(i suggested back in november
[1] that) it would be nice if we could highlight the sidebar searchbox with yellow, on just the main page. --
Quiddity02:47, 24 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Reference desk contributors get irritated regularly with the amount of fools that don't use the search box first. So what if it's redundant? It needs to have a big deal made of it, otherwise nobody will use it, and more fools will pour into the reference desk asking questions like "wut iz wikipedia lolz"
12.72.243.7821:06, 25 January 2006 (UTC)reply
I think this design is classy and not boring, as a couple other drafts tend to be. Aside from a couple of technical mistakes, it is excellent. I especially like the color and font scheme. (Some other drafts are similar.) I wish the spacing would be cleaned up a bit. -
ElAmericano |
talk22:29, 21 January 2006 (UTC)reply
This is by far the best of the drafts. Just becuase a few people said the redundant searchbar is bad doesn't mean it's so. The most used feature on wikipedia is the search. On the main page, it isn't that obvious on the side. It is the best and fastest way to find what you need. Just becuase 2 or 3 people don't like it doesn't mean that the millions of people who use wikipedia should have a harder time finding the info they need. Also, this draft is the most atractive visualy by far, and looks the most sofisticated. It is very neat and organized too.
Tobyk77704:14, 24 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Easily the best draft for the home page i have ever seen! You have to be crazy not to vote for this one! It is stunning, and meets the eye beautifully. If i had to describe this in one word, it would be... Grand. Simply class.
M cappeluti10:09, 24 January 2006 (UTC)reply
This is by far the best, and the only one that seems different enough from the current Main Page to be noticably "new".
Angela.10:46, 25 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, attractive, colored and likely to draw in visitors. I would like to see this format used on the ordering in Draft B, though. -
Mgm|
(talk)11:10, 25 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, this is certainly the best of the candidates. It is refreshing, very colourful and it promotes and focuses the searchbar. Just great! --
DMichel15:48, 25 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. As I went through all of the drafts, this one immediately popped out at me and grabbed my attention. It's not ugly, it's noticably different from what we have, and I really enjoy having the search bar at the top of the page.
Mo0[
talk]
16:13, 25 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, marginally, over the current main page. On balance, I do like this one, and it seems like it would get the job done.
Lord Bob16:53, 25 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, Draft G not only keeps the structure of Wiki Main Page, but also brings Wkipedia in 2006, with a new efficent, modern, simple and functional design.—Preceding
unsigned comment added by
80.97.237.230 (
talk •
contribs)
Support, but I hope to god that the snowflakes on the bottom of all those nifty boxes change with the seasons (otherwise, it'll look really stupid in August).
User:Cernen under the ip
12.72.243.78 at
21:03, 25 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support with reservations. I like the colors pretty well, and I like how the separate boxes look, but I prefer the white box at the top of Draft A, and leave off the ridiculous category-by-letter box at the bottom. The categories link at the top is enough. Also, I would agree with Cernan that the snowflakes at the bottom of the boxes should change with the seasons, except that this is NOT a northern-hemisphere Wikipedia. A significant part of our consumers live in Australia (not to mention English-speakers in many other countries in the southern hemisphere, like Zimbabwe, for example), where the seasons are reversed from those in the northern hemisphere. Because of this, we should leave the snowflakes off or choose another non-seasonal gif. Also, some reworking of the boxes so that they line up better (avoiding excess white space) would be highly recommended. But overall, good work! --
Cromwellt|
Talk21:29, 25 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support with modifications. I like the overal content but i think the header and portals should be taken from Draft 6I.2 (revision)
Askewmind | (
Talk)
22:28, 25 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support with SLIGHT modifications - I absolutely love the color scheme and the ability to slightly theme (based on the season or perhaps specific events,) but there is a bit of blank space that is somewhat annoying below the "Second Feature" space... Don't know how to fix it, but the color scheme wins all. --
Nick Catalano (
Talk)
22:59, 25 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support Most different and I think appealing to new users (and I think that's what we're going for). A few things to change before the final vote (white header, two columns line up, footer a generic pic and perhaps not orange, maybe blue footer colour) -
Trevor MacInnis (
Talk |
Contribs)
02:48, 28 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. I especially like the colors on this page. I'm not too keen on the white space under Did You Know? But this is still far and away my favorite. —
Lovelac703:28, 28 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. Good selection of colours & content placeholders. The topic bar at the topic looks too cramped on 800x600, but could be fixed. --
Pamri •
Talk10:21, 28 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. This one gets my vote. It has a neat layout, and also has both "Today's featured picture" and "Did You Know?From Wikipedia's newest articles on the same main page. Search bar at top is a nice touch. Just rename the Did You Know? box from "Second Feature" to something else, like placing "Did You Know?" in the title section, and "From Wikipedia's newest articles" right below that, and it will be perfect. --
G VOLTT16:01, 28 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. Clean, attractive design. Likely to draw in new visitors and enourage them to explore. I like the inclusion of "Today's featured picture", too.
Lan3y17:39, 28 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Strongly Support By far the most attractive design, in my opinion, especially with the search bar in the top-right corner. I disagree with JustPhil, I think adding the icon portals would make the design too busy. -
Chairman S.14:14, 29 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support Not perfect (white space, On this day seems to be in the wrong place), but by far the best design apart from the existing page.
Gareth Aus22:51, 29 January 2006 (UTC)reply
I voted for Draft C, but would like to commend this one to be available as a template in user settings - it is a very nice design, but may be too colourful for some. -
Samsaracontribtalk22:24, 30 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support This design is by far my favourite. Font size is a tad small but I guess we have to put up with a smaller font size nowadays because of the increased amount being packed into one screen. --
Spaceman8518:11, 31 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support just a little over the current main page. It's not cluttered, eyecatching, and the colors look fine. The only thing that might be strange would be how the "on this day" section is now crammed at the bottom, but that might be just me.
Hurrah01:32, 2 February 2006 (UTC)reply
Support The only thing I don't like about this (and I mean the only thing) is the lack of icons for the categories. However, the practicality and class of this design wins handily. --
Jm woltjen23:32, 2 February 2006 (UTC)reply
Support By far the best layout. I prefer categories without the Icons
(i suggested back in november
[1] that) it would be nice if we could highlight the sidebar searchbox with yellow, on just the main page. --
Quiddity02:47, 24 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Reference desk contributors get irritated regularly with the amount of fools that don't use the search box first. So what if it's redundant? It needs to have a big deal made of it, otherwise nobody will use it, and more fools will pour into the reference desk asking questions like "wut iz wikipedia lolz"
12.72.243.7821:06, 25 January 2006 (UTC)reply
I think this design is classy and not boring, as a couple other drafts tend to be. Aside from a couple of technical mistakes, it is excellent. I especially like the color and font scheme. (Some other drafts are similar.) I wish the spacing would be cleaned up a bit. -
ElAmericano |
talk22:29, 21 January 2006 (UTC)reply
This is by far the best of the drafts. Just becuase a few people said the redundant searchbar is bad doesn't mean it's so. The most used feature on wikipedia is the search. On the main page, it isn't that obvious on the side. It is the best and fastest way to find what you need. Just becuase 2 or 3 people don't like it doesn't mean that the millions of people who use wikipedia should have a harder time finding the info they need. Also, this draft is the most atractive visualy by far, and looks the most sofisticated. It is very neat and organized too.
Tobyk77704:14, 24 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Easily the best draft for the home page i have ever seen! You have to be crazy not to vote for this one! It is stunning, and meets the eye beautifully. If i had to describe this in one word, it would be... Grand. Simply class.
M cappeluti10:09, 24 January 2006 (UTC)reply
This is by far the best, and the only one that seems different enough from the current Main Page to be noticably "new".
Angela.10:46, 25 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, attractive, colored and likely to draw in visitors. I would like to see this format used on the ordering in Draft B, though. -
Mgm|
(talk)11:10, 25 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, this is certainly the best of the candidates. It is refreshing, very colourful and it promotes and focuses the searchbar. Just great! --
DMichel15:48, 25 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. As I went through all of the drafts, this one immediately popped out at me and grabbed my attention. It's not ugly, it's noticably different from what we have, and I really enjoy having the search bar at the top of the page.
Mo0[
talk]
16:13, 25 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, marginally, over the current main page. On balance, I do like this one, and it seems like it would get the job done.
Lord Bob16:53, 25 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, Draft G not only keeps the structure of Wiki Main Page, but also brings Wkipedia in 2006, with a new efficent, modern, simple and functional design.—Preceding
unsigned comment added by
80.97.237.230 (
talk •
contribs)
Support, but I hope to god that the snowflakes on the bottom of all those nifty boxes change with the seasons (otherwise, it'll look really stupid in August).
User:Cernen under the ip
12.72.243.78 at
21:03, 25 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support with reservations. I like the colors pretty well, and I like how the separate boxes look, but I prefer the white box at the top of Draft A, and leave off the ridiculous category-by-letter box at the bottom. The categories link at the top is enough. Also, I would agree with Cernan that the snowflakes at the bottom of the boxes should change with the seasons, except that this is NOT a northern-hemisphere Wikipedia. A significant part of our consumers live in Australia (not to mention English-speakers in many other countries in the southern hemisphere, like Zimbabwe, for example), where the seasons are reversed from those in the northern hemisphere. Because of this, we should leave the snowflakes off or choose another non-seasonal gif. Also, some reworking of the boxes so that they line up better (avoiding excess white space) would be highly recommended. But overall, good work! --
Cromwellt|
Talk21:29, 25 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support with modifications. I like the overal content but i think the header and portals should be taken from Draft 6I.2 (revision)
Askewmind | (
Talk)
22:28, 25 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support with SLIGHT modifications - I absolutely love the color scheme and the ability to slightly theme (based on the season or perhaps specific events,) but there is a bit of blank space that is somewhat annoying below the "Second Feature" space... Don't know how to fix it, but the color scheme wins all. --
Nick Catalano (
Talk)
22:59, 25 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support Most different and I think appealing to new users (and I think that's what we're going for). A few things to change before the final vote (white header, two columns line up, footer a generic pic and perhaps not orange, maybe blue footer colour) -
Trevor MacInnis (
Talk |
Contribs)
02:48, 28 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. I especially like the colors on this page. I'm not too keen on the white space under Did You Know? But this is still far and away my favorite. —
Lovelac703:28, 28 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. Good selection of colours & content placeholders. The topic bar at the topic looks too cramped on 800x600, but could be fixed. --
Pamri •
Talk10:21, 28 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. This one gets my vote. It has a neat layout, and also has both "Today's featured picture" and "Did You Know?From Wikipedia's newest articles on the same main page. Search bar at top is a nice touch. Just rename the Did You Know? box from "Second Feature" to something else, like placing "Did You Know?" in the title section, and "From Wikipedia's newest articles" right below that, and it will be perfect. --
G VOLTT16:01, 28 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. Clean, attractive design. Likely to draw in new visitors and enourage them to explore. I like the inclusion of "Today's featured picture", too.
Lan3y17:39, 28 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Strongly Support By far the most attractive design, in my opinion, especially with the search bar in the top-right corner. I disagree with JustPhil, I think adding the icon portals would make the design too busy. -
Chairman S.14:14, 29 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support Not perfect (white space, On this day seems to be in the wrong place), but by far the best design apart from the existing page.
Gareth Aus22:51, 29 January 2006 (UTC)reply
I voted for Draft C, but would like to commend this one to be available as a template in user settings - it is a very nice design, but may be too colourful for some. -
Samsaracontribtalk22:24, 30 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support This design is by far my favourite. Font size is a tad small but I guess we have to put up with a smaller font size nowadays because of the increased amount being packed into one screen. --
Spaceman8518:11, 31 January 2006 (UTC)reply
Support just a little over the current main page. It's not cluttered, eyecatching, and the colors look fine. The only thing that might be strange would be how the "on this day" section is now crammed at the bottom, but that might be just me.
Hurrah01:32, 2 February 2006 (UTC)reply
Support The only thing I don't like about this (and I mean the only thing) is the lack of icons for the categories. However, the practicality and class of this design wins handily. --
Jm woltjen23:32, 2 February 2006 (UTC)reply
Support By far the best layout. I prefer categories without the Icons