Talk:Wikimedia brand survey
Add topicIMHO this questionary misses a important question: and if all I need isn't a new project name, but a logo related to the content developed in some project instead of a one related to a pun not more used as a project name? 555 04:00, 17 May 2007 (UTC) Reply
Define brand.68.195.44.150 12:28, 17 May 2007 (UTC) Reply
Definition is not up-to-date, since only a minority of our articles are original.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:56, 21 May 2007 (UTC) Reply
Is Wikijunior considered a Wikimedia "brand"? If my memory serves me correct, Jimbo got into a big huff and got a book pulled from Lulu Press over the "improper" use of a Wikimedia brand. So is this name wide open for use any more?
BTW, this is more than just an academic exercise, as you (the Wikimedia community thinking about this issue) should look at http://www.wikijunior.nl/ I think you might be surprised at where that goes.... and this URL post-dates the issue of the Wikijunior Big Cat formal publication. --Roberth 08:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC) Reply
Has the Foundation reached a crisis? Is somebody trying to be Salvor Hardin? :) Hillgentleman 22:27, 31 May 2007 (UTC) Reply
I've analyzed a snapshot of the survey responses here.--Eloquence 12:26, 1 July 2007 (UTC) Reply
After seven years with no additional content, I think it's OK to boldly mark this as {{historical}}. Rogol Domedonfors (talk) 21:42, 23 July 2015 (UTC) Reply