Wikibooks/Logo/Proposal/D

From Meta

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

[edit] Gallery

[edit] Full colour

(n6) Blue version, favicon:

Without text version of blue

(n7) Green version, favicon:

Without text version of green

[edit] Greyscale

(n6) Blue version, favicon:

Without text version of blue

(n7) Green version, favicon:

Without text version of green

[edit] Black & white

black on white

white on black

[edit] Variants

(n6.1) Blue version modified, favicon:

(n7.1) Green version modified, favicon:

(n7.2) Green version, more book-like corners and different slogan

(7.3) Same as (7.2) except the pages have tops.

(7.3) Same as the other 7.3, but with no words.

(n) favicon:

(n2) favicon:

(n3) favicon:

(n4) favicon:

(n5) favicon:

(n5.1) favicon:

(n8) favicon:

(n8.1) favicon:

(n8.2)

(n7.4)

[edit] Current discussion

[edit] Opinions

  1. Since it is completely obvious that either n6 or n7 is the most agreed to logo by the previous discussion people, and is the best one in this set, I believe that both of them should cut top corners to make them look more realistic as noted before. I think this logo really rocks, and has the highest possibility of getting chosen, being the most discussed and agreed upon. -- Felipe Aira 12:21, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  2. I am not a fan of n7 and n6. The svg files are sloppy and the pointy corners do not work. The shape of n3 is slightly more bookish with the squared off corners, but the three pronged approach seems weak. They don't really look like a book, a "w", or anything remotely related to the project. This logo needs a dramatic shift to something more along the lines of n5.1. The two books definitely look like books, and the pair make a subtle "w". In all fairness though, I did draw n5 and 5.1, so I am a bit biased. ~ Ezra Katz 21:20, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
    I think the pointy corners are better then the cut corners. A logo doesnt have to be completely realistic, and pointy corners are more iconic and look sharper. --Whiteknight (meta) (Books) 03:41, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
    Totally agree with Whiteknight on the corners! 17:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
  3. I like (n6) and (n7) because they look the most stylish, and they convey an image of books/knowledge exploding out from the logo text more so than the others. --Cmelbye 15:02, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
  4. I like (n6) best of all. I think it looks exactly like a book (I'm surprised by Ezra Katz's opposite opinion above) (in an iconic sense, of course) and also hints at "W"-ness. The pointy corners look good. I'm afraid I think (n5) and (n5.1) look very dated, and use a poor font too. My personal vote is strongly with (n6) --Mcld 17:15, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
  5. I prefer (n7) more because green is rather symbolic of new growth, and these books are helping promote new knowledge. Green, to me, is also a very stimulating color, as well as being aesthetically pleasing, so I believe I'll go with (n7). --72.55.212.180 20:01, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
  6. I like n6, and n7 is fine too. This is the only logo that I, personally, consider an alternative to the current one. --217.229.13.146 13:27, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
  7. Personally, I like most (n7) (as well as (n6)) among all the icons proposed. I suggest that we should choose a better font: IMHO, the current one looks really demodé! -- RaminusFalcon «…» («it.wikipedia») 14:54, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
    I've uploaded a new version (n7.1) with improved edges and font Optima. (It's in PNG: there is also SVG version but has a problem in visualization). -- RaminusFalcon «…» («it.wikipedia») 15:44, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
  8. Not certain if I like the text from n7.1 or n7, but my two cents says we should stick with blue of n6. It seems to be growing as an iconic color for wiki-foundation projects. It matches most html color schemes better (hyperlinks traditionally being blue), and continues the blue motif from the old logo. Bigmacd24 21:34, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
    That's exactly the problem with blue, it's just like what all the other projects are using. Green would help Wikibooks to stand out from the crowd. --Whiteknight (meta) (Books) 23:00, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
    • In order to allow you to have a wider choice, I've uploaded the (6.1) version: it's the same shape of 7.1, but with 6 colors. -- RaminusFalcon «…» («it.wikipedia») 14:18, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
  9. Agree with wknight, blue is also used on wikisource and wikiversity logo, so green could be better. --Ramac 17:15, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
  10. Yes, green would be the best colour to avoid having the same colours with other blue projects. I still like the original n7 best, the variants are too abstract and far less readable. -- Felipe Aira 02:15, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
  11. I like n7; I quote Felipe Aira and Ramac's comments above about the green colour. --Pietrodn · talk with me 12:45, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
  12. Blue or green is the same to me, this is the logo I prefere. --Xaura 16:58, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
  13. What about other colour schemes like red or yellow? And I'd rather like the text from n6 and n7 because a minimalistic logo like this would fit a more modern text style. OnkelDagobert 12:28, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
  14. I tried one last time to come up with an alternative to the three stripe approach. See n8 and n8.1. Regardless of what advocates for this logo think of the new graphic, please consider the internationalization plan I included in my other proposal. It will solve many of the issues we have with the unpopular "Think Free. Learn Free." slogan. --Ezra Katz 19:00, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
  15. I like n7 and n4, but also n8 is very good, IMHO. --Stef Mec 16:33, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
  16. I like n8.1 very much (as well as my n7.1). I wish my compliments to Ezra Katz. -- RaminusFalcon «…» («it.wikipedia») 20:13, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
  17. WOW! n8 might be my new favorite. I like 7.2 a lot, although I think the stylized pages would look better with "tops" to the pages. I tried to show this effect in 7.3 but I'm not a good artist. I would like to point out that the 16x16 favicons for 7.2 and 7.3 are very clean and scale down to small sizes well. If we picked a logo such as 7.1 or n8, we should use one of those two for the favicon instead. Alternatively, if we picked 7.1 or n8 for Wikibooks, 7.2 or 7.3 might be an excellent logo for Wikijunior (considering there are few Wikijunior logos to vote on, and none of them are drawing significant support). --Whiteknight (meta) (Books) 16:52, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
  18. I added tops to the pages in 8.2 and changed things around a bit to look more realistic. I went ahead and changed your proposal to the newer version. If we stay with the fonts I chose, a green version of this favicon would be nice. I like your idea about making a complimentary Wikijunior logo, but I think we can do better than reusing one of the variations. A cartoony version of 8.2, or something colorful and crayon-like would be better suited (I'll sketch something out when I have the time). --Ezra Katz 21:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
  19. I rather like how 7.3 turned out. I think this should be the Wikibooks logo and it looks good at the small favicon size as well! I don't think 7.3 should be limited to just the favicon or be used as the Wikijunior logo instead. --darklama 23:36, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
  20. n6 but drop the subtitle; too small to read and only adds clutter. Have faith that readers will come to understand more as they use the product. This is a logo; image and title are plenty. I see variants without subtitle but with a different font for the title; no. This is the correct version. Blue better than green for psychological reasons too complex to go into here. — Xiong熊talk* 13:29, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
    This is how bi it will be when actually used. -- Felipe Aira 03:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
    This is how bi it will be when actually used. -- Felipe Aira 03:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
    Don't worry about the tagline. When it is used in 135px, it already becomes readable. And I believe 135px is the size of the Wikimedia logos used at the top left corners. -- Felipe Aira 03:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
  21. Wanting to be sure Wikibooks don't end up with a logo resembling the logo of some other organization, company, whatever, as that wouldn't help Wikibooks' image, I decided to do a Google test. I found an image on this page: http://www.rogerwendell.com/books.html, which looks like a flipped version of most of the proposals on this page. For this reason I think n through n7.1 would be bad choices and the n8 variants probably shouldn't be used as well. --darklama 19:19, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
  22. Sorry, but I dislike all of these --penubag06:46, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Unified Proposal, Green

I would like to propose that we pick several of these logos, and integrate them into a complete visual scheme for Wikibooks and Wikijunior. Here is one proposal that I would like people to consider, based on my understanding that the green logos are gathering the most positive attention in the discussion above:

  1. n8.2 Be selected as the new Wikibooks logo candidate
  2. 7.3 (or a cleaner version of it then i can make) be selected as the favicon.
  3. n7.1 (with the word "Wikijunior" instead of "Wikibooks") be selected as the Wikijunior logo candidate. I pick n7.1 instead of n7 here because I think the font is better for children.
Wikibooks Favicon Wikijunior

We'd have to do some work to unify the way the text looks between the Wikibooks and the Wikijunior logos, of course. What do people think of this comprehensive proposal? --Whiteknight (meta) (Books) 17:29, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I oppose since I don't really admire these varitations showed. I still like n7 best. Hey what if, since both has the largest support in all the proposals. Let's just make the green one logo for Wikibooks, and the blue one for Wikijunior and just change the text below them so readers especially noobs will have a clear sence that Wikijunior is still Wikibooks. And also please, people, see this Talk:Wikibooks/Logo. -- Felipe Aira 09:05, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
I like your proposal (I like the n7 too, we're fortunate to have so many good options to choose from), but I would like to suggest that we not use Blue for the Wikijunior logo. I say this for a number of reasons. First, Wikijunior might not always be associated with Wikibooks, it might open branches on other projects, or it might eventually become it's own project. What we should do is work out a unique colorscheme for it that it can use anywhere. Blue is too similar to many other Wikimedia logos. I would like to see this same logo in a large number of colors: Red, Orange, Yellow, Purple, and Brown. Picking a good colorscheme for Wikijunior is more important in the long-term then any specific logo. --Whiteknight (meta) (Books) 01:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
I support this proposal except for the favicon; just use the image with out the text. n7 is the best design, and it can be varied (with the text of n8) to have enough variations to provide images for future subprojects (wikibooks in Deutch, Français, etc). I like the use of green, "No trees were destroyed getting this book to you." --CubBC 14:19, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
That's nice. It's like the tagline "No animals were harmed in the making of this movie". I believe it would be good to use that tagline with Wikibooks on Earth Day. -- Felipe Aira 03:08, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Winner: n7?

Judging by the general tone of the conversation above, I think that n7 (and immediate variants thereof) are looking like the winner of this family. Can we get a quick show of hands here to that effect? --Whiteknight (meta) (Books) 23:02, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Support --Ramac 12:37, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Previous discussion

  1. This is amazing! I really like both the design and the colours here. Even at 16x16, this looks decent. Perhaps some tweaking for small scales (and remove the text). I would like to see one with the pale yellow replaced by something more saturated though... not sure what exactly. Overall, this is excellent though! – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 01:53, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
  2. Although a good idea, I'm not very fond of the idea of having the text overlapping the picture. This is just a minor issue though. --penubag (talk; w) 03:57, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
    1. I quote penubag. On red, the contrast is low. --Pietrodn · talk with me 18:22, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
  3. Great logo, unfortunately it is a PNG image and is difficult making changes, it should be an SVG. I tried to contact the autor for having a layered version of the image but I didn't get any response. --Ramac 20:41, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
  4. (n2) is a svg version that tries to deal with some of the issues brought up. --darklama 22:16, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
  5. (n3) I SVG-fied it and used bright colours. --Ramac 22:27, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
  6. Clean, simple, yet elegant. I like the new version with the text underneath the logo a lot better, although i think the colours could be a little more fresher. Husky
  7. (n3) is WMF colors, and that's not good. However, I like (n2) and (n3) better because the text does not cover the logo. I would like to see some other color schemes and other fonts for the text as well on this one. --Whiteknight (meta) (Books) 22:51, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
  8. (n4) I think using Wikimedia Foundation is not a bad thing: on the contrary, it's a positive element, if the graphical effect is good. I've improved the shape of the books, adding the corners of the pages (which before were cut). In addition, I've used Myriad Pro font, which is much better than the previous fonts. To you the evaluation of my work. -- RaminusFalcon «…» («it.wikipedia») 10:00, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
    1. The logo can not use the Wikimedia colors because the foundation requested it. One of the requirements set out in the rules says so. I prefer the square corners to the pointy ones because it looks more realistic. --Ezra Katz 00:36, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
  9. I like most n4. The font of n2 is not very appealing. But I think there should be a colour change. -- Felipe Aira 03:03, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
  10. I changed colours. Do you think is better having different colours (like the orginal proposal) or variation on a single color (like these ones?) --Ramac 10:24, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
  11. Your n6, Ramac, is really nice! But it could be better with the font (Myriad Pro) I used for n4. -- RaminusFalcon «…» («it.wikipedia») 13:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
  12. Both n6 and n7 is very nice. I cannot really decide which one is better but I am pretty much sure that colour shade variations are better than having different colours. -- Felipe Aira 10:27, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  13. n7 is my favourite. n6 is also nice. --Pietrodn · talk with me 16:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  14. Sorry, I cannot decide but Ramac's logos rock ;-) (n6, n7 and so on :-D) --Filnik 17:08, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  15. n5 and n7 are my favorites, so far, from this group. I probably prefer the Orange of n5, but I would like to see some other kind of detail inside the "pages", not just a block of orange. Maybe make the orange field out of puzzle pieces (a cliche at this point, but it might look nice), or add brackets into it so it seems more like a "wiki" or something. Of course, even without these changes the logos are still nice. --Whiteknight (meta) (Books) 21:04, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
  16. Both n6 and n7 look great. --Frank Schulenburg 07:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
  17. I love n6 and n7, the others - the colors are weird. ST47 21:04, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
  18. I don't know, I don't like any of these --penubag (talk; w) 06:11, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
  19. Beautiful! I can't say enough good things about this design. Iconic, memorable, easy to identify at a quick glance. I prefer the single-color versions (n6) and (n7). Slight preference for the green, just because so many other projects use blue. I also like the slogan "Free textbooks for free learning" - it is descriptive and doesn't horribly abuse English grammar like the old slogan ("think" and "learn" are verbs; "free" is an adjective; adjectives modify nouns, not verbs.) - Chardish 21:17, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
  20. n5.1 is definitely my favourite from this group. The colours work really well with this design. The simplified slogan also works well. Reece (Talk) (Wikibooks) 13:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
  21. (n6) is a really good logo! Well done! I would love to see this to be the new logo. --84.187.129.172 21:07, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
  22. (n4) looks best of this bunch, (n7) if the Foundation want to be picky about colours (why?) The tiny text at the bottom is little more than a distraction at the sizes it is likely to be used. Not bad, but (a+u) is better. Webaware talk 01:53, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
  23. (n6) and (n7) are my favorites, although I prefer the font from (n4). The single-color designs look more unified and professional than having each book a seperate color. It's not obviously a "w", so it will work in any language, but the "w" idea is still there. GatesDA 12:15, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
  24. Wow, (n6) looks awesome! Thanks to whoever improved on my original to make it, it's looking a lot better. --Cmelbye 23:47, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
  25. These are definitely my favorite. I like the shape of (n4), (n6), and (n7); the font of (n3), (n6), and (n7); and the colors of (n2), (n6), or (n7). I think the font for (n1) is a bit inappropriate... seems a bit too "kiddy". I don't like the overlaid text in (n), and (n5) and (n5.1) are too bland, but the others are great. Νεοπτόλεμος 01:29, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
  26. (n6) and (n7) really stands out for me but I prefer the blue one (n6) which retains the familiar colour of the old logo. It is simple and the gradient effect is attractive. The subtle use of a book to form "W" is clever. Its a highly scalable design without losing much detail as evident from the favicon sample. I think the old slogan "Think Free, Learn Free" should be retained but using a clearer font. If possible, the height of the book might be shortened by a bit or tilting the book's perspective to make it fit evenly within a square space. Personally I think this may be the best logo out of all submissions. Roychang 07:53, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
  27. (n7) scores over (n6) for it's colour green. Green is a better symbolism for knowledge and learning than blue (my two cents) (UTC)
  28. Yes to n6, it looks very professional. And i like blue better than green. --OnkelDagobert 14:19, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
  29. (n6) and (n7) are fine. --193.210.65.69 10:20, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
  30. Confusing. Only n6 and n7 work to show a book. They fail to have readable wording. I don't think that is a good idea and unreadable words should be reduced to 'wikibooks' otherwise this will be a problem for many people. Without modification to remove unreadable writing drop all. If modified keep n6 and/or n7 SunCreator 14:07, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
  31. n6 and n7. Better without the text over the logo and in a single color. - Jorge Morais 19:11, 18 April 2008
  32. n7 ist von allen Logos am besten!(UTC)
Retrieved from "http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikibooks/Logo/Proposal/D"
Personal tools