Talk:Logo Suggestions

Starting off [2 July 2013]

I'm not very artistic I'm afraid so I'll start off by talking in words. My suggestions for the new logo are:

1. It needs to be clearly better than the current one (otherwise no point having the disruption of changing)
2. it needs to have broad community support
3. it needs to intuitively communicate the essence of werelate, such as
   1. genealogy e.g. a tree, ancestry chart
   2. pando perhaps through a chain, a globe
   3. collaboration, eg through shaking hands
   4. open source, perhaps through subtle reference to logos of Wikipedia, creative commons, open street map etc.
4. it needs to be distinctive from other family history logos
5. it needs to be culturally neutral

How's that for starters? AndrewRT 18:30, 2 July 2013 (EDT)

I think that's a great list. Now we just need to find someone who can design a logo. :) -- Jdfoote1 10:19, 3 July 2013 (EDT)

[9 August 2013]

ok here's my first (very much draft) attempt: Critiques anyone?

--AndrewRT 18:54, 4 July 2013 (EDT)

Great Andrew, I do not have any idea how to create a logo and am not artistic. Please explain the meaning of the logo. Why three trees? The arms seem rather large in proportion to the trees but as I said I am no expert. Thanks so much for your work on the new logo.--Beth 00:45, 5 July 2013 (EDT)

The idea with the trees is to bring across the idea that WeRelate includes multiple trees from different people that connect at the top. The three trees in the foreground are also matched with four more in the second row behind and 8 more in the third row, giving a forrest of trees. The arms around the logo is intended to give the overall message of collaboration, that all users are working together on all the trees. I admit that bit certainly needs more work but it was the best I could find looking through wikimedia commons' image library. All together this was done in a couple of hours browsing through commons and then editing through the svg-edit web-based tool - why don't you have a go? AndrewRT 15:26, 5 July 2013 (EDT)

Sorry, Andrew, I have kind of a problem with this one. I'm all for racial harmony, and I've been a strong supporter of civil rights since the 1960s, . . . but that isn't what WeRelate is about. If I ran across this image on the Web, it certainly wouldn't jump out and say "Genealogy!" to me. And if you did go with this sort of theme -- why only pink and brown? I think I would avoid any inkling of race or nationality at all. The whole point of WeRelate is "one big tree" and any subdivision within the human species is therefore irrelevant. It's the wrong focus.

Having said that, I admit I have no drawing ability at all (not even with a computer). I would definitely like to see the current "parchesi pieces" logo replaced, and I rather like the suggested "Remembering Everyone" as a motto. Perhaps some form of Yggdrasil? The Norse "world tree"? It's an ancient, pre-Christian image and there are lots of very nice renditions online as a model. Like these? I did some genealogical self-publishing back in the 1970s and early '80s (pre-computer, all by hand) under the name TAPROOT PUBLISHERS and I used something very similar, except in my case the roots of the tree were clutching a book. --Mike^Talk 06:11, 28 July 2013 (EDT)

ok, not wedded to the colours here. The hands aren't meant to indicate racial harmony, just collaboration - in my mind this is what WeRelate is fundamentally about - not just genealogy but _collaborative_ genealogy. AndrewRT 12:51, 28 July 2013 (EDT)

Howdy all, I thought I'd crash the party and add my own logo suggestion, hope you like it. Since I think collaboration is the most important aspect of WeRelate (and all other genealogical wiki sites), I thought I'd call that out in the logo. Best regards to all!Delijim

Deadline [25 July 2013]

During the Overview Committee's last meeting, it was suggested that a deadline date be set for accepting new logo entries. The date proposed was 31 August 2013. After that, the entries will be presented to users for a vote. --Jennifer (JBS66) 12:03, 16 July 2013 (EDT)

Makes sense, although in practice I would suggest the logos need to go through a number of iterative cycles of feedback and remakes before we come up with something that is better than we have at the moment. AndrewRT 17:15, 21 July 2013 (EDT)

Perhaps a notice on the main page will receive more logo suggestions. Regards,--Driskell 20:02, 24 July 2013 (EDT)

"Relating" logo prototype [24 August 2013]

The "Relating" logo I just added is a quick draft. Obviously the colors and font, etc could be changed. The background/transparency might need fixing for a final logo. Anyone's welcome to take it and run with it for a WeRelate logo. The source is vector-based (svg) and can be edited with Inkscape or other things. You can find the source at [1]. --Robert.shaw 18:08, 23 August 2013 (EDT)

Like this a lot - ticks most of my boxes, communicates the collaboration aspect very well! AndrewRT 13:00, 24 August 2013 (EDT)

Sharing Logo [26 August 2013]

I've added the "Sharing" logo in color and grayscale. Source of this image at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tree_template.svg

Implying the Collaboration with Wikipedia elements [10 December 2013]

Sorry this is really late, I just saw the discussion today and mocked something up before seeing this talk page. I have no design training and no software. I thought, rather then spelling out "Collaboration", simply making clear visual references to Wikipedia which is broadly understood as the fundamental example of collaboration/user contribution would get the idea across, especially to new people, that this is where we all come to work on the single definitive article (and to include citations) -- that this is not another database project.

I made the wikipedia references by including a puzzle-textured globe (I had to screen clip but any designer with Photoshop can do this) which is similar to the wikipedia globe and for the same reason: this is a world-wide wiki of global relevance where people bring forth individual pieces of the puzzle. The font for the WeRelate wordmark is the same open source Linux Libertine, including the cross-over W.

I put a tree on top, because as others have pointed out, that is the universal symbol for genealogy (not sure how or why, come to think of it, but if it works, don't fix it).

--Artefacts 06:35, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Not sure if this is still under consideration. Personally, I don't see much need for a change. Thought the old logo worked well, though as someone pointed out its a bit quirky (i.e., doesn't involve a tree). That, I think, is one of its advantages. Everyone uses the tree symbol, and so another wiki site doing genealogy using the tree symbol, doesn't set WeRelate apart.

That said, your suggestion is nicely done, Though I'm not sure "the Free World Family Tree" is apt; It may be free, but its not limited to the "Free World"---which is what most of the older (American) generation would think of when they saw that logo.

The reason the tree is neigh on to the universal symbol of genealogy is because the upward branching structure of the tree is an analogy for tracing an ancestors descendants, while the downward branching structure of the roots is an analogy for tracing someone's ancestors. So the tree analogy combines both descendant and antecedent genealogy in one symbol. Of course, most of us are doing antecedent genealogy (looking for our own ancestors), so the roots of the tree are perhaps more relevant. Which is why you see things like "Rootsweb".

Q 13:16, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

This is great - I really like it! My one worry is that I think it goes against Wikipedia's trademark policy, so we probably couldn't use it unless we become a Wikimedia project. For me, I think Wikipedia + tree is exactly how I picture what WeRelate offers - family history done in a way that is open and collaborative. -- Jdfoote1 02:01, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

That was considered once upon a time. I believe the issue was that to make what's now WeRelate, Dallan had to modify the MediaWiki program considerably more than WikiMedia could tolerate. Hence WeRelate could not be part of the Wikia. Wikia has their own genealogy based Wiki, FamilyPedia. I'm not sure if it predates WeRelate or not, but they came into existence about the same time. I'm pretty sure WikiMedia wouldn't tolerate two separate and competing wikis. So that avenue is probably not open for consideration (even if Dallan was so inclined.) In any case, appropriating portions of the WikiMedia logo would probably not be tolerated either. Also, there are quite a few genealogy based wikis at the present time. I'm not even certain that WeRelate is still the largest….just the best in my opinion. Q 02:34, 11 December 2013 (UTC)