Mailing List Archive

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Denny Vrandečić
<denny.vrandecic@wikimedia.de> wrote:
> <rant>
>
> If WMF had a Steve Jobs on staff, everyone would hate him for making
> decisions without properly consulting the community, for destroying
> the community, for reinventing Wikimedia again, for making unpopular
> decisions, for making decisions behind close doors, for being an
> egomaniac, etc.
>
> Heck, we cannot even get the branding right. We call our project
> Wikimedia Commons, Wikipedia, Wiktionary, Wikinews... we have a
> software called MediaWiki, and the whole movement is called the
> Wikimedia Movement. No surprise people think Wikileaks is one of ours.
> No surprise people cannot get these words right. There have been
> several suggestions for improving the branding, but every time met
> with strong resistance.
>
> I think Athena is a much more though-out design step for Wikipedia,
> and I am very much looking forward to it to happen. But as long as
> there is considerable backlash for something like a move from Monobook
> to Vector -- which, it seems, is not even regarded as a design update
> by most critics here -- I am wary about the social costs involved in
> such an update.
>
> </rant>
>
> Yes, it would be nice if it was easier to change Wikipedia.

http://toolserver.org/~magnus/redefined/?page=Pyramid

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such [ In reply to ]
Indeed Denny, making those changes is very difficult, and we are
facing a number of these challenges.
You know what? Given the importance of a good user interface (and
other things), I could even imagine that the WMFbuilds up a new
Wikipedia site and watches where the majority of people want to
contribute. If that would result in a permanent fork, between a modern
user interface Wikipedia and the one we have now... well, depending on
some factors, I might find it worth the progress.
Kind regards
Ziko


2012/8/17 Denny Vrandečić <denny.vrandecic@wikimedia.de>:
> <rant>
>
> If WMF had a Steve Jobs on staff, everyone would hate him for making
> decisions without properly consulting the community, for destroying
> the community, for reinventing Wikimedia again, for making unpopular
> decisions, for making decisions behind close doors, for being an
> egomaniac, etc.
>
> Heck, we cannot even get the branding right. We call our project
> Wikimedia Commons, Wikipedia, Wiktionary, Wikinews... we have a
> software called MediaWiki, and the whole movement is called the
> Wikimedia Movement. No surprise people think Wikileaks is one of ours.
> No surprise people cannot get these words right. There have been
> several suggestions for improving the branding, but every time met
> with strong resistance.
>
> I think Athena is a much more though-out design step for Wikipedia,
> and I am very much looking forward to it to happen. But as long as
> there is considerable backlash for something like a move from Monobook
> to Vector -- which, it seems, is not even regarded as a design update
> by most critics here -- I am wary about the social costs involved in
> such an update.
>
> </rant>
>
> Yes, it would be nice if it was easier to change Wikipedia.
>
> Cheers,
> Denny
>
>
> 2012/8/17 Nathan <nawrich@gmail.com>:
>> Never having been to design school like Amir, I can't comment on what grade
>> it might get. But I do like it a lot; I think it's a serious improvement
>> over what we use now, and incorporates design principles that we should
>> adopt even if we don't take the design itself. The visual elements, the
>> better branding and identification of sister projects, and the modern feel
>> / look are all elements that can be adapted.
>>
>> I'd love to see more of these complete redesign proposals with a
>> professional feel. The current "2012 main page redesign" proposals are
>> almost uniformly amateurish, and many make only the most minimal
>> adjustments. More importantly, they are aimed only at the main page - what
>> needs to be updated is really the entire thing. 10 years on and the editing
>> interface is still shit, and the design is still aimed at satisfying lowest
>> common denominator concerns. Time for a new approach, if only Wikimedia had
>> a Steve Jobs on staff.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
>
>
> --
> Project director Wikidata
> Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Obentrautstr. 72 | 10963 Berlin
> Tel. +49-30-219 158 26-0 | http://wikimedia.de
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
> Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg
> unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das
> Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l



--

-----------------------------------------------------------
Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland
dr. Ziko van Dijk, voorzitter
http://wmnederland.nl/

Wikimedia Nederland
Postbus 167
3500 AD Utrecht
-----------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such [ In reply to ]
Trying to respond to your "wiki is not..." statement from this awful
gmail mobile website...

While technically correct, from the user's pov, which is the one the
websites's creators have, wiki is often used as a synonim for
wikipedia. I hear more often „did you search on wiki?” than „did you
search wikipedia?”. I find this distinction is nowadays a little
pedantic.

Strainu

2012/8/8, Peter Gervai <grinapo@gmail.com>:
> On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 11:47 PM, Michel Vuijlsteke <wikipedia@zog.org>
> wrote:
>> Well, it's certainly a possible starting point for discussion:
>> http://www.wikipediaredefined.com/
>
> Yes, interesting.
> I asked them about whether they intend to keep it "teling us" instead
> of "discussing it" (no email list but an email), and mentioned some
> thoughts of mine, which I share here:
>
> - the design fails without javascript [.why javascript often bad or
> non-applicable is a long thread itself]
>
> - it (often) wastes screen space
>
> - "wiki" is ***NOT*** wikipedia, nor is it wikimedia, nor is it a
> brand or a trademark or a name of one entity. it's like saying
> "webpage"
>
> - it did not seem to touch one of the most important part deserving
> more professional attention: typography.
>
>
>
> --
> byte-byte,
> grin
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such [ In reply to ]
No one will argue these days that the WMF is short of money, so this is a
good opportunity for it to deploy some of that funding for a real impact.
The main page on the English Wikipedia is an ideal starting point for a
conscious effort at design evolution throughout Wikimedia. The Foundation
should solicit and pay for several design firms to submit efforts to the
main page contest, which is in dire need of some talented input. The
community can still select between them, let's just make sure they have a
number of great options.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such [ In reply to ]
2012/8/17 Magnus Manske <magnusmanske@googlemail.com>:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Denny Vrandečić
> <denny.vrandecic@wikimedia.de> wrote:
>> Yes, it would be nice if it was easier to change Wikipedia.
>
> http://toolserver.org/~magnus/redefined/?page=Pyramid

Oh my goodness, Magnus. Is it that easy for you?
There's some room for improvement (e.g. the positioning of images) but
I like a lot the result =)

That said I think the biggest idea in that proposal are two:
* maybe we need a "read" mode and an edit mode to be better separated,
it's of little use to have buttons and tools for
interaction/editing/statistic purposes if I want only to read. We
should keep that in mind also while developing the interface for
mobile apps. (and I actually like a lot the current Wikipedia app on
Android, because you can only read but you read it extremely well even
on that small screen because there are just the things you actually
want to read.
* maybe the big point is "we try to make the process of designing and
implementing an interface for Wikipedia easier and we see with what
people come out".
* (even more difficult, and maybe impractical for some reasons) we
should leave to the users the possibility to tweak some elements of
the design of the Wikipedia they are reading (I'm thinking about: *
show/hide this * magnify that, etc.)

Cristian

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such [ In reply to ]
On 8/17/12 12:02 PM, Magnus Manske wrote:
> http://toolserver.org/~magnus/redefined/?page=Pyramid

This is quite nice, especially on a larger screen! Our current layout,
which uses the full browser width for text, makes articles hard to read
and cluttered-looking on larger screens. The text column with images and
ToC in the sidebar is a nice change. Though on the other hand, I do like
flowing text around images below some with threshold. When reading on a
smaller screen, with this layout you can end up with a very narrow text
column down the middle. But overall I like it. The only thing I'd really
want is some way to get to more of the functionality. For example, I
can't find how to view edit history.

-Mark


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Delirium <delirium@hackish.org> wrote:
> On 8/17/12 12:02 PM, Magnus Manske wrote:
>>
>> http://toolserver.org/~magnus/redefined/?page=Pyramid
>
>
> This is quite nice, especially on a larger screen! Our current layout, which
> uses the full browser width for text, makes articles hard to read and
> cluttered-looking on larger screens. The text column with images and ToC in
> the sidebar is a nice change. Though on the other hand, I do like flowing
> text around images below some with threshold. When reading on a smaller
> screen, with this layout you can end up with a very narrow text column down
> the middle. But overall I like it. The only thing I'd really want is some
> way to get to more of the functionality. For example, I can't find how to
> view edit history.

Thanks! This is just a demo, most functionality is missing; no point
in implementing all of it unless there's a potential long-term user
and developer base :-)

That said, it uses only the MediaWiki API, so it can run anywhere,
even on a blank page served by Wikipedia, in the far future, when
there is no more server-side full-page rendering...

It's pretty useless on mobile devices, but then we have a nice mobile
interface; this whole auto-collapse-on-mobile thing only goes so far,
IMHO.

Upshot: Unless I get at least, say, five people who'd help debug it,
and at least one person who'd help coding, I'm not going to add more
functions to it. Also, the "redefined" people might sue me for
stealing their layout proposal ;-)


Magnus

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such [ In reply to ]
2012/8/17 Magnus Manske <magnusmanske@googlemail.com>:
> Upshot: Unless I get at least, say, five people who'd help debug it,

I can help with debugging :-).

> and at least one person who'd help coding, I'm not going to add more
> functions to it. Also, the "redefined" people might sue me for
> stealing their layout proposal ;-)

meh!

Cristian

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such [ In reply to ]
On 17 August 2012 10:47, Magnus Manske <magnusmanske@googlemail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Delirium <delirium@hackish.org> wrote:
> > On 8/17/12 12:02 PM, Magnus Manske wrote:
> >>
> >> http://toolserver.org/~magnus/redefined/?page=Pyramid
> >
> >
> > This is quite nice, especially on a larger screen! Our current layout,
> which
> > uses the full browser width for text, makes articles hard to read and
> > cluttered-looking on larger screens. The text column with images and ToC
> in
> > the sidebar is a nice change. Though on the other hand, I do like flowing
> > text around images below some with threshold. When reading on a smaller
> > screen, with this layout you can end up with a very narrow text column
> down
> > the middle. But overall I like it. The only thing I'd really want is some
> > way to get to more of the functionality. For example, I can't find how to
> > view edit history.
>
> Thanks! This is just a demo, most functionality is missing; no point
> in implementing all of it unless there's a potential long-term user
> and developer base :-)
>
> That said, it uses only the MediaWiki API, so it can run anywhere,
> even on a blank page served by Wikipedia, in the far future, when
> there is no more server-side full-page rendering...
>
> It's pretty useless on mobile devices, but then we have a nice mobile
> interface; this whole auto-collapse-on-mobile thing only goes so far,
> IMHO.
>
> Upshot: Unless I get at least, say, five people who'd help debug it,
> and at least one person who'd help coding, I'm not going to add more
> functions to it. Also, the "redefined" people might sue me for
> stealing their layout proposal ;-)
>
>

It looks pretty clean and less cluttered. It also draws attention to some
of our internal issues, such as massive listing of references at the bottom
of the page, and all those templates linking groups of articles together;
between these two, they're taking up nearly a quarter of the 'space'.
They're both important issues, although separate ones.

I'm looking at this from a fairly small screen, and I wonder how wide the
"text" will be when the left-side links are added in, or if your proposal
is to drop that entirely. As it is, the text is a bit narrow now, leading
to a very long article, but I think that balances out with the increased
white space and different font, both of which make the article easier on
the eyes.

Risker/Anne
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such [ In reply to ]
2012/8/17 Risker <risker.wp@gmail.com>:
> It looks pretty clean and less cluttered. It also draws attention to some
> of our internal issues, such as massive listing of references at the bottom
> of the page, and all those templates linking groups of articles together;
> between these two, they're taking up nearly a quarter of the 'space'.
> They're both important issues, although separate ones.
>
> I'm looking at this from a fairly small screen, and I wonder how wide the
> "text" will be when the left-side links are added in, or if your proposal
> is to drop that entirely. As it is, the text is a bit narrow now, leading
> to a very long article, but I think that balances out with the increased
> white space and different font, both of which make the article easier on
> the eyes.

I think we can gather comments about Magnus proposal here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_redefined

Also, you're invited to put your name in either list if you're interested.

Cristian

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Cristian Consonni
<kikkocristian@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2012/8/17 Risker <risker.wp@gmail.com>:
>> It looks pretty clean and less cluttered. It also draws attention to some
>> of our internal issues, such as massive listing of references at the bottom
>> of the page, and all those templates linking groups of articles together;
>> between these two, they're taking up nearly a quarter of the 'space'.
>> They're both important issues, although separate ones.
>>
>> I'm looking at this from a fairly small screen, and I wonder how wide the
>> "text" will be when the left-side links are added in, or if your proposal
>> is to drop that entirely. As it is, the text is a bit narrow now, leading
>> to a very long article, but I think that balances out with the increased
>> white space and different font, both of which make the article easier on
>> the eyes.
>
> I think we can gather comments about Magnus proposal here:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_redefined
>
> Also, you're invited to put your name in either list if you're interested.

Thanks, I've added a META backlink from the interface.

Magnus

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such [ In reply to ]
Yes, I would like to see the skin in my Preferences. Where is a wiki
page for comment? :-)
Ziko

2012/8/17 Magnus Manske <magnusmanske@googlemail.com>:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Cristian Consonni
> <kikkocristian@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2012/8/17 Risker <risker.wp@gmail.com>:
>>> It looks pretty clean and less cluttered. It also draws attention to some
>>> of our internal issues, such as massive listing of references at the bottom
>>> of the page, and all those templates linking groups of articles together;
>>> between these two, they're taking up nearly a quarter of the 'space'.
>>> They're both important issues, although separate ones.
>>>
>>> I'm looking at this from a fairly small screen, and I wonder how wide the
>>> "text" will be when the left-side links are added in, or if your proposal
>>> is to drop that entirely. As it is, the text is a bit narrow now, leading
>>> to a very long article, but I think that balances out with the increased
>>> white space and different font, both of which make the article easier on
>>> the eyes.
>>
>> I think we can gather comments about Magnus proposal here:
>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_redefined
>>
>> Also, you're invited to put your name in either list if you're interested.
>
> Thanks, I've added a META backlink from the interface.
>
> Magnus
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l



--

-----------------------------------------------------------
Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland
dr. Ziko van Dijk, voorzitter
http://wmnederland.nl/

Wikimedia Nederland
Postbus 167
3500 AD Utrecht
-----------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such [ In reply to ]
2012/8/17 Ziko van Dijk <vandijk@wmnederland.nl>:
> Yes, I would like to see the skin in my Preferences. Where is a wiki
> page for comment? :-)

See the "META" link in the upper-right corner i.e.:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_redefined

Cristian

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 6:43 PM, Cristian Consonni
<kikkocristian@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2012/8/17 Ziko van Dijk <vandijk@wmnederland.nl>:
>> Yes, I would like to see the skin in my Preferences. Where is a wiki
>> page for comment? :-)
>
> See the "META" link in the upper-right corner i.e.:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_redefined

Technically, it's not a MediaWiki skin. It could become one, but that
would require changes in MediaWiki itself, and we all know how long
that takes. There are intermediary solutions, but they'd be ugly, like
loading each page in a "normal" skin, then rearranging it via
JavaScript, which causes a flickering "jump" on each page load. For
the moment, toolserver it is.

Magnus

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such [ In reply to ]
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 08:54:38 -0400
> From: Nathan <nawrich@gmail.com>
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX
> and such
> Message-ID:
> <CALKX9dTTP_GOQgXjOn3ftcwbhBCmRBfkm=yJtnh_2RCT=
> zR0sQ@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> No one will argue these days that the WMF is short of money, so this is a
> good opportunity for it to deploy some of that funding for a real impact.
> The main page on the English Wikipedia is an ideal starting point for a
> conscious effort at design evolution throughout Wikimedia. The Foundation
> should solicit and pay for several design firms to submit efforts to the
> main page contest, which is in dire need of some talented input. The
> community can still select between them, let's just make sure they have a
> number of great options.
>
>
>

We should by now have enough user data to be able to calculate user
retention rates by skin. It would be interesting to see how the
implementation of Vector affected editor retention rates.

WSC
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such [ In reply to ]
http://www.fastcodesign.com/1670648/a-promising-wikipedia-overhaul-designed-to-squash-info-overload#1


A follow-up article on the redesign. Excerpt:


---o0o---


So, will we all be able to enjoy this clear and concise online experience
anytime soon? Kazlauskas put the odds at a discouraging, and definitive,
“zero chance,” even though the response has been positive. “So far the
reaction of people at Wikipedia--creators, not users, mind you--is they are
not ready for anything radical,” he says (and the whole endeavor reminds me
a bit of Wired’s similar attempt to updating
Craigslist<http://www.wired.com/entertainment/theweb/magazine/17-09/ff_craigslist_makeover>
for
a feature package a few years ago).

Despite the unlikelihood of implementation, the team still sees an
opportunity to leverage what they’ve done for an audience who would no
doubt welcome the opportunity to tool around with the slick style. “We are
already working on app which will use new interface to read Wikipedia,”
Kazlauskas explains. “We’ll see how that goes and if anyone’s interested.”
What say you, knowledge-seekers?
---o0o---


Personally, I would welcome third-party offers of alternative skins.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such [ In reply to ]
Keyhole solution:
The MediaWiki API and Wikipedia copyright and trademark licences allow
Wikipedia Redefined to implement their ideas already. It will, of course,
be marketed as an alternative browsing and editing device like AWB
currently is. If there's enough uptake, it's never too late for WMF to buy
them up :)

On 5 September 2012 22:11, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> http://www.fastcodesign.com/1670648/a-promising-wikipedia-overhaul-designed-to-squash-info-overload#1
>
>
> A follow-up article on the redesign. Excerpt:
>
>
> ---o0o---
>
>
> So, will we all be able to enjoy this clear and concise online experience
> anytime soon? Kazlauskas put the odds at a discouraging, and definitive,
> “zero chance,” even though the response has been positive. “So far the
> reaction of people at Wikipedia--creators, not users, mind you--is they are
> not ready for anything radical,” he says (and the whole endeavor reminds me
> a bit of Wired’s similar attempt to updating
> Craigslist<
> http://www.wired.com/entertainment/theweb/magazine/17-09/ff_craigslist_makeover
> >
> for
> a feature package a few years ago).
>
> Despite the unlikelihood of implementation, the team still sees an
> opportunity to leverage what they’ve done for an audience who would no
> doubt welcome the opportunity to tool around with the slick style. “We are
> already working on app which will use new interface to read Wikipedia,”
> Kazlauskas explains. “We’ll see how that goes and if anyone’s interested.”
> What say you, knowledge-seekers?
> ---o0o---
>
>
> Personally, I would welcome third-party offers of alternative skins.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such [ In reply to ]
They have no financial means or interest in doing so, Deryck. They are a
design studio trying to push their work to prospective employers. Although
they could serve ads alongside the content, they do not have the
advertising budget to facilitate any sort of uptake. Plus, they could never
compete in Google.

The only way Wikipedia's interface will improve is if we demand to improve
it.

On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Deryck Chan <deryckchan@wikimedia.hk> wrote:

> Keyhole solution:
> The MediaWiki API and Wikipedia copyright and trademark licences allow
> Wikipedia Redefined to implement their ideas already. It will, of course,
> be marketed as an alternative browsing and editing device like AWB
> currently is. If there's enough uptake, it's never too late for WMF to buy
> them up :)
>
> On 5 September 2012 22:11, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> http://www.fastcodesign.com/1670648/a-promising-wikipedia-overhaul-designed-to-squash-info-overload#1
> >
> >
> > A follow-up article on the redesign. Excerpt:
> >
> >
> > ---o0o---
> >
> >
> > So, will we all be able to enjoy this clear and concise online experience
> > anytime soon? Kazlauskas put the odds at a discouraging, and definitive,
> > “zero chance,” even though the response has been positive. “So far the
> > reaction of people at Wikipedia--creators, not users, mind you--is they
> are
> > not ready for anything radical,” he says (and the whole endeavor reminds
> me
> > a bit of Wired’s similar attempt to updating
> > Craigslist<
> >
> http://www.wired.com/entertainment/theweb/magazine/17-09/ff_craigslist_makeover
> > >
> > for
> > a feature package a few years ago).
> >
> > Despite the unlikelihood of implementation, the team still sees an
> > opportunity to leverage what they’ve done for an audience who would no
> > doubt welcome the opportunity to tool around with the slick style. “We
> are
> > already working on app which will use new interface to read Wikipedia,”
> > Kazlauskas explains. “We’ll see how that goes and if anyone’s
> interested.”
> > What say you, knowledge-seekers?
> > ---o0o---
> >
> >
> > Personally, I would welcome third-party offers of alternative skins.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

1 2  View All