Hi Quim and Pau, TL;DR, the suggested design icons are men. I realize that it's not the best to make a negative comment without offering a solution, but here I go. Both of these suggestions for the design icon read as men (the first even being called "man" that refers to mankind most likely but no one ever thinks of a woman, and the second being a fairly stereotypical architect bald-with-glasses look which I suppose could sort be a generic person but doesn't read as anything other than a man to me, personally). While I know that you have no intention to imply anything in that regard, if I were approaching as a volunteer and a woman it would (maybe only subconsciously) read to me as if things are a bit man-centric. I would prefer that not be the case. Heather Regarding the design icon I would prefer something more simplistic.

An alternate design that comes to mind is the one used for the technical barnstar - and indeed said barnstar would even make sense in context, given design is a very large part of any good technical implementation and these do be wikis. As for the icons, Pau is right about black being a not good colour for them, but making them solid grey wouldnt necessarily help either - some of the icons are very solid, while others arent, and any solid colour would still make that stand out, contributing to that inconsistency. As it is, the support and testing ones are much more prominent than say the translation, and apparently also bigger to boot, which is only exaggerated by their solidity. But this is for mwws visual identity, right? MediaWiki, it aint flat, so why would its wikis icons be flat? Nevermind how Wikimedia is going, this is the platform. There is this cheery sunflower and these cute buttons... and then a bunch of large, hard, flat icons. It doesnt fit. Are there perhaps more dynamic sets that could be used? I appreciate these are harder to find and would probably need to be made ourselves to actually fit, since they indeed often tend to be if anything overdone, but it would be worthwhile to consider, at least. On 01/03/2013 09:22, Quim Gil wrote: -- -— Isarra