are two drafts for such a button similar to the MediaWiki button:
Comments are welcome. -- Arne (akl) 18:48, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Like it a lot. Definitely support. I prefer the top version because it's more compact.--Eloquence 18:54, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- I prefer the second version because it avoids confusion about which Wikimedia Organization (Foundation or one of its Chapters) is responsible for the site. -- Arne (akl) 19:17, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
-
- Good point. One way to avoid the confusion is that the button will link to the foundation website. So for me the short version is slightly better for that reason. Jimbo Wales 23:45, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
-
-
- no more objections. -- Arne (akl) 10:33, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
-
- I like both, but the second one a lot more, mainly for reasons of æsthetic. James F. (talk) 19:44, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- I favour the first version - the less text, the better. --Elian 22:52, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- I slightly prefer the second version, because the "A" stands too alone in the first version. Fruggo 16:59, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Nice, but you do realise that every language will want a version of its own? -- Arwel 02:03, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
[edit] General issues
The rights on the logos should be held by the Wikimedia foundation. At the moment, legal status of most of the logos is unclear (?). Are they under GNU FDL? Can everyone use them for everything? Who is the author? Whom and where to ask for localized versions or high resolution versions? If you know some answers, please fill them in below. --Elian 01:55, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)
[edit] A small question about the logo
Are the different scripts in the Wikipedia logo supposed to be somehow representative of the word "Wikipedia" in different languages? The Japanese characters at the top of the Wikipedia logo look like ワ (wa) and イ (i). But the first two characters of "Wikipedia" (in Japanese) are ウ (u) and ィ (small i) as you can see in the Japanese version of the logo. Notice the small extra stroke at the top of the first character. Should the logo actually have said "ウィ", or does "ワイ" have some special significance that I haven't thought of? -- 82.32.191.92 17:26, 5 June 2006 (UTC) (Contact me)
[edit] Hindi text
The Hindi portion of the logo is not composed correctly. The symbol for short "i" should be placed just before "w" for it to be understood as "wi".
[edit] Correcting Language Issues
The current Hindi characters on the logo are unintelligible. Nāgarī is a very flexible script, and may be written with various levels of style; however, this is one of those few examples of what you can not do. To explain:
व (va) also substitutes for the English wa. If you wish to create wi, you must use the dependent vowel ligature (-i) with the consonant व (wa) to signify that the vowel has "changed" from a short "a" to a short "i" – वि (wi)
The current image is incorrect because the "i" ligature is not associated with a consonant. In this form, the segment is impossible to read intelligibly – wa?i
The Wikipedia logo is an image reproduced in various forums. For example, an illustration was recently printed in the Miami Herald (August 22, 2006) with these issues clearly apparent. It is important for any and all simple language issues on the logo to be corrected.
--Aryamani 08:33, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Copyright status
Those blank lines next to "legal status" for half the logos are a bit worrying. What is the status of commons:Image:Wikiquote-logo.png - GFDL or not? And did Wikiversity really pick a logo that is actually part of a LGPL icon set? Good move...
Some official word either way would be appreciated, thanks --pfctdayelise 13:42, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Colors
This page should make some mention that logos for individual projects should not use the RED/BLUE/GREEN colors of the Wikimedia logo - and should avoid a logo that resembles that logo - see: Talk:Wiktionary/logo/archive-vote-4#Changing colors for a discussion of why those colors should be avoided. Trodel 17:03, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] commons:Category:Wikimedia Community Logos
WarX has proposed some freely licensed "community logos", which wouldn't be subject to the restrictions that apply to official WMF logos. I'd like to know the WMF's take on this, and if there are any objections. -- Duesentrieb 13:56, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Temporary Variants
Why wouldn't an american-independence-day themed one for July 4 be neutral? I mean, as long as other holidays got similar consideration - bear with me here a minute. There are five selected anniversaries for 4 July. Of those, three (the US, Alice in Wonderland, and Hawai'i) are, i think, "logo fodder" in that it would be possible to make a good iconic image based on them. (if anyone wants to try to tackle the other two, they're welcome to it).
So let's think of it this way - what are the top 20, 50, 100 most notable (in a modern context) things in Selected Anniversaries?
Or, even - the selected anniversaries get one picture. Clearly there's some process by which that picture is chosen, so why not a similar process for an altered mainpage logo? An additional criteria could be "how good of a logo would it make" in addition to being notable enough to, essentially, be featured on every single page for a whole day. I think 20 July would qualify with the moon landing, for two reasons - it is unquestionably a milestone event for humanity, and - well, a picture of the moon would make a pretty good one-day replacement texture for the puzzle sphere.
I think that the idea that recognizing american independence day is an oversimplification - sure, it would be unacceptable to say "the majority of us are americans and we all voted to have an american flag" - but, wouldn't it be more acceptable to say "the signing of the declaration of independence is a highly notable event, it has had significant impact on the world, and is observed by many people in the world today. How about a declaration-of-independence themed logo of some sort?"
In other words, you haven't stated your argument why a US flag logo for july 4th would be inappropriate, and I think the unstated argument here relies on a straw man. --Random832 03:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Errors in current logo
There are 2 major errors in the current Wikipedia globe logo, and other minor problems. They've been noticed but unfixed for at least a year.
w:User talk:Ambuj.Saxena/Wikipedia-logo is the most centralized discussion/link compilation that I know of. (There's even a petition at that link's projectpage)
Nohat has explained the problems with correcting the errors. But noone seems to have a solution. Hence I'm mentioning here, and w:Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Wikipedia Logo - errors and various other places. Thanks for any help. Quiddity 19:09, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
- It is possible to correct the errors by hand. For example I created the image to the right, which is the normal logo with the errors mentioned in [4] corrected. Would people be interested if I tried creating a logo with the other errors corrected? The response to my modified logo was underwhelming. Thue 13:53, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- I am new to this 'problem' but honestly Thue, that looks great. And I think I've got a pretty good eye for these things. What is the issue? I mean, all I've read is that the original creator said it is impossible to fix (to which I thought 'not true' but did not reply since this person's post was over two years ago), and then I read all the complaints about the logo... So, what's the deal? Why the underwhelming response?
-
- That said, the bigger problem I have with the current logo is not so much those characters--actually, I'd never have noticed since I don't speak Sanskrit or Japanese--but that annoying white space around the globe. As a designer, these types of things annoy me to no end. I don't know if anyone else sees this--just a second, let me try the site in IE really quick... waiting on IE to load it's slow ass... (10 mins later...)
-
- OK, yes, there it is. So it is not a browser-specific problem. That white halo around the globe. Don't tell me this is supposed to be a shadow(?!) In certain spots, you can see the screen pixels--not good if what people want is a professional-looking logo. This has bothered me for a very long time, and I am actually very surprised that no one else has been bothered by this considering they have created such a large ruckus over those two characters which I would think to most people are rather unnoticeable/insignificant. That pixelly white halo, on the other hand, is noticeable to anyone with, I think, semi-decent vision. 67.42.233.138 14:55, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- The corrected version of the logo looks great, Thue. The logo should be updated as soon as possible. As for the white halo, I have noticed it, too and it bothers me as well. Splette 08:43, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
-
[edit] Some questions
Hello!
I have two questions about the Wikipedia logo. Why are there no letters on the bottom pieces? There is a graphical error on the right side, isn't it? The upper right piece is missing but the piece below has no depth. --84.179.213.77 (w:de:Benutzer:Toffel) 16:35, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] What is on the back of the logo?
Wikimedia Sverige, the Swedish chapter, are going to make a 3D version of the logo, a meter in diameter. But this means that we need to know what is on the puzzle pieces on the back of the globe. Which symbols are on the back?
It seems that we should probably have some official answer to this - or we will have to improvise ourselves. This question needs to be answered by September, at the very latest, when we are going to show the globe in front of a 100 000 visitors of the Gothenburg Book Fair.
I know of at least one attempt to make puzzle globes for real, namely in Taiwan, see picture to the right, but it is not nearly good enough we feel. (Sorry, you who created it.)
Best wishes, svHannibal 17:23, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
- I would ask this on the mailing lists as well, not everyone watches this page. Cbrown1023 talk 17:28, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
- You're right, of course. Will do.//svHannibal 13:49, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Logo trademarks
All Wikimedia logos currently do not have any trademark signs SM,™ and ®. If it is a registered trademark, why isn't there any TM or registered logo to prevent any misuse of the logo. Diagramma Della Verita 15:16, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Renewing discussion
Pursuant to #Errors in current logo above, please participate in the discussion at Wikipedia/Logo, which has official support, and appears to be moving forward. See Wikipedia-l - Wikipedia logo work in progress for details. Thanks. Quiddity 21:00, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Meta-Wiki logo - legal status?
The list currently says that File:Wikimedia Community Logo.svg's legal status is “Pending transfer of Copyright to WMF.” Is this correct? The image description page says that it is released into the public domain. --Kjetil r 16:07, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
