Forum:Logo Submissions

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Logo Submissions
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 2 March 2011 by Iiii I I I.

Submissions[edit source]

Submissions are closed. Please do not add any more images or modify your entry.

Survey 1[edit source]

First of all, there were obviously some serious problems with this survey. I guess you could say say that we needed more speed but less haste in getting the survey together, and I apologize for my haste. Anyway, I've done the best I can to decide on the highest voted logos from the survey. Anyone wishing to see the "raw" data can do so here.

Based on my assessment, I believe the following logo's were the top choices:
(These numbers correspond with the table above):

  • 1
  • 2
  • 4
  • 14
  • 15*
  • 19
  • 20
  • 24
  • 29
  • 31
  • 33
  • 35
  • 36

*Based on Cook's comment above this must be removed on copyright grounds

I'm not one for statistics, so if other people could look over the data and give feedback that would be great. What I hope to be able to do from here is to get our choices down to about 10 logos, run another survey, take the top 2 or 3 from that survey, and then have a discussion to gain consensus on one of them. For the next survey, I'm hoping to have the choices listed in 2 columns of 5 to lessen the scrolling issue, with nothing but the identifying number next to them to minimize bias, followed by one question asking for the visitors single favorite logo. Feedback/discussion please? --Aburnett(Talk) 19:10, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

I am going to assume your figures are correct. I don't have access to the more advanced statistical analysis software we use at work so I cant play with the figures the way I want. Your method this time is a little better but it's still flawed. You need the options to show in a random order. And the tick boxes need to be a lot closer to the images than they are currently. It's crazy people need to scroll up/down so many times to check what they are voting on. Also the logos should really show a preview of how they would look with the current skin. You should be able to click each logo and a preview image will open. I don't think you can do this with the limitations of Kwiksurveys. Perhaps you need to consider another method. --Gold ore.png Mercifull UK serv.svg (Talk) 22:59, January 22, 2011 (UTC)
I do think it's possible to provide a preview of the logo in use on a page. I'll add that to this next survey. You are correct, many of the things that would improve the validity of the survey are not possible with Kwiksurvey. If anyone can find a better survey option, I'm more than open, but I don't thing we can find anything for free that will give us that level of functionality. We could emulate some of there features by having multiple surveys, each with the logos in a different order, and useing <choose> to distribute visitors amongst the different surveys. --Aburnett(Talk) 03:43, January 23, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - Per above, I believe the results are flawed but try out Enigma's scheme for listing the logos instead of a large list. One choice, that's it. Personally, the very first survey ever ran (despite SurveyMonkey being limited to only the first 100 results without being a paying member) had the best questions and most thorough with adding comments and option to add username(s). Also, whatever the outcome of the final of these surveys, I know which one I will be using. A spreadsheet for OpenOffice or Excel wouldn't hurt either. Ryan PM 00:48, January 23, 2011 (UTC)

Go ahead - Yeh have all those listed except 15 and do another survey. Hunter cape (t).png Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask.png 03:05, January 23, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - I don't think we can just go with those numbers. For example, you believe we should consider 20 but not 19, both of which got 11% total. The problem is that we can't determine whether a vote for question one was in fact intended to be worth more than a vote for question two - or how much more it's worth if it is. I don't think the survey provided enough completely valid information except that certain logos, like 16, got straight 0s, and they should be removed. For the sake of actually making a dent in the pool of logos, I say remove 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16, 21, 22, 23, 26, 27, 28, and 30 for having less than a total of 5% across the board. Again I reference copyright law in regards to removing 15, 24, and possibly 21, 25, and 26. While I'm uncomfortable with considering 21, with 4%, better than 25, with 5%, I feel like less than 5% is a low enough amount. Feel free to disagree, but it would be ridiculous not to consider 19 when you're considering 20.

In regards to a better way of surveying, is it possible to implement a points system? Say surveyees receive 10 points to distribute among logos that they like. Each point is worth the same amount as each other point, and the only deciding factor would be that one logo has more points than the other. This system would provide surveyees with the opportunity to point out their second best without making it unable to comprehend, as is the current three-question system, and less desired options would be easily ruled out by glancing over the data and setting a reasonable minimum to stay in the running. Notice that I say reasonable, by which I mean that you should not remove 19 and keep 20 in order to save time; if you can only reasonably remove a small portion of the options, it's better to only do so much.

Apologies for what I consider an incoherent and somewhat contradictory commentary, but it's difficult to make a valid point based on invalid data. In my opinion, it may be better to completely disregard the three-question survey in favor of another method, which may or may not be a points system depending on the reaction of the community to such an idea. To anyone who would disagree with disregarding the three-question survey on the basis that we put work into creating the three-question survey, I reference the concepts of sunk costs and prospective costs, that only prospective costs should be considered in rational decision-making. Leftiness 03:00, January 24, 2011 (UTC)

I agree that not including 19 was oversight on my part, that's this discussion is occurring: to make sure I had not overlooked anything. While I Like Leftiness' idea, that would leave us with a ton of choices. That again brings up the issue to too many choices overwhelming those talking the survey. Based on everyone's concerns, there is really no way to continue without some problem emerging. The points system is not possible with Kwiksurvey, but perhaps some other survey service offers it. --Aburnett(Talk) 00:10, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
I'm unaware of a survey service that would allow a points system in such a way as I would have imagined it when I commented yesterday, but it could be done in the same way the three-question survey was; if we make it clear that you are to answer 10 questions, that you can vote for the same logo as many times as desired, and that each vote for a logo counts as the same amount no matter which question you use to vote for a logo, then it's good. The problem is that the three-question survey asked for a second and third-best logo, which means that users ranked the first higher than the third, but we have no way of telling just how much more each user ranks their first choice above their third.
In regards to leaving us with a large amount of choices, there's nothing wrong with having more than one survey to gather information. When the first survey eliminates logos, the votes that were for an eliminated logo will go towards another in the next round. While this would take quite a bit longer, I feel like the benefit of increased accuracy would be worth it.
Also, I expect everyone's comfortable with removing the logos which received 0% across the board, and also removing those which are legally unfit would provide a benefit from the three-question survey. Personally, again, I wouldn't mind removing those which received less than 5% total, and we'd be down to 16 for a second round of surveying if we removed those which I suggested. Leftiness 04:57, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

About time I spoke here. It's been three weeks since the submission of the logos and I have seen many treachery involving copyright issues as well as multiple submissions that proves to be unfair for those who spent time producing that one logo. What I strongly suggest is to inform the creators of the logos to limit themselves to only one logo and remove the others or risk voiding their submissions. The clog of multiple submissions is clearly dumb and stupid for everyone trying to vote. I have never seen a survey where by I had to choose between 30+ choices. Like I said, it's been three weeks since the submissions, I've been checking the pages everyday to see if the logo has changed (so that I can congratulate whoever had won). However, up till now there is nothing. There are 17 designers but 36 logos, so if we decide that it's one logo per designer, we effectively cut down the number of choices to 17. One more thing before I close, the purpose of a logo designing competition is not about knowing how to rip pieces off item images and slapping them together with a funky font. I believe in originality and coming up with your own drawings for a competition. I personally was disappointed in the lack of honor in this competition. Yours Sincerely, FizzyLiquid

Wut? Not everyone "ripped" the detailed images off the wiki, and added font. Only about 10 or 11 feature ingame graphics exclusively - look at the designs by, say, Aburnett, or Fiove. Neither of them have used items in their designs. Also, not everyone has access to a scanner, or high-quality design software, so their best shot will be an IT-designed logo. Real Crazy 08:28, January 29, 2011 (UTC)
Why restrict amount of submissions per person to one? We have already cut down the amount to 12, and I think they are much better than some of the other suggestions. If we would do it your way, we would have 5 more options, and lower quality options. This is just the best, we cut it down enough already. I don't know what's supposed to happen now though(why isn't there another survey yet?), but we shouldn't restrict amount of submissions to one per person. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 11:47, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
That survey data is basically useless for reasons stated above. Leftiness 19:37, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
Could you please stop this kind of thing? We don't appreciate it, as we will keep using this method. It is just annoying to see the same kind of comments over and over. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 23:22, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - I don't think removing logos over votes is good, I think removing logos by QUALITY is the right path to go, because lets be realistic, Neither 3 nor 9 would ever get to see as the logo of the Wiki, instead I'm suggesting to remove:

  • 2
  • 3
  • 6 (copy of 5)
  • 7 (copy of 6)
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • (One between 13 and 14 - duplicates)
  • 15 by copyright
  • 16
  • (Keep one from 21-22/25)
  • 24 (derived from 15)
  • 26
  • 27
  • (Keep one between 28-29)
  • (Keep one between 31-32)
  • (Keep one betwee 33-36 - Seriously, 4 VARIANTS)

TL:DR, remove all variants and bad quality/badly done logos. ScionCrush 19:52, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

Why not just get the ones from the first survey as they will probably remove all the bad quality ones and also the ones people don't like. Hunter cape (t).png Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask.png 23:53, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
This list is heavily biased. There's nothing wrong with variants, either. The only ones that should be removed are the ones that do not fit the wiki standards (Transparency, copyrights, etc.) We need a completely different survey. — Enigma 01:41, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - Is it just me, or is this discussion making too big a deal of the logo? It's just a picture in the upper left of the screen, not a visual manifestation of the super natural entity that will determine the ultimate fate of the wiki. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 02:02, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

The logo is what represents us not just on the wiki but at various events. If we had some paint drawn stickman, how would we look? That's right, stupid.   Swizz Talk   Events!   07:59, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
I know, but discussions that drone on indefinitely like this one never go anywhere. I've archived the older parts of the discussion, as to make the page easier to wrap one's mind around. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 19:56, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - Just start another survey please. The only thing that is going to happen here is causing doubt if the used method is good, and as we are not going to change the way we do it(atleast not this round of logo submissions) I think we could as well start the new survey with the selected logo submissions:

(I corrected reference to earlier submissions, and removed a text that could have influence on votes. If the version which was referred to didn't pass the survey, I merged the descriptions)
If we are going to keep this discussion open forever, we aren't going to get something. If we take action, we will. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 23:41, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what's going on here. Will there be a vote? Can we just close submissions now? I belive this was previously to be voted on, and was on the sitenotice, and then It was gone. Could we just archive the previous disscussion and have a vote on the above logos?  Golden warpriest of Zamorak helm.png Wingcap Firemaking master cape.png 16:41, February 6, 2011 (UTC)

I agree. Could someone please set up another poll for the final/semifinal? And the 3rd of my list and 4th of the first list needs a reupload, because it doesn't show anymore. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 01:19, February 7, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - I would just like to make it known that I have neither the energy nor the time to run the next survey. This, however, is not something that needs to be headed up by an administrator. If you think you've got what it takes to get this moving again, by all means go for it so we can get somewhere. --Aburnett(Talk) 20:08, February 7, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - I am setting it up with the ones mentioned by aburnett at the start of this section minus the one that has copyright infringement and removing one of 35/36 as they are virtually the same. If there are no reasonable objections I will release it about this time tomorrow. Hunter cape (t).png Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask.png 09:26, February 8, 2011 (UTC)

Also #2 will be removed because it is virtually the same as 33. Hunter cape (t).png Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask.png 09:39, February 8, 2011 (UTC)
Objection - Just include the "duplicate" logos, as those also did get the votes to be included. Apparently they are good logos, and so should be included. Just use the table I made because that has the good descriptions so it is clear what it is about etc. kthxbai JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 15:12, February 8, 2011 (UTC)
Ok, I will add them, but i have also removed all descriptions to make it more neutral. Hunter cape (t).png Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask.png 06:11, February 9, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - Survey has been created, please vote here. Hunter cape (t).png Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask.png 10:11, February 9, 2011 (UTC)

The survey will close on 23 February GMT automatically but this is subject to change if needed. Hunter cape (t).png Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask.png 10:35, February 9, 2011 (UTC)
WAT - Where did #20 go? >_< bad_fetustalk 11:21, February 9, 2011 (UTC)
Number 4 and number 20 are missing, number 21 isn't supposed to be there. And isn't number 15 somewhat violating Wikipedia's logo copyright...? — Enigma 22:38, February 9, 2011 (UTC)
Please start up another survey with the list here, thanks. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 22:49, February 9, 2011 (UTC)

Updated - That was my fault I accidentally got 21 instead of 20 and missed 4. Url is the same as the previous one, if you have already voted you will need to vote again. Also the end date has been extended by a day to make up for the day missed with this. Hunter cape (t).png Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask.png 07:14, February 10, 2011 (UTC)

Nub (yes, this is a totally unnecessary comment that doesn't need to be here) 222 talk 07:44, February 10, 2011 (UTC)
Kewl (yes, this is one too) JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 08:44, February 10, 2011 (UTC)

Ur 2nd logo is still "illegal"... But, as it had more "first choice"s than 29, which is also included, I forgive you, son. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 08:44, February 10, 2011 (UTC)

Survey 1 Results[edit source]

So, the survey is supposed to be over now. Can we get some results? — Enigma 22:40, February 24, 2011 (UTC)

Ok, here they are. If anyone wants some more information I will try to post a link here. Overall there were 1293 votes between the 13 logos and they were:

Number Logo Votes (Percentage) Number Logo Votes (Percentage)
1 Wiki-wordmark.png 148 (11%) 2 116 (9%)
3 171 (13%) 4 184 (14%)
5 45 (3%) 6 169 (13%)
7 68 (5%) 8 47 (4%)
9 98 (8%) 10 83 (6%)
11 42 (3%) 12 logo2-1.png 43 (3%)
13 79 (6%)

So from how I see it we will need to decide from 3, 4 and 6 as to which logo we want as our new logo. If you do have another suggestion please post it, but I believe we should try to get consensus on one of 3, 4 or 6 in some way on this thread. Hunter cape (t).png Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask.png 05:43, February 25, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - Although any changes to the Wiki-wordmark will not affect me (hurray for excellent CSS), I honestly don't think the fourth logo will shine too brightly on any page of the wiki. Hence the imageshack file, I can only see the third submission in the above survey doing well, as it goes with the theme of this wiki. Ryan PM 06:02, February 25, 2011 (UTC)

I agree that the 4th one isn't the best for the wiki, although it is a great picture, that doesn't make it a great logo. Hunter cape (t).png Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask.png 07:47, February 25, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - I agree with Ryan. The fourth one is too bright for our wiki, and will be a serious detriment. The sixth is okay, but the non-transparent box and spacing of words messes it up. The third is not bad, but not perfect imho. 10 honestly is my favourite, as it fits in well with the colour scheme, and gives us a sense of identity. It also looks so much better with transparency right through the text. Observe. Voting isn't accurate or the best option, as voters do not take in all the factors, like how it actually looks ON our skin. Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 06:23, February 25, 2011 (UTC)

Like I keep saying, we should take into account that logos 9-11 are very similar, and together had the most support of any logo. ʞooɔ 08:19, February 25, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - Basically repeating what others have said, #4 does not fit with our theme at all, and #6 does not look professional enough to be a representation of our site. #3 seems to me to be the only option here. --Aburnett(Talk) 21:13, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

True. But what about 9-11? All together, they are about 17%, and that seems fair as they are extremely similar style/design. Take a look at the imageshack image above of what it looks like on our skin. Chicken7 >talk 08:14, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
That's not an accurate measure as people liking one doesn't mean they like the others at all. I personally don't like the frilly font, but other may like that but not the more basic font. Hunter cape (t).png Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask.png 08:25, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
Maybe. But it is highly likely that both the frilly logos liked the other colour, and that at least half of the "basic" font liked the frilly. Anyway, regardless, this poll was extremely inaccurate. Not only is there somewhat potential for taking advantage of polling, there is also the issue that voters were not supplied with the full picture. Before I saw the logo I liked on the background, I thought it looked crap. Voters did not really match the logos to the skin well, as seen by the winner of the poll. I cannot really take this polls seriously, as the results are, and always will be, inaccurate. Chicken7 >talk 08:47, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
How was there potential for taking advantage of the poll? Also if a logo is good it will get quite a few votes, although yes not all the ones with a lot of votes will be great. Hunter cape (t).png Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask.png 08:50, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
After talking to Sentra in the IRC, it seems that this survey site may even run on cookies being stored. This is probably the easiest way to circumvent the system, as cookies can be wiped in seconds; then the user can revote, and redo. From personal opinion and observation, the poll has placed the few good logos all over the ranking. Also, I didn't get a response about the inaccuracy due to not showing it with a background. Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 09:07, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
I think that not showing the logos on our background was without a doubt an error. People need context if they are going to choose a logo to match our sight. In regards to duplicate votes, I can say with certainty that the survey site we used does allow duplicate responses to be blocked by IP address, so as long as this option was selected we should be good to go. If not, the IP addresses of all votes are logged by the site, allowing us to manually remove duplicates if necessarily. --Aburnett(Talk) 20:16, February 28, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - I have gone through the results and there are no big violations from multiple votes from people voting multiple times. There was about 10-15 added to #4 and about 5-10 added to #8 by the abuse, but other than that the voting is mostly accurate. Hunter cape (t).png Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask.png 09:35, February 28, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - 13% of the votes are for a logo which I still hold as a violation of trademark on the Wikipedia logo. For my argument on the subject, see Cook's talk page [1], specifically the part about a logo only needing to be similar. Anyway, declaring a logo accepted by the majority of 14% of a vote is ridiculous. There's a reason that elections involve a small amount of candidates; especially when you divide the votes among several very similar choices, the other options are inaccurately favoured or disfavoured. As such, I wonder why we're so hurried to get a result. We should eliminate 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, and 13 before having another vote. I expect that the percentage of votes for 9 and 10 will go up, though I could be wrong. I can't guess what people would want if the logos with <6% were eliminated and the votes went elsewhere, and neither can you. Leftiness 05:08, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

Survey of Final 3[edit source]

Below are mockups of the highest ranking candidates (each >12%) as numbered in the Survey 1 Results section above.

1):[edit source]


2):[edit source]


3:[edit source]


Please feel free to vote for your favourite and/or least favourite. Tally's can be made by a one of our statistics peeps.

Votes/Comments[edit source]

1 definatly looks the best and 3 the worst.   Swizz Talk   Events!   16:36, March 2, 2011 (UTC)

I am strongly opposed to not including one of the 9-11 logos. They are very similar and together they got a plurality of the vote. ʞooɔ 18:22, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
You're also ignoring the trademark violation. Wikipedia is not Jagex; we have no permission to use their intellectual property, and I'm rather disappointed in the continued indifference toward blatant inaccuracy. As I wrote, 9, 10, and 11 had their votes divided in a manner that biases votes for others. I suggested another survey eliminating 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, and 13, which is the only way to provide an accurate vote, which is the only reasonable manner in which to use the travesty of voting to determine our decisions. Leftiness 19:16, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
Wow, I completely missed the globe. We definitely need to remove that from contention, no questions asked. I would like it if we stopped with the surveys and attempted to get consensus on a single logo (my favorite is 10). Does anyone have a problem with that? ʞooɔ 19:35, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
I agree. --Aburnett(Talk) 19:51, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
Yeah 11 and 10 are the best, 11 maybe be better as it's darker which looks nicer against the background.   Swizz Talk   Events!   20:12, March 2, 2011 (UTC)

Closed - 10 ([2]) will be used. --Iiii I I I 20:19, March 2, 2011 (UTC)