Wikivoyage/Logo/2013/R1/c/Wv logo proposal flying plane.png

Wikivoyage Logo

Election 2013

Background • FAQ • Translate • Results

end

Globe-trotter: Plane(t) - Emphasizes that Wikivoyage is a free, world-wide travel guide. The airplane represents travel, and considering we're a world-wide travel guide, it is flying around the Earth. The "free" bit is only slightly hinted at, as the airplane is flying in a half-moon-shaped reversed "c", a nod to our copyleft license.

• 
  6a. Two planets
• 
  6b. One planet
• 
  6c. One planet blue
• 
  6d. Two planets alt

• 
  6e. Plane and planet
• 
  6f. Looping plane and planet
• 
  6g. Plane in front of planet
• 
  6h. Looping plane
• 
  6i. Flying plane

• 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 6 - Plane(t):

Seems like the Death Star with a bigger hole. ~~EBE123~~ ^talk_Contribs 21:58, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Very nice but it remind me the expedia logo. Inkey (talk) 11:52, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

I think it's a bit similar to Expedia's previous logo, but not their current. //Shell 18:37, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Generally speaking I like the logo, but it doesn't makes me think to a WMF site (I don't recall at all the expedia's one, so I'm not referring to it). Try to use all the RGB colors just to see what comes out. --Andyrom75 (talk) 21:57, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm a fan of this, but would like to see some other versions. The planets to me look more like an eyeball, which probably isn't what you're going for. I don't think the swooshed plane, which I like a lot, is too similar to the old Expedia logo (the whole look is very different). --Peter ^Talk 19:19, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

The two planets were no success, so I uploaded a couple of different versions of the logo. I thought it might be an idea to make the plane loop, as it makes the logo a bit more playful and shows how fun travel is (just like how making loops is fun). Globe-trotter (talk) 03:41, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Upturned planes on 6f and 6h lead to aerophobia. Alex Spade (talk) 15:58, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't like most of the alternative versions you made, but 6i is excellent, I like a lot! PS The above Alex comment cracks me up! :-D --Andyrom75 (talk) 17:21, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

These are by far my favorite logos here (enough to make me make my first edit on Meta). Simple but interesting, and (my pet peeve) actually has good typography. 6d, 6g, and 6i are my favorites.—Kelvinsong (talk) 18:20, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

These are very intriguing. I really like 6i out of all the options, but would also like to see a version of 6e flipped vertically (so the plane flies forward to the right) and changed to blue. JamesA (talk) 07:53, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

This is generally a very nice logo, very dynamic. Only it took me while to recognize the plane in it - it looked like a lizard to me at first :) And also I am not sure if a plane represents traveling very well, it doesn't work with me, anyway. --Danapit (talk) 13:56, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

You improved it greatly in the later variations, namely 6i. The use of orange and bright blue is really dynamic. On that note, is it possible for us to see 6i in orange? Nick1372 (talk) 15:03, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

What about some more color? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:32, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

6i is my favorite, and it seems like a few others agree with me. The problem with it is when it needs to be shown without the word Wikivoyage & small, i.e. a favicon. Frankly, it would make a terrible favicon. I like it a lot, though. Does anyone know if it's possible to have a slightly different favicon than full logo? 6g would make a nice favicon. Nick1372 (talk) 06:25, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

No reason we can't, I guess. Wikipedia does it. JamesA (talk) 12:01, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Great concept, but the plane instantly reminded me of a shark swimming in the water...?

Globe-trotter, this is a really good idea for a logo and I love the way it evolved to become more simple and poignant. If you already don't, I believe you could make a living as a graphic / corporate identity designer. This is one of my favourites, because it looks really cool and professional, which will make people think Wikivoyage is not just a bunch of nutters writing crazy stuff about things they didn't like in Tblisi.

Just a few remarks:

• I am a strong believer in using Wikimedia standard colours for newer projects to make clear their association with the foundation. Worked for Species, Commons and Data, should work well for us, because the point we want to make online is that while there are other wiki-based travel sites online, we are the only one thus far that is genuinely free in every sense and run according to all of the Wikimedia principles. Would you be able to try to use the RGB colours on a version of the logo?
• There might be some concern about suggesting travel = airplanes, which is somehow something we might want to avoid, being very inclusive of all modes and types of travelling and throwing cliches outta the door. That said, I am a quite cliche traveller myself and I like planes :)
• I agree I get this "I've seen that somewhere" vibe and you may want to check out whether there aren't some similar logos around
• I absolutely believe the only way the plane should be pointing is upwards and it should point in one direction both in the general logo and favicon, although I am all for having a different favicon than general logo, or even many versions of it, as long as they are instantly recognizable.
• As a sidenote, we may want to later reuse the "inverted plane" logo (6h I believe) or the "plane + mountains" logo from another proposal whenever we would be looking for a logo for WikiAirCrashInvestigation

All from me now. Over and out, PrinceGloria (talk) 15:11, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

I agree with PrinceGloria that using RGB could highlight the sense of a greated community that we are a part of. Maybe "wiki" and "voyage" could be colored with the two missing color, because I think that the remaining part of the logo is nice as it is. --Andyrom75 (talk) 20:04, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

What complete rubbish. Wikipedia doesn't use RGB. Wiktionary doesn't use it. Wikibooks doesn't use it. Wikinews doesn't use it. Wikisource doesn't use it. Are they any less a part of the community? Wikipedia especially? Why would we want to look like a meta project? LtPowers (talk) 19:34, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words. The aformentioned projects, perhaps excluding Wikisource, are very popular in their own right. You can see that the less popular / newer the project, the more coherent its logo is with the general theme (e.g. same shades of blue, similar style). We would want to look "like a meta project" for the reasons mentioned above - for people to immediately know and become familiar with the idea, that this IS a Wikimedia project, not just yet another travel site / wiki. PrinceGloria (talk) 05:33, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

When I first saw Wikivoyage’s current logo I thought "this looks like an internal project of the Wikimedia foundation, probably something boring and not something useful like Wikipedia or Wiktionary" (of course I was wrong, but having those colors on the logo was very confusing) Fractal (talk) 15:47, 24 July 2013 (UTC)