Direct link to one of the early adopter wikis: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Accueil_princip...
Quite a pleasant change
Wikipedia is getting a new look
361–370 of 529 posts
Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look
#362Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is how it looks in my Firefox: https://imgur.com/a/x2Gl1Sj And this is how it looks in my Chrome: https://imgur.com/a/LQ7pmH8
Ah, you're right. You need to login and enable "advanced mode" in setting (in hamburger menu) to see it.
I see.
But this also means that every mobile user of wikipedia (I guess the majority now?) which is not logged in and enabled that feature (for sure the majority) does not even know about the discussion pages of wikipedia articles. This is super sad.
Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look
#363Earlier quoted context omitted.
PSA: old.reddit.com is so much better in these regards. I use it on my phone too, with some custom css to make things bigger. There is also i.reddit.com.
I only use old.reddit.com on phone and pc as it is much faster and much more intuitive , reddit has gone to hell in my opinion
I'm already resigned to the fact that once old.reddit.com goes away I'm not going to be spending any more time on Reddit. Maybe that'll be a good thing.
Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look
#364Earlier quoted context omitted.
PSA: old.reddit.com is so much better in these regards. I use it on my phone too, with some custom css to make things bigger. There is also i.reddit.com.
New reddit feels like they hired 6 junior React developers and put a gun to their head telling them to rewrite the website in React in 6 months or else. It's unbelievably slow.
Funny yet accurate! I wonder what's causing them from sunsetting old.reddit...usage? An individual?
I will never use new.reddit, I tried to once but it's such a poorer UX
Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look
#365Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
a) People don't know their own needs until you show them what their options are. Are you familiar with the literature on optimal line length that is quoted in the OP? If so, good job. I think it's fair to say 99% of people aren't. Consequently, if you asked people if they wanted an optimal reading experience, then they would have to concede that they are not knowledgeable about what that means, and thus that they should adopt different settings than what they would instinctively pick.
b) The alternative is not that people are "idiots who don't know how to use their window manager." I don't want to have to use my window manager. Manually resizing windows for each tab to get the right line length is a huge waste of time and seems idiotic to me. I want a professional designer to make it so I have the best possible reading experience on the websites I'm browsing. Because I'm humble enough to know I couldn't reach that standard by "using my window manager".
Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look
#366Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use that quite a lot, because google periodically just refuses to acknowledge that I usually want my links in English despite living in Germany. English quality is often times a bit better, but it is also useful to check in multiple languages, as sometimes you get different information, especially on more controversial topics.
try changing your IP address, OS language/region and browser language to English
I'm not aware IP addresses have language settings associated with them? since when is this the case? any links for further information?
Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look
#367Earlier quoted context omitted.
The experience with js-heavy sites even on a very capable desktop is still negative. Too much js introduces bugs, latency, and lack of stability. A page like that will sometimes jump around and resize for no apparent reason. Making wikipedia noticeably js-heavy would definitely ruin the experience.
The size and amount of JS doesn't really matter. Whether it's well written and integrated matters. How many round-trips it introduces matters. The stuff that gives JS a bad reputation is sites that slap together nested widgets that each load their resources sequentially. If you serve a 1 MB blob of all_the_things.min.js on the first page load, then gzip reduces that to ~300 KB, which will take ~2.5 seconds to load on…
1MB of JS is bad, and you should feel bad for delivering it. A content focused website should fully render without caching in under one second on a normal desktop. That is not possible with a meg of JS.
Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look
#368Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the current efforts in this regard are focused on https://wikidata.org and to a lesser extent the new (planning stages only so far) abstract wikipedia project https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Abstract_Wikipedia . Those are both the opposite of an incremental approach but i'd be curious what you think of them.
I don't want to say anything negative about them, because both are fine initiative on their own. But I'm not hugely optimistic about them (yet). Both can succeed, but both are pretty far from what I'd consider succeeding. First of, I want to highlight what you already said: this approach is the opposite of an incremental. Both approaches are fine and have their own value, but they are truly different, and not somehow…
Thanks. That is an interesting perspective and i agree with a lot of it.
I would point out in the bird example though - the normal way of having a "data model" in wikipedia is through templates (yes it is very definitely mixing view/model/controller in a questionable way). These templates do have the ability to fetch data from wikidata (with some restrictions) and wikidata does store an image for most animal entries.
So its entirely possible to have a template on wikipedia, that just takes a list of species names, and turns that into a pretty table listing the species, a picture, and perhaps other fields as required.
Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look
#369Ugh, don't hard code a maximum line width. Let me decide by sizing my window if I want it.
Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look
#370I bet it won't remember my scroll position when navigating back between articles.