Why not just leave the puzzle pieces blank entirely? I think the point would still come across that way.
Adam Bishop
From: Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net Reply-To: wikipedia-l@Wikipedia.org To: wikipedia-l@Wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Voting versus consensus Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 11:41:15 -0700
tarquin wrote:
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 "international". 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.
- 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"
- 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 existing design. b. The puzzle piece would either be blank or contain the 2-letter code for that language.
- The underlying concept is that Wikimedia brings together the diverse
puzzle pieces to form a single world. Each project is one piece of that puzzle.
Ec.
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
_________________________________________________________________ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 15:00:44 -0400, Adam Bishop grenfell_@hotmail.com gave utterance to the following:
Why not just leave the puzzle pieces blank entirely? I think the point would still come across that way.
The point that a jigsaw puzzle is a closed, finite system, unlike Wikipedia which I see as an open, infinite system, or the point that a jigsaw is worked on, enjoys a brief moment of "perfection" and is then destroyed? Those are the conceptual reasons I think the puzzle globe is bad - negative symbolism.
From: "Richard Grevers" lists@dramatic.co.nz
The point that a jigsaw puzzle is a closed, finite system, unlike Wikipedia which I see as an open, infinite system, or the point that a jigsaw is worked on, enjoys a brief moment of "perfection" and is then destroyed? Those are the conceptual reasons I think the puzzle globe is bad - negative symbolism.
I definitely agree. It would be better to change the concept into something alive, like a "tree" with branches, and leaves, at least it would be something alive, except so many other logos already use this "knowledge tree" concept that it has been overworked. Like the puzzle concept, which is in use by Microsoft Office suite, it's old and moldy cheese and we need to find new cheese.
Sincerely, Jay B.
Jay Bowks wrote:
From: "Richard Grevers" lists@dramatic.co.nz
The point that a jigsaw puzzle is a closed, finite system, unlike Wikipedia which I see as an open, infinite system, or the point that a jigsaw is worked on, enjoys a brief moment of "perfection" and is then destroyed? Those are the conceptual reasons I think the puzzle globe is bad - negative symbolism.
See [[Georges Perec]]'s novel, "[[La Vie mode d'emploi]]
I definitely agree. It would be better to change the concept into something alive, like a "tree" with branches, and leaves, at least it would be something alive, except so many other logos already use this "knowledge tree" concept that it has been overworked. Like the puzzle concept, which is in use by Microsoft Office suite, it's old and moldy cheese and we need to find new cheese.
Lebanon uses a whole tree on its flag, and Canada uses a single leaf. By your reasoning either of them could shut us down for a breach of their trademarks. :-)
Ec
From: "Ray Saintonge" saintonge@telus.net
Jay Bowks wrote:
into something alive, like a "tree" with branches, and leaves, at least it would be something alive, except so many other logos already use this "knowledge tree" concept that it has been overworked.
Lebanon uses a whole tree on its flag, and Canada uses a single leaf. By your reasoning either of them could shut us down for a breach of their trademarks. :-)
My point, Ray, is that the tree logo is also "overworked" but at least it's a living concept. Your point supports what I'm trying to say. The tree idea is just as "overworked" as the puzzle concept.
And that we seriously need new cheese.
Sincerely, Jay B.
Jay Bowks wrote:
My point, Ray, is that the tree logo is also "overworked" but at least it's a living concept. Your point supports what I'm trying to say. The tree idea is just as "overworked" as the puzzle concept.
And that we seriously need new cheese.
Hmm! Wikimedia as a block of Swiss cheese! ... with each project suggested by one of the holes in the block of cheese ... that's an interesting logo idea, :-)
Ray
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org