Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such
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. Yes, it would be nice if it was easier to change Wikipedia. Cheers, Denny 2012/8/17 Nathan : > 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
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Denny Vrandečić wrote: > > > 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. > > > > 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
[Wikimedia-l] Articles for Creation broken
So, I had a look at articles for creation today, and there was nearly 1,000 pending article submissions. Articles for creation has changed a lot since 2008 - it was of a similar structure to XFD - all submissions for a particular day were on one page, and people could come along and approve or reject based in certain criteria. I think that system worked well. True, we have a lot more article creations, but I think it gave more visibility than the current system where everything is subpaged. Some may think that the bar at AFC is set too high but this high bar discourages new users, especially when their submissions stay unreviewed for weeks at a time. And since editor retention is something we are trying to focus on, it seems a worthy project since many new users have their first experiences in AFC. The lack of volunteers in wikiprojects like AFC is not a new thing, so it's not that volunteers have reduced. I think we need to consider if AFC is something we still want to have, and if so, how can we improve it? Steve Zhang ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Articles for Creation broken
For those who don't know what "Articles for Creation" is: It's a page in the English Wikipedia. Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:AFC -- Amir 2012/8/17 Steven Zhang : > So, I had a look at articles for creation today, and there was nearly 1,000 > pending article submissions. Articles for creation has changed a lot since > 2008 - it was of a similar structure to XFD - all submissions for a > particular day were on one page, and people could come along and approve or > reject based in certain criteria. > > I think that system worked well. True, we have a lot more article creations, > but I think it gave more visibility than the current system where everything > is subpaged. > > Some may think that the bar at AFC is set too high but this high bar > discourages new users, especially when their submissions stay unreviewed for > weeks at a time. And since editor retention is something we are trying to > focus on, it seems a worthy project since many new users have their first > experiences in AFC. The lack of volunteers in wikiprojects like AFC is not a > new thing, so it's not that volunteers have reduced. I think we need to > consider if AFC is something we still want to have, and if so, how can we > improve it? > > > Steve Zhang > ___ > 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
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 : > > > 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. > > > > Yes, it would be nice if it was easier to change Wikipedia. > > Cheers, > Denny > > > 2012/8/17 Nathan : >> 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
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 : > On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 11:47 PM, Michel Vuijlsteke > 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
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
2012/8/17 Magnus Manske : > On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Denny Vrandečić > 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
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
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Delirium 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
2012/8/17 Magnus Manske : > 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
On 17 August 2012 10:47, Magnus Manske wrote: > On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Delirium 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
[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia UK report - July 2012
Hello everyone, Just a quick note to let you know that our report for July 2012 is now published. http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Reports/2012/July Highlights include notes on how we reached 4 million articles on the English language Wikipedia, details of GLAM activities, the June / July board meeting and a comms round up. Thanks, Stevie -- Stevie Benton Communications Organiser Wikimedia UK +44 (0) 20 7065 0993 / +44 (0) 7803 505 173 @StevieBenton Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited, a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents. ___ Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more information about Wikimedia-l: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-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
2012/8/17 Risker : > 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
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Cristian Consonni wrote: > 2012/8/17 Risker : >> 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
Yes, I would like to see the skin in my Preferences. Where is a wiki page for comment? :-) Ziko 2012/8/17 Magnus Manske : > On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Cristian Consonni > wrote: >> 2012/8/17 Risker : >>> 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
2012/8/17 Ziko van Dijk : > 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
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 6:43 PM, Cristian Consonni wrote: > 2012/8/17 Ziko van Dijk : >> 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
[Wikimedia-l] Office hours with Sue Gardner tomorrow
Hi everyone, We realize this is short notice, but Sue Gardner (the Foundation's Executive Director) is doing an IRC office hours tomorrow, Saturday August 18, at 17:30:00 UTC. It's been some time since Sue did one, so we're leaving the topic pretty open. As usual, the particulars are on Meta at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours -- Steven Walling https://wikimediafoundation.org/ ___ 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
> > Message: 2 > Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 08:54:38 -0400 > From: Nathan > To: Wikimedia Mailing List > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX > and such > Message-ID: > zr...@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
