Knowledge (XXG) talk:2014 main page redesign proposal/Archive 2

3974:

really, really excited!" Sorry, Harej, I'm sure you have excellent intentions but, having been a web designer since the early 90's (you know, when you wrote your own html and looooong before unicode was stable), experience has taught me that simple is usually better. You can spend inordinate amounts of time working on being incredibly clever in order to make it a wizz-bang impressive site or an intuitive and clean approach with a lot more going on behind the scenes than you'd expect. Looks good; seems to work on all browsers; tried on various OS's, etc... but when you road test it IRL you suddenly discover that you didn't reinvent the wheel and the vehicle's just sitting on the asphalt (I LOVE bad analogies!). Unless you stick to absolute fundamentals, the next big thing becomes old and obsolete very quickly (and probably not even supported by the next generation of browsers). --

2612:

that I've long since ceased to use the google home page as my own home page because it sometimes takes ridiculously long periods of time to load (dependent on their server, my server, traffic & a multitude of factors), being concerned with byte-heavy is an entirely different concern in terms of the Knowledge (XXG) entry page. Levels of logic and a sense of who the entry page 'audience' truly are should be the primary concern. I'm sticking to my guns on this issue - being that a simple feedback form for collecting information from the primary users on the current page would be a genuinely informed process of gleaning useful information rather than asking contributors/editors to guestimate what users want. That's just us piping up about our personal predilections and ignoring the majority of users. --

2001:"Three years ago, while I was a web developer at YouTube, one of the senior engineers began a rant about the page weight of the video watch page being far too large. The page had ballooned to as high as 1.2MB and dozens of requests. This engineer openly vented that “if they can write an entire Quake clone in under 100KB, we have no excuse for this!” Given that I agreed with him and I was excited to find a new project, I decided to champion the cause of getting the YouTube watch page to weigh in under 100KB. On the shuttle home from San Bruno that night, I coded up a prototype. I decided to limit the functionality to just a basic masthead, the video player, five related videos, a sharing button, a flagging tool, and ten comments loaded in via AJAX. I code-named the project “Feather”. 2006:"Even with such a limited set of features, the page was weighing in at 250KB. I dug into the code and realized that our optimization tools (i.e. Closure compilation) were unable to exclude code that was never actually used in the page itself (which would be an unfair expectation of any tool under the circumstances). The only way to reduce the code further was to optimize by hand the CSS, Javascript, and image sprites myself. After three painstaking days, I had arrived at a much leaner solution. It still was not under 100KB though. Having just finished writing the HTML5 video player, I decided to plug it in instead of the far heavier Flash player. Bam! 98KB and only 14 requests. I threaded the code with some basic monitoring and launched an opt-in to a fraction of our traffic. 3792:

Driverless Car, Google Fiber, Google Finance, Google Fonts, Google Goggles, Google+, Google Groups, Google Hotel Finder, Google Ideas, Google Keep, Google Knowledge Graph, Google Mail, Google Maps, Google Music, Google News, Google Patents, Google Picasa, Google Project Glass, Google Public DNS, Google Scholar, Google Search, Google Shopping, Google Sky, Google Sync, Google Talk, Google Trader, Google Translator, Google TV, Google Voice, Google Wallet, Google Website Optimizer, Google Wireless Access, and about 200 other things. Google needs to realize that their users are to dimwitted to find any of those unless that are "featured" on the Google main page. You want to tell them or should I? --

4121:

do so within a couple of generation. In fact, if you bother to check what you're developing while you're even in the process of development (which I used to do in a roomful of computers on different platforms, OS's, a myriad of browsers and user resolution preferences, ad nauseum, you'll find that anything beyond absolutely straight forward ends up as an unsightly and incoherent mess and, of the myriad of browsers available, a substantial number won't recognise your recognise or display your CSS in the first place). A basic html page deploying the minimum CSS (which defers to the user's CSS as the preference: call me crazy but

2719:

committee" has been established. The RFC raised awareness of serious concerns. Perhaps you should re-read it and acquaint yourself with issues raised. These can be found between wish lists for cool features. "A consistent UX vision" doesn't equal a good UX vision unless it has established who the 'user' is and what could be detrimental to their experience. I feel you're being dismissive of the construction process and constructive input for those who will actually be redesigning without taking it on as a unilateral decision. It's moved past the "kvetching" to phase two. --

1414:? Incremental updates are always going to beat out rewrites, I think. At least at this point. Identifying what's wrong (even a small piece) and then working on just getting that fixed is the way to go. That could be just a certain section (e.g., enhance the featured picture section in some way), or a particular color (no more green!), or whatever. Just fixing up the header box to be a little less ugly would be a great first step, in my opinion, and might snowball into other good, healthy incremental updates to the page. 294:- can perhaps be done simultaneously with the last step. To be located here at a subpage, and open to editing by all editors, to include the best elements/layout as identified above. Multiple versions could be considered. At this stage it would be useful to recruit people with template and/or HTML/web design knowledge in order to create a proper, working alternative. Assistance from the wikiprojects managing the current elements of the main page may also be required. The final version will need to be edit protected. 4285:, my apologies for taking so (seriously) long to respond as I was caught up in a plethora of fair dinkum Knowledge (XXG) messes I couldn't relegate to the backburner. I'm sorry that my comments read as being disparaging however, I did look at the source of your proposal and got a sense of what you are/were trying to accomplish. While I can appreciate your intent as regards delivery, it doesn't translate well in practice per your example. Unfortunately, there's many a slip between the theory and the design reality. 715:- basically step 5 of the process - but you have it divided into separate "focal points". Whilst it would be nice to implement content, layout, and design/style changes separately, they are inevitably tied into each other, unless only very minor changes are considered. If a content block is added or removed, than that forces a change in layout. Similarly, major design/style changes may change the relative size of content blocks, requiring layout changes and/or content changes to be considered. 4963: 276:- to be widely advertised. Discussion to be based around comments which support or oppose statements (which would either be worked out in the brainstorming, or alternatives proposed by anyone at the RFC). Each section would be open a minimum of 30 days, but not be closed until there is consensus. If a section does not seem to be reaching consensus, and discussion isn't continuing, then it may need to be closed as "no consensus". 4327:

of cyberspace more recently and just adore gimmickry, ignoring the logic of WC3's aims. The fun of Knowledge (XXG) is, to my way of thinking, in the fantastic content to be discovered. Working on the premise that it's a commercial concern and should, therefore, reflect snazzy commercial design is counterproductive. The tortoise approach may be arduous but will, eventually, win the race. Here's to the hard plod ahead! --

4950: 4976: 4898: 4911: 3940:) but found that nobody was particularly interested in discussing anything other than minor tweaks to the existing byzantine and sesquipedalian loquaciousnes. This predilection for prolix exposition and visual sonorities too pleonastic to be expeditiously assimilated notwithstanding the availability of far more comprehensible albeit diminutive alternatives profundicates me greatly. -- 4885: 4937: 4924: 4846: 4820: 4872: 4833: 4581: 691:- Whilst this is your viewpoint, it is important to know the view of the community - perhaps there are a significant number of people who think "it aint broke, don't fix it"? There would be no point in designing a "major overhaul" if there were to be only minority support for this type of change, therefore making it is unlikely to pass the final vote. 2025:"When we plotted the data geographically and compared it to our total numbers broken out by region, there was a disproportionate increase in traffic from places like Southeast Asia, South America, Africa, and even remote regions of Siberia. Further investigation revealed that, in these places, the average page load time under Feather was over 1879: 4859: 5161:

they consider their 'enemies' with reverts rather than developing articles. Evasion would be far more difficult if they had to use up their finite store of email accounts and go through the process of creating more, plus having to set up another user account. Slowing down the process certainly does put a damper on that kind of enthusiasm.

755:"The main page should include a ..... section" (with endorse and oppose sections). The degree of support for each statement would show us the relative importance of each aim, which could influence layout. Also, we will need to specify that were are not looking for just one primary aim (that seemed to be unclear in the 2011 RFC). 2809:

news headlines possibly flashing or just scrolling along the top of the page in the manner of a news ticker, also there should be a much larger image on the page, and the font is a bit square, should be replaced for something a bit more fun. I think this would get more people keen to view more parts of the site.

2220:? Long meandering discussions like this will never reach a consensus on anything. If you give the community 10 choices, none of them will get over 50% (or even close to it), and therefore will never reach a consensus. And a discussion like this that has perhaps hundreds of differnt ideas will be even worse. 4263:), and I agree that a way for users to customize their userpage more easily would be helpful, especially for newcomers. There are some ideas and tentative plans in that direction, but I can't find the link. All we've had for the past few years is the slightly terrifying (overwhelming) and getting outdated 5178:

Naturally, I am aware of the argument for account only access having come up before and, on balance, I have to agree that it possibly wouldn't make that much impact and may be considered contrary to the spirit of this resource... but I'd still like to see what would happen if it was given a one month

4394:

to promote content discovery (a legitimate concept, even in the era of minimalist home pages), even if the current implementation of this is excessive and/or broken and/or some other negative adjective. The RFC, as far as I can remember (I will have to double-check), was heading more in the direction

4326:

Ah, interesting. I've put it on my watchlist and will take a look at it next time I swan around WM (which I haven't done much of since their Privacy Policy child (... er, reader) friendly. Sadly, serious overhauls of the entry page are going to be scrutinized by those who were inducted into the world

4120:

You seem to have overlooked my take on the simplicity of Guy's presentation. I made a point of how quickly even simple CSS tricks such as tabs, tooltips, hovering text dependent on div alignment, etc. become obsolete very, very quickly. Newer browsers which once supported the nifty stuff simply don't

4065:

I can relate to the attraction to simple aesthetics (I'm not a fan of rounded corners and gradients and other superfluous stylistic flourishes - they distract from the content, and (if imperfectly done, or on imperfect platforms) take additional time to render), but I think that retaining most of the

3467:

I hope so, that's why I proposed it. The current styling is just a demonstration (which I can't help tinkering with), which perhaps will trigger other designs when we get there. But this framework does allow us to have separate and concurrent discussions on content/layout and styling. If however this

2033:

to load! This was the penalty incurred before the video stream even had a chance to show the first frame. Correspondingly, entire populations of people simply could not use YouTube because it took too long to see anything. Under Feather, despite it taking over two minutes to get to the first frame of

1861:

The background section mentions the 2012 proposals and mock-ups, any chance that these (and other previous?) discussions could be linked to in said section to aid those who's thinking caps may be running low on power and so people can have an idea of what has floated or sank with the community in the

754:

What I envision for the RFC is a set of statements about the aims of the main page, with endorse and oppose sections. Each aim would be followed by discussion of whether the current main page achieves each aim, and if not, what needs to change. The discussion could lead to further statements, such as

473:

Obviously we don't want steps to drag on for too long, but also there is no sense having a firm deadline if discussion and collaboration is ongoing. If discussion is going stale, then it needs to be closed with consensus determined. I suppose a rough timetable could be worked out, as long as it isn't

2808:

I believe the main page of Knowledge (XXG) could be make a great deal bolder with a couple of small changes. The top boxes (In the News) and (Today's Featured Article} are not bold enough - the headings should be in BOLD and ALL-CAPS and the typeface should be at least 2 points larger, with the blue

2491:

That captures the essence of it. In general, a future design will likely retain all the existing elements, although perhaps in smaller sections to accommodate additional sections. One thing to clarify is wither goals 1, 2 and 3 are in priority order. If they are, then designs should reflect that (50

1954:

Is the goal of this phase of the rfc to make a list of all the ideas that have come up, and than discuss the merits of each one individually in another rfc? I worry that this process will be taken by some to be an all or nothing deal, rather than a way to discuss the best ideas and use them to guide

926:

I do think that there should be a follow-up straw poll, with its exact nature determined by the responses received in the initial discussion (which might or might not give us a good idea of the amount of change desired, while hopefully narrowing our focus to a manageable subset of the ideas laid out

5160:

Of course they can. I wouldn't argue against the fact that there are already more than enough POV pushers here already. I'm just getting of sick of certain users who were blocked years ago, but are still present and running the gamut of IP hopping and being disruptive for the sake of tying up those

4240:

I have been thinking about your "I really dislike clicking multiple times" comment. Of course you can always create a page in userspace that transcludes whatever pages you prefer into one big page, but that is a lot of work. How about this: we create a wizard that automagically creates such a page,

3740:

Comparing Knowledge (XXG) to Google is too simple; Google's homepage has only one use: search. Knowledge (XXG) has many more besides search for an article. We also try to involve new editors. And that simply does require a bit of 'marketing'. Showcasing featured content has also been an established

3192:

We have fallen into a newspaper mentality, where as much as possible needs to be crammed in to the front page. We are not using what makes the world wide web unique: hyperlinks. The page is crowded, complex, and redundant (on the left I see "Current Events". On the right, "In the news". Below that,

3109:

It looks crisp, don't get me wrong, but it is just a restyled version of the current design. Are we just trying to achieve a visual update, or are trying to do a content/structure update? Style is nothing without substance. I thought we had identified several important criteria that would add or at

2703:

I feel like that was already done with the RFC, where for a month participants kvetched at length about the current Main Page. While the RFC is not necessarily conclusive, I think it does generally represent the variety of opinions regarding the Main Page. It should be up to individual designers to

2611:

Considering that there's a Knowledge (XXG) search box on every page, a search form entry page is obviously ludicrous. As per NickPenguin's query, I, too, would be interested in a breakdown of where the entry page is byte heavy. 342KB does not strike me as being seriously byte-heavy and, considering

2323:

By issue/proposal seems to be the best option. Select the topics which have come up the most, and add the most pertinent viewpoints. This phase of the RfC was to locate our problems, now we'll be looking towards identifying potential solutions. Already suggested solutions will be another thing that

911:

is added. Having a single open-ended discussion rather than multiple sections will of course mean more work analysing the RFC (but as you said above, "No one promised that this would be easy"). What do you think about having an open ended discussion, followed by a straw poll on the amount of change

840:

I guess I'm not clear on the differences between Phase 1 and Phase 2. I would think that Phase 2 could include brainstorming. I'll say right now that I oppose having "encourage donations to WMF" be an objective of the main page, WMF has many ways to ways money and the main page of this encyclopedia

481:

There wont be a single mockup - any will be able to sumbit and effectively own a mockup - but having a single main alternative should encourage collaboration. Normal editing guidelines will still apply to the draft main page alternative, with disputes taken to the talk page, edit warring banned, no

4129:

does matter) is, quite simply, the best judgement call. Knowledge (XXG) is, essentially, text-based. Knowledge (XXG) is not competing with commercial social sites. Knowledge (XXG) does not need to compromise accessibility in order to accommodate and attract advertising. Some people like and others

3973:

doesn't "present information clearly and beautifully"? It's clean, clear and doesn't look like a clumpy late 90's/early 2000s attempt at looking 'interesting' by using 'pretty' coloured boxes and byte heavy jpegs that are usually completely meaningless and smack of, "I just got Photoshop 4 and I'm

3954:

Actually, I'm interested in an entirely new look for Knowledge (XXG)'s front page. I agree that the current approach is stodgy and inappropriate for 2013. A better main page works on all platforms, is light, and presents information clearly and beautifully. I am interested in working on a proposal

3222:

Make it clean and simple, with subpages to hold all the Wikicruft, and each subpage ("In The News", "On This Day", etc. will be able to communicate far better with an entire page instead of a corner of the main page. It will be far easier for the blind, for users in third-world countries with very

3188:

too complex. "Knowledge (XXG)'s sister projects" should be a link. "Knowledge (XXG) languages" should be a link. "In the news" should be a link. "Today's featured article" should be a sentence (less than 10 words) and a link. "On this day" should be a link. That long list of languages on the left?

2880:

In order to to have the main page be able to accomodate many criteria, it will need to be flexible and modular. That way, content and design can be separated. This allows for content and design criteria to be indepedent of eachother. To that end, I have been working "in secret" on a version of the

2102:

Apples and oranges... You can't compare Knowledge (XXG) and Youtube. As a matter of fact, the source of the current main page weighs in at a mere 6.3 KB. The served page is about 63 KB, of which 7 KB is body text. Then there are images, CSS and scripts that are loaded. You can see that even a very

659:

as separate focal points. Having to choose from dozens of mockups is bound to fail, because it will be impossible to focus on details. A small(er) group also ensures collaboration; involving the entire community in the entire process, with an RFC at every step, will give a flood of information and

646:

I do have a few. First, I think a major overhaul is the way to go. The current page is seven(!) years old; it's a dinosaur. Second, an RFC could be helpfull, but I also fear that it may lead to red tape. What I would like is to form a workgroup, or committee if you like, that will review all ideas

352:

Without deadlines don't we have the risk that some steps would take long periods of time and editors would also lose interest through this process? Deadlines push the process to move forward. Also, given the large number of possible editors involved, does having so many editors working on a single

5127:

Oh, well. Best of luck on that. Does anyone ever feel that IP's should only be allowed to request changes on talk pages? I swear the community would be able to get on with some of these outstanding issues if so much time & energy wasn't focussed on cleaning up after vandals and POV pushers...

3791:

Google does is Google Android Os, Google Blogger, Google Bookmarks, Google Books, Google Calendar, Google Chrome Os, Google Chrome Web Browser, Google Chromebook, Google Chromebox, Google Chromecast, Google Code, Google Crisis Response, Google Cultural Institute, Google Docs, Google Drive, Google

4472:

My personal proposal (which I suggested numerous times before) is to make the main page more like a newspaper without focusing on news: we have sections on politics, math, science, arts, sports, etc. Just like newspaper site, we can let a relevant Knowledge (XXG) project to manage a section; for

2718:

I think you're missing the point of TheOriginalSoni's suggestion (which I consider a good one) - being a list of the changes now intended to be implemented and an opportunity for some feedback on the proposed changes. A lot more than "a hodge-podge implementation of a set of criteria collated by

2687:

Also, for the next phase, do we start listing and discussing the possible solutions we can have to solve the above issues/have the above features? I think that will be a good way to move forward, as those of us looking to design the main page in the next phase will know exactly what is expected.

1417:

I appreciate the more thoughtful and considered approach that people are trying to take here (certainly better than the 2012 competition), but I think that even with a slower pace and more discussion, you have to start by identifying a specific problem (or set of problems) and focus on those. If

980:

I'm not sure I'm following the procedure about having an open ended discussion. Could we have an open ended discussion in the "brainstorming" phase and include the "brainstorming" phase in the RfC, and then have a follow-up straw poll on things that were mentioned in the "brainstorming" phase as

3156:

Your cryptic post is cryptic. Are you saying that the page is too complex as it is? The thing about Apple and Google is that the initial function is simple, but each subsequent function is extremely powerful. I don't know if we can schluff things into subpages, that might detract from the goal.

1386:

and anyone else reading this - I am trying to sort everything into their respective sections so we can have the discussions, but its turning out to be quite a deal of work. If we dont compete this fast enough, this Rfc might be too hard to navigate and/or manage and/or close and it would not be

856:

While phase 2, the RFC, could also include brainstorming and suggestions, phase I is meant to be designing the RFC - ie brainstorming what goes on it, rather than about the individual items, so that the important questions are there, and everything is described clearly, before the RFC opens for

4038:

With my proposed design, no architecture is needed. You can achieve it using only elements found in 1995's HTML 2.0 and using the user's default CSS stylesheet. (I would recommend a minimal stylesheet designed to keep the look consistent across platforms, but the CSS doesn't need to be bloated

3623:

We need a new, clean front page where we respect and honor the reader enough to trust that if she is interested in Knowledge (XXG) articles about current events, she will click on the "In the news" link. Treat the readers like adults who know what they want and not like children who need to be

1237:

As it currently stands, the RfC appears to be a very arbitrary collection of ideas, and is bound to become repetitive, as well as hard to navigate. I wonder if summarising most of it in a points format right now is a good idea so everyone can quickly check which of the points have been already

4413:

What if there was a way that people could add and remove elements, like how Google News lets you? That would certainly catapault the main page into the modern era. We would have a base design (like how it looks now, maybe) but it would allow people to add or remove the content as they choose.

2824:

Oh, please, no flashing or scrolling. That was done to death early in the piece with web development. It really is irritating & distracting rather than "fun" . Bold and all-caps I can take on as being reasonable suggestions, but epileptic fits & motion sickness aren't appealing. Quite

526:

OK, I am willing to support Evad37's version of how this may be workable. I think present conditions may be different than they were in 2006 but I'm still willing to support Evad37's ideas. If this attempt fails then we can try a different method. I am hopeful that this attempt will succeed.

2392:

Given the dwindling number of comments I think its well about time for us to start the next phase of this RfC. We must now be looking for specific points from the users on what needs to be the features for every topic mentioned, and also start voting on those points so we can have a list of

3079:

The discussion was much more lively during the RFC, with dozens of messages per day. Counting DOM elements seems a bit pointless, that only affects rendering speed. As for the number of requests and KBs; I have no control over that, because that is determined by the skin and its associated

1491:

about Main Page features, which at a glance has almost the same structure as the current draft proposal. How will this new RFC be different and gain more traction than the last one? Or maybe I should characterize this differently, how can the last RFC be used to improve and focus this RFC?

889:

So perhaps we could consider a more open-ended approach, at least to start out. Simply asking people what they like/dislike about the main page (and in the latter case, how it could be improved) might yield some useful feedback, including ideas that don't cleanly fall into a particular

2080:

Does anyone know how to selectively exclude sections from the table of contents? I want to keep "Proposed Simple Main Page" and "Proposed Simple Main Page Discussion" while nuking "Today's Featured Content", "Other areas of Knowledge (XXG)" and "Knowledge (XXG)'s sister projects".

3667:. They know that, given a choice, you would like to just see the actual content of the page without third-party ads, and you would like to see concise links to other, related content rather than seeing what amounts to another ad, this time promoting that other page on the site. 4020:. I'm still of the opinion that I left near the end of that thread (agreement with the idea of incremental change) - first update the architecture, then update the content/ordering, then (and only then) start investigating aesthetic changes - cross-browser compatibility, and 2019:

for videos to load on Feather. This could not be possible. Digging through the numbers more and after browser testing repeatedly, nothing made sense. I was just about to give up on the project, with my world view completely shattered, when my colleague discovered the answer:

477:

The set of criteria is needed so that designs actually have a chance of passing the final vote. What is the point of any of this if we are going to let any old design come along, suck up time and effort, and then face overwhelming opposition because its not what wikipedians

2944:

I don't care if you hate the styling (not to fond of it myself actually), but that is not a problem; it can be styled independently, it can even have different styles for each section. What I want to show is how simple the main page is built, and how flexible it can be,

728:- I don't propose an RFC at every step, only the beginning, in order to get design criteria for the the community actually wants, and the end, to determine if there is consensus to implement the redesigned main page. However, perhaps we can form a wikiproject (perhaps 3293:

What I'm trying to acomplish is a flexible framework on which to build content and styling indepentently. My example is based on the current main page, but only in content and pallette. The beauty is that both can be changed without affecting eachother; it is merely a

2055:"The first factor is regarding whether the use in question helps fulfill the intention of copyright law to stimulate creativity for the enrichment of the general public, or whether it aims to only 'supersede the objects' of the original for reasons of personal profit." 1646:

I think that's an excellent start date; by then TAFI should be able to gather some data to measure the projects effectiveness, and give that input to the redesign. In truth, you have been very patient, and I think that will be a testament to this redesign's success.

141:

60 days for editors to submit and discuss designs based on the principles and elements votes. Proposals may include existing designs such as the current design, designs that were submitted during the 2012 main page redesign discussions, and/or variations of existing

52:

I would be interested in helping out, but its got to be better organised than last year. There's got to be design criteria (for what wikipedians actually want), rather than just asking people to submit mockup proposals where everything and anything can be changed. -

4215:@Iryna Harpy: If you were referring to my earlier comment about csszengarden, I wasn't pointing enthusiastically at the whizbang css/javascript that some of the design-variants there use - I was pointing earnestly at the valid HTML that underlies the entire premise. 2034:

video, watching a video actually became a real possibility. Over the week, word of Feather had spread in these areas and our numbers were completely skewed as a result. Large numbers of people who were previously unable to use YouTube before were suddenly able to.

732:?) for organising the group of people who choose to be involved with the other steps in the process. I believe that would be better than "committee", which sound more exclusive, or like something one would be appointed to; whereas anyone can join a wikiproject. - 4389:

As it turns out, the two are inextricably linked. Design ultimately depends on what content you're trying to present. The question is if there is consensus for a simple, Google-style home page. My own opinion is that Knowledge (XXG)'s home page should at least

1451:

I agree, a fact finding mission is the first step, even if the mission discoveres there are no facts to find and the design is nigh perfect. I feel there is room for improvement, and the Main Page design would likely benefit from a broad discussion like this.

897:

is due to be added to the main page soon (possibly this month), so we definitely should wait until after that occurs before opening the RfC (as it clearly stands to affect opinions, particularly regarding the concept of "enticing readers to become editors").

1714:

Hi Paladox. Its great that you want to improve the main page, however any changes you (or anyone else) propose to make have virtually no chance of being implemented, unless there is widespread support from the community. That is why we are going to have an

4701: 2238:

We're not going to present 10+ designs to vote on this time. Hopefully, theis will be a redesign from scratch with all involved. Right now, we're gathering general input which we can boil down to the core issues, then build on that, and so forth...

325:

The above strikes me as an excellent plan, very much in line with what's worked in the past (and mindful of what hasn't). Provided that we remain flexible and allow for adjustments as the circumstances dictate, I think that it has a good chance of

4994: 2956:

for content and design, which will hopefully speed up the process somewhat. I also hope to be involed on the technical aspects as much as possible, implementing other people's ideas into a working main page. Thank you for your consideration.

4520:

Why not? Who do you think the Knowledge (XXG) target audience are? That's the most irritating, unnavigable page bar none. It's like android kiddie heaven, only more so. I've just developed a migraine looking at it for more than 10 seconds.

3084:

page here suffers those same numbers. My page at least separates the CSS, avoiding lots of duplicated inline code. Plus my CSS is working code (and loaded separately) and in now way optimized (the styling is only for demontration anyway).

3064:

Also, to make sure the test is fair, I would want to put your proposed page and a copy of Knowledge (XXG)'s main page in separate subpages before I would rely on the above numbers. I suspect that the history function adds a lot of bytes.

1206:

Yes, I think this makes sense for a first round of the RFC. It's going to be a lot of work to close that round but I see this brainstorming round as a necessary step for moving forward if we intend to involve as many people as possible.

5032:...Or we could do something along the lines of or possibly (note: you have to use the up and down arrows to see it all -- no newfangled "scroll bars" here!). It's clearly what a lot of people want our main page to look like... :( -- 2215:

Do any of the old-timers here think this will succeed where all other attemps have failed? The problem with these long drawn out and unorganized discussions is that they wear people out and people start dropping like flies. Remember

1437:

That's what we're doing. The RfC is intended to identify specific areas in need of improvement (if any) and how to go about it. We realize that change for the sake of change (as seen in the failed redesign attempts) doesn't work.

4241:

allowing either full custom or a selection menu with options for "just like the present mainpage", "just policy proposals", "Just abuse noticeboards" etc. That would be worth having around no matter what we do with the main page. --

4061:

to the very limit! I'm not sure I'd agree that a majority (let alone 90%) of users would prefer to have to click multiple times in order to see the various (updated daily) content blocks that are currently all available in a single

3575:. When you print something on a piece of paper, you need to fit everything on that page. For example, You need to provide a full address, telephone number, and email address, not just the words "Contact Page". Compare that with the 2421:

Glancing through many (but not all) of the comments, I notice the following, in no particular order. This is not an official closing; just a rough summary of some of the major viewpoints. Please edit or object to this list at will.

2041:

Many of us are fortunate to live in high bandwidth regions, but there are still large portions of the world that do not. By keeping your client side code small and lightweight, you can literally open your product up to new

270:- to be done here by those interested. The RFC should be designed as to give us design criteria for each section of the main page, and overall (ie how much change is desired). Move onto next step after consensus is reached. 2343:

Heavens help me, I might read the entire RFC and produce a summary that should explain the current sense of the community on the redesign. I may also volunteer a first draft of this redesign, having recently finished with

4212:@Guy: I really dislike clicking multiple times! In your version, I have to either click ten times (forward/back), or open five new tabs, in order to see the daily content. In the current mainpage, I just scroll and read. 562:

I am too. You might be right about the conditions changing since 2006 (and we may need to compensate for that), but knowing what didn't work a few months ago (and in 2008) should gives us a good idea of what to avoid.

963:

pages, which cover more than just "help with editing". At this point it is not clear how the aims are to be discussed - per David Levy's comments above, having a lot of questions/subsections is not such a good idea. -

353:

set of criteria and a single mockup make it more likely that there will be edit wars and WP:OWN issues? By allowing separate proposals for elements and designs as I proposed I think heated conflicts are less likely. --

435:

Likewise, we could greatly reduce the number of heated conflicts by allowing everyone to write their own versions of articles instead of collaborating and seeking consensus. We just wouldn't end up with a usable

2704:

figure out how to address the various concerns. A good Main Page is one designed with a consistent UX vision, rather than one designed as a hodge-podge implementation of a set of criteria collated by committee.

426: 3750:

The contact page is actually several pages linked together; that creates an immense ammount of extra overhead if such a mechanism is applied to the main page. Some form of tabbed content would be nice though,

3672:

One would think that Knowledge (XXG) would be immune to this, but we aren't. People work hard on their little corners of Knowledge (XXG), and they want their hard work to be advertised on the main page in the

2363:

Note that while what I linked to is quite fancy and flashy, whatever I end up designing for Knowledge (XXG) will probably be simpler and not as image-heavy. Different websites have different needs, after all.

725:

A small(er) group also ensures collaboration; involving the entire community in the entire process, with an RFC at every step, will give a flood of information and everyone will loose track, and consequently

4467:

The talkpage of the main page got archived so I'm copying my proposal from there to here. I presented a much more detailed version before without getting any feedback so I'm putting something much shorter.

3193:"More Current Events". At the bottom "Wikinews". (Yes, I know that Wikinews isn't the same, but a first-time visitor does not.) It looks like it was designed by a committee, and the results are craptacular. 4081:

Some people like tabs, some people like subpages, some people like collapsed/hidden content, some people like everything in one. Different options make more or less sense in different circumstances. Eg.

420:

Also, given the large number of possible editors involved, does having so many editors working on a single set of criteria and a single mockup make it more likely that there will be edit wars and WP:OWN

300:- after there is consensus on the final version from the above step, put it to an RFC vote. Needs to be widely advertised and open for at least 30 days. Closer should be an uninvolved admin, if possible. 4312:, and commented there just this morning! Sadly it hasn't seen much activity since 2011, but there are a few potentially great ideas in there. As with this page - inch-by-inch we get closer to solidity.– 2646:

Thanks, Ypnypn for alerting us to move further discussions here. (Oops, and apologies for correcting your spelling of bandwidth. I've been proofing for a few hours & was still in auto-edit mode!) --

2580:

For that matter, what is our baseline? How long would it take to load a completely blank Knowledge (XXG) page? That is our zero-bound; it can only grow from there unless MediaWiki is further optimized.

695:

Second, an RFC could be helpfull, but I also fear that it may lead to red tape. What I would like is to form a workgroup, or committee if you like, that will review all ideas coming from the initial RFC

123:: 30 day RFC to ask community to brainstorm design principles and elements that should be included on the main page. Discussion is welcome but voting will wait until the end of the brainstorming period. 330: 42:, there's been some discussion of trying this again. I temporarily moved last year's talk page to this title, so it should appear on the watchlists of editors following that attempt. Any interest? — 721:- I agree with you on this point, however that doesn't mean we should just ignore the existing mockups. Some of them may have interesting ideas to try out, if they fit in with what we learn at the RFC 3990:

Iryna, I was not referring to Guy Macon's proposal. I was referring to the current main page. I was agreeing with Guy that what we need is a whole new design, not just a variation of what we have on

2952:

I hope to have laid down some groundwork on which we can build. The main goal of this framework is making content and design separate and independent. That way, we can have separate and independent

2736:

Any next phase should implement the fact that Athena will eventually be the interface (it might happen tomorrow, or ten years from now), so if we could tailor it to that, it might be a good idea.

1933:. This would provide a good overview over where we are standing and also make it easier for people who might not have followed it from the beginning to jump in in the middle of the process. -- 4130:

like doesn't come into the equation. This shouldn't be about trying to accommodate quirks and convolutions but the KISS (Keep it simple, stupid) principle. It's an entry page, not a circus. --

1525: 1521: 1188: 858: 4559:

Note that you can only scroll with the up and down keys -- no scrollbar. And you really do need to scroll, because it tells a story from top to bottom. An utterly batshit crazy story. --

2982:

No response after two days? That's it... this process is officially dead. I'll just work on it by myself and boldly suprise the community in the near future then. Don't want that? Talk!

2535:

I dispute the assertion that the page is currently low-randwidth. I do not consider 342KB and 39 requests to be low-bandwidth. Google advanced search weighs in at 85 KB and 3 requests.

1262:

Perhaps we should have a separate ==Discussion== section where threaded discussion can occur under ===level 3=== headers. The TOC would then show the points already being discussed. -

3723:

a sample of their content is not the way to go. Sure you get a nice clean main page, but absolutely nothing to stimultate visitors to actualy go and visit those pages. What if Goolge

204:

I think feedback provided from the 2012 proposals could be included in the "Principles and elements" phases if editors wish to use that feedback to inform the 2013 discussions. --

2223:

If you want to change the main page, pick a single alternative for the community to !vote up or down. That's the only way a major change like this will ever reach a consensus.

1631:

TAFI is now up on the main page. How does everyone feel about a starting the RFC on Monday May 6th? This gives everyone three weeks to get used to TAFI before the RFC opens. -

4090:. If only we could A/B test the universe, and see whether more people read the subpage/tabbed versions, or if merging it all into a well-organized single page was better! :) – 1488: 883: 2631:

By the way, this is an excellent summary of the discussion (which I admit I could not get through all of). Anyone designing a new main page should keep those things in mind.

936:

Clarification, I think "Directing readers and editors seeking help to appropriate venues is an aim of the main page" should instead be "Directing readers and editors seeking

1758:

Hi. I've moved your redesign to your user space. The Main Mage sandbox of for testing new code before it goes live on the Main Page, not for testing new designs. Thank you.

1154: 4399:

content sections. Either way, I'm not sure there is strong support for a search box-only main page, but I do recognize it as a valid idea (even if I do not agree with it).

5200: 4145: 4067: 3937: 3933: 3011: 17: 4148:) is the most irritating and does not adapt well to various resolutions and, for that matter, androids and the many different methods of internet access now being used. 493:

Separate designs may reduce conflict, but would also reduce collaboration - what I propose is taking the best of each mockup submitted design into a collabortaive design

129:: 30 day RFC for the community to vote on the principles and elements that were proposed. Voting options will be Support, Weak Support, Neutral, Weak Oppose, and Oppose. 3535:

In order to keep this going, I think we can safely split the two subject now. I believe the framework is pretty much fleshed out. Now let's discuss content and design.

2414: 1789: 4043:

version of the mainpage that has a lot of content, 90% plus of the users would choose the fast-loading version with no styling, no scripting, and minimal graphics. --

2295:

We should begin considering how to organize the next phase of the RFC. How do we want to integrate/summarize the points raised from this first portion of the RFC? --

1929:

to add a short summary of the results under the respective step once it is finished. For example, once the RFC is over, list a short summary of the main results at

2466:

Goal #2 can be achieved by adding more prominent links to introductory pages. This might even allow the complete annihilation of the left sidebar for the main page.

1611:). After TAFI is on the main page, and users have had a few weeks to get used to it, we'll have the RFC... so probably early May, if everything goes to schedule. - 288:- Mockups from previous design attempts, and newly submitted mockups, to be reviewed against the design criteria, and discussed to identify the best ideas/elements. 4149: 4071: 1020:

those aims are accomplished. Users might want to comment on fonts, colors, or other stylistic elements, or where on the page certain elements should be located. --

490:. If it really becomes too hard, then it can be edit protected earlier on the process, with changes implemented by an admin only after discussion on the talk page. 2429:

In The News seems to be one of the least popular sections, perhaps because it duplicates Wikinews. For that matter, some pointed out that TFP duplicates Commons.

232:

Thirdly, there shouldn't be any formal competition among prospective designs. That might be the single biggest factor in the last two attempts' failure (and it

3372:

I was actually planning on submitting my version when the process got to the design state, but because it seems like it never did, I'll get to working on it. --

5086: 4635: 2472:

Some Wikipedians complained that DYKs are low-quality and boring (Did you know that Hurricane Foobar hit Georgia?). Some suggested that Good Articles be added.

2217: 2015:. I had decreased the total page weight and number of requests to a tenth of what they were previously and somehow the numbers were showing that it was taking 1930: 1926: 894: 429: 388:

Redesigning the English Knowledge (XXG)'s main page is an ambitious and challenging endeavor. It can't be expedited by imposing artificial time constraints.

1695:

hi I have been developing a new main page and I think I am finished with the new dsgn if you doint think it is not finishe please could I have some help at

1222:

Very nice work. The wording is a good balance of brevity and thoroughness. It solicits a great deal of useful information without seeming overwhelming. —

886:

from 2011 had a disappointingly modest turnout. It seems as though the more questions we ask, the fewer users are willing to read through them and respond.

5070:

What's the status of this endeavor? The subject-space page currently says "Develop design criteria and guidelines: In progress". Is this still accurate? --

3874:

Where exactly can I see the outcome of the RfC (if there is one)? Which are the criteria that should be applied to a proposed design for the main page? --

236:

derailed the successful 2006 redesign, which fortunately was refocused). Users may create separate mockups, but not for the purpose of voting. We should

1138: 2751:

As a point of interest, could you provide some sort of indicator as the the backwards compatibility of the Athena interface, Kevin? Thanks in advance. --

1719:

so the community can tell us what they like about the main page, and what should be changed. The rest of the process we intend to follow is described on

3955:

but I'm currently very busy. As soon as I have some spare time I'd be interested in getting a design draft up, using the RFC outcomes to guide me.

1317:

It still doesnt look pretty. I suggest moving entire comments to their respective columns in the first half of the RfC. (Most of them can be done)

1162: 1150: 697:- This is basically what I proposed for step 3 the process in the above section, but without calling the participants a "committee" or "workgroup". 408:...ready or not. In 2008 and 2012, deadlines came and went (along with the participants). In 2006, we worked as long as we needed to, relying on 2789:

Their version is perhaps not perfect, but I like many things : the header (perhaps a little too big), the footer, the border less left section. --

5103:

It's dead for now. Still trying to figure out a process to get things going again. The 2014 "proposal" was bound to fail before it even started.

3468:

discussion dies (and I hope not, becuase it has been awfully quiet), I'll just keep tinkering with both aspects, and someday I may just well be

1303:". I decided separating replies/discussion from initial comments wasn't a good way to go - would have been rather messy and complicated to do - 3727:

presented links or titles as their search results? Imagine how that would look on their news site. I would like to know if I'm even interested

2662:

Other possible suggestions for websites to emulate were - JSTOR, Vietnamese Wikitionary, Windows 8 wikipedia app and the French Knowledge (XXG)

2272:

My suggestion: check out what other langauges do, there might be something useful that can be copied one to one. A good example is,imho, the

2011:"After a week of data collection, the numbers came back… and they were baffling. The average aggregate page latency under Feather had actually 912:

needed? It would be useful to know what proportion of users want big changes compared to those wanting small changes, or no changes at all. -

223:

Parts of the above suggestion make sense, but it also duplicates some of the mistakes made made last year and in 2008 (and initially in 2006).

2854: 5060: 5041: 1740:

Hi I have created a cleaner and newer look in sandbox for main page it has a more new colour and has the same look just newer please visit

4672:

include all 23 links in the sidebar at the left side of your screen, but we may decide to keep a few by adding them to the main section.

4264: 3346:

a clean looking framework. I don't know whether it is the subtle color choices or the rounded corners, but the style looks really nice. --

1158: 2775:, that be updated in may after a redesign proposal start in 2012, which was very influenced by the redesign proposal of 2012 of wp:en. 4742: 2435:

On the other hand, the page is currently low-bandwidth. More exciting would change this, causing problems for those with slow Internet.

4599:

P.S. Zen, eh? I'm in one mind as to my thought on the proposal. One man's Knowledge (XXG) heaven is another's Knowledge (XXG) hell. --

3428:

Visually the underlying framework presents no problems for my viewing. Is this the structure we should be basing future designs on? --

2224: 229:

Secondly, there can't be predetermined time frames. The process will take however long it takes and mustn't be hampered by deadlines.

4427: 3441: 3170: 3123: 2566: 2505: 2308: 1968: 1660: 1564: 1505: 1465: 729: 439:

No one promised that this would be easy. It won't be. But if we put in the effort and avoid the pitfalls, it can be successful. —

4255:

Some editors use their userpages in this way (ie. transcluding: the content blocks that the main page uses, or various sections of

3580: 3298:

demonstration. I'm not suggesting we put my example on the main page, but that we build the new main page based on that framework.

2476:

Again, feel free to edit this list or to present your own thoughts here. I'm just trying to get the ball rolling on the next step.

2469:

Goal #3 could be helped by a bigger search box or links to portals. It might need more significant changes to the software, though.

2103:

simple main page will save very little. Real saving can be done by using the mobile version, which is designed to be light-weight.

148:

30 day RFC for editors to vote on proposed designs. Voting options will be Support, Weak Support, Neutral, Weak Oppose, and Oppose.

4190: 2174:(to test the Google main page, you will have to wait until they aren't showing a short movie about petri dishes on the main page) 4205:, and fully agree that simple and valid HTML is the route to happiness. My comments to Guy were only in disagreement about the 3584: 4617: 4075: 3970: 2070: 2064: 3588: 160:

30 day RFC for editors to vote on the top two. Voting options will be Support, Weak Support, Neutral, Weak Oppose, and Oppose.

4728: 4714: 1142: 1107:

template). A watchlist notice would inform editors who don't follow those pages. Is there anywhere else that I've missed? -

5236: 5212: 5188: 5155: 5137: 5122: 5098: 5079: 4608: 4594: 4568: 4530: 4514: 4486: 4450: 4436: 4408: 4384: 4336: 4321: 4300: 4276: 4250: 4235: 4194: 4161: 4139: 4099: 4052: 4033: 4003: 3983: 3964: 3949: 3921: 3889: 3849: 3801: 3774: 3706: 3554: 3521: 3491: 3450: 3415: 3387: 3355: 3317: 3266: 3179: 3151: 3132: 3104: 3074: 3001: 2976: 2862: 2838: 2818: 2798: 2760: 2745: 2728: 2713: 2697: 2677: 2655: 2640: 2621: 2606: 2590: 2575: 2548: 2528: 2514: 2485: 2402: 2373: 2357: 2338: 2317: 2285: 2258: 2232: 2202: 2122: 2096: 1977: 1948: 1910: 1895: 1870: 1851: 1777: 1752: 1708: 1684: 1669: 1640: 1620: 1597: 1573: 1546: 1532: 1514: 1474: 1442: 1431: 1357: 1343: 1326: 1312: 1297: 1271: 1257: 1247: 1226: 1217: 1200: 1174: 1132: 1116: 1071: 1044: 1030: 1005: 991: 973: 954: 931: 921: 902: 877: 851: 834: 741: 679: 638: 605: 567: 537: 505: 443: 396:

Deadlines didn't prevent editors from losing interest and abandoning the 2008 and 2012 attempts. In fact, they helped to

363: 337: 312: 255: 214: 195: 180: 101: 79: 62: 46: 4756: 3675: 2131:

Images, CSS and scripts count too. It doesn't matter why the page loads slow in Uganda. All that matters is that it does.

1146: 1588:

What is the current status of this proposal? Are we going to have a RFC at all? I liked the current draft version. --

1276:

Anyone ready to get their hands dirty on that? I think if we dont do it, this RfC might crumble faster than we think.

282:- to be done here by those interested, following and based on the RFC. Move onto next step after consensus is reached. 247:

In short, history has shown that this endeavor cannot succeed unless it takes the form of a wiki-style collaboration,

4780: 4721: 4473:

example, Knowledge (XXG) project math can decide what to put on the math section; e.g., maybe newly improved article.

4260: 818:

A major update (new style and modified layout, which would probably also entail content adjustment/s to make it work)

385:

It's all but certain that the process will be lengthy, provided that it doesn't stall (as it did the last two times).

244:

ask the community to vote on whether it will replace the current main page). This is what rescued the 2006 redesign.

23: 4017: 3882: 2814: 1941: 1403:

It isn't clear what problem this entire process is intended to solve. Yes, people occasionally try to redesign the

4772: 1839: 907:

I see your point about more questions discouraging responses, and agree that we should definitely wait till after

2693: 2673: 2524: 2398: 2334: 1392: 1353: 1348:

Started. Will need others to hop in and do the same. There are too many grey area comments that come everywhere.

1322: 1293: 1243: 4796: 2039:"Through Feather, I learned a valuable lesson about the state of the Internet throughout the rest of the world. 1741: 1696: 1302:

I've done some refactoring so that comments are now under level 3 heading of the form "Comments by <user: -->

4623:

In my opinion, if we put up my proposal (]) for comment it has a reasonable chance of gaining consensus. Now I

2858: 4784:– Serving as virtual librarians, Knowledge (XXG) volunteers tackle your questions on a wide range of subjects. 4078:(c.2013). Of those three, I can only forsee #1 being hypothetically accepted by a future !vote between them... 1086: 2890: 940:

to appropriate venues is an aim of the main page". You could add "Directing readers and editors seeking help

4152:

is minimalism taken to the extreme, although it makes for a nice example of pedestrian postmodernist art. --

3380: 3138: 2228: 226:

Firstly, there are too many steps and formalities. This causes editors to grow impatient and lose interest.

4178: 3663: 3576: 3396:

We're not in the actual design stage yet. My proposal is for the underlying framework, not a final design.

1035:

Yes, style and layout considerations are important, and they should be encouraged in the RFC discussion. -

719:

Having to choose from dozens of mockups is bound to fail, because it will be impossible to focus on details

4482: 2553:

What is the primary cause of the high page size, is it rendering all those tables? Or is it the images? --

1593: 4764: 4291:, I hope you didn't misunderstand. I actually like your proposed layout: it's simple and to the point. -- 4256: 1608: 1062:

I am going to make a second RFC draft, based on the above comments. Will post the link here when done. -

487: 5184: 5133: 4735: 4627:

simply post an RfC, but fragmenting the discussion is undesirable. Instead, I want to do the following:

4604: 4590: 4526: 4420: 4332: 4296: 4157: 4135: 3979: 3875: 3681: 3657: 3434: 3163: 3116: 2834: 2810: 2756: 2724: 2651: 2617: 2559: 2498: 2301: 1961: 1934: 1748: 1704: 1653: 1557: 1537:

I've now added a notice to version 1 to indicate that it is an old version, with a link to version 2. -

1498: 1458: 4202: 2772: 1094: 97: 4792:– Announcements, updates, articles and press releases on Knowledge (XXG) and the Wikimedia Foundation. 647:

coming from the initial RFC, and then translate that information into the the main page, focussing on

425:

Yes, it does. The alternative is to allow everyone to do their own thing, thereby creating dozens of

4824: 4544: 2689: 2669: 2520: 2394: 2330: 1388: 1349: 1318: 1289: 1239: 4760:– Bulletin board, projects, resources and activities covering a wide range of Knowledge (XXG) areas. 4267:, which could really use some more caretakers (especially those with more plain aesthetic tastes). – 4083: 1331: 5075: 5056: 5037: 4646: 4564: 4550:

There is, however, one page that you have to experience to truly grasp the Zen of website design:

4510: 4246: 4186: 4048: 3945: 3797: 3702: 3517: 3351: 3262: 3147: 3070: 2544: 2198: 2092: 1908: 1868: 1427: 4800:– For discussions about Knowledge (XXG) itself, including areas for technical issues and policies. 4309: 4308:

Also, I did find the project to create a "way for users to customize their userpage more easily",

4024:

looks/functionality should be achievable, if the architecture and content-blocks are done right. –

5208: 4692: 4365:

This is clearly a content related discussion. A reminder; this section is for discussing design.

4317: 4272: 4231: 4095: 4029: 3651: 3373: 2277: 1551:

Being late to the party, I was looking at the old version. Looks good, a very general inquiry. --

464: 5143: 5010: 2783: 2779: 2087:

but that killed the TOC on this page. Feel free to delete this comment if you fix it. Thanks! --

3715:

Not to be an argument-killer, but we're past the RFC stage now. To address your points: Having

868:

so that it is clear what I was proposeing, and so we can work towards a final version there. -

5229: 5115: 4478: 4377: 3914: 3842: 3767: 3689:

sections. The basic theory is that the reader is too stupid to know what she wants to see and

3547: 3484: 3408: 3310: 3097: 2994: 2969: 2853:

the page was redisgn of simple wikipedia but like that but with the content from en wikipedia

2251: 2115: 1770: 1589: 672: 4788: 2885:

Inline styling is moved to file-based styling. This saves bandwith, and allows 'excitement'!

1604: 1082: 908: 329:

My one note would be that the community vote probably needn't remain open for 30 days. (The

5180: 5151: 5129: 4600: 4586: 4522: 4415: 4328: 4292: 4153: 4131: 3975: 3591:, etc. See how we are able to provide far more detail than is possible using paper and ink? 3429: 3158: 3111: 2830: 2794: 2752: 2741: 2720: 2647: 2613: 2554: 2493: 2481: 2345: 2296: 2281: 1956: 1891: 1847: 1744: 1728: 1700: 1648: 1636: 1616: 1552: 1542: 1493: 1453: 1339: 1308: 1267: 1196: 1170: 1112: 1067: 1040: 1001: 969: 917: 873: 830: 805:

The other question that should be asked is: How much change is desired, with options being:

774:

Help readers find articles on specific topics (ie include navigation via portals or similar)

737: 634: 601: 501: 308: 240:

them and seek to incorporate the best elements into a single collaborative design (and only

93: 58: 4828:– Non-profit organization that hosts Knowledge (XXG) and Knowledge (XXG)'s sister projects. 4551: 4441:

It's certainly a cool idea but I don't know if MediaWiki supports that kind of modularity.

4039:

either.) I believe that if you gave the users a choice between a lightweight main page and

2889:

A bug will need to be filed requesting that MediaWiki loads the CSS for the main page from

1720: 1716: 812:

Minor fixes (Minimal tweaks. Remove a couple of outdated links, update a few small things.)

483: 5094: 4446: 4404: 4087: 3999: 3960: 3822:

have to know exactly what you're looking for to reach one of those projects through their

3645: 2709: 2636: 2586: 2369: 2353: 1529: 1439: 1383: 1285: 1223: 928: 899: 564: 440: 334: 252: 76: 43: 4634:

Reach consensus that my proposal, unchanged, should be part of step 4 (Mockup review) at

4166:

I wonder if my simple mainpage is one of those proposals where you can't find anyone who

3512:

Just so you know, I have been quiet because I like the look what you have done so far. --

1528:(intended to greatly simplify the discussion, thereby attracting wider participation). — 4993:

This page was last modified on dd mmmm yyyy at hh:hh (UTC). Text is available under the

4962: 3110:

least change content on the Main Page, and this design doesn't integrate any of them. --

381:

Without deadlines don't we have the risk that some steps would take long periods of time

5071: 5052: 5033: 4560: 4506: 4395:

of trimming *some* of the content offerings; some people were even recommending adding

4288: 4242: 4182: 4044: 3941: 3793: 3698: 3513: 3347: 3258: 3143: 3066: 2540: 2194: 2088: 1903: 1863: 1681: 1423: 1214: 1129: 1090: 1027: 988: 951: 848: 534: 360: 333:

ran for 18 days, during which it generated an unprecedented level of participation.) —

211: 191: 177: 72: 39: 4949: 4936: 1886:. (Though there were linked to from the See Also section at the bottom of the page) - 5204: 4313: 4282: 4227: 4091: 4025: 3031: 2877:

It has been too quiet, so let me kickstart the next phase by submitting my proposal.

2826: 2600: 2187: 2172: 2158: 2144: 960: 4975: 4923: 4577:

Batshit crazy, you say. You seem to be able to read what appeals to me like a book!

3055: 3047: 3039: 3023: 1081:

Once the RFC is finalised and opened, it should obviously be advertised widely - at

5220: 5106: 4910: 4871: 4368: 3905: 3833: 3758: 3621:

We don't need subtle tweaks of the horrible design philosophy we are following now.

3579:

link on the page you are reading. Click on it and look. Then look at the links for

3538: 3475: 3399: 3301: 3088: 2985: 2960: 2446: 2242: 2106: 1761: 1101: 663: 4897: 2519:

I would personally give a 40% finding, 30% getting them involved, and showcasing.

1137:

We should also leave a note for each project responsible for a main page section:

264:

Here's my idea for the procedure, based on consensus decision making at each step:

5005: 3061:

Your version does look better and more modern that the current main page, though.

2825:

seriously, there's a reason the blink tag should not be used, and you'll find it

5147: 4700: 2790: 2737: 2477: 1887: 1843: 1724: 1632: 1612: 1538: 1375: 1335: 1304: 1277: 1263: 1192: 1166: 1108: 1063: 1036: 997: 965: 913: 869: 826: 733: 630: 597: 497: 496:

Finally, if something like this worked in 2006, why wouldn't it work in 2013? -

304: 54: 4999: 3934:

Knowledge (XXG) talk:2013 main page redesign proposal#Proposed Simple Main Page

3012:

Knowledge (XXG) talk:2013 main page redesign proposal#Proposed Simple Main Page

2665:

Having more and bigger pictures than a Wall of Text was also among the options.

2269:

Let's not reinvent the wheel; rather try to make it uniform in all languages.

2029:

This meant that a regular video page, at over a megabyte, was taking more than

116:

Here's a first draft for a procedure based on the discussions mentioned above.

5090: 4442: 4400: 4058: 3995: 3956: 3010:

You do realize that it took you six days to comment when I posted a proposal (

2705: 2632: 2582: 2365: 2349: 1379: 1281: 1254: 799:

Describe the purpose of Knowledge (XXG) (ie an About Knowledge (XXG) section)

701:... and then translate that information into the the main page, focussing on 4858: 4845: 4819: 4776:– For Knowledge (XXG)-related communication in languages other than English. 3991: 1676: 1419: 1411: 1404: 1209: 1124: 1022: 983: 946: 843: 529: 413: 355: 206: 187: 172: 5146:. But why do you thing logged-in users can't be vandals or POV pushers? -- 4884: 2273: 4832: 4804: 3938:

Knowledge (XXG) talk:2013 main page redesign proposal#A modest Proposal...

3755:

that could be done without javascript, or otherwise has proper fallback.

2597:

Comparing a page full of content to a form is obnoxious and meaningless.

2169: 1524:'s format is very similar to that of the 2011 RfC, but we've moved on to 944:

to appropriate venues is an aim of the main page" as a separate point. --

821:

A major overhaul (something utterly different from the current main page)

1407:

and it fails. Yes, the page has looked the same for a long time. But...

5015: 2432:

The page feels 2000-ish. The page needs to be more modern and exciting.

154:: 7-14 days depending on how much work is involved to tally the votes. 135:: 7-14 days depending on how much work is involved to tally the votes. 2184: 4997:; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to our 3080:

CSS/scripts, and transcluded content. Page history is not a factor.

166:

7-14 days depending on how much work is involved to tally the votes.

4505:

It's like the current Knowledge (XXG) main page, but more so. :) --

2850: 2492:

showcase content, 35% get editors involed, 15% finding content). --

2426:

Some people like the main page more or less as it is. Others don't.

92:

Support. I think it's a decent idea, and we should try it out. :-)

3731:

I click on a link, and therefor a sample of its content is needed.

2906:

Moving content only requires moving two lines to its proper place.

186:

I would work from the feedback provided for the 2012 proposals. --

4066:

existing content-blocks in a single location is a must-have. Eg,

3936:) and made a later attempt to get my point across through humor ( 629:(moved from brainstorming section as it focuses on the process - 3596: 4631:

Ask for help tweaking my content without losing the simplicity.

4021: 3566:

Discuss content and its layout here, i.e. What should go where?

1931:

Knowledge (XXG):2013 main page redesign proposal#RFC Discussion

170:

Comments? Should we have an RFC about the procedure itself? --

4170:

dislikes it, but there are plenty of people who believe that

2327:

The thrid stage would then be to consolidate those solutions.

793:

Direct readers and editors seeking help to appropriate venues

4699: 4540: 2881:

main page with flexibility in mind. It's core features are:

1189:

Knowledge (XXG):2013 main page redesign proposal/Draft RFC/2

996:

I think this is basically what is proposed at the moment. -

5144:

Knowledge (XXG):PEREN#Prohibit_anonymous_users_from_editing

4538: 4498: 1387:

possible for us to move forward. May I have a hand please?

882:

The poll seems sensible on paper. My main concern is that

4542: 3253: 2439: 2141: 1016:

the aims of the Main page are, I think we need to discuss

392:

and editors would also lose interest through this process?

4668:

Note: This proposed main page replacement is intended to

4268: 4226:(scroll down to see). No frills or design. None at all! – 2771:

Hi. Did you see the main page of the chinese wikipedia :

1804:, and the main page section projects have been notified: 825:

Thoughts and commments (on the questions for the RFC)? -

71:

I couldn't agree more. I don't know whether you've read

4636:

Knowledge (XXG):2013 main page redesign proposal#Process

3624:

manipulated into reading what we think is best for them.

3184:

Yes, I am saying that the page is too complex as it is.

2463:

Goal #1 is achieved quite well. Goals #2 and #3 are not.

2155: 1927:

Knowledge (XXG):2013 main page redesign proposal#Process

1607:

to be implemented, which looks like it will be April 8 (

4223: 3223:

slow connections, and for users with older smartphones.

2937: 2930: 2922: 2915: 2085: 1832: 1828: 1824: 1820: 1816: 1812: 1809: 1805: 1801: 1797: 1793: 1418:

there aren't any problems to identify with the current

2438:

Some users wanted the page to be spartan, almost like

5201:

Knowledge (XXG) talk:2014 main page redesign proposal

4218:

Re: "Main Page alternative (simple layout)" - it has

4146:

Knowledge (XXG):Main Page alternative (simple layout)

4068:

Knowledge (XXG):Main Page alternative (simple layout)

24:

Knowledge (XXG) talk:2013 main page redesign proposal

18:

Knowledge (XXG) talk:2014 main page redesign proposal

1483:

In what way will this RFC differ from the 2011 RFC?

660:everyone will loose track, and consequently leave. 4941: 4837: 4150:Knowledge (XXG):Main Page alternative (links only) 4072:Knowledge (XXG):Main Page alternative (links only) 1122:Yes, and add the Knowledge (XXG)-en email list. -- 4695:articles in the English Language Knowledge (XXG). 3899: 3595:how we need to design our main page; like a true 815:Re-Style (Same basic layout, but change the look) 133:Tally period for votes on principles and elements 75:, but that's exactly my take on the situation. — 5087:Knowledge (XXG):2014 main page redesign proposal 3019:Getting back to your proposal, your numbers are: 2458:Help readers find what they are looking for fast 2218:Knowledge (XXG):2012 main page redesign proposal 689:First, I think a major overhaul is the way to go 4995:Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 4954: 4863: 3693:far, far too dimwitted to click on a link. No, 1902:My mistake then, didn't think to look there. -- 758:Some ideas for the initial statements on aims: 412:to tell us when to move on to the next stage. 4980: 4967: 4928: 3639:pages that try to cram everything on one page 1487:I was browsing around a bit, and I cam across 730:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Main Page Redesign 474:used as an excuse to rush through the process. 4915: 4876: 4496:Why not just copy the excellent work done at 4018:Talk:Main Page/Archive 177#Main page redesign 3573:We are treating Hypertext as if it were paper 3027:Today's Knowledge (XXG) main page come in at: 2903:. Tables hugely restrict content flexibility. 1988:I would like to propose a simple main page. 1838:Can someone who is already subscribed to the 1603:The current status is that we're waiting for 432:that reside in the project space forevermore. 8: 4902: 4889: 4768:– Ask questions about using Knowledge (XXG). 4224:All it does is transclude the content-blocks 3022:1057 DOM Elements, 55 requests, and 2,635 KB 2189:, but I don't think anyone here wants to go 400:this (by prematurely halting their efforts). 4201:@Iryna Harpy: I'm an active participant in 2929:Move the Sister Project links to the left? 2455:Help new editor become involved efficiently 1991:First, the reason why I am proposing this: 404:Deadlines push the process to move forward. 4850: 4655: 3695:we have to shove everything in their face. 2868:Next phase: Design criteria and guidelines 1422:(besides its age), leave it alone. :-) -- 152:Tally period for votes on proposed designs 5142:Yes, plenty of people feel that way. See 4958:– Free learning materials and activities. 4305:Agreed, and also no offence was taken. :) 3046:289 DOM Elements, 11 requests, and 397 KB 3038:298 DOM Elements, 62 requests, and 833 KB 3030:927 DOM Elements, 39 requests, and 342 KB 2084:I tried putting NOTOC in the transclusion 1842:for wikipedia-en post a message there? - 1792:is now opened. It has been advertised on 780:Promote the breadth of Wikimedia projects 280:3. Develop design criteria and guidelines 3719:links to the several main page projects 1253:+1. I was going to suggest this myself. 1187:I've made another draft RFC, located at 127:Voting period on principles and elements 4676:START OF PROPOSED MAIN PAGE REPLACEMENT 4265:Knowledge (XXG):User page design center 768:Showcase Knowledge (XXG)'s best content 268:1. Brainstorming for the RFC discussion 4686:The encyclopedia that anyone can edit. 4016:See also the Sep15-Oct6 discussion at 2899:The page is based on (floating) divs; 783:Motivate editors to create new content 777:Showcase timely and newsworthy content 724: 718: 700: 694: 688: 419: 403: 391: 380: 5027:END OF PROPOSED MAIN PAGE REPLACEMENT 3054:27 DOM Elements, 2 requests, and 4 KB 2063:Because of the above considerations. 863: 121:Brainstorming principles and elements 7: 4578: 2076:Proposed Simple Main Page Discussion 1921:Short summary of the completed steps 3932:I came up with a serious proposal ( 3826:. All those projects do have their 2393:requirements for the design phase. 2385:Time to move on to Phase two please 2143:weighs in at 342KB and 39 requests. 1736:New design for main page in sandbox 1520:To which draft are you referring? 251:a highly-structured competition. — 158:Top two runoff for proposed designs 1410:But what's wrong with the current 292:5. Develop a main page alternative 31: 5013:is a registered trademark of the 4867:– Wikimedia project coordination. 4813:Knowledge (XXG)'s sister projects 2346:Wikimedia DC's main page redesign 146:Voting period on proposed designs 4974: 4961: 4948: 4935: 4922: 4909: 4896: 4883: 4870: 4857: 4844: 4831: 4818: 4707: 4579: 3697:It is time for a total reboot.-- 2910:Here are some working examples: 2851:http://simple-random-wikisaur.tk 2778:Their precedent main page was : 1877: 959:I did actually mean the various 771:Entice readers to become editors 4812: 4618:User:Guy Macon/Simple Main Page 4076:User:Guy Macon/Simple Main Page 3868:Discuss design and styling here 3635:So why do we still see bloated 2445:Three goals mentioned were, as 2071:User:Guy Macon/Simple Main Page 596:OK, lets start brainstorming - 5199:Should this talk page move to 4808:– Wikipedias in 285 languages. 4750:Other areas of Knowledge (XXG) 4261:Knowledge (XXG):Article alerts 938:information or media resources 1: 5218: 5189:03:33, 28 February 2014 (UTC) 5156:03:04, 28 February 2014 (UTC) 5138:02:55, 28 February 2014 (UTC) 5123:13:08, 27 February 2014 (UTC) 5104: 5099:05:27, 27 February 2014 (UTC) 5080:05:25, 27 February 2014 (UTC) 5061:13:00, 29 November 2013 (UTC) 4880:– Free textbooks and manuals. 4366: 4337:04:45, 29 November 2013 (UTC) 4322:04:12, 29 November 2013 (UTC) 4301:02:40, 29 November 2013 (UTC) 4195:04:26, 29 October 2013‎ (UTC) 3903: 3850:22:54, 1 September 2013 (UTC) 3831: 3802:22:40, 1 September 2013 (UTC) 3775:19:43, 1 September 2013 (UTC) 3756: 3707:17:14, 1 September 2013 (UTC) 3682:From today's featured article 3555:12:15, 1 September 2013 (UTC) 3536: 3473: 3397: 3299: 3189:That should be a single link. 3086: 2983: 2958: 2784:that before 2010 (wp:en like) 2240: 2104: 1759: 1399:Seems like a strange approach 661: 164:Tally period for runoff votes 73:the aforementioned discussion 5019:, a non-profit organization. 4854:– Wiki software development. 4487:12:10, 3 November 2013 (UTC) 4451:23:21, 3 November 2013 (UTC) 4437:02:24, 3 November 2013 (UTC) 4409:22:21, 30 October 2013 (UTC) 4385:18:45, 29 October 2013 (UTC) 4277:02:07, 3 November 2013 (UTC) 4251:10:28, 29 October 2013 (UTC) 4236:05:46, 29 October 2013 (UTC) 4162:03:49, 29 October 2013 (UTC) 4140:03:32, 29 October 2013 (UTC) 4100:01:40, 29 October 2013 (UTC) 4053:22:12, 28 October 2013 (UTC) 4034:05:53, 28 October 2013 (UTC) 4022:http://www.csszengarden.com/ 4004:16:24, 28 October 2013 (UTC) 3984:01:13, 28 October 2013 (UTC) 3965:23:35, 27 October 2013 (UTC) 3950:16:44, 27 October 2013 (UTC) 3922:14:42, 27 October 2013 (UTC) 3890:13:10, 27 October 2013 (UTC) 2053:(Reproduced under fair use: 1817:OTD (Selected anniversaries) 1574:19:59, 9 February 2013 (UTC) 1547:02:01, 9 February 2013 (UTC) 1533:22:07, 8 February 2013 (UTC) 1515:18:38, 8 February 2013 (UTC) 1475:17:19, 8 February 2013 (UTC) 1443:11:51, 8 February 2013 (UTC) 1432:10:32, 8 February 2013 (UTC) 1227:06:27, 7 February 2013 (UTC) 1218:05:58, 7 February 2013 (UTC) 1201:15:22, 6 February 2013 (UTC) 1175:02:42, 8 February 2013 (UTC) 1133:05:40, 5 February 2013 (UTC) 1117:03:37, 5 February 2013 (UTC) 1072:14:14, 6 February 2013 (UTC) 1045:14:14, 6 February 2013 (UTC) 1031:05:52, 5 February 2013 (UTC) 1006:14:14, 6 February 2013 (UTC) 992:05:50, 5 February 2013 (UTC) 974:14:14, 6 February 2013 (UTC) 955:05:46, 5 February 2013 (UTC) 932:03:53, 5 February 2013 (UTC) 922:03:37, 5 February 2013 (UTC) 903:02:02, 4 February 2013 (UTC) 878:01:20, 4 February 2013 (UTC) 852:18:24, 3 February 2013 (UTC) 835:05:17, 29 January 2013 (UTC) 742:16:52, 3 February 2013 (UTC) 680:15:41, 3 February 2013 (UTC) 639:16:52, 3 February 2013 (UTC) 606:05:18, 29 January 2013 (UTC) 568:20:03, 28 January 2013 (UTC) 538:19:43, 28 January 2013 (UTC) 506:05:03, 28 January 2013 (UTC) 444:05:00, 28 January 2013 (UTC) 364:04:14, 28 January 2013 (UTC) 338:02:35, 28 January 2013 (UTC) 313:01:57, 28 January 2013 (UTC) 256:01:00, 28 January 2013 (UTC) 215:00:41, 28 January 2013 (UTC) 196:00:39, 28 January 2013 (UTC) 181:23:51, 27 January 2013 (UTC) 102:09:39, 27 January 2013 (UTC) 80:02:08, 27 January 2013 (UTC) 63:01:42, 27 January 2013 (UTC) 47:21:50, 26 January 2013 (UTC) 5066:Status as of February 2014? 4984:– Dictionary and thesaurus. 4919:– Collection of quotations. 4222:layout, that was my point. 4144:As a P.S. your preference ( 3641:(*Knowledge (XXG)* *cough*) 3637:(*cough* *Knowledge (XXG)*) 3522:00:39, 27 August 2013 (UTC) 3492:16:21, 26 August 2013 (UTC) 3451:15:41, 26 August 2013 (UTC) 3416:07:50, 19 August 2013 (UTC) 3388:23:50, 18 August 2013 (UTC) 3356:09:15, 18 August 2013 (UTC) 3318:09:04, 18 August 2013 (UTC) 3267:08:58, 18 August 2013 (UTC) 3180:04:41, 18 August 2013 (UTC) 3152:04:32, 18 August 2013 (UTC) 3133:04:02, 18 August 2013 (UTC) 3105:20:20, 17 August 2013 (UTC) 3075:19:45, 17 August 2013 (UTC) 3002:16:17, 17 August 2013 (UTC) 2977:16:45, 15 August 2013 (UTC) 2863:17:00, 12 August 2013 (UTC) 5255: 4681:Welcome to Knowledge (XXG) 4174:people will dislike it... 3254:I'll just leave this here. 3139:I'll just leave this here. 2839:23:02, 5 August 2013 (UTC) 2819:19:29, 5 August 2013 (UTC) 2157:is 137 KB and 17 requests. 1742:User:Paladox2014/Main Page 1709:12:07, 27 April 2013 (UTC) 1697:User:Paladox2014/Main_Page 1691:User:Paladox2014/Main_Page 1685:20:39, 20 April 2013 (UTC) 1670:01:24, 18 April 2013 (UTC) 1641:00:39, 18 April 2013 (UTC) 1621:02:11, 26 March 2013 (UTC) 1598:01:18, 26 March 2013 (UTC) 1233:The RfC is quite scattered 1012:In addition to discussing 841:isn't for that purpose. -- 796:Encourage donations to WMF 5237:11:22, 1 March 2014 (UTC) 5213:08:34, 1 March 2014 (UTC) 5042:18:25, 27 June 2016 (UTC) 4805:Knowledge (XXG) languages 4257:Knowledge (XXG):Dashboard 4209:and where it all lives... 2799:02:31, 20 July 2013 (UTC) 2698:03:50, 23 June 2013 (UTC) 2678:03:47, 23 June 2013 (UTC) 2656:03:57, 23 June 2013 (UTC) 2641:22:43, 22 June 2013 (UTC) 2622:04:18, 23 June 2013 (UTC) 2607:00:15, 23 June 2013 (UTC) 2591:22:43, 22 June 2013 (UTC) 2576:02:35, 14 June 2013 (UTC) 2549:05:19, 12 June 2013 (UTC) 2529:04:30, 12 June 2013 (UTC) 2515:02:16, 12 June 2013 (UTC) 2486:01:17, 12 June 2013 (UTC) 2452:Showcase featured content 1984:Proposed Simple Main Page 857:discussion. I've created 750:Brainstorming for the RFC 4841:– Free media repository. 4708:Today's Featured Content 4609:00:27, 7 July 2013 (UTC) 4595:22:12, 4 July 2013 (UTC) 4569:07:55, 4 July 2013 (UTC) 4531:06:42, 4 July 2013 (UTC) 4515:05:54, 4 July 2013 (UTC) 4499:http://www.osunrise.com/ 3969:Are you suggesting that 2761:00:17, 7 July 2013 (UTC) 2746:21:05, 5 July 2013 (UTC) 2729:23:28, 2 July 2013 (UTC) 2714:19:13, 2 July 2013 (UTC) 2403:23:32, 9 June 2013 (UTC) 2374:03:18, 8 June 2013 (UTC) 2358:02:30, 8 June 2013 (UTC) 2339:10:24, 4 June 2013 (UTC) 2318:10:24, 1 June 2013 (UTC) 2286:11:46, 28 May 2013 (UTC) 2265:International uniformity 2259:14:04, 31 May 2013 (UTC) 2233:03:33, 28 May 2013 (UTC) 2203:18:21, 31 May 2013 (UTC) 2171:is 85 KB and 3 requests. 2123:14:02, 31 May 2013 (UTC) 2097:09:44, 25 May 2013 (UTC) 1978:15:21, 23 May 2013 (UTC) 1949:06:08, 23 May 2013 (UTC) 1911:11:57, 17 May 2013 (UTC) 1896:04:21, 17 May 2013 (UTC) 1871:03:13, 17 May 2013 (UTC) 1831:. I have also requested 1802:Village pump (proposals) 1778:11:12, 11 May 2013 (UTC) 1358:11:21, 13 May 2013 (UTC) 1344:12:12, 11 May 2013 (UTC) 1327:11:31, 11 May 2013 (UTC) 1313:04:40, 11 May 2013 (UTC) 1298:21:14, 10 May 2013 (UTC) 1272:02:38, 10 May 2013 (UTC) 713:as separate focal points 486:of the page, and normal 4945:– Directory of species. 4932:– Free-content library. 4310:mw:GlobalProfile/design 3630:Some websites get this. 2891:MediaWiki:Main Page.css 2827:here in Knowledge (XXG) 2186:is 4 KB and 2 requests 2065:I propose the following 1852:01:40, 6 May 2013 (UTC) 1753:21:15, 5 May 2013 (UTC) 1258:09:25, 9 May 2013 (UTC) 1248:08:14, 9 May 2013 (UTC) 1191:. What do you think? - 4893:– Free knowledge base. 4704: 2168:Google advanced search 1798:Centralized discussion 4703: 4652:Here is my proposal: 2921:Here's the same page 2780:that (terrible thing) 2291:Next phase of the RFC 1997:, by Chris Zacharias 1699:to improve it please 927:in the draft RfC). — 5016:Wikimedia Foundation 4971:– Free travel guide. 4906:– Free-content news. 4825:Wikimedia Foundation 4492:A modest Proposal... 2938:currently looks like 2914:Here's my framework 2539:is low bandwidth. -- 2193:simple... (smile) -- 2183:My personal web page 3900:#Some "conclusions" 2949:from it's content. 2442:. Others disagreed. 2413:Disclosure: I made 1995:Page Weight Matters 862:(old version - see 4705: 4537:I have seen worse. 3633:(*cough* *Google*) 3560:Content and layout 2440:Google's home page 2408:Some "conclusions" 2324:needs to be added. 1833:a watchlist notice 1489:this RFC from 2011 5217:Eventually, yes. 5048: 5047: 4729:Featured pictures 4715:Featured articles 4269:Quiddity|Quiddity 4198: 4181:comment added by 2418: 2415:one minor comment 2376: 2211:Will this succeed 2059: 867: 763:From the 2011 RFC 642: 468: 298:6. Community vote 274:2. RFC Discussion 22:(Redirected from 5246: 5235: 5232: 5226: 5121: 5118: 5112: 5018: 5011:Knowledge (XXG)® 5008: 5002: 4978: 4965: 4952: 4939: 4926: 4913: 4900: 4887: 4874: 4861: 4848: 4835: 4822: 4757:Community portal 4660:Extended content 4656: 4584: 4583: 4582: 4432: 4423: 4418: 4383: 4380: 4374: 4197: 4175: 3920: 3917: 3911: 3886: 3879: 3848: 3845: 3839: 3824:search home page 3773: 3770: 3764: 3741:goal in the RFC. 3553: 3550: 3544: 3490: 3487: 3481: 3446: 3437: 3432: 3414: 3411: 3405: 3384: 3377: 3316: 3313: 3307: 3175: 3166: 3161: 3128: 3119: 3114: 3103: 3100: 3094: 3000: 2997: 2991: 2975: 2972: 2966: 2849:Hi if you go to 2811:Horatio Snickers 2738:Kevin Rutherford 2605: 2571: 2562: 2557: 2510: 2501: 2496: 2412: 2362: 2313: 2304: 2299: 2257: 2254: 2248: 2121: 2118: 2112: 2058: 2051: 1973: 1964: 1959: 1945: 1938: 1906: 1885: 1881: 1880: 1866: 1776: 1773: 1767: 1721:the project page 1683: 1665: 1656: 1651: 1569: 1560: 1555: 1510: 1501: 1496: 1470: 1461: 1456: 1216: 1183:Second draft RFC 1131: 1106: 1100: 1029: 990: 953: 864:Second draft RFC 861: 859:a draft RFC here 850: 678: 675: 669: 628: 536: 462: 362: 286:4. Mockup review 213: 179: 27: 5254: 5253: 5249: 5248: 5247: 5245: 5244: 5243: 5230: 5221: 5116: 5107: 5068: 5049: 5023: 5014: 5004: 4998: 4815: 4752: 4710: 4698: 4697: 4689: 4688: 4684: 4683: 4661: 4621: 4580: 4494: 4465: 4435: 4428: 4421: 4416: 4378: 4369: 4176: 4088:Portal:Politics 3915: 3906: 3884: 3877: 3864: 3843: 3834: 3768: 3759: 3676:Did you know... 3562: 3548: 3539: 3485: 3476: 3449: 3442: 3435: 3430: 3409: 3400: 3382: 3375: 3311: 3302: 3178: 3171: 3164: 3159: 3131: 3124: 3117: 3112: 3098: 3089: 3035:Britannica.com: 2995: 2986: 2970: 2961: 2875: 2873:Basic framework 2870: 2855:109.144.229.214 2847: 2806: 2769: 2690:TheOriginalSoni 2685: 2670:TheOriginalSoni 2598: 2574: 2567: 2560: 2555: 2521:TheOriginalSoni 2513: 2506: 2499: 2494: 2410: 2395:TheOriginalSoni 2387: 2331:TheOriginalSoni 2316: 2309: 2302: 2297: 2293: 2274:Dutch Main Page 2267: 2252: 2243: 2213: 2116: 2107: 2078: 2052: 1986: 1976: 1969: 1962: 1957: 1943: 1936: 1923: 1904: 1878: 1876: 1864: 1859: 1857:Prior proposals 1786: 1771: 1762: 1738: 1693: 1675: 1668: 1661: 1654: 1649: 1629: 1586: 1572: 1565: 1558: 1553: 1513: 1506: 1499: 1494: 1485: 1473: 1466: 1459: 1454: 1401: 1389:TheOriginalSoni 1350:TheOriginalSoni 1319:TheOriginalSoni 1290:TheOriginalSoni 1240:TheOriginalSoni 1235: 1208: 1185: 1123: 1104: 1098: 1079: 1021: 982: 945: 893:Also note that 842: 752: 673: 664: 626: 528: 416:was the result. 354: 205: 171: 139:Proposal period 114: 36: 29: 28: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 5252: 5250: 5242: 5241: 5240: 5239: 5197: 5196: 5195: 5194: 5193: 5192: 5191: 5169: 5168: 5167: 5166: 5165: 5164: 5163: 5162: 5101: 5067: 5064: 5046: 5045: 5031: 5024: 5021: 5020: 5006:Privacy Policy 4991: 4990: 4988: 4986: 4985: 4972: 4959: 4946: 4933: 4920: 4907: 4894: 4881: 4868: 4855: 4842: 4829: 4814: 4811: 4810: 4809: 4801: 4793: 4785: 4781:Reference desk 4777: 4769: 4761: 4751: 4748: 4747: 4746: 4739: 4732: 4725: 4722:Featured lists 4718: 4709: 4706: 4696: 4690: 4687: 4685: 4682: 4680: 4679: 4667: 4663: 4662: 4659: 4654: 4650: 4649: 4644: 4639: 4632: 4620: 4615: 4614: 4613: 4612: 4611: 4597: 4572: 4571: 4556: 4555: 4547: 4546: 4534: 4533: 4493: 4490: 4475: 4474: 4464: 4461: 4460: 4459: 4458: 4457: 4456: 4455: 4454: 4453: 4425: 4362: 4361: 4360: 4359: 4358: 4357: 4356: 4355: 4354: 4353: 4352: 4351: 4350: 4349: 4348: 4347: 4346: 4345: 4344: 4343: 4342: 4341: 4340: 4339: 4306: 4286: 4216: 4213: 4210: 4142: 4109: 4108: 4107: 4106: 4105: 4104: 4103: 4102: 4079: 4063: 4057:That's taking 4014: 4013: 4012: 4011: 4010: 4009: 4008: 4007: 4006: 3971:Guy's proposal 3927: 3926: 3925: 3924: 3893: 3892: 3871: 3870: 3863: 3860: 3859: 3858: 3857: 3856: 3855: 3854: 3853: 3852: 3809: 3808: 3807: 3806: 3805: 3804: 3780: 3779: 3778: 3777: 3745: 3744: 3743: 3742: 3735: 3734: 3733: 3732: 3710: 3709: 3669: 3668: 3626: 3625: 3617: 3616: 3615:anguage) page. 3569: 3568: 3561: 3558: 3533: 3532: 3531: 3530: 3529: 3528: 3527: 3526: 3525: 3524: 3501: 3500: 3499: 3498: 3497: 3496: 3495: 3494: 3458: 3457: 3456: 3455: 3454: 3453: 3439: 3421: 3420: 3419: 3418: 3391: 3390: 3369: 3368: 3367: 3366: 3365: 3364: 3363: 3362: 3361: 3360: 3359: 3358: 3329: 3328: 3327: 3326: 3325: 3324: 3323: 3322: 3321: 3320: 3282: 3281: 3280: 3279: 3278: 3277: 3276: 3275: 3274: 3273: 3272: 3271: 3270: 3269: 3237: 3236: 3235: 3234: 3233: 3232: 3231: 3230: 3229: 3228: 3227: 3226: 3225: 3224: 3207: 3206: 3205: 3204: 3203: 3202: 3201: 3200: 3199: 3198: 3197: 3196: 3195: 3194: 3190: 3168: 3121: 3062: 3059: 3057: 3052: 3049: 3044: 3041: 3036: 3033: 3028: 3025: 3020: 3017: 3015: 3005: 3004: 2942: 2941: 2934: 2926: 2918: 2908: 2907: 2904: 2901:no more tables 2897: 2896: 2895: 2874: 2871: 2869: 2866: 2846: 2843: 2842: 2841: 2805: 2802: 2768: 2765: 2764: 2763: 2734: 2733: 2732: 2731: 2684: 2681: 2667: 2666: 2663: 2659: 2658: 2629: 2628: 2627: 2626: 2625: 2624: 2595: 2594: 2593: 2564: 2532: 2531: 2517: 2503: 2474: 2473: 2470: 2467: 2464: 2461: 2460: 2459: 2456: 2453: 2443: 2436: 2433: 2430: 2427: 2409: 2406: 2386: 2383: 2382: 2381: 2380: 2379: 2378: 2377: 2328: 2325: 2306: 2292: 2289: 2266: 2263: 2262: 2261: 2212: 2209: 2208: 2207: 2206: 2205: 2178: 2177: 2176: 2175: 2163: 2162: 2161: 2160: 2149: 2148: 2147: 2146: 2135: 2134: 2133: 2132: 2126: 2125: 2077: 2074: 2062: 2046: 2045: 2036: 2035: 2031:TWENTY MINUTES 2022: 2021: 2008: 2007: 2003: 2002: 1985: 1982: 1981: 1980: 1966: 1922: 1919: 1918: 1917: 1916: 1915: 1914: 1913: 1858: 1855: 1794:Talk:Main Page 1785: 1784:RFC has opened 1782: 1781: 1780: 1737: 1734: 1733: 1732: 1692: 1689: 1688: 1687: 1674:OK with me. -- 1672: 1658: 1628: 1627:RFC start date 1625: 1624: 1623: 1585: 1584:Current status 1582: 1581: 1580: 1579: 1578: 1577: 1576: 1562: 1503: 1484: 1481: 1480: 1479: 1478: 1477: 1463: 1446: 1445: 1400: 1397: 1373: 1372: 1371: 1370: 1369: 1368: 1367: 1366: 1365: 1364: 1363: 1362: 1361: 1360: 1234: 1231: 1230: 1229: 1220: 1184: 1181: 1180: 1179: 1178: 1177: 1091:Talk:Main Page 1087:WP:VILLAGEPUMP 1078: 1075: 1060: 1059: 1058: 1057: 1056: 1055: 1054: 1053: 1052: 1051: 1050: 1049: 1048: 1047: 1010: 1009: 1008: 978: 977: 976: 891: 887: 823: 822: 819: 816: 813: 810: 803: 802: 801: 800: 797: 794: 786: 785: 784: 781: 778: 775: 772: 769: 751: 748: 747: 746: 745: 744: 722: 716: 698: 692: 683: 682: 625: 622: 621: 620: 619: 618: 617: 616: 615: 614: 613: 612: 611: 610: 609: 608: 581: 580: 579: 578: 577: 576: 575: 574: 573: 572: 571: 570: 549: 548: 547: 546: 545: 544: 543: 542: 541: 540: 515: 514: 513: 512: 511: 510: 509: 508: 494: 491: 479: 475: 470: 469: 453: 452: 451: 450: 449: 448: 447: 446: 437: 433: 423: 417: 406: 401: 394: 389: 386: 383: 371: 370: 369: 368: 367: 366: 345: 344: 343: 342: 341: 340: 327: 318: 317: 316: 315: 301: 295: 289: 283: 277: 271: 265: 259: 258: 245: 230: 227: 224: 220: 219: 218: 217: 199: 198: 168: 167: 161: 155: 149: 143: 136: 130: 124: 113: 110: 109: 108: 107: 106: 105: 104: 85: 84: 83: 82: 66: 65: 40:Talk:Main Page 35: 32: 30: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 5251: 5238: 5233: 5227: 5224: 5216: 5215: 5214: 5210: 5206: 5202: 5198: 5190: 5186: 5182: 5177: 5176: 5175: 5174: 5173: 5172: 5171: 5170: 5159: 5158: 5157: 5153: 5149: 5145: 5141: 5140: 5139: 5135: 5131: 5126: 5125: 5124: 5119: 5113: 5110: 5102: 5100: 5096: 5092: 5088: 5084: 5083: 5082: 5081: 5077: 5073: 5065: 5063: 5062: 5058: 5054: 5044: 5043: 5039: 5035: 5029: 5028: 5022: 5017: 5012: 5007: 5001: 4996: 4989: 4983: 4982: 4977: 4973: 4970: 4969: 4964: 4960: 4957: 4956: 4951: 4947: 4944: 4943: 4938: 4934: 4931: 4930: 4925: 4921: 4918: 4917: 4912: 4908: 4905: 4904: 4899: 4895: 4892: 4891: 4886: 4882: 4879: 4878: 4873: 4869: 4866: 4865: 4860: 4856: 4853: 4852: 4847: 4843: 4840: 4839: 4834: 4830: 4827: 4826: 4821: 4817: 4816: 4807: 4806: 4802: 4799: 4798: 4794: 4791: 4790: 4786: 4783: 4782: 4778: 4775: 4774: 4773:Local embassy 4770: 4767: 4766: 4762: 4759: 4758: 4754: 4753: 4749: 4745: 4744: 4740: 4738: 4737: 4733: 4731: 4730: 4726: 4724: 4723: 4719: 4717: 4716: 4712: 4711: 4702: 4694: 4678: 4677: 4673: 4671: 4665: 4664: 4658: 4657: 4653: 4648: 4645: 4643: 4640: 4637: 4633: 4630: 4629: 4628: 4626: 4619: 4616: 4610: 4606: 4602: 4598: 4596: 4592: 4588: 4576: 4575: 4574: 4573: 4570: 4566: 4562: 4558: 4557: 4553: 4552:The Afterlife 4549: 4548: 4545: 4543: 4541: 4539: 4536: 4535: 4532: 4528: 4524: 4519: 4518: 4517: 4516: 4512: 4508: 4503: 4501: 4500: 4491: 4489: 4488: 4484: 4480: 4471: 4470: 4469: 4462: 4452: 4448: 4444: 4440: 4439: 4438: 4433: 4431: 4424: 4419: 4412: 4411: 4410: 4406: 4402: 4398: 4393: 4388: 4387: 4386: 4381: 4375: 4372: 4364: 4363: 4338: 4334: 4330: 4325: 4324: 4323: 4319: 4315: 4311: 4307: 4304: 4303: 4302: 4298: 4294: 4290: 4284: 4280: 4279: 4278: 4274: 4270: 4266: 4262: 4258: 4254: 4253: 4252: 4248: 4244: 4239: 4238: 4237: 4233: 4229: 4225: 4221: 4217: 4214: 4211: 4208: 4204: 4200: 4199: 4196: 4192: 4188: 4184: 4180: 4173: 4169: 4165: 4164: 4163: 4159: 4155: 4151: 4147: 4143: 4141: 4137: 4133: 4128: 4124: 4123:accessibility 4119: 4118: 4117: 4116: 4115: 4114: 4113: 4112: 4111: 4110: 4101: 4097: 4093: 4089: 4085: 4080: 4077: 4073: 4069: 4064: 4060: 4056: 4055: 4054: 4050: 4046: 4042: 4037: 4036: 4035: 4031: 4027: 4023: 4019: 4015: 4005: 4001: 3997: 3993: 3989: 3988: 3987: 3986: 3985: 3981: 3977: 3972: 3968: 3967: 3966: 3962: 3958: 3953: 3952: 3951: 3947: 3943: 3939: 3935: 3931: 3930: 3929: 3928: 3923: 3918: 3912: 3909: 3901: 3897: 3896: 3895: 3894: 3891: 3888: 3887: 3881: 3880: 3873: 3872: 3869: 3866: 3865: 3861: 3851: 3846: 3840: 3837: 3829: 3825: 3821: 3817: 3816: 3815: 3814: 3813: 3812: 3811: 3810: 3803: 3799: 3795: 3790: 3786: 3785: 3784: 3783: 3782: 3781: 3776: 3771: 3765: 3762: 3754: 3749: 3748: 3747: 3746: 3739: 3738: 3737: 3736: 3730: 3726: 3722: 3718: 3714: 3713: 3712: 3711: 3708: 3704: 3700: 3696: 3692: 3688: 3684: 3683: 3678: 3677: 3671: 3670: 3666: 3665: 3660: 3659: 3654: 3653: 3648: 3647: 3642: 3638: 3634: 3631: 3628: 3627: 3622: 3619: 3618: 3614: 3610: 3606: 3602: 3598: 3594: 3590: 3586: 3582: 3578: 3574: 3571: 3570: 3567: 3564: 3563: 3559: 3557: 3556: 3551: 3545: 3542: 3523: 3519: 3515: 3511: 3510: 3509: 3508: 3507: 3506: 3505: 3504: 3503: 3502: 3493: 3488: 3482: 3479: 3471: 3466: 3465: 3464: 3463: 3462: 3461: 3460: 3459: 3452: 3447: 3445: 3438: 3433: 3427: 3426: 3425: 3424: 3423: 3422: 3417: 3412: 3406: 3403: 3395: 3394: 3393: 3392: 3389: 3386: 3385: 3379: 3378: 3371: 3370: 3357: 3353: 3349: 3345: 3341: 3340: 3339: 3338: 3337: 3336: 3335: 3334: 3333: 3332: 3331: 3330: 3319: 3314: 3308: 3305: 3297: 3292: 3291: 3290: 3289: 3288: 3287: 3286: 3285: 3284: 3283: 3268: 3264: 3260: 3256: 3255: 3251: 3250: 3249: 3248: 3247: 3246: 3245: 3244: 3243: 3242: 3241: 3240: 3239: 3238: 3221: 3220: 3219: 3218: 3217: 3216: 3215: 3214: 3213: 3212: 3211: 3210: 3209: 3208: 3191: 3187: 3183: 3182: 3181: 3176: 3174: 3167: 3162: 3155: 3154: 3153: 3149: 3145: 3141: 3140: 3136: 3135: 3134: 3129: 3127: 3120: 3115: 3108: 3107: 3106: 3101: 3095: 3092: 3083: 3078: 3077: 3076: 3072: 3068: 3063: 3060: 3058: 3056: 3053: 3051:GuyMacon.com: 3050: 3048: 3045: 3042: 3040: 3037: 3034: 3032: 3029: 3026: 3024: 3021: 3018: 3016: 3013: 3009: 3008: 3007: 3006: 3003: 2998: 2992: 2989: 2981: 2980: 2979: 2978: 2973: 2967: 2964: 2955: 2950: 2948: 2939: 2936:How my draft 2935: 2933: 2932: 2927: 2925: 2924: 2923:with styling. 2919: 2917: 2913: 2912: 2911: 2905: 2902: 2898: 2894: 2892: 2887: 2886: 2884: 2883: 2882: 2878: 2872: 2867: 2865: 2864: 2860: 2856: 2852: 2844: 2840: 2836: 2832: 2828: 2823: 2822: 2821: 2820: 2816: 2812: 2803: 2801: 2800: 2796: 2792: 2787: 2785: 2781: 2776: 2774: 2766: 2762: 2758: 2754: 2750: 2749: 2748: 2747: 2743: 2739: 2730: 2726: 2722: 2717: 2716: 2715: 2711: 2707: 2702: 2701: 2700: 2699: 2695: 2691: 2682: 2680: 2679: 2675: 2671: 2664: 2661: 2660: 2657: 2653: 2649: 2645: 2644: 2643: 2642: 2638: 2634: 2623: 2619: 2615: 2610: 2609: 2608: 2604: 2603: 2596: 2592: 2588: 2584: 2579: 2578: 2577: 2572: 2570: 2563: 2558: 2552: 2551: 2550: 2546: 2542: 2538: 2534: 2533: 2530: 2526: 2522: 2518: 2516: 2511: 2509: 2502: 2497: 2490: 2489: 2488: 2487: 2483: 2479: 2471: 2468: 2465: 2462: 2457: 2454: 2451: 2450: 2448: 2444: 2441: 2437: 2434: 2431: 2428: 2425: 2424: 2423: 2419: 2416: 2407: 2405: 2404: 2400: 2396: 2390: 2384: 2375: 2371: 2367: 2361: 2360: 2359: 2355: 2351: 2347: 2342: 2341: 2340: 2336: 2332: 2329: 2326: 2322: 2321: 2320: 2319: 2314: 2312: 2305: 2300: 2290: 2288: 2287: 2283: 2279: 2275: 2270: 2264: 2260: 2255: 2249: 2246: 2237: 2236: 2235: 2234: 2230: 2226: 2221: 2219: 2210: 2204: 2200: 2196: 2192: 2188: 2185: 2182: 2181: 2180: 2179: 2173: 2170: 2167: 2166: 2165: 2164: 2159: 2156: 2153: 2152: 2151: 2150: 2145: 2142: 2140:Our main page 2139: 2138: 2137: 2136: 2130: 2129: 2128: 2127: 2124: 2119: 2113: 2110: 2101: 2100: 2099: 2098: 2094: 2090: 2086: 2082: 2075: 2073: 2072: 2068: 2066: 2060: 2056: 2049: 2043: 2038: 2037: 2032: 2028: 2024: 2023: 2018: 2014: 2010: 2009: 2005: 2004: 2000: 1999: 1998: 1996: 1992: 1989: 1983: 1979: 1974: 1972: 1965: 1960: 1953: 1952: 1951: 1950: 1947: 1946: 1940: 1939: 1932: 1928: 1925:I suggest at 1920: 1912: 1909: 1907: 1901: 1900: 1899: 1898: 1897: 1893: 1889: 1884: 1875: 1874: 1873: 1872: 1869: 1867: 1856: 1854: 1853: 1849: 1845: 1841: 1836: 1834: 1830: 1826: 1822: 1818: 1814: 1811: 1807: 1803: 1799: 1795: 1791: 1783: 1779: 1774: 1768: 1765: 1757: 1756: 1755: 1754: 1750: 1746: 1743: 1735: 1730: 1726: 1722: 1718: 1713: 1712: 1711: 1710: 1706: 1702: 1698: 1690: 1686: 1682: 1680: 1679: 1673: 1671: 1666: 1664: 1657: 1652: 1645: 1644: 1643: 1642: 1638: 1634: 1626: 1622: 1618: 1614: 1610: 1606: 1602: 1601: 1600: 1599: 1595: 1591: 1583: 1575: 1570: 1568: 1561: 1556: 1550: 1549: 1548: 1544: 1540: 1536: 1535: 1534: 1531: 1527: 1523: 1519: 1518: 1517: 1516: 1511: 1509: 1502: 1497: 1490: 1482: 1476: 1471: 1469: 1462: 1457: 1450: 1449: 1448: 1447: 1444: 1441: 1436: 1435: 1434: 1433: 1429: 1425: 1421: 1415: 1413: 1408: 1406: 1398: 1396: 1394: 1390: 1385: 1381: 1377: 1359: 1355: 1351: 1347: 1346: 1345: 1341: 1337: 1333: 1330: 1329: 1328: 1324: 1320: 1316: 1315: 1314: 1310: 1306: 1301: 1300: 1299: 1295: 1291: 1287: 1283: 1279: 1275: 1274: 1273: 1269: 1265: 1261: 1260: 1259: 1256: 1252: 1251: 1250: 1249: 1245: 1241: 1232: 1228: 1225: 1221: 1219: 1215: 1213: 1212: 1205: 1204: 1203: 1202: 1198: 1194: 1190: 1182: 1176: 1172: 1168: 1164: 1160: 1156: 1152: 1148: 1144: 1140: 1136: 1135: 1134: 1130: 1128: 1127: 1121: 1120: 1119: 1118: 1114: 1110: 1103: 1096: 1093:, as well as 1092: 1088: 1084: 1076: 1074: 1073: 1069: 1065: 1046: 1042: 1038: 1034: 1033: 1032: 1028: 1026: 1025: 1019: 1015: 1011: 1007: 1003: 999: 995: 994: 993: 989: 987: 986: 979: 975: 971: 967: 962: 958: 957: 956: 952: 950: 949: 943: 939: 935: 934: 933: 930: 925: 924: 923: 919: 915: 910: 906: 905: 904: 901: 896: 895:a new section 892: 888: 885: 884:a similar one 881: 880: 879: 875: 871: 865: 860: 855: 854: 853: 849: 847: 846: 839: 838: 837: 836: 832: 828: 820: 817: 814: 811: 808: 807: 806: 798: 795: 792: 791: 790: 787: 782: 779: 776: 773: 770: 767: 766: 764: 761: 760: 759: 756: 749: 743: 739: 735: 731: 727: 723: 720: 717: 714: 712: 708: 704: 699: 696: 693: 690: 687: 686: 685: 684: 681: 676: 670: 667: 658: 654: 650: 645: 644: 643: 640: 636: 632: 623: 607: 603: 599: 595: 594: 593: 592: 591: 590: 589: 588: 587: 586: 585: 584: 583: 582: 569: 566: 561: 560: 559: 558: 557: 556: 555: 554: 553: 552: 551: 550: 539: 535: 533: 532: 525: 524: 523: 522: 521: 520: 519: 518: 517: 516: 507: 503: 499: 495: 492: 489: 485: 480: 476: 472: 471: 466: 465:edit conflict 461: 460: 459: 458: 457: 456: 455: 454: 445: 442: 438: 436:encyclopedia. 434: 431: 428: 424: 422: 418: 415: 411: 407: 405: 402: 399: 395: 393: 390: 387: 384: 382: 379: 378: 377: 376: 375: 374: 373: 372: 365: 361: 359: 358: 351: 350: 349: 348: 347: 346: 339: 336: 332: 328: 324: 323: 322: 321: 320: 319: 314: 310: 306: 302: 299: 296: 293: 290: 287: 284: 281: 278: 275: 272: 269: 266: 263: 262: 261: 260: 257: 254: 250: 246: 243: 239: 235: 231: 228: 225: 222: 221: 216: 212: 210: 209: 203: 202: 201: 200: 197: 193: 189: 185: 184: 183: 182: 178: 176: 175: 165: 162: 159: 156: 153: 150: 147: 144: 140: 137: 134: 131: 128: 125: 122: 119: 118: 117: 111: 103: 99: 95: 91: 90: 89: 88: 87: 86: 81: 78: 74: 70: 69: 68: 67: 64: 60: 56: 51: 50: 49: 48: 45: 41: 33: 25: 19: 5222: 5108: 5069: 5050: 5030: 5026: 5025: 5000:Terms of Use 4992: 4987: 4979: 4966: 4953: 4940: 4927: 4914: 4901: 4888: 4875: 4862: 4849: 4836: 4823: 4803: 4797:Village pump 4795: 4787: 4779: 4771: 4763: 4755: 4741: 4734: 4727: 4720: 4713: 4675: 4674: 4669: 4666: 4651: 4641: 4624: 4622: 4504: 4497: 4495: 4476: 4466: 4429: 4396: 4391: 4370: 4219: 4206: 4177:— Preceding 4171: 4167: 4126: 4122: 4074:(c.2006) vs 4070:(c.2004) vs 4059:m:separatism 4040: 3907: 3883: 3876: 3867: 3835: 3827: 3823: 3819: 3788: 3787:Good point. 3760: 3752: 3728: 3724: 3720: 3716: 3694: 3690: 3686: 3680: 3674: 3662: 3656: 3650: 3644: 3640: 3636: 3632: 3629: 3620: 3612: 3608: 3604: 3600: 3592: 3577:Contact Page 3572: 3565: 3540: 3534: 3477: 3469: 3443: 3401: 3381: 3374: 3343: 3303: 3295: 3252: 3185: 3172: 3137: 3125: 3090: 3081: 2987: 2962: 2953: 2951: 2946: 2943: 2928: 2920: 2909: 2900: 2888: 2879: 2876: 2848: 2807: 2788: 2777: 2770: 2767:Chinese main 2735: 2686: 2668: 2630: 2601: 2568: 2536: 2507: 2475: 2420: 2411: 2391: 2388: 2310: 2294: 2271: 2268: 2244: 2225:64.40.54.145 2222: 2214: 2190: 2108: 2083: 2079: 2069: 2061: 2054: 2050: 2047: 2040: 2030: 2027:TWO MINUTES! 2026: 2016: 2012: 1994: 1993: 1990: 1987: 1970: 1942: 1935: 1924: 1882: 1860: 1837: 1787: 1763: 1739: 1694: 1677: 1662: 1630: 1587: 1566: 1507: 1486: 1467: 1416: 1409: 1402: 1374: 1236: 1210: 1186: 1125: 1080: 1061: 1023: 1017: 1013: 984: 947: 942:with editing 941: 937: 844: 824: 804: 788: 762: 757: 753: 710: 706: 702: 665: 656: 652: 648: 627: 530: 488:WP:Etiquette 484:WP:OWNership 409: 397: 356: 297: 291: 285: 279: 273: 267: 248: 241: 237: 233: 207: 173: 169: 163: 157: 151: 145: 138: 132: 126: 120: 115: 37: 5181:Iryna Harpy 5130:Iryna Harpy 4955:Wikiversity 4942:Wikispecies 4743:On This Day 4736:In The News 4601:Iryna Harpy 4587:Iryna Harpy 4523:Iryna Harpy 4463:My proposal 4329:Iryna Harpy 4293:Iryna Harpy 4203:WP:WPACCESS 4154:Iryna Harpy 4132:Iryna Harpy 3994:right now. 3976:Iryna Harpy 3898:See above: 3652:Advertising 2954:discussions 2947:independent 2931:No problem! 2845:My proposal 2831:Iryna Harpy 2804:My proposal 2753:Iryna Harpy 2721:Iryna Harpy 2648:Iryna Harpy 2614:Iryna Harpy 2417:to the RfC. 1955:designs. -- 1745:Paladox2014 1701:Paladox2014 1288:?? Anyone? 1238:mentioned. 1095:WP:RFC/PROP 1077:Advertising 981:phase 2? -- 326:succeeding. 34:New attempt 4981:Wiktionary 4968:Wikivoyage 4929:Wikisource 4691:There are 4168:personally 4084:WP:MILHIST 3830:homepage. 2683:Next phase 2048:Source: 2020:geography. 1840:email list 1530:David Levy 1440:David Levy 1384:David Levy 1332:WP:SOFIXIT 1286:David Levy 1224:David Levy 929:David Levy 900:David Levy 565:David Levy 441:David Levy 335:David Levy 253:David Levy 77:David Levy 44:David Levy 5179:trial. -- 5072:MZMcBride 5053:Guy Macon 5034:Guy Macon 4916:Wikiquote 4877:Wikibooks 4864:Meta-Wiki 4851:MediaWiki 4789:Site news 4765:Help desk 4693:6,886,110 4561:Guy Macon 4507:Guy Macon 4289:Guy Macon 4243:Guy Macon 4183:Guy Macon 4062:location. 4045:Guy Macon 3992:Main Page 3942:Guy Macon 3885:Yamaguchi 3794:Guy Macon 3699:Guy Macon 3691:certainly 3658:Promotion 3646:Marketing 3514:Guy Macon 3348:Guy Macon 3296:technical 3259:Guy Macon 3144:Guy Macon 3067:Guy Macon 3014:), right? 2916:unstyled. 2541:Guy Macon 2195:Guy Macon 2089:Guy Macon 2013:INCREASED 1944:Yamaguchi 1905:wintonian 1865:wintonian 1609:more info 1526:version 2 1424:MZMcBride 1420:Main Page 1412:Main Page 1405:Main Page 1097:(via the 890:category. 809:No change 427:arbitrary 410:consensus 331:2006 poll 112:Procedure 5205:Byfserag 4903:Wikinews 4890:Wikidata 4430:contribs 4314:Quiddity 4283:Quiddity 4228:Quiddity 4191:contribs 4179:unsigned 4092:Quiddity 4026:Quiddity 3472:bold... 3444:contribs 3376:Kangaroo 3173:contribs 3126:contribs 2602:Pretzels 2569:contribs 2508:contribs 2449:put it: 2311:contribs 2042:markets. 1971:contribs 1862:past? -- 1663:contribs 1567:contribs 1522:Verson 1 1508:contribs 1468:contribs 624:Comments 430:variants 142:designs. 94:Dodoïste 4838:Commons 4647:Profit! 4422:Penguin 4392:attempt 4207:content 3721:without 3679:" and " 3581:Readers 3436:Penguin 3165:Penguin 3118:Penguin 3043:Google: 2561:Penguin 2500:Penguin 2447:Edokter 2389:Hello, 2303:Penguin 1963:Penguin 1655:Penguin 1605:WP:TAFI 1559:Penguin 1500:Penguin 1460:Penguin 1083:WP:CENT 909:WP:TAFI 703:content 649:content 421:issues? 238:discuss 5225:dokter 5148:Ypnypn 5111:dokter 4373:dokter 4259:, and 3910:dokter 3878:Toshio 3862:Design 3838:dokter 3763:dokter 3729:before 3611:arkup 3593:That's 3585:Donors 3543:dokter 3480:dokter 3404:dokter 3306:dokter 3093:dokter 2990:dokter 2965:dokter 2791:Nouill 2782:, and 2478:Ypnypn 2278:Dvh369 2247:dokter 2154:Mobile 2111:dokter 2017:LONGER 1937:Toshio 1888:Evad37 1844:Evad37 1766:dokter 1725:Evad37 1633:Evad37 1613:Evad37 1539:Evad37 1376:Evad37 1336:Evad37 1305:Evad37 1278:Evad37 1264:Evad37 1193:Evad37 1167:Evad37 1109:Evad37 1064:Evad37 1037:Evad37 998:Evad37 966:Evad37 914:Evad37 870:Evad37 827:Evad37 789:Others 734:Evad37 711:design 709:, and 707:layout 668:dokter 657:design 655:, and 653:layout 631:Evad37 598:Evad37 498:Evad37 305:Evad37 234:almost 55:Evad37 5091:Harej 5085:See: 4625:could 4443:Harej 4401:Harej 4172:other 3996:Harej 3957:Harej 3687:bloat 3589:Press 3383:powah 3082:Every 2706:Harej 2633:Harej 2583:Harej 2366:Harej 2350:Harej 1380:Rd232 1282:Rd232 1255:Rd232 961:Help: 726:leave 478:want? 398:cause 16:< 5234:) — 5231:talk 5209:talk 5185:talk 5152:talk 5134:talk 5120:) — 5117:talk 5095:talk 5076:talk 5057:talk 5038:talk 5003:and 4605:talk 4591:talk 4565:talk 4527:talk 4511:talk 4483:talk 4479:Taku 4447:talk 4417:Nick 4405:talk 4382:) — 4379:talk 4333:talk 4318:talk 4297:talk 4273:talk 4247:talk 4232:talk 4220:zero 4187:talk 4158:talk 4136:talk 4127:size 4125:and 4096:talk 4049:talk 4030:talk 4000:talk 3980:talk 3961:talk 3946:talk 3919:) — 3916:talk 3847:) — 3844:talk 3818:You 3798:talk 3772:) — 3769:talk 3725:only 3717:only 3703:talk 3664:Push 3607:ext 3603:yper 3597:HTML 3552:) — 3549:talk 3518:talk 3489:) — 3486:talk 3470:very 3431:Nick 3413:) — 3410:talk 3352:talk 3315:) — 3312:talk 3263:talk 3160:Nick 3148:talk 3113:Nick 3102:) — 3099:talk 3071:talk 2999:) — 2996:talk 2974:) — 2971:talk 2859:talk 2835:talk 2829:. -- 2815:talk 2795:talk 2757:talk 2742:talk 2725:talk 2710:talk 2694:talk 2674:talk 2652:talk 2637:talk 2618:talk 2587:talk 2556:Nick 2545:talk 2537:That 2525:talk 2495:Nick 2482:talk 2399:talk 2370:talk 2354:talk 2335:talk 2298:Nick 2282:talk 2256:) — 2253:talk 2229:talk 2199:talk 2191:that 2120:) — 2117:talk 2093:talk 1958:Nick 1892:talk 1883:Done 1848:talk 1829:TAFI 1821:POTD 1788:The 1775:) — 1772:talk 1749:talk 1729:talk 1723:. - 1705:talk 1678:Pine 1650:Nick 1637:talk 1617:talk 1594:talk 1590:Taku 1554:Nick 1543:talk 1495:Nick 1455:Nick 1428:talk 1393:talk 1354:talk 1340:talk 1323:talk 1309:talk 1294:talk 1268:talk 1244:talk 1211:Pine 1197:talk 1171:talk 1165:. - 1159:POTD 1155:TAFI 1126:Pine 1113:talk 1068:talk 1041:talk 1024:Pine 1014:what 1002:talk 985:Pine 970:talk 948:Pine 918:talk 874:talk 845:Pine 831:talk 738:talk 677:) — 674:talk 635:talk 602:talk 531:Pine 502:talk 414:This 357:Pine 309:talk 242:then 208:Pine 192:talk 188:Izno 174:Pine 98:talk 59:talk 5203:?-- 4670:not 4477:-- 4397:new 4086:or 4041:any 3828:own 3789:All 3342:It 3186:Far 2786:. 1825:TFL 1813:ITN 1810:DYK 1806:TFA 1790:RFC 1717:RFC 1284:? 1163:TFL 1151:OTD 1147:ITN 1143:DYK 1139:TFA 1102:RFC 1018:how 249:not 38:At 5219:— 5211:) 5187:) 5154:) 5136:) 5128:-- 5105:— 5097:) 5089:. 5078:) 5059:) 5051:-- 5040:) 5009:. 4607:) 4593:) 4585:-- 4567:) 4529:) 4521:-- 4513:) 4502:? 4485:) 4449:) 4414:-- 4407:) 4367:— 4335:) 4320:) 4299:) 4275:) 4249:) 4234:) 4193:) 4189:• 4160:) 4138:) 4098:) 4051:) 4032:) 4002:) 3982:) 3963:) 3948:) 3904:— 3902:. 3832:— 3820:do 3800:) 3757:— 3753:if 3705:) 3685:" 3661:. 3655:. 3649:. 3643:? 3587:, 3583:, 3537:— 3520:) 3474:— 3398:— 3354:) 3344:is 3300:— 3265:) 3257:-- 3157:-- 3150:) 3142:-- 3087:— 3073:) 3065:-- 2984:— 2959:— 2861:) 2837:) 2817:) 2797:) 2773:首页 2759:) 2744:) 2727:) 2712:) 2696:) 2676:) 2654:) 2639:) 2620:) 2599:— 2589:) 2547:) 2527:) 2484:) 2401:) 2372:) 2356:) 2348:. 2337:) 2284:) 2276:. 2241:— 2231:) 2201:) 2105:— 2095:) 2067:: 1894:) 1850:) 1835:. 1827:, 1823:, 1819:, 1815:, 1808:, 1800:, 1796:, 1760:— 1751:) 1707:) 1647:-- 1639:) 1619:) 1596:) 1545:) 1492:-- 1452:-- 1430:) 1395:) 1382:, 1378:, 1356:) 1342:) 1334:- 1325:) 1311:) 1296:) 1280:? 1270:) 1246:) 1207:-- 1199:) 1173:) 1161:, 1157:, 1153:, 1149:, 1145:, 1141:, 1115:) 1105:}} 1099:{{ 1089:, 1085:, 1070:) 1043:) 1004:) 972:) 920:) 876:) 833:) 765:: 740:) 705:, 662:— 651:, 637:) 604:) 527:-- 504:) 311:) 303:- 194:) 100:) 61:) 5228:( 5223:E 5207:( 5183:( 5150:( 5132:( 5114:( 5109:E 5093:( 5074:( 5055:( 5036:( 4642:? 4638:. 4603:( 4589:( 4563:( 4554:. 4525:( 4509:( 4481:( 4445:( 4434:) 4426:( 4403:( 4376:( 4371:E 4331:( 4316:( 4295:( 4287:@ 4281:@ 4271:( 4245:( 4230:( 4185:( 4156:( 4134:( 4094:( 4047:( 4028:( 3998:( 3978:( 3959:( 3944:( 3913:( 3908:E 3841:( 3836:E 3796:( 3766:( 3761:E 3701:( 3673:" 3613:L 3609:M 3605:T 3601:H 3599:( 3546:( 3541:E 3516:( 3483:( 3478:E 3448:) 3440:( 3407:( 3402:E 3350:( 3309:( 3304:E 3261:( 3177:) 3169:( 3146:( 3130:) 3122:( 3096:( 3091:E 3069:( 2993:( 2988:E 2968:( 2963:E 2940:. 2893:. 2857:( 2833:( 2813:( 2793:( 2755:( 2740:( 2723:( 2708:( 2692:( 2672:( 2650:( 2635:( 2616:( 2585:( 2573:) 2565:( 2543:( 2523:( 2512:) 2504:( 2480:( 2397:( 2368:( 2352:( 2333:( 2315:) 2307:( 2280:( 2250:( 2245:E 2227:( 2197:( 2114:( 2109:E 2091:( 2057:) 2044:" 1975:) 1967:( 1890:( 1846:( 1769:( 1764:E 1747:( 1731:) 1727:( 1703:( 1667:) 1659:( 1635:( 1615:( 1592:( 1571:) 1563:( 1541:( 1512:) 1504:( 1472:) 1464:( 1438:— 1426:( 1391:( 1352:( 1338:( 1321:( 1307:( 1292:( 1266:( 1242:( 1195:( 1169:( 1111:( 1066:( 1039:( 1000:( 968:( 916:( 898:— 872:( 866:) 829:( 736:( 671:( 666:E 641:) 633:( 600:( 563:— 500:( 467:) 463:( 307:( 190:( 96:( 57:( 26:)

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge (XXG)

talk:2014 main page redesign proposal/Archive 2 - Knowledge (XXG)

Index