Talk:International logo contest/Ballot

Blank ballot

~~~~

*1a: 
*1b: 
*2a: 
*2b: 
*2c: 
*2d: 
*2e: 
*3a: 
*3b: 
*4a: 
*4b: 
*4c: 
*4d: 
*5a: 
*5b: 
*5c: 
*5d: 
*5e: 
*6a: 
*6b: 
*6c: 
*7a: 
*7b: 
*7c: 
*7d: 
*7e: 
*8: 
*9a: 
*9b: 
*9c: 
*9d: 
*9e: 
*10: 
*11: 
*0: 

------

I assume that the ratings are as follows:

5 - Excellent In my opinion, this logo best represents WP and should win.
4 - Satisfactory With minor touchups, this logo is a good contender.
3 - Indifferent Eh! I'm indifferent to this entry.
2 - Unsatisfactory I really don't think this logo is appropriate/drawn well/satisfactory.
1 - Terrible In my opinion, this logo is terrible and probably should not have been drawn, let alone win.

Where 3 is the "don't care" point, above that is "acceptable", and below is "unacceptable". If there isn't a standard for rating, people may have a different idea of what "4" or "3" means. If we are truely want to represent the opinion of everyone, there should be a standard way to represent that opinion. Just my thoughts on this. Neolux 12:57, 16 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Has anyone written a script to show the current results of the vote? Dgrant 02:53, 16 Sep 2003 (UTC)

This page will become HUGE ! Traroth 10:29, 16 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Let me be the first to say that if 1a or 1b wins, I will probably be so upset that I will stop contributing to Wikipedia. Eloquence put is most eloquently, "too cluttered". If you agree that 1a or 1b shouldn't be the new logo, make sure to make rank it as 1, not 2, 3, or 4.... I'm a bit worried, since that one was first in the first round of voting, although I think this was due to the fact that it was at the top of the page... I'm voting for 4d. Dgrant 15:15, 16 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I agree. Some people love it, some people hate it. At the moment most of its votes are 5 or 1. CGS 17:02, 16 Sep 2003 (UTC).

A better way to prevent 1a from winning is, of course, to agree on an alternative ;-) —Eloquence 19:15, 16 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Is it better to have a logo the majority love but the minority hate, or a logo that everyone just likes? CGS 19:40, 16 Sep 2003 (UTC).

Is there such a logo? If so, it will hopefully end up with a higher score. In any case, even if 1a wins, we can certainly talk to Paullusmagnus and try to find ways, in consensus, to make it more acceptable to those who objects to its business. (Another problem I have with the logo is that the text appears to be meaningless -- if it is readable at all, it should have meaning, in my opinion.)—Eloquence 06:42, 17 Sep 2003 (UTC)

The puzzlesphere is GFDL'd, so if there's a consensus toward doing anything with it, the only thing I can do to prevent it is not to help. However, I'd be glad to try to make changes if it wins, and anyone wishing to reformulate it has my blessing on doing so. Paullusmagnus 16:37, 18 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Another problem with the 1a and 1b are that they can't be made much smaller, or else they'd become totally unintelligible. I think a big problem with this logo is that it was at the top of the list on Stage 1 and now it is again on the top of the list in Stage 3. Believe me, this has a huge effect on the rank it will receive. Why do you think it received so many votes in Stage 1? In Stage 3, people will grade it differently as well. When they first start filling out the votes, their mind has no concept of the marking scheme, just a vague concept of bad=1, good=5, but the scale is not refined. The voter is thinking, "This is pretty bad, but what if there are even worser ones later! I'd better give it a 2, so that I can give something else a 1 later." Or, "This is really nice, but maybe there is another one later that will be THE BEST. I'll give it a 3 or 4." By the time the user reaches half way through the list the user knows exactly what deserves a 1,2,3,4, or 5, based on the previous entries he/her has voted on. But now it is too late. The first half of the list has already been voted on, and the user can't be bothered to look over his votes and made adjustments. I experience this same thing every time I mark exams, which is why I always go back over the first few exams after I'm done. I almost gave 1a and 1b a 3 the first time I voted. Then I went back to the first few and revised 1a and 1b to a 1. Perhaps half way through the voting, we can reverse the order of all the entries? It's an interesting experiment. Dgrant 09:06, 17 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Well, the initial ranking was based on the time of submission, and the present ranking is based on the number of votes. I do think it's fair that the logos which received the most votes get a higher ranking, and I'm doubtful that the effect you observe is very strong (if it exists, it should work both ways -- less likely to rate very highly, less likely to rate very lowly).—Eloquence 10:39, 17 Sep 2003 (UTC)

People are taking this so seriously! I don't care for 1 as a logo either, but don't run away if it wins. It's just a logo! -- Stephen Gilbert

hehe, I won't run away. I'm not officially a Wikipedaholic according to the test, but close enough. Dgrant 23:23, 18 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Gotta disagree with Dgrant. 1a looks fine at the size of the current logo. Below is a resample to the exact width of the current logo. I'm sure my resample is inferior to the one the creator will eventually do, but even it looks sharp. It's true the logo has more going on than the typical logo, but to me that's a plus. I don't think intelligibility is an issue. At this size it's obvious there are characters on the globe, but it doesn't matter if they can be read. They're iconic. JDG

.

This logo looks much better. The white background does wonders for this logo, the grey was horrid looking. I wonder if it would look better if the rest of the grey was made white? Also, not having to look at the one with the ant (1b) on the same page, helps as well. Another problem I just realized is how much this looks like the old logo...I kind wanted to see something new, as opposed to the old writing on a globe thing... Oh well, there's still hope for 4d (hint, hint vote for 4d everyone!) Dgrant 23:23, 18 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I think this is a minor improvement, having more white, giving the text and coloured pieces more contrast... Dgrant 23:37, 18 Sep 2003 (UTC)

hmm that's interesting. For my taste something between the two would be ideal. I think the gray in the original gives more of a sense of spherical volume against a white background, but I like the brightness of your modification... About its looking like the old logo-- I think the logo creator was responding to earlier comments from a lot of people saying they thought some sort of continuity with the current logo would be good. I think they have a point. Wikipedia has received a lot of positive exposure in the last nine months, so it's probably good to retain some of the look that people now associate with the quality of the encyclopedia... In any event, I certainly hope you don't stop contributing if 1a wins. It would be a loss. JDG

Good comments, you have a point about it now appearing like it isn't a spherical volume. I wonder if shading would help. Of course the author could easily do this in his POV-ray program. I noticed the meta-wikipedia (which is god-awful) is shaded to look like a sphere... Whatever happens, even if 1a is chosen, I think there will still be some play. Continuity with the old logo is a good idea, I agree. It would be a good transition point, and to have all the wikipedia sites have the same logo would be great... Then maybe a few years down the road, maybe a new logo contest can be started if people are fed up with the logo of the day. Dgrant 03:16, 19 Sep 2003 (UTC)

If the puzzle world is more incomplete it would be much better as a concept.As it stands, it looks as if the puzzle is on the verge of being complete. How about the idea of a dynamic logo, where puzzle pieces could be added on at random, probably everyday, in different locations, still maintaining the wholeness of the world. This would show 'growth' and 'changes/ reorganisation', both fundamnetal to the idea of Wikipedia. KRS 05:46, 19 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Do you work at McDonalds? I'm kidding but this just reminds of McDonalds signs where it says "1 billion served", "2 billion served", etc... The one in my neighbourhood now just says "99 billion served". I think they've given up counting... You have a good idea, I just don't know what we'd do once the puzzle was full? Design a new logo? A disadvantage is that you'd never have a consitent logo, some people might use an older version on their webpage, and so overall the colour would look different. And then you end up with a similar problem to the one we have now (where all the different wikis have different logos). Dgrant 16:46, 19 Sep 2003 (UTC)

The idea is to never finish the puzzle, one day it should look almost complete like now, for some days continuously pieces could be added one by one on any one side, then they can disappear one by one as some new ones come on some other side. There would be a gradual inexorable process by additions and subtractions, with a slight edge towards additions, the balance always in favour of and tending towards completeness rather than towards incompleteness. Everyone should have the same version, I don't understand what you say about older versions(McDonald's?!I am a vegetarian)- KRS 17:09, 19 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Moved comment

These results are completely wrong. They sum the votes instead of averaging them. It's a big difference because one doesn't have to vote on every logo, and in this setup, voting 1 is better for a logo than not voting at all. Taw 13:12, 20 Sep 2003 (UTC)

If you want to compare one with another one, then it is actually not necessary to calculate a mean value because after all, every sum is divided by the number of voters. And about in the case you don't have to vote, you are right. I will revise the script and result. Thank for pointing out. -- TakuyaMurata

You must vote on all variants! Is that so? -- TakuyaMurata 01:47, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)

No. I have warned Kris not to insert incorrect claims into the voting instruction again.—Eloquence 02:26, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Maybe the current results can be rounded to 2 decimal places. Dgrant 03:07, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Done. -- Taku

uninvalidate me please?

added a link on my meta userpage now User:Matthewmayer

I hope that users that are "marked for invalidation" will have an opportunity to validate their vote. Perhaps they should be contacted to let them know that their vote is invalid. It would be a shame for their vote to be wasted due to a minor technicality that they could have fixed in a few minutes if they were aware of the problem. Neolux 23:13, 24 Sep 2003 (UTC)

This page is too long for my browser to edit, which means I can't vote... Fransvannes 10:39, 25 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Put your votes here, and hopefully, someone will move them. (right, Eloquence?) Paullusmagnus 11:50, 25 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Use this link to append to the page.—Eloquence 16:34, 25 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Because the ballot pages are now protected, please a sysop add on each page "Vote is closed" , fr: "Le vote est clos", eo : "Baloto estas ŝlosita" de : "Wahl ist zum Schluß" . ArnoLagrange 08:14, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I've unprotected the pages. The history cannot be altered through the wiki interface, and it may be useful to alter formatting and notices on the pages. --Brion VIBBER 00:53, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)