4 ms·

I noticed that the Wikipedia page for "Wikipedia" allows you to preview the new design: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wi

by kibwen 4y ago

I noticed that the Wikipedia page for "Wikipedia" allows you to preview the new design: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia The top comment from yesterday's HN submission mentions how you can configure Wikipedia (or any MediaWiki) page to use whatever theme you like, including all the previous themes, which are still actively maintained: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34431533 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34431533

chimeracoder 4y ago
> I noticed that the Wikipedia page for "Wikipedia" allows you to preview the new design: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia The navigation frame on the left is absolutely massive. At first I thought you linked the mobile view, but no, it really is wasting a quarter of the width of the page (on my monitor) on white space.
- kibwen 4y ago
  The main feature of the new design is that the width of the article body is now limited, rather than unlimited as previously, under the idea that overlong lines reduce the readability of text. With limited text width, removing the navigation sidebar would not decrease the amount of whitespace. If you would prefer to have unlimited width, you can configure this behavior in the new theme or select a different theme altogether.
  - pwdisswordfisha 4y ago
    They tried this already in 2014 as part of the Typography Refresh™ package, but reverted it rather quickly after a backlash. Likewise line height changes and not-quite-black black text. Only the relatively benign font changes stayed. Today the only reminder of it (a rather cryptic one) seems to be https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiSpeak#Typography_Refresh https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiSpeak#Typography...
karaterobot 4y ago
Only if you create an account and log in, right? I've gotten along without having a Wikipedia account for the last 20 years, I guess now I have to make one. If that was a product goal, it was a very sneaky success.
- kibwen 4y ago
  As mentioned in the above HN link, you don't need to log in. If you're annoyed by the logged-out approach of appending a query parameter to the URL, other people in sibling threads shared Greasemonkey scripts (or whatever they're called these days) for doing so automatically.
- sdiacom 4y ago
  I'm pretty sure that "getting the same four Hacker News users, who feel personally wronged every time a website becomes more readable, to sign up" is nowhere near the top of their list of priorities.
  - karaterobot 4y ago
    Grrr, I hate readability! Just the idea of proper line lengths makes me angry. But I think everybody has to create an account, not just us salty grandpas. Like I said, if it was a product goal, it's a sneaky way to do it. Not saying that is the case.
    - sdiacom 4y ago
      Sneaky indeed. So sneaky, in fact, that it would be completely ineffective.
      - karaterobot 4y ago
        I dunno, I bet they get an uptick in signups, especially right after launching this design.
lycos 4y ago
Just to add on this `?useskin=vector-2022` will show the new one.
jklinger410 4y ago
Looks like the white space on the right side is a perfect width for banner ads.
- kibwen 4y ago
  If they wanted to add banner ads, they could have just done so on the old design. The existence of a new design has no implications there.
  - swsieber 4y ago
    It may not imply that they intend to add ads, but having that space already there makes it more likely.
- bastawhiz 4y ago
  It's also the perfect width to add a friends list or sidebar full of skeuomorphic widgets or live updating feed of edits to the site. There's no reason to assume Wikipedia would introduce advertising (they're not a corporation, they're not motivated by profit, they have a healthy chunk of cash in the bank). Of all the organizations I'd expect to give in to greed, Wikimedia doesn't crack the top 100.
  - mik1998 4y ago
    They have been known for continuously lying in their banner advertisements for donations so I wouldn't be surprised if they ever finally sold out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has_Cancer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has_C...
    - pwinnski 4y ago
      People keep making that claim, and yet when I ask for example of lying, I never seem to get anything. Just asking for money while you already have money is not inherently lying. You might not like it, but lying involves making untrue statements. "We need your money" is not untrue, even if you already have a lot of money. "We need your money or else we'll shut down" would be untrue, but all of the pitches I've seen don't include anything like that.

by kibwen 4y ago

chimeracoder 4y ago

> I noticed that the Wikipedia page for "Wikipedia" allows you to preview the new design: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia The navigation frame on the left is absolutely massive. At first I thought you linked the mobile view, but no, it really is wasting a quarter of the width of the page (on my monitor) on white space.

kibwen 4y ago
The main feature of the new design is that the width of the article body is now limited, rather than unlimited as previously, under the idea that overlong lines reduce the readability of text. With limited text width, removing the navigation sidebar would not decrease the amount of whitespace. If you would prefer to have unlimited width, you can configure this behavior in the new theme or select a different theme altogether.
- pwdisswordfisha 4y ago
  They tried this already in 2014 as part of the Typography Refresh™ package, but reverted it rather quickly after a backlash. Likewise line height changes and not-quite-black black text. Only the relatively benign font changes stayed. Today the only reminder of it (a rather cryptic one) seems to be https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiSpeak#Typography_Refresh https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiSpeak#Typography...

karaterobot 4y ago

Only if you create an account and log in, right? I've gotten along without having a Wikipedia account for the last 20 years, I guess now I have to make one. If that was a product goal, it was a very sneaky success.

kibwen 4y ago
As mentioned in the above HN link, you don't need to log in. If you're annoyed by the logged-out approach of appending a query parameter to the URL, other people in sibling threads shared Greasemonkey scripts (or whatever they're called these days) for doing so automatically.
sdiacom 4y ago
I'm pretty sure that "getting the same four Hacker News users, who feel personally wronged every time a website becomes more readable, to sign up" is nowhere near the top of their list of priorities.
- karaterobot 4y ago
  Grrr, I hate readability! Just the idea of proper line lengths makes me angry. But I think everybody has to create an account, not just us salty grandpas. Like I said, if it was a product goal, it's a sneaky way to do it. Not saying that is the case.
  - sdiacom 4y ago
    Sneaky indeed. So sneaky, in fact, that it would be completely ineffective.
    - karaterobot 4y ago
      I dunno, I bet they get an uptick in signups, especially right after launching this design.

lycos 4y ago

Just to add on this `?useskin=vector-2022` will show the new one.

jklinger410 4y ago

Looks like the white space on the right side is a perfect width for banner ads.

kibwen 4y ago
If they wanted to add banner ads, they could have just done so on the old design. The existence of a new design has no implications there.
- swsieber 4y ago
  It may not imply that they intend to add ads, but having that space already there makes it more likely.
bastawhiz 4y ago
It's also the perfect width to add a friends list or sidebar full of skeuomorphic widgets or live updating feed of edits to the site. There's no reason to assume Wikipedia would introduce advertising (they're not a corporation, they're not motivated by profit, they have a healthy chunk of cash in the bank). Of all the organizations I'd expect to give in to greed, Wikimedia doesn't crack the top 100.
- mik1998 4y ago
  They have been known for continuously lying in their banner advertisements for donations so I wouldn't be surprised if they ever finally sold out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has_Cancer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has_C...
  - pwinnski 4y ago
    People keep making that claim, and yet when I ask for example of lying, I never seem to get anything. Just asking for money while you already have money is not inherently lying. You might not like it, but lying involves making untrue statements. "We need your money" is not untrue, even if you already have a lot of money. "We need your money or else we'll shut down" would be untrue, but all of the pitches I've seen don't include anything like that.