Talk:Obama logo

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

https://web.archive.org/web/20090115213909/http://www.vsapartners.com/news.asp?article=70

This article was nominated for merging with Sol Sender on 4 October 2017. The result of the discussion was merge the pages.

Barack Obama (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Barack Obama, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Barack ObamaWikipedia:WikiProject Barack ObamaTemplate:WikiProject Barack ObamaBarack Obama articles

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Graphic design Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Graphic design, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of graphic design-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Graphic designWikipedia:WikiProject Graphic designTemplate:WikiProject Graphic designGraphic design articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I think the rising sun link shouldnt be there robert67.101.88.121 (talk) 17:23, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

There is honestly no reason that President Obama's logo should have a seperate article, it's only a logo, and no other presidents have a seperate page for their logo. I believe that, maybe at most, the logo should have a section on Obama's article, and not its own article. 76.236.121.75 (talk) 18:28, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It was distinctive, and became very well-known in a way that hasn't quite occurred before in U.S. presidential politics... AnonMoos (talk) 12:41, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrights

Forget all the copyright-blah. Look for "agenda-glas" in Google-Pics. This is incredibly brazen plagiarism there since 2008 and nobody cares! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.221.209.48 (talk) 12:30, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A conceptual resemblance does not count for too much, and the main inspiration for the Obama logo was obviously fitting a simplified version of the United States flag into a letter "O"... AnonMoos (talk) 16:10, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:PDO-Logo.svg Protected designation of origin

Obviously. -174.28.54.125 (talk) 01:04, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merge

Articles like this exist so that the main Barack Obama article doesn't become horrendously long and difficult to organize. See further the comment of "12:41, 9 August 2011" above... AnonMoos (talk) 10:55, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since the editor who added the merge tag didn't initiate a discussion, I've replaced it with a new proposal that this page be merged to Barack Obama presidential campaign, 2008#Logo. That was the campaign for which the logo was originally created, so that's the best place for this information. The 2012 campaign article can simply note that the same logo is being reused. DoctorKubla (talk) 21:31, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, looks like he did start a discussion at Talk:Barack Obama. It was met with unanimous opposition and lost in the archives. So, same difference. DoctorKubla (talk) 21:38, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe best to remove the merge tag; not sure why it wasn't done before... AnonMoos (talk) 16:45, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No further relevant discussion, removed merge tag. AnonMoos (talk) 16:14, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Katy Perry dress

On Nov. 3rd 2012, Katy Perry wore a dress with the Obama logo on it... [1] -- AnonMoos (talk) 22:44, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with Sol Sender

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was to merge the two pages. Citrivescence (talk) 06:15, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sender's sourcing indicates that he is solely known for the logo. Sources do not cover his biographical life or work separately from the logo. Thus he should be covered within the scope of the logo's article and only split out summary style as warranted by sources. czar 17:01, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose "Sender's sourcing"? What does that mean? Do you perchance mean, "the state of a mere Wikipedia article, on one day in October"? That's not the measure of a man. If he, as a long-established designer (and I don't think you get invited to design a presidential logo otherwise), had done only this, then you might have a point. But if you claim "Not listed in Wikipedia means it didn't happen", as your edits seem to present everything, then that is quite wrong. What if he's done something else? What if he's a senior partner at a major design house? What if he happened to have been a founding director at IBM's Design Lab? Or if he's the sort of visiting academic who's invited to contribute the odd chapter for Steven Heller's new book Teaching Graphic Design?

But you haven't considered the possibility of any of this, have you? You just blank articles regardless. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:15, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great, let's see your sources then czar 18:46, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For posterity, everything in the Sender article is already duplicated in toto within this logo article, so there's nothing to merge, only redirect. czar 05:54, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Response to third opinion request :

As the article stands a redirect would be appropriate as the sources in the article are solely based upon his work on the logo. Andy Dingley's argument that because he was chosen to do the logo means that he must be notable is not really valid I'm afraid, this might have been his first big break and he was unable to build on this. It is possible that the different aspects of his career make him notable but this cannot be presumed, in-depth secondary sources have to be supplied to pass WP:GNG. One of the sources is a video posted by his new employer where it explains that he was the lead on the project but not the sole designer. According to his linkedin profile here His company Sender LLC was only in existence for 2 years, 2006 to 2008, he then went to work for a design company that he left in September of this year to start his own company again. Oddly enough he makes just a passing mention about the Obama campaign on his profil. The other sources that are in the article are dead links (one of which I repaired) one is a from a local news web site The Minnesota Independent that had a short lived existence, and the other is a very short article that mentions Sender but is essentially about the logo and has nothing in depth about him or his company. I would suggest that it would be better to add sources than try and argue notabilty on the sources that are already in the article as I think this would not survive an WP:AFD Domdeparis (talk) 17:35, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Domdeparis (talk) 17:35, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.