AVID:Requests for Comment/Rename "Logo/Bumper/ID/whatever" section to "Visuals"

The following discussion is closed.
Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Closing as

passed Logoarto (talk) 00:03, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Yes, another section rename proposal. I'm proposing to rename the "Logo/Bumper/ID/..." section where we write the main description to simply "Visuals". This would create more consistency across our articles now that we span a variety of topics beyond just closing and opening logos. It would also make things simpler for editors and, like the newly renamed "Audio" section, it would fit nicely with the name of the wiki too. Talk · Edits 07:48, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Support

Support for the power of consistency. Also because it's audiovisual identity database, not audiologo identity database. Eternity Media Group (talk) 07:54, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Support per EMG. · Talk · Edits 08:07, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Support Camenati (talk) 08:07, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Support Doctorine Dark (talk) 08:08, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Support but if we're doing this, then any company with only one logo/bumper should have the header "Logo (2000)" because if this proposal passes, those pages won't have the word "Logo" in it and it could affect search results. Logoarto (talk) 08:11, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Support This was bound to come. We are not just about logos anymore and it's time we reflect that in our descriptions. Although Logoarto raised a good point about search results, I couldn't see this as too much of an issue to tackle. Compooper (talk) 11:35, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Support I guess so. Gilby1385 (talk) 12:21, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Support It might be a tad bit strange at first glance, but an overall fair and well-reasoned change if implemented. Dison (talk) 17:22, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Support but as Logoarto pointed out, any company with only one logo/bumper/tag should have a matching header. For instance, if a company has only one logo, we should have "Logo (????)" (e.g. "Logo (February 18, 1994)" for Seagal/Nasso Productions or "Logo (1987-1990s)" in the case of Tintoretto). Besides that, I'm in. --AUnnamedDragon 1:33 PM, October 7, 2023 (ET)
Support Cattotld (talk (not really)) 6:29, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
Support with the same words as Logoarto. VPJHuk (talk) 10:02, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
Support SnowflakesOmega (talk) 12:21, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
Support Per Logoarto TPatKB (AKA Mr Vadimon) (this is my talk page) 14:16, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
Support Because I could not care less. Availability will be next for sure! Rainbow Puppy (talk) 23:46, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Abstain

Oppose

Oppose Yes, it's due to consistency, but renaming it to "Visuals" wouldn't be fair to every section featured in the identity, especially "Audio". By adding "Visuals" to the header, one would assume that the visual sequence of the logo would be described, but not the audio and availability portions. Camenati (talk) 07:57, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
I think you've misunderstood the change. This should only be applying to the logo subheader, not the "1st Logo" titles. Eternity Media Group (talk) 07:58, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
In that case, then whoopsies. Camenati (talk) 08:00, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Comments

The above discussion is preserved as an archive.
Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.