Communications/Wikimedia brands/2030 research and planning/community review/brainstorm
The ultimate purpose of the sites is to present information to an outside audience.
To focus the brand inward as a social networking gift to contributors, is not exactly the same as bringing the sites closer together such that they identify with each other, so renaming all the sites as world, community, people, pals, friends, association, gang, bunch, family, sisters, school, collective, following, gathering, wikitogether, wikilovers, save those for internal projects.
The ultimate purpose of rebranding seems to be looking to the future. That does not mean a declaration that Wikipedia has suddenly realised there will be a future, but it means trying to become for now, in the present, the future as it will be. So renaming all of the sites movement, motion, future, forward, progress, direction, path, way, route, trail, destiny, nice subproject names and ideas, but not giving the foundation what they seem to be trying to achieve here.
You are going to find it difficult to beat three names chosen or bought by the professionals who initially set the sites up long ago.
Those names are Wikipedia, Wikisource, and Wikia.
These caveats are not very encouraging to the progress of the discussion on the talk page so far, but if you are trying to come up with something new, try to come up with something that suits an encyclopaedia and public domain resource better than the big 3 names.
The nostalgia names are great so far, but try also to be constructive! Trying to help the encyclopaedia into the future with this "branding" scheme.
Thank you for loving Wikipedia and WMF and each other. Do not stop doing that. But if this brand is going to change according to a community decision, please make a real effort to outdo your selves and find a concrete base for Wikipedia, which can never be broken, and then all our love and togetherness will be safe and we can broadcast it, any way we like, through the sites and our new combined identity.