Wikivoyage talk:Archive of Wikitravel (not Wikivoyage) logo contest

Great job! --(WT-en) Evan 13:32, 22 Jun 2005 (EDT)

Status
I don't see the new logo... (WT-en) BayernMann 19:27, 8 Sep 2005 (EDT)


 * I've been working on touching it up and incorporating some ideas from the other entries. Meanwhile (WT-en) Evan who will have to install it is kindof busy right now.  For what it's worth I'm spending a good chunk of my vacation time right now working on a new skin which incorporates the new logo.  Of course everyone will get their say. -- (WT-en) Mark 20:59, 8 Sep 2005 (EDT)
 * Thanks for info. (WT-en) BayernMann 17:35, 9 Sep 2005 (EDT)

Why is the Wikitravel logo T capitalized?
This is probably the silliest question yet for the pub, but if the FAQ says that Wikitravel has only one capital letter, why is the "t" capitalized in the Wikitravel logo at the top left of the screen? -- (WT-en) Mikito 01:30, 22 Jun 2005 (EDT)


 * Good question. An even better question is why the background is not transparent, because it looks like arse against a non-white background.  Any graphics gurus out there?  The original file is floating around somewhere, right...? 203.147.0.44 06:15, 22 Jun 2005 (EDT)


 * There's a fairly high-resolution png around with transparency. I suppose I could grab that and do some work on it.  That said, I would rather have an svg version, and notes about the font used.


 * In all honesty I'm not a big fan of the logo for a bunch of reasons, but the decision was made before I had finished my entry. I've always thought that it would be better to have a very iconic version of a compass card or a compass star instead, but hey, that's just one opinion. -- (WT-en) Mark 08:26, 22 Jun 2005 (EDT)

What about a new logo?

 * I'm with (WT-en) Mark on not being a big fan of the logo as it stands - I also think a stylised compass card would be a great icon for Wikitravel.... Can we get support for a new logo competition perhaps? I'm thinking also with an eye to the future.... Should we ever do any merchandising, à la Wikipedia - and I think this would be a great way to "spread the message" - the current logo's gonna look awful, especially on a T-shirt.... So whadya reckon? Call for new logo designs, followed by a vote......? (WT-en) Pjamescowie 08:44, 22 Jun 2005 (EDT)


 * I'm for it. (WT-en) Gutzka did a nice job with the current logo, but I think it's been hard to work with since we don't have a vector-graphics version. The fact that the name is spelled wrong (!) has always stuck in my craw, too.


 * Project:Logo contest is still up. Why don't you run with it? --(WT-en) Evan 10:24, 22 Jun 2005 (EDT)


 * OK, so I've updated Project:Logo contest and the Logo Contest Entry page.... Can everyone take a look at the fairly arbitrary dates I put in and say what they think regarding the timing? Next question: How do we now draw attention to the logo contest? Announcement on the Main Page? Email all users? Make an announcement elsewhere? Suggestions / thoughts? (WT-en) Pjamescowie 13:32, 22 Jun 2005 (EDT)


 * One month plus seems reasonable, and it's on the Main Page now. Let's hope we get more than one entry this time... (WT-en) Jpatokal 21:44, 22 Jun 2005 (EDT)

Maybe this should be a bit more iterative?
I also think the updates to the logo contest page are great, but I'm wondering a bit about the process. I'm thinking that a multi-staged approach would be better, with a dead-line for submitting draft proposals, followed by normal wiki-type discussions, and iterations with a later deadline for final work product. That way participating designers can work more collaboratively than competitively. We can keep the concept of a final vote though in case competing teams emerge. What do you think? -- (WT-en) Mark 06:23, 23 Jun 2005 (EDT)


 * The more I think about it the less happy I am with calling this a "Contest". I think making a logo should be (actually pretty much has to be) a collaborative process, and people aren't too willing to collaborate when something is called a contest.  Even if there is no prize! -- (WT-en) Mark 11:54, 23 Jun 2005 (EDT)


 * I full heartedly agree. At first I was reluctant to put in my submission early for fear that someone would steal my work. I guess I like winning. But then I realized that winning the contest would win me nothing. I think having people collaborate will lead to a better logo than making people feel pressure to win. BTW, I ended posting my submission early, for feedback. --(WT-en) Comrade009 23:08, 24 Jun 2005 (EDT)

Merchandising?
Quote: it'll look awful on merchandising / publicity, and it's mis-spelled!

So WikiTravel is a commercial enterprise, is it? Well, well. (Can't see the misspelling, though!). -- (WT-en) Picapica 20:49, 23 Jun 2005 (EDT)


 * Not-for-profit entities sell stuff all the time. For instance I have an umbrella from the bookshop at the International Commitee for the Red Cross building. -- (WT-en) Mark 00:46, 24 Jun 2005 (EDT)
 * And Wikitravel does not even have to sell it. There are sites where we could upload an image, and users could order T-shirts with that image without any economic involvement of Wikitravel. It would just be a way for Wikitravelrs to print whatever they want on a T-shirt --(WT-en) elgaard 10:25, 4 Jul 2005 (EDT)
 * And the misspelling is "WikiTravel" when it should be Wikitravel (small t). (WT-en) Jpatokal 03:02, 24 Jun 2005 (EDT)

Other Languages
Has the logo contest been announced in the other language Wikitravels? Graphic designers don't only speak english, you know. --(WT-en) Comrade009 19:21, 26 Jun 2005 (EDT)


 * I posted it up on the Japanese front page. (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:00, 26 Jun 2005 (EDT)


 * It's ok for the French Wikitravel too. --(WT-en) Quirk 02:36, 27 Jun 2005 (EDT)


 * Would it be wrong to translate this page into Japanese, German, French, etc., and just link to en: for the contest entries page? --(WT-en) Evan 11:13, 4 Jul 2005 (EDT)

Status quo: keeping the current logo
I hate to be a sourpuss, not that this has ever stopped me before, but I've been a little underwhelmed by the submissions so far and I kinda like the current logo. It even scales surprisingly well. Could some enterprising artist out there just resample/vectorize/whatever the current logo into an SVG, make the background transparent and maybe replace the font? (WT-en) Jpatokal 10:34, 18 Jul 2005 (EDT)

You just needed to wait a little bit longer. Some of the ones on the page aren't half-bad. -(WT-en) Comrade009 18:17, 31 Jul 2005 (EDT)

Voting process
The entry period ends today (or maybe yesterday), so I think it's high time to agree on a voting process. Here's my suggestion:


 * Voting page created with all submitted entries in random order, author name not shown.
 * Authors may upload new versions during the contest: however, all votes cast for the previous version will be removed.
 * Authors may choose to withdraw their entries at any point in the contest.
 * Vote by signing under the logo of your choice.
 * Everybody gets a maximum of two votes. Votes can be changed and you can vote for the same logo twice.
 * Only votes from registered, signed-in users count. Admins have full discretion for determining vote validity.
 * Two rounds of voting, one week each:
 * After the first round, the top 3 are selected.
 * After the second round, the winner is selected.
 * In the event of a tie in either round, voting continues until a tie-breaker vote is cast.

Sounds OK? (WT-en) Jpatokal 05:36, 1 Aug 2005 (EDT)


 * If we must use voting to make this decision, then I think that with this many candidates perhaps elimination rounds might be better. Maybe kindof like one of those tv shows.  It is kindof a similar excercise. -- (WT-en) Mark 08:41, 1 Aug 2005 (EDT)


 * I definetly agree. Since we have so many entries, the votes might get really spread out, and the winner probably won't have a clear majority. I also think that they used runoff voting for deciding the wikipedia logo. How about after each round of voting, half the logos (the ones with the least votes) are thrown out?


 * In retrospect, I think this should have been discussed a little earlier. :( --(WT-en) Comrade009 11:45, 1 Aug 2005 (EDT)


 * One more thing: on the voting page, I suggest that we display the entries at the size that would most likely be used. Some logos may look great when they are 500px across, but not so hot when shrunk to 150px. --(WT-en) Comrade009 11:47, 1 Aug 2005 (EDT)


 * Looks good with three comments:
 * Removing all votes for changing versions will prevent people from responding to suggestions for improvement. So long as users can change their votes then I don't think there should be any penalty for minor logo changes.
 * There seems to be a good possibility that three of the entries (I won't say which three...) might get several votes from sock puppets. Not sure how to prevent that.
 * I like Mark's idea about an iterative vote, how about something like votes in the first week will determine the three finalists, and votes in the second week determine the final logo?
 * And agree with Comrade009, this needs to get going soon since the front page advertises that voting starts on Aug 1. -- (WT-en) Wrh2 17:11, 1 Aug 2005 (EDT)


 * I meant that a change to a logo invalidates previous votes for that version, but people can (and should!) recast their votes for it if they still like it. (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:24, 1 Aug 2005 (EDT)


 * Does the media wiki software have any voting tools built into it? For the Wikipedia Board elections, they had people log into vote. They even had a required 400 edits in order to vote. But then again, maybe someone specifically wrote the script for the election. :( --(WT-en) Comrade009 18:33, 1 Aug 2005 (EDT)


 * Admins will have full discretion in weeding out sock puppets. (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:24, 1 Aug 2005 (EDT)


 * I like the changes and agree that this needs to get going soon. Barring any disagreements I'd say start the first round tonight at midnight EDT and let it run 7 days. -- (WT-en) Wrh2 22:52, 1 Aug 2005 (EDT)


 * A shucks, it looks like I started a little early. It's only 11:49. ;) --(WT-en) Comrade009 23:49, 1 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Voting page created
I've taken the liberty of starting the actual voting page. Once the rules are agreed upon, we can add them to the page. My big concern, however, is that people submitted multiple image, but as one logo/treatment. Should we just tally the votes for the multiple logos as votes for one logo? Also, will people be allowed to spend both their votes on one logo? Once someone higher up (an admin maybe) thinks the page is ready, we can post it on the main page. --(WT-en) Comrade009 18:57, 1 Aug 2005 (EDT)


 * Problem with multiple versions is that if you can cast two votes, then you can vote for the same logo twice... maybe this should be explicitly allowed then?  And I agree that a first round to weed out the chaff and then a second round for the winner is a Good Idea(tm). (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:24, 1 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Vfd discussion
Moved discussion from Travellers' pub.

There are several WT project pages that have nothing to do with Wikivoyage and are not needed for historical purposes. We will develop our own history as time passes and these pages are from a fork that really has nothing to do with us and are not needed for any type of history that applies to Wikivoyage. I think these pages and links to them should be deleted. And any other pages that apply to WT only and are not needed to justify policies we are continuing on Wikivoyage. All of these pages will have equivalent Wikivoyage pages now and in the future. If someone wants to know the information covered in those pages, then they should visit WT. What are the thoughts of others? Should we start a discussion page on this? - Tom Holland (Xltel) (talk) 07:34, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Project:10K Party
 * Project:Archive of Wikitravel (not Wikivoyage) awards
 * Project:Archive of Wikitravel (not Wikivoyage) milestones
 * Project:Archive of Wikitravel (not Wikivoyage) press coverage
 * Project:Archive of Wikitravel (not Wikivoyage) logo contest
 * Project:Archive of Wikitravel (not Wikivoyage) logo contest entries
 * Project:Archive of Wikitravel (not Wikivoyage) logo contest results
 * Project:Archive of Wikitravel (not Wikivoyage) logo voting page
 * Oppose. Bear in mind that the history of Wikitravel up to the last data dump IS our history, along with the history of Wikivoyage between the fork and the reconnect, and all that has happened since. We who were Wikitravel have no need to pretend that we were not Wikitravel. Our disagreement was not with the community of contributors or with our past, it was with IB, who in spite of owning the name and the server, are not the people or the content. I do not support suppression or denial of that history. &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 12:07, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I understand your point and I agree totally that Wikitravel is "MY" history and our history and I am not ever going to pretend it was not my/our history. This is "our" history and I am not suggesting anyone pretend we did not come from Wikitravel or that there is any disagreement with the Wikitravel community in the past. I have been a big part of that Wikitravel past very active as an Administrator/contributor and will be a part of the future of WV. I have tried my best to help WV with edits and cleanup where I could and will continue. But as time goes on some of these older pages may get a bit more muddy and confusing to new Wikivoyagers. We have changed "Wikitravel" to "Wikivoyage" just about everywhere on the site including talk pages when were talking specifically about Wiki""travel"". To be honest I don't really like that very much and it causes additional confusion in my opinion, but I figured there were legal issues (I apologize I have not read all the comments and discussions in that area). I never thought it was a purge of "our" history. When I was on Wikitravel in my past life and put comments on a talk pages and mentioned Wikitravel it was about Wikitravel, but now all my references and everyone's references to Wikitravel have been changed to Wikivoyage. If you go to User talk:Xltel/Mar 2006 you can see where I was welcomed to "Wikivoyage" in December 2005, but we know that is not the case. I am now on Wikivoyage and as we go forward I expect we will get farther apart from the content, policies, goals and overall objectives of Wikitravel. New people will have new ideas and as time goes on we will move farther apart from where WT and WV are now. Please don't think I have any difference in agreement whatsoever in your comments, just looking for some better organization on the old Wikitravel content going forward, maybe deleting is not the solution and possibly the way it is now is the best way to keep it. My comment on not needing it for historical purposes really applies to they are not needed to explain development of policy. Obviously, there is no rush or need to delete anything and we can discuss organization of our history going forward. Happy New Year! - Tom Holland (Xltel) (talk) 17:40, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Tom, next time when you nominate something for deletion, please do so at Votes for deletion. @Peter, I agree with you but then at-least we should have some information on this site about our (WV) background so that people who will join this community sooner may learn about our history. Happy new year everybody! --Saqib (talk) 18:46, 1 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree with Peter. These historical pages should be kept, albeit perhaps in an archive section or tagged as historical.
 * I also agree with Tom, and perhaps go farther than he would. To me it seems obvious that, except where there are compelling legal reasons not to, the WT->WV substitutions on talk pages should all be undone. Pashley (talk) 20:51, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I concur, though I fear it may be too late for the latter. LtPowers (talk) 22:16, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The WT→WV substititions are particularly annoying on pages such as User:(WT-en) IBobi, where it says that Internet Brands owns Wikivoyage. It would be nice to have those undone, but maybe there are legal reasons not to. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:49, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * We should try and undo substitutions that don't make sense by hand. Most substitutions were OK, though, since most mentions are just referring to our project, and it is the same project, albeit with less-douchey hosts and a different name. --Peter Talk 23:53, 4 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep per Peter S. --Peter Talk 23:53, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Outcome: kept. --Peter Talk 22:51, 14 January 2013 (UTC)