Erik Moeller wrote:
What was missing was a good overview of the pros
and cons of each
logo. This has technical reasons -- with the pages already very big
and over 130 submissions, discussions had to be relegated to
relatively hidden talk pages. I'm not very happy with this, because
I believe in the principle of *informed* democracy.
Yes, I agree entirely with this.
I think the winner got so many votes because it incorporates words in
many languages, which probably appealed to people because it looks
But this excessive text is *exactly* what makes it a terrible logo -
it doesn't scale down and the filesize is TOO BIG for the web.
After reading more about this subject than I care to, and not being
particularly enthusiastic about the results, I do want to make a suggestion.
1. Use the puzzle piece logo (with modifications) as the logo for Wikimedia.
a. Get rid of the meaningless text from the surface of the globe.
b. In each pussle piece include the 2-letter ISO639-1 code for some
language, oriented to conform with the position of that piece on the
globe. These letters can be omitted from scaled down versions of the logo.
c. The centre puzzle piece should preferably be blank to generically
represent all the non-Wikipedia projects. The worst thing you could put
in the centre piece would be "en"
2. Each project could design its own logo, use the one it already has or
use a temporary generic logo while it is designing its own.
a. A key required element of each logo would be a single puzzle
peice. It would be up to the participants of that project to determine
how that puzzle piece would be worked into aesthetic conformity with the
b. The puzzle piece would either be blank or contain the 2-letter
code for that language.
3. The underlying concept is that Wikimedia brings together the diverse
puzzle pieces to form a single world. Each project is one piece of that