[Foundation-l] Re: Logo use

[Anthere]

Sam Korn wrote:
> On the subject of the recent introduction of Wikimedia's visual
> identity guidelines [1], I came across several images (one of which I
> apparently created myself, though I don't remember doing so) which
> contravene these guidelines.  Angela has made a list of these on Meta
> [2].  Most of these don't seem to be intrinsically harmful to the
> Foundation's copyright or give the impression that the Foundation
> endorses any concept or group that it in fact does not.
> 
> However, there are some images that do concern me.  There are two
> images created by Cool Cat [3] for a group named the "Counter
> Vandalism Unit" [4], a group that aims to facilitate and improve
> vandal fighting.  The images are logos for the group.  One [5]
> incorporates the WMF logo, the other [6] the Wikipedia logo.
> 
> Cool Cat was given provisional permission by Anthere to use these
> images before the above guidelines were created. [7]



Correction please.

I did not give any permission at all for use of that logo.

On my talk page, I answered : [1]

Hmmm, an immediate question comes to my mind... where will this bot be 
active ? Likely on the english wikipedia, or possibly on other 
wikipedias ? If so, why using the wikimedia foundation logo and not the 
wikipedia one ? There is no reason to use the foundation logo as the 
foundation is not involved in this bot activity. I fear it could be 
perceived wrongly. I myself see no specific problem in having the bot 
with the wikipedia logo... but since it will appear as a community bot, 
I think you must get approval from the wikipedia community to use it. 
The only question left is "where will this bot be active ?" Ant

-------

Later, there was a bit of a conflict on the issue and I was asked to 
confirm I gave permission. If I remember well, I confirmed I did not 
give it.

I did not change my mind since then.

-------

Months later, I still think this logo is a bad idea, because it gives 
the impression the Foundation is supporting the Counter Vandalism Unit.
The Foundation supports is entirely irrelevant here. Fighting vandalism 
is a community issue.


Just a few days ago, a similar logo appeared on the french wikipedia and 
I must confess, I did a speedy deletion... (on the grounds it received 
no authorization... a bit borderline :-))

-------

The current guidelines are for the way the logo could appear, not for 
its internal uses. I think the change you are suggesting would fit in 
another definition of its use.



[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Anthere#Couter_Vandalism_Unit


Ant


> However, the Counter Vandalism Unit does have some opposition within
> the community.  I would note that I myself am in disagreement with
> much of its structure and attitudes, particularly some comments that
> imply that the Unit is the only way in which to fight vandalism. 
> However, just to avoid any undue comments, I am sending this post not
> to request removal but just _reappraisal_ of the situation, which I
> see as potentially harmful.
> 
> The logos give the impression that the Unit is Foundation-sanctioned. 
> This idea is encouraged by the proliferation of the Foundation logo
> attached to Unit-related matters (most notably the infamous
> userboxes).
> 
> With this in mind, may I suggest that the provisional permission
> granted to Cool Cat be at least reconsidered in light of the new
> guidelines.
> 
> Happy Wikipedia Day!
> 
> [1] http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikimedia_visual_identity_guidelines
> [2] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_logo_derivatives
> [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cool_Cat
> [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Counter_Vandalism_Unit
> [5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:CVU2.PNG
> [6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:CVU2.5.PNG
> [7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:CVU2.5.PNG
> 
> --
> Sam