Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Wikinews logo contest voting/Runoff/Archive

< Wikinews logo contest voting | Runoff

Globe with waves

edit

   

Vote:

  1. --Inetd 21:08, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  2. --The silentist 06:11, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC) - Good, bolder colors, very well balanced range of blues, maybe lessen or remove the drop shadow from the text. I see how people might have a problem with the N. American centralized image, but that can be fixed - the aesthetics are far and away the best here. Solid logo.
    These are the final versions, there will be no modifications. Dan100 07:25, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    I appreciate The silentist's constructive criticisms. Let's get the best logo, rather than a perfect vote. No one is running for office here. — DV 08:17, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    We're trying to avoid the same mistakes we made before, when one logo suddenly became the many you see here during the course of the vote and it became unclear who was actually voting for which version :/ Dan100 11:02, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  3. --Mboverload 08:34, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC) - Great logo, only the most uptight nitpicker will care if its over the atlantic/east coast. It's not like wikinews is going to be run by a bunch of "republican world-haters". The wiki system elimatinates alot of that problem.
  4. --Mikeaitch 15:48, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  5. --ekkis 07:48, 7 Feb 2005 (PST) - This image has the cleanest look and best contrast. I'm not keen on focusing on America as representing the world (which I believe is what it ought to represent) but the North Pole view will not be easily recognised by most as our planet. Additionally, I find the Neutral Globe totally meaningless. What I don't understand is: why do we have to have a picture of the planet to represent news? wouldn't a newspaper be more meaningful given the clear association with the purpose of this site?
    • People did vote for this concept. The "beta" logo they have now seems better though. Brianjd 05:30, 2005 Feb 8 (UTC)
  6. Mats Halldin 17:23, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  7. --Mindmatrix 18:45, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  8. --Cburns 18:04, 7 Feb 2005 (MST)
  9. --Terrible Tim 01:55, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) This, the designers original idea seems to look the best as a logo.
  10. --SamE 03:01, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) - See my comments under "Against" below.
  11. -- John N. 13:01, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  12. Gunnar Larsson 22:31, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  13. — Dan | talk 03:09, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  14. The main objections to this logo are that it's too centered on the Americas, however in my opinion it's simply the best logo. (Note that I do not live on the continents in question) — Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 03:11, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  15. —Ben Brockert < 00:35, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  16. Fjl 12:01, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  17. Bo
  18. Ivand Olivero I like this one, I prefer it not to be N. American centralized but..
  19. Jeandré, 2005-02-11t16:04z Would have preferred a cloud covered globe with no continent recognizable tho.
  20. EagleOne 19:45, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)
  21. Aphrael 00:57 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  22. Robdumas 01:41 12 Feb 2005 (UTC) Good colors. Not too soft (like I think "Neutral Globe" is), not too harsh (like I think "Neutral Contrast" is). The waves are a big win, design-wise. I do think the North American-centered logo is a bit prejudiced (though surely not intentionally). Might I recommend that since the Wikinews servers use UTC for time, that the logo focus on Europe, where UTC exists? With Europe being between the Americas and Asia, it's a somewhat more "neutral" location to focus on. Finally, since Wikinews will have many localizations, couldn't we have logos for each quarter of the globe?
  23. --Sweets 18:10, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC), Each local project may choose a shifted world map

Against

  1. DV 18:56, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC) I wish it were not so, but on this page, and in the previous vote, too many voters expressed the sentiment that they were not keen on a logo which focuses on North America. Also, East Asia and Australia are completely hidden. Once a Chinese Wikinews is launched, how could we expect them to use this logo?
    • Wiktionary's logo has English words in it, and that doesn't make it biased. The Chinese Wiktionary still uses it. If the English-speaking world is primarily the US and UK, then let the globe focus on North America and Europe, just as Wiktionary's logo focuses on the English language. - SamE
    Is this vote only to select the logo for use on the English Wikinews? It was my understanding that this logo was to be used by all language versions of Wikinews. If we are selecting a logo solely for use on English Wikinews, then there has been a major miscommunication about what we are voting on. — DV 03:15, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    • English is not the same as the western hemisphere - English is generally accepted as an international language of business. Your point is still good - editions of Wikipedia in other languages could have different versions of the globe and text. There's no reason the Chinese Wiktionary couldn't get their own logo, I suppose. - McCart42 03:30, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
      • Stefantastic 11:31, 8 Feb 2005 (GMT+1) I would vote for this logo for its esthetics, but cannot accept a news source whose very logo reflects a cultural/geographical/language bias. As Wikinews grows, the objective is that it should cover without bias news from all parts of the world, and -let's hope- in as many languages as possible. For this logo to represent this, I see only two solutions: 1. make multiple versions of this logo for each world region : North/Sourth America, Europe/Middle-East/Africa, and Asia/Australasia. 2. show the view from the North pole. I would choose the 1st solution, looks nicer.
  2. Delph 22:22, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC) Same reasons
  3. Aphaia | WQ2翻訳中 | talk 01:25, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) Westsemispherecentric.
  4. gcbirzantalk 04:42, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) Ditto.
  5. Jacoplane 10:34, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  6. Dan100 19:37, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) Wikinews is an international project; this in unacceptably biased towards North America and it isn't NPOV, which is the central core aim of all Wiki projects. In fact I doubt that any of the Wikinews sites would accept it.
  7. Christiaan 23:05, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  8. Weft 18:15, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC) argh!
  9. Forseti Talk E-mail 01:33, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC) - please convert it to a GIF with animated "AMERIKA IST WUNDERBAR" all over it ;)
  10. EliasTorres 01:54, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC) Please without a specific map.
  11. --Avsa 21:25, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC) being neutral is the exact opposite of a map showing only north america.
  12. It has the best design, but the view... Habakuk 12:11, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  13. No. It's the view. Khaosworks 16:26, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  14. GerardM 11:28, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC) According to the "centre-periphery model" this one should win. Choosing either pole is not so blatantly POV.

Neutral globe

edit

File:Neutralglobe.png File:Neutralglobe.png

Vote:

For

  1. Christiaan 19:33, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  2. Kpalion 14:56, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) -- simple, elegant, not overloaded with details or colors, and geographically neutral.
  3. NicholasJones 19:33, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) -- Geographically neutral but doesn't look too much like the U.N. logo
  4. .:Ajvol:. 20:56, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  5. handyteeth 19:33, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) -- Excellent, elegant and professional
  6. Doby 22:30, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) -- Best of the bunch.
  7. Forseti Talk E-mail 01:30, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC) -- at last it doesn't look as view-finder. Though even all-seeing eye of Sauron would be more meaningful than versions presented.
  8. EliasTorres 01:59, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC) Elegant and Neutral.
  9. Thryduulf 23:17, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC) neutral and inclusive.
  10. Dahamsta 04:09, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  11. Glimz 05:05, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC) Least of all evils. Alternatively, do the right thing and acknowledge that none of these designs work. They were proposed as a group: some of the group looked esthetically pleasing, others were neutral, so many people chose them. These characteristics, however, cannot be combined in this design.
  12. Brandnewbrain 10:08, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC) Like the simplicity. And the fact that no special nation is up front.
  13. --huebler 19:43, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC) As mentioned by others, this logo is the best because it is neutral and attractive in its simplicity.
  14. Samaritan 23:53, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC) It also brings to mind a microphone, suggesting voice, broadcasting... Subtly, it communicates more than the ones with loud busy land. It's elegant.
  15. It's got my vote. I think it would scale/svg/shrink/black-and-white very well, plus neutrality and the fact that it doesn't look like a UN logo rip off. Ideally, I'd like a south-pole view, but the one at the bottom of the page is too indistinguishable -- it just looks made up to me. Jxn 01:00, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  16. My vote is in (y). Looks very nice indeed. Maybe a more global approach, while using the white color for the countries.. Drk 20:06, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)


Against

  1. BryceHarrington 21:52, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) -- Too bland
  2. EagleOne 19:47, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC) -- just not as bold or as striking as the logo above.
  3. joelpf 21:02, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC) -- Good idea, but the projection of the grid against the globe is counter to what latitudes/longitudes should look like, hence it looks less like a planet's globe than a reflection of a flat grid on a pinball.

North pole globe

edit

   

Vote:

  1. I actually think this looks a lot better than the other globe views, and avoids the blurry text underneath it. Every 2-D rendering of a globe can be controversial; this one negates some of that by getting a pretty broad swath, but still preserves the mandala-like symmetry that one expects out of a globe. It is a more powerful logo than the others, in my singular opinion. Clearly not going to win, but it ought to. Sigh. --Fastfission 04:43, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Neutral contrast

edit

   

Vote:

Against:

  1. Inetd 21:08, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  2. BesigedB 18:57, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) Poor resolution.

Neutral bulgarian

edit

   

Vote:

  1. Davodd | Talk 20:33, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Spin

edit

   

Vote:

  1. Screw you! Moving logos RULE!
  2. AlexR 03:14, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC) - at least nobody can accuse it of being whatever-centric

Against:

  1. Eloquence 17:45, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC) — no animations in logos which are constantly visible - very annoying
  2. Andrewmackinnon 18:42, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC) Logos should not be animated.
  3. Minh Nguyễn (talk, blog) – Ick. (Although the little version would look pretty good as a favicon. Oh well.) – 19:23, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  4. nothing more annoying than moving parts on a page --Ekkis 15:59, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  5. Doby 22:33, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) -- Please, oh please, not this one!
  6. Comics 20:20, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC) No to animations!

Human chain

edit

   

Vote:

Against:

  1. Hollyboy (Talk, Goatse.cx)]] 19:03, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC) God no. This is Wikinews, not some Buddhist thingy.
  2. bo

Polar Globe NM

edit

   

Vote:

Against: --146.145.195.74 14:36, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Polar globe M

edit

   


Taking the constructive criticism that was offered to heart, I've posted an improved variation of this variation two entries down.

McCart42 18:02, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC) - At first, I liked the design without meridians better than this because the continents show up more clearly without the meridians. After noticing the resemblance to the UN logo though, I decided this is a better design. Perhaps if the continents appeared in front of the meridian and latitude lines though, it would look better - the UN logo places the two in the same color so neither overlaps the other. Also, I like the WikiNews font from the first logo, with the shadow. This is a much more minor issue though. Update: 14:28, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC) - Withdrew For vote after new logo appeared with changes made. Thanks DV!

Vote:

  1. MichaelDiederich 00:18, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  2. Aphaia | WQ2翻訳中 | talk 01:29, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Against:

  1. Davodd | Talk 20:33, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC) Too close to the UN logo - which could cause confusion about who we are.
  2. --The silentist 06:11, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC) - Gaah! Sorry, but terrible colors, too densely packed images, no contrast, pretty unprofessional. This logo needs to really look aesthetically good, and choosing it because it has a NPOV view of the earth isn't a good enough reason - such a view can be added to a much nicer looking logo. This would not lend wikinews much credibility.
    Thanks for the constructive criticism. I posted a new version that uses the color scheme, contrast, and typeface from the other variations. — DV 07:40, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  3. Blurry... \Mike 17:47, 2005 Feb 7 (UTC)

Polar globe MT

edit

   

Vote:

  1. Minh Nguyễn (talk, blog) – Although I think the CSW9 variation is very elegant, this one looks stronger to me, with its darker tones and wider type. This will also be more visible as a favicon (16×16), although it'll still suffer from being scaled down too much, since we'd either have to get rid of the "pulse" bands on either side, or scale the entire logo down quite a bit, which would present another problem: it'd look too similar to Wikiquote's logo. Despite all these issues, however, I still think this logo is the best. – 03:00, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    Hey, what about using the wordmark itself (WN) for the favicon? It'd scale well, and it'd be consistent with so many other news outlets that use wordmarks as favicons (off the top of my head, CNN, the AP, Voice of America, Guardian, ZDNet News, NYT…). – Minh Nguyễn (talk, blog) 03:09, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  2. --Alpharigel 19:17, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) Strong colors, big type. Bold lines. I think just the name should be used for the favicon as well.
  3. Lbs6380 07:36, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC) nice

Polar globe CSW9

edit

   

The transparent version of this logo, resized to 135 pixels wide, is over here.

Here is the small version.

The high-resolution version for printing is over here. — DV 22:25, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Replaced. The old version can be seen at Image:WikinewsLogoPolarGlobeCSW9.png. —Ben Brockert < 23:59, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Vote:

  1. DV 11:34, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC) This version has the meridian and latitude lines behind the continents, and the font of the first variation, per request by McCart42 and Minh Nguy?n.
  2. McCart42 14:29, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC) - Looks good, in my opinion.
    One change though -- could it be made as large as the others? Some people are saying it's cluttered and the continents are unrecognizable, which mainly can be blamed on its small size (in the large version). - McCart42 03:10, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    Yes, if this version wins, of course I will supply a version at the standard size of 135px wide, a high-resolution version for printing, as well as a version with a transparent background for compositing on non-white skins. But Eloquence has asked me to hold off posting more logos until the vote is done, so I'll wait until then to generate and post them. — DV 05:13, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    For some reason Dan100 felt compelled to post a transparent version that he created himself, with messed up edges (it appears that he tried to generate it from the low-resolution opaque version), which reflected very poorly upon this entry. He left a comment "might as well see what we're voting for", which was obviously untrue. To show what the logo would really look like with a transparent background, I posted the transparent versions built from the original artwork instead. It is also resized to the standard 135px width. — DV 23:12, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    My reason was that the image that was displayed was not transparent and was not correctly sized, so did not look like how a version used on WN actually would. I corrected that. Dan100 19:08, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    I just changed it to the newer version. Also, it's important that all the small versions be the same size and generated by the mediawiki software, as it will be when used on the pages. Forgive the boldness. —Ben Brockert < 23:59, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    Impressive. However, I think this actually increases the similarity to the UN logo, which is a bit of a problem. Also, if you keep adding new variants now, we'll again be left clueless if your version wins which one to use :-). One thing that would be very useful, on the other hand, is to create a high resolution version of the logo that can be used for printing.--Eloquence 08:03, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    Since you posted your comment, I matched the border to the colors of the first version above. The faded border lessens the similarity to the UN logo quite a bit.
    The original artwork for the globe portion is at 1000x1000, which will easily create a 600dpi image if you print it at around an inch and a half or so. I still need the name of the official font to create that part at high resolution.
    As for causing confusion by posting new variations - I see no harm in iterating over finer-grained variations until we get it just right. Instead of getting too fixated on the voting protocols let's strive for the best logo. Voters are welcome to take a second look and even revise their votes as the process continues. — DV 08:13, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    The harm is we won't get a winner, just like last time, so the vote will be pointless. Dan100 11:09, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    It's more important to have the best possible logo, than to be so concerned about "winners" and "losers". However, I'll abide by your wish to have separate entries for each variation. — DV 11:34, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    Well if we never have a winner, we'll never get a new logo actually in use on Wikinews :( Dan100 12:58, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  3. DCLXVI 00:02, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC) - I prefer the logo to be transparent, but it's quite good and now :)
    I will upload a transparent version if this version wins. I just need to figure out the name of the typeface to mask out the text. — DV 18:22, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  4. Borislav 15:06, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  5. Waerth 15:26, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  6. 159753 16:11 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  7. \Mike 17:47, 2005 Feb 7 (UTC) Nice.
  8. Eloquence 16:55, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC) — UN similarity is a bit of an issue, maybe make minor changes later to reduce it
    What do you think of Andrewmackinnon's idea to rotate the map 45°? — DV 20:10, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    I think it's worth experimenting with this and other ideas, but I ask you to hold off on that until the logo vote is over.--Eloquence 22:48, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    Well, Dan100 and others seem to think this is the final vote, and that the opportunity for trying out modifications or variations will have passed once this vote is over. I don't see what the hurry is, (isn't it better to keep working until we have a superior choice?), nor do I fully understand why we can't add entries for improved variations based upon feedback as it is received, but I'll heed your advice to avoid causing conflict. — DV 05:29, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  9. Snooo 18:30, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  10. Andrewmackinnon 19:52, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC) — I like it, but it resembles the UN logo too much. Maybe the earth's projection should be rotated 45° or so to reduce this resemblance.
  11. Hello5959us 20:30 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  12. SonicR 20:38, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  13. Delph 22:18, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC) Thank you for this improved version of The Polar Globe - A good alternate to "Globe with waves" which is very too much Amerika centered.
  14. Felix Wan 03:07, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  15. gcbirzantalk 04:43, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  16. IlyaHaykinson 07:57, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  17. Jacoplane 10:37, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  18. Cafzal 16:50, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) Hey, it is better than nothing! When will the winner be put up?
  19. NickM 20:40, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  20. BryceHarrington 21:50, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  21. Sukh 23:42, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  22. Ugly but better than one focused on North America. Juntung 09:59, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  23. Stefantastic 15:36, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC) : This one is my choice. However, it could be a good idea to rotate the world by 45 degrees, and get the same perspective than is currently the case on the Wikipedia logo's globe. This would give a view at mid-point between the "Globe with waves" and the "Polar Globe CSW9", and maybe allow for a consensus of some kind.
  24. Trodel 16:52, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC) I agree with rotating - and what is the big deal this having to be the final logo - refinements that are kept in the spirit of the logo can be made and without serious objections implemented without having another "vote". And if another vote is needed so be it.
  25. Karderio 11:16, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC) Looks good to me !
  26. Arwel 14:05, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  27. villy 22:40, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  28. JB82 23:24, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  29. Johan 04:34, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  30. Avatar 11:20, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  31. Lovely —Neuropedia 11:47, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  32. Yes, Habakuk 12:08, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  33. Yes. Khaosworks 16:24, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  34. AlexTheMartian 22:38, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  35. --Elian 01:38, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  36. This is nice also, but the raised background is missing. Either this or the south-pole centric below. Dysprosia 07:22, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    Could you explain what you mean by a "raised background"? Are you requesting a "drop shadow" effect behind the globe, like the one behind the text? — DV 08:07, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  37. Dan100 08:56, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC) - now enlarged to fit the canvas better and made transparent, I prefer this logo. Thank you for the improvements, DV.
  38. The bellman - it gets my vote, agree with everyone else about the 45 degree thing though.

Against

  1. Wikinews is not UN. I like the idea of having "neutral ground" in the middle, but this don't really make sense to me. No! / Mats Halldin 17:34, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ditto. Perhaps we could have an antarctic-centered globe instead, to /really/ confuse people. +sj+ 18:58, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  3. The continents are so distorted, small and pixellated they are barely recognisable. --NicholasJones 19:38, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  4. handyteeth 19:33, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) -- Cluttered and unprofessional
  5. Viewed from the top (and in this image) the earth looks too flat, something more like the first logo on this page but from this viewpoint would be good. —[[User:Ævar Arnfjör<eth> Bjarmason| ]] [[User:Ævar Arnfjör<eth> Bjarmason/|Ævar]] [[User talk:Ævar Arnfjör<eth> Bjarmason/|Arnfjör<eth>]] talk:Ævar Arnfjör<eth> Bjarmason|action=edit&section=new}} Bjarmason [[User:Ævar Arnfjör<eth> Bjarmason/| ]] 03:07, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  6. Terrible Tim 20:15, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC) I can see why a lot of people are voting for this, but if you are going to show the earth, you have to pick a side and show it, you can't show all sides and once, neither can we have a constently spining logo. If this just showed the top of the earth it might be ok, but it is trying to show the southern hemisphere as well, and winds up looking really strange.
    Very good-looking projections of the earth have been around for a long time as documented in Wikipedia here, especially if we are not stuck on round. A great world view (used by National Geographic, et al), the Winkel Tripel projection pretty-much has it all - widely accepted, nationally unbiased (except, yes, North is up), not very different from a circle so current logos could be quickly adapted, and it doesn't look like the UN News Centre's logo (as if the UN is so horrible). See examples via search of "Winkel Tripel" on google images. So why not someone with graphic talent see how great this icon would look redone with a Winkel Tripel projection? Yes, perhaps causing dissent, rabble rousing, etc. Isn't it much better though?: Andreasnyc 03:00, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  7. This one is just plain unattractive, perhaps because it is so assymetrical. TimShell 23:00, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  8. —Ben Brockert < 00:35, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  9. Dahamsta 04:13, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  10. Glimz 04:58, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC) -- Too UN.
  11. Jeandré, 2005-02-11t16:07z Not my least favorite, but my least favorite popular logo.
  12. --huebler 19:41, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC) Looks like the logo of the UN News Service with waves added on the sides.
  13. Samaritan 23:55, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC) Huebler is right.
  14. Thryduullf 10:16, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC). I agree that the large version of this logo looks too like the UN News Service logo. The small version also looks more like a wristwatch than anything else!
    The UN News logo is a 3D sphere with a ring round it - nothing like this logo. Dan100 14:58, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Polar globe South Pole

edit

   

Ok, no new versions should be added. But this one was just necessary, because of the last one. Wikimedia's international scope requires that if there is a North pole globe then MUST be a South pole one. This logo ilustrates how the 'opposite UN flag' looks like. All continents (except Antarctica) are equally distorted and non-recognisable. All you see is a mass that looks like a planet. This can be seen as a good thing... or not.

Vote

This is quite nice. Drop shadows on the Wikinews text would be good though it looks suitable on it's own. Dysprosia 07:21, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikinews_logo_contest_voting/Runoff/Archive&oldid=17047328"