Wikiversity/Logo/archive-vote-2

Logo discussions & votes

Discussion on the logo votes

Wikibooks
- 2006–2007 archive: pg.1, pg.2, pg.3, pg.4, pg.5
- 2008 archive: pg.1 pg.2 pg. 3 pg. 4 pg. 5
Wikijunior
Wikipedia
Wikiversity
- Archive: pg.1, pg.2, pg.3, pg.4, pg.5, pg.6
- 2017 refresh: discussion
Wiktionary
- 2006 archive: pg.1, pg.2, pg.3, pg.4
- 2009 refresh: discussion, proposals, voting (round one, results or [1])(round two results or [2])
Wikivoyage
- 2013 change: process, round 1, review, round 2
Wikidata
MediaWiki
- 2020 change: process
Wikifunctions

Logo (current logos, guidelines, localisation)

Welcome to the process for finding a logo for Wikiversity!

Phase 1 of the logo contest has been finished (archive); we have our three finalists! The finalists were determined by taking the logo group with the most votes and eliminating all logo groups which didn't have more than half of that amount. I arranged the various designs from the winning logo groups by similarity; if you disagree with my classification, please say so on the talk page.

In the phase 2, which will last until 30 September, you are invited to refine the existing designs and propose new ones which must be based on the basic design of the finalist logos (don't propose entirely new logos any more).

The next round of voting will be phase 3, during which we will determine which logos from each logo group will go to the final round.

If you have any questions, suggestions or complaints, please contact me on this page's or my own talk page. Thanks for participating!

—Nightstallion (?) 19:34, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Important: If a logo proposal uses the Wikimedia colors, please upload versions in new, other colors. All logos should be clearly distinguished from the Wikimedia logo in color and form.

#A (Learning together) - 62 votes in phase 1

The Thumbnails

The Inline Links

#A 1

#1 Learning Together
#2 Variation by Deltinu

Those "humans" look way too uniform for a logo for a freer way of learning, they look more like soldiers than free people learning together freely... (hope everyone understands what I want to say...)--Speck-Made 11:37, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Soldiers doubleplusgood. Learning doubleplusungood. (No, just kidding, I agree.)--HereToHelp (talk) 23:02, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

#A 2

#4 Yet Another Version by Aldenis
#5 Colour variation on #4 by Ehremo
#6 Shaded version of #5 by Ehremo
#7 Shaded version of #4 by Aldenis, inspired by #6
#11 Smaller Team/Bigger Globe by Eitch

A bit more colourful, flowerlike – wonderful thing in general but looking too crowded, too complicated – especially in smaller size.--Speck-Made 11:39, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

#A 3

#9 simple by rei-artur

#A 4

#12 Another version by Snorky

#A 5

#13
#14
#15
#16
#17
#18

New or slightly different versions (A)

Hi there. I think that before we increase the amount of logo proposals we should perhaps discard some of the versions that received less attention during the previous round of voting. For example, maybe A1 #3 (Another Multicolor Version by Aldenis) A2 #8 (Tessellation by Aldenis) and A4 #10 (Open Doors by Aldenis) can be eliminated without voting, so we can focus our efforts on the development of the most promissory versions. What do you think? Aldenis 22:25, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say as the creator, you have the right to withdraw any logos created by you if you think they add little to the contest. —Nightstallion (?) 17:13, 23 September 2006 (UTC) Well, I did it.Aldenis 17:41, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As for actual discussion...I'd like to remind people that simplicity is a goal to strive for. #9 is the most simple, but since it depicts only one individual I believe it sacrifices the concept of learning together. I like #12, or the more symmetrical #13 and #18. I think we need a balance of colors, and the blue rim, though reminiscent of the Commons, is not as good as no rim or a gray one.--HereToHelp (talk) 22:59, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I personally prefer # 13 with no rim, for the sake of both openness and simplicity. Aldenis 17:44, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Computer request

I would love to see a version of A2, A4 or A5 in which half of the "people" have computers rather than books. --JWSurf 13:59, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to try. The problem is that computers don't age very well. In a decade, any technological allegory based on our current perceptions will look kind of funny. Aldenis 18:51, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Simplification needed

All logos above are impossible to use as favicons since they are way too detailed and complicated. Is it possible to create some simpler versions? --Elian 15:10, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the favicon for Wikipedia is just a black W on white, so we could certainly come up with a similar solution in this case. I wouldn't put that down against these logos, they're quite good, I'd say. —Nightstallion (?) 06:02, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that a possible solution could be to use something like this (without the name of the project) as our favicon, independently of the logo that gets selected.Aldenis 17:28, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that simplification is needed - when I look at the logo - it just is too busy, maybe I'm just not abstract enough but it was a bit before I realized the circle between 2 ~parrallelograms~ was supposed to be a student. I would suggest fewer, instead of more, students like A4 - as the one where I realized that it wasn't just a pretty design was A4 :). Trodel 18:42, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On a related note, I prefer symbols such as OpenWiki.png, A3, or A4, which are asymmetrical. For me most of the A-series symbols simply look like snowflakes (winter semester?) - sure, the intent is clear if I scrutinize, but if I were quickly browsing a page I wouldn't. 204.186.59.166 01:23, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think we're fine with the complexity of the logos. i don't like the individual with a book (learning together) but (s)he's work great for a favcon, as said above.--HereToHelp (talk) 23:06, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

#B (University) - 47 votes in phase 1

#B 1

#1 original
#2 some changes

#B 2

#3 blue

New or slightly different versions (B)

I really like the simplicity of B #3, it's clean, clear, and can be used in larger/smaller sizes and be readable. This is my first day at Meta, and I supposed that edit meant to design an edited logo - so I did, but learned this is limited to text.

I'd like to see the globe ablove the logo replaced by the Wikipedia Globe, and use the same font as on the main page. Since the Wikipedia logo is universally recognized, wouldn't a variation on that theme link the two sites and values together?

The winning Motto, could then be done in italic, again, as on the original. I'd like to see this logo done is gray-tone.

Thanx for letting me have some input - Bon

If you have a logo based on this which you have made, please do submit it here - that's what this stage is for. The worst that can happen is that the logo gets removed. Daniel (‽) Check out Wikiscope! 18:29, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Similarity with Unesco logo

I am afraid this one is too close from the Unesco logo. guillom 12:36, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The last one isn't. Daniel (‽) Check out Wikiscope! 19:23, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

I think we should stick to variations of the wikimedia color scheme, i.e. B2 or the third thumbnail. Trodel 18:33, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please, no!!! I've recently become a convert to the anti-Wikimedia-colour movement. Please, people, make some unique logos which stand out in the sisterprojects box. Take a look at it now and look at the difference between the Wikipedia and current Wiktionary, then the rest. Does that not make the whole thing look better? I know that people want them to have a common theme, but in my mind that is both solving a problem which is not there and very unimaginative. Please keep making new logo designs which deviate from the Wikimedia, or I won't have anything to vote for. Daniel (‽) Check out Wikiscope! 19:21, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

#C (Child, Earth & Question mark) - 32 votes in phase 1

Thumbnails:

Inline:

#C 1

Child, Earth & Question mark

#C 2

New version by Rei-artur

New or slightly different versions (C)

Realistic world
Sans axis
Inverted land/sea
Zanimum blues

I've created some without the Wikimedia colours. There are still similarities, but these are coincidental, as Wikimedia colours are similar to those of the earth (blues and greens). Smurrayinchester 15:06, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting stuff, however I'm totally against those particular shades of blue in "Inverted land/sea", they don't work well together. Especially the violet-like colour, which could get lost on a bad printer. What about

? -- Zanimum 16:33, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool logo, but I don't think it goes very well here.--HereToHelp (talk) 23:04, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

With the exception of "Inverted land/sea" (for the same reason that Zanimum brought up), I like all four of these variations. I think the logo works with or without the axes; without the axes, however, it might look more like something flying around (exploring or touring) the Earth, rather than a globe. Also, when creating a favicon for this logo, you might need to remove the white latitude/longitude lines on the globe, so that the globe can be more clearly blue or green. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 01:15, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like them very much! I think that the colours go very well together. I personally prefer the version with axes - it makes the idea behind it clearer. Thank you for daring to make a non-Wikimedia colour version. Daniel (‽) Check out Wikiscope! 08:59, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Related Wikiversity Projects

Motto and slogan contest for English Wikiversity - Please list your suggestions and help select a motto and a slogan.
Wikiversity mission - We can use ideas from the motto, slogan and logo contests to help refine the mission statement. Feel free to post English Wikiversity mission statement revisions.