Talk:Wikimedia Foundation/Communications/Wikimedia brands/2030 movement brand project

A space to discuss the 2030 movement brand project. Add new topics below.

Links to discussions in the projects

• deWP: Umbenennung auf der Kurierdiskussionsseite.
• enWP: Branding event in the Village Pump
• esWP: Carta abierta en relación al proceso de cambio de denominación (rebranding) de la Fundación Wikimedia en el café
• frWP: Projet de renommage in the Bistro
• fiWP: Wikimedia-liikkeen Wikipediaksi nimeämisen -palautekysely 7.7.2020 saakka in Kahvihuone (Village Pump)
• itWP Sondaggio di Wikimedia Foundation sui nomi collettivi del futuro in il bar di Wikipedia
• nlWP: Enquête over voorstellen nieuwe namen Wikimedia Foundation in De kroeg.
• ptWP: Mudança do nome da Fundação Wikimedia para Fundação Wikipédia (20jun2020) na Esplanada.
• Wiktionarians: Tremendous Wiktionary User Group talk page
• Commons: WMF rebranding on the Village Pump
• faWP: تغییر نام ویکی‌مدیا در قهوه‌خانه
• Wikidata: Rebrand of the Wikimedia Foundation in the archive of the project chat

Community feedback and straw poll

• English: The Community feedback and straw poll was moved to a dedicated sub-page: Talk:Communications/Wikimedia brands/2030 movement brand project/Community feedback and straw poll
• Deutsch: Der Community feedback and straw poll wurde auf eine eigene Unterseite verschoben: Talk:Communications/Wikimedia brands/2030 movement brand project/Community feedback and straw poll

Community discussions on branding

Polls and RfCs as of May 21 (UTC)
Straw Poll	Agree	Disagree	Other	Agree %
(Q1) Include the status quo	229	1	2	99%
(Q2) Name of the Foundation	5	207	3	2%
(Q3) Name of the Movement	8	183	8	4%
RfC (closed)	Support	Oppose	Other	Support %
Wikimedia should use Wikipedia as name	46	540	4	8%
Other as of 10:40, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
Open letter (more stats)	Affiliates	Non-Affiliates	Community members	Total entities
Pause or stop renaming	73	5	1014	1092

Straw Poll Meta-Comments

Extended content
Can I suggest this not be done, or not be done here and now and on this page? There are a lot of balls in the air today, and if we're going to have an RfC-like discussion, it might make sense to wait a bit and see if we and get some buy-in from the Foundation contributors to this project. TomDotGov (talk) 21:51, 16 June 2020 (UTC) They have started this premature sham survey, what do you expect from them? I can't see any glimmer of understanding in any of their answers, they live in a parallel universe, that's disconnected from the Wikimedia community and really don't seem to want to change this. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 21:55, 16 June 2020 (UTC) So far, today, I haven't seen anyone outside the WMF that supports the WMF's proposals. As far as I can tell, nobody outside the WMF has supported them on-wiki in over a month. So who are we trying to convince? I'd rather give the WMF some time to process this, and then I hope we can begin working together to see if a name better than Wikimedia is possible. TomDotGov (talk) 22:03, 16 June 2020 (UTC) Yes, but as we know from the history of this, they falsified surveys to fit their purpose before, and I don't trust them the tiniest bit, that the current "survey" will not be abused by the renamers with falsified "outcomes", to push for their agenda. I really don't know why, what is the secret behind their reckless renaming enterprise, but nothing in the open up to now makes any sense here. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 22:08, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Would anyone be opposed to moving this poll to a transcluded sub-page? We're getting a lot of diversity of people, and that might make it harder to follow longer-form discussion on this talk page. TomDotGov (talk) 22:05, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@TomDotGov: I'm agreed. This was good as first start, but separate page will be better. --Kaganer (talk) 23:48, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

+1, seems to be a good idea. Grüße vom Sänger ♫^(Reden) 06:07, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

You have my blessing. :) --Mdaniels5757 (talk) 16:46, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Tried to do it, but it triggered a rule about too many Emoji. It looks like we'll need an admin to do it for us. TomDotGov (talk) 17:07, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

I was successful: Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/Community feedback and straw poll (with a redirect from Talk:Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/Community feedback and straw poll. Grüße vom Sänger ♫^(Reden) 19:03, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Update on Branding next steps

Hello all, The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has passed a new resolution on the topic of branding.

Some context

As you may remember, last year the Board paused all work under the 2030 Movement Brand Project, in order to rethink and improve the Foundation’s approach to community participation and decision making around renaming. After year-long work, attentive listening and thoughtful conversation between the Board, Wikimedia Foundation staff, and community advisors, the committee has come up with a recommendation for next steps. The recommendation was unanimously approved by the Board and captured in the above mentioned resolution. The Wikimedia Foundation will therefore be resuming its role to steward and protect Wikimedia brands, in partnership with our broader movement, and the ad hoc Brand Committee concludes its work .

What are the main aspects of the resolution?

Importantly, this resolution extends the Board’s decision that the Wikimedia Foundation should not pursue renaming work for this fiscal year (until at least July 2022). Instead, it directs the Foundation to support the Wikimedia movement through three main areas of brand work that protect and support Wikimedia’s reputation throughout the world. Please read more about this decision on the Diff Blog.

Next steps?

Wikimedia Foundation teams intend to share more information on new projects, including their plans for engaging our community, in the coming weeks. In the meantime, Foundation staff and I are available to answer clarifying questions in this thread. You are also welcome to join the Board’s Open Meeting on October 20th, where you will be able to ask questions and hear from the team directly.

Special thanks

On behalf of the Board, I would like to thank the community advisors to the Brand Committee. This group has worked with us since February 2021, lending their time and expertise. Their input to the process has been invaluable and we appreciate their commitment to help us find a productive way forward. Thank you -- Lucy Crompton-Reid, Joao Alexandre Peschanski, Megan Wacha, Justice Okai-Allotey, Rachmat Wahidi, Erlan Vega Rios, Richard Knipel, Phoebe Ayers and Jeffrey Keefer!

I would also like to thank our Brand Studio team at the Wikimedia Foundation for their hard work, dedication, professionalism, flexibility, openness, and vision they brought to our joint work on the future of branding. Together, we made sure that the next steps for brand work are closely connected to our 2030 strategic goals and we have no doubt they will be an important service to the Wikimedia movement. I look forward to watching these plans come to life and invite the community to actively participate in these discussions and decisions as they unfold.

Sincerely, Shani Evenstein Sigalov, on behalf of the ad hoc Brand Committee. Shani (WMF) (talk) 19:24, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Comments, Question & Answers

Please insert any comments or questions you may have about the Brand resolution below. Thank you!

About Snohetta

Hello! We spent a couple of millions working with Snohetta in the redesign of Wikipedia Movement's (sic) visual identity. Has there been any assessment of this expenditure and its consequences? Thanks. -Theklan (talk) 19:58, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Good question, they never seemed to have any clue about what they were supposed to do with the movement, at least they never bothered to care about us. I can't imagine a worse setup, it was doomed from the beginning without proper community integration, only done as a top-down thing from detached people, (detached means no clue about the Wikiverse, the real Wikiverse, not the xyz_(WMF) ivory tower). They never had any connection with the Wikiverse at all. Grüße vom Sänger ♫^(Reden) 20:08, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Paused or Ended?

Is the 2030 movement brand project paused or ended? Communications on this have been a bit confusing. According to the resolution that captures the Brand Committee's secret deliberations, "any considerations around name changes will involve a new participatory and deliberative process with the community." To me, that says that this current project is basically over, and a new project will be started in the middle of next year. However, the post on the diff talks about "remaining paused".

It's a good idea to have a formal end to the current incarnation of the movement brand project, marking it as historical. While there are a few things (such as the seven guidelines for good movement branding) that might make sense to move to a new project, most of the pages under this namespace are now obsolete (the FAQ and Timeline, the widely-rejected naming convention proposals, the off-wiki Brand Network, and so on.) Many of the reports have misleading content, and it doesn't look likely there will be effort to fix them. A new project seems like a good way to restart without having to deal with previous mistakes. TomDotGov (talk) 20:35, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Bumping this thread, as the questions and comments are still relevant. Some sort of response from a WMF employee would be ideal, but if anyone knows what's going on, please, speak up. Symmachus Auxiliarus (talk) 03:35, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

This may be useful where it seems we have the go ahead to mark this project now as "historical": Talk:Community_open_letter_on_renaming#Marking_"2030_movement_brand_project"_as_historical. - Fuzheado (talk) 03:41, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

As noted above in Talk:Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project#2021_Board_of_Trustees_Update, the "Movement Brand Project" may be marked as historical. It will not be continued. The Board's 2021 resolutions indicate new directions for shared brand development and stewardship - ZMcCune (WMF) (talk) 17:03, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Sound logo

The blog post mentions "exploring the idea of creating a sound logo to improve attribution of Wikimedia content on audio devices" among the Brand Studio team's next steps, and according to the resolution this will happen "through a globally inclusive process that will promote movement-wide participation and be open to the public." Is there already a public page where one could start following and deliberating that project?

Relatedly, I just happened to see that a Wikipedian (who is also a professional musician, keyboardist of the Counting Crows and Oscar nominee as co-composer of the Shrek 2 opening song) composed and recorded a "Wikipedia theme" a while ago:

"The Wikipedia theme, in the style of a five second commercial television cue." (help | download | file info)

Regards, HaeB (talk) 10:01, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

This is really cool, thank you for the reminder, HaeB! --Gnom (talk) 19:12, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

@HaeB (talk) not yet, but we should have something up in the next couple of weeks and I can link it here. Thanks for your interest! --KStineRowe (WMF) (talk) 16:06, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi HaeB,

Below is the copy I'm posting in appropriate forums and talk pages.

The Wikimedia Sound Logo project

The Wikimedia sound logo project is in an early development phase -- this stage is for asking all kinds of questions, developing and fielding ideas, finding themes and shaping the direction of the project. Here is a link to the meta page for the project:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Sound_Logo

Your input is welcome. Thank you, VGrigas (WMF) (talk) 18:27, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

A book that can follow up on the rebranding impasse

As Wikimedia will remain at least historically the name of our movement and the foundation that supports it. The idea came to me to produce a wikibook based on the first three chapters of my PhD thesis about the movement.

The title of this book is: Le mouvement Wikimédia - Derrière la planète Wikipédia se cache toute une galaxie !

And it can be read now in all languages thanks to google translate : https://fr-wikibooks-org.translate.goog/wiki/Le_mouvement_Wikim%C3%A9dia?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=fr&_x_tr_pto=nui

The publication of this book in paper format is discussing in the French-speaking world. And I wonder if it would not be interesting to think about producing similar books in other languages based on a translation and a cultural contextualization of what I have already written. I would like to know what User:Shani (WMF) and other people concerned with the subject think?

Cheers ! Lionel Scheepmans ^{✉ Contact (Fr-N, En-3, Pt-3)} 21:44, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Dear Lionel, it's been a long time and I hope you and your are doing well during this pandemic. Regarding your request for feedback, could you be more specific on what exactly you are interested that I do at this point..? I was not clear from your message. All the best, Shani (WMF) (talk) 21:49, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes Shani, a long time indeed ! Stockolm I mean ? I'm well as the rest of my familly. Hope that's also your case. Is it ? So, I'll try to be more presise. There is two points. First : I'm sharing my work to invite people to reread and tell me if they see any errors or omissions. Second : Since the Wikimedia community refuses to let the popularity of the word Wikipedia be used to make the foundation and association brand more popular to increase participation to our movement, I had an idea : Instead of using the popularity of the word Wikipedia, we can popularize the word Wikimedia. In this context, I wonder if my works (and specially in first stepp the one published in French Wikibooks) could not be used in this sens. The first thing that precedes the popularity of a term is its understanding. And I think that my works could help people to understand what the word Wikimedia stands for, including within the movement itself. Hence the idea to come to you who seems to be invested in branding to see what you think. Maybe you can relay this idea to the board and staff of the foundation? If the foundation thinks that publishing an explanatory book about what Wikimedia is is a good idea, then know that my work is available to do so and that I am available to help with reuse, translation or otherwise. If the idea is not found interesting, then no worries, I have many other projects in the pipeline. Hope that's more clear now. Best, Lionel Scheepmans ^{✉ Contact (Fr-N, En-3, Pt-3)} 12:01, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

An other idea to follow up on the rebranding impasse

To promote the movement along with all its projects, I also think that we could mobilize the idea of a pedagogical office, just as Microsoft developed its own office suite. Under the single Wikimedia label, one would then group together, not processing software of text, spreadsheet, graphic, presentation, etc. but all the Wikimedia projects. The term Wikimedia would then become the brand name of the Wikimedia Foundation, which supports the development of the educational suite named Wikimedia. The word Wikimedia would then become the new product name that the foundation and the rest of the movement could promote. The domain name https://www.wikimedia.org/ already exists and would be the ideal web page location to start this project of the pedagogical office Wikimedia. What do you think about it? Lionel Scheepmans ^{✉ Contact (Fr-N, En-3, Pt-3)} 21:59, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi again Shani, once again, as you are a member of the board of trustees and closer than me to the foundation staff. I shared this Idea of using the Word Wikimedia as the mane of a pedagogical or educational office. To gather all Wikimedia projects in one product name is I think another solution to make the word Wikimedia more popular and useful for the movement at the same time. After giving a definition, the popularity of a word depends on its usefulness and therefore on its usage. The number 365 has become popular because it refers to a very useful online office suite with many tools. The term Wikimedia could become popular if it referred to an educational or pedagogical online suite, equally useful or even complementary to office 368. I'm addressing you again because you seem to be the right person to relay the idea to the foundation. Tell me, if there are still things that are not clear to you. Lionel Scheepmans ^{✉ Contact (Fr-N, En-3, Pt-3)} 12:19, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Lionel, thanks for your questions, and congratulations on the publication of your wikibook. It is always valuable when volunteers and academics help share what they know about Wikimedia with one another and the wider world - though this is not a specific project for the Wikimedia Foundation at this time either as an academic endeavor around a pedagogical office or within our current work around the Wikimedia brand. Thanks again for reaching out here, and also over our email exchange. Tas 12:46, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello Tas, thanks for your comment. I understand from this that the foundation is not interested at the moment in using a document that could help it to make the movement better known to the general public. Anyway, this document remains available on Wikibooks for a possible future use. I'm going back to the finalization of my doctoral thesis. Sincerely, Lionel Scheepmans ^{✉ Contact (Fr-N, En-3, Pt-3)} 14:14, 14 December 2021 (UTC)