@SerDIDG has already produced some candidate logos that are derived from the new MediaWiki logo:

• https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Serhio_Magpie/Logo_proposal
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikitech_variant_1.svg
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikitech_variant_2.svg

In T279087#6965876, @bd808 wrote:

@SerDIDG has already produced some candidate logos that are derived from the new MediaWiki logo:

• https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Serhio_Magpie/Logo_proposal
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikitech_variant_1.svg
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikitech_variant_2.svg

And additionally new iteration of icon - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MediaWiki-2020-installer-large-icon.svg.

@SerDIDG as the designer here, what would you think about using colors that invoke a feeling of either a blueprint or a pencil sketch as part of the design for wikitech? I'm imagining a variation on https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikitech_variant_2.svg where the outlined petals are somehow less "finished" looking. I think that was part of your intent with the outlined petals, but my eye wants more contrast somehow between the filled and outlined sections.

I feel like https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikitech_logo.svg is trying to invoke the idea of an unfinished work in progress. I like that connotation for branding of our backend technical docs.

+1 to a blueprint/unfinished variation of the mediawiki logo.

I don't mind if the wikitech logo is going to use the mediawiki logo or not, or if it's going to use the half-full mediawiki logo but I want to emphasize that if it's using the new logo, please follow the variant guideline put by @SerDIDG https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:MediaWiki_logo_guidelines

It is not recommended to change the position and size of the petals to create derivative logos.

While I have your attention I just want to point out the current wikitech logo doesn't have a wordmark and it's just emptiness there:

In T279087#6966470, @bd808 wrote:

An attempt at a "blueprint" look (ok, really an inverse blueprint look) derived from the https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikitech_variant_2.svg base image. In addition to the obvious change in stroke color and pattern, I also rebuilt the "wikitech" text based on the wordmark guidelines for MediaWiki. The blueprint blue used is R:96 G:129 B:142 at full opacity.

Love it. Slap it on Commons and then it's a one line mw-config change (plus a script run)? ;-)

In T279087#6966470, @bd808 wrote:

An attempt at a "blueprint" look (ok, really an inverse blueprint look) derived from the https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikitech_variant_2.svg base image. In addition to the obvious change in stroke color and pattern, I also rebuilt the "wikitech" text based on the wordmark guidelines for MediaWiki. The blueprint blue used is R:96 G:129 B:142 at full opacity.

I like it! I made some customization to the font and capitalize a first letter. Here are different examples from old to new based on your idea:

I like 5 the best here.

wikitech2020-logo-3, wikitech2020-logo-4

note: edited to include the file name, as the order of the images changed

1 or 3

I really like @SerDIDG's "Wikitech-2020-logo-5.svg" variant. I actually liked it so much that I had some fun with a tweaked version that has animation (which was inspired by something @Jdforrester-WMF said about the collection of logos on irc). You can see it in action at https://bd808-test.toolforge.org/wikitech-logo.html.

I like 5. Animated version in slow should be the "Please wait. Slides are loading..." first screen of every technical Wikimedia presentation. By law.

Thanks for making these! I like 4 or 5 the most.

It seems we have a winner, shall I make the patches?

In T279087#6986293, @Ladsgroup wrote:

It seems we have a winner, shall I make the patches?

My animated version makes a few style and structure tweaks that I think are good to @SerDIDG's design (varies outline width by color "completion", removed some overlapping petal paths). I would be happy to prepare a static version and put it on commons with joint authorship by @SerDIDG and myself if he is agreeable to that.

After that I would love for you to do the needful magic of making the config patches @Ladsgroup. :)

Sounds good to me. Ping me once you're ready ^^

Nice, but looking at the example i only wish that the colors should fade out smoothly until completely transparent.

I uploaded my variant without animation as https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikitech-2020-logo.svg. I also posted the data for the version without the wordmark at https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File_talk:Wikitech-2020-icon.svg&oldid=551559886.

Today I took a close look at the details and I don't really like how the petals grow in size in the stroke, i think I need to completely redraw. But the biggest problem is in the modern vector skin. The stoke lines become thin or messy depending on the thickness. But maybe these are my personal worms :)

So by specking in general graphical terms, I see a lot of problems. The cross of a stroke is little bit messy, whatever i try, it's required a manual high precision adjustments rather that the built-in svg stroke feature. Additionally it has a poor scalability, see examples above. The colors don't blend well with each other and doesn't look great in a dark theme. My preferred logo is still this one:

Change 678342 had a related patch set uploaded (by Jforrester; author: Jforrester):

[operations/mediawiki-config@master] [wikitech] Update logo to mirror the new MediaWiki logo

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/678342

2.5 and 5 are the best two. That's the direction I'd recommend going in.

Do people refer to the logos by their position or their filename? It happens that they are not coinciding.

I re-upload the attached svg files so they follow the preview order.

In T279087#6989203, @Jack_who_built_the_house wrote:

Do people refer to the logos by their position or their filename? It happens that they are not coinciding.

I was referring to the file names when I commented. So, now that they are renamed, I meant that those now labeled 3 and 5 were the best

What about the favicon? That might be a case where the hard change from colored to white may result in a better rendering than a cross fade. Also probably a solid line rather than dotted since there won't be much left of it otherwise at 32px

In T279087#6988323, @SerDIDG wrote:

My preferred logo is still this one:

That one is fine with me too, but I thought that it was the design that was picked for the MediaWiki installer? Or was that just a proposal and not actually a committed action?

For what it's worth, at any given time I have multiple tabs open to mediawiki.org (which is using the new MW logo as it's favicon) and wikitech (which will use whatever we pick here as a favicon). For me personally it would be nice if two favicons were easily distinguishable as my pile of tabs also mostly reduces the visible info to the favicon and maybe a few letters of the page title. This is a "power user" problem for sure, but also something that I expect I am not uniquely alone in among frequent wikitech visitors.

In T279087#7007049, @bd808 wrote:

In T279087#6988323, @SerDIDG wrote:

My preferred logo is still this one:

That one is fine with me too, but I thought that it was the design that was picked for the MediaWiki installer? Or was that just a proposal and not actually a committed action?

Something similar to that was indeed committed. However I've proposed at T274678 to change that, and use the "Empty leafs" variant instead.

For what it's worth, at any given time I have multiple tabs open to mediawiki.org (which is using the new MW logo as it's favicon) and wikitech (which will use whatever we pick here as a favicon). For me personally it would be nice if two favicons were easily distinguishable as my pile of tabs also mostly reduces the visible info to the favicon and maybe a few letters of the page title. This is a "power user" problem for sure, but also something that I expect I am not uniquely alone in among frequent wikitech visitors.

+1. I think for this reason, I'd strongly prefer that Wikitech involve a distinctly different color or shape. Keeping the same colors and having only half the leafs empty seems very easy to confuse.

Perhaps we can take the "blue" tone of these leaf outlines and take it a step further and render it in blue for Wikitech.

Perhaps we can take the "blue" tone of these leaf outlines and take it a step further and render it in blue for Wikitech.

Yeah, that make sense. Made several variations:

Change 678342 merged by jenkins-bot:

[operations/mediawiki-config@master] [wikitech] Update logo to mirror the new MediaWiki logo

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/678342

Mentioned in SAL (#wikimedia-operations) [2021-04-15T23:06:18Z] <jforrester@deploy1002> Synchronized static/images/project-logos/wikitech.png: Config: [[gerrit:678342|[wikitech] Update logo to mirror the new MediaWiki logo (T279087)]] (duration: 00m 57s)

Mentioned in SAL (#wikimedia-operations) [2021-04-15T23:07:34Z] <jforrester@deploy1002> Synchronized static/images/project-logos/wikitech-1.5x.png: Config: [[gerrit:678342|[wikitech] Update logo to mirror the new MediaWiki logo (T279087)]] (duration: 00m 57s)

Mentioned in SAL (#wikimedia-operations) [2021-04-15T23:08:33Z] <jforrester@deploy1002> Synchronized static/images/project-logos/wikitech-2x.png: Config: [[gerrit:678342|[wikitech] Update logo to mirror the new MediaWiki logo (T279087)]] (duration: 00m 56s)

Mentioned in SAL (#wikimedia-operations) [2021-04-15T23:09:33Z] <jforrester@deploy1002> Synchronized wmf-config/logos.php: Config: [[gerrit:678342|[wikitech] Update logo to mirror the new MediaWiki logo (T279087)]] (duration: 00m 56s)

In T279087#7007049, @bd808 wrote:

For me personally it would be nice if two favicons were easily distinguishable as my pile of tabs also mostly reduces the visible info to the favicon and maybe a few letters of the page title.

+1

In T279087#7007474, @SerDIDG wrote:

Yeah, that make sense. Made several variations:

I like these blued options the most, and particularly blue-1. Not only are they eye-catching, they contrast the mediawiki.org logo very well.

I created https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikitech_logo, @SerDIDG Can you upload them in commons and add them to the page? I'll do the similar jazz with did with mw logo but faster (only one round, two week voting period and no legal clearance) to finish it.

@Ladsgroup, i have added last four options, please let me know if i need to upload others as well.

No, that's enough. I just an email asking people to vote. Thanks.