[Foundation-l] Rethinking brands
erik at wikimedia.org
Wed May 9 04:37:43 UTC 2007
On 5/8/07, Andreas Praefcke <bibliopolist at googlemail.com> wrote:
> To me, "Wikimedia" is the one name to be changed: something completely
> new may be invented in its place, and pretty much nobody would
Yes, I very much support that, though I think there are very good
reasons for a broader rebranding as well.
:-) I think the healthy debate in this thread demonstrates that at
least the basics of my proposal are fairly transparent and obvious.
> In a recent message, Erik asked for "rational" arguments rather than
> "emotional" ones. Here's one: IMHO "emotional success with the
> contributing user" pretty much equals "success" in non-profit
> grassroot communities like Wikimedia's projects.
Arguably, yes. I am curious how unpopular this change would really be,
both initially and after it has sunk in. I'd like to do some basic
polling on it, but only after I've heard all the arguments for and
Do you believe that, if the projects had started under these names,
people would have been less likely to contribute? If so, why?
Peace & Love,
DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
"An old, rigid civilization is reluctantly dying. Something new, open,
free and exciting is waking up." -- Ming the Mechanic
More information about the foundation-l