Logo discussion

>Kathy Harris wrote:
> > OK. That pretty much answered my question.
> >
> > Now if they cold only explain why the cool new logo with Wikimedia 
>colors
> > was not allowed .... ;)
> >
> > -Kathy
>
>Since we are in branding discussion...
>
>I am not sure who is "they", but I can give it a try
>
>It was perceived that we should give a real identity to each project
>logo, not make the logo a derivative either of Wikipedia, or of
>Wikimedia Foundation. If I remember well, the logo suggested used WMF
>colors. And we asked that this be avoided.
>
>I presume this is the right
>page:http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikibooks/Logo
>
>See at the bottom of the page.
>
>
>Ant

Anthere, so long as it seems we have your attention, I was wondering what 
exactly was the status of the new logo? I'm pretty convinced that a shiny 
new logo would be a great way to kickstart wikibooks' image. I know all 
wikibookians won't agree with me on that point, however.

Who has the final say in the logo? can each wikibooks project select a logo 
individually, or do all wikibooks projects have to have the same logo? What 
I mean to ask is, can the en.wikibooks community vote on the issue 
themselves, or do we have to have a "global" discussion on meta only?

I would like to get the discussion going again on logo discussion, because i 
feel like it's really been put on the back burner.

--Andrew Whitworth

_________________________________________________________________
PC Magazine’s 2007 editors’ choice for best Web mail—award-winning Windows 
Live Hotmail. 
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_pcmag_0507

_______________________________________________
Textbook-l mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l