Topic: Website_logo BUR

The bulk update request #3444 is pending approval.

create implication deviantart_logo (219) -> website_logo (6805)
create implication discord_logo (115) -> website_logo (6805)
create implication e621_logo (69) -> website_logo (6805)
create implication facebook_logo (154) -> website_logo (6805)
create implication furaffinity_logo (987) -> website_logo (6805)
create implication inkbunny_logo (18) -> website_logo (6805)
create implication instagram_logo (309) -> website_logo (6805)
create implication ko-fi_logo (283) -> website_logo (6805)
create implication newgrounds_logo (124) -> website_logo (6805)
create implication patreon_logo (25300) -> website_logo (6805)
create implication steam_logo (6) -> website_logo (6805)
create implication subscribestar_logo (1693) -> website_logo (6805)
create implication twitter_logo (4033) -> website_logo (6805)
create implication youtube_logo (59) -> website_logo (6805)

Reason: Logos belonging to the Internet.

Is website_logo really worthwhile to have, instead of just using logo?

+1 for just using logo. I don't see the point of distinguishing them really.

Plus things like Discord and Steam are considered apps/software, rather than a website, making those wrong in either case. But along with just implying logo instead, it would be a good idea to also have them imply their respective copyrights (deviantart, discord_(app), e621, etc).

The bulk update request #13658 is pending approval.

create alias website_logo (6805) -> logo (31567)

Reason: Alright, let’s put it to a vote. Keep website_logo or alias it to logo?

spe said:
The bulk update request #13658 is pending approval.

create alias website_logo (6805) -> logo (31567)

Reason: Alright, let’s put it to a vote. Keep website_logo or alias it to logo?

Having website_logo alias to logo while having artist_logo imply logo feels wrong to me.
I think aliasing both would be overkill, though.

braixenarchivist said:
Having website_logo alias to logo while having artist_logo imply logo feels wrong to me.

Honestly, I think artist_logo should probably be aliased to watermark, since that's what it effectively is. A mark to identify the creator/artist.

Regardless, the problem with website_logo is that a website doesn't describe an entity. For example, steam isn't a website, but has a website, it also has an application. Both serve as access points to a store or distribution center for digital video games (primarily), with the app also serving as a software library manager and launcher. Valve also now sells hardware under the Steam brand, which would make it odd to tag website_logo because a post depicts a Steam Deck or the Steam app without a website in sight. When I think "Steam", it not "website" that pops into my head for what it is.

A similar issue exists for Discord, which to most people is an application to access a chat platform. It has a website, but isn't just a website. Facebook also, which while a large portion of its services are accessed through its website, has other business ventures besides web services, like data brokerage.

Additionally, given the existence of webapps, the line between what is or isn't a website is blurry. Used this way, website_logo basically translates to "logo of an entity that has a web presence", which is 90+% of logos.

As an aside, the original BUR is now showing its age with twitter_logo and facebook_logo. They should probably be changed to x_logo and meta_logo, or something.

watsit said:
As an aside, the original BUR is now showing its age with twitter_logo and facebook_logo. They should probably be changed to x_logo and meta_logo, or something.

Most of my reply to this is splitting hairs.
Changing the name/logo of something doesn't retroactively change every usage of the old logo. An image could have a Twitter logo and not an X one or vice versa. Is that useful for searching is a different question I guess. Why tag individual company logos at all, etc.
And from what I remember Discord just gives you an Electron wrapper for their website and calls it a program. Webapps are websites pretending to be programs.
I'd also say Facebook is primarily a website, Meta is the company running it.

I do agree that Steam is significantly non-website enough to not be in this BUR though. They may do a similar "wrapper for website" with the Steam client, but the purpose of that website is to indefinitely rent games to be played via their launcher program.

braixenarchivist said:
And from what I remember Discord just gives you an Electron wrapper for their website and calls it a program. Webapps are websites pretending to be programs.

That's getting into technical details, and really just goes to show the ambiguity with what a "website" can be these days. Ultimately, Discord is a company that provides a social media platform of the same name for voice, video, and text chat. It provides an app that sends and receives information over their servers to facilitate that functionality, which just happens to be sending data via a public URL that (some) web browsers can understand (this can be changed without altering how the platform looks or feels, and they could still offer a web portal for people to access with a web browser; it's just simpler to cut out the extra steps).

braixenarchivist said:
I'd also say Facebook is primarily a website, Meta is the company running it.

This is an issue with companies that have the same name as the primary service or product they provide, then later rebranding. Were people tagging facebook_logo meaning the company's logo, or the site's logo? And is there an effective difference from the user's perspective?