Wikibooks/Logo/Proposal/A

From Meta

Jump to: navigation, search

a

(a-multi) Changed the colors. Now there is more varity and is not just Wikimedia colors.

(a with u) This could be a good way to bring the jigsaw theme in without too much re-branding. The jigsaw piece could be the favcon.--HereToHelp (talk) 13:29, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

a-jigsaw-only for easier localisation

(part of a) this is a proposal for a favicon

(i2) A multi-subject blue-shaded textbook from a standing perspective.

(i3) A multi-subject brighter blue-shaded standing textbook.

(a+i2) 3 stacked books with more curved corners. Tried to make the imagery less "loud".

(a+i3) Using a+i's perfective with 3 books, different colors and different imagery, plus a jigsaw puzzle

(a+i4) Same as (a+i3) with Wikibooks text underneath.

[edit] Current discussion

  1. i2 is too centric on music and math with it's cover symbols. I added a version with a bigger jigsaw and removed the "Wikibooks" text: a-jigsaw-only --Matthias 07:35, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
  2. I don't like the jigsaw ideas, makes Wikibooks look like it's centric on writing puzzle books. Also the jigsaw doesn't really fit in with the design of any of these proposals, it looks plastered on top rather then part of the design. I think a book cover that looks like it was made of many different pieces of paper or fabric with different designs, would do a better job of symbolizing that books are made up of many contributions. The jigjaw just doesn't do it for me. It looks out of place. --darklama 14:10, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
  3. I'm afraid I don't really like any of these proposal A ones. They're kind of cliparty, not very dynamic or fresh. Oh and I agree with the 'puzzlebook' concern above. --Mcld 20:45, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
  4. I agree with Mcld's "Clip Art" statement. Νεοπτόλεμος 10:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
  5. I don't like any of these proposals. Agree with Mcld. --Pietrodn · talk with me 13:03, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
  6. (a+i2) is definitely wrong way since it recalls WinRAR icons. So is (but little less) (a+i3) or (a+i4).
    — Danny B. 01:38, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
  7. I think the best from this proposals is i2 but it is a bit "poor". Others are not logo-like. --Ramac 12:51, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Previous discussion

For arguments leveled against keeping this logo, see here
  1. I like the .svg format version displayed here. If the foundation whats the colors changed just change them. Zginder 13:46, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
  2. By keeping it the same we avoid re-branding ourselves. Zginder 13:46, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
  3. I would like to see several variations on this, similar to the one shown by User:HereToHelp. Some ideas would include:
    1. Making the stack of books a different color besides grey-on-blue.
    2. For that matter, making the books below different colors, so all the books don't look the same. Maybe also make the rest of the books different sizes and shapes.
    3. Adding new details to the cover of the top book, in lieu of the weird atom-rose (such as the jigsaw puzzle peice).
    4. Maybe adding some other kind of detail, such as making the entire cover of the book out of puzzle pieces, or similar.
    --Whiteknight (meta) (Books) 16:19, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
  4. By the way, the favicon which I made from this for (u) could be used for this logo, too.--Demoeconomist 18:21, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  5. (a+i) I think is a step in the right direction, but the edges are too hard, and some of the imagery is a little bit strange. I would like to see this one cleaned up a little bit, maybe simplified (add another book to the stack, but remove the designs on the books), and soften up the edges. A really "obvious" book shape is going to have more of a rounded spine, etc. --Whiteknight (meta) (Books) 02:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
    How's (a+i2) look? Does the imagery still need to go? Is the spine round enough? Is the edges soft enough? --darklama 21:16, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
    Sorry for all the nit picking! I wouldn't even comment on it if i didn't like it. Yes, this is a much better version, the colors are good, although the red-green-blue scheme has to go. Maybe like a blue-orange-red, or orange-red-brown or something? I dont know, I'm certainly no artist. There are a few small changes I would make to this, but then again there are a few small changes that I would make to every proposed logo. I still don't like the spine imagery, but that's a personal thing. (a+i2) is far better then (a) or (a+i), in my opinion. It's definitely moving in the right directions. --Whiteknight (meta) (Books) 21:52, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
  6. (a+u) is the pick of the bunch, IMHO. The layout of (a+i) is good, and I like the jigsaw piece on the cover. (a+i2) is better, but perspective is wrong - (a+i) has better perspective. Whiteknight is colour-blind, pay no attention to him! I reckon (a+2) would be better with the perspective of (a+i) and the jigsaw piece on the cover. (a+u) is still my preference... Webaware talk 01:13, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
  7. (a+i) is a very good idea, but it needs a new color scheme, some new book spine symbols, and can we please, please, please put in something to look like a computer screen? Kari hyena alligator thing 23:51, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
  8. (a+u) I also like the plain and simple book-stack. Exchanging the stylised atom with the Wikipedia jigsaw should be enough to make sure that it's project scope is not just about natural science without rebranding everything. --Matthias 14:41, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
  9. The logo should not contain the text 'wiki-books', or even a 'W', otherwise it will be a lot of trouble to localise. I like the idea of using the jigsaw silhouette instead. Can someone do a version of (a with u) without the text? --HappyDog 13:11, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
  10. I still like a. au is okay and a-multi is nice also, the others without the words poor.SunCreator 13:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
  11. i don't like it at all, too simple, too plain, lacks life, excitement.--Afa86 17:12, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
  12. nice with the additional colors (a-multi - the last one shown. It's clear, simple, and colorful.
  13. Please Keep this for the next round. Zginder 00:17, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

discussion relating to i2:

  1. i2 is definitely better than the brown colors. Is it possible to make a logo without the stars (#) also, because then there is 3 symbols instead of 5 (and it gives a better view) ? Perhaps instead of the pi can be used some other text/symbol (e.g. WB or B) ? ----Erkan Yilmaz
    I support your opinion, but it could be also realized by the brown color, if the contrast between the colors on the page and on the left side was more clear (that means, the color on the page should be more brighter)--Demoeconomist 19:49, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  2. I prefer "W" on the book rather than "p", because Wikibooks isn't specialized in mathematic. Additionally, the musical symbols at the left side should be better replaced with letters of various languages like in the Wikipedia logo.--Demoeconomist 19:49, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  3. Like colors on i2, would support h and i, the others are too clunky. ST47 21:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
  4. I reckon i2 shows some promise. My druthers: lose the stars, replace p with a jigsaw piece, pick two non-music symbols to replace two of the music symbols, make the book more square. IMHO, of course! Webaware talk 01:24, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
  5. i2: I think, common symbols are generally more international than any letter. Additionally Pi is related to a circle, which might be interpreted as the world. --Turelion 10:43, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
  6. I like the pi symbol and the music signs but the brown books look boring. They are not 3d enough and the brown is dull. i2 is the best of these because it's blue but I prefer the pi symbol from h. SunCreator 13:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


Retrieved from "http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikibooks/Logo/Proposal/A"
Personal tools