Wikipedia talk:2008 main page redesign proposal/Gnangarra

This is my favourite proposal. One thing I would do however, is make the box with the sister projects symmetrical, like the rest of the page. --Pwnage8 (talk) 13:50, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Search/portals column

I find the middle column to be very jarring. Am I weird, or does it bother other people too?--YixilTesiphon ^Talk_Contribs 16:53, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It bothers me as well, but I see its potential, and IMO, it works nicely. --haha169 (talk) 17:47, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, nicely done. I see no problem but worry about four columns on smaller screens. Interesting to feature three articles. I think I saw and maybe even made a proposal once to feature more than one per day; maybe it is possible. —SusanLesch (talk) 05:57, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As someone with a smaller screen, I'm afraid I have to say it looks terrible - typically about one to three words of text per line before it wraps, making it very difficult to read. There's also lots of whitespace about half way down the page to scroll through (which presumably would be minimal on a wider screen). Once you get down to 'Picture of the Day', it looks fine, though. Overall, though: sorry, but this just doesn't work at all on my screen. Anaxial (talk) 20:50, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What size screen? I've checked 800 x 600 its ok though the side bar dominates the screen. Also I didnt find lots of whitespace Gnan garra 04:45, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, its 800x600. I don't think I can post screenshots here, so you'll have to trust me that the problems are severe! Anaxial (talk) 18:52, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

DYK needs the DYK question mark next to it. --haha169 (talk) 17:48, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also it looks like the header for DYK is just a bit lower than the one for the TFAs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Five Fifteen (talk • contribs) 18:16, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Amazing

Wow. This is my favorite so far. I even like it better than my own. I know you've added more content, but the page looks less cluttered than the old one. 5:15 17:53, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I think the "On this day..." section stands out from the rest from it's color. And I don't like the top either. The rest is fine though. -- RyRy (talk) 22:41, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great thinking

Tripling the number of feature articles is a wonderful idea. What is impressive is that it does so without cluttering the page. Gizza^Discuss ^© 07:49, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks that IMHO is the main issue that needs to be addressed in this process what ever the final design, one TFA isnt enough. Gnan garra 04:42, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not 'small' screen compatible

With an 800px wide browser and a reasonable font size each column is only getting 3-4 words per line. It's pretty much unreadable, a serious regression from the current main page. Perhaps if the mediawiki default skin were ditched for the main page and the left side bar removed/moved elsewhere it might work. --Gmaxwell (talk) 21:10, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

checking at an 800 x 600 resolution its not dissimilar to the current page, where the left side bar is the dominant feature. Gnan garra 04:36, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At least on my screen, it looks very different indeed from the current page (although, unfortunately, I'm not sure I can demonstrate this). Anaxial (talk) 18:53, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

so far my fav

The only other change that I would make, and this might be a discussion for elsewhere, is to make DYK a place for new articles AND newly promoted GA's---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 07:14, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mmm, not bad.

This one seems to be aimed at potential contributors as well as casual readers. Recruiting is important. However duplicating links, such as Help, from the left column shouldn't be necessary, I think.

The Search box in the left column has now been move further up, eliminating IMO any need for the additional one in the middle. Perhaps the top of that middle column could better be used specifically for recruiting?

I think that the star should be in the heading for the featured articles, as the user will also see that star on any featured articles encountered. It could also be used in the featured picture heading. All the other heading icons are unnecessary, IMO.

The text below the Image credit in featured picture could be in a smaller font, and "and Sohn" looks silly in English, should be "& Sohn". But you're probably responsible for neither of those things.

I like the side-by-side boxes where there are 2 columns, but they seem not to be of the same width, just almost?

You've left the precise article count at the bottom and removed it at the top. Good!

DYK needs to be shortened to avoid so much white (light green / light blue) space in the other columns. (DYK isn't my favorite feature, but there's not much point saying that here.)

In all, decidedly one of the best proposals. --Hordaland (talk) 20:48, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]