File talk:WhatCanIDoForTradeMarkedWebsiteName.png

Comments:

• Why Helvetica? A free font such as open sans would be both more visually appealing and more in line with Wikimedia's aims.
• Fixed sizing of the text blurbs makes some of them seem much too close to each other - consistent padding is more important than a fully consistent grid.
• Things are very close together in general. Smaller elements and more margin/padding would make the individual elements stand out more while also making it more visually appealing, especially when the overall object it is this small and centered surrounded by whitespace - the closeness stands out even more.
• The contrast between the grey background and the grey text (and light blue links) should be higher - on some screens the secondary text will be near illegible, and even in general it gives it a faded or disabled effect. A whiter background and darker text (and links) should work better.
• The large fonts are uncomfortably large - to the point where the size can stand out more than what it's saying. They don't need to be this large. People will read what's there.

Not entirely sure who actually made this so I apologise if it seems like I'm belittling or something, but I'm hoping this can serve as constructive feedback.

-— Isarra ༆ 20:02, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

This is a very rough draft from jorm. Poke him on IRC? Yuvipanda (talk) 20:04, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Aiight. -— Isarra ༆ 21:51, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

It was a first draft; if you have better ideas {{sofixit}}.--Jorm (WMF) (talk) 18:22, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Nope, just trying to offer some constructive criticism and fully expecting to be slapped for it per usual. I'd probably be a lot better at this were that not the standard response, of course, but it's hard to improve without useful feedback. -— Isarra ༆ 08:37, 10 April 2013 (UTC)