Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Wikibooks/Logo/Proposal/J

< Wikibooks | Logo | Proposal
edit

See examples with other Foundation logos below.

  •  
    (5) Modified for smaller sizes
  •  
    (6) Modified even further, for even smaller sizes
  •  
    (11) A little less dark
  •  
    (12) A little more dark. Two favicons:    
  •  
    (D10a.3) Proposal D10 with Version 12's colors. Discuss under proposal D please.
  •  
    Wikijunior (C2.1) proposed logo that uses a modified version of (12) for the book

Full proposal

edit

The full proposal is available for review.

Current discussion

edit

Note: older discussions and logos were archived to reduce page length and help focus the discussion.

  1. I prefer 5, but I would have moved the text down, like in 6, and switched the colors. The stuff behind the text in 5 is much nicer than its equivalent in 6. — H92 (t · c · no) 14:20, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. These are quite nice. I like the dynamic aspect of the pages turning, can almost hear them fluttering by. The book is unmistakable IMHO. Text should definitely be below since itherwise it's a bit hard to read. (I still prefer D, but this is my second favourite :) --Mcld 17:29, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. These are good, but not great. It doesn't get my attention nearly as much as, say, B or D (my favorites), or even C, E, or G. Νεοπτόλεμος 21:33, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. This is the only proposal where the book is facing away. Not very 'wiki-friendly'. ...Aurora... 08:33, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. I don't like it very much... there should be some lines to separate the front, the spine and the cover. --Pietrodn · talk with me 13:12, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. I'd take the book of (5) and the text of (6), and I agree with H92 that it would be better to have the text under the book. The motive and the design generally is great. -- Michi (from de.wikibooks) 88.217.21.136 12:03, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. I disagree with Aurora; J seems like the friendliest of the remaining competitors, simply because it's less "corporate". And I think friendliness is a very good thing to associate with Wikimedia; it's a collaborative venture. And the design certainly says "book" without much equivocation. 12 gets my vote for best variation, due to the better contrast of the book with the background, and the text position and font.--Murmurr 17:31, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Sorry to say, but I just do not like any of these. The image is just too concrete --penubag 06:56, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree, I don't like these. Tkgd2007 01:06, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  9. I'd say that 11 and 12 are the best here, but I also like the globe on the book design... 92.3.141.219 12:43, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  10. I like number twelve the best here. RJM 01:11, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  11. I made 15 for proposal D, however it also suites as a possible alternative for this proposal, to deal with the problem of the book facing away from the viewer. Making it possibly a more wiki-friendly version. --darklama 18:18, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Looks good. I think it might be more friendly/natural/open if on the top, the spine was lower than the corners of the cover. So like the other logos here, but turned around to reveal the pages. Might be worth a try. Risk 11:42, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't understand what your proposing be changed. If you rotate the other books around, using the spin as the rotating axes for instance, the spin would appear to be behind, higher or farther away from the cover's corners. Take a real book out, open it up and I think you'll see what I mean. If I've misunderstood you, can you please clarify? --darklama 18:23, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I mean rotating it along the axis that is parallel to the horizon. If you were holding the book by its pages, you would rotate it by moving your wrists. Now you're looking down on the book, then you'd be looking up at the book (except maybe not rotate it _that_ much). Does that make sense? Risk 19:29, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  12. I think 12 looks good, it just needs a bit of anti-aliasing on the text so it doesn't look so "rough"/"pixelated". I love the colour scheme.--Colintso 09:56, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  13. 15 with 12's colors (or the colors from the (u) version of the puzzle book which combine blue and gold in an attractive way) would be nice to see. I'd support either 15 or 12, because both strongly represent a "wikibook" to me. I like 12 a little less, becuase it faces away from the person, and, as others have said, seems less welcoming. 15 is friendlier, but just a bit too green for my liking, because It doesn't seem to fit the look of the other Wikimedia Foundation sites. Different, but related, would be fine. The green looks unrelated to me. That's why blending the layout of 15 with the "related" colors of 12 sound like a good choice to me. --Willscrlt (Talk) 20:04, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I have done what I suggested. It's show above as version 10a.1. There are three other variations on this logo proposal available at Proposal D, including a green version (instead of the blue) and versions without the puzzle piece in both blue and green. --Willscrlt (Talk) 22:47, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Now that the copyright problem with D has appeared, this (J, version 11 or 12) is my absolute favourite of the remainders. Gets my vote. The black/pink colour scheme of 10 seems a bit racy to me, not sure it's generally suitable. I'm not keen on the perspective in 15 --Mcld 20:14, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I think you mean "due to the aftermath of the copyright problems with D", since there is no longer a problem with any of the D proposals. I know what you mean though. I do like the new D ones, but they sure changed a lot from the original D's. n8.2 was really nice, but alas, it's no longer an option. This proposal has survived well, and it still looks good. --Willscrlt (Talk) 21:00, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  15. I created a new proposed logo for Wikijunior that incorporates a modified version of (12) into the design. I thought that everyone here might like to know that, because it could make a good pairing of logos between the two projects if both are selected. --Willscrlt (Talk) 22:07, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Oppose all - bad design and bad colours (of course except the D10 logo). -- RaminusFalcon «…» («it.wikipedia») 07:27, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support 11-12 Good design, good colors. I think my favorite is a cross between 11 and 12. The colors from 11 (with the blue a tad darker) and the rest from 12. 6 isn't bad but the shadow part's to dark. 5 looks really good but wouldn't like itas the logo since it would be the only one without the text below the picture. These fits in with the other projects' the best, at least to me. Rocket000 04:36, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  18. 5 is my favorite. The text shouldn't be shadowed, though; plain text is more aesthetically pleasing. -41.241.104.178 11:14, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  19. I like 12 it would suit WikiBooks the most. 78.86.94.247 00:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  1. oppose except D10 as well. There's something odd about the flaring red pages, looks "snake" like or something. As well the symbolism is whack. The book is opened AWAY from you instead of towards you, giving you the impression that it's material you have to try hard to get at. The blue cover also says "stop" and tends to hide the fiery information inside. Not very encouraging. Davumaya 19:44, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. oppose This logo doesn't represent the multiplicity of books in wikibook. --Gdgourou 10:57, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. oppose - Per Gdgourou and the color sheme doesn't help either. --Panic 23:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
edit
edit

Here is how Wikibooks_LogoProposal.Risk.Small.svg looks with other Wikimedia Foundation logos:

       
       
       
  Meta-Wiki - Coordination   Wikipedia - Encyclopedia   Wiktionary - Dictionary
  Wikisource - Sources   Wikibooks2 - This is the example   Wikiquote - Quotations
  Wikispecies - Species   Wikinews - News   Wikiversity - Learning tools


edit

Here is how -Wikibooks_LogoProposal.Risk.VerySmall.svg looks with other Wikimedia Foundation logos:

       
       
       
  Meta-Wiki - Coordination   Wikipedia - Encyclopedia   Wiktionary - Dictionary
  Wikisource - Sources   Wikibooks2 - This is the example   Wikiquote - Quotations
  Wikispecies - Species   Wikinews - News   Wikiversity - Learning tools


edit

Here is how Wikibooks logoproposal.Risk.BlueOrange3.svg looks with other Wikimedia Foundation logos:

       
       
       
  Meta-Wiki - Coordination   Wikipedia - Encyclopedia   Wiktionary - Dictionary
  Wikisource - Sources   Wikibooks2 - This is the example   Wikiquote - Quotations
  Wikispecies - Species   Wikinews - News   Wikiversity - Learning tools


edit

Here is how Wikibooks logoproposal.Risk.BlueOrange4.svg looks with other Wikimedia Foundation logos:

       
       
       
  Meta-Wiki - Coordination   Wikipedia - Encyclopedia   Wiktionary - Dictionary
  Wikisource - Sources   Wikibooks2 - This is the example   Wikiquote - Quotations
  Wikispecies - Species   Wikinews - News   Wikiversity - Learning tools


edit

Here is how Wikibooks D10a.3.svg looks with other Wikimedia Foundation logos:

       
       
       
  Meta-Wiki - Coordination   Wikipedia - Encyclopedia   Wiktionary - Dictionary
  Wikisource - Sources   Wikibooks - This is the example   Wikiquote - Quotations
  Wikispecies - Species   Wikinews - News   Wikiversity - Learning tools
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikibooks/Logo/Proposal/J&oldid=27631485"