Forum:Changes to the logos

Forums: Index > Rin's Travel Agency > Archive > Changes to the logos

On response to the recent logo design, someone has mentioned that it is unprofessional to use the font being use for the lettering in "wiki", suggesting we use the Final Fantasy font.

The lettering used was done to match (as closely as available) the font used on the monobook logo.

I hold no opinion on this issue. It is up to the community to decide whether we should change it (no opinion means we change it because the user suggesting the change is +1 for change). JBed (talk) 22:02, July 9, 2013 (UTC)

I like Comic Sans, but it's pretty out of place in the logo, so yeah change it. C A T U S E 22:09, July 10, 2013 (UTC)

There are few situations where Comic Sans is appropriate. This isn't one of them. -- Some Color Mage ~ (Talk) 22:13, July 10, 2013 (UTC)

How about Berlin Sans FB?—Kaimi (999,999 CP/5 TP) ∙ 22:15, July 10, 2013 (UTC)

No, this is a proposal to use the Final Fantasy font, like so. Why Berlin Sans FB? C A T U S E 22:18, July 10, 2013 (UTC)

Now I'm confused: you're talking about the Oasis or Monobook skin? I'd appreciate if some things were given on a plate to avoid confusion (at least from my side).—Kaimi (999,999 CP/5 TP) ∙ 22:42, July 10, 2013 (UTC)

Oh apologies, I wrote out the problem on the IRC and clearly only half-assed the explanation here. Yeah, we're considering changing the font of "wiki" on both the monobook and Oasis logos. Either we stick with the two that we have now, or update both so the "WIKI" part uses FF-style lettering. JBed (talk) 22:46, July 10, 2013 (UTC)

The Final Fantasy font is quite tall and narrow. Considering the small space we would be fitting the word "wiki" in, will it be clearly visible? Catuse, in your example, "Wiki" is far too tall. Jeppo (Talk | contribs) 22:47, July 10, 2013 (UTC)

If you take a look at the current wordmark, we've done a little bit of trickery to make it taller than it's supposed to be. Looks like the proposed one is the same size as what we've currently got. -- Some Color Mage ~ (Talk) 22:52, July 10, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, but if you go to the Edit page screen, you get the cropped version of the title. In the proposed version, the bottom of the word "Wiki" will be chopped off. Jeppo (Talk | contribs) 23:02, July 10, 2013 (UTC)

Right, so without bothering to amend anything else to suit a new design, we'd end up with something like this, the red indicating the actual wordmark ratio. JBed (talk) 23:18, July 10, 2013 (UTC)

Actually that doesn't look as bad as I initially feared. Jeppo (Talk | contribs) 23:50, July 10, 2013 (UTC)

I thought the font was good already. The FF font is so narrow short words just look weird on it. I can't actually see the logo on the wiki at all though, I just have a blank space... I am running some script-blocking add-ons though, so maybe that's the deal there.Keltainentoukokuu (talk) 23:44, July 10, 2013 (UTC)

http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii319/THE_faethin/kainfinal.png

		FëasindëTalk "Burn the land, boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me." 16:15, August 16, 2013 (UTC)
		I missed this thread, which is unsurprising considering it was up for a single day. I liked the old logo, and so do several people at the IRC channel. I know this isn't a big issue, but formality requires that until we have a sort of poll asking Wikians whether they prefer the old or the new logos, the old one remains in place.

You know what? Rants are fun, I feel like ranting. Let's begin.

First of all, I don't get where the hell the anti-change side of this argument is getting this strange interpretation of the old logo from, unless they were having long, deep chats about it with Lycentia six years ago about it. It's not informal, it's sloppy. I'm not sure what exactly the font is, but it brings up a Comic Sans feel, which as this is not a webcomic with a primary demographic of people still using 1990s computer monitors, makes it a horrible idea. Also, the slanted Is in it make the kerning look absolutely off, which is another big no. The old logo does not say "Oh, we're a serious site but have a really informal community", it says "We are lazy and incompetent designers that can't even get a logo right".

Also, as I already said below, this thread was not up for a single day. Date of discussion: 10 July. Date the change was made: 6 August. Twenty seven days, Fae, in which you had ample time to check the forum, see there was a thread about changing the logo, and raise an objection. And when you finally did, soon after the changes were made, you had one of the logos reverted, and then sat on the issue for another ten days before reverting another of the new logos and reviving the conversation. What the hell, Fae!? Oh, and good job on those reverts, because you didn't actually revert the main Oasis logo. We've still got the new logo up there because the size constraints mean we don't use wiki-wordmark on the main content pages. And you botched reverting that one, too, because according to the file history, the last change to the file was you putting the new logo back in.

I suppose I should also note because of that botched revert/wiki glitch/whatever causes the wiki to sometimes eat uploads, it is less work to keep the new logo than revert to the old one. Everyone loves efficiency, right? Well, two of the three logos in use use the new design, and one for the old. Putting the old logo back in requires 100% more reverts than keeping the new logo. Is this argument supposed to be serious? I don't know. I don't care. I'm still ranting.

Oh, and of course, one question; why do we need a poll for this? We are routinely capable of achieving consensus without counting number of people for vs number of people against vs people who don't give a shit (I'll give you a hint, the latter one of those three is always the biggest). There's just no point to "I agree with this" repeated fifty bloody times.

OK, so, uh, rant over, wall of text crits you for 9999 damage, I await to see people just plain up ignore me pointing out why the old logo is bad design. -- Some Color Mage ~ (Talk) 04:20, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

Poll

Votes for the Current logo

1. Fëasindë ^Peth 16:44, August 16, 2013 (UTC) I like the fact that the formal font of the series is used in contrast with the more informal font of the word "Wiki". I believe it reflects accurately what we try to be as a community.
2. Drake Clawfang (talk) 16:45, August 16, 2013 (UTC)
3. Really can't add anything to what Fae said -- Sorceror Nobody  17:02, August 16, 2013 (UTC)
4. Yeah, Fae has come in very late, but I do prefer the more informal font. EDIT- I will point out though, that even though the logo was changed to have the Final Fantasy type font, it didn't show up in Monobook and I wasn't even aware it had been changed until Fae decided he was changing it back. Tia-Lewise 22:30, August 16, 2013 (UTC)
5. I like history. --BlueHighwindツ 22:56, August 16, 2013 (UTC)
6. — Yuan^Salut 02:16, August 17, 2013 (UTC)
7. Keltainentoukokuu (talk) 02:48, August 17, 2013 (UTC)
8. I like having a different text for the "wiki" because I feel it accentuates the Final Fantasy classic font. It also matches the cute chocobo o uo 8bit 05:24, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

Votes for the New Logo

1. The font on the old one is awful. Also, up for a day? Fae, you had nearly a whole month to object. -- Some Color Mage ~ (Talk) 22:10, August 16, 2013 (UTC)
2. Jimcloud 22:48, August 16, 2013 (UTC)
3. We need to keep to one logo and then stick to it. There's nothing wrong with the current one, so why change it back? Jeppo (Talk | contribs) 23:09, August 16, 2013 (UTC)
4. C A T U S E 23:40, August 16, 2013 (UTC)
5. Arciele Spira (talk) 01:03, August 17, 2013 (UTC)
6. ShirubaKurono  05:38, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

Comments

"We need to keep to one logo and then stick to it. There's nothing wrong with the current one, so why change it back?" Jeppo, one could ask the same about changing it the first time. Drake Clawfang (talk) 23:46, August 16, 2013 (UTC)

Well, the new logo is still implemented. wiki-wordmark was essentially deprecated by the code needed to display bigger logos. -- Some Color Mage ~ (Talk) 23:49, August 16, 2013 (UTC)

I'm gonna point out again that I actually had no clue it had been changed as nothing showed up in Monobook. So if we do go for the consistent throughout font- hope we don't but if we do- can we make sure it actually shows up in all skins? Tia-Lewise 01:12, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

Monobook was changed to. And it would have changed for you. JBed (talk) 03:13, August 17, 2013 (UTC)

Oh right, but Faethin had it reverted straight after. File:Wiki.png- check file history. JBed (talk) 03:15, August 17, 2013 (UTC)