[theme-reviewers] Theme Names

Mon Jul 21 16:04:25 UTC 2014

There is already a rule :

Themes are *not* to use Theme author/developer credit text in their name.
For example *AwesomeSauce by John Q. Developer* (makes for a much better
credit link); or, *SEO/SPAM-seeded text*, such as: *AwesomeSauce by Awesome
Free WP Themes*.

Simplifying it :

Themes are *not* to use Theme author/developer credit text in their name
or, *SEO/SPAM-seeded text*

On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 11:00 PM, FasterThemes <support at fasterthemes.com>
wrote:

> Mate, I donot want to continue this debate hence resting my case here.
>> FYI, We all honour the theme naming conventions at WordPress. Org and
>> will change theme names if there is a guide line issued by the management
>> of WordPress. Org at any point of time.
>> If these things were mentioned in the naming conventions then I would
>> have never started debating here.
>>
>> Blessings.  :)
>>
>
>
>> On 20 Jul 2014 21:28, "Srikanth Koneru" <tskk79 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> 1) I am only bothered because wordpress.org domain authority in Google
>>> is being abused, I don't care about other domains, their owners can worry
>>> about them.
>>>
>>> 2) Better late than never
>>>
>>> 3) I don't see how fasterthemes and themealley domains are spammy or how
>>> they are related to this discussion.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 8:14 PM, FasterThemes <support at fasterthemes.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Why are you so much bothered about this mate ? If some XYZ theme for
>>>> this keyword comes in top rank for this keyword then you don't have any
>>>> issues but if wordpress.org themes come, it seems spammy.
>>>>
>>>> If you are raising voice then you should have done that earlier because
>>>> you joined the community approx 1 year ago and in this period there are
>>>> tens of themes which were contributed keeping SEO names in mind.
>>>> You should have convinced the admins to put a system for *theme name*
>>>> check.
>>>>
>>>> As per your logic, the username like fasterthemes and themealley are
>>>> also spammy because they contain THEME in the names ?
>>>>
>>>> Sorry but very strange logic , my friend !
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Ofcourse you don't agree, "Premium Photography Theme" is a great
>>>>> keyword and your theme www.wordpress.org/themes/premium-photography/
>>>>> will rank #1 or #2
>>>>>
>>>>> one look at the url name www.wordpress.org/themes/premium-photography/
>>>>> and anyone can see how spammy it looks.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 6:09 PM, FasterThemes <
>>>>> support at fasterthemes.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Mate.
>>>>>> I don't agree to you here.
>>>>>> People should be free to use Any theme name of their choice if it
>>>>>> doesn't violate any copyright issues.
>>>>>> For e.g. Responsive is a theme with MAX downloads. One of the reason
>>>>>> is that it comes in top 3 for RESPONSIVE WORDPRESS THEMES in Google.
>>>>>> I don't think the first  theme author (Emil) didn't break any rule giving
>>>>>> it this name.
>>>>>> He was smart enough to choose a name earlier than all of us.
>>>>>> We shouldn't bother about theme names until they breach any copyright
>>>>>> issues.
>>>>>> As far as using WordPress.ORG's domain authority is concerned, we all
>>>>>> are part of it and we are contributing to its growth hence there shouldn't
>>>>>> be any issues using it. In Contrast, I think we all should use easy to
>>>>>> remember theme names which make sense :)
>>>>>> Feel free to share your thoughts in this. :)
>>>>>> P.S. No offense meant to anyone :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you take a look at https://themes.trac.wordpress.org/report/4
>>>>>>> you will notice that the keyword name menace(premium photography, win8
>>>>>>> metro style, the magazine, bootstrap-on, sans-serif, mobile first, design
>>>>>>> furniture) is growing and its purpose is to abuse the domain authority of
>>>>>>> wordpress.org in Google, one remedy is to ask those theme authors
>>>>>>> to remove all branding, credit link and pro upgrade links, that will
>>>>>>> certainly demotivate such tactics.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This can be applied to already live themes too.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 8:07 PM, Peter Kakoma <kakomap at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hehehe. Good points. Agreed
>>>>>>>> On 27 Jun 2014 17:20, "Chip Bennett" <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There are some huge differences:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1) Apple owns the entire App store
>>>>>>>>> 2) Apple has an army of paid staffers to enforce their guidelines
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> WPORG does not own the sole distribution means for Themes, and I
>>>>>>>>> would prefer that the limited time available to the reviewers enforcing the
>>>>>>>>> Guidelines be spent on things far more important/beneficial than conducting
>>>>>>>>> Google searches of Theme names.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 9:17 AM, Peter Kakoma <kakomap at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I do largely agree with all that's been said, particularly what
>>>>>>>>>> Chip, Emil & Bryan said. However, allow me to throw a spanner in the works.
>>>>>>>>>> This isn't a new issue so we wouldn't have to re-invent the
>>>>>>>>>> wheel. The Apple store has some guidelines and so does the Google Play
>>>>>>>>>> store (and basically all stores that accept stuff from developers)
>>>>>>>>>> To quote the play store guidelines: (edited to leave the bit that
>>>>>>>>>> matters the most here)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *Impersonation or Deceptive Behavior:* Apps must not have names
>>>>>>>>>> or icons that appear confusingly similar to existing products, or to apps
>>>>>>>>>> supplied with the device
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Checking if a name has been used before is a simple Google
>>>>>>>>>> search; takes no more than 1 minutes I think.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=box+site:wordpress.org%2Fthemes
>>>>>>>>>> One basically prefixes the search term with
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *site:wordpress.org/themes <http://wordpress.org/themes> *
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 4:49 AM, Bryan Hadaway <
>>>>>>>>>> bhadaway at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Here's what I replied with to the other discussion (didn't
>>>>>>>>>>> realize there was a bigger one at hand):
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "I agree, it's theme developer's responsibility to not infringe
>>>>>>>>>>> on trademarks and trademark holder's responsibility to protect their
>>>>>>>>>>> trademarks, but impossible for the theme review team (except for in
>>>>>>>>>>> extremely obvious cases) to check for or inform of possible trademark
>>>>>>>>>>> issues."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> That's the only logical solution. In other words, in the rare
>>>>>>>>>>> event that this issue comes up, I'm sure it will be dealt with by the
>>>>>>>>>>> parties involved or brought to WordPress directly to have the infringing
>>>>>>>>>>> content removed. But, having the team go as far as to Google the theme name
>>>>>>>>>>> to see if it's already been used or check against the USPTO would be
>>>>>>>>>>> insane, that's the theme developer's due diligence to make sure their
>>>>>>>>>>> theme/product names are unique and original, as in not taken.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> http://kakoma.ug
>>>>>>>>>> http:somanystories.ug <http://somanystories.ug>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>>>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>>>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>
>>>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20140721/e29b6307/attachment-0001.html>