---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Andrew Whitworth" <wknight8111(a)hotmail.com>
To: textbook-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 23:30:17 -0400
Subject: Re: [Textbook-l] Logo discussion
I disagree that the logo is necessarily a limiting
factor on the
development and progression of Wikibooks as a project, but I would have
to agree that the current logo is clearly dated and does need to be
updated to something a little more polished beyond the rough idea that
Wikibookians came up with nearly four years ago. And the current
"slogan" is also in dire need of improvement.
I'm just thinking about a PR standpoint. It's going to be easier for
"real"
organizations to take our project seriously if we have a professional look
to us. This requires a good logo, a good slogan, and some kind of
indication
that we aren't a rag-tag group of internet losers. I think that we carry
ourselves very well, but if our logos and slogans and all are trashy, our
project is going to look like trash by extension. That's been my primary
motivation behind redesigning the main page, or redesigning the staff
lounge, or making all sorts of other aesthetic improvements.
This is true, the logo and the main page ARE the first things that any PR
people would look at, what, may I ask, was the reason that the WMF insisted
on a certain set of colors? This, I think, is another good reason to have
the main page set up as it is now, to be more reader-oriented.
What it really needs right now is for somebody to take
on this issue and
set up the "voting" pages somewhere
neutral that would also strongly
involve Wikibookians on all of the various language editions of
Wikibooks, not just en.wikibooks.
I'm not against doing that kind of thing. I'm busy myself in the next few
days, but if nobody steps up to this plate, I will.
Its hard for me to think of a neutral place except maybe commons, if (as I
may gather from previous discussions) Meta was not appropriate last time.
But maybe we could try Meta again, this time with a better understanding of
what the WMF wants from the final product, to avoid the whole thing being
turned upside-down on us.
Rather than trying to get WMF involvement in the logo
selection, we
should try to find out what went wrong with the
logo selection process
and try to fix those problems for the next round, if we want to go
there.
I'm pretty convinced that "what went wrong" was the WMF enforcing new
stipulations after the voting was already over. They had a logo all picked
out and voted on, and then the WMF told us that the colors were wrong.
One of the major complaints regarding the logo
selection process on the
last round was that the active Wikibookians
involved with content
development were largely not involved with the logo selection on Meta.
This is the fault of the wikibookians, not with those who were voting on
the
discussion. We posted notices, on the site notice, on the main page (when
the site notice was hijacked for Wikimania and fundraising messages), and
I
personally posted it on the staff lounge more then once. If wikibookians
were not part of the discussion, it's because they chose not to
participate.
We can't complain if people are given the opportunity, and choose not to
take it. What I can't speak for, however, are the other languages, I dont
know how well the logo discussion was advertised to speakers of other
languages.
I would like
to hear from
others on this list in regards to this point, and is it at
least possible that potential logos weren't selected because a block of
individuals indifferent to Wikibooks were involved in its selection?
I don't think that we should cast non-wikibookians as second-class
citizens
when making votes. All wikimedians want our project to succeed, and all
wikimedians have to look at our lousy logo on the main pages of the other
projects. Like I said before, the process would have succeeded if a
last-minute color change stipulation wasn't made: A logo had already been
selected.
I think I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and call it a
miscommunication, unless I can see some evidence of such prejudices. And
yes, since we're all part of the same project, people who are not part of
wikibooks can also have their say, though I think it's somewhat unfair if
someone outside the wikibooks community makes the final decision.
-Matt
Something else that perhaps ought to be looked at is
the selection
process of the logo itself.
Again, Something that I will look at personally, if nobody beats me to it.
Perhaps even other ideas like a logo selection
committee or even
something more off the wall could be considered instead.... although I
do think a fiat decision by the WMF board would be a very bad idea.
I'm not asking for a fiat decision, just a hand up out of the hole that
we've been dug into. Maybe what we need is some kind of impetus: the WMF
could set some kind of "deadline", even if it was a soft one, and that
would
motivate people to get off their asses and get the job done. Or, the WMF
could say "we have selected a logo, we want to change the colors. Vote on
the new colors, and the winner is the new logo of Wikibooks". Even if the
board never follows up on these statements, it will serve as the
motivation
the community needs to finish this mess up.
--Andrew Whitworth
_________________________________________________________________
More photos, more messages, more storage—get 2GB with Windows Live
Hotmail.
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_mig…
_______________________________________________
Textbook-l mailing list
Textbook-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l