Over at BPR3, we've picked the top three icons from the BPR3 icon contest. Here are the top three entries in the contest to design a universal icon that everyone can use on their blog posts whenever the post is a serious commentary about a paper published in a peer-reviewed journal:
Kevin Z: |
Uriel Klieger: |
Jeff Hunt: |
Vote for your favorite, but also please make suggestions for improvements in the comments section -- the winning entry will have the opportunity to be revised before we declare it "final." Feel free to copy this poll and put it on your own blog so we can get the largest possible number of votes (I'll include the code you need below).
Here is the code to include this poll on your website:
<script type='text/javascript' src='http://quimble.com/inpage/index/7770'></script>
Note: If you receive helpful comments about the icons on your blog, please let us know in the comments at BPR3. We want to have the best possible icon for BPR3!
- Log in to post comments
I voted for the Klieger entry. I like all three versions of the icon, but the font used for the text needs work. It's too clunky. I like the font that Hunt used better, with the rounded corners. I also think that the bold font Klieger uses is too heavy, and a more elegant font would balance better with the very visually appealing green check mark.
Kevin Z's is the only one of the icons proposed which actually tells folk what it's about. I'm glad to see that it's made it thus far, and hope it's adopted (although I quite like the graphics of option 2, the content is not as high).
Although Kevin Z's entry may be the only one that says exactly what it's for I chose Uriel's entry. Kevin's inclusion of all the text is not needed nor is the URL - people will click it if they are that curious and anyone who cares enough about it will already know what it means.
i voted for Uriel Klieger's entry- just a good icon all-around. i think that Jeff Hunt's needs more creativity and variation between the large and smaller versions. i liked the simplicity and sophistication of Klieger's smaller icons
Aesthetically, I like Klieger's best, but Kevin Z's is good because it has the URL. I think a URL is essential so that people can find out more when they see the icon for the first time.
I definitely prefer Klieger's. The others are too visually cluttered. However, when I tried to vote, I got an error message.
I prefer Kevin's since it states that this is _blogging on_ peer reviewed research, the text in the blog itself is _not_ peer reviewed.
ie. Stating its "peer review research" is just the sort of misleading sleight of hand hypery that we wish to avoid.
John,
I see your point. We definitely want to be careful with the final wording on the icon -- and we'll make sure that whichever icon is the winner, its wording doesn't mislead readers.
Qalmea,
Try voting at BPR3. It's a different version of the code that may work better with your browser.
Uriel Klieger's lets the novice understand what it means, and the tick on the page is easily ID'd. But th font is terrible, and the tick a little pale. Otherwise, very suitable.
I think Kevin's is the clearest!
Kevin's is the easiest to understand