Wiktionary/logo

Logo discussions & votes

• Discussion on the logo votes

---

• Wikibooks
  • 2006–2007 archive: pg.1, pg.2, pg.3, pg.4, pg.5
  • 2008 archive: pg.1 pg.2 pg. 3 pg. 4 pg. 5
• Wikijunior
• Wikipedia
• Wikiversity
  • Archive: pg.1, pg.2, pg.3, pg.4, pg.5, pg.6
  • 2017 refresh: discussion
• Wiktionary
  • 2006 archive: pg.1, pg.2, pg.3, pg.4
  • 2009 refresh: discussion, proposals, voting (round one, results or [1])(round two results or [2])
• Wikivoyage
  • 2013 change: process, round 1, review, round 2
• Wikidata
• MediaWiki
  • 2020 change: process
• Wikifunctions

---

• Logo (current logos, guidelines, localisation)

+/-

We've got our winning logo! Please join the discussion at discussion on the logo votes on how to proceed from here on.

• 
  Proposed "Scrabble-Mah Jong" style logo
• 
  Japanese version, an example of the design's adaptability for different languages/alphabets
• Potential "favicon" (used only at small sizes)
  Potential "favicon" (used only at small sizes)

• 
  Potential portal logo
• 
  English (Korean letter to be changed)
• 
  Russian (colour balance to be addressed)
• Korean
  Korean
• 
  Hebrew
• 
  Chinese (Korean letter to be changed)

Font refinement

While I like the logo, I am not so happy with the font used. I just played around a bit with my DTP program testing other fonts, please say what you prefer and/or add your suggestions. --Elian 01:41, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I like the third typeface in each image; the Wikipedia-esque logo and the Gill Sans type one. Smurrayinchester 08:07, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

My favourite is (counting from top-left): Row one, column two. -- Stromdal 08:23, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

The fonts on each pieces aren't final, are they? I'd like the typeface font to match the pieces font, and I remember someone proposing that we use fixed-width (sans-serif) fonts in all scripts. --朝彦 (Asahiko) 08:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

The pieces are obviously all in different fonts, hence cannot be matched. Are you suggesting to match the central piece's font? Wikipediatrician 02:58, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I know that they are all different fonts, which is natural as they're all different scripts, but I was referring to what you were saying in the Talk page. If we are going to use sans-serif (or gothic or dodum or whatever) consistently, then it would only be natural to use matching font in the text below, won't it? --朝彦 (Asahiko) 16:12, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

The font in on the tiles should be modulated (serif, etc.) It seems more appropriate. The underlying text should be in a font that is easily available in many scripts. For Latin, Cyrillic and Greek, we could have the same font, something like a SIL font, DejaVu or Lucida. If characters are missing we can always make them in SVG but a multiscript font would really make the translation of the logo easier. I personally don't care whether the underlying text is modulated (serif) or unmodulated (sans-serif). The current Wikimedia identiy typeface is Gill but it lacks many characters or compatible scripts. --moyogo 13:17, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry 朝彦, I had completely misunderstood you. I agree with Moyogo in that tiles and underlying text need not be the same, as long as they're reasonably readable at low resolutions. Wikipediatrician 04:58, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

My wording might not have been clear enough so sorry for that, Wikipediatrician. I understand Moyogo's point which seems to be more significant than maching the text and the pieces. --朝彦 (Asahiko) 12:32, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I think the second (counting from left) in the first row ist the best. And it fits well to all other wikimedia logos -- Sensenmann 15:15, 7 December 2006 (UTC)