From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Archives of this page

Change one letter?[edit]

In the old Japanese discussion [1] which Smurrayinchester has linked from my Wiktionary talk page, the Japanese letter ウィ (ui/wi) had a clear support compared to シ (shi). It was never changed however, probably because it had seemed difficult to fit ウィ on a tile. With the help of Smurrayinchester and Electric goat it has now been found out that it fits there fine. シ (shi) is also not the best choice because some Japanese people may consider it bad luck, which I found a lot of web pages about, for example: [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] (usually in the place where numbers are talked about in those links). What do you think about changing it now, and is there something specific which would need to be done in order to change it? Best regards Rhanyeia 15:21, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support. The current one doesn't appear to relevant to Wiktionary for Japanese. If it is relevant, the latin alphabet should rather be "T" instead of W, and much worse, for Japanese / in Japanese language, ショ (which appears in Wiktionary) and シ are completely different phonetic units. So the current one is quite pointless. Imagine V featured instead of W? That happens now about this Japanese letter .. This proposed replacement is a definitely improvement. --Aphaia 15:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
On "bad luck". It represent [shi] which means death. So it is considered "bad luck". While I am no superstitious, I'm agree on that it is no amicable choice leaving other around 50 letters, specially when it has no real relevance to the project. --Aphaia 16:05, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree. Use the Wikipedia logo but with coloured letters.This symbolically shows knowledge has a refining quality where as language is coloured by life styles and cultures.Since language and knowledge ,the earth and humanity are very intimately connected so should be the logos.Tiles are ugly and symbolically meaning less.Why does the obvious have endless permutations?


Shouldn't there just be one logo, like with Wikipedia? Would be way easier. Servien 21:10, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - but which? English Wiktionary refuses to use the new logo, despite it winning consensus here (over several years). We shouldn't just force them to change their logo...
James F. (talk) 06:53, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]


A decade ago, there was a contest ( that resulted in the various Wiktionarys updating to the current "Tiles" logo. However, I thought the winner of the contest was the "Realistic Book" proposal, and "Tiles" was the runner-up. How did we end up with "Tiles"? Been perusing some of the various discussion and vote pages, and it isn't clear to me. Can anyone clarify please? -Indefensible (talk) 04:59, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Indefensible: The 2006 vote decided on the tiles logo (with very low participation) which was then adopted by several language versions. In 2010 there was a vote with much more participation which was won by the book logo. The 2010 central vote on Meta was followed by local votes to approve the change to the book logo. On the English Wiktionary, the local community did not approve of changing to the book logo. in 2016, there were two ENWT votes on the logo (1, 2), with the community deciding to adopt a tile-less version of the tile logo. Some communities (eg Lithuanian, Simple English) did adopt the book logo. The French Wiktionary continued to use the tile logo, which they had started using in 2007. --Yair rand (talk) 05:12, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That was quick, thanks. Didn't see the information on the 2016 votes on the Wikimedia page; should a link be added? Appreciate you providing the info. -Indefensible (talk) 05:55, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you asked the question, Indefensible, and thanks for the answer Yair rand. I was just trying to figure out the same thing; how did more people vote for the book logo in 2010 (I was one of them), and yet Wiktionary uses the tile design now? Apparently if you don't like the results, just initiate another round of voting and hope for different results. The voting will continue until morale improves :-p Except the 2016 voting was so poorly attended that no one option received more than 23 votes, as opposed to the hundreds of votes that the 2010 poll drew in. What a great lesson in democracy. Griping aside, at least the current design of the tile logo on the English Wiktionary is nicer than what was put forth in 2010. --Iritscen (talk) 19:34, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A simpler way to look at it is that the "tiles" logo is Wiktionary's logo by 2006 consensus and long-term status quo. There were a few discussions to change it, including a rather large poll in 2010, but none ever achieved broad consensus. Some language editions at various stages refused to adopt the prevalent logo of the time. Nemo 20:03, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]