On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
With the refusal of the logo by many wiktionaries, a precedent was set.
If a precedent was set then, then it was reversed by the successful Wikibooks logo change: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikibooks/Logo
As should be the case, when that happened it was enforced and all the projects were updated -- if they had no translation, they were given a plane version without any words (this could later be translated and requested on bugzilla). The Wikibooks way is probably the best way to go about it.
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 1:36 PM, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
Sure - the first part of what I wrote (discussing a conflict of vote outcomes) related specifically to Wiktionary, the second part was more general. Given the status of the logos as marks of the Foundation, can the meta community vote to change any logo?
It's not "the Meta community". If a vote is held on Meta-Wiki in the mainspace (not Meta: space), then it has to do with multiple projects and we use Meta-Wiki because it is the "Wikimedia project coordination wiki". This means that the vote is intended for all communities and they are the ones who vote and discuss.
If not, what is the 'right way' to pursue a logo change - using a staff driven process like this one, where the vote is more confirmatory than determinant?
IMO, the process doesn't need to be staff-*driven*, but they need to be involved and know about the progress of the change. This being said, their input would be valuable and would mean a lot -- if Jay says "no, this isn't going to happen", I think that would either make it so that the proposal wouldn't move forward or people would be less likely to vote in favor of it.