---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Andrew Whitworth" wknight8111@hotmail.com To: textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 23:30:17 -0400 Subject: Re: [Textbook-l] Logo discussion
I disagree that the logo is necessarily a limiting factor on the development and progression of Wikibooks as a project, but I would have to agree that the current logo is clearly dated and does need to be updated to something a little more polished beyond the rough idea that Wikibookians came up with nearly four years ago. And the current "slogan" is also in dire need of improvement.
I'm just thinking about a PR standpoint. It's going to be easier for "real" organizations to take our project seriously if we have a professional look to us. This requires a good logo, a good slogan, and some kind of indication that we aren't a rag-tag group of internet losers. I think that we carry ourselves very well, but if our logos and slogans and all are trashy, our project is going to look like trash by extension. That's been my primary motivation behind redesigning the main page, or redesigning the staff lounge, or making all sorts of other aesthetic improvements.
This is true, the logo and the main page ARE the first things that any PR people would look at, what, may I ask, was the reason that the WMF insisted on a certain set of colors? This, I think, is another good reason to have the main page set up as it is now, to be more reader-oriented.
What it really needs right now is for somebody to take on this issue and
set up the "voting" pages somewhere neutral that would also strongly involve Wikibookians on all of the various language editions of Wikibooks, not just en.wikibooks.
I'm not against doing that kind of thing. I'm busy myself in the next few days, but if nobody steps up to this plate, I will.
Its hard for me to think of a neutral place except maybe commons, if (as I may gather from previous discussions) Meta was not appropriate last time. But maybe we could try Meta again, this time with a better understanding of what the WMF wants from the final product, to avoid the whole thing being turned upside-down on us.
Rather than trying to get WMF involvement in the logo selection, we
should try to find out what went wrong with the logo selection process and try to fix those problems for the next round, if we want to go there.
I'm pretty convinced that "what went wrong" was the WMF enforcing new stipulations after the voting was already over. They had a logo all picked out and voted on, and then the WMF told us that the colors were wrong.
One of the major complaints regarding the logo selection process on the
last round was that the active Wikibookians involved with content development were largely not involved with the logo selection on Meta.
This is the fault of the wikibookians, not with those who were voting on the discussion. We posted notices, on the site notice, on the main page (when the site notice was hijacked for Wikimania and fundraising messages), and I personally posted it on the staff lounge more then once. If wikibookians were not part of the discussion, it's because they chose not to participate. We can't complain if people are given the opportunity, and choose not to take it. What I can't speak for, however, are the other languages, I dont know how well the logo discussion was advertised to speakers of other languages.
I would like
to hear from others on this list in regards to this point, and is it at least possible that potential logos weren't selected because a block of individuals indifferent to Wikibooks were involved in its selection?
I don't think that we should cast non-wikibookians as second-class citizens when making votes. All wikimedians want our project to succeed, and all wikimedians have to look at our lousy logo on the main pages of the other projects. Like I said before, the process would have succeeded if a last-minute color change stipulation wasn't made: A logo had already been selected.
I think I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and call it a miscommunication, unless I can see some evidence of such prejudices. And yes, since we're all part of the same project, people who are not part of wikibooks can also have their say, though I think it's somewhat unfair if someone outside the wikibooks community makes the final decision.
-Matt
Something else that perhaps ought to be looked at is the selection
process of the logo itself.
Again, Something that I will look at personally, if nobody beats me to it.
Perhaps even other ideas like a logo selection committee or even something more off the wall could be considered instead.... although I do think a fiat decision by the WMF board would be a very bad idea.
I'm not asking for a fiat decision, just a hand up out of the hole that we've been dug into. Maybe what we need is some kind of impetus: the WMF could set some kind of "deadline", even if it was a soft one, and that would motivate people to get off their asses and get the job done. Or, the WMF could say "we have selected a logo, we want to change the colors. Vote on the new colors, and the winner is the new logo of Wikibooks". Even if the board never follows up on these statements, it will serve as the motivation the community needs to finish this mess up.
--Andrew Whitworth
More photos, more messages, more storage—get 2GB with Windows Live Hotmail.
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migr...
Textbook-l mailing list Textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l