Talk:Visual identity guidelines

    From the Wikimedia Foundation Governance Wiki

    Wikimedia Foundation mark

    Hi. Looking at the current version of this page, specifically the "Wikimedia Foundation mark" section, the colors listed and the associated images are wrong. File:Wikimedia Foundation RGB logo with text.svg is the Wikimedia Foundation logo. A quick inspection reveals that its colors are #006699 (blue), #339966 (green), #990000 (red), #484848 (dark grey), and #666666 (medium grey).

    File:Wmf diagram VIG 11.png, File:Wmd VIG 11.png, and related images are currently using the wrong colors and this document is currently encouraging others to use the wrong colors. We should get this fixed up as soon as possible. --MZMcBride (talk) 18:50, 24 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Wikimedia visual identity guidelines#Color specifications is what I was looking for. It lists all the appropriate colors and includes appropriate images. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:02, 24 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Hey, thanks! So yes, File:Wikimedia Foundation RGB logo with text.svg is exactly as you say and now I wonder which is the correct version of colors?
    As far as the diagrams, they are clipped directly from the PDF and not meant to be used for color (all designers know you should go by the color listed, not the color it looks like on your screen) and rebuilding them would take way more time than it is worth. This does of course make the above SVG/color list, a real issue. I will talk with Jay and get everything corrected. Thank you for pointing it out. heather walls (talk) 20:31, 24 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I'll make up a template for the diagrams to indicate more clearly from the file page that they aren't to be used as official logos. heather walls (talk) 20:54, 24 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Regarding the diagrams, okay. Honestly, all of these PNGs would ideally be SVGs so that they'd be trivial to edit, but they're fine for now.
    Regarding the colors, yes, the colors I listed are the correct ones. They exactly match the red, green, and blue used for various other project logos: File:Wikivoyage-logo-en.svg, File:Incubator-text.svg, File:Wikidata-logo-en.svg, and File:Wikimedia Community Logo.svg.
    File:Wmf horiz VIG 11.png, File:Wmd VIG 11.png, File:Wmd horiz VIG 11.png, and File:Wmf VIG 13.png are all using the wrong colors. As best I can tell, these were based on the "PMS color format" from commons:File:Wmf logo vert pms.svg.
    We can easily compare the File:Wmd VIG 11.png with wmde:File:Wikimedia Deutschland Logo.png to see that colors are not quite right. Ironically, for most purposes these colors would probably be close enough. But for this particular document, it's quite important that we use the standard RGB. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 01:57, 25 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Anyone who wants to turn the diagrams into SVGs is welcome, though we have to hash out this color issue first. Don't compare the colors in the current diagrams to anything, they are for showing spacing, not coloring and I added a template to the image files to reflect that. I am talking with Jay and James about the color issue, changing standard (RGB/PMS, etc) could make more than one version "okay" but we should probably have an order of preference or something. heather walls (talk) 23:39, 25 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I'm not sure there's much to hash out. The colors are just wrong currently. And I specifically ignored the diagrams in my follow-up reply. Focusing on the non-diagrams, the colors still need to be fixed.
    Regarding the Pantone Matching System, I don't see any reason to use a proprietary color system. But I also can't imagine Pantone colors wouldn't include these five basic colors. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:49, 25 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Using a tool like <>, we can see that the Pantone Matching System really is pretty awful. I think it's best not to use it. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:02, 26 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    There are certain situations in printing where pantone is the only option, and you need to give a value for that or people will just wing it which tends to go badly. heather walls (talk) 02:23, 26 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Google Maps example not working

    As of today (Oct 14th, 2014) Google Maps example is not working, it does not show any Wikipedia logo or mark on the maps (actually it does show *only* the map). -- CristianCantoro (talk) 10:08, 14 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Hi CristianCantoro, it looks like they stopped providing Wikipedia info. I went ahead and removed the section that refers to the map. Thank you for pointing it out! Heather Walls (WMF) (talk) 23:28, 14 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Using logos on a background: Clarification needed


    Section 18 of Visual identity guidelines says: "Do not add decorative shapes or borders to the accepted mark".

    How do dozens of celebration Wikipedia logos from Category:Wikipedia logo variants, Category:Holidays Wikipedia logos and similar categories correspond with this?

    Section 18 also says: "Do not place the logo on a colored, textured, or image background. The mark is only intended to go on white backgrounds".

    There are several cases in which this is not followed.

    1. Facebook profile photo frames campaign. Using a new feature to add Wikipedia logo "I Gfgdhd.png Wikipedia" on a profile picture was a huge success. Profile pictures of FB users are seldom white, though (example).
    2. Wikipedia Store is long since selling coloured T-shirts with Wikipedia globe and even in the guidelines there was an image named "puzzle globe on a saturated background".

    I have several possible explanations:

    • All the cases mentioned do contradict with Visual identity guidelines and therefore must be banned.
    • Visual identity guidelines explain usage of logos referring to Wikipedia in general (and not it's anniversaries or internal projects) in official documents, texts, and places and do not touch what is going in Wikipedia itself (like project pages etc.)
    • WMF is free to make with their trademark whatever they want and Visual identity guidelines are for the usage outside of WMF
    • Wikimedia movement is free to make with their logos whatever they want and Visual identity guidelines are for the usage outside of Wikimedia movement

    In any case, some additional clarifications are needed in the text of Visual identity guidelines because I'm sharing not my personal thoughts but confusion present among my fellow Wikimedians. If explanation already exists please link it for me. Thank you! -- Ата (talk) 11:30, 11 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Hi Ата
    • I'm sorry this is confusing, some of the information about Wikimedia marks is complex. In this case, one would start with the Trademark policy. When it comes to marks on Wikimedia sites, "You may use and remix the Wikimedia marks on the Wikimedia sites as you please." Most of the detailed information of how to use the trademarks can be found in this policy.
    • Regarding the Facebook frames, the Communications team considered this problem very carefully. We needed to choose between the legibility of the globe, and it's placing inside the frame. After many variations, this was our solution. If you have any suggestions for how to handle this in the future, please let us know.
    • Your point about the colored background is taken. These guidelines were intended for partners and associates of Wikimedia and how they are allowed to use the mark, and we chose to use them ourselves. When it comes to merchandise designed by the Wikimedia Foundation, and gifts designed by Wikimedians, we are more flexible about colored backgrounds.
    Thank you for your questions! Heather Walls (WMF) (talk) 03:07, 19 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    A most useful page

    On revisiting this page, I was just reminded what a handy model it is. Thank you. SJ + 21:11, 23 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]