Forum:Upgrade of logos in non-active languages

From Uncyclomedia, the UnMeta-wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Forum: Home > Upgrade of logos in non-active languages
User:Athyria came with a proposal to upgrade/replace every logo of a non-active wiki (wiki.png and favicon.ico) with a new version of it. She says her logos have a lot better quality. She already tried to do this on the Icelandic Ekkipedia, but I rollbacked her actions because, in first sense, I found the new versions of hers to be too "Uncyclopedic". The Uncyclopedian (en) image is very gray, dark and cold, but I know... de gustibus et coloribus non est disputandum.

No, the main issue is still that the logo for the English Uncyclopedia should stay a "trademark" of Uncyclopedia itself and not a trademark for other projects. A logo is - beside the content - an explicite and important way to present a project. And if you want to replace the Icelandic Sophia with an Uncyclopedic look-a-like, you actually replace its soul with the English one. These projects are - as Alzheimlich obviously stated - independent countries with another name and another flag. They even have other URLs. They only thing they have in common is their concept to make people laugh. In my eyes (correct me if I'm wrong here) Athyria wants to bring these projects under one flag, one union, a kind of United States of Uncyclopedias, which is absolutely not fine if we want to keep the sovereignty of every Uncyc. You know, information on Wikipedia is factual is almost not bounded to languages. Information is universal, humour is almost.
Athyria also didn't notice that logos should suit in their language environment: did you ever mind the valuta symbol ($ vs € vs Kr) in Sophia for instance? I mean, it's not really welcoming for Icelanders to read a site (as a national humour project) that promotes a dollar sign...
Finally: what about the dead projects such as dlm: or oc:? Change those too?

The logos I created for the new projects are made with care for the national aspects of life. Of course, I admit, the majority of these logos are a copy paste from other projects. But I still didn't give Krones as valuta for Desgalipedia, nor did I give Euros for the Faroese project.

And why copying logos from Uncyclopedia? What's the particular reason for copying from Uncyc? Cartoonist | Spit it out (talk) | E-mail | UnMeta | 17:53, 14 December 2011 (UTC)


I was kind of weird that the term referred to Desgalipedia (Krones as valuta) and figured I was spending a pearl to the sea declaring a Latin term, Cartoonist. I did not realize it was in Norwegian. xP Rhubella beach.jpgRhubella Marie, the rat sockpreppie 2,347 preppieditsRhubella.jpg

Didn't read anything yet, but to react to the last sentence: the biggest uncyc's, the Uncy, but also the Desci, has the same colourscheme. Roye7777777 ~ Talk 21:21, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Desciclopedia copied it from the English one. I don't understand why they did that. Each community is, however, free to do what it wants, we can't decide for them... Cartoonist | Spit it out (talk) | E-mail | UnMeta | 22:58, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
I think that each of Uncyclopedia to have your logo identical to the English version, please somehow share the way to be their mother. In my view, should be for this reason that the Uncyclopedia that belongs to Wikia (with the exception of Inciclopedia) and the Korean version (independent) have different logos. Rhubella beach.jpgRhubella Marie, the rat sockpreppie 2,347 preppieditsRhubella.jpg 23:04, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
(IMO): English is main language on this planet, English version is mother-ship (sort of), logo should be the same (recognizable/branding), Text in logo should however be in own language and in accordance with the url. Wkr, Alzheimlich (talk) 23:22, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
This is only my mind, of course, but who even cares about those empty/unactive projects? If I was you, I would rather care that we don't have statistics for 3 months and it needs to be fixed... --This user is administrator of Ukrainian Uncyclopedia. Vox 23:51, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
@Vox, we can't fix the problem :-/ You should send an e-mail to [email protected], because he is the only one who can fix this properly.
@the rest: What about the French and the Danes who have something completely different? The whole "follow the Uncyclopedians" mentality just doesn't make sense. Let each project develop itself. UnMeta's task is not to enforce all projects to standardise themselves, we just unite them. Yes, it's true: I piddled upon the logos on the newest wikis in a dictorial way, but projects need a start. I still let the case open if a native speaker contributes and he has a better idea, he may do with it what he wants. Only natives know the best solution for the general appearance for their wiki.
I just want to have a debate about this, because I fear for the sovereignty of many wikis, if we tollerate this standardisation | Cartoonist | Spit it out (talk) | E-mail | UnMeta | 00:44, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Personally, I find the Uncyclopedia logo more professional than the old one, it has depth and is groovy, but with a more depressing colourscheme (so I adjusted it for Oncyclopedia, but that is offtopic). Though, somehow it does make sense, looking to the web, which is mostly English, included UnMeta. English is the lingua franca on the web and I think even worldwide, the whole Uncyc project started from English, we still call this UnMeta and not DesciMeta as was the case a few times. It is their own choice to use the logo they prefer, but yeah, at dead Uncyc's there is no-one. Still, then a qualitative better one than one logo with one letter that is a thorn in my eye, and many others. About the French and the Danich, those are completely different, and not related to the we-got puzzle potato. That's their own choice to have their own concept, but then, still, looking at our logo-voting, choosing for the Wikimedia-colour-ripoff versus own identity (which I prefer), is a bit against the concept of the Franish. Roye7777777 ~ Talk 19:50, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Words

Here, let's look at a close-up (400%). See that jaggedness on the E? That's called 'pixelisation'. It's what happens in games from the early 90s and when people tried to edit things using MS Paint in the 90s. Compare to the smooth transitions on that... whatever that thing below it is.

I've got words. Having completely missed this forum when it was actually active, I'll just say some now. Sorry, but that's just how it's going to be.

Yes, I wanted to update the logos - they looked bad. It was exactly the same reason I wanted to change en's logo - the old one looked like a flattened beach ball with weird symbols sharpied on it. Many of the inactive projects here, however, go a step even further than that, such as the one CH was kind enough to link, which uses a somewhat odd font with less antialiasing that it probably needs, and also has serious dithering issues with the E, detailed to the right. While font is less than professional, it is still not such a major issue as that E. That is pretty much a graphical no-no.

The fun thing about this, however, is the things are pretty easy to fix. Use a modern image editor and it is almost certain to smooth the fonts for you, and replacing a letter or two isn't terribly difficult either. And since this is the same logo as en was using, there shouldn't be any problem with it using the logo en is now using, either.

Tada, fixed, or very nearly. Not like anyone was going to complain about it being too much like Uncyclopedia (en); not only was it already exactly the same logo as en's, but there was no active community. I just sort of figured that whenever one showed up, well, they could do with their logo what they wanted (or request it be done if need be) - colours, symbols, style, or just toss out the entire thing and use something classy of their own like the Greeks do. Theirs is nice.

Some people, or at least one person, felt otherwise, however. Okay. Disagreements happen. And CartoonistHenning, you stated you wanted a debate? Very well; I have some questions for you:

  1. Since when is anything about Uncyclopedia trademarked? I mean, there was that time some Wikia person said it was, but all they'd done was bought a domain name, and not even one of the most applicable TLD. That certainly doesn't make it trademarked. Couldn't; the name was too much older and unassociated.
  2. If the en project's setups and whatnot should be distinct to it, why were all these other ones using the en project's logo and other setups in the first place?
  3. Instead of just reverting things and then complaining about them, did you know that offering constructive criticism can not only prove more productive in the long run, but also helps people to develop mutual respect, something which we currently appear to completely lack?
  4. Did you know Americans are actually a minority on en? Most of the folks there are in fact various shades of British, or not even native English speakers at all.
  5. If a community wants a different symbol on a one, I can change it. Chances are I didn't even notice it was different in this case because the thing in question was mostly chopped off, but it could be done regardless.
  6. Yes, I know that wasn't a question; this isn't either.
  7. But this is.
  8. Well, okay, that wasn't, but this next one is.
  9. Ignore the colours for a bit (those can also be modified pretty trivially, and would be done for the asking if a community so desired it). Do you honestly think the current is logo looks better than the other one? I ask because if you do, you probably either need a new monitor or glasses. Or new glasses, if you already have glasses. My brother keeps needing new glasses too, poor guy, so for your sake I kind of hope it's a monitor problem.
  10. If you want the logos to match the logo environment, does that mean I should have changed rcmurphy's initials to something more appropriate for a more international environment? See, rcmurphy, the one who made the original logo, was and is a user on en, not on these other ones, so perhaps changing the initials to 'CH' would fit better. You know, for 'CartoonistHenning', since you seem to think you own them all.
  11. What are the national aspects of life, exactly, and how do they pertain to the logo? I'm not trying to pry or anything, as you say you care for them, but I am a little curious.
  12. And yes, why did these other Uncyclopedias copy from Uncyclopedia? You tell me, what was the particular reason for copying from Uncyclopedia?

I hope this will help clarify matters. ~ Pointy.png 09:28, 27 January 2012

That 'E' became a kind of blur when I tried to merge the different layers, but I have rectified it in pixlr.com/editor. I also minimised 'EKKIPEDIA' so that it didn't take the whole width. Now, give me some time to read all our points | Cartoonist | Spit it out (talk) | E-mail | UnMeta | 15:06, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Just made this one quite quick.
By the way, that thing below is a Cyrillic letter (known from e.g. Russian), that is been called a Yu (Ю). #funtoknow. For an Icelandic wiki though, a ð or an Ð (not a þ) seems logical though :þ Roye7777777 ~ Talk 16:05, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Butbut the english Uncyclopedia isn't in cyrillic, either! We must fix this immediately, for it mustn't have a cyrillic letter on it; that would be wrong! Also, what is it with you and bright orange-yellow? Seriously, yellow... eugh. I'm trying to be funny, see, because yellow is just this... er... you know what? Just read the article, will you? >.> ~ Pointy.png 03:05, 28 January 2012
1. If I did understand well, Carlb mailed me once that Uncyclopedia and Desciclop[e|é]dia are Canadian registered trademarks. Carlb still has the domain uncyclopedia.info, I am, however, pretty unsure if that domain has anything to do with that domain. I think you should e-mail him personally to have clarification.
2 and 12. There are indeed some projects that have copied Sophia from en. Maybe the communities had intentions to customise their copied logos, maybe not. Perhaps there was a lack of knowledge about editing or creating logos. I can't speak for them: whether these communities are gone or they are big enough to give you an answer.
3. I don't think I lack any respect towards your person. We just have different opinions, that's all. I'm sure we would like each other when we would meet in real-life.
4. Okay, from now on I say the Great Brittish Commonwealth ;-) If I ever refer to America or Americans, it is not meant serious. It's rather irony, as the "owner" of the project is an American company.
5 and 9. No problem, but don't impose a logo before you have talked with the local community. In the case where I am the only bureaucrat, you can't speak of an active community. That means: when a new logo doesn't meet its environment (includes valuta), I won't allow you to upload it. I like much more medium:Ekkidinges.png, it contains everything I expect (btw, nice work, R7).
10. It's sad that you view it like that. I don't want to have credits for these logos, I don't even have credits for my work on any Uncyclomedia project I edit. I never say: "this article or thing is mine and you don't touch it", I just created it. But if someone wants to change a work, it's obvious that review is needed. Review = take in count cultural background and not just let someone copy paste.
11. Cultural/linguistic background, valuta etc... things you didn't modify. We had about that earlier.
Cartoonist | Spit it out (talk) | E-mail | UnMeta | 16:30, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
BTW, you know why I'm bureaucrat on all these wikis? I'm just hoping I can give them a life when someone applies to become an administrator there. Nothing more. If someone applies, I don't have constantly to ask Carl to make him/her sysop. When someone reports spam, I can delete it, otherwise I always have to ask Carl. And no, I'm not the superman here, but someone had to take over (and why not me?). I'm sorry if you think I'm a squib and I'm not able to rule things, people always appreciated my work internationally. I'm not begging you to like me or to say 'thank you CH for all your work'. I just felt the need to have things on order | Cartoonist | Spit it out (talk) | E-mail | UnMeta | 16:48, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Hmm, okay, this format works.
1. If carlb, who has no affiliation with the english Uncyclopedia, trademarked 'Uncyclopedia' in Canada, then what does that have to do with the logo of the english Uncyclopedia, which is not in Canada?
2. The projects in question all use this particular logo style from en. You were the one asking why I used the logo style from en. Since they already used that style, a better question might be why would I have not used it. (And for the record I generally don't particularly like people who think overly highly of themselves in any situation. Doesn't matter if they can back it up, either; it's just not an appealing trait.)
4. Actually, my point was that most of them don't use dollars either. Hells, most of them don't even use the same currency now as they did six years ago; perhaps it should be updated to use euros, instead? With added VAT, of course. Can't forget that.
5. Did you talk to the local community? Since there isn't one, if you have a way to talk to things that don't exist, that could be worth something. Could maybe even make money off things that don't exist, too, rather like some religions best left unmentioned do... waaaait... (Also, wasn't the entire point of this forum to close the matter in a meta vote because there were no local communities? I notice a distinct lack of you having started that vote you explicitly agreed to starting. Then again, you hadn't started this forum at all within two weeks of saying you would, either, and by the time I finally noticed it, well... eh.)
9. Oh, you won't allow me to upload it? WP:OWN in a nutshell, that. Seems I truly was spot-on with #10.
Now we could go on point-counterpoint indefinitely, but to what end? This is clearly going nowhere.
Far as I can tell, the only reason you're a bureaucrat was because there was nobody else and you offered to help. Which is fine, nothing wrong with that, but now that other people are also trying to help, perhaps you might want to consider letting them help (with whatever guidance might be appropriate, of course), as opposed to reverting their good-faith edits on sight and then attempting to belittle and denigrate them until they go away. I shouldn't need to remind anyone here that that sort of behaviour only harms collaborative projects.
Which is kind of my main beef with you in general - it's like you don't seem to know how to be a part of wikis at all, let alone run them, and this continued inability to cooperate with others is kind of exactly why I would think that. If you don't want help, fine; though between us I'm sure Roye and I could make a whole slew of multihued logos or some such for a whole slew of dead projects, what, even, would be the point? I'm certainly not inclined to bother when greeted with this sort of antipathy, and nor would most any passersby who might otherwise be interested in contributing should you take the same approach with them. Given that, the possibility of the wikis in question ever actually attaining communities is seeming pretty slim, so preparing pretty interfaces and whatnot for them ahead of time is seeming pretty pointless. ~ Pointy.png 03:05, 28 January 2012
Sooo, what do you wait for then? Go to commons and upload your oh so improved pictures one by one. I haven't seen any of them except for is:. I dunno definition of a wiki "being dead". nl:, for instance, counts 3 diehard article makers (including Roy, someone else and me). In the eyes of WM (since you're constantly linking to WP) nl. should have been called "dead" and incubated for a long time ago. If want to see iw codes, there you are: tr, hr, sr, lt, tl, lv, bg, et, ro, ms, mk, cy, ast, oc, bs, ka, mwl, li, hy, vls, got, tlh, bn, fy, be, mg, lb, jv, lo, su, dlm, grc, sco, is, af, ga, io, km, ie, fo.
All of them are "dead". If you're finished with your uploads, start up a vote in a header below this section. Each of these projects gets a seperate h3 and others may also propose another logo. Normal voting procedures as stated in the policy, except for the explanation (which is this debate). As for the active projects, you first ask if they see the need to change the logo, you show them your upload on commons and then you ask if they agree or they will have a vote about it | Cartoonist | Spit it out (talk) | E-mail | UnMeta | 20:10, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
BTW: I warn you for WP:PA, WP:NPR, WP:WIN, and above all: WP:NAM and this one. You know, WP is true, but they are still a parody. So am I...
If you are familiar with those acronyms, then please heed them yourself. I have said what I shall say; if you do not wish to read or understand it, I cannot help you. ~ Pointy.png 04:19, 29 January 2012
WTF man, you don't have to help me, but this community here and other communities that want to participate. This isn't about me... I don't heed any "rules" based on behaviour. Nobody should tell me how to behave, nor here, nor in the real world. I'm citing these acronyms just to parody you, because you're actually inviting people let them mock with you. Do you actually read your own comments? They're so full of tiles wisdom which make me believe you're my mom or my aunt. Furthermore... why don't you go to Wikipedia, if you're so full of yourself, seeing you're constantly citing WP? Just a rethorical question.
BTW: you take back what you say on the voting policy, you can place it on that talk page as forseen. This is becoming very personal, so continue your personal agenda on my talk page or on yours | Cartoonist | Spit it out (talk) | E-mail | UnMeta | 12:22, 29 January 2012 (UTC)