Talk:International logo contest

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search



I suggest logos not use any text, so they can be use across all language without modification -- Tarquin 09:19 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)
My suggestion would be that the contestants should provide two images, one entirely without text and one with the English name (Wikipedia) to show where the text goes. Then logos for the other languages can be made from that. -- Timwi 13:34 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)
What I meant was that the final logo be without text. It's a needless duplication of the site title. -- Tarquin 14:25 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Agreed. Why go to all the point of having an internationally-accepted logo if we then go and spoil it by making multiple versions of it, each with different text that should be implicit from its context? Despite what some seem to think, the Wikipedia is (or at least, is intended to be, over time) a single encyclopedia in multiple languages, and having (however slightly) different logos for each branch thereof detracts from this goal, surely?
Jdforrester 14:45 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Also agreed. But it makes sense to propose it with an example of the text, to see where this latter should go. It seems obvious it is replaceable. I think the final logo should contain "Wikipedia" (or any other given name such as Wikipedio)
Why is the name requiring that the W and A are upper case necessarily ? User:Anthere

A good logo consists of a picture and a matching text, that is, text in an appropriate font and color scheme. It is usually the designer who knows best which combination of font/color/size to use. Otherwise you end up with hackish cut&paste jobs. That's why logo submissions should have the "Wikipedia" text in it, but in easily removable form, so that other Wikipedias can adapt it if needed (most Wikipedias should use the "Wikipedia" text anyway).

The WIKIPEDIA capitalization has been used since the beginning, and in virtually all our logo and design variants, including the existing T-shirts etc., so it seems reasonable to continue to use it. --Eloquence 15:11 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I agree with Tarquin - keep the word "WikipediA" out of the site logo - that gives more freedom to the designers of the Wikipedia skin, etc. Perhaps in one skin or another it will make more sense to have the WikipediA text in a different colour or font, or to put it above the logo rather than below. Having that flexibility is a good thing. Besides, it's good to have text outside of the image itself - that's what's recommended on en:Wikipedia:image use policy. --mrd

What about a text like "" (which is redirects to www. or "" with variants for national language Wikipedias like ( This has the advantage of high impact : the web address and the logo - in one image - so if the logo propagates so does the address.


  • en:M. C. Escher / nl:Maurits Cornelis Escher's Drawing Hands might be appropriate, apart from possible copyright issues, and the lack of colour... Just a thought. Maybe an alien hand drawing a human hand drawing the alien hand, the alien could be the Wikipaedia... Cyp 10:13 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)
An alien hand? Why an alien?
Because the Wikipaedia is like a new and unknown life form, similar to an alien. Or something like that. Cyp 09:46 21 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I've got an idea.. what about an illustration of the world globe (with all the continents oceans etc) and a semicircle on the top, which consists of people of different race, age and gender.. and everyone holding a letter: W I K I P E D I A.. just 9 guys who hold this blind ? Webkid 17:11 21 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I can't see why another logo is necessary. The original one is very elegant and smooth. I think we are strongly risking to be kitch -and that's no good. Be careful before considering picking up another logo. Wait. Think about it.

The problem is each Wikipedia (in other language) used different logos. I suppose is to making uniform all Wikipedias. Aoineko 03:17, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I'd rather see a different logo for each language with text in that language. - Karl Wick

I really like the sunflower logo that is on the meta page. Why can't we use it? -- LittleDan

Because there's no connection between this nice flower and Wikipedia, or at least I think so. Webkid 18:18 22 Jul 2003 (UTC)

File size[edit]

Could we suggest a maximum file size for the images displayed on the International logos? Some are 80k and the page is very slow to load :-( -- Tarquin 18:23 22 Jul 2003 (UTC) (I'd say 30k)

Great idea. 30 K should be enough for a proof of concept, and a hi res image can always be attached. --Gutza 18:29 22 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I think it would be great if the logo could be themed, like the Swedish wikipedia has done with the logo.

Somebody further up commented that the original logo looks quite nice and elegant, and I'm afraid I have to say I agree. (Not the Meta-Wikipedia logo, but the normal black and white Wikipedia logo, that is.) Maybe we could replace the text from Hobbes with something more multilingual, and eliminate the "The Free Encyclopedia" caption? --

Agreed. The Wikipedia logo impressed me right from the start as being simple, stylish and elegant. If internationalisation is a problem then why not allow the French-language Wikipedia, for instance, to replace the text in it with, say, some Rousseau, and so on? I hope that the original logo will be one of those that we will have the opportunity to vote for - after all, from what I can gather this Wikipedia-wide (rather just than on some non-English-language sites) logo change is based around the idea of one person.
On the subject of redesigning, actually, am I alone in thinking that the front page was more stylish and more cohesive before the pastel colours were introduced? Matthew
Matthew, the old logo will definitely be an option to vote on. We don't want to make things worse than they are. --Eloquence 11:51 26 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Well, I feel that the old Wikipedia front page was ever so slightly less attractive than the current one. I have a slight preference for the new one, provided that it's just as accessible as the old. --


From the page:

After that deadline, there will be two votes:
1. Which logo should be used?

Waiteaminute. Wouldn't it be better to first have a simple approval vote to create a list of finalists (top 5 maybe) and then have a more complicated "average voting" vote to decide which of the finalists is the winner? I think this is the best option. --Maveric149

Good idea. I didn't think we would get so many logos. --Eloquence 11:50 26 Jul 2003 (UTC)
About a half dozen already look very professional - good idea on advertising this on's Main Page. --mav
Agreed. Not only would it be easier to vote, it'd probably be fairer to the logos on the second (or third, or fourth) page, where they are less likely to be seen ahead of time and more likely to suffer from "voter fatigue." Paullusmagnus 22:13 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Perhaps it would make sense to, after the initial "brain-storming" stage, go to the authors of the various proposals and ask if they wish to enter the vote proper. That way we'd not have so many comedy logos in with the serious contenders... --mrd

Especially since some of the logos have multiple versions. Each author could choose to submit all their versions, or just some of them.
Or we could have mini-votes over a course of two days, so Wikipedians can choose which qualifies themselves. - user:zanimum

How exactly does average voting work?

Could we possibly narrow it down to a certain amount from each page, do the voting gradually, by slowly eliminating the choices? - user:zanimum

For those of you who have read "The Dispossessed", there is a logo in that book which, I think, would do well for the Wikipedia. The society presented in that book is an anarchy. When I first heard of the Wiki technology, that was the first thing that came to mind ... anarchy on the web. And look how well it is working out! Anyway, the symbol is the "Circle of Life", a green circle with a line in the center. It was printed on all the books of that society. I think a similar symbol would be excellent, something highly stylized which connects with the idea in "Dispossessed". I'll leave it to the graphic artists to come up with something... (

This is a contest for a logo for Wikipedia. But there is also "Wikimedia", "Wiktionary", Textbook, Wikiquote, ... I would be nice if there is a universal "Wikimedia"-logo whit some changes for every project. So the same general look for al projects. Giskart Walter 18:17 27 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I'm ahead of you on this one Walter! I've done a sample of Wikiquotes, and will be uploading some others for the other sections as time permits. I was kind of looking at my submissions for Wikipedia, for as for Wikimedia. I'll let you know when I've done the entire series. :) Neolux 18:52 27 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Every project should have their own, very distinct logo in order to make it easy to know what project you are in while reading. I do not support the "one logo with variations" idea for logos. We can have a separate vote for the Wikimedia logo - there are at least a couple logo presented in this contest that would be good for Wikimedia (esp the puzzle globe). --Maveric149 05:44 3 Aug 2003 (UTC)
However the logos should share the same design and choice of colours if they are supposed to be distinct. Preferably done by the same artist.
Kpjas 07:56 3 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Eh? How can they be distinct if they share the same design and colors? --mav
Well, let's say, a recognisable style of design and colours. We want something to suggest that the projects are indeed sister projects?

Here's another idea for the approval voting phase of the vote: Allow each person to add up-to 3 vote points to each entry. This, I think, will be more fair and representative for the first (major) cut. Then, of course, we can have a the much more complicated vote method (average voting) for the finalists (I'm assuming there will be five, right?). --Maveric149 22:05 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)

With 88 entries (so far), we should keep this simple. A yes/no approval vote is tied to a fairly simple question: "could you see this as Wikipedia's logo?" and making each decision shouldn't be too hard or take too long. Of course, I'm an entrant, so maybe I shouldn't be making suggestions about the voting process....-- Paullusmagnus 00:20, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I think the voting process should be done with as few alternatives for each vote as possible. Otherwise a situation like alternative X gets most votes but alternative A and B, which are very similar, combined gets more votes than X may come up.

So first group all logos that are similar to eachother in cathegories. That can be accomplished by the wiki process. Then each user votes on a cathegory, then on each alternative in that cathegory. Then a yes/no vote if that alternative should replace the existing logo. Thats how I remember they did in a party once. Very time consuming yes, but there are no short cuts to democracy :-). 20:44 8 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Since average voting is strategically equivalent to approval voting, why don't we use approval voting for all the rounds? What advantage does the more complicated average voting system present? -- AdamRaizen

Submission deadline - extend or keep?[edit]

    • Comment: This deadline is rather pushy -- Stevertigo
      • I agree. Many editors are on holidays and it will give them very little time. It is also short time for translation in various languages. In any case, I won't be there, so if there is any suggestion of improvment over my logos, only chance to tell me about is in the next 2 days. Then that will be to late :-) User:anthere

I figure August 20 should be enough to get a few logos, and the different Wikipedias will probably not want to advertise something like this for more than a month. However, if we don't have anything cool by August 20, we could consider extending it by another month. -- 07:02 22 Jul 2003 (UTC)~

As the deadline draws to a close, please vote on whether the deadline for submissions should be extended or kept (August 20).

Keep current deadline:

Extend by one or more weeks -- we need more logos:

  • 9 votes: user:Anthere (for a wikicat), BL (soon I will upload the killer logo), user:Aoineko (many people was in vacation), Taw (idea of deciding by voting is braindead. Anyway, there aren't many good logos now, most of submisions are "nice pictures that in no way could work as logos". Let's wait for people to return from their holidays, so we'll have more logo-like images to choose from), マイカル (no rush really. Just something before the press release maybe?) User:fuzheado (Agree with August holidays; and pick a good one, not just one on deadline), Tomos 19:42, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC) (it seems many entries are still being made - waiting a bit more could give us more choices, artists more chances to participate.), Looxix (Holidays, are we in a hurry?) Oliezekat :o|

Perhaps voting on the logo should be in more than one round. The first round with so many suggestions could be used to develop a short list that would allow us to see all the leading candidates afterwards on a single page. Eclecticology 00:28, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC)

seconded. Definitly. user:Anthere
Uh, we already decided that above. The first round will be a simple approval vote and from that we will get a set of finalists. The finalists will be voted on via the more complicated average voting method used in the article count reform vote. --Maveric149 05:20, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Answer to Maveric149[edit]

« Maveric149 (100 is way more than enough to choose from; now we should all focus on helping each artist improve their ideas) »

Sure we have many pictures, but how much can become a logo ? Very few imho. Perhaps we have better to make this "election" in two times. First, select the pictures that can become the wikipedia logo, then give more time to selected artist to improve there idea with the feedback we gave. Aoineko 03:12, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Oups! the same idea was developped just above by Eclecticology... sorry I didn't read it :oP Aoineko 03:13, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Deadline extended[edit]

Since there is a majority for extending the deadline, it will now last until August 27.—Eloquence 23:43, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC)

  • I like the Mryan_logo.png and in interlingua a sort of bluish globe with the motto "WIKIPEDIA" "The Free Encyclopedia". The text on the surface of the globe is indistinct and therefore non-language specific, the motto can be translated using "Garamond" type font to whatever the language of the Wikipedia should be (as in the example for the ia.Wikipedia). But I would also like to see a logo that can change with the season or events, for example a between the brackets object could change. It could be a flower on the first day of Spring or it could be a nest with two eggs in it or whatever the occassion. The brackets are the wiki-way for a link and this isn't just tech-thinking in my idea but it helps to surround and bring into focus whatever is within the brackets, and makes a link to the idea. User:ILVI 8/8/2003
Which first day of spring are you thinking of? March 21st (Northern hemisphere) or September 21st (Southern hemisphere)? Many "occasions" are on different days for different countries/peoples. 21:07, 22 Aug 2003 (UTC)

— I have been rushing the last 2 days to produce 7 files for consideration… and it is still August 27th, and I was about to upload them and the means to do so seem to have been removed… Please respond with suggestions. ---Kalki 2003·08·27 21:35 UTC


The following text was moved from "International logo" following the Request for deletion "Meta:Historical/Events/International logo". // [admin] Pathoschild (talk/map) 00:24, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

We might also want to try to think of an international logo for Wikipedia which is neutral to language. I wouldn't object to the word Wikipedia being used though... --Chuck Smith

Maybe, but it's slightly nonsensical, in the sense that it seems that the greatest push to make Wikipedia completely language-neutral is coming from all the English speakers. "I wouldn't object to the word Wikipedia being used"? I should hope not.--Anon

I disagree with the idea "the greatest push seems to be coming from english-speaking langage". I think this a little bit insulting given the energy I have been putting in these issues in the past month. I think Giskart will also appreciate this comment. I agree many english-speakers are *very* willing to go in that direction, and are doing a lot, and this is really great.
But when Giskart wrote this and when I wrote this, there were no international homepage on meta, no page written by any international here I believe, no embassies, no options for settings, only one international wiki in phase III... My thanks go to all the international that took time to raise the matters on the main list. And of course to all the english ones. We are *very small* wikis, we are still struggling to get the basics done, we are not very numerous here to state our concerns, and few people can't do much. Maybe we don't "deserve" equal representation because of our size, but stating we are not really involved in the evolution towards more representativity than before is gross misconception. anthere

I also disagree with Anon. Anthere and Giskart were the first people even to mention that there was a problem in this regard. Sadly at first I was one of the many English Wikipedians who just brushed-off their concerns as being over-inflated or even as being unfair to the community. But through the process of trying to understand why there was a Spanish fork I began to realize how important these perception issues are to the non-English Wikipedians. Up until very recently the non-English Wikipedias were really just afterthoughts and the concerns of non-English Wikipedians were not being addressed. In short they were being treated like second class Wikipediacitizens. Now, I hope, we are in the process of changing that. See a copy of my letter to the community on this at; User:Maveric49/commentary also see all the threads about the Spanish Wikipedia, the Wikipedia family, and discussion about moving the English Wikipedia to en.wikipedia here.--Maveric149

At the Esperanto wiki we're currently discussing the form of an ad we're hoping to take out in Pasporta Servo; the main question being whether to use the current logo (a straight translation of the English wikipedia logo) in the ad. Aside from the fact that I don't think it would look so good squished down to the 5x3.75cm print size of this tiny advertisement, I'm currently favoring a text-based approach which has the Wikipedia name in several writing systems, presently Latin/English, Cyrillic, Latin/Esperanto, Japanese, and Korean. (The "Vikipedio" form is made most prominent because, of course, we're trying to push the Esperanto edition. ;)

I don't know if something in that direction can or should be used as a logo, but it's something to consider. It explicitly emphasizes the multilingual aspect of the project; of course the "the free encyclopedia" bit is still audience-language-dependent (and probably should be). On the other hand, "text in a globe" is distinctive as well... personally if I'd been around when the present logo voting was being done, I'd have gone for the blue one which by happenstance is the one currently displaying here on meta. --Brion VIBBER 06:47 Oct 23, 2002 (UTC)

Logo in the interface[edit]

Another question is on the user interface; the Cologne Blue skin does not use the logo and presently has no real place for it. Do we want an alternate-form logo that fits in there? Or... something? --Brion VIBBER 06:47 Oct 23, 2002 (UTC)

See also the old Logo suggestions discussions.