Talk:Wikibooks/Logo

From Meta

[edit] Merge Wikijunior Logo Discussion

Wikijunior only has 7 choices to select from, and none of them seem to be gathering much support from anybody. I don't know if it's because Wikijunior is less popular of a project or if the submitted logos aren't considered high quality enough to vote on them. Many of the current Wikibooks logos have variations that would be well suited to be a Wikijunior logo.

I propose (and I know this is short notice!) That the separate Wikijunior logo discussion be cancelled, and a Wikijunior logo be selected based on the winning Wikibooks logo. For instance, if one of the a books win, another variation of a be selected to be the Wikijunior logo. That way the two projects are unified visually. I would like to hear people's opinions on this. --Whiteknight (meta) (Books) 17:10, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree. The Wikijunior logo should be included in the current Wikibooks logo discussion. If the community decides we need a Wikijunior logo to go along with the Wikibooks logo, add it to the list including internationalization and other concerns. Who cares about the late notice? This process has taken close to two years already, and only two of the current batch fulfill the guidelines (monotone, grayscale version etc.) of the 2008 round of voting. All these deadlines are not very wiki like. We have several good concepts here that need fleshing out and when they are ready, we can vote for the best. --Ezra Katz 20:32, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree too. It is better if we'll just have colour variations of the Wikibooks logo that will be chosen. Just as what I've said at Wikibooks/Logo/Proposal/D#Unified Proposal, Green, what if we'll just change the Wikibooks logo's colour. Like have for the Wikibooks logo, and for the Wikijunior, or the other way around; just for example. Although I feel bad that current efforts for the WikiJunior logos will be just wasted. -- Felipe Aira 09:10, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I disargee with this for the simple reason that wikijunior isn't necessarily a sub project of wikibooks. It started that way because of the grant, but there is no reason wikijunior can't become it's own sister project, or even a series of sister projects. It's just the wiki(media) spirit, aimed at children. The name reflects that, so should the logo. If we use a version of the wikibooks logo, that will reinforce the idea that it's just a series of books. Risk 15:09, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. Wikijunior has had consistent support for a single logo both this time and the previous time. I also disagree that Wikjunior needs to have a logo similar to Wikibooks. I believe at some point its the intention for Wikijunior to become an entirely separate project, just as Wikiversity has, and in some ways, at least on English Wikibooks, Wikijunior is already treated like a separate project. As a separate project Wikijunior needs its a unique logo, otherwise there isn't really a point in having a logo for Wikijunior at all if people don't consider it separate from Wikibooks. I agree with Ezra Katz about these deadlines not being very wiki like. I think its the constant rushing to get things done that has repeatedly held up quality logos and left the situation indecisive and no real community consensus. What's the rush? --darklama 15:17, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

If Wikijunior is it's own project, and if it's not just books but for other sites as well, then the whole logo discussion so far is moot. In our preparation for this logo discussion, only Wikibooks projects were contacted for input, and nobody raised the issue that we shouldn't do these at the same time.

I would tend to disagree with this on many levels. En.wikijunior, at least, has never expressed an interest in being separate from Wikibooks and it certainly doesn't have the critical mass (and it's activity levels have been in steady decline for some time) to attempt such a separation. The current crop of logos are generally low quality, save for one or two of them. Some logos which are currently candidates are blatant copyright violations, and others blatantly fail the requirement that they not be visually similar to the WMF logo. I don't want to stick Wikijunior with a bad logo because of apathy amongst voters and graphic artists.

As for the timelines, we discussed it and agreement was reached on this schedule. You can't ignore the scheduling discussions on the wiki and then months later complain about how deadlines aren't "wiki like". Many open-source and open-content projects have schedules and deadlines, and I don't see why we should be barred from employing the same. Granted, a lot of people didn't voice opinions about the timeline, but this entire process has been marred by voter apathy and we can't wait forever for passers-by to decide to chime in their opinions.

If you don't want Wikijunior to have a logo that is similar to Wikibooks, that's fine. I do not, however, believe that we should be continuing with the current Wikijunior logo discussion as it is because it has so many problems. If you think Wikijunior can do better, I do recommend (and hope with all my heart) that somebody else takes it over and leads it to a proper conclusion. I believe that if we do not work out a logo now, Wikijunior will be stuck without one in perpetuity. Not having a logo or worse, having a terrible one, is going to be far worse to the long-term projects of the Wikijunior project then having one that is too similar to the Wikibooks one. --Whiteknight (meta) (Books) 00:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

.I agree at all with Darklama. There aren't only books for children; in example I saw a project Wikijunior also on it.wikinews (although there are no active users about that). --Ramac 15:36, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't know where to go to understand the scope of Wikijunior other than here: b:Wikibooks:Wikijunior:What_is_Wikijunior. It clearly states that Wikijunior is for creating non-fiction, age-appropriate books. If this is the case why not call the project "Wikibooks for Kids"? Wikijunior as a umbrella project for other kid-friendly wiki projects is a way off, and for now, a strong association with Wikibooks is useful for both projects. A tagline like "Big Cats: a Wikijunior Wikibook" may be good for the current Wikijunior titles. It reenforces the idea of an Wikijunior being a separate entity while strengthening the Wikibooks identity. Maybe all we need for Wikijunior is a typeface, then each for each project there can be a "kidified" logo. Here is an example using my Wikibooks logo entry:

Using this formula, Wikijunior could have as many logos as the rest of Wikimedia's projects. For now, since Wikijunior only covers books, a logo related to Wikibooks is the best option. --Ezra Katz 22:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you, Ezra. If we create a Wikijunior logo now that is similar to the Wikibooks logo would create a template that other projects could use to make their own Wikijunior logos as well. For instance, if we created a Wikijunior logo that was like the Wikibooks one but with specific differences (different colors, different typeface, etc) all other projects could follow that lead later if they choose to create Wikijunior branches for themselves. Consider that we create a wikijunior logo that is exactly like the Wikibooks logo, except yellow or orange. If Wikipedia wanted a wikijunior logo for itself, it could make an orange globe with a kid-friendly font. All other projects could use orange to demarcate it's children-oriented materials. In this way, we would be doing a far bigger service to Wikijunior by setting it up with not only a logo now, but also a comprehensive theme that it could use everywhere. Orange is just an example, I don't think it would be the best colorscheme for this. --Whiteknight (meta) (Books) 01:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Could Wikimedia organize a pissup in a brewary?

Two years? Why does it take so long to make the simplest decisions on Wiki projects? It's a logo, that's all. Advertise the vote to the users of the various Wikibooks and Wikijunior projects, allow a few weeks of voting then choose the winner. What is the obsession with having rounds of voting (it's like the American elections which go on and on an on before eventually America decides and chooses an idiot from Texas who'll be the world's most powerful moron for the next 4 years). It's quite simple - if you like a particular logo then vote for it, say why you like it and be done with. At the end of the day the logo will probably only last a few years before some clown at the Wikimedia foundation decides that he doesn't like green and insists that everyone choose again.--217.202.111.252 21:14, 12 May 2008 (UTC) (Xania, yes the annoying admin from Wikibooks English and Wikibooks Simple English)

There is so much wrong with this post! First, we haven't been selecting a logo now for two years, we've only been at this for a matter of months (and people are complaining that we are moving too quickly as is). There was a previous separate attempt that failed for a number of reasons. Second, we have contacted, as best as we were able, to contact Wikibookians from the various projects when we started this process. That few have responded or participated is more indicative of voter apathy then anything else. We should probably attempt to contact them all again when we move to the final stage.

As to our method, it doesn't make a lot of sense to complain about it now. Plus, having multiple stages of voting has also allowed us to have iterative stages of discussion and improvement. Like books on Wikibooks, we can't expect these logos to be perfect when they are first submitted. Editing, modification, and iterative process are precisely the kinds of things that Wikibooks is all about. --Whiteknight (meta) (Books) 23:09, 12 May 2008 (UTC)