Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I don't know where they got the idea that a serif 'W' is the most recognisable 'W' on the net (as Wikipedia). I first thought of Waterstones (a UK bookstore chain), and then Wordpress.

Even after that, how does it then make sense to actually change it to something else, thus removing what identity there once was? It's not like the replacement (with the Adobe-esque abbreviations that are meaningless to people who don't already know them) is an actual improvement.

Otherwise, I don't really get the purpose of it. Wikipedia's not there to look fancy or show off designer skills, and I'd argue that anything that isn't pure content is just completely unnecessary for it.



Exactly what I thought; Wordpress' serif W dominates the web and this one is far too similar to it for people to know the difference. People know Wikipedia as Wikipedia and as an international website, we shouldn't use a generic 'W' as the logo across the board.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: