Wikipedia:2008 main page redesign proposal/Similar

Based on the current page
These designs are similar to the current page, but with significant differences, such as content rearranged:

Juliancolton

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Juliancolton

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:
 * Horizontal scrolling at 800 x 600. MER-C 07:05, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Pros:

Cons:

Comments: Contrast in this piece is quite stunning. --Zblewski (talk) 02:35, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

There are now two search boxes if we choose this one. Pie is good  (Apple is the best)  23:59, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Highfields

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Highfields

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:

Pros:

Cons:

Comments:

5theye

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/5theye
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:

Pros:

Cons:

Comments:

88wolfmaster

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/88wolfmaster
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility: *Looks ugly with all that white space under POTD at 800 x 600. MER-C 08:52, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Pros:

Cons:

Comments: Suggest moving some content under the sister projects and moving the projects to the bottom. Pie is good  (Apple is the best)  00:02, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Alexfusco5

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Alexfusco5
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:
 * 800 x 600, 1280 x 960 OK however the columns don't line up vertically at 800 x 600. MER-C 08:53, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Pros:

Cons:

Comments:

Aquillyne

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Aquillyne
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:

Pros:

Cons:

Comments:

Artyom

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Artyom
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:
 * Horizontal scrolling at 800 x 600 . POTD is marginal. MER-C 08:57, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Fixed! Thanks for pointing it out to me. I had to remove the "Community portal" link from under the Welcome message, as it is already linked in the left navigation panel. Would've been even better if we could move the "Site news" link from there to the left nav - I have never seen/used it before, but found it pretty useful.  A R  TYOM   01:56, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * POTD still looks like a fairly tight squeeze - could you try it with a wider image such as this one? MER-C 08:08, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see what you mean. I put that image in the POTD and set its width to 300px. I guess we could go with that width, doesn't look bad at 800x600 resolution.  A R  TYOM   02:25, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Pros:

Cons:

Comments: There are now two search boxes. Pie is good  (Apple is the best)  00:03, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Blackhole77

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Blackhole77
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:

Pros:

Cons:

Comments:
 * Excessively large header causes significant horizontal scrolling at 800 x 600 and takes up the whole screen. POTD looks silly at this resolution. MER-C 08:59, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

CrazyChemGuy

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/CrazyChemGuy

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:
 * 800 x 600, 1280 x 960 OK. MER-C 12:12, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Pros:

Cons:

Comments:
 * Pretty good! ≈  Mi nd st or ms Kid  00:48, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Eitch

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Eitch
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:

Pros:

Cons:

Hereford

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Electrical Experiment
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility: Pros:
 * Significant borkage at 800 x 600: cent overlays portals and other areas, POTD looks whacked and dead space. MER-C 05:13, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * rm -- HereFord  Public  23:20, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Cons:

Comments: There are two search boxes. Pie is good  (Apple is the best)  00:04, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Hereford (2)

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Electrical Experiment (2)
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility: Pros:
 * Horizontal scrolling at 800 x 600. MER-C 05:14, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Cons:

Comments:

Five Fifteen

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Five Fifteen
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:

Pros:

Cons:

Comments:

Onecanadasquarebishopsgate

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Onecanadasquarebishopsgate
 * Previous discussion

NOTE: I have updated the design slightly on 18th July, all comments made on screen settings before the 18th July may no longer apply. Onecanadasquarebishopsgate 22:16, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:
 * Significant horizontal scrolling at 800 x 600. MER-C 13:42, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Fixed. My comment below still stands. MER-C 07:57, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Pros:

Cons:

Comments:
 * Not that Similar to main page Electrical Experiment  00:46, 13 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I find those color boxes look *really* tacky. TFA and OTD are surrounded by heaps of dead space at 1280 x 960, the dark blue blob should be centered and read less like a promotional. The bullets are indistinguishable against the blue background. MER-C 13:42, 16 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Is "consensus" misspelled? I can't remember where I saw that on there. CCG (T-C) 20:41, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Red Thunder

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Red Thunder
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:
 * 800 x 600, 1280 x 960 OK. Java required. MER-C 05:28, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Pros:

Cons:

Comments:
 * I don't agree with having sounds in the header. Firstly, our OggHandler doesn't make it obvious what those little grey buttons do or that Java is required for it to function properly. Firefox users would get a nasty hanging surprise when they click on them because OJI is teh suxxor (I'm not sure about the new interface). And besides, not everyone has Java (configured/enabled) for internet browsing. MER-C 05:28, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I like the fact that FLs are (finally) being put on the main page. Pie is good   (Apple is the best)  00:05, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

RyRy

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/RyRy
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:
 * POTD (22 August) breaks at 800 x 600. MER-C 07:06, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Pros:

Cons:

Comments:
 * I absolutely love how the DYK and ITN sections switched places! —Animum (talk) 00:42, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! :) I actually think DYK is more looked at then ITN, so a switch would make users and others look at them more. Seemed like a good idea for me. ;) -- RyRy  ( talk ) 06:06, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Nice one, RyRy5!! I love the navigation bar design! Keep up the good work ;-). doña macy [talk] 23:53, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks Macy, but my username is just RyRy, not RyRy5. ;) -- RyRy  ( talk ) 08:50, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * This one is impressive! I think the Image:Wbar purple.jpg is unnecessary. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 17:04, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Ryan

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Ryan
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:

Pros:

Cons:

Comments:
 * DYK header looks borked to me. shoy (reactions) 12:50, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Ryan Postlethwaite

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Ryan Postlethwaite
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:
 * 800 x 600, 1280 x 960 OK. MER-C 05:29, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Pros:

Cons:

Comments: Why is it that all the main sections have an image next to it, except WP:DYK? Thanks, RyRy  ( talk ) 06:45, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Scottydude

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Scottydude
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:
 * Breaks with lots of dead space at 800 x 600. MER-C 05:33, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Pros:

Cons:

Comments:

Scottydude (2)

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Scottydude (2)
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:
 * Same as Scottydude (1). MER-C 05:33, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Pros:

Cons:

Comments:

SusanLesch

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/SusanLesch
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:
 * Search bar overlays user links ("my talk, my preferences, ...") and parts of the tabs at 800 x 600. It also is non-functional, but I suspect it is a placeholder. MER-C 05:20, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * MER-C, thanks for looking. Yes it's a placeholder. I don't see any support for tweaking static content or for moving search to the top. So count my blessings, they moved the search box up a section which was a great improvement. SusanLesch (talk) 23:06, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Pros:

Cons:

Comments:

SusanLesch 2

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/SusanLesch 2
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:
 * Same as SusanLesch (1) above. MER-C 05:20, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Pros:

Cons:

Comments:

Tlogmer

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Tlogmer
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:
 * Horizontal scrolling at 800 x 600, but no other borkage. MER-C 05:22, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Pros:

Cons:
 * Green text could be a problem for color blind people. MER-C 11:06, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

Wintran

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Wintran
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:
 * 800 x 600, 1280 x 960 OK. MER-C 05:29, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Pros:

Cons:

Comments:

Zrs 12

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Zrs 12
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:
 * POTD borkage, horizontal scrolling at 800 x 600. MER-C 05:30, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Pros:

Cons:
 * POTD too small, caption takes up more space than the picture. Can be fixed by having the picture over the caption with increased resolution, but there may be problems with panoramas. MER-C 13:52, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

Xenus

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Xenus
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility: Pros:
 * Horizontal scrolling at 800 x 600, no other borkage. MER-C 05:30, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Cons: