Talk:Wikipedia App Design

Taking part
These are high-level to detailed thoughts. Do express concerns and advantages to the thoughts below as they help the team make better design decisions. Do suggest improvements as these thoughts are imperfect and loose enough for your ideas to be incorporated and only stronger when that happens. With that said, discussions should not be about whether it's good enough or not / right or wrong, but to help the team flush out concerns.

"'It just does not make sense. I won't want to read this article anymore'" Saying this confuses the team. We would not know how to better the design decision as we do not understand your pain point(s).

"'This might cause a reader to not want to read the article because the text size is too small and leading too tight. I realize my eyes get tired after reading a few sentences. What if you increased the text and leading sizes?'" Giving us more insight, we are able to empathize and become motivated to find ways to address your concern. We look forward to listening to you, happy collaborating!

General thoughts
Ideas & thoughts go here

Page 1 : Feed me more knowledge
Thoughts
 * * Love this! We should consider how discoverable the navigation is. Is it intuitive enough that users will understand right away? Should we provide in-context hints, or a very quick tutorial screen when a user first comes to the app? KHammerstein (WMF) (talk) 22:36, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Advantages

Concerns

Page 2 : Navigation Drawers
Thoughts

Advantages

Concerns
 * More that a bit concerned with the concept of draws behind drawers show on this screen, I think its possible to show users there is "more behind" but could be rather difficult.
 * Yuvi mentioned that on Android, that's the current pattern. Toggling between one thing and another in the same drawer. We could think of a better way to combine site nav/profile/notifications. But the reason for this move is the questions that I had like: What's important to us? We want more editors, we should think about having a dedicated space for just that to happen. Is the site nav/settings broad enough to have a dedicated drawer? Same with notifications and profile. Site nav wise, we might think of ways to not have links at all. When that happens we only have settings and profile page. And now it sounds like the right drawer is all about you and your preference for the app. Why don't we include notifications because it's only to editors that notifications become heavily used. What if I'm a read-only user? At least it's obvious now I can do more than read and make heavy use of one of my drawers. We can experiment to present it better, I'm positive there is another way. But we like the idea of combining these items in the right drawer. What do you think in that area? MGalloway (WMF) (talk)
 * It might be annoying to have to go through notification every time to see my profile/contributions Jaredzimmerman (WMF) (talk) 09:28, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * We could look into "remembering" that I ignored my current notifications until a new one comes up. Or "remembering" that I ignore my notifications and from then on defaults to site nav/settings. MGalloway (WMF) (talk)

Page 3 : Humanize Wikipedia & More contributions
Thoughts
 * I like the idea of using a different shape to replace normal home area when there is an alert that will invite a reader to contribute. KHammerstein (WMF) (talk) 23:10, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Advantages

Concerns
 * Concerned that using the same puzzle icon to indicate just edited/article issues will confuse users. KHammerstein (WMF) (talk) 23:10, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Page 4 : Contribution overlay
Thoughts -Maybe this is the screen you come to first when you tap the edit icon in the header area, and then when you tap on a section of text you are taken to the actual wikitext editor.KHammerstein (WMF) (talk) 23:26, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I think this is a great way for a user to see all the ways in which they can contribute to an article. We can continue to brainstorm how to access the contribution overlay:

Advantages

Concerns
 * Drag from the W? I'm confused, it seems that this means there are now 3 drag left to right actions now, which seems really overloaded. Jaredzimmerman (WMF)
 * They are all different ideas, not all combined! That would've been an overload. MGalloway (WMF)
 * I think we can do better at showing contribution CTAs to me this feels like its actually hiding them Jaredzimmerman (WMF)
 * This is an addition to inline CTAs. There are many ways of contributing that you don't typically see within the article. MGalloway (WMF)
 * if it only turns into a draggable element when there are recent changes would it be obvious when its not in the puzzle piece stare? Jaredzimmerman (WMF) (talk) 09:28, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Also turns into a puzzle piece when there is an opportunity to contribute, which is pretty common on WP articles. But for articles like one that's so polished and is a FA, alerts of a recent edit and anything that deserves one still convey the edibtability of a polished article. MGalloway (WMF)

Page 5 : Drag to Contribute
Thoughts

Advantages

<font color="#D11D13">Concerns
 * I know this could make the articles themselves cleaner but it feels like a weird interaction, it could also could be an accessibility issue, dragging to drop something on a specific precise point on screen could be a problem for people with mobility issues.
 * the puzzle piece thing is fun, but it hides the actual change, making the user have to click through to more info rather than giving them something at a glance. Jaredzimmerman (WMF) (talk) 09:28, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I know we've never seen this pattern anywhere thus far and might be why it's weird, I was thinking wildly how to make it a fluid and fun experience to find places to contribute. I can't think of a reason why this should be the only way users can edit yet, but I'm thinking it would be nice as an addition to other methods. Btw, I changed the topic to Page 5 instead of Page 3 cus it sounded like a comment for Page 5. MGalloway (WMF)
 * This feels like a weird interaction to me too. Drag-n-drop is great for direct manipulation like 'move this item from here to here' but feels very.... rarefied when used as an action initiator. --brion (talk) 12:51, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Page 6 : Tap & Tell
<font color="#347BFF">Thoughts

<font color="#00AF89">Advantages

<font color="#D11D13">Concerns
 * This is a good thought, but what about readers who want to copy/paste text or define a word? Though we do need larger targets for citations, without interrupting reading flow too much. KHammerstein (WMF) (talk) 23:18, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Page 7 : How did I get here?
<font color="#347BFF">Thoughts
 * I like the concept. Jaredzimmerman (WMF) (talk) 09:28, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

<font color="#00AF89">Advantages

<font color="#D11D13">Concerns
 * but, this actually seems like it would be a good "edge drag" screen rather than a totally separate place, I wonder if partial left edge drag was previous page, and full edge drag was history/how i got here would work?
 * This is a great idea, need to consider the interference of pulling out the left nav though. Left nav could be accessible via button tap instead. MGalloway (WMF)
 * partial vs full edge drag sounds complicated :) What if dragging over to reveal stuff on the left showed a (horizontally laid out) how-did-i-get-here thingy, which you can just keep on panning through to go farther back? --brion (talk) 12:50, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 * would break these into "threads" "e.g. Search→wikilink→wikilink→wikilink→current page, External link→wikilink→offsite link,   echo notification→article→history,   Random→article" basically some of the ways you navigate are purposeful, like following wikilink, and some that start new threads through the site, like search, random, and external sources. Jaredzimmerman (WMF) (talk) 09:28, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Visuals
<font color="#347BFF">Thoughts

<font color="#00AF89">Advantages

<font color="#D11D13">Concerns