Jimmy Wales
wrote:
Jake Nelson <jnelson(a)soncom.com> wrote:
> I'll tell you the truth: while I *love* the
new
> Wikipedia logo (puzzle
> ball) and fully support it in every way, I
>*really* preferred the logo
> that's now on the wikimedia foundation website
>(the #2 logo, the
> abstract peace-person) all along.
Stevertigo writes:
Well, the people have spoken --havent they?
Jake:
Ditto. Failing that, I thought it was perfect as a
WM logo... I think that
the #2/3 logoing was very wisely done.
JW:
So, I hope the
answer is "Yes, of course, the
Wikimedia Foundation is
> an umbrella
Jake:
(On a completely tangential note, last I heard,
it's
just Time Warner again
now. They're not so happy with AOL these days.)
SV:
Thats what they get for buying a piece of crap like
AOL. Suckers.
JW:
But, I wonder.
We're not a huge media
organization, yet. And the
beneficial branding impact of a logo depends on
people actually seeing
> it a lot.
SV:
Speaking of media -- we *need* a news wiki. No joke.
JW:
then if I send
a letter on Wikimedia Foundation
letterhead to the Ford
Foundation, say, then if that letterhead has the
Wikipedia logo on it,
there's a good chance that someone there will
instantly have happy
feelings towards us, because they'll
instantly
know who we are and
> what we do.
SV:
This is exactly right (I thought this logo stuff was
just a trivialty, huh?) and the two runners up need
some professional post-election refinement/treatment
of their own. I might suggest a merger of the PM
sphere with the Neolux model.
Ill work on a mockup today. This way the WM logo
would contain both -- IF Neo doesnt like it? Well it
was an arbitrary executive decision by Erik to use it
at all, and he could just at well executively allow
for some modifications. Nohat's got some free time ;)
Ill set up a new page on meta for modding the WM
("urgent") and MW logos (less urgent) and blurb them
on the WP.
JW:
So, what am I
supposed to do when I print
letterhead?
SV:
Give the raster-monkeys a week to come up with
something.
Jake:
I'd personally advise putting /both/ of them on
letterhead to be used in
Wikipedia-related contexts; cases where it's clearly
a Foundation issue
should have that alone. Putting them together isn't
that much more
I disagree --they could be better combined --Think of
them as each "winning concepts" --- free to alter to
best effect.
~S~
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com