Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Usability/Main Page/Draft/Vote6G


 * 1) I like how the search is more prominent at the top. This should be a feature in all of the new Main Pages. -Travis 20:55, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) The search idea was deemed redundant in the discussion last week.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 22:35, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) (i suggested back in november that) it would be nice if we could highlight the sidebar searchbox with yellow, on just the main page. --Quiddity 02:47, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Reference desk contributors get irritated regularly with the amount of fools that don't use the search box first. So what if it's redundant? It needs to have a big deal made of it, otherwise nobody will use it, and more fools will pour into the reference desk asking questions like "wut iz wikipedia lolz" 12.72.243.78 21:06, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 5) Why not put the search box on the Reference Desk page, with a strong suggestion to use it before asking any questions? --Go for it! 06:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * The font is much smaller than the others - this is a serious issue. Trödel&#149; talk 12:34, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) I think this design is classy and not boring, as a couple other drafts tend to be. Aside from a couple of technical mistakes, it is excellent. I especially like the color and font scheme. (Some other drafts are similar.) I wish the spacing would be cleaned up a bit. - ElAmericano | talk 22:29, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) I like this design as it is very colorful and plasing to the eye. It also has a very interesting layout. Tarret 14:46, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) I also would prefer the draft.... G, because i like the colors and that """new""" fresh desgin--Topfklao 13:57, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) I like draft G because the colors are very bright, and the home page has an appealing look to it. --WriterFromAfar755 23:42, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 5) This is by far the best of the drafts. Just becuase a few people said the redundant searchbar is bad doesn't mean it's so.  The most used feature on wikipedia is the search.  On the main page, it isn't that obvious on the side.  It is the best and fastest way to find what you need.  Just becuase 2 or 3 people don't like it doesn't mean that the millions of people who use wikipedia should have a harder time finding the info they need.  Also, this draft is the most atractive visualy by far, and looks the most sofisticated.  It is very neat and organized too.  Tobyk777 04:14, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 6) No doubt in my mind that this is the best draft by far. --8shq8 04:28, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 7) Beautiful and functional. &mdash; Nightstallion (?) 07:59, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 8) Easily the best draft for the home page i have ever seen! You have to be crazy not to vote for this one! It is stunning, and meets the eye beautifully. If i had to describe this in one word, it would be... Grand. Simply class. M cappeluti 10:09, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 9) This version makes the best first impression on newcomers to this Wikipedia. This one gets my positive vote.  --Infobacker 16:45, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 10) Very nice, but it would be ideal if columns had the same length, just for the sake of avoiding "hanging" whitespace. Otherwise it's got my support. -- Run<font color="#339900"&gt;e Welsh | &tau;&alpha;&lambda;&kappa; 00:44, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 11) Support I liked this one the most. - Ganeshk  ( talk ) 04:27, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 12) This is by far the best, and the only one that seems different enough from the current Main Page to be noticably "new". Angela. 10:46, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 13) Support, attractive, colored and likely to draw in visitors. I would like to see this format used on the ordering in Draft B, though. - Mgm|(talk) 11:10, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 14) Support, this is certainly the best of the candidates. It is refreshing, very colourful and it promotes and focuses the searchbar. Just great! --DMichel 15:48, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 15) Support. As I went through all of the drafts, this one immediately popped out at me and grabbed my attention. It's not ugly, it's noticably different from what we have, and I really enjoy having the search bar at the top of the page.  Mo0 [ talk ] 16:13, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 16) Support, marginally, over the current main page. On balance, I do like this one, and it seems like it would get the job done. Lord Bob 16:53, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 17) Support, Draft G not only keeps the structure of Wiki Main Page, but also brings Wkipedia in 2006, with a new efficent, modern, simple and functional design. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.97.237.230 (talk • contribs)
 * 18) Support, but I hope to god that the snowflakes on the bottom of all those nifty boxes change with the seasons (otherwise, it'll look really stupid in August). User:Cernen under the ip 12.72.243.78 at 21:03, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 19) Support with reservations. I like the colors pretty well, and I like how the separate boxes look, but I prefer the white box at the top of Draft A, and leave off the ridiculous category-by-letter box at the bottom.  The categories link at the top is enough.  Also, I would agree with Cernan that the snowflakes at the bottom of the boxes should change with the seasons, except that this is NOT a northern-hemisphere Wikipedia.  A significant part of our consumers live in Australia (not to mention English-speakers in many other countries in the southern hemisphere, like Zimbabwe, for example), where the seasons are reversed from those in the northern hemisphere.  Because of this, we should leave the snowflakes off or choose another non-seasonal gif.  Also, some reworking of the boxes so that they line up better (avoiding excess white space) would be highly recommended.  But overall, good work!  --Cromwellt|Talk 21:29, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 20) My vote: I personally like 6G best, but I think Featured Picture and On This Day In... should be swapped. --Kitch 18:45, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 21) Support, for helpful use of color, and prominent search bar to help orient new visitors. --Krubo 22:26, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 22) throwing my two cents into the fray and casting my vote:: I like DRAFT G - Why?  It appeals to me. JessanDunnOtis 21:09, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 23) Support with modifications. I like the overal content but i think the header and portals should be taken from Draft 6I.2 (revision) Askewmind''' | (Talk) 22:28, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 24) Support with SLIGHT modifications - I absolutely love the color scheme and the ability to slightly theme (based on the season or perhaps specific events,) but there is a bit of blank space that is somewhat annoying below the "Second Feature" space... Don't know how to fix it, but the color scheme wins all. --Nick Catalano (Talk) 22:59, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 25) Support- it's so well designed and user friendly. I like the search box at the top and the very sophisticated look, something the current page doesn't have-- M  W  Johnson  12:15, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 26) Support Best looking design; like search box at top as well. --TomPhil 23:15, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 27) Support Most different and I think appealing to new users (and I think that's what we're going for). A few things to change before the final vote (white header, two columns line up, footer a generic pic and perhaps not orange, maybe blue footer colour) - Trevor MacInnis (Talk | Contribs) 02:48, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 28) Support. --Randy 03:06, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 29) Support. I especially like the colors on this page. I'm not too keen on the white space under Did You Know? But this is still far and away my favorite. &mdash; Lovelac7 03:28, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 30) Support. Good selection of colours & content placeholders. The topic bar at the topic looks too cramped on 800x600, but could be fixed. -- Pamri &bull; Talk 10:21, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 31) Support - nice, colourful, well-designed appearence. Definitely my favourite -- 217.35.96.167 14:14, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 32) Sorry, that was me... odd, I swear I was logged in -- Gurch 14:17, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 33) Support. This one gets my vote.  It has a neat layout, and also has both "Today's featured picture" and "Did You Know? From Wikipedia's newest articles on the same main page.  Search bar at top is a nice touch.  Just rename the Did You Know? box from "Second Feature" to something else, like placing "Did You Know?" in the title section, and " From Wikipedia's newest articles " right below that, and it will be perfect. --G VOLTT 16:01, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 34) Support. Clean, attractive design. Likely to draw in new visitors and enourage them to explore. I like the inclusion of "Today's featured picture", too. Lan3y 17:39, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 35) Support - well-organized, nice colors. I would support it more if the icon portals were added.- JustPhil 21:50, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 36) Support, but the "Biz" and "Math" should be changed to their full form. &mdash;siro&chi;o 05:28, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 37) Comment That big area of white space in the right hand column is not the best feature of thsi draft. Batmanand 09:50, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 38) Strongly Support By far the most attractive design, in my opinion, especially with the search bar in the top-right corner. I disagree with JustPhil, I think adding the icon portals would make the design too busy. - Chairman S. 14:14, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 39) Support I like it alot! The colors make it alot more interesting, less dull and boring. Marcus1060 19:56, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 40) Support Not perfect (white space, On this day seems to be in the wrong place), but by far the best design apart from the existing page.Gareth Aus 22:51, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I voted for Draft C, but would like to commend this one to be available as a template in user settings - it is a very nice design, but may be too colourful for some. - Samsara contrib talk 22:24, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Support This design is by far my favourite. Font size is a tad small but I guess we have to put up with a smaller font size nowadays because of the increased amount being packed into one screen. --Spaceman85 18:11, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Support just a little over the current main page. It's not cluttered, eyecatching, and the colors look fine. The only thing that might be strange would be how the "on this day" section is now crammed at the bottom, but that might be just me. Hurrah 01:32, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Support The only thing I don't like about this (and I mean the only thing) is the lack of icons for the categories. However, the practicality and class of this design wins handily. --Jm woltjen 23:32, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Support By far the best layout. I prefer categories without the Icons
 * 5) Support More colourful and bright! Hohohob 23:22, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 6) Support I thank it looks cool.**My Cat inn @ (talk)** 07:35, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 7) Support Looks great! --WS 01:48, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) Oppose.  To bright and incoherent.  Tacky.  Kevin Baastalk 00:26, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose. Agree with Kevin Baas. Also, the font is far too small. Cap&#39;n Refsmmat 00:34, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Weak oppose- make the font bigger guys!--Urthogie 16:09, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose ugh... per above. Mi kk er ... 00:28, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose - Too colourful. The empty space to the right of today's featured picture looks bad. The font is very small. vedant (talk &bull; contribs) 15:32, 25 February 2006 (UTC)