Wikivoyage/Logo/2013/R1/c/WV-Logo Proposal AleXXw.svg

Wikivoyage Logo

Election 2013

Background • FAQ • Translate • Results

end

AleXXw: Arrows. The arrows decorated in WMF colours represent all possible directions of travel. Find other versions (differnt languages and own favicon) at the discussion page.

• 
  Main logo
• 
  Same logo - greyscale version (ie for greyscale printing)
• 
  Same logo - black version (ie for Fax / monochrome printing)
• 
  only the arrows for special purposes, ie favicon:

• Votes for this proposal
• Proposal description
• Please sign your comments with ~~~~; try to be friendly and constructive.
• Use === H3 headings === for starting a new topic (if required at all).

Comments

The following conversation is taken from Wikivoyage/Logo 2013/Submissions#Option 12 - Arrows:

My proposal for the new logo. The arrows represent the directions of travel, I took the colours from Wikimedia Design guidelines. Best --AleXXw (talk) 23:57, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Very nice. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:01, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

I agree. Very nice. -- DerFussi 04:54, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Very striking. The text can be translated while the logo remains recognizable for all languages. Works for me. · · · Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 07:59, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

I agree. Beautiful and versatile. Nice work. --Nanae (talk) 09:43, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Great. Simplicity is the best. Re the favicon: suggesting to remove either preferrably both letters (ie. as the last example is - some languages even don't use latin alphabet and ie. chinese/japanese characters probably wouldn't be legible, or consider azbuka, where the first letter is similar to latin B) or at least the "V" (mind translations, where "voyage" could be translated to the word beginning with the different letter). Favicons should be icons (preferably of the logotype) only. In any case, again, very nice work!
Technical: What is the font and is it free?
— Danny B. 12:38, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Beautiful! I like a lot this one! In particular the first version (i.e. main logo)! It has all the feature that I was looking for (i.e. WMF logo & recall to the current one), furthermore, for future use it can be streched to the "only arrows version". Currently it's my favourite! Regarding the letters I don't consider it a problem, because we can have exactly the same approach of the wikipedia logo: an image with a text translated in each language. (e.g. ko, it, fa)--Andyrom75 (talk) 12:57, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

It would work well with a wide variety of fonts, so that would be a separate issue. Each language could make their own decision on what best suits their name. · · · Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 13:44, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Thx for your feedback!

• I was not thinking about different character systems at the moment of creating the favicon, I think just the arrows will work better.
• If anyone here could translate wikivoyage to a language with different character systems (hebrew, any asian, kyrilic,...) I'd love to present them as demo.
• To clarify: the first three logo versions are the same logo for different purposes.
• The font I used was Gill Sans bold. The creator Eric Gill died in 1940, so it should be free in most countries. If there is any problem: I think most of the bold sanserif typeface would work as well.

Best --AleXXw (talk) 20:28, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

• 
  most latin languages
• 
  greek
• 
  spanish
• 
  hebrew
• 
  polish
• 
  russian
• 
  ukrain

Slightly new version using DejaVu sans, an open source font, the other languages for demo. Which version do you like more? Best --AleXXw (talk) 05:54, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

There is one simple rule in typeface design and it is that Gill Sans always wins. Seriously though - drop the bold, it doesn't look good. Either Sans is fine to me, but not with bold. A very good design, I am only slightly worried it is not very travel-themed and could just as well be used by many other projects. PrinceGloria (talk) 19:04, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't like concept "Three arrows". Four arrows are classic for geo-projects. Alex Spade (talk) 12:23, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

I confirm my appreciation for this logo, so I suggest you to invest part of your time in searching over the web if there's any similar registered logos that may arise legal issues. --Andyrom75 (talk) 12:54, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

And I like the three arrows because it is different from the conventional four directions arrows and allows use of the three primary colours. · · · Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 13:43, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

I think this is a very attractive, strong submission. The idea of an unconventional compass (which maybe I'm projecting onto the submission), is really cool. Working the name into the center of the logo is also a cool step. How would this work with a caption, if we choose to use one (we don't have to). --Peter ^Talk 20:23, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't expecting to like anything better than Nick's arrow, but I like this submission best of all the ones that have been submitted so far. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:08, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I like the plain 3 arrows (favicon) (also produces a closure illustion of a cube!) Shyamal (talk) 11:36, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Very pretty. Simple and flexible. --Danapit (talk) 13:50, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

It's a good looking logo, but why the hell does everyone want to use red, green, and blue?? Of all the content (as opposed to meta) projects, only Wikispecies uses this color scheme, and theirs is muted. If we use red, green, blue, we look like a meta project. LtPowers (talk) 01:38, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

I see a great potential on this logo. I was thinking on video where the 3 arrows goes out to show something in the middle, and/or to draw something on their trails as they pass by. Or, in static pages, the smallest ones (with no letter inside), could be used as bullet points on some institutional list or brochure. --Andyrom75 (talk) 08:21, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

I agree. Very nice... -- DerFussi 08:11, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Answer to LtPowers: Because it's pretty. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:28, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

I really like this logo – very clean and striking. I like the font of the original version better than the DejuVu Sans one. I've never been a fan of the clunky-looking DejuVu Sans, open source or not. Kaldari (talk) 04:56, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Font

I would have voted for this one, if it wasn't in Gill Sans. I saw the logo just now and I like the arrow concept, but Gill Sans is not nice. Wolf Lambert (talk) 12:30, 1 August 2013 (UTC)