Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikipedia is getting a new look

diff.wikimedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 529 posts

Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look

#331

Post by Tijdreiziger »

grishka wrote: post #263
ziftface wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. Thinking about it, it actually seems like a major achievement that even after so long, Wikipedia's design doesn't feel clunky or unintuitive. I still think of this as the "new" design, and I'm still happy with it.

These changes are driven by actual issues actual end users were having, as opposed to the usual " we want this feature [no one asked for] to be used more so we gave it more exposure [at the expense of the UX]". That's what software development should be like. You serve your users. Not the other way around.

> as opposed to the usual "we want this feature [no one asked for] to be used more so we gave it more exposure [at the expense of the UX]"

This is just how business works, you like to steer users to features that will make them spend more. Wikipedia has been able to side-step this because it's a non-profit.

Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look

#332

Post by userbinator »

stevebmark wrote: post #291
userbinator wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Resize the window yourself then. I get far more annoyed at sites that refuse to flow text to the desired width.

This is a good strategy called "blaming the user" and means you should never design computer interfaces! Full width site text means the creator has no understanding of basic HCI

Full width site text means the creator has no understanding of basic HCI

No, it means the creator thinks of users as knowledgeable and able to take care of their own personal needs, and not as idiots who don't know how to use their computer's window manager.

Perfect example of the former? HN itself.

Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look

#333

Post by cmckn »

aembleton wrote: post #306
cmckn wrote: post #299

Wikiwand[1] is something I've been using for a while that makes Wikipedia a bit nicer to look at. The concerns others have voiced about the long line length are addressed by this plugin. It also has a great table of contents on the left. Other things, I think wikipedia.org does better. Excited to see the changes! [1] https://www.wikiwand.com/

Thank you. I've never seen wikiwand before but it is a big improvement. It is missing those pop over windows that wikipedia has when you hover over a link though.

The popovers work for me in the latest Chromium (if we're talking about the same thing)! I love those.

I do think Wikiwand goes a bit too far in the "slick" direction; Wikipedia is more functional. But it's nice to play with an alternative.

Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look

#334

Post by Tijdreiziger »

Kuinox wrote: post #298
jbay808 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems obvious but it's not necessarily true. It seems to be an increasingly popular philosophy in this data-driven era of telemetry though, so I'd like to offer a counterpoint. I want Wikipedia to be as convenient as possible for the editors/authors , even if most users are readers. The authors -- even as a small minority of users -- create the content that, in turn, attracts the readers. It's possible that alie…

then make a special UI that editors/authors can enable in their preferences...

'Editors' and 'readers' is not a binary dichotomy. One of the great things about Wikipedia is that anyone who happens to be reading an article and notices an error can correct it without much friction.

Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look

#336

Post by fiblye »

petters wrote: post #59
Uehreka wrote: post #19

If someone asked me to critique the UX of Wikipedia, the first two things I’d point out would be that I almost never use the left hand side bar (and I have a feel almost no one does) and that when paragraphs are that wide they become harder to read (especially when they snake around floated images). Not changing for 10 years, watching as some trends fade and others become law-of-the-land, and then making two changes…

This is how I use the fullscreen expandable images: 1: Go to a page. 2: Click on an image. 3: Close the image. 4: Click the browser back button. I am now at the image again. This is surprising and I cannot seem to learn this.

The worst part is when you eventually make it back, it loses your position on the page. They made this change years ago and it still drives me nuts.

Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look

#337

Post by grishka »

Tijdreiziger wrote: post #331
grishka wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These changes are driven by actual issues actual end users were having, as opposed to the usual " we want this feature [no one asked for] to be used more so we gave it more exposure [at the expense of the UX]". That's what software development should be like. You serve your users. Not the other way around.

> as opposed to the usual "we want this feature [no one asked for] to be used more so we gave it more exposure [at the expense of the UX]" This is just how business works, you like to steer users to features that will make them spend more. Wikipedia has been able to side-step this because it's a non-profit.

Yes and I never liked businesses, especially IT ones. Also why I can't find a job for 1.5 years now — can't fathom making someone already rich even richer as opposed to making the world better.

Just imagine how amazing the world would be if the creators of most of the things we use every day weren't obsessed with making more money than what they know what to do with but instead with improving the design of said things to serve the people's needs better.

Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look

#338

Post by Tijdreiziger »

grishka wrote: post #337
Tijdreiziger wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> as opposed to the usual "we want this feature [no one asked for] to be used more so we gave it more exposure [at the expense of the UX]" This is just how business works, you like to steer users to features that will make them spend more. Wikipedia has been able to side-step this because it's a non-profit.

Yes and I never liked businesses, especially IT ones. Also why I can't find a job for 1.5 years now — can't fathom making someone already rich even richer as opposed to making the world better. Just imagine how amazing the world would be if the creators of most of the things we use every day weren't obsessed with making more money than what they know what to do with but instead with improving the design of said thing…

> Also why I can't find a job for 1.5 years now — can't fathom making someone already rich even richer as opposed to making the world better.

Have you considered working for your government or a non-profit?

Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look

#339

Post by howlgarnish »

msla wrote: post #304
mywittyname wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly think they were exploring replacing the desktop version with mobile at some point and used desktop m. removal as a gauge of aversion to the change.

That can't be true because the mobile version doesn't allow access to all of Wikipedia's functionality, such as talk pages, unless they've made some serious changes. (More precisely, I don't remember there being any way to get from an article to the article's talk page without editing the URL in the mobile version.)

This was fixed quite some time ago, there's now a Discussion tab/link on the mobile version.

Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look

#340

Post by howlgarnish »

EE84M3i wrote: post #323
tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, the mobile version collapsing the zippies, which means search doesn't work.

What are "zippies"? I tried searching but couldn't find a relevant definition.

On Wikipedia, the content section headers. More generally, expandable sections of a page that default to being collapsed.
Post reply on HN