It's fine as is why change it?
The post details why it's not fine...
Wikipedia is getting a new look
21–30 of 529 posts
Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look
#22If 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…
I use it very often, just because i check articles in multiple languages.
Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
So make the window narrower or get a narrower screen if you don't want to see empty space. Readability is more important.
Readability is exactly why sites need to enforce a maximum chars/line. Don't ask your users to constantly resize their window just to read your content.
I got a big screen specifically so that I can have multiple windows on my screen. Having a site decide to be in charge of sizing instead of allowing me to choose is user-hostile.
Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
So make the window narrower or get a narrower screen if you don't want to see empty space. Readability is more important.
Readability is exactly why sites need to enforce a maximum chars/line. Don't ask your users to constantly resize their window just to read your content.
You seem to be agreeing with the parent and Wikipedia and the research on the subject.
Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look
#25If 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…
I use it very often, just because i check articles in multiple languages.
I use it for the same thing. This allows me to learn what specific word is used for [obscure thing] in a different language. Eg computer hardware related words for my native language.
Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look
#26If 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…
I use it very often, just because i check articles in multiple languages.
Languages - yes, all the other links - almost never.
Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look
#27I don't know why they did that, now we have empty space on the left and right, it's really useless, why is it better than using the full screen? "Our second change introduces a maximum line width to our content on pages where reading is the focus, such as article pages and discussion pages. Research has shown that limiting the width can lead to better retention of the content itself, as well as a decrease in eye stra…
> So all documentation website should now have that max line widht to better retent the content?
Absolutely.
Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look
#28> the wide range of functionality on the site can feel overwhelming and difficult to understand I guess it must just be my lengthy history with the web, but this line is like nails on a blackboard to me. It's OK to have to learn how to use powerful tools!
I feel the same way. I wish interface designers would focus on ways to get people comfortable with experimentation instead of removing features entirely.
Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look
#29I don't know why they did that, now we have empty space on the left and right, it's really useless, why is it better than using the full screen? "Our second change introduces a maximum line width to our content on pages where reading is the focus, such as article pages and discussion pages. Research has shown that limiting the width can lead to better retention of the content itself, as well as a decrease in eye stra…
[deleted]
Re: Wikipedia is getting a new look
#30I don't know why they did that, now we have empty space on the left and right, it's really useless, why is it better than using the full screen? "Our second change introduces a maximum line width to our content on pages where reading is the focus, such as article pages and discussion pages. Research has shown that limiting the width can lead to better retention of the content itself, as well as a decrease in eye stra…
No it isn’t. There’s ample research showing that shorter lines are more readable. Check out the sources on this page for more details: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_length
I agree, their line width has been atrocious since the early days. It was as bad in 2005 as it is now. The font size on their primary topic page text on desktop is also too small.
Checking a well filled out topic page, something like George Washington, a typical line might be 160-190 or more characters across in the top section. In some places on the page it can reach to 210+ characters across. It isn't a very good reading experience at their present font size and at that width.