File talk:Wiki-commons.png
Note that for the best compatibility/quality tradeoff, the logo image should be an 8-bit indexed PNG. This allows Internet Explorer to show the transparency without hacks, and as long as you're careful still looks pretty good at the edges. See meta:Fixing transparent PNGs. --Brion VIBBER 03:26, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Image as commons icon : 2006 10 01
[edit]I think the previous pic with Ziang Zeming is a vandalism. I restore the old commons logo.
If that's not : please explain why just here. --Yug (talk) 19:53, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Copyright Logo on Wikimedia?
[edit]Why does this logo retain copyright (specifically non free redistribution and modification)? Commons:Licensing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr. Bene (talk • contribs) 20:48, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
- I believe this was a default policy when we didn't understand the full spectrum of ways to protect trademarks; we had been advised to retain copyright on core trademarks as a secondary way to protect TM rights. However we have started to move towards having all logos available under a free license, which should eventually include this one. --SJ+
Logo image test
[edit]- Images: canonical SVG file, canonical PNG file, thumb used in the corner of every page, PNG of the SVG (dl and re-ul)
Why is our corner logo so degraded, using an old font-style? And why is it wasting 15% of its space? (using 115px rather than the full 135px)
The svg (to the left) is the crispest and newest, and has fixed two small image errors (on the first inward-facing arrow from the top, and on the outer curve there). It should replace the current corner image.
But even the second image -- a png with the original errors -- is significantly crisper than the logo we're actually displaying (the 3. image). It would be instructive to know what the difference is… --SJ+ 15:41, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
- I also wondering about the bad transparency, visible on background change. Some users as me use an High Contrast style, the logo looks odd. So I suggest to use the 4. version. ↔ User: Perhelion (Commons: = crap?) 10:27, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Compare Wikipedia, which has a similar but less severe problem of image quality but uses the full 135px.
- Top row: canonical SVG file, canonical PNG file, thumb used in the corner of every page
- Bottom row: default PNG of the canonical SVG (downloaded and re-uploaded), SVG resized to 135px (dl and re-ul)
Odd logo usage: Wiktionary
[edit]While on the topic of corner-logos: are these all sourced locally on the wikis, or are they sourced from Commons? ↔ User: Perhelion (Commons: = crap?) 10:27, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
For instance, Wiktionary logo use is totally unstandardized: at least three different logos, and multiple visual styles and widths for some of them.
- Top: simple, bangla, german
- Bottom: spanish, greek, english
Oddities
[edit]{{Editprotected}} At the moment there are two (identical) "trademark" blurbs, one by {{Copyright by Wikimedia}}, the second by {{Wikimedia trademark}}. This cruft could be replaced by one permission={{Wikimedia trademark}} in the info box, and an ordinary {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} in the legalese. Based on an Old revision of m:Wikinews/Logo/Proposals I'd also update date={{other date|ca|2005}} to date=2004, c.f. BRION's timestamp at the top of this talk page. Please move the ugly {{Portal usage|wikimedia}} to the bottom with file history ("You cannot overwrite this file") and file usage, because that's what {{Portal usage}} is about. –Be..anyone (talk) 20:11, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
