Image talk:WFUSEAL ACB.jpg

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Age of logo / insignia?

Do we know when this logo / insignia was created? The institution itself is quite old. Jkelly 18:16, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Logo template?

I have semi-protected this image page. Some anonymous user is reverting the {{logo}} notice on the page with no discussion. Until an explanation can be found, or some clarification can be made about the logo status, I request that this remain in place, at least for the time being. Bastiq▼e ^demandez 14:48, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello. I hate to nitpick, but this is NOT the logo of Wake Forest University. This is a PHOTO of the SEAL of the university. The logo of Wake Forest University is entirely different. So, the information below the photograph with the big red (C) stating that it is a logo should be removed. I repeat: This is a photograph of the university seal; it is not the logo of Wake Forest University. I would add the logo here for comparison purposes, but it is a copyrighted image and cannot be used without proper licensing from the university. Please, respect the owners of copyrighted images.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 152.17.56.159 (talk • contribs).

Thanks for explaining your concern. Our licensing templates don't differentiate between a seal and a logo. If this was fixed, would you have further concerns about the photograph of the seal? Jkelly 19:24, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I would only note the following information from the Wake Forest University Graphic Standards Policy and Manual:

---

The seal is Wake Forest University's official mark and testimony of highest value. Its use is reserved for official documents or occasions and must be used synonymously with the standards and values of the institution.

The seal may be used on:

-- Official legal documents;

-- Transcripts;

-- Convocation and commencement programs;

-- Honor society documents;

-- The official catalog and approved publications;

-- Diplomas; and

-- University stationery as a watermark.

It is unacceptable to use the seal:

-- As a casual signature or identifying mark;

-- As a design element for recruiting purposes; or

-- As a decorative element.

Since the seal is the official and legal symbol of the institution, any use other than those stated above, must be approved by the Legal Department of Wake Forest University. Each use of the seal must connote the solemnity with which the seal is associated.

---

Given the above, you probably would not use the seal as it is used here, as a casual signature or identifying mark. It's worthy of debate, however, on whether or not the university has violated its own policy by using the seal on buildings, such as is depicted in the photo.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 152.17.56.159 (talk • contribs).

It is wholly irresponsible for you to simply use anonymous IP accounts to consistently delete content without discussion. If you would like to be taken seriously, please stop vandalizing these pages and sign up with a user account. As it is, your ranting and raving in the comments section of vandalism edits does not constitute discussion, and if you truly do go to Wake Forest University, you are not displaying some of the crucial characteristics that make up the honor code. Furthermore, please read up on the fair use guidelines of images, especially photographs made by users. Thank you, JHMM13 (T | C) 00:51, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Well now. The above commment by JHMM is neither relevant to the discussion here nor is it particularly useful. It is, in fact, "ranting and raving." If anyone would like to discuss further the issues at hand, I'd be happy to do so as well. As for my anonymity, just who is JHMM? I have no earthly idea, and neither does anyone else on wikipedia who happens to look at his or her profile. Just because you happened to have registered does not mitigate the fact that you are as anonymous as I am.

Now, back to the point. As noted previously, the photograph in question is perfectly legitimate. Labeling it as the university logo is not. It is not the university's logo. I do not know how to make that point more clearly. Further, the photo is not the university seal - it is a photo of the seal. Again, there should be no confusion there. So, what I'm asking is quite simple: remove the Licensing heading and statement from the photo page. It is not necessary and is in fact erroneous.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 152.17.59.220 (talk • contribs).

I've edited the template to reflect the fact that the photograph is of a seal, not a logo. We are somewhat constrained by our categorisation system here; we cannot leave the image description page without any template that references the licensing status of the image. I appreciate your point that using a template that describes the image as a logo is misleading. I hope that the removal of the use of the word "logo" resolves at least some part of your concern. The most elegant thing to do, probably, is to come up with a new Template:Seal that distinguishes between seals and logos, but, given that we handle seals and logos more or less in an indentical way, no one seems to have made it a priority to go through everything labelled a logo and sort out other insignia. Jkelly 16:53, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

You have cleverly ignored the point. I have, for at least a month, been trying to have some control the situation at Wake Forest University with regards to this image. It has, of course, been impossible because you have ignored all requests to go through the proper channels or engage in discussion. What has made this situation even worse is the fact that it has been impossible to contact you outside of edit summaries since you sign on from a different IP every time. Do you want to go through the extensive amounts of edits you've made without discussion and with no ability to contact you? Am I wrong to assume that once you did have a user account, you not only deleted the discussion but also did not respond or ever sign in again? Or are there really this many people at Wake Forest obsessed over a supposed copyright violation:

152.17.59.220, 152.17.56.159, User:WFU, User:WFU, User:WFU on the image page, 152.17.113.197 on the image page, User:WFU talk page, 152.17.62.104 on the image page, User:WFU, User:WFU, 152.17.115.170, 152.17.59.69, 152.17.62.104, 152.17.60.41, 152.17.62.137, noticing a trend? This last one was from exactly a month ago, and this was also around the time I stopped asking to engage in an open debate after being ignored many times before (I'll link those up after I'm done with this). Just so you get the idea, I'll continue: 152.17.114.182, 152.17.60.119, 152.17.114.68, 152.17.114.68, 152.17.60.229, 152.17.56.213, 152.17.56.126 - This one is from three months ago, 152.17.55.224.

Your edit summaries are nearly identical through the span of this entire time (ranging at least three months) in which I have tried to be civil with you, engage you in discussion, and refer you to he proper authorities to handle your claims. But you have simply ignored this:

The never-responded-to part of the talk page, my first talk page request, another one of many, my request for debate on WFU's talk page. Please do not tell me I haven't tried. THAT is what I mean by being anonymous, not that I don't know your name, but that I can't contact you about your edits. JHMM13 (T | C) 17:49, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure what your point is in all of the above -- to resolve the issue at hand or somehow mount a personal attack -- but when coming across improper use of copyrighted images, the wikipedia guidelines state explicitly: if you are the owner of a copyrighted image and it appears on wikipedia, your first and most effective tool is to simply remove it. This is exactly what I have done. That you continue to ignore the valid copyright ownership of images and continue to repost them is interesting, to say the least. As a result of your actions I have indeed contacted the legal representatives of wikipedia in order to resolve the matter. Yes, I am interested in maintaining and preserving the copyright and trademarks of Wake Forest University. As owners of these images, it is incumbent upon us to do so. If we merely let people use our images without defending our ownership, then we essentially lose our ownership of them. I understand that it is difficult if not impossible for you to understand, but I do wish you would try.