Audiovisual Identity Database:Featured Media Nominations/Archive 1

From the Audiovisual Identity Database, the motion graphics museum

January 2023


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

Closing as no consensus. Logohub (talk) 13:20, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Amblin1983.webp

Reason: Rare prototype Amblin Entertainment logo (The Third Place) 13:35, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Support

Support. What a fantastic find! Dominicmgm (talk) 14:41, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Support This wins my vote because Amblin made Animaniacs (• USER TALK! •) 15:09, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Let's not forget WB's role in it. They distributed the show and aired it on Kids WB, Cartoon Network, Boomerang and Nickelodeon (for some reason). Sonictailsknucklesshadow (talk) 15:20, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
and Fox Kids (• USER TALK! •) 15:55, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Support Doctorine Dark (talk) 12:26, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

Oppose because according to this article, it is not an on-screen logo but a door sign.

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2016/10/09/alibaba-pictures-amblin-to-co-produce-films-for-global-chinese-audience.html --Axel (talk) 23:40, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Crap (The Third Place) 23:53, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
It's still cool so I support (• USER TALK! •) 23:58, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
  1. Oppose Not an on-screen logo Logohub (talk) 14:34, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose I've seen this logo before you requested it; i've seen it in Logopedia, a wiki in Fandom. (Talk/Edits) 15:41, 9 January 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.



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

Closing as passed. Logohub (talk) 13:20, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Two Soups Productions early logo.jpeg

Reason: It turns out that the logo with those kids was not the only logo they had. This was found back on September 29 last year. I was on YouTube finding full episodes of long gone shows and one of these was Teachers (2006, NBC). The videos I found of that show mostly cut off the credits (which were original airings), but one of them actually showed a partial logo combo (meaning it cut off NBC Studios), which is how I got this capture. SuperMax124 (talk) 13:26, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Support

Support Now that's rare indeed! Doctorine Dark (talk) 13:33, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Support AlmightyKingPrawn (talk) 19:10, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments

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



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

Closing as passed. Logohub (talk) 13:20, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

File:Jerry Bruckheimer Films (Kangaroo Jack, Theatrical A).jpg and File:Jerry Bruckheimer Films (Kangaroo Jack, Theatrical B).jpg

Reason: This was actually found by someone on Twitter, but video has since been deleted and only these images exist.

Support

  1. Support Doctorine Dark (talk) 11:22, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
  2. Support AlmightyKingPrawn (talk) 19:10, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
  3. Support Agreed. (Talk/Edits) 15:49, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
  4. Support · Talk · Edits 17:03, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments

  1. What rare about this? Thesquidgeeks (talk) 8:31, January 7, 2023 (UTC)

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



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

Closing as passed. Logohub (talk) 11:30, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

File:Rare nick turkey logo.png

Reason: This logo was seen on only one source and has a byline of 1989. Because of this, this is the true first Nickelodeon Productions logo
(• USER TALK! •) 20:22, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Support

Support This is surprisingly fascinating to see! I never expected a logo even EARLIER than the haypile. This is the definition of an underrated gem of a discovery. VinegarPop (talk) 20:28, January 6, 2023 (UTC)

Support SnowflakesOmega (talk) 23:09, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Support Per VinegarPop. Doctorine Dark (talk) 11:25, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Support since Frank Zappa dropped Sheik Yerbouti in 1979. (The Third Place) 13:39, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

In 1979 Columbia Pictures had it's (in my opinion) best logo; The Sunburst. (• USER TALK! •) 20:50, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Support Logohub (talk) 14:35, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Support (Talk/Edits) 15:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Support A very suprising find to me considering that most Nickelodeon logos I know of are from 1991 and onward. So a Nickelodeon logo (with MTV mentioned as opposed to no byline) is a pretty neat find! Snorunt (talk) 21:15, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Support · Talk · Edits 17:08, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments

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



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

Closing as passed. Logohub (talk) 11:30, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

WNET New York (1982 - Great Performances).png

Reason: Notable discovery due to having no footage until last month.
Nova (talk) (Logo not final) 19:29, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Support

Support holy twilight sparkle (The Third Place) 21:21, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Support Cool find (• USER TALK! •) 21:51, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Support Finally after all these years, one lost media less. User:Luli Logo (Talk)

Support Holy crap. AlmightyKingPrawn (talk) 19:10, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Support (Talk/Edits) 15:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Support · Talk · Edits 17:08, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

Comments

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



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

Closing as passed. Logohub (talk) 11:30, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

WBITV (AOL Byline and Extended, 2000s).png

Reason: This logo by itself is extremely rare, but it having the AOL byline? That is next level. This is also significant company-wise, as it's something from Warner Bros. VPJHuk (talk) 19:26, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Support

  1. Support alright Compooper (talk) 19:39, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
  1. Support Nice (• USER TALK! •) 00:39, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
  1. Support · Talk · Edits 17:08, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

Oppose I think the one I've nominated is just a bit rarer. Sonictailsknucklesshadow (talk) 15:30, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't see it as a competition though. Your nomination is pretty good too, but it shouldn't be a factor as to why another should be opposed VPJHuk (talk) 10:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

No it's not. VPJHuk's is better in my opinion. Sorry (• USER TALK! •) 16:36, 10 January 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.



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

Closing as passed. Logohub (talk) 11:30, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Krad016.jpg

Reason: This Is an Unused CBC logo from 1974 and This is the only image we have of it. (My Talk Page) 17:33, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Support

Support (The Third Place) 18:45, 6 January 2023 (UTC) Support Per Doctorine Dark. Some people just vote because of rarity.

Support This find is awesome. Now I'm wondering, how this picture look like as a video logo? User:Luli Logo (User talk:Luli Logo) January 7, 2023 19:23 (UTC)

Support Even though I know next to nothing about CBC, this looks like a pretty cool find and CBC is significant enough (• USER TALK! •) 15:54, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Support AlmightyKingPrawn (talk) 19:10, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Support (Talk/Edits) 15:44, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Support · Talk · Edits 17:09, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Oppose This seems like it would've been very hard to find, sure. But the impact this had on the community was almost nothing. We have a whole lot of lost logos still being found. And with that amount of busy people, nobody seems to care about this one. VinegarPop (talk) 17:41, January 6, 2023 (UTC)
But it's not about the significance of the logo. It's about its rarity. Doctorine Dark (talk) 18:02, 6 January 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.



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

Closing as  failed. Logohub (talk) 11:30, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

20thcenturyfox1981 (talk) 16:00, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Reason: this logo looks great, doesn't it?

Support

Oppose

Oppose As Logohub said about Touchstone Home Video, this isn't really significant enough to warrant a feature. (name change coming soon) 16:11, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose not really significant. Logohub (talk) 17:37, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Not significant. SnowflakesOmega (talk) 23:10, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Doctorine Dark (talk) 11:29, 7 January 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.



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

Closing as  failed. Logohub (talk) 11:30, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

disney logo 2006

20thcenturyfox1981 (talk) 16:00, 6 January 2023 (UTC)|200px|right]]

Reason: nothing can't beat the iconic castle

Support

Support only because of how iconic it is. Also your formatting is disgusting. (name change coming soon) 16:11, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

Oppose simply because it's nothing significant. While yes, it's an iconic logo, that's all the value it has for the normal version (which you seem to have posted). VPJHuk (talk) 16:55, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose per VPJHuk. Logohub (talk) 17:37, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose I don't get what is rare or significant about this. It is just the Disney logo. (• USER TALK! •) 18:47, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose C'mon, everyone already knows this. SnowflakesOmega (talk) 23:10, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Too common a logo. Dominicmgm (talk) 11:02, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose I know it's an iconic logo, but definitely not feature-worthy since it's almost everywhere. (Discussion area ¯\_(ツ)_/¯) 11:25, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Doctorine Dark (talk) 13:10, 7 January 2023 (UTC)


Oppose Too common to be featured here and was used for 16 years in a good number of films (including a few non-Disney films such as Ponyo and The Ice Age Adventures of Buck Wild (was originally a Fox movie before the big merge of 2019) to name a few). --Snorunt (talk) 02:44, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose this logo is like the exact opposite of rare. i've torrented two movies with this logo (the wreck-it ralph movies btw) so this is not getting featured (The Third Place) 04:31, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose I know that I like this logo, but this isn't rare or interesting for this nominations. I know it's iconic, but not THAT much. It doesn't need to be featured. User:Luli Logo (Talk January 8, 2023 14:20 (UTC)

Oppose Really easy to find; sorry for your request, but make sure if you find a logo that almost nobody cannot find, then it would be perfect. (Talk/Edits) 15:47, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose since Happy became the new McDonald's mascot. This is a thing for extremely rare stuff, not extremely common stuff. Sonictailsknucklesshadow (talk) 17:33, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Per everyone else. · Talk · Edits 17:10, 14 January 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.



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

Closing as passed. Logohub (talk) 11:30, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Touchstone Home Video (1989).jpg

Reason: It's just that versions of famous logos with altered looks fascinate me. It looks really different compared to the movie logo (I know it's a home video logo, so it's not supposed to look exactly like the movie logo). Sonictailsknucklesshadow (talk) 15:12, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Support

Oppose

  1. Oppose, because it's not a really significant logo IMO. Logohub (talk) 15:23, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Not rare or significant. SnowflakesOmega (talk) 23:11, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

It is pretty rare, since it only lasted a year before being replaced (it was around a bit longer here in the UK, though.) Sonictailsknucklesshadow (talk) 13:19, 8 January 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.



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

Closing nomination as passed. Logohub (talk) 11:30, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

File:TAT1979.png

Reason: A very rare logo thats very famous.

Support

  1. Support Logohub (talk) 17:33, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
  2. Support (The Third Place) 18:44, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
  3. Support This was featured in the original Wikifoundry CLG back in the day, and considering other WF features were re-featured, I don't see why this can't. VPJHuk (talk) 19:28, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
  4. Support Solely because it's one of the rarest finds we've had. IAmThe789Guy (talk) 19:58, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
  5. Support Since this was featured on the old Wikifoundry site, it's a no-brainer. Dominicmgm (talk) 11:02, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
  6. Support Even though we got only one find that was 4 or 5 years ago, it is still pretty intresting. (• USER TALK! •) 02:56, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
  7. Support It isn't already?! AlmightyKingPrawn (talk) 19:10, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
  8. Support Per everyone else. (Talk/Edits) 15:48, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
  9. Support Will we ever find this? (probably not).
  10. Support · Talk · Edits 17:05, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Oppose, How are we supposed to know if it's good if it hasn't been found yet? VinegarPop (talk) 17:19, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
    it's not about how good it looks, but rather how significant it is for the community. Logohub (talk) 17:34, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
  2. Oppose This is a screenshot from Broken Saw's video. If it wasn't from the 1980 rerun, I would support. (• USER TALK! •) 17:40, 6 January 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.



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

Closing nomination as passed. Logohub (talk) 11:30, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

30th Television (2011).jpg

Reason: Before this find, all we knew of a 30th Television logo was a hella cheap version that nobody really liked. Those were found in syndicated prints. This new find by me is from a sales tape from 2011. VPJHuk (talk) 11:31, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Support

  1. Support Talk · Edits 11:37, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
  2. Support Logohub (talk) 11:40, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
  3. Support Compooper (talk) 11:41, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
  4. Support Whenever we find something like this or a new logo is launched it should be immediately considered for featuring. (name change coming soon) 11:43, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
  5. Support (• USER TALK! •) 13:52, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
  6. Support (Discussion area ¯\_(ツ)_/¯) 14:00, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
  7. Support VinegarPop (talk) 17:25, January 6, 2023 (UTC)
  8. Support · Talk · Edits 22:41, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
  9. Support Supreme Raridade lol Thesquidgeeks (talk) 8:28, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
  10. Support (Talk/Edits) 15:48, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Oppose All it is is just the normal 20th Television logo with a 3 instead of a 2. Sonictailsknucklesshadow (talk) 16:11, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
    While the appeal isn't the most satisfying one, the real reason I posted it was due to it's rarity as well as it probably interesting a couple others. This is also a way better version of the 30th Television logo than the one we got in syndication. You can see that one here. Shame it wasn't used in the actual show. VPJHuk (talk) 16:50, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
    Lmao tell it to 30th Century Fox TV. This find is neat (• USER TALK! •) 18:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
    "Sonictailsknucklesshadow" Dios mio, you've unlocked them all! (The Third Place) 01:00, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Comments

first nomination ever

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



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

Closing nomination as no consensus. Logohub (talk) 11:30, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Bell System (1941).png & others

  • 1941

    1941

  • 1960

    1960

  • 1964

    1964

  • 1966

    1966

  • 1968

    1968

  • 1968

    1968

  • 1983

    1983

Reasons:

  • The 1941 Bell System logo was found on Telephone History: "Long Distance", which in turn can be found here.
  • The 1983 Bell System logo was found on a March 1, 1983 airing of The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour. I actually expected the 2nd AT&T logo to be there, but I guess I got a surprise. This can be found here.
  • The rest was found on a Bell System/AT&T logo history video. They are all seen here.

Support

Support (The Third Place) 12:20, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Oppose, In what situation would anyone vote for these? VinegarPop (talk) 17:27, January 6, 2023 (UTC)
Idk. Thought they were rare enough to be posted here. I don't blame you. Doctorine Dark (talk) 17:35, 6 January 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.


Retrieved from "https://www.avid.wiki/Audiovisual_Identity_Database:Featured_Media_Nominations/Archive_1?oldid=476896"
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.
More information