Wikipedia Redefined

#1

Post by troethom » Tue, Aug 07, 2012, 9:02 PM UTC

Wikipedia Redefined
wikipediaredefined.com

Re: Wikipedia Redefined

#2

Post by derleth » Tue, Aug 07, 2012, 9:11 PM UTC

Too much space is taken up by navigation in this scheme. There's a reason Wikipedia's design is dominated by text.

Re: Wikipedia Redefined

#3

Post by calvin » Tue, Aug 07, 2012, 9:11 PM UTC

I like the use of colors in the redefined design, but will it work for people with color-blindness?

Re: Wikipedia Redefined

#4

Post by cmelbye » Tue, Aug 07, 2012, 9:29 PM UTC

This is awesome. I'm not on board with everything (as someone else pointed out, the navigation is huge and overshadows the content), but it does a good job of rethinking how users interact with Wikipedia by making it easier to use for research. Unfortunately, I can't see anything like this ever happening due to inertia and the direct democracy system that Wikipedia generally employs when making changes.

Re: Wikipedia Redefined

#5

Post by sajithdilshan » Tue, Aug 07, 2012, 9:29 PM UTC

functionality wise much more better than prevailing wikipedia. But still seems like a lot of clutter is there. And sister sites could use different icon (logo) scheme. Using a letter as an icon (or logo) can be confusing sometimes.

Re: Wikipedia Redefined

#6

Post by jameswyse » Tue, Aug 07, 2012, 9:30 PM UTC

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

Re: Wikipedia Redefined

#7

Post by jwm » Tue, Aug 07, 2012, 9:30 PM UTC

derleth wrote: post #2

Too much space is taken up by navigation in this scheme. There's a reason Wikipedia's design is dominated by text.

I agree. Websites that do this are awful, Google Plus is guilty of this.

Re combo-boxing the language list: Wikipedia is the most successful multi-language website by far. Highlighting this to new and old users is a great thing. Its not like the search box takes up any more than one line anyway.

For Wikipedia, this redesign blows. I do like the visual style though. This is really just showcasing the webdesign company's talent, right?

Re: Wikipedia Redefined

#8

Post by fusiongyro » Tue, Aug 07, 2012, 9:30 PM UTC

Overall, I think it's gorgeous, especially the page layout stuff. I don't like the logos especially, but having a "branded house" approach makes a lot of sense for uniting the disparate sites.

Re: Wikipedia Redefined

#9

Post by dmazin » Tue, Aug 07, 2012, 9:31 PM UTC

I'm not sure Wikipedia needs a rebranding, and tell me if I'm the only one, but I use Google to get to specific Wikipedia articles. Wikipedia's actual search and search results need to be re-implemented, but I don't agree about redesign beyond that.

That leaves the actual articles. I like the way they are designed here, except for the monolithic nav bar.

If anything, this is a nice theme for articles - and theming is a feature that has existed on Wikipedia for a number of years now.

Re: Wikipedia Redefined

#10

Post by kajecounterhack » Tue, Aug 07, 2012, 9:32 PM UTC

cmelbye wrote: post #4

This is awesome. I'm not on board with everything (as someone else pointed out, the navigation is huge and overshadows the content), but it does a good job of rethinking how users interact with Wikipedia by making it easier to use for research. Unfortunately, I can't see anything like this ever happening due to inertia and the direct democracy system that Wikipedia generally employs when making changes.

If they made a mediawiki theme that could easily be applied or made an option, they might actually have a chance. << I don't think they did that though.