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

431–440 of 529 posts

Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look

#431

Post by dirktheman »

waldofrank wrote: post #233
blewboarwastake wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I second using Wikipedia for translating, most of the time is better than using a translator or using a dictionary and sometimes is the only option for more technical or specific terms. I don't use it for comparing between languages much because I'm bilingual and my native tongue Wikipedia is not that big, but sometimes is really interesting to see the different perspectives.

Regarding the comments about the importance of language links in the sidebar: if you look here you can see that the language links will be moved to a button/menu in the article header — https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Web/Desktop_Improveme... The conclusions of the user testing show that people have a much easier time finding them in the new location.

Their test group for this feature consists of 8 to 9 people, with 5 in a control group. You'd think that for one of the most visited sites in the world, they'd have larger test groups?

Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look

#432

Post by bmn__ »

davidivadavid wrote: post #365
userbinator wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 sho…

That argument completely falls flat if you consider the actual result: https://i.imgur.com/7mAQy5H.png It enrages me to no end that this is sold as an improvement.

• Who wants to read four to five words per line? THIS LINE SIZE IS ACTUALLY UTTER ASS.

• In the good design, it was easy to resize to window to make the line length narrower. However, in the bad design, there is no recourse to make the line length longer.

Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look

#435

Post by vixen99 »

not_kurt_godel wrote: post #420
Eiriksmal wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also find your first point to be a truly indispensable tool. How else do you know what they call carbon fiber in German? [0] But the second is a touchy area. In fact, Wikipedia's co-founder recently wrote a blog post detailing how its neutral point-of-view policy has flopped, in the name of fighting false balance. [1] His examples are pretty embarrassing, but more important in that Google points human "Search Quali…

The combination of political opinion expressed in [1] + the author's wildly incorrect past statements is all I need to know that Wikipedia is doing things right: > Since 2002, Sanger has been critical of Wikipedia's accuracy. ... [In 2007], Sanger again criticized Wikipedia, stating it was "broken beyond repair" and had a range of problems "from serious management problems, to an often dysfunctional community, to fre…

I guess you don't need to know much to ascertain the truth of something.

Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look

#436

Post by lopmotr »

unethical_ban wrote: post #398
stevebmark wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All books ever made have text that has roughly the same text width for a reason. It's a well established pattern, and full width websites ignore the most fundamental design principle. Do books make you feel claustrophobic too?

Your sass is unwelcome. Books are a different, more constrained format. If I had a book with 12" wide pages and only 6" centered were used for content, it would be uncomfortable.

How about a normal book placed on a big empty tabletop? That's a more fitting analogy since you provide your own browser but not your own pages for a book.

Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look

#437

Post by kalleboo »

userbinator wrote: post #189
systemvoltage wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Design should not be trendy. It is not fashion. I hope we don't bloat up wikipedia pages with too much whitespace. Getting of borders, "minimal" looks bother me so much because they're sacrificing layout for aesthetics. There is a reason why borders exist. It is a line segment that separates logically laid out content into groups. I want Wikipedia to stay the same even if it is not ideal. There is a lot of legacy and…

I don't understand why people complain about line length when that really means you should just resize the window to your preference. On the other hand, pages that stay in a narrow column in the middle when I widen the window really infuriate me, because I explicitly asked for wider columns and am not getting it.

My experience is that most people who were raised on Windows will just full-screen everything. Long-time Mac users are more likely to use sized-to-fit windows.

Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look

#438

Post by beshrkayali »

The most underrated thing about websites that have kept a working design/ui/ux/whatever for a few years or more is that people are used to them. I know where the search bar is, I know where to switch language and where to exactly point my attention to find what I’m looking for. Even if something is not exactly right, or doesn’t make sense to some expert UI designer, you really don’t have to change it. I’m seriously weary of multi year redesign projects undertaken by websites used regularly by a lot of people. It almost never works. PayPal didn’t get it right, Spotify constantly messes with their app and changes where things are, everyone can probably add something to this list.

Shouldn’t UX be a lot more about how the thing looks? Work on enhancing your copy if people find it difficult to understand.

Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look

#439

Post by mantap »

shoeffner wrote: post #427
ehsankia wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely, the only time I've ever used the sidebar is for language change, but with this change they are moving that to a more accessible place (Which is nice), but it also means the sidebar is now truly useless :)

Changing the language, yes. But translating at a glimpse will get lost this way.

Go to the wikidata page and it has the translations.

Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look

#440

Post by corentin88 »

beshrkayali wrote: post #438

The most underrated thing about websites that have kept a working design/ui/ux/whatever for a few years or more is that people are used to them. I know where the search bar is, I know where to switch language and where to exactly point my attention to find what I’m looking for. Even if something is not exactly right, or doesn’t make sense to some expert UI designer, you really don’t have to change it. I’m seriously w…

That’s something I’m a huge fan in G Suite. The UI changes very slightly, most of the time you don’t even notice, but the number of new features that the team ship is incredible.
Post reply on HN