Wikipedia talk:Brilliant prose/temp

This design has some good ideas, but I think is a little too busy visually. I like the "recently added" feature. The boxes, such as around the Joshua Norton text, seem not to work properly in some browser sizes (text flows out of box). I think they clutter more than they add, and would prefer them just dropped. I'd also favor loosing the photo illustrating Sino-Soviet. I don't see any reason for any pix here. Keep it simple for ease of use. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 18:53, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)

OK, for ease of discussion, and so I can use the elements people like but not the ones they dislike: let me seperate different aspects of the redesign:


 * 1) Tighter introductory text
 * 2) front-page-like categorization scheme
 * 3) recently added bar
 * 4) front-page-like table scheme
 * 5) in-line pictures and notes

I agree that 5 is the weakest part of the page as it stands. I'd like to keep it, but don't know how to make it look better. DanKeshet 18:58, Jan 20, 2004 (UTC)


 * Might I suggest a "Did You Know?" Section at the bottom of the page, or at the side, or at any other place you please so long as it not be intrusive (unlike the locations of the present notes), in which such notes on astonishing facts relating to articles could be placed? -- Lord Emsworth 22:56, Jan 20, 2004 (UTC)


 * For now, I will remove the infolets; maybe I will find a way to add them as you suggest. DanKeshet

from Wikipedia talk:brilliant prose

It's basically a face life of this page to make it look more like the main page. I don't like the idea for several reasons. First, it's too gaudy. Second, it isn't scalable. What happens when the number of BP articles doubles? Or triples? Third, (just like the main page) editing it becomes hard when you have all that extra HTML stuff to deal with. I can't say I like the idea much at all. &rarr;Raul654 19:04, Jan 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * There are a few elements to it: other parts beside the HTML include changes to the categories and tightening the text. I understand the difficulty in editing with the HTML, but I actually think it's more scalable, because it uses the page space more fully, it won't get too long the way the current page is.  DanKeshet


 * Actually, as the number increases (it'd be nice to say at least 1% of the articles on Wiki are BP -- which number would be about 2,000), instead of listing the actual articles, we could list the topics, with perhaps a selection of featured articles on this page. I think the design is scalable. -- llywrch 20:04, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I like the design very much, can't wait until its ready for prime time. --Exigentsky