A logo less english centric is a good idea and I am happy some editors are taking interest in this :-)

I would highly recommand that all wiktionaries have the same logo, as it is an important mark to identify one common project. We are not a collection of different projects, but one project in different languages. This indeed suggest an approval at least at the whole wiktionary project.

Recently, a debate took place as well with regards the wikicommons logo. This debate suggests to me that any logo change should be accompanied by a formal poll at the global wiktionary level, as well as with mention to the global mailing lists.

Incidently, the logo should be owned by the foundation so as to protect it. So, how the logo should look is entirely debatable, but the license of the logo itself is not really debatable. Before any logo contest, it should be made clear that the logo will not be copyrighted by its author.

I sent this mail in copy to foundation.

Anthere

Muke Tever a écrit:

On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 13:14:27 +0100, Tomasz Sienicki tsca@edb.dk wrote:

...

The problem is that

• the original logo is English-centric and difficult to make local (translate)
• it's a nice design, but not really a logo, it does not contain a recognisable sign (that is clear among others on main pages of several projects where miniatures of 'sister projects' logos are shown)

Agreed.

...

That's why we've come up with an alternative logo (containing a sign, easy to translate). You can see it here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Tsca_wiktionary_logo2.png

Now, the questions are:

• should we launch an inter-Wiktionary debate on a new logo?

or

• do we allow some Wiktionaries to use an alternative logo?

The former. It would be good to have a graphic in the logo along with the translatable title, just like the other wikimedia wikis.

*Muke!