Thanks. The reason I think it's a problem is because I tried to use this logo in the Wikipedia Smalltalk article, but the Wikipedia overlords kept rejecting it, telling me that it wasn't an "official" logo and thus Wikipedia would not accept it. What makes a logo "official?" Why are all the other language logos in my article (which I gleaned from Wikipedia) any more "official?"
Thierry Goubier wrote > Hi Richard, > > 2017-05-02 12:57 GMT+02:00 horrido < > horrido.hobbies@ > >: > >> I have A Logo Proposal for Smalltalk >> <https://medium.com/@richardeng/a-logo-proposal-for-smalltalk-e78180f3ec02 > > > >> > > I like it. > > >> . But there is one huge (insurmountable?) obstacle. >> >> > If you refer to a standard 'org' that would force the use / change of a > logo, then I see no obstacle. I like it that the multiple shapes Smalltalk > has have left space for creativity and freedom. > > If your logo is nice and creative enough, and that it can be freely used, > then it will raise through the community and replace / displace the old > one. > > Regards, > > Thierry > > >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/A-Logo- >> Proposal-for-Smalltalk-tp4945122.html >> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/A-Logo-Proposal-for-Smalltalk-tp4945122p4945127.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
