Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Wikibooks/Logo/Proposal/D

< Wikibooks | Logo | Proposal
edit
Prior proposals

n5, n6, n7, n7.5, and n8 were deleted due to copyright poisoning.

Proposal Version 7.x

edit

See examples with other Foundation logos below.

  •  
    (7.3) Stylized pages in green.
    Favicon:  
  •  
    (7.4) Modified version of 7.3 with added color
    Favicon:  
  •  
    (7.5) Similar to 7.3 with page colors filled in.

Proposal Version 9.x

edit

See examples with other Foundation logos below.

  •  
    (9.4)
    Favicon:  
  •  
    (9.6)
    Favicon  
  •  
    (9.7) Multicolor version
    Favicon:  
  •  
    (9.8) Another multicolor version
    Favicon:  

Proposal Version 10.x

edit

See examples with other Foundation logos below.

  •  
    (D10a.3) Open text book with blue and gold tones.
    Favicon:  
  •  
    (D10b.3) Open text book with green and gold tones.
    Favicon:  
  •  
    (D10d.3a) Open text book with blue and gold tones and a hovering globe.
    Favicon:  
  •  
    (D10d.3b) Open text book with green and gold tones and a hovering globe.
    Favicon:  
  •  
    (D10e.1) Multicolored version of D10d.2.

Proposal Version 11.x

edit
  •  
    (11.1) Leaning open book.
    Favicon:  
  •  
    (11.2) Favicon:  
  •  
    (11.3) Favicon:  
  •  
    (11.4) Favicon:  
  •  
    (11.5) Favicon:  

Current discussion

edit

Note: older discussions and votes were archived due to excessive page length warnings.

General comments

edit

General comments about Proposal D may be added here.

  • I hope nobody is offended, but I reorganized this page, archiving the old discussions to the talk page, and sorting all the proposals into numerical/chronological order to help eliminate any bias for or against particular proposals. It's so nice to see that this proposal has survived a serious setback with possible copyright violations in much earlier versions, and we are starting to regain consensus again. Thanks to everyone for keeping cool heads and creative spirits. :-) --Willscrlt (Talk) 23:38, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We were becoming overwhelmed with possibilities again. I think we need to stay focused, so I archived all of the logo revisions that did not seem to have much traction in terms of support or positive comments. Some that I archived had good support at one time, but newer versions seem to be more appealing. I kept the three versions of each series with the most support. I didn't delete anything--I just archived everything to the (very large now) talk page. If I archived a particular favorite of yours, feel free to resurrect it again by cutting and pasting it back here again. --Willscrlt (Talk) 22:23, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Version 7.x

edit
 
(7.3) for Wikibooks

Version 7.3

edit
  1. Neutral This one is the least like the clip art or logo used by the library that were based on a similar design/theme. --darklama 18:08, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


  1. Support I like this one, it's simple, it has good colors that people enjoy, and it scales down nice to be a good favicon. There might be some improvements that we could make to it, but it's good enough as-is. --Whiteknight (meta) (Books) 21:46, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Support — H92 (t · c · no) 19:01, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support I like this. It suits well with the other wikimedia logos --Ramac 17:41, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support - Yeah, I like this one, it's very possibly the best one of all current proposals, in my eyes. Agree that the favicon is nice. --Mcld 11:18, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support - This is possibly my favorite of all that are left. Cary Bass demandez 22:29, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support - Agree this is the best one. --Panic 23:50, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support - --C64 23:15, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support This is certainly the best option on this theme.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 03:57, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  9.   Support This is the clearest, most stylish option here. It also looks good next to the other projects' logos and makes a clear favicon. Inductiveload 18:16, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Oppose - n8.2 and 9.3 are better. --Willscrlt (Talk) 19:38, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 
(7.4) for Wikibooks

Version 7.4

edit

Version 9.x

edit
 
(9.4) for Wikibooks

Version 9.4

edit
  1. Weak support - Thanks darklama for darkening the books part of the 9.3 logo. That looks great on my screen. I'd remove the unreadable text from the favicon. I noticed that you also narrowed the width that the book is open, which makes it look a bit like a drill bit now. I'd go with the wider, more-open book that looks more like a book; even a bit wider at the top than 9.3 might look good. Either way, I definitely think that I could live with 9.4 9.5... BUT... I was wondering if someone would be willing to try coloring the 9.4 9.5 logo using the color pallets from Image:Wikibooks logoproposal.Risk.BlueOrange4.svg and/or Image:Husky puzzle book.svg. The green is okay, but it doesn't really look like a Wikimedia Foundation logo. It's too green. Most of the Foundation logos use a lot of blue and also the teal-ish green. I really like the look of this book, but the colors seem wrong. I'm not sure how the book would look with different (i.e., non-green) colors, but I think it would be worth it to at least see it that way before making a final decision. I think that it would also pull in support from people liking proposals E, F, J, and maybe even G A, and B. --Willscrlt (Talk) 04:44, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    FYI, The Wikimedia Foundation opposed the last logo finalist picked, because of its colors being too similar to existing logos, which is why none use a combination of blue and green. WMF apparently does not want to be associated with a lot of blue, green, red logos. Julian awhile back demonstrated the problem caused by all the logos using the same colors. I intend to remove the text from the favicon after this settles down on the big one, I just include it as a favicon for now to demonstrate that it can still be made out. --darklama 14:00, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Just because we don't want a clone army of logos, doesn't mean that we can't pay homage to the tradition. That's what I especially liked about the Image:Wikibooks logoproposal.Risk.BlueOrange4.svg colors. It has blue, but also an "energy" to the colors lacking in this all-green logo. With just various shades of the same green color, it doesn't feel very energetic to me. It feels a little bland. And while it separates us from the standard WMF colors, it doesn't do anything to link it to the WMF at all. A dash of blue might do that. I suck at editing SVG images (Inkscape baffles me), otherwise I'd try to do it myself. I just want to see what the book would look like in a non-monochromatic color scheme, and Image:Wikibooks logoproposal.Risk.BlueOrange4.svg has some good looking colors. It would also help to bring the two proposals together (consensus building, perhaps, unless the outcome is terrible). I'd just like to see how it looks, because I love the shape and style of this logo, but the all-green color is a little boring to me. --Willscrlt (Talk) 23:58, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support per Willscrlt. I agree that you should remove the text from the favicon. Also, the shadow is a bit too dark. The green brought "energy" to the logo. The logo is "energetic". --Jackl 11:47, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support A modern, clean logo that fits in with the rest of the WM logos. — H92 (t · c · no) 19:02, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Neutral - To me the shape of 9.4 seems a little bit too straight and too simple. So I tried to make it a little bit smoother - see "9.4 - edit" [9.5] (I know that the colours and so on aren't correct - I just experimented on darklama's proposal). Please note that this is not a official proposal but only a possible suggestion how to improve 9.4. --OnkelDagobert 16:12, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Oppose - 10.x are better --Ramac 10:29, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 
(9.6) for Wikibooks

Versions 9.5/9.6

edit
  1. Support - While I'd still like to see the color palette from Image:Wikibooks logoproposal.Risk.BlueOrange4.svg tried with this book (see previous discussion above), I really like both the shape (the curves are more realistic and add "sex appeal") and the darker colors you used. Great job OnkelDagobert (and ditto to darklama for the original 9.4 version on which it's based). BTW, I renamed it from "9.4 edit" to "9.5", because I think it deserves to be an "official proposal" and 9.4 edit was too hard to type and read. :-) --Willscrlt (Talk) 19:22, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment - I just noticed that 9.4 and 9.5 contain a drop-shadow and that 9.5 does not include the English name of "Wikibooks" in the logo. Is a drop shadow a good thing to have in these logos? Yes, it looks really nice and "grounds" the book to the white background, but they tend to print and resize poorly (with SVG that might not be a big problem). Leaving out the text would make internationalization of the logo much easier, and that's probably a good change. --Willscrlt (Talk) 19:26, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Note: Version 9.5 was a JPEG image and was replaced by version 9.6, which is and SVG image. The rest of this discussion concerns 9.6.
  3. Comment - The bottom looks very nice, but the top still needs a little rounding out like I did in D10b.1. At the very least, I think the "V" shape should be widened out more like 9.5 so that the book is a bit more open and welcoming. --Willscrlt (Talk) 06:53, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Oppose - 10.x are better --Ramac 10:29, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 
(9.7) for Wikibooks

Version 9.7

edit
  1. Strong Oppose - The colors to me look foreboding, depressing even. That is not at all how I think of Wikibooks. Maybe it's because the blues and purples remind me of bruises. Anyway, I'd rather stick with the current logo than switch to this one. Sorry darklama, but I like all of your other logo suggestions better than this one. --Willscrlt (Talk) 22:23, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Oppose – Version 9.6 is better, I don’t like these colors. — H92 (t · c · no) 21:44, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose - 10.x are better --Ramac 10:29, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Joke - Wikibooks: Halloween edition! Wikibooks: British/American horror story edition! Wikibooks: BDSM edition!

Version 10.x

edit

I decided to bite the bullet and figure out how to do this in Inkscape myself :-) I took darklama's 9.4 version and curved its pages a bit to look more like OnkelDagobert's version (his was PNG, so I couldn't edit his version). Then I picked the blue and gold colors from Image:Wikibooks logoproposal.Risk.BlueOrange4.svg and applied them to the book. It looked a little sparse, so I added Image:Wiki letter w.svg from the Commons and tweaked it a bit to fit on the page (thus possibly making it more clear that this is a wikibook, not just a regular book). I also added the "in English" below the main text. In other languages, that phrase could be translated while keeping the Wikibooks the same (for Latin character languages), or both could be replaced with other languages (especially in non-Latin cases). Since probably not everyone is going to like the puzzle piece, I included a version without, too. I also eliminated all the extra stuff for the favicon size. It still looks a little blurry to me, so I will probably tweak the page colors a bit to get more contrast. Other than that, I really liked the result.
After all of that, I thought that I'd like to see how it looked with the original green colors, so I created the b version. I used darklama's original dark green colors to replace the blue in version a, and wow! I really liked how that turned out. I especially like how the green looks with the other WMF logos (see below in the second batch of logos). It stands out much better than the blue version (same place, first batch of logos). --Willscrlt (Talk) 22:37, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Making logo proposals for Wikibooks is what has given me plenty of practice using Inkscape. I'm sure your proposals will improve the more you use Inkscape as well. I tried adjusting the colors and messing around with them as you've done. I didn't really like the results, so I deleted them instead of submitted them. For the same reasons I don't like any of these proposals, the colors are too bright and also the colors don't really contrast and complement each other well. There is too much yellow in them. I also don't like the use of the W puzzle in two of the proposals. I think a puzzle is too Wikipedia centric. I think "in English" needs some work to complement "Wikibooks". I think you left it as text rather than converting it, which may be one part of the problem, it looks pixilated on my screen. I think 10c likes like the pages are defying gravity with some pages flapped open and some pages perfectly settled or like some invisible force is keeping the pages from settling down like the rest. --darklama 03:54, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The newest version of Inkscape (0.46) is much easier to use than the older versions I tried before. You are correct. I did not convert the text to paths in Inkscape. That's partly because I forgot to, and partly because I haven't come across that particular command yet. :-) I like the bright colors. The monochromatic (single-color) greens are too bland for me, even the eye-poppingly bright green ones. I also happen to like colorized movies better than the black-and-white original versions. I guess I really like a variety of color since we live in a colorful world. As to the puzzle pieces... It does harken to Wikipedia, but I think it is subtle and it it helps tie the two project together--they are related after all. On the other hand, the puzzle piece is tiny, and only a small part of the whole book. Another way of looking at it is that the book is made up of wikitext, and that's what the piece could represent. I also added a globe version for those who like globes. --Willscrlt (Talk) 05:56, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have revised all of the 10.x logo proposals based on the growing consensus in this thread. Here is what I changed:

  • Used the curved and pointed page design by OnkelDagobert as the base for each of the new versions.
  • Adjusted the colors to use only standard web-safe colors for better cross-platform and cross-browser compatability. (The globe has a little less "punch" to it now at 32-bit color depth, but it looks a lot better at lower color depths than the older version did.)
  • Added "layers" in the SVG file to make it easier to edit the documents in the future (it was difficult to grab the parts you wanted before). The layers are all locked by default to make it more difficult to accidentally nudge something.
  • All text was converted to paths for cross-platform compatibility. All paths were aligned and kerned for consistency and ease of reading.
  • Some of the curved vector paths in the book pages were smoothed out, and the left and right sides were made more identical with each other (mirrored).
  • The plain books are just the globe books without the globe layer (reducing the file size). The favicons are the same books with the wordmark and localized name layers removed and the document size reduced to the actual size of the smaller icon.
  • The localized name is in Georgia font, freely available from Microsoft in the Windows platform, and, I think, available for Linux and Mac, too. It was designed to be very readable at small sizes, which is why I chose it. Does anyone (like darklama) know what font was used in the "WIKIBOOKS" wordmark? It would be nice to add that to the file description.

I hope everyone likes the changes. I'm just trying to polish these up so we can move on to the voting phase soon and get rid of the current logo sooner! P.S. Don't forget to leave feedback on the Wikijunior logos, too. --Willscrlt (Talk) 02:03, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I used "DejaVu Sans Bold" kerned for "WIKIBOOKS". I think the adjustments to colors are a little better, but I still don't really care for either color combinations. I like the proposed Wikijunior logo to go with it even less. Wikijunior exists also as a Wikinews project in some language, so the book theme isn't really appropriate. --darklama 21:19, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info on the font. I don't have that one, so it's good that it was converted to paths. It's also good to know about the Wikinews/Wikijunior thing. However, the proposal only seems to indicate that the logo is for Wikijunior on Wikibooks. That's rather confusing. It also seems confusing that two projects that are so different are hosted on the same web address, one as just a sub-page of the other. It seems like it should be en.wikijunior.org or something like that. I know it's not part of this discussion, but I still think it would help with the branding, and then the news and the books would all live together rather than being separated. --Willscrlt (Talk) 22:34, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Link to DejaVu fonts from CPAN archive. --Willscrlt (Talk) 22:40, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 
(D10a.2) for Wikibooks

Version D10a - Blue

edit
  1. Weak support - I think the puzzle piece helps identify the logo as a wikibook, so I would prefer either version with it. --Willscrlt (Talk) 22:37, 15 June 2008 (UTC) [Updated: However, nobody else seems to agree, so I archived it. I prefer the green to the blue color. 22:23, 17 June 2008 (UTC)][reply]
  2. Strong support – I think the puzzle piece looks really bad, so the blue and green versions without it are the best ones. I'd like to congratulate their author! -- RaminusFalcon «…» («it.wikipedia») 08:17, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the compliment, but it's truly been a collaborative effort, and everyone involved deserves congratulations. Did you mean that the puzzle piece actually looks bad (poor image quality), or the concept looks bad? If it's poor image quality, that's probably because of how I imported it and/or problems in the original source file. If it's the concept... well... we will just have to agree to disagree. :-) --Willscrlt (Talk) 11:41, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    No, there's no problem with the puzzle quality: the fact is that I think a puzzle there, in the very middle of a book page, is extremely unsmart! -- RaminusFalcon «…» («it.wikipedia») 17:03, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. I like this one. I'm against putting anything (puzzle piece or globe) in the book, the book can stand on its own. My only concern is that the perspective is a little too strong. The top of the pages could be a little wider. Risk 13:00, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose I like this but, as said before, blue is also used in lot of other project logos, so IMHO the green versions are better. --Ramac 19:04, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Support H92 persuased me --Ramac 09:11, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Support strongly – An easy call for me. When talking about logos, colors mean different things: Yellow and red means economy, cheapness and so on. Green means environment. Blue means quality. Thinking about the environment and stuff isn’t necessarily bad, but a logo that symbolizes quality is even better, and that many other logos use blue doesn’t mean Wikibooks can’t. The logo should also fit in with the rest of the Monobook interface (blue links and so on). The beige symbolizes the pages, which is an exception. However, I’d like the tagline to be “Think free, learn free” instead of “in English”. I would also allow localization (translation) on both title and tagline. — H92 (t · c · no) 22:58, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Oppose all but the blue seems better than other. For information this logo doesn't indicate the multiplicity of books in wikibook. --Gdgourou 10:50, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. support I do like this one. --129.64.131.25 09:55, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 
(D10b.2) for Wikibooks

Version D10b - Green

edit
  1. Support - I think the puzzle piece helps identify the logo as a wikibook, so I would prefer either version with it. --Willscrlt (Talk) 22:37, 15 June 2008 (UTC) [Updated: However, nobody else seems to agree, so I archived it. I prefer the green to the blue color. 22:23, 17 June 2008 (UTC)][reply]
  2. I like this one the best of any of these latest designs. The added curve to the pages make it look much more natural and softer. The colors add some much needed contrast. --Ezra Katz 23:04, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Strong support - As I said about D10a.2, I think these two ones are the best. -- RaminusFalcon «…» («it.wikipedia») 08:18, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support - I prefer this one over the 9.x books. While I thought the 9.x's were visually appealing (I enjoy 9.6 the most), the combination of yellow and green on D10b.2 is particularly good. Kal (talk) 09:14, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. 'Support - IMHO the best one from this selection, after the copyviol disaster --Ramac 18:56, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Strong Support - One of the stronger candidates that i've seen to date of any of the logo proposals -- Reece (Talk) (Wikibooks) 15:43, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support I liked some of the archived logos. This is one of my favorites of the ones remaining. I don't much like the globe inside of it. Cary Bass demandez 22:27, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  1.   Oppose – Blue is better, see my comments on the above proposal. — H92 (t · c · no) 23:00, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 
(D10d.2b) for Wikibooks (Green)
 
(D10d.3a) for Wikibooks (Blue)
 
(D10d.3b) for Wikibooks (Green)
 
(D10d.4b) for Wikibooks (Green)
 
(D10d.4b_edit) for Wikibooks (Green)
 
(D2) for Wikijunior

Version D10d - Globe

edit
  1. Support - This combines the globe idea from Proposal E with D10b.2. I like the puzzle piece of D10b.1 the best (looks most like a "wiki"book to me), but this is nice, too. --Willscrlt (Talk) 05:56, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support - I like this version a lot. The iconic globe fills the empty space very well. Nevertheless to me it looks a little bit to dark, so I tried to lighten it a little (see D10d.2). Furthermore I sharpened the corners. What do people think? --OnkelDagobert 13:16, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Support This is the best one yet. And this might be even better than the copyvio one. -- Felipe Aira 11:43, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Comment - I like how this ties in well with Wikijunior Logo Proposal D (funny how they are both "D"). They make a matched set, even without looking the same. I created D2, too, but they were not designed to make a matched set; that just sort of happened. --Willscrlt (Talk) 22:23, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Strong support – really wonderful. Very good choice of colors and improvement of the design of the pages. Looks cute also the globe in the middle. -- RaminusFalcon «…» («it.wikipedia») 13:11, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I've drew back logo D10d.2 as I think its globe looks much better (without the black edge, and with brighter colors) than the one used in the other version. Perhaps the globe could be used on D10d.3b, which has the best style, apart from the globe. -- RaminusFalcon «…» («it.wikipedia») 12:27, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    To me, it is very important that we use web-safe colors. I might not have picked the best colors, but the D10d.2 colors are definitely not the right ones. The edge of the globe is actually a darker blue, not black. I felt it helped the globe to stand out a bit better with that edge. Aside from web-safe colors, I also try to use colors that are easy for people suffering from color-blindness to be able to view. This is so important in a good logo. By adding a darker outer edge, it helps separate the yellow and blue colors, which could otherwise be impossible to distinguish for a yellow-blue color blind person. I'll play around with the colors a bit more. Tell me what you like about 2 compared to 3... lighter blues? more vibrant gradients? Give me an idea of the things you like better, and I will try to come up with something that will make both of us happy (and hopefully most everyone else, too). --Willscrlt (Talk) 14:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    What I don't like about D10d.3b is the fact that you can hardly distinguish between land and water on the globe - regarding this version D10d.4b is better. But I'm not very happy about the different colours used on the globe in D10d.4b. There are two different blue tones and also a 3-D effect (little dark area near greenland ;) ) interfering with each other. May be we should use only one blue tone, and we should consider if it is better to have bright land with dark water or the opposite (dark land with bright water). Furthermore IMO the logo should be more symmetric. And finally: I've uploaded a new version with a slight shadow under the pages; it's hard to notice but it's adding some detail a good logo IMO should contain. What do you think about all that? --OnkelDagobert 12:30, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support D10d.3a - I love this version because the color should be blue, although I think that the blue on the book should match the blue on the globe. Also, if possible, the "In English" and maybe even the "WIKIBOOKS" should be removed because it takes away from the clean style of the logo. Neo 22:21, 22 October 2008 (CST)
  • Support for 2b, 3a, or 4b_edit :) -129.64.131.25 09:56, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Version D10e - Globe, Multicolored

edit
 
D10e.1

Version 11.x

edit

Version 11.1

edit
 
Version 11.1
  • Neutral - I think the orientation of this version is better than that of the 10.x logos, but the green used for the left-facing page is a bit dark. Maybe a subversion of 11.1 could be made with the same green used on both pages? Kal (talk) 08:58, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    There is two problem with doing this. First using the same color for both pages makes it no longer look like pages. Second using a color that is of similar brightness to the page on the right can make it hard to tell its a page at small sizes. I could try different colors, but overall for the pages to remain looking like pages, there needs to be one page relatively darker than the other. --darklama 16:24, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I like this idea but it is too simple --Ramac 10:39, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I like the idea, but the globe is unnecessary. Try to darken the page on the left. Overall, support. --Jackl 07:12, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There is no globe here so I guess you voted for proposal 11.2. — H92 (t · c · no) 17:29, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Version 11.2

edit
 
Version 11.2

Version 11.3

edit
 
Version 11.3

Version 11.4

edit
 
Version 11.4

Version 11.5

edit
 
Version 11.5

Version 11.6 - Blue variant

edit
 
Version 11.6, blue theme goes better with other logos.
edit

7.x Appendix

edit
edit

Here is how Wikibooks simple book green3.svg looks with other Wikimedia Foundation logos:

       
       
       
  Meta-Wiki - Coordination   Wikipedia - Encyclopedia   Wiktionary - Dictionary
  Wikisource - Sources   Wikibooks - This is the example   Wikiquote - Quotations
  Wikispecies - Species   Wikinews - News   Wikiversity - Learning tools


edit

Here is how Wikibooks simple book green beige.svg looks with other Wikimedia Foundation logos:

       
       
       
  Meta-Wiki - Coordination   Wikipedia - Encyclopedia   Wiktionary - Dictionary
  Wikisource - Sources   Wikibooks - This is the example   Wikiquote - Quotations
  Wikispecies - Species   Wikinews - News   Wikiversity - Learning tools

9.x Appendix

edit
edit

Here is how Wikibooks green open book3.svg looks with other Wikimedia Foundation logos:

       
       
       
  Meta-Wiki - Coordination   Wikipedia - Encyclopedia   Wiktionary - Dictionary
  Wikisource - Sources   Wikibooks - This is the example   Wikiquote - Quotations
  Wikispecies - Species   Wikinews - News   Wikiversity - Learning tools


edit

Here is how Wikibooks green open book4.svg looks with other Wikimedia Foundation logos:

       
       
       
  Meta-Wiki - Coordination   Wikipedia - Encyclopedia   Wiktionary - Dictionary
  Wikisource - Sources   Wikibooks - This is the example   Wikiquote - Quotations
  Wikispecies - Species   Wikinews - News   Wikiversity - Learning tools


edit

Here is how Wikibooks multicolor open book.svg looks with other Wikimedia Foundation logos:

       
       
       
  Meta-Wiki - Coordination   Wikipedia - Encyclopedia   Wiktionary - Dictionary
  Wikisource - Sources   Wikibooks - This is the example   Wikiquote - Quotations
  Wikispecies - Species   Wikinews - News   Wikiversity - Learning tools

10.x Appendix

edit
edit

Here is how Wikibooks D10a.3.svg looks with other Wikimedia Foundation logos:

       
       
       
  Meta-Wiki - Coordination   Wikipedia - Encyclopedia   Wiktionary - Dictionary
  Wikisource - Sources   Wikibooks - This is the example   Wikiquote - Quotations
  Wikispecies - Species   Wikinews - News   Wikiversity - Learning tools


edit

Here is how Wikibooks D10b.3.svg looks with other Wikimedia Foundation logos:

       
       
       
  Meta-Wiki - Coordination   Wikipedia - Encyclopedia   Wiktionary - Dictionary
  Wikisource - Sources   Wikibooks - This is the example   Wikiquote - Quotations
  Wikispecies - Species   Wikinews - News   Wikiversity - Learning tools


edit

Here is how Wikibooks D10d.3a.svg looks with other Wikimedia Foundation logos:

       
       
       
  Meta-Wiki - Coordination   Wikipedia - Encyclopedia   Wiktionary - Dictionary
  Wikisource - Sources   Wikibooks - This is the example   Wikiquote - Quotations
  Wikispecies - Species   Wikinews - News   Wikiversity - Learning tools


edit

Here is how Wikibooks D10d.3b.svg looks with other Wikimedia Foundation logos:

       
       
       
  Meta-Wiki - Coordination   Wikipedia - Encyclopedia   Wiktionary - Dictionary
  Wikisource - Sources   Wikibooks - This is the example   Wikiquote - Quotations
  Wikispecies - Species   Wikinews - News   Wikiversity - Learning tools


edit

Here is how Wikibooks D10d edit21.svg looks with other Wikimedia Foundation logos:

       
       
       
  Meta-Wiki - Coordination   Wikipedia - Encyclopedia   Wiktionary - Dictionary
  Wikisource - Sources   Wikibooks - This is the example   Wikiquote - Quotations
  Wikispecies - Species   Wikinews - News   Wikiversity - Learning tools

11.x Appendix

edit
edit

Here is how Wikibooks open book leaning.svg looks with other Wikimedia Foundation logos:

       
       
       
  Meta-Wiki - Coordination   Wikipedia - Encyclopedia   Wiktionary - Dictionary
  Wikisource - Sources   Wikibooks - This is the example   Wikiquote - Quotations
  Wikispecies - Species   Wikinews - News   Wikiversity - Learning tools
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikibooks/Logo/Proposal/D&oldid=24894843"