Wikipedia:2008 main page redesign proposal/Tweaks

Tweaks of the current page
These designs have the same general layout of the current main page, but with different styling:

AMK152

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/AMK152

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:

Pros:

Cons:

Comments:
 * Portal columns are too small in 800 x 600, causing the image and the portal name to be split over two lines in some cases. MER-C 07:37, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Calibas

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Calibas
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:

Pros:

Cons:

Comments:
 * Sorry, but no on the smiley. Bob Amnertiopsis ∴ChatMe! 00:48, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is exactly what I thought - "ummm, no". MER-C 12:15, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose Sorry, but no smiley. Jonathan speak out 22:47, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Ishikawa Minoru

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Ishikawa Minoru

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:

Pros:

Cons:

Comments:
 * Same as AMK152 (above), but slightly worse. MER-C 07:38, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Jackl

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Jackl

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:

Pros:

Cons:

Comments:
 * Same as AMK152. MER-C 08:54, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Now broken at 1280 x 960. MER-C 12:57, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Two In the news sections is a tad much.  Spencer T♦C 01:54, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Lights

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/Lights
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:

Pros:

Cons:
 * Green text may cause problems for the color blind. MER-C 12:16, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

MZMcBride

 * 2008 main page redesign proposal/MZMcBride
 * Previous discussion

Browser/screen resolution compatibility:
 * FWIW, it looks equally good on FF3, IE, Windows Safari, Maxthon and SeaMonkey, at screen widths of 800 to 1680. user:Everyme 15:44, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Pros:
 * Emphasises written text over gratuitous shiny and colorful graphical elements, thereby both conveying the spirit of the project and better fulfilling its function by omitting a never-recurring and thus unuseful color scheme.

Cons:
 * Bland colour scheme

Comments:
 * I love it. This is the best proposal, bar none. user:Everyme 17:59, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Love it! Best one yet. No extraneous pictures, finally! Lu  na  ke  et  19:24, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
 * love this proposal content and alignment. Can improve colour scheme to something a little more attention grabbing. --Wiki Roxor (talk) 17:12, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * But why make it attention grabbing? Let's let the reader decide, they will read and follow their intellectual interest. Also, the color distinction currently used, while not particularly harmful in any way (as opposed to, say, image icons in the titlebars and all such glittery stuff), signify nothing of use to the reader. 78.34.138.100 (talk) 14:38, 12 August 2008 (UTC) = user:Everyme