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

Wikipedia Redefined

wikipediaredefined.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 305 posts

Re: Wikipedia Redefined

#271

Post by rmc »

pirateking wrote: post #38
tptacek wrote: post #27

You'd probably want any redesign of Wikipedia to start with the understanding that the front page of the English Wikipedia isn't WWW.WIKIPEDIA.ORG, it's EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG, and that that page is dominated by content --- most notably the WP Featured Articles, which are a core part of the Wikipedia community. Draw the pretty colored lines after you grok the concept. It goes downhill for me as they try to get more technic…

> Also the capital "I" in the font they're using is killing me. This is the main thing I remember after reading what seemed like an otherwise interesting study.

And it wasn't even consistant. They used the same character for the first letter of "Jimmy" and "It". I first thought it was a weird font with a weird I, but then say "Iimmy" and had to re-read.

Re: Wikipedia Redefined

#272

Post by arrrg »

taylorfausak wrote: post #14
jameswyse wrote: post #6

Does anyone else find the font used on that page really distracting? What's with the I looking like a J?

I was going to say the same thing. The font is FF Schulbuch Süd Web Pro, and it looks like this: http://imgur.com/Uvft4 . I can't fathom why it's designed like that. (Link to FontShop: http://www.fontshop.com/fonts/singles/fontfont/ff_schulbuch_... )

The name hints at its use: Schulbuch is German and means school book. Why was that font used in textbooks in elementary schools in Germany?

Because this is what kids learn to write: http://i.imgur.com/LbQ7l.png

But nowadays textbooks use changed variants of that font, actually – with a normal I. I think that has something to do with the decreasing importance of that cursive. Kids still learn it, sure, but it’s no longer as important and central as it was only, say, twenty years ago.

Re: Wikipedia Redefined

#273

Post by ajanuary »

mibbitier wrote: post #262
rushone2009 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google is a search engine designed to be fully functional in its simplicity. Wikipedia is a community. If you use Wikipedia only as a search engine, you are missing out.

I'm not. I only ever use wikipedia the same way I would use an encyclopedia - to look up facts. I'm entirely uninterested in the community, just as I'm uninterested in the individual contributors to an encyclopedia. The article makes some silly points, but it also makes some good ones. The front page of wikipedia shouldn't be mainly comprised of a list of languages - that's useless to most people. It should mainly be…

I'd say being told "this is a community that cares about non-English speaking people" isn't completely useless to most people.

Re: Wikipedia Redefined

#275

Post by mibbitier »

ajanuary wrote: post #273
mibbitier wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not. I only ever use wikipedia the same way I would use an encyclopedia - to look up facts. I'm entirely uninterested in the community, just as I'm uninterested in the individual contributors to an encyclopedia. The article makes some silly points, but it also makes some good ones. The front page of wikipedia shouldn't be mainly comprised of a list of languages - that's useless to most people. It should mainly be…

I'd say being told "this is a community that cares about non-English speaking people" isn't completely useless to most people.

It clearly cares about non-English speaking people, as there's many articles in other languages. As I say, I don't think the vast majority of people consider wikipedia as a "community". They consider it a place to find facts.

However, you don't dedicate 90% of your home page to 5% of use-cases.

Is it that hard to have a small dropdown language selection in one of the corners? I don't see why "language" needs to be the main thing on the wikipedia homepage.

Also I'm not sure going forward that language will matter that much. Chrome can already translate webpages to whatever language you choose with pretty good results.

Re: Wikipedia Redefined

#276

Post by tfb »

lubujackson wrote: post #227
dsl wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? I have my assistant find the article of interest and send a bit.ly link via courier.

Really? I use Encyclopedia Britannica. It's the best.

To the above few parents, keep this idiocy on reddit, please.

Re: Wikipedia Redefined

#278

Post by sageikosa »

rmc wrote: post #271
pirateking wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also the capital "I" in the font they're using is killing me. This is the main thing I remember after reading what seemed like an otherwise interesting study.

And it wasn't even consistant. They used the same character for the first letter of "Jimmy" and "It". I first thought it was a weird font with a weird I, but then say "Iimmy" and had to re-read.

Almost the same, the "J" in Iimmy descended and was overall taller than the "J" in Jmagine.

Re: Wikipedia Redefined

#280

Post by iansinke »

Am I the only one who finds a capital "T" very non-intuitive for "Dictionary"? Likewise "V" for "University"? That part of the whole logo branding I found unnecessarily concise.
Post reply on HN