Skip to content
Diff

Diff

  • Categories
    • Equity & Inclusion
    • Education & Open Access
    • Technology
    • Partnerships & Events
    • Policy & Advocacy
    • Movement Strategy
  • About
  • Submit
  • Calendar

Wikipedia in 3D

13 May 2010 by Jay Walsh
Translate This Post

(Update: We’ve received a lot of feedback about how the new Wikipedia identity functions in different browsers, and we’re working on some minor improvements over the next few days.  We’ve captured much of the feedback below, and now encourage users to visit this thread on Wikimedia Commons where you can further comment on a revised version, currently being tested on our prototype Wikipedia.  Thanks!)
Later today you’ll be reading about one of the first major changes to  Wikipedia’s user interface.  A significant part of that change is a minor, but noticeable refinement to one of the most-recognized logos on the internet: the Wikipedia puzzle globe.
Our puzzle globe has an amazing story, and its creation and localization across more than 250 distinct language versions of Wikipedia is a collaborative design achievement. The original globe was created in 2003 following a historical logo-creation contest on Wikipedia.  The original winning design came from Paul Stansifer (Wikipedia User:Paullusmagnus), a design that was then revised to reflect the international breadth of Wikipedia by David Friedland (User:nohat) — the version users around the world have grown to know as Wikipedia’s puzzle globe.
Just over a year ago we saw a need to update the beloved Wikipedia globe, both to resolve some minor typographic errors found by our volunteers, and to develop a high-resolution version with gradient qualities (it is a sphere, after all) that could be used in a variety of new settings.  It was a perfect opportunity to build a new model that would be completely 3D in its design.  To complete the project we would need help from a 3D designer, and we’d go back to our community of volunteer contributors to examine what the 52 or so un-identified puzzle pieces might look like.
A new chapter in the history of the logo was written as volunteers examined languages and scripts that were not represented in the previous iteration of the puzzle globe.  Several small errors were corrected, and the Klingon character was replaced with an Amharic character (Klingon Wikipedia wound down in 2005). A great history of the puzzle globe, not surprisingly, can be found on Wikipedia.
The actual 3D construction of the new mark was carried out by a San Francisco bay area professional 3D animator, art director, and graphic designer, Philip Metschan.  Through his career Philip has worked for Industrial Light and Magic and Pixar, and currently he’s also a visualization and concept artist for the DIRECT program.
The results are fantastic, and now you can see many new languages and scripts represented.  The final state for our puzzle globe is quite similar to the original.  The ‘hero’ version closely resembles the shape, and orientation of the original.
You can review more details about the revised identity, and see some of its current physical manifestations, here.
Aside from the puzzle globe, you’ll also notice a small refinement to the text underneath the puzzle globe.  To facilitate the incredible work of our volunteers in localizing the Wikipedia identity into over 250 languages and character sets, it was decided to use Linux Libertine (an open-source typeface) as an alternative to Hoefler.  “The Free Encyclopedia” tag line has also lost its italics to facilitate better on-screen reading (although we’re pretty sure everyone on the internet knows those words by now). You can see the incredible volunteer effort of localizing these new Wikipedia identies unfold here.
This is a small part of the next steps for Wikipedia in terms of look and feel, but we hope the revised logo is a useful and more practical tool for our volunteer chapters and volunteers around the world. We’d love to hear your feedback as well, because like any great and visible logo, small improvements are always in store.
Our thanks to the whole usability team, Philip Metschan, and the dozens of volunteers who have helped make this project a reality. We also recognize the original efforts of David Friedland, Paul Stansifer, and those early pioneers who brought this identity to life in 2003.  We hope it’s a lasting tribute and a testament to the incredible impact this symbol makes on millions of people every day.
Jay Walsh, Head of Communications

Archive notice: This is an archived post from blog.wikimedia.org, which operated under different editorial and content guidelines than Diff.

Can you help us translate this article?

In order for this article to reach as many people as possible we would like your help. Can you translate this article to get the message out?

Start translation

Related

211 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Nihiltres
12 years ago
#2066

While I’m convinced the update is a good thing, I’m not quite happy with the result. Perhaps it’s a function of having seen the old version for 5 years or so (that is, the time I’ve been a Wikipedian), but it doesn’t look quite right to me. In particular, I wish that there was more contrast on the ridges between puzzle pieces. On the low-resolution versions of the new version, the ridges look particularly flat, compared to a more “3D” look for the old one. I think the new puzzle globe could do with a bit of tweaking, though I’m… Read more »

0
Ryan Rice
12 years ago
#2067

I agree about the depth of the puzzle pieces as well. Perhaps a re-render with a wider and deeper bump map with some inner outer falloff on each piece and some anti aliasing would help? If it is a physical model just give the edges of the pieces a bit more of a chamfered edge, deeper bevel cuts, and a bit of a soft curve out from the center of each piece. Otherwise, great work. It definitely looks polished yet retains the instant recognition of the original.

0
Link-urile de joi (11) | www.tykryt.com
12 years ago
#2068

[…] Wikipedia in 3D, in viitor !link! […]

0
Kalan
12 years ago
#2069

Although it is great to see that the characters are fixed, and full 3D version is available now, the final rendering resulted to be too ugly to be the logo. Characters are out of place, the very globe is deformed and unbalanced, and colors make lines between the puzzles look like they have different thickness. I hate the rendering (just this one rendering) and consider it a big counter-improvement done without enough consideration. It seems like there is no way back for the good old logo, so I hope the new one will be fixed ASAP, and I am ready… Read more »

0
Redskies
12 years ago
#2070

I for one am happy with the new update. Im currently enjoying the new interface and look.
The work on the Wikipedia Globe is a real improvement from the original idea of a slate finish.

0
JovanCormac
12 years ago
#2071

I have to agree with Nihiltres here. Recreating the globe in 3D is a good idea, but the result leaves a lot to be desired.
The joints between the puzzle pieces looked far better in the old version; the bevel really added to the overall plasticity. Because of this, paradoxically, the old, 2D version, looks more three-dimensional than the new one.
Please revise!

0
Joseph Seddon
12 years ago
#2072

I have to agree that paradoxically the new version has no depth, washed less contrasting greys and at smaller resolutions is less easily identifiable than the older version.
Updating the logo is needed and I think that work should continue, but it should be a step forward and not backward. Releasing this logo should be put on hold for the time being until improvements can be made.

0
Ciro Pabón
12 years ago
#2073

Thanks, Jay, Philip. I suppose it’s my imagination, but the white balance seems to me far from beautiful, although you would believe it’s technically perfect, given the credentials of the creator. Is that balance what blurs the edges? (i.e. the edges of the “bottom” pieces are diffuse). I have a couple of questions: many (if not all) languages are represented, but how were the symbols chosen? Do these symbols mean anything or are they random ones? And, what material is the globe made of? It doesn’t “shine” and the edges are unrealistically perfect. Compare with the image at the top… Read more »

0
Camilo Martin
12 years ago
#2074

I couldn’t be unhappier with the new logo. It sucks in every possible way compared to the original, it just looks washed of all texture and detail. Sorry but I can’t give any constructive criticism other than PLEASE try again and this time, for real. Notable issues: – The pieces should have the same size (Hey I know “W” is the most important one but the logo should reflect equality!). – It looks deformed, I haven’t overlaid a circle on it but I’m almost sure that’s not right. – It looks poorly rendered, like some really cheap UV mapping preview.… Read more »

0
Sonia
12 years ago
#2075

Having used Vector since it first became available, I can say that the only thing I really noticed about the update was that the Wikipedia logo was naggishly flat. It actually, to be honest, looks much worse this way, if only because the contrast is lower. The details of the 3-d rendering are only seen if comparing the two images directly- as a logo, it doesn’t matter as much. Also, the word Wikipedia should be a little closer to the globe; the italics on “The Free Encyclopedia” added a touch of elegance and made it contrast more with the title.… Read more »

0
Sonia
12 years ago
#2076

Oh wait, I basically stated everything that was different about the logo. Oops. The positioning, just to clarify, isn’t that big a deal; I suppose it’s just because the globe’s a bit smaller that I’m getting that empty feeling.
Oh well.

0
human
12 years ago
#2077

Ugh, at least ask the community to try and fix the errors and make a better 3d model than this. This looks horrible

0
Justin MP
12 years ago
#2078

The new logo looks flat and does not have the same strong iconic presence the old one had. Basic is better for logos, 3D is not always the way to go.

0
rod rodriguez
12 years ago
#2079

I like the redesign. I come here a lot and didn’t see the difference until I saw the notice message. Upon a closer inspection I immediately saw the changes it looks cleaner and makes navigation a cinch. Congratulations!

0
Ruben
12 years ago
#2080

From the very end-user point of view: the new version looks just blured.

0
dapete bloggt » Das neue Puzzle-Logo von Wikipedia
12 years ago
#2081

[…] der unter anderem für ILM und Pixar gearbeitet hat. Weitere Informationen hat Jay Walsh in einem Blogeintrag im Wikimedia-Blog […]

0
Taemojitsu
12 years ago
#2082

Note especially that in the original image, the joins went from being dark in one place to being light in another place due to the concept of different illumination from the light source. This is absent in the current render, where the joins are all “faint gray”.

0
Peridon
12 years ago
#2083

Couldn’t really care about the logo (sorry to the folks who have worked on it) – in fact, haven’t noticed much difference there yet anyway. The top of page buttons and click words are a mess to my eyes. Washy looking and insipid. Why the vast gap between Discussion and the rest? Why a star for Watch? Plenty of room for the whole word. Don’t like the side bar, which looks bleak and unlived in. Do like the better edit bar for posting, especially the nowiki. That was a damn nuisance to type out. Pity it all comes as a… Read more »

0
sanju
12 years ago
#2084

well…the change seems to be good..i welcome it…but as the search box is moved above..i dont see any use of left-hand-side margin now…i would say its waste of space…you could place to the links to main page, current events to top ..this will give us more screen space to the actual content…why would the reader want to have a margin?? if the website designers like that margin…then please keep the hanging-search-box in the margin…which will be at the same screen position even if the reader scrolled down…that would be helpful to reads a lot… BTW … i loved that new… Read more »

0
wwwwolf
12 years ago
#2085

It’s smaller, and it’s fuzzier. and it’s very very grey. You can barely see the edges of the puzzle pieces. The old one had more contrast. This doesn’t work as well in smaller resolution, and by smaller I mean “our darn $wgLogo, which – last time I checked – was 135px wide, tops”.
A big deja vu time: I said pretty much the same thing about the recent winner of the Wiktionary logo contest.
So, is it really too hard to ask for more contrast? Pretty please?

0
Alen
12 years ago
#2086

It is a perfect circle Camilio, but that’s exactly what’s wrong with it. It is a globe puzzle, not a perfect sphere. The letters should be equally thick and the pieces should not fit perfectly. If each one was rendered individually, that wouldn’t be much of a problem.
The interface is improved on a lot, though. Good work with that.

0
Alphathon
12 years ago
#2087

I have to agree with everyone else – it looks really flat. I don’t know what it is, but it’s almost as if the divides between the puzzle pieces are just painted on. There’s no depth to them whatsoever. They just look like grey lines, not rounded plastic/ivory/”whatever material it’s supposed to be made of” edges. The pieces blend too well into a single surface and have no specific highlights or reflections either. Looking at it on the site it doesn’t even look 3D (looks like it was knocked up in Photoshop in half an hour TBH – the lighting… Read more »

0
CoE
12 years ago
#2088

I agree with Kalan: The logo change itself is good, and having a 3D globe is just awesome. The font change is also okay.
But please re-render the image, make it a bit bigger and less blurry.

0
Psychologicoff
12 years ago
#2089

This logo really bad. Return previous!

0
George
12 years ago
#2090

I agree with many of the posters above. The new desing looks slick, but the new logo is not attractive and makes Wikipedia feel very foreign all of a sudden. I don’t oppose the creation of a new version (3D is good) but this should not be it. In addition to what’s already mentioned, I don’t like the strong frontal lighting of the globe, and the strong shadows on the edges. A little less will do just fine. Hope to see some improvements soon.

0
JovanCormac
12 years ago
#2091

Another thing I wanted to add: While I understand the need to switch to another, free font, the text also looks markedly worse than before.
Why not make the symbols “etched” into the surface of the globe? That would add a lot more depth and detail.

0
Thariq
12 years ago
#2092

Neat! The new interface looks cool

0
SeL
12 years ago
#2093

I can’t believe that you put so much thought into improving the logo as a 3D model, and then executed the rendering with what seems so little care for the quality of the result.

0
SQB
12 years ago
#2094

How about making and selling these to raise money for the foundation? See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puzzle_globe and various websites that sell these (in my experience, sans core just like the logo in contrast to what that article says).

0
Mauser55
12 years ago
#2095

Beautiful change! Simple and cool design, that’s I like it.

0
George
12 years ago
#2096

One more thing: is it just me or is the globe now smaller than before (in relation to the ‘WikipediA’ tekst?)

0
Etrigan
12 years ago
#2097

Oh dear. Why is the search box on the new home page so small? It’s hard to find and tucked into that top right corner as if its an afterthought. Considering that search is the single most important function on Wikipedia, this is bizarre. I would have expected the search box if anything to be made bigger and put front and centre. After all, 99% of users come to Wikipedia to search for info.

0
HereToHelp
12 years ago
#2098

I agree with many of the above comments, that it looks worse than the original, even though it’s technically better. Beveling the edges of pieces will help a lot, as will making it display slightly larger in the site-wide version. Keep working on it.

0
Luke
12 years ago
#2099

Why, why, why??? The search box is in the top left corner. This is terribe. My fovourite website has been ruined.
The logo is OK.

0
Rizky
12 years ago
#2100

Wikipedia improvement is very very very very good, but the search box is too narrow I don’t really like it. There is a problem with the edit box too where everytime you type, it will scroll to a random location which is really confusing.

0
Alþykkr
12 years ago
#2101

I’ll agree with many above : good idea, bad execution !
And Etrigan is right – what was done to the search box is a really bad idea…
“If it’s not broken, don’t fix it !”

0
Jimmy
12 years ago
#2102

Do not like the new logo. The new font is ugly (even if it is free, it is still ugly, if you are a font-lover). The overall logo looks crudely done. Agree 100% with the idea that the rendering is poorly done and ugly. The concept is fine — render it in true 3D, change the characters, sure — but the output is horrible, a real strike against the idea of open-source graphic design.

0
Paul Stansifer
12 years ago
#2103

I think that the reason it looks irregular is that the size of nubs in the puzzle has increased, jostling the “Ω” and the “W” out of alignment. The “袓” and “и”, however, have been kept almost in alignment, at the cost of bumping them almost against the intruding nub. I think those two characters look better; try holding a piece of paper over the top half of the logo.

0
Wikipedia Gets A Revamp, Better Search And Navigation – And An Updated Logo : Bloggii – The Global News Aggregator
12 years ago
#2104

[…] was originally created in 2003. The Foundation goes into more detail about the logo update in a separate post, if you’re interested in its history and all […]

0
Harry Wood
12 years ago
#2105

I want to see it spinning! It’s not really 3D until we see it spinning.

0
Rupert Swarbrick
12 years ago
#2106

Etrigan: I’d say that 99% of users come to Wikipedia after having searched. It’s just that they don’t use WP’s search box to do so…

0
Wikipedia Gets A Revamp, Better Search And Navigation – And An Updated Logo | The Good NET Guide
12 years ago
#2107

[…] was originally created in 2003. The Foundation goes into more detail about the logo update in a separate post, if you’re interested in its history and all […]

0
Julio Montoya
12 years ago
#2108

Love the new logo! Simple and cool design!

0
Wikipedia gets makeover « Mendip Media
12 years ago
#2109

[…] Wikipedia puzzle globe: We have updated the puzzle globe. Read more at the Wikimedia blog. […]

0
Aylad
12 years ago
#2110

I agree with all the comments about “flat” “fuzzy” “painted-on lines” etc… and what really upsets me is that the banner at the top of this blog page has a beautiful, well-lit puzzle globe. Either photograph that (apparently physical) globe for the WP logo, or at least use it as a model for how to make the virtual globe look more appealing.

0
Wikpedia Goes 3D | Technology and Web 2.0
12 years ago
#2111

[…] as the new logo looks to replace the old, the discussion has already begun over what could be done for the next […]

0
Mark
12 years ago
#2112

Nice idea, poor execution. Re-render it with more depth to the joins between the pieces, and better lighting. Also increase the globe size relative to the text – it’s too small now and looks fug.

0
Wikpedia Goes 3D | gabriel catalano | in-perfección
12 years ago
#2113

[…] to a blog post today by the Wikimedia Foundation, the now-familiar globe logo was found in 2003 in a logo design […]

0
Wikpedia Goes 3D | SKZYİZ
12 years ago
#2114

[…] to a blog post today by the Wikimedia Foundation, the now-familiar globe logo was found in 2003 in a logo design […]

0
Loh
12 years ago
#2115

I like the look of the new globe. It looks smoother but I wouldn’t say it looks flat. The slightly different sized pieces match a real puzzle and diminished bevel effect matches the cleaner look of the layout.
It would be nice if the globe were a bit bigger, but that is probably just my built in aversion to change.

0

Meta

Posted in Highlights, WikipediaTagged 3D, logo, Wikimedia Blog (EN Archive)

Related

Welcome to Diff

Welcome to Diff, a community blog by – and for – the Wikimedia movement. Join Diff today to share stories from your community and comment on articles. We want to hear your voice!

Learn more

Subscribe to Diff via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to Diff and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Wikimedia News

Wikimedia Foundation News

  • Making Wikipedia Safer: Enforcement Guidelines for Wikimedia Universal Code of Conduct provide a model for governing online behavior
    21 March 2023 by Wikimedia Foundation

Wikimedia Technology Blog

  • From hell to HTML: releasing a Python package to easily work with Wikimedia HTML dumps
    24 February 2023 by Martin Gerlach, Isaac Johnson and Nazia Tasnim

Down the Rabbit Hole

  • 2022 as you saw it on Wikipedia
    15 December 2022 by Ed Erhart

Diff

This is Diff, a Wikimedia community blog.

All participants are responsible for building a place that is welcoming and friendly to everyone. Learn more about Diff.

A Wikimedia Foundation Project

Links

  • Join
  • Subscribe
  • Guidelines
  • Editorial guidelines
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
Log in

Content licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 (CC-BY-SA) unless otherwise noted.
Powered by WordPress.com VIP, Automattic Privacy Notice.

wpDiscuz
 Report this comment
You are going to send email to

Move Comment