File talk:Ncwiki.png/archive

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Archive of all comments on these designs[edit]

Simple, clean and functional. The "i" is for information, and is derived from the international symbol for information. It could also mean "internet" ;) Also decided to keep the circular (globe, infinite) theme going. Colour of blue with a green tint as colour psychology suggests this is calming, and we want to be calm while learning something.


Design also allows easy transition to b&w for printing.

Considering making the outer circle incomplete (an arc from 0 degrees to 270 degrees for example) to indicate the ongoing updating and modification of the wikipedia.

Suggestions welcome.


I like it! But it remids me a little of the logo of a white goods manufacturer (possibly Indesit). How similar is it to that? -- Tarquin

http://www.merloni.com/Indesit/ -- http://www.merloni.com/Indesit/catalogue/images/welcome_logo.gif

I will say it again... For ALL logo in the world, we could find a similar logo ! Art is like that !!! :o|
The true question is only "Its really (and the right) logo for Wikipedia ?" !! ;op
Oliezekat 15:01 25 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Heh. Okay, well as you say it's difficult to design something without it reminding someone of something else. As a professional media designer, I strike this problem all the time. I've never heard of Indesit before (i'm in Melbourne Australia) but there it is.

It took about 4 radically different designs to come up with the logo for my business, and even that reminds people of another logo.

This is my first submission, and not my last, but thanks for the comments. Maybe this logo could evolve into something different, just like the articles. Collaborative design is great!

Neolux 15:16 25 Jul 2003 (UTC)


hey hey! I really like it! Most of the planet won't see any similarity to Indesit because they've not heard of it. Those that have might not make the link. I would be concerned about the company complaining about our logo being similar to theirs -- would they have grounds for that? If not, cool! Like I said, I really like it! -- Tarquin 15:57 25 Jul 2003 (UTC)
It seems unlikely, since Indesit's logo is based on, and almost identical to, a fairly standard symbol for the on/off switch on electrical devices. Lezek
Considering making the outer circle incomplete (an arc from 0 degrees to 270 degrees for example) to indicate the ongoing updating and modification of the wikipedia. -- what if ou gradually fade it out, from say 270 to 360? But then it won't print as easily. just a thought -- Tarquin 15:57 25 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Against fading, but what about a dotted line, say something like: ". - -- - ." in one part of the circle? -- Tillwe 18:34 25 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I like it because it's really a functional and logoid logo, not some picture book, and it looks modern and "digital" enough for internet. And it continues the (blue)-disk-aspect found in the current logo. en:Indymedia has something similiar as logo, but probably it's distinct enough. -- Tillwe 18:34 25 Jul 2003 (UTC)


This is a great logo! It represents Wikipedia a lot. en:user:colipon 25 July 2003


Wow! So much feedback overnight! I'll try a few different samples of what has been suggested, including fading the arc, dotting the arc, and a couple of other things I have in mind.

I might make the dot on the "i" circular as well, as the square looks a bit hard to me. Maybe I could justify the square dot by saying that wikipedians think outside the box and the outer circle surrounds the "box". Maybe this is just too big a leap to make... It's amazing what you can justify after the fact!  ;)

Neolux 08:05 26 Jul 2003 (UTC)


From Image talk Ncwiki1a.png (now redirected)
Very interesting! Does it have a meaning? --Eloquence 20:11 26 Jul 2003 (UTC)


Ok, a variation on a theme. Justifications follow:

  • Kept circular theme, made the outer circle incomplete as per above.
  • Inner shapes kinda look like an open book. Kinda.
  • Shapes and top circle can make up a humanoid figure. This figure is surrounded by the incomplete circle suggesting being in the center of the knowledge, which is incomplete.
  • look at the white space. Can you see a "w" letterform?
  • circle at top could be a globe, or planet shaped object
  • open at the top "supporting" circle. can represent in the input of the circle (of information) into the book, or brain of the wikipedia(n).

Thoughts?

I'll still keep working on the fades, dots and so forth, but everything i tried so far i haven't been completely happy with. Not that I'm completely happy with this one either, but it was getting late and I needed to show some progress!

Refer to second image as (b) and original as (a) for easy reference...

Neolux 20:15 26 Jul 2003 (UTC)


I'd like the dot on "i"/"head" on the man's figure to a be a globe, a planet but only symbolic with latitude and longitude lines. Thank you for your really nice logo. Kpjas


As suggested by Kpjas (thanks for the compliment!):

Lines (wrong)

Neolux 21:36 26 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Hey I really love it ! One more comment though. I thinks something's wrong with the latitude and longitude lines. I was thinking about drawing the lines like in proposition #14. Less lines, and the latitude curved. I think this logo might really win the contest. I will certainly vote. Kpjas

I like these ones a lot. I think the variations are more distinctive than the "i" icon; they would be recognizable as Wikipedia's logo without the text. I'd like to see more variations if you have time. -- Stephen Gilbert 03:18 27 Jul 2003 (UTC)


I prefer a). It's the lattitude lines that are wrong in the little globe: they should look parallel, but at the moment they look like they are heading to East and West Poles! You could try the little globe for the dot in a) -- Tarquin 09:37 27 Jul 2003 (UTC)


Type B makes my think of the peace symbol. That is also positive. Great logo! Giskart Walter 15:30 27 Jul 2003 (UTC)


Looks like people like (b) as long as I fix up those lines. I guess the way it is, is just a wireframe sphere, but reversing the curvature of those lat lines, would look like a Marconi globe. Hmm. I'll fix it when I get home.

I've shown the logo to a few friends, and interestingly, they said it looks like "Peace" as well. Initially I thought this may have taken something away from a NPOV, but since it wasn't a motivation for the design, and it can be justified in other ways, maybe not. Peace may mean different things to different people, but in recent times, the Peace Symbol has been anti-war and could be seen as anti-government of the time. It may have moved it's status from a universal symbol, to a political one. Am I being a little too paranoid here? Let me know! In any case, I think that peace is a positive thing to strive for, so I'm happy to let that be read into the symbolism of the logo.

On another note, I've been playing with some logos for the other Wikimedia projects as well, that will fit into this theme if it is selected. I'll post some ideas when I get some time, and let you see a whole series and how it can work across the board. I understand that the comp is not for those other projects, but this is a fun exercise and I'm learning lots!

Thanks for all your critiques, compliments and complaints,

Neolux 17:04 27 Jul 2003 (UTC)

If the Peace symbol having political undertones bothers you you could extend it to make a symbol of a man/woman with arms raised but you will lose "i" symbolism in consequence. Kpjas
It doesn't bother me, as such. It was just that since WP strives to have NPOV, have a political connection (pseudo Peace symbol) as the WP identity could be seen by some as not having NPOV. That was my only concern. I like the fact that the more that's read into it, the better it seems! Neolux

The Second Logo consisting of the globe on the top is so far the best graphic projection i have seen in all of these logos. It is excellent. en:user:colipon


I agree -- the globe-on-top version is excellent. Could you post some versions with the lat/long lines re-done? -- The Anome 23:07 27 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Okay, here is the logo with the lines reversed, the lines straight (as if you were looking directly from the side) and the lines curved up (as if you were looking from above). The reversed lines just looked wrong, and from an optical point of view, are wrong. So i guess it's down to the equator view, and the above view... Let me know, and thanks for your patience!

Lines reversed (wrong)
Lines equal

Neolux 23:55 27 Jul 2003 (UTC)


I prefer the plain variant to the globe variant -- IMHO the globe makes it look like a sports logo, not sure why. I'd rather play a bit with the color of the elements, e.g.:

--Eloquence 13:43 28 Jul 2003 (UTC)


There shouldn't be any words on the logo. That will make it more international. Here's b4 without words:

-LittleDan 15:54 28 Jul 2003 (UTC)


Hmm. Okay. Well, in the interests of simplicity, can I assume that the only versions likely to be seriously considered are b1 (plain circle) and b4 (above view globe)? I think (a) (circle with "i") is no longer an option people are considering, perhaps due to the indesit comparison, and b2, b3 and b2.5 (i knew I misnumbered these!) the lines are wrong for the globe anyway.

Can I cull the images here to just b1 (with Eloquence's colour variation) and b4? Then we can move on to the next step...

I myself am torn between these two as I agree with the colour variation idea, and the plain circle. This image can be scaled and easily recognised. The globe in b4, when scaled down would lose it's lines, and from an impact point of view, the lines make the circle look a little washed out anyway.

On the other hand, the plain circle with colour variations can still be de-saturated to greyscale or black and white without a loss of identity. Perhaps (if chosen) the logo can remain similar for the series of wikiprojects with a colour change for each one (e.g. blue for the pedia, green for the quotes, red for the wiktionary, black(grey) for the umbrella Wikimedia, etc)...

I also agree somewhat with LittleDan, in that if the logo can be recognised as wikipedia without the word "Wikipedia" then the word becomes redundant for branding. You can recognise McDonalds in any language by the golden arches without having to see the word actually there. Why can't we get WP to a point where it can be recognised in any language by the logo, and not necessarily by the word? That would also remove some multicultural, translation, and definition issues.

Neolux 16:26 28 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I guess I agree about the lines. They make the logo too complex. The logo should be simple enough to line-draw, as I have done with b1 (but can't do with b2-4):
Freehand Line draw

I throw all my support behind all variants of this lovely, well designed, functional, solid, strong logo. - user:zanimum

I also like the idea of using different colors for different aspects of wikimedia. LittleDan 17:00 28 Jul 2003 (UTC)



why don't you follow your other, the dotted logo, idea? the most boring logos ever are those including a globe. having a w and an i would be much smarter.

flux900


Would it be possible to change the en:font color and/or font type a little? I think I'm gonna go with this logo for en:Wikipedia.- colipon 28 July in the en:afternoon

This is only an amateur projection, what do you people think about it?

See Image here.


Ok, I know I'm just another of those picky guys saying "that looks like this and that", but it does strikingly resemble a UN-related logo I can't identify for the life of me -- I just know it looks a lot like one, including the colour. The UN-related logo I'm talking about represents a human silhouette with the hands spread at just about the same angle as your proposal in the top sector, and it includes the same symbol of the globe. I'd be glad if someone could identify the logo I'm talking about, I Googled for it for two hours now, but since I don't know what it's related to, I was unable to find it. That's why I can't even tell for sure if this proposal does indeed resemble that logo as strikingly as I remember, please don't flame if it doesn't after all.

Apart from that, I think this proposal is one of the best so far, that's why I took the time to explain myself above -- maybe some changes would be in order if I remembered correctly the "other" logo, thus making this one truly unique and eligible. -- Gutza 00:22 29 Jul 2003 (UTC)


I really like this logo but thought it could use a bit more color:

The colors are symbolic; blue is for hyperlinks, red is for redlinks, and green is for community. At first I tried to use yellow for community (background color of non-article pages) but then it looked like PacMan was about to consume the Earth! What say you? --Maveric149 01:56 29 Jul 2003 (UTC)


Hmm, now that you said Pacman, if you rotate it about 90 degrees it begins to look like the Commodore computer logo. Especially with the primary colours there.

Also, Gutza, I have a nagging feeling in my head about the logo looking similar to another international organisation too. I'm thinking Flowers or something like that, or perhaps a Childrens thing.

In response to flux900, who believes I'm out of my mind (hehe) I may re-instate the other logo just for kicks. You'll be able to see it as submission 26 in the near future.

I have to go to bed and get some sorely needed sleep now though, so I'll do some colour changes to this one and do some stuff with the other one in the next couple of days.

Thank you for all your support and suggestions, and if entry 26 actually wins, I'll share have of the winnings for the prize with flux900! (If this logo wins, I'll probably donate the rest back into the Wikimedia Foundation.)

Neolux 02:41 29 Jul 2003 (UTC)

That's right! The three primary colors are blue, red, and green. With those colors all the colors of the rainbow can be created. --mav
Depends on the context -- colours made of light use RGB indeed, but pigment colours have red, yellow and blue as primary colours, so it's not as universal as you'd expect. As a matter of fact, RGB is a symbol for the cyber-age more than a symbol for generic colour, since the human race typically used pigment, not light for symbolic representations throughout the time. -- Gutza 22:58 29 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Oooo! I like this one a lot:

Colour logo rotated Anti-clockwise 90 degrees

It has color symbolism going for it; blue for hyperlinks, red for edit links (always something to do - some fact to check, etc) and green is for community (grassroots movement). And since those are the primary colors then every other color can be made from them.

But we are also free content - hence the reversed copyright symbol (I've seen this before in ref to "en:copyleft"). And as an evil aside; we plan to take over the world (the jaws about to consume the earth)! This is just too much fun. :-) --mav


Rotating the logo in this way destroys the "w" letterform in the white space and turns it into a "3" letterform. If you go the other way, the white space forms a Euro symbol and also gets very close to the Commodore computer logo below, just with slightly different colours.
Commodore Computer logo

The colours used in the last two variations, are very bright, and it might just be me, but having highly saturated colours reminds me of certain annoying TV commercials "50% OFF NOW NOW NOW COME IN SALE ON BE THERE OR BE SQUARE SALE SALE" etc. I think the colours should be muted, or only have a single colour, but different shades. Then the different colours for different areas (wiktionary etc) could work. Also, by using muted or dark colours you can add a certain dignity and credibility to the organisation/site/people/content.

That said, I'd be interested to see what people think is working and what isn't working with this entry...

  • Shape
    • Do the shapes tell the newcomer what the site is about?
  • Colour
    • Is/are the colour(s) appropriate for the medium?
    • If we took all the colours out, would the design still work?
  • Flexibility
    • Can the design be used on a variety of media without losing identity?
  • Scalability
    • Can the design be scaled up or down without losing identity?
  • Non-discriminatory
    • Is the design able not to exclude certain races/languages/cultures?
    • Does it work as well for a student as it does for academia?

If there is an area lacking, let me know where I should focus...

Neolux 18:26 29 Jul 2003 (UTC)


I like this logo b1 a lot. The color is very well chosen, easy on the eyes and radiates a certain serenity. To me, the logo looks like a stylized cross section of a flower (remember biology?). With a little imagination, you can also identify the i for information, the W (in the whitespace) for Wikipedia. If the outer circle were broken at the bottom, you could also identify the (double) brackets so characteristic of Wikipedia.

What I don't like about logo b1 is the relative proximity of the disc in relation to the rest of the logo. It looks a bit cramped to me.

Ap Wed Jul 30 01:51:40 UTC 2003



I do like b1 either, simple, open, clear. _-Nerd 10:52 30 Jul 2003 (UTC)


Okay folks...here's a version with a bit more colour. I also extended the center line, so now the white space makes up the Wiki currency letterform (ψ), and an abstract representation of the double square brackets everyone is so fond of. Colours are as per above, to represent the links. Also played with typefaces just for a change....

Neolux 02:20 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I kinda liked the globe - a burgundy or dark red color next to the dark green would also be nice. --Maveric149 03:03 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Just for you mav!  :) Neolux 03:19 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)
This is perfect! - Colipon
I like that. Very nice - but why the green splotch on the globe? It kinda looks like a slip of the airbrush.. --Maveric149
Well, blue/green planet... I just thought I'd make it like an earth planet with a random splotch. I can make it a single colour if you prefer... like the blue of the outside "ring". Basically, it's just me playing with different concepts.
We seem to be divided into two camps regarding this logo concept. On one side there's the plain circle group, and the other side is the globe with lines group. Is this a fair summary? It's been the most division I've seen so far as people seem happy with a coloured logo or a monochrome logo, but have been saying "Get rid of the lines", or "It would look better with lines".
Feel free to add the pros and cons of lines somewhere on this page (preferably the bottom). I myself like it plain, as it can be scaled down radically, and still retain all the elements that make it what it is without compromising on anything. (e.g. size of a favicon (the little picture next to the URL in bookmarks etc)). Doing this with the "globe" would compromise on the lines. Other than that, I think most of what I've done is pretty good. Modest, aren't I? Neolux 08:49 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I really like this image. In the belief that this is a really serious contender, so we should start checking bases, I produced a greyscale version just to check if it looks OK (hope doing so was alright with you, Neolux):

It looks fine to me... --Robert Merkel 05:30 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)


I made an svg version of b1, here's the code for it:

<svg viewBox="0 0 200 200">
<circle cx="100" cy="100" fill="#006699" r="70"/>
<circle cx="100" cy="100" fill="white" r="50"/>
<circle cx="100" cy="100" fill="#006699" r="40"/>
<rect x="95" y="0" height="140" width="10" fill="white"/>
<path d="M 0 0 L 100 100 L 200 0 Z" fill="white"/>
<circle cx="100" cy="50" r="25" fill="#006699"/>
</svg>

and here's a:

<svg viewBox="0 0 200 200">
<circle cx="100" cy="100" fill="#006699" r="70"/>
<circle cx="100" cy="100" fill="white" r="50"/>
<circle cx="100" cy="100" fill="#006699" r="40"/>
<rect x="93" y="105" height="35" width="14" fill="white"/>
<rect x="93" y="90" height="10" width="14" fill="white"/>
</svg>

--w:User:LittleDan

  • LD, youre awesome. -Stevertigo 21:39 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)

The logo design is nice, clean, tight, professional -- but what the hell does it mean? What makes this distiguishible from a logo for US Steel or International paper? -Stevertigo 21:39 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Read above text, and the symbolism should become apparent. The colours represent the primary additive colours, and are also wikipedia link colours, there are representations of a letter "w", the double brackets, broken circles show something that is not 100% complete as WP will never be 100% complete and is a work in progress, as well as a few other things that people have read into it, like peace, support, and so on. Neolux 22:46 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Here's the brown, green, and blue one (the one without the globe) in SVG.

<svg viewBox="0 0 200 200">
<circle cx="100" cy="100" fill="#006699" r="70"/>
<circle cx="100" cy="100" fill="white" r="50"/>
<circle cx="100" cy="100" fill="#339966" r="40"/>
<rect x="95" y="0" height="200" width="10" fill="white"/>
<path d="M 0 0 L 100 100 L 200 0 Z" fill="white"/>
<circle cx="100" cy="50" r="25" fill="#663333"/>
</svg>

I like the additional symbolism for wikimoney in this one, and the green and brown looks good. But I also like the peace sign and W, so in order to unextend the center line, just replace the fifth line with:

<rect x="95" y="0" height="140" width="10" fill="white"/>

Now that I'm doing minor changes, here's the change to eloquence's version starting from the b1 version: replace line 3 with

<circle cx="100" cy="100" fill="#5f88c6" r="40"/>

The globe ones would be much more difficult, and I really don't like them. If someone else wants to make them in SVG, it's all theirs. LDan

Okay, it's not meant to be brown...it's meant to be dark red! I'll change the image, but in the SVG change #663333 to #990000. It obviously looks different on my screen than on anyone else's, so I'll just upload over the top.
Also, does anyone think I should start archiving these comments?
Neolux 00:34 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Also, in comparison to some other logos, at about 4k in size, these ones load FAST! Just thought I'd mention that. Neolux 01:08 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)


The new font is too light, I liked the first one better. And even in red+green+blue it looks like some UN organisation (which is maybe okay). Couldn't we try to get the "i" symbolic into again? And the colours lighter. And the font bolder. And maybe some dynamic element, like turn the whole thing 5 degrees to the right. And the '[' symbolic stronger by making the circle more a rounded quadrat. And ... ;-) -- till we *), 2 Aug 2003

The typeface is just me playing with different things. I personally like the typeface of (a)... now, if only I can find it again! :) --Neolux 05:40 3 Aug 2003 (UTC)


While I like the clean, solid look, I found I wasn't sure what this logo was trying to show. The arc + circle version just seemed like a block of random shapes until I stared at it for a long time... the 'person reading a book' representation may be a bit clearer with some alterations:

Thoughts? --Brion VIBBER 18:32 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)

No offense, but if you interpret the white lines as arms, that looks a lot like a slightly overweight person handling their private parts.—Eloquence 19:14 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)
All the more appropriate for the internet then, no? ;) --Brion VIBBER
ROFL. No further comment. :) -Stevertigo
To be honest, I think that adding more complexity to the image deprives it of what i think makes it work...it's simplicity. I wasn't shooting for the book reading thing specifically, or for the "w", or for peace or most of what has been said here. It's convenient that if you think about it, some of that symbolism can be derived from the logo, but I think that "solid", "simple", and "unique" should be enough. Are we trying to make people be amazed with the logo and stare at it for aeons looking into the symbolism and profoundness behind it, or are we trying to create an open-content encyclopedia that looks and feels professional? The logo is an identity, and can be used to help people recognise something. If it's good, it eventually becomes a point of loyalty and respect. When it has been around for a while, you don't even need any words to explain what it is, it's just is "Wikipedia" or "Vikipedio" or whatever. Do you recognise McDonalds by the word, or by the golden arches? All strong logos are generally simple, and as was done by someone above, you can draw it freehand and still be able to recognise it. In summary, higher complexity means lower retention and less impact. </rant> --Neolux 05:40 3 Aug 2003 (UTC)
The previous version doesn't work for me because it's a shapless, meaningless blob. I've got nothing against shapeless, meaningless blobs, but it doesn't sing to me as something I'd want to slap on a web site, CD-ROM, T-shirt in association with anything. (The McDonald's arches are a very recognizable "M", which is the first letter of the name of the company. It's not exactly abstract.) --Brion VIBBER 17:45 3 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Hey - I like the book idea. With a few fixes that could be the Wikibooks logo (if this logo doesn't win - I don't want the Wikibooks logo to be too similar to the Wikipedia one). --Maveric149
I prefer the suggestion of giving different sections different logo colors. And I really don't like those added lines. To me, they look like a tuxedo, implying richness or elitism. Wikipedia is neither rich (although an individual contributer may be rich) nor elitist. And if they aren't making a tuxedo, they don't add symbolism, only complexity. w:User:LittleDan
Books are also elitist: not everyone can read, you know. --Brion VIBBER

As a simpler alternative to lines implying a globe, how about making the top circle a sphere? I don't know how to do that with any raster graphics program, but to make the head of b1 a sphere, replace the second-to-last line (of my svg) with:

<circle cx="100" cy="50" r="25" style="fill:url(#sphere);"/>
<radialGradient id="sphere" cx="100" cy="50" r="25" fx="90" fy="40" gradientUnits="userSpaceOnUse">
<stop offset="0" style="stop-color:white;"/>
<stop offset="1" style="stop-color:#006699;"/>
</radialGradient>

I wish I knew how to render an SVG as a PNG, but I'm not sure that's possible. w:User:LittleDan

Render the SVG with the SVG viewer and press the "Print Screen" key. Copy the image into Microsoft Photo Editor, crop the SVG drawing out and save it as a PNG. Robert Lee

I like the earth-like globe in the last version but the openning at the bottom distorts the "W" figure inside the logo, which I think is important. And I think less colors on the inside make the logo a bit less complicated-looking. And making the inside green, brings out the green from the globe. This is one of my favorite logos so far in any case. Just me 2 cents. Robert Lee


B4 is excellent! Good job!


I like just about all of them. The ones with the globe are best, though. Its design is simple enough that it can be tweaked to mean different things, while still being easily recognizable (such as the version above with the open book). I was gonna enter the logo contest myself but this one is better than anything I'd have been able to come up with. "i" for information, "w" shape for Wiki, sort of a tree-shape, or person-with-upturned-arms-shape, it has a sort of puzzle-pieces look to it; it encapsulates all of it. Very cool! This is my favorite logo of all the entries so far. -- Wapcaplet 17:14 7 Aug 2003 (UTC)


B4, i'd say - en:User:Colipon


I found the design overly simple.- Darius


It looks like the logo is devided into two parts. Is the wiki devided?

This logo looks way to much like something I've seen before. I'm not sure what exactly, but I know there is some world organization with a similar logo. Dgrant 09:57, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)

B7 ROCKS[edit]

b7 is sweet.

Thanks! Appreciate your comment! Neolux 10:34, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)

We will need transparent versions if this logo is chosen. Vector versions would be nice as well.—Eloquence

No problems. Due to the number of variations of this entry, I'd rather create the vector and transparent versions of one or two versions that are the strongest contenders, instead of putting in a lot of time on versions that will be dropped. Once the concept has been accepted, then I will happily refine and do any modifications necessary. Neolux 17:22, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Good[edit]

One of Indias Youth Orginization or a childrens organization has a similar logo. But anyway looks good. Phoe6

This was suggested previously, but unfortunately no one has been able to track down which one it is. The design was created completely independantly without inspiration from other sources except other wikipedians and the design breif. If you can direct me to similar logos, please let me know! Neolux 17:25, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)