Reading/Web/Desktop Improvements/Second prototype testing/Feedback

From mediawiki.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Username:Dqeswn[edit]

  1. As many have mentioned the pointless empty space that restricts content to a much narrower area is horrible. Instead of the whole area being used it might be half, or less.
    1. And with the all this empty space useful items are still hiden in the hamburger menu.
  2. The Language list is also hidden in a dropdown menu, yet it only opens up a tiny clunky scrollable area for it. Why, ho why? The whole page could be used. It's an overlay area, you can't use anything else anyway, until its closed.
    1. The languages are not represented in english, so it's difficult/impossible to search for because of your keyboard and not even the tooltips show the languages in english (Sometimes you might want/need to visit un unfamiliar language page, and use a web translator)
  3. On the in-content header no tooltips appear, so I can't even know what the icons represent, the appearance should be with icons+text anyway. Important items shouldn't be hidden, like the mentioned talk page.
    1. As for the "fixed" one. I find the auto hide/appearance rather annoying. I usually need multiple attempts to use it, because I keep overshooting it. Why not have it always visible at the top? It would be much better
    2. The sidebar would be better served as being fixed on the left, instead of being hidden, and have a fixed position at the top of the page. Just have it always at the left and scroll separately from the content if it is to tall to fit.


Username:Macuser[edit]

  1. Too much empty space to the right. Giant card with too much empty space. Many of my requests to wiki is to translate or see what other languages have to say on the subject, are there more images on commons, all that was to the left, now it is just empty. Languages do not work and are difficult to access.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? Nothing. Chrome on OS X. There is a title bar popping on top, just irritating.
    1. No. And I basically see no features.
    2. I do not want a header. I want to read text when reading, and have no empty space at the side, so put links back there.
  3. Can you figure out how to do that? Yes. What do you think of this experience? This is stupid - there is a lot of empty space between "Search" and the bell, and you hide Talk to a secondary menu? Really?
  4. Wiki is about text, links, and a minimum of formatting. I never use mobile version, desktop fits even on my cheap phone screen which is just below 720p (1280×720 px; standard HD) resolution. Drop this "development for development's sake" stuff. There are MANY things in need of improvement: categorization, commons (why 200 images per page limit? what are these infinitely large meaningless categories like "graves in Sweden"?), searching, etc.

Username:Daehan[edit]

  1. General feedbacks on the prototype
    1. Note that I mainly contribute on the French Wikipedia, so I could have a longer experience of this desktop improvement.
    2. The website looks more modern: all quality websites now have a limited width, I think people are just reacting to what they are used to. The text is easier to read and the article layouts are less subject to some contributors' fantasies that make the article less responsive: with one common width (the reader's), we know how to get a responsive layout, especially with pictures.
    3. The searchbar is also more reachable, enjoyable and effective.
  2. Scroll down/back up a bit
    1. It's a good idea to give this contextualized information and features.
    2. It's a VERY VERY good idea to have all personal links available from any part of the article without having to scroll to the top.
    3. It would be way more useful to get the full summary at hand, on the sides (maybe inside a roll/unroll pan)
  3. Scroll back to the very top of the page
    1. This is a feature that makes more sense for smaller devices than a computer, but I find it ok. I appreciate having all my personal links at hand when I'm on the very top of the page, but the display is "cleaner" and certainly fits for every screenwidth.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    1. I personally love the way Wikipedia is getting more modern.
    2. I'd appreciate using the blank spaces on the sides (preferably the right one) to display the references when mouse over the reference link in the text.

Username: Lapingenieur[edit]

  • As others have mentioned before me, I think the limited width of the arcticles isn't a good idea, it makes it less readable. The french wikipedia already uses a smaller width and it's sad.
  • This site has a nice look in general, like the bar at the top and the icon set look modern.
  • The bar arrives way too fast and the icons around it are (user and wikipedia) don't get away which looks a bit strange at the begining.
  • The bar just poping when hovered while the other icons slide from the top is kinda weird...
  • I'd like the bar to do not disapear when scrolling down and then re-appear when scrolling up or hovering it.
  • The menu on the left could take more space between the left side of the screen and the article itself. That would explain the spacing of the article (see point n°1)
  • Wikipedia's logo at the top looks a bit old

Username: Kmer woman[edit]

- I linke the fact that the body of the text seems airy even though it is dense. Also because we do not have a menu of things at the sides, I think it helps us focus on the actual information we need. The font is cuter as well.

- It is interesting that the text "skips" when scrolled faster. It saves time and though there is a lot of media on the prototype, it loads quickly.

- To get to my talk page, and I hope that was it since it didn't open took 2 trials before getting it right. I do not think it is an issue though, because like every new thing we need adaptation.

- I like that things are hidden into menus because like I said it doesn't crowd the page, giving the impression that the information is cumbersome to read.

- To conclude I see nothing wrong with this format and actually like it.

Username: DKF01[edit]

  1. I don't like the fact the articles had their width limited. I don't like all white space, I find it mild infuriating. It feels like someone slapped the mobile version of the wiki and put on desktop and called it a day. Thank god I can swicth back to classic else the portuguese wiki would be semi-unsable. I also find the newer font is hard to read and "less friendly" compared to the old one. Table of contents is missing and why does the left side needs a scroll bar? It was fine before why need it now?
  2. Pretty neat, I can see being useful and convenient to me.
  3. I don't like it, I have to waste 1 more click get to the talk page instead of one. Just keep it in the open like the old one.
  4. While minimalist is the name of the game it would be prudent to keep a side of organized chaos rather than trying to minimise everything and worsen the user experience through more clicks and scrolling than normal and full width of the screen please, if I wanted to see articles with width limited I would click on mobile version.

Nome de Utilizador ; Pedromos[edit]

Gostei Do Logo E Da Coluna Esquerda

  1. Dê uma olhada ao redor, role para cima e para baixo na página, observe algumas páginas diferentes. Quais são algumas de suas impressões iniciais? Você acha algo confuso? Conveniente? Particularmente interessante? ( Lembre-se de que, como este é um protótipo, alguns dos links podem não funcionar e pode haver outros bugs ou peculiaridades que você encontrará.) As Páginas Funcionaram Todas Bem ;;; Gostei Especialm/ Da Página Participar
  2. Role a página para baixo lentamente. Agora volte um pouco para cima. O que você percebe? O que você acha dessa experiência? tbm gostei do modelo do roll on e da fácil leitura
    Página D Largura Apreciada
    Página D Largura Apreciada
    1. Os recursos mostrados aqui são úteis para você? Existem recursos que são particularmente úteis para acessar durante a leitura ou edição? Bastante úteis
    2. Há algum recurso que você gostaria de acessar que não está disponível no novo cabeçalho? Talvez Uma Maior Interação Entre Linguas Diferentes Para Editar Em Comum ;;; E Dps Sim ;;; Separar As Páginas Por Paíes E Línguas Diferentes
  3. Agora, volte para o topo da página. Imagine que você gostaria de ir para a sua página de discussão. Você consegue descobrir como fazer isso? O que você acha dessa experiência? Achei Que Está Similar Como Antigam/ ;;; Manter Aquilo Que Está Bem
  4. Adicione quaisquer pensamentos, ideias ou perguntas finais. única Pergunta Que Tnh  ?!? Há 1 Calendário Ou Plano Para "Quando Entrarão Em Vigor Estas Possíveis Mudanças" ?!?

Username: LUKISO2[edit]

Hi, there's some critisism on the design;

  1. Sooo much unused space. The thing I loved about wikipedia was the text(content) to screen ration, but with this update there will be so much wasted space, I would add a dropdown menu with 50%, 75%, 100%, fill, etc. opinions, where you could choose your wiki content widness.
  2. No dark mode. I would love to see some kind of a official dark mode implemented, things like Dark Reader worked (and still are working on the old version) floalesly on your site, and I belive they would update it to the newest design at some point, but there is nothing like the official support.
  3. The top bar is too 'sensitive'. When I'm scrooling up the top bar showes instantly, add some small delay, then when I start scrooling down it disapears again instantly, add some distance traveled delay to stop it's 'blinking'.
  4. The upper font should be something more modern like, so it goes along with your website. The old font was fine, for the old website. When you are building a new website use a new fornt, I don't care if it's a Roboto, or whatever, but not this "Linux Libertine", or "serif", when serif, then sans-serif.

Username: Darío Guaminga[edit]

Tómese un minuto para observarlo. ¿Cuáles son algunas de sus impresiones iniciales? ¿Hay algo que encuentre confuso? ¿Adecuado? ¿Particularmente interesante?

Como hago trabajos concretos, hay algunas pestañas que nunca he utilizado. Ahora veo que podría explotar el potencial de la web.

Al realizar la búsqueda no está claro en que idioma hacerlo. Si existen varias entradas, considero que debería haber un enlace entre ellas para llegar a la página usando términos que se corresponden en varios idiomas.

Es muy adecuada, por su utilidad, la posibilidad de traducir (en mi caso al español) cualquier página sobre un tema, que inicialmente está en otros idiomas.

Son muy interesantes los enlaces externos pero, además de ir solamente a críticas y comentarios (¡muy bien!), hecho en falta ir a más artículos más amplios como existen en algunos casos.


2. Desplácese despacio hacia abajo de la página. Ahora vuelva un poco hacia arriba. ¿Qué nota? ¿Qué piensa de esta experiencia?

Está bien, pero no se ve claramente (algo borroso) lo que va apareciendo en la pantalla. En todo caso, no es un gran problema.


¿Son las características mostradas aquí útiles para usted? ¿Hay alguna de las características a las que sea particularmente útil acceder al momento de leer o editar?

Es muy acertado que a la hora de acceder, archivar, imprimir... la página esté en formato PDF.


¿Hay alguna característica a la que le gustaría acceder que no se encuentre disponible en la nueva cabecera?

No he usado la página con suficiente amplitud para notar alguna falta. Para mí es más que suficiente.


Ahora, vuelva al inicio de la página. Imagine que quiere ir a la página de discusión. ¿Puede intuir como hacerlo? ¿Qué piensa de esta experiencia?

Me parece suficientemente intuitivo. Sin problemas.

Por favor añada sus ideas finales, comentarios o preguntas.

Confio en la capacidad de tantos usuarios para que la página mejore sustancialmente.


ftarazon. Wikipedia en Español.


  1. The writing is kind of small and the line spacing is short for this character size. The reading was much more pleasant and less tiring with the old layout. The page is narrow. People have wide monitors, and they tend to be wider, why make more than half of the screen useless? You can fit information there too. A larger font size + less blank space would be much more suited to reading. On the "selene" page, right at the top, some text is 2cm wide between an image and a side panel.
  2. The top bar is retracting when going upwards. This is confusing and hides some information that is useful,. and takes very little space. Having that 1cm bar at the top won't hurt, it does not take up much space. If it was 3/4 cm high, this would of course be desired.
    1. I read mostly, I like information to be here and available. The bar thing is confusing, other than that, nothing especially useful.
    2. The table of content is absolutely necessary. This moon article is super long, and if you are looking for a particular information, it can be a nightmare.
  3. I don't know what a talk page is.
  4. The table of content can be pinned on the left side of the page, with the "on screen" section bold, this can be practival, show to the reader where he is on the page, what is coming, the table of contect is available, and those oseless partos of our screen that we still paid for, bu no website want to use are useful again.

Username: Doc_Cox[edit]

Graficamente più accattivante. Non riesco a trovare l'indice che normalmente è presente subito dopo la descrizione iniziale. Se non fosse più disponibile, trovo la cosa non buona. Bisognerebbe ripristinarla.

Username:Droppank[edit]

Проблем в использовании Википедии для редакторов я не вижу, но думаю что рядового потребителя (обычного читателя) интерфейс слегка будет сложен. Нужно обязательно создать версию для iPad, ведь сейчас редактор там очень сложный, непонятный и неудобный.

Username: Loutrec[edit]

For the French version of the article.

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).

Ma première impression concrète réside dans le fait que la page semble ^tre plus "aérée" et plus agréable à lire. En effet, la police est très agréable visuelement, et donne un véritable effet de légèreté à l'article. Il n'y a pas particulièrement d'élement choquant, cependant la box info du début de l'article est au dessus du texte. Cela doit être dû à un bug, si ça ne l'est pas dans ce cas c'est effectivement dérangeant. Le changement de language est mis en évidence comparé aux versions actuelles, ce qui me semble plutôt être positif et pratique.

  1. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?

On peut effectivement remarquer un menu réduit qui se déroule au dessus lorsque l'on remonte. Celle-ci est intuitif et agréable à mon goût.

  1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?

Les fonctionnalités sont intéréssantes, et ont toutes leur place dans le menu d'après moi. Je pense seulement que mettre l'étoile pour ajouter la page en favori pourrait en intéresser plus d'un.

  1. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?

D'après moi, rien de particulier ne manque.

  1. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?

L'emplacement de la page de discussion n'est pas tellement différent des versions précédentes, celui-ci me correspond parfaitement.

  1. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.

Juste un petit commentaire pour vous remercier de continuer à faire vivre et évoluer cette belle encyclopédie :) !

Cordialement, Loutrec (talk) 11:27, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Username: Sherpaman[edit]

  1. I like the cleanilness but I would reduce the white spaces to both sides. It seems like wasted space since every thin action/option is accessible only at the top.
    1. I think it is useful to have a global menu accessible from every section of the article
    2. I think that having allways access to a Table of Content, and being able to jump to another section of the article would be really useful
  2. It was easy for me, but just beacuse I was hinted there was a way to do this specific action.
  3. Concerning this last part maybe it would be useful to have the option to personalize which actions are allways visible on the top menu and which are accessible via click on "..." . While this new hidden/drop menu is nice, i think that some of its functionalities could work on the side bar/column that now seems empty and wasted space.

Username: Nomimi[edit]

  1. Everything seems too white and blank... I like the 2000's aesthetic with the blue thin straight lines around the article ahah! Besides I think it's much better to have the menu automaticaly open with the languages.
  2. I often switch from a language to another and I don't find this new system handy. Wait, is the tree view contents gone??
  3. The feature with the titles is interesting.
    1. Putting Languages there is nice but I really prefere having it on the side
    2. No I don't think so.
  4. Yes; this experience is ok (i mean: there's nothing spectacular, that's just a menu....)
  5. Overall, i don't like it so much. Wikipedia becomes more minimalistic and I think that's sad because I love its cheesy look! It is technically nice, but it lacks of soul.

Username: Orange-kun[edit]

[edit]

Horizontal Wordmark is absolutely ugly! Russian version dosen't fit, you better upload one separate image of it (logo+text) instead of using exotic combination of 2 images one of which is used as a portion. Maybe we should remove Free Encyclopedia tagline at all and just leave work WIKIPEDIA next to globe?

SO MANY EMPTY SPACE[edit]

There are too many empty space on the page, why do we need it? We should be wise and use all the space that we got or at least have an option to disable content squeezing and be able to use all space.

THE FONTS[edit]

They are absolutely faceless, font for regular text is absolutely unreadable, better leave the current font! and the font for titles should be more newspaper-styled. I recomend use Oranienbaum font or something in that style!--Orange-kun (talk) 13:24, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Username: nitoninoio[edit]

  1. Pour ma part, je pense que pour les articles, il faudrait placer des liens à chaque titre ou sous-titres de la page qui ramènera le lecteur en haut de la page ou carrément, si possible, placer un curseur (ou deux,en forme de lien) au bas de la page ou en haut avec la possibilité de ramener soit en haut soit en bas et vice-versa pour ainsi faciliter la navigation. Merci

Username: Александр Русский[edit]

  1. Я всегда на Фэндоме писал, что стиль Википедии лучше, за исключением нескольких мелочей и искал скрипты, чтобы подстроить всё под Википедию. Но вместо улучшения Фэндома, мы получаем перенос всех его минусов на Википедию... Я не возражу, если будет гарантия, что старое оформление будет доступно после перехода на это. Мне очень не нравится телефонный экран на компьютере (всё узкой полоской на мониторе). Языки: у меня на текущем оформлении настроено отображение жирным ряда нужных языков и перенос ссылок вверх, но в новой их придётся искать долго. В общем этот дизайн хуже текущего, он годится для телефонов, но на компьютере он не будет удобен.
  2. Наверное это единственный плюс, хотя и малополезный.
    1. Практической разницы не вижу.
    2. Пожеланий нет.
  3. Я так и не понял где страница обсуждения.
  4. Текущий дизайн Википедии меня полностью устраивает (отлично читается и редактируется), поэтому не стоит его сносить ради сомнительной авантюры, которая может повыгонять многих редакторов, как это произошло на Фэндоме (и не только). Старая версия оформления настолько удобна, что даже не знаю, что можно было бы добавить туда. А предложенна выглядит ужасно. И вообще: если старый дизайн работает, зачем его сносить? Если же переход на новую версию состоится, оставьте в настройках опцию, позволяющую использовать старую версию, так как многим этот новый дизайн будет неудобен.


Username: Evodash[edit]

  1. I think the small bar at the top when scrolling down was very needed already at the start, and I find it very useful and convenient, however I think the buttons should all have text with them so that it's easier to understand which button's which since they aren't very present in the current Wiki layout. However at first sight I find this whole new layout a downgrade to the current one, as it seems like I'm using the mobile version and the actual article looks like a small widget in the middle of the page.
  2. More buttons appear, that's cool.
    1. I find them useful, yes.
    2. preferences shortcuts

3. No. Where am I supposed to go? It's all so hidden, and there's no reason to remove almost all the text from the menus and tabs in favor of icons that are harder to understand.

4. If this ever becomes the main layout (which I hope not, at the current state), I think that when you first access wikipedia there should be a pop up saying which layout you'd like to use, kind of like when you first open your new phone and it tells you if you want the classic android icons or the brand's icons. What I find particularly annoying and unnecessary is how the layout all seems like a mobile version of the normal website and how the actual article, what people are actually focusing on, is just a small window on the whole page especially when the page is long, and when you scroll down the article still remains small in the middle and it's very confusing. what I also don't like at all is how the bar at the left is collapsed by default, and for small windows the text is also cut in half. I don't get why it's a separate tab now, it's just unconvenient and serves no purpose other than leaving more space on the article, which however is already wasted by making the article smaller.


Final thoughts: I get that nowadays we're in a new age and everything is becoming more minimal (and rightfully so), however that doesn't mean everything should automatically become minimal. At first I thought I was using the mobile version, and this new layout is a clear downgrade to the current one, and leaves a LOT of less space for the actual article. I hope that everything I just said gets fixed, and we'll still be able to use the old layout whenever we want.

This current layout is not only inconvenient for readers, but also for editors. Why is everything so dramatically aligned to look like a minimal mobile version? Also, for us editors the experience is even worse as the article is smaller and there's less room for the editing options in visual mode, and everything looks like it's purposefully hidden to make it harder to edit. There's also no reason to make these many useless changes that just ruin the experience for everyone on wikis.

Kullanıcı adı: Sametso[edit]

  1. Bir süre ayırarak etrafa bakının, sayfada yukarıya ve aşağıya gidin, birkaç farklı sayfaya bakın. İlk izlenimleriniz neler? Kafanızı karıştıran herhangi bir şey var mı? Peki ya kullanışlı bulduğunuz? Özellikle ilginizi çeken bir şey? (Bunun bir prototip olması nedeniyle bağlantıları çoğunun aslında çalışmadığını ve karşılaşacağınız başka hata veya gariplikler de olabileceğini unutmayın.)
    Pek kafam karışmadı, bütün her şey ilgimi çekti ve çok iyiler.
  2. Sayfaya yavaşça aşağıya inin. Şimdi biraz yukarı çıkın. Ne fark ettiniz? Bu deneyim konusunda ne düşünüyorsunuz?
    Sayfanın tepesinde küçük bir ön izleme çubuğu vardı. Bence bayağı iyi bir özellik.
    1. Burada gösterilen özellikler sizin için kullanışlı ve/veya yararlı mı? Okuma ve düzenleme sırasında erişim sağlanması özellikle kullanışlı ve/veya yararlı herhangi bir özellik var mı?
      Özelliklerin hepsi yararlıydı.
    2. Yeni başlıkta bulunmayan ama erişmek istediğiniz herhangi bir özellik var mı?
      Herhangi bir özelliğe erişmek istemiyorum.
  3. Şimdi de sayfanın en tepesine çıkın. Mesaj sayfanıza gitmek istediğinizi düşünün. Bunu nasıl yapabileceğinizi bulabiliyor musunuz? Bu deneyim konusunda ne düşünüyorsunuz?
    Evet bulabildim. Bütün profil ayarlarının tek bir yerde olması oldukça iyiydi.
  4. Lütfen her türlü nihai düşünce, fikir ve sorunuzu ekleyin.
    Herhangi bir nihai ekleme yapmayı düşünmüyorum.

Username: Iketsi[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    I expected to be able to interact with the TOC by clicking on the section name.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    Good for optimal screen real estate, but it could confuse some users by hiding away the search field and editing features. I would make the bar sticky by default and allow users to toggle its stickiness.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      A narrow layout with a minimalist visual interface is ideal for reading but suboptimal for editing. Ideally, it should be able to quickly switch between them.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      I need to see all interwiki language links at a glance without going through the extra step of hovering, clicking, or digging through menus. It allows me to quickly determine which languages have an article about a given topic while I am reading it, and I often read a different language that I would not have necessarily looked for, had the languages not been as visible.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Not having to scroll all the way to the top to click on the Talk link is a definitive improvement, but I hope the Ctr+Option+N hotkey shortcut is still kept.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    The search bar would make more ergonomic sense in the middle, and it could be a tad wider.

ব্যবহারকারী নাম:আফতাবুজ্জামান[edit]

  1. উক্ত পৃষ্ঠায় যান, এক মিনিট সময় নিয়ে ভালো করে দেখুন, পৃষ্ঠার উপরে এবং নিচে স্ক্রোল করুন, কয়েকটি ভিন্ন ভিন্ন পৃষ্ঠাও দেখুন। আপনার প্রাথমিক অনুভূতি কি? আপনি কি বিভ্রান্তিকর কিছু খুঁজে পেয়েছেন? সুবিধাজনক? আকর্ষণীয়? (লক্ষ্য করুন, যেহেতু এটি একটি প্রোটোটাইপ, অনেক লিঙ্ক কাজ নাও করতে পারে, এবং অন্যান্য বাগ বা ত্রুটি থাকতে পারে।)
    ... নতুন প্রোটোটাইপটি বেশ চমৎকার। বর্তমানে ওয়েব সাইট গুলো আরো আকর্ষণীয় হয়ে যাচ্ছে যার সাথে উইকিপিডিয়ার ইন্টারফেস যথেষ্ট বিভ্রান্তিকর । তাই আমি নতুন প্রোটোটাইপটি সমর্থন করছি। এছাড়াও ডার্ক মুড থাকলে আরো ভালো হতো।
  2. ধীরে ধীরে পৃষ্ঠার নিচের দিকে স্ক্রোল করুন। এখন আবার একটু উপরে স্ক্রোল করুন। কিছু কি খেয়াল করেছেন? এটি নিয়ে আপনার অনুভূতি কি?
    হ্যাঁ খেয়াল করেছি, নিচে যেয়ে আবার উপরে স্ক্রোল করলে শীর্ষচরণ বা শীর্ষকটি দেখা যায়। খারাপ না, তবে ব্যক্তিগত অনুভূতি হল, এটা সর্বদা ভাসানো বা দৃশ্যমান থাকলে ভালো হয়। এখন মাউস নিলে দেখা যায় আবার মাউস সরালে হারিয়ে যায় যা আমার ভালো লাগেনি। প্রস্তাব: এমন করা যেতে পারে যে বামদিকের পার্শ্বদণ্ডের মত ক্লিক করার দ্বারা শীর্ষচরণ দেখানো/লুকানোর ব্যবস্থা করা। সব কিছু ঠিকঠাকই লেগেছে।
    1. এখানে প্রদর্শিত বৈশিষ্ট্যগুলি কি আপনার জন্য উপকারী? এমন বিশেষ কোন বৈশিষ্ট্য বা ফিচার আছে কি, যা পঠন বা সম্পাদনার সময় আপনি পেতে চান?
      হ্যাঁ। এতে নিবন্ধের আলাপ পাতায় যেতে, সম্পাদনায় যেতে বা অন্য উইকিতে যেয়ে বারবার একদম শীর্ষে যাওয়া লাগবে না। শীর্ষচরণেই তা পাওয়া যাচ্ছে। একটা বুকমার্ক বাটন থাকলে ভালো হয়। এক টানে উপরে যেন যাওয়া যায়।
    2. নতুন শীর্ষচরণে উপলভ্য নয় কিন্তু আপনি পেতে চান এমন কোন বৈশিষ্ট্য আছে কি?
      বাম দিকে উপরের W আইকনে ক্লিক করলে লুকানো পার্শ্বদণ্ড আসে না। এটা আসলে ভালো হত। তাহলে এটা পেতে নিবন্ধের একদম শুরুতে প্রতিবার যাওয়া লাগবে না। আর W আইকনের বদলে উইকির লোগোর গ্লোবটি থাকা উচিত এখানে।
  3. এখন, পৃষ্ঠার একদম উপরে স্ক্রোল করুন। কল্পনা করুন আপনি আপনার আলাপ পাতায় যেতে চান। কিভাবে যাবেন আপনি কি তা বের করতে পেরেছেন? এটি নিয়ে আপনার অনুভূতি কি?
    না, আমি কিছুতেই নিজস্ব তথা L May Alcott-এর ব্যবহারকারী আলাপ পাতায় যাওয়ার লিঙ্ক বের করতে পারলাম না। ড্রপডাউন মেনুতে আলাপ নামে বা এই জাতীয় কোন আইকন দেখতে পেলাম না। তবে নিবন্ধের আলাপ পাতায় যাওয়ার লিঙ্ক সহজেই বের করতে পেরেছি।
    হ্যাঁ, এখন পেয়েছি। তবে ১০০% নিশ্চিত করে বলছি, গতকাল ডানদিকের ড্রপডাউন মেনুতে কয়েকবার ক্লিক করেও "আলাপ" নামে কিছু দেখতে পাইনি। কিন্তু এখন ড্রপডাউন মেনুতে "আলাপ" দেখতে পাচ্ছি। গত ১২-১৪ ঘণ্টায় প্রোটোটাইপ পরীক্ষণ সাইটে কোন কিছু পরিবর্তন হয়েছে সম্ভবত।
  4. আপনার কোন চিন্তা ভাবনা, কোন ধারণা বা প্রশ্ন থাকলে তা যোগ করুন।
    ... ডার্ক থিম ব্যবহার করলে ভালো হতো। এছাড়া একটু গোঁজামিল ধরনের সাইট টা, নিজের প্রোফাইল আর কোন আর্টিকেল লিখা তার চেয়েও ঝামেলার। সহজ ইন্টারফেস হলে অনেকেই নিজের মূল্যবান সময় ব্যয় করতে দিধা করত না

Username:Huji[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    Nothing is confusing.
    The layout is clean and familiar. It is less cluttered than current Vector which is nice. I also like the flat, black-and-white theme of the top section; what I don't like is it does not match the theme and coloring of the rest of Vector elements, namely the tabs ("Page", "Discussion", etc.)
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    I like the autohiding top bar. What I don't like is that the Wikipedia logo (globe) is replaced with a "W" logo. This makes sense for languages using Latin alphabet, but not for other languages (think Arabic, Japanese, Russian, etc.)
    Also, in the scrolled-down view, the search box in that top bar is not rendered properly; the search button is displaced.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Persistent access to the "edit source" button through the new header is definitely a good thing. Same with "talk" and "history" buttons in the new header.
      The "233 Languages" menu is not working so I cannot speak to its usability. A pedantic question is: for a page that is only available in one other language, will this read "2 Languages" or "1 Language"?
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      I cannot think of any; but I hope the extra real estate of the new header would be easily available for injecting additional tools.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Yes; see comment above, regarding the theme of the new header and the old Vector tabs not being consistent.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    If you type something in the search box that is part of the new header but don't press search, then scroll back up, you won't see the typed value anymore. This is likely because there are two search boxes. It would be nice if they could be in sync.
    Before moving forward with this, it would be nice if an RTL version is also previewed and comments are solicited from RTL users (e.g. Persian Wikipedia users). I am particularly worried that the displaced search button in the new header may be an issue in RTL too.

Reading and interwiki[edit]

It's more comfortable for reading. But opening interwikis in new tabs (which needed for translation) are more complicate.--Alexander Roumega (talk) 23:44, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:KtosKto64[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    Lack of contents table makes the page more difficult to navigate; margins are too wide (they take up space that could otherwise be used for text); hidden sidebar makes the page feel empty.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    I find the header movements while scrolling distracting and irritating, I don't see why it would be useful.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      None of them are really helpful - I find the current layout easier to navigate.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      If the header needs to be there at all, I would make it permanently visible.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    I can figure out how to do that easily. I can figure it out even more easily with the current layout.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    I don't see the need to update Wikipedia's layout ("If it ain't broken, don't fix it"). I don't see why new features would be beneficial over current ones. New layout seems like an attempt to adapt mobile page visuals to desktop version, which I don't think is good idea. In particular, the wide margins are atrocious. Too much whitespace makes the page feel empty and less engaging.

Nom d’utilisateur :SleaY[edit]

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
    Infobox étrangement placée au dessus du texte qui n'invite pas à la lecture. Les contours du texte sont épurés ce qui facilite la lecture. Certains modèles ne sont pas correctement affichés.
  2. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    La barre d'outils disparait puis réapparait. Honnêtement, cela me semble être un artifice qui n'apporte pas grand chose à la lecture, mais complexifie la navigation. Peut aussi porter à confusion avec la « cloche » de notification.
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles oui ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page tout ?
      Oui, historique, modifier, discussion etc oui
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête oui ?
      Langages, mais pas de liens interwikis non ?
  3. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Pas sûr... en cliquant sur le nom d'utilisateur peut-être ?
  4. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.
    Peut-être envisager un fond sombre, comme sur l'application mobile.

Nom d’utilisateur :TED[edit]

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
    L’infobox ne s’affiche pas correctement (elle est décalée tout à gauche, hors d’un tableau, avec le texte qui passe à la suite), les galeries d’images ne s’affichent plus en ligne mais en colonne, les palettes ne s’affichent pas correctement non plus (il semble y avoir un bug avec les listes horizontales, et il y a une gestion différentes des listes à puces). Il manque le sommaire, les liens interlangues en colonne de gauche, et les catégories. La police de caractère est différente et plus difficile à lire (problème d’espacement entre les caractères ?). Les tableaux (comme pour l’infobox) semblent aussi avoir des problèmes d’affichage.
  2. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Un barre apparaît en haut avec le titre de l’article et le titre de section de niveau 1 (alors qu’on peut être dans une sous-section avec un autre titre). Il n’y a pas de lien sur le titre de l’article ou de la section qui permettrait de naviguer dans l’article. Elle n’a aucun intérêt, ou je n’en comprends pas l’intérêt.
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      Il serait plus intéressant de pouvoir afficher tout le sommaire pour naviguer dans la page sans à avoir à revenir en haut, mais afficher seulement un titre de section de niveau 1 ne sert pas à grand chose, surtout si on ne peut pas cliquer dessus pour revenir au début de la section par exemple. (cf. ce qui est proposé ici, si j’ai bien compris : Reading/Web/Desktop_Improvements/Features/fr#Sommaire_des_articles)
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
      Le sommaire, les liens inter-langues en colonne de gauche, les catégories.
  3. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Non, je ne trouve pas : ni ma page utilisateur, ni ma page de discussion, ni ma liste de suivi, ni mes préférences, ni ma liste de discussion, ni le lien « Se déconnecter ». En fait, c’est tout le haut de page qui a disparu. C’est assez déroutant et désagréable. Il y a des icônes noires en gras pour mes alertes et mes notifications, mais pas cliquables. Et « L May Alcott » toujours en noir en gras (un nom d’utilisateur qui n’est pas le mien ?)… Je ne comprends pas à quoi cela correspond. Il ne se passe rien quand je clique sur tout cela. (NB : impossible d’accéder à la page de discussion de l’article ou à l’historique de l’article non plus, mais c’est probablement plutôt dû au prototype)
  4. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.
    J’espère que cela ne sera pas déployé par défaut en l’état. TED (talk) 00:53, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Имя участника:Sunpriat[edit]

  1. Уделите минуту тому, чтобы осмотреться, пролистайте страницу вверх и вниз, посмотрите несколько различных страниц. Какие у вас первые впечатления? Вас что-нибудь смущает? Вам удобно? Вы находите что-нибудь сбивающим с толку? Удобным? Особенно интересным? (Имейте в виду, что это прототип, в котором некоторые ссылки могут не работать, и в котором вам могут встретиться другие ошибки или странности.)
    W и иконка человека несимметрично отодвинуты по отношению к статье.
    Ощущение, что дизайнеры отобрали волшебную палочку, которая позволяла редактировать статьи, сломали её пополам и вернули нам только половину палочки. Статья выглядит больше для чтения и менее encourage к изменению текста. Раньше большая шапка немного походила на интерфейс текстового редактора, где не страшно нажать для начала любых изменений на сайте. Теперь всё спрятано и походит на любой другой сайт которые можно только читать.
  2. Медленно прокрутите страницу вниз. Теперь прокрутите немного назад. Что вы заметили? Что вы думаете об этом опыте?
    Когда прокручиваешь вверх слева W, лупа и название статьи и справа черные иконки, особенно иконка обсуждения, доминируют над размером и тонкостью текста (текст не жирный ведь), отвлекают внимание на себя и мешают сосредоточиться на тексте статьи. Иконки должны быть более лёгкими и тонкими. Когда иконки/действия нужны, тогда человек посмотрит прямо на панель, панель не должна перетягивать внимание когда человек смотрит на текст статьи.
    1. Полезны ли вам показанные здесь функции? Существуют ли какие-либо функции, к которым особенно полезно иметь доступ во время чтения или редактирования?
      нет мнения
    2. Есть ли какие-либо функции, к которым вы хотели бы получить доступ, которые недоступны в новой шапке сайта?
      В текущем макете не сделано, но текст после иконок должен остаться синей ссылкой и подчеркиваться при наведении курсора. Бывает нужно открыть в новой вкладке песочницу/вклад/настройки, тогда к элементам относишься как ссылкам - можно кликнуть с альт или в контекстном меню по пкм выбрать "открыть в новой вкладке", "открыть в приватной вкладке". Если элементы в меню не будут подчеркиваться, они будут считаться за кнопки и будет сложней понять, что к ним можно применить такие действия.
  3. Теперь прокрутите назад до самого верха страницы. Представьте, что вы хотели бы перейти на свою страницу обсуждения. Можете ли вы понять, как это сделать? Что вы думаете об этом опыте?
    действительно, нет не могу понять. Может пока что-то не работает. Это конечно не часто посещаемая страница, но на уровне с настройками. Если есть место для настроек и списка наблюдения смысла убирать обсуждение мало. Выглядит словно доступ будет после клика и открытия личной страницы участника (лишняя накрутка её просмотров), что сравнимо с доступом к общим форумам через левый сайдбар - сначала кликнуть в сайдбаре форум или сообщество и от туда кликнуть на нужное название форума. Вроде терпимо, но добавляет пользователю много монотонно повторяемых ненужных ему действий.
    upd: в меню теперь есть talk, найти его просто
  4. Завершая свой отзыв, добавьте, пожалуйста, любые мысли, идеи или вопросы.
    Много элементов скрыто. Когда что-то скрыто, то оно не запоминается читателем. Буквально он становится не подозревающим о существовании того что скрыто. Пример: во вкладках над заголовком многие не знают что в "ещё/more" вкладке. Пример: сигареты настолько хорошо продавались, что их располагали ближе к кассе, но когда решили их запретить законом в 2014, то их везде спрятали в шкафы с непрозрачными ширмами - когда что-то было на виду, а потом спрятали и теперь нужно доставать из-за жалюзи, сейчас это негативная аналогия. Стоит организовать метрику, чтобы было с чем сравнить - ухудшится ли посещаемость (количество кликов и открытий) по тем ссылкам которые оказались скрыты в сравнении что было до включения нового интерфейса (в идеале чтобы сравнить год перед и год после). (возможно падение в статистике переходов/кликов по языкам)
    Вероятность того, что читатель кликнет на раскрывающийся список достаточно низкая. Например, в левом сайдбаре у ruwiki есть ссылка Сообщить об ошибке. Теперь новые читатели о ней не будут знать, пока не откроют список и внимательно не прочитают список. Например сайдбар мог бы всегда показываться когда страница в самом вверху, скрываться когда страница начинает прокручиваться вниз, и слева-вверху показываться W — иконка интуитивно ожидается какой-то интерактивной, может по клику на ней будет прокручиваться в начало и показываться сайдбар.
    Очень многое заглушено в чёрный цвет. В Wikimedia Design Style Guide ведь выделили цвет действия - синий цвет. Например, когда наводится курсор на языки или меню пользователя c "…" ожидалось бы изменение цвета текста на синий - побуждающее к действию и показывающее, что это активный действующий элемент. Раньше всё было ссылкой, ссылка была активной синей и при наведении на ссылку она подчёркивалась. Теперь при наведении элемент еле заметно сереет, что почти не заметно и ни о чём не говорит.
    Наличие блока содержания раньше помогало редакторам отодвигать текст дальше вниз от карточки. Теперь нам придётся приспособится к новому расположению текста, но многие картинки справа сдвинутся под инфобокс-карточку.
    Заголовки предположительно как в Flow (Structured Discussions). Когда было содержание, оно помогало в обзоре статьи, в навигации и в понимании положения читателя на странице. Сейчас при прокрутке ощущается как "бесконечно" сменяется заголовок. Возможно в заголовке в панели стоит оставить нумерацию рядом с названием разделов, так это будет больше способствовать пониманию, в какой части страницы по отношению к началу и концу этой страницы читатель находится. Для страниц-форумов это не очень удобно, это скрывает поднятые проблемы и открытые обсуждения - более старые темы, будут получать ещё меньше внимания.
    Значок истории похож на действие отмена/откатывание (сравните с тем, что показывается в уведомлении notification-header-reverted "commons:File:Echo revert icon.svg Your edits on pagename were reverted" ), иконка понимается как "верни время назад" (как призыв к негативному действию "вернуть", но не как "посмотреть на историю"). Нормальное движение по часовой стрелке тоже привычно бы представляло историю как "все правки до этого момента/к этому моменту".
    После клика на поиск, его поле сдвинуто влево. Может он мог бы быть расширенным вправо до границы, где заканчивается обычное поле поиска, которое рядом с логотипом Википедии вверху страницы, таким образом кнопки "поиск" у обоих полей оказывались бы в одинаковой позиции.
    Сложно отобразить индикатор пустой страницы обсуждения от непустой? Если нет обсуждений - значок бы какой-то пустой. Если есть обсуждения - значок более заполненный и возможно цифра с количеством открытых тем. А просто одиночный значок не лучше слова "talk", возможно даже немного хуже, так как добавляет неопределённости. Подобный значок есть в визуальном редакторе в панели по кнопке "?"(Справка)/"Отправить отзыв" и его жирная чернота совершенно не побуждает (does not add courage, but rather scares away ) начать общение кликнув по нему. Чёрный - цвет траура, будет ассоциация с негативом, с мёртвым обсуждением, с написанием в никуда где никто не прочитает.
    Многие прокручивают страницы колесиком мыши. Но оно может плохо работать или со временем работать хуже - это проблема многих мышек. Тогда у колесика появляются ложные распознавания - хотя крутишь колесико вниз, иногда срабатывает как прокрутка вверх и затем опять распознается как прокрутка вниз. Такой неверный тик появляется случайно между правильными тиками колесика и длится намного меньше секунды. Но страница успевает прокрутиться на строку вверх и выплывает панель. Может стоит сделать незначительную задержку у появления панели, достаточную чтобы после неверного тика колесика его действие могло бы быстро успеть переопределиться путём правильного тика.
    Когда на большой странице много подразделов - 2-й уровень разбит на много 3 и 4-х уровней, а в панели всегда показывается только название 2-го уровня, - интуитивно ожидалось увидеть в панели заголовок 3-го уровня, если внури него есть 4-й уровень (например, "название статьи | 2 уровень | 3 уровень", "название | 3 уровень"). Когда прокручиваешь несколько экранов текста, несколько подзаголовков и в заголовке всё время сохраняется только название 2-го уровня, это название только 2-го уровня выглядит уже бесполезным и неуместным к показываемому к этому моменту на экране тексту.
    Дальнейшее не столько к плавающей панели и моментам когда читаешь середину статьи, сколько к получившемуся минимуму кнопок когда страница в самом вверху. Сложно представить нормальную работу когда ленточный интерфейс в ms office или верхняя и левая панели photoshop сделаны свёрнутыми. Таким же образом пока есть слева и сверху угол из панелей с инструментами, как в этих редакторах, это даёт схожее и знакомое настроение и уверенность для редактирования. Можно ли представить чтобы из этих редакторов пропали эти панели инструментов и вернулись старые выпадающие меню? Когда что-то скрывается, это может пониматься как "мы не считаем это важным чтобы вы заходили туда, поэтому мы скроем это поглубже". Сделать вики достаточно простой или похожей на другие сайты возможно несколько не такое поведение, которое ожидается от сайта, где каждый читатель уже редактор и сайт фактически больше веб-приложение по редактированию текста. Конечно можно сказать, что редактирование текста будет в инструментах редактора уже только после нажатия кнопки править. Но и сложно сказать, что все сейчас убранные/свёрнутые инструменты не важны для редактирования и судьбы статьи - слева ссылки это комьюнити, справа ссылки это участник, сворачивание отодвигает всё комьюнити на второй план, отдаляя читателя от редактора и более спрятанная вглубь внутренняя вики-кухня приведёт к недовольству простых редакторов и большему произволу более старых опытных. Да, нам всем тоже сложно с вики-кухней, но спрятав её подальше не улучшит для нас положение, а только ухудшит. Должна наоборот поощряться политика открытого простого доступа к вики-кухне и её простому мониторингу для сдерживания произвола. Как говорится, за малым погонишься — большое потеряешь. Потенциально, кардинально упростив ситуацию для новичков мы грохнем сообщество. Убранное на второй план и невидимое/спрятанное прямо ведёт к меньшему количеству использований/кликов по нему, к меньшему количеству посещений страниц сообщества, замедлению и остановке активности внутри вики-кухни.
    Сейчас при наведении на вклад есть всплывающее окно с переводами и загруженными файлами. (возможно всплывающее окно видно только если включен инструмент перевода). Так вот, по этим ссылкам я почти никогда не нажимаю, а на медиафайлы вообще никогда не нажимал. В то же время все ссылки, которые сейчас видны вверху у пользователя фиолетового посещенного цвета и иногда открываются - они как бы предлагают редактору варианты что можно сделать дальше. Если все ссылки окажутся в свёрнутом меню, я почти уверен, что забуду про них и никогда или очень редко стану на них нажимать. Спрятать все действия может быть как-то полезно для контента статей, ведь теперь на виду будут только два действия - править код или визуально, и может быть будут немного чаще на редактирование нажимать. Но это убьёт все остальные инструменты, которые предполагались в "помощь участнику". Наоборот, если бы ссылка на инструмент перевода была постоянно на виду, в строке участника, (а не скрыта в меня как уже сейчас) я бы чаще вспоминал об этом инструменте, чаще его нажимал и использовал. --Sunpriat (talk) 00:54, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:Sepguilherme[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    The first thing I was impressed was by the amount of white space on the sides of the page. That doesn't mean it's a bad thing, I guess if the text were to be read all across the screen, it would make the reading quite difficult and boring. It's nice to have a max width. But I guess the "floating" sidebar makes the page looks rather "empty". Otherwise, it still feels like a normal Wikipedia page.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    I guess it's alright. It helps us to remember which page we are reading.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      I enjoyed the little summary that shows up when using the search bar. It's useful.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      No. Every feature I'm used to access is in the new header.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    I couldn't find the link to my talk page. I don't know if clicking on my username was supposed to take me there, but it didn't. I tried to find it in the little ellipsis menu, but couldn't find it either.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    I like the new layout, it still feels like Wikipedia. One thing I would suggest would be if you were interested in trying some new fonts for the headers and/or the text. But, to be honest, if this new features were to be ditched and Wikipedia stayed the same, I wouldn't be sad.

Username:Triton[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    More epurate, easier to read and certainly easier for non contributors. Not specifically convenient for contributors to access quickly to their tools (I still use wikicode so I may not be the best example). Missing the plan of the article?
    I understand Mediawiki try to be more phone/tablet friendly but how many contributors use this kind of hardware?
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    Menu at the top interesing for lecture, again, not specifically designed for contributors. Not sure on the necessity to see the paragraph.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      More nice than useful at this stage.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      Interwiki/Commons/data and categories
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Not found
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    Thank you for your work

Nombre de usuario:OGalati[edit]

  1. Tómese un minuto para mirar alrededor. ¿Cuáles son algunas de sus impresiones iniciales? ¿Hay algo que encuentra confuso? ¿Conveniente? ¿Particularmente interesante? (Dado que esto es un prototipo la mayoría de los links no funcionan puede que se encuentre otros bugs o defectos).
    El menú lateral ocultable es muy buena idea. Si embargo en monitores anchos parece que el espacio extra no se aprovecha. El artículo se muestra demasiado angosto, dejando bandas laterales vacías.
  2. Desplace despacio la página hacia abajo. Ahora haga scroll hacia arriba un poco. ¿Qué nota? ¿Qué piensa de esta experiencia?
    La barra de menú descendente es interesante.
    1. ¿Son las características mostradas aquí útiles para usted? ¿Alguna de las nuevas características es particularmente útil para tener acceso a la hora de leer o editar?
      ...
    1. ¿Hay alguna característica a la que quiera acceder que no encuentre en la nueva cabecera?
      El Indice ocultable debería conservarse.
  3. Ahora, vuelva al inicio de la página. Imagine que quiere ir a la página de discusión. ¿Cómo lo haría? ¿Cómo ve la experiencia?
    No veo otra forma que el enlace tradicional de Discusión para ir a la discusión del artículo. El menú desplegable de 3 puntos me parece muy interesante
  4. Por favor añada cualquier idea final, comentario o preguntas.
    Veo las imágenes de las caras de la Luna, una debajo de la otra, en vez de verlas una al lado de la otra, como en el artículo original. Pienso que es un error en el diseño.

Gracias por el trabajo !!

اسم المستخدم:Dr-Taher[edit]

  1. نطلبُ منك -لطفًا- أن تقضي دقيقة في تأمل هذه الصفحة طلوعًا ونزولاً وفي افتح بعض الروابط فيها. أخبرنا الآتي: ما هي انطباعاتك الأولى؟ هل تفهم الغرض من هذه الصفحة؟ هل تجدُها مربكة؟ هل تجدها مفيدة؟ (نرجو أن تتفهم أن هذا نموذج أولي، لذا قد لا تعمل جميع الروابط، كما قد تكون هناك بعض الأعطال أو المشاكل العرضية).
    ..تصميم جديد للصفحات، ولا يبدو مُربكا، بل أراه مُفيدًا.
  2. انزل ببُطءٍ إلى أسفل الصفحة، ثم اصعد مرة أخرى إلى أعلاها. هل لاحظت شيئًا؟ هل لديك رأي بما شاهدت؟
    ..لاحظت ظهور "رأس جديد للصفحة" وبه عدة إختصارات، وهي إضافة جيدة.
    1. هل الميزات التي تحتويها الصفحة مفيدة لك؟ خصوصًا إن كانت متوفرة أثناء قراءة وتحرير صفحات ويكيبيديا؟
      ..نعم أرى أن هذه الإضافة جيدة.
    2. هل هناك أي ميزات مفقودة ترغب بأن تراها في الرأسية الجديدة؟
      ..هل يمكن إضافة قائمة منسدلة فيها أوامر "لمح البصر" ، وقائمة اخرى فيها "الأوامر المتاحة للإداريين"؟
  3. نطلبُ منك -لطفًا- أن تعود إلى أعلى الصفحة الآن. تخيل أنك تريد الوصول إلى صفحة نقاشك على ويكيبيديا، هل تعرف كيفية الوصول إليها من هذه الواجهة؟ ما هو رأيك بذلك؟
    ..نعم، هناك رمز يشير إلى صفحة النقاش. طريقة جيدة.
  4. يمكنك هنا إضافة أي أفكار أو أسئلة أخرى لديك.
    ..هل يمكن إضافة قائمة منسدلة فيها أوامر "لمح البصر" ، وقائمة اخرى فيها "الأوامر المتاحة للإداريين"؟

Username:Martin Vrut[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    There are not the links at the left side of the page, that I was used to and there is nothing instead of them. There is a lot of empty space, which does not look good.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    I actually do not like these kinds of effects. I find it annoying
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      The big search bar is quite useful.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      Watchlist, recent changes, log out button and more
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    I actually do not know where to find my talk page which is confusing
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    I do no find this layout useful, the old one is better for me. The only change I find better than at the old one i the bigger search bar situated at the left.

Username: Greatder[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    I really wish the links on the left would be expanded by default, then I can compress them if I am doing half-screen editing. The infobox is way too wide, needs shrinking. While I like the centerness of the text I think it's a bit overboard and needs to be a tad wider.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    Like আফতাবুজ্জামান said, I wish it was permanent instead of dynamic.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Yes, language switching mode and access to general stuff in the middle of reading.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      The language is not well suggested like in mobile mode, which causes problems finding and switching.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    That's weird am I supposed click my name here or something? :/
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    Stuff I just said above should improve massively, with emphasis on suggested language, somewhat wider text area, expanded left section by default and permanent header.

Username:Thas Tayapongsak[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    Overall this looks very clean. One thing keeps bugging me though which is the floating "W" on the top left. I think when I open the hamburger menu, the logo shouldn't be there anymore as it blocks all the links. Also, in the profile dropdown menu, shouldn't there be a link to go to one's profile page too? It works nicely with my third party dark mode extension. The clock (I would assume it is) is also a useful addition. (as I was writing this, the profile drop down turned into three dots. I would prefer more the profile dropdown, with the profile link in it.)
  1. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    It's good, but it disappear as soon as I hover my mouse over my browser's url search bar thing. Top left showing which section im in is useful
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      I think it's ok as it is right now.
    1. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      None that I can think of
  1. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    good
  1. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    it's great.

I don't retrieve quick link to wikidata & commons[edit]

Globally I'm ok with new display. I was just unable to retrieve a quick link to wikidata & the commons. Take care, --FHd (talk) 05:39, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Oops coming from the French page, I didn't get the 4 questions. Will see again later on, sorry no time yet. Have a nice day, --FHd (talk) 05:41, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:Artushak[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    It looks really bad. Font is not easy to read (I prefer to use custom font set in browser settings). Left and right margins are too huge. Line spacing is too small.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    I noticed a top bar ("sticky" one).
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Top bar is mostly OK. It contains "talk", "languages" and "edit source" buttons, they are useful (I prefer editing source, because WYSIWYG editors are terrible).
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      Yes, I want link to my user page.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    No, I do not know how to do it. This is bad.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    Make sticky header always visible (i.e. show it always, not only when I hover it with mouse pointer) and remove another (non-sticky top) bar. And remove those margins and do not override browser font settings.

Ім'я користувача:Богдан Панчук[edit]

  1. Приділіть хвилину щоб озирнутись, прокрутити вгору-вниз сторінки, прогляньте кілька різних сторінок. Які Ваші початкові враження? Щось є важкозрозумілим? Зручним? Особливо цікавим? (Майте на увазі, що оскільки це прототип, частина посилань може не працювати й що можуть бути інші баги чи приклади дивної поведінки, на які Ви наштовхнетесь.)
    Мало місця для меню з інструментами зліва. Також нехай вміст сторінки не зсувається "туди-сюди": навіщо, і без цього між меню і вмістом є певний простір. Це дуже кидається в очі. Також, незрозуміло навіщо вільний простір справа сторінки (дивлюсь через ПК, можливо при мобільному перегляді воно все органічно)
  2. Повільно прокрутіть сторінку донизу. Тепер прокрутіть трішки вгору. Що Ви помічаєте? Яке Ваше враження щодо цього досвіду?
    У шапці («прилиплому» заголовку) сторінки поруч з назвою статті відображається назва розділу. Надто різка зміна, якщо чесно. Також, йдучи знизу вгору, ледве побачивши назву розділу "Умови на поверхні Місяця", як у шапці вже "Лібрації". При такій анімації, думаю, потрібно врахувати і розмір самої шапки, через яку в певній мірі не видно контент.
    1. Чи є представлені функції корисними для Вас? Чи є якісь функції, які особливо корисно мати під рукою під час читання чи редагування?
      Все, у принципі, схоже до теперішньої версії - "все під рукою". Особливо добре, що є кнопка швидкої зміни мови (зараз у бета-тестуванні вона поки що відсутня)
    2. Чи є якісь функції, до яких Ви б хотіли мати доступ, які не представлені в новому заголовку?
      Меню вибору для переключення між візуальним редактором і звичайним (кнопки "Edit" і "Edit source") є лише при прокручуванні сторінки. І не має кнопки для візуального редактора ("Edit" або ж "Редагувати"), коли знаходжусь на горі сторінки.
  3. Тепер прокрутіть назад нагору сторінки. Уявіть, що Ви б хотіли перейти на свою сторінку обговорення. Чи зрозуміло для Вас як це зробити? Що Ви думаєте про цей досвід?
    Не дуже зрозуміло. Є кнопка користувача ("L May Alcott" у прототипі), але не знаю, куди вона має вести (зараз вона неактивна): на сторінку користувача, чи на сторінку його обговорення?
  4. Будь ласка, додайте будь-які фінальні думки, ідеї чи запитання.
    1) Сторінка історії редагувань сторінки залишиться незмінною, візуально?

2) Загалом дизайн цікавий, компактний (це ключове слово), легкий для розуміння. Дякую Вам, очікуватиму на повне впровадження. --Богдан Панчук (talk) 06:09, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:Dalka[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    I hope you have people who can read Russian, so I continue in Russian. Первое впечатление: пусто слева, и неясно, что же там будет.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    Кажется интуитивно понятным, но я предпочитаю, когда нужные мне элементы интерфейса появляются по моей команде, а не выскакивают сами. Кстати, после самой первой прокрутки вообще нет ни одного элемента интерфейса!
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Было бы хорошо, если бы можно было легко переключаться на английскую версию статьи и обратно. Язык, конечно, должен быть настраиваемым для пользователя или даже ещё и для каждой статьи.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      Для меня самой важной кнопкой является просмотр списка наблюдения, но прямого доступа к нему там нет. Возможно, список элементов верхней панели надо сделать индивидуальным для пользователя, чтобы каждый мог подстроить под себя.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Нет, я не вижу, как же это сделать :(
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    В новом заголовке подсказки должны быть у всех элементов, а в составе подсказок хорошо бы показывать горячие клавиши для вызова данной функции.

Nombre de usuario:Fabro[edit]

  1. Tómese un minuto para mirar alrededor. ¿Cuáles son algunas de sus impresiones iniciales? ¿Hay algo que encuentra confuso? ¿Conveniente? ¿Particularmente interesante? (Dado que esto es un prototipo la mayoría de los links no funcionan puede que se encuentre otros bugs o defectos).
    El diseño es bastante moderno, algo que me agrada mucho. El hecho de que haya tanto espacio en blanco a la izquierda y a la derecha hace que la página se vea un poco extraña.
  2. Desplace despacio la página hacia abajo. Ahora haga scroll hacia arriba un poco. ¿Qué nota? ¿Qué piensa de esta experiencia?
    Es bastante agradable, pero como he dicho antes, tanto margen en blanco se ve extraño. Como solución, mantendría la barra lateral siempre desplegada.
    1. ¿Son las características mostradas aquí útiles para usted? ¿Alguna de las nuevas características es particularmente útil para tener acceso a la hora de leer o editar?
      El nuevo diseño parece ser muy bueno y atractivo para los lectores, pero para los editores parece poco práctico.
    2. ¿Hay alguna característica a la que quiera acceder que no encuentre en la nueva cabecera?
      No realmente.
  3. Ahora, vuelva al inicio de la página. Imagine que quiere ir a la página de discusión. ¿Cómo lo haría? ¿Cómo ve la experiencia?
    La experiencia es similar a la actual. El botón de discusión con un tono azulado se ve anticuado, eso podría mejorar.
  4. Por favor añada cualquier idea final, comentario o preguntas.
    En resumen, el diseño es moderno y agradable para los lectores, pero para los editores puede resultar poco práctico. Mantendría la barra lateral de la izquierda desplegada en todo momento para tener ciertos enlaces a mano y para rellenar el enorme margen blanco que hace que la página se vea extraña. --Fabro (talk) 06:18, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Nom d’utilisateur :Reptilien.19831209BE1[edit]

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
    J'imagine que l'infobox statique, et non plus flottante à droite, fait partie des bizarreries à ne pas considérer, tout comme les galeries d'images qui apparaissent comme des listes à puces et autres difformités dans les bandeaux thématiques en bas de page. Le texte est bien dégagé ce qui rend la lecture agréable, car l'œil reste concentré sur le contenu.
  2. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    • Observations. Quand je fais descendre la page, l'entête disparaît et le menu utilisateur se réduit en un petit onglet fixe sur la droite. Le logo Wikipedia se réduit à son simple W caractéristique de la marque, et le menu hamburger disparaît également. Quand je remonte la page, ou que je survole l'entête, il réapparaît avec l'ensemble des outils (recherche, menu utilisateur, notifications, actions sur la page). Le titre de la page apparaît dans l'entête avec le nom de la section où l'on se trouve, les deux éléments étant séparés par une barre verticale.
    • Remarques. 1. Le menu hamburger n'est plus accessible quand on descend dans la page. Pour pouvoir afficher le menu de gauche, il faut donc remonter en haut de la page. C'est pas pratique ! 2. Je ne comprends pas pourquoi il faudrait cacher l'entête lorsqu'on descend dans la page. Je préférerais qu'il reste affiché tout le temps et qu'il occupe la totalité de la largeur de l'écran. Une présentation combinant votre proposition avec ce style me conviendrait davantage. 3. Le logo réduit à son simple W me donne un sentiment d'appauvrissement. 4. Le titre combiné avec le nom de la section dans l'entête donne un résultat hideux quand celui est long, et plus encore quand la section est longue également. On se retrouve avec un entête sur deux lignes, avec les outils utilisateurs et les outils de la page placés sur la ligne du bas. C'est pas beaux !
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      Je ne suis pas sûr de ce que je dois comprendre par « utiles ». Les outils présents dans l'entête sont utiles, la fonctionnalité elle-même, j'en sais trop rien ! Au regard des critiques que j'ai formulées ci-dessus je dirais non, elles ne me sont pas utiles.
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
      À première vue, non. Enfin, oui, le menu hamburger quand on est plus pas dans la page.
  3. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Probablement en cliquant sur le nom de l'utilisateur, mais je ne peux pas confirmer, rien ne fonctionne à ce niveau.
  4. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.
    Je pense qu'on peut réduire davantage les outils de notification. Actuellement il y a deux icônes (clochette + casier), simplifions ! L'entête de Winter me plaisait mieux.

Nom d’utilisateur :gdgourou[edit]

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
    beaucoup d'espace inutilisé de part et d'autre mais lecture agréable. La liste des autres langues est intéressante mais le gras attire trop l'œil. La source et l'historique ne sont pas accessibles. Il n'y a pas de bandeaux de portails en bas.
  2. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Ce bandeau escamotable n'est pas intuitif. sans cette question je ne l'aurais pas vu. Il manque le bouton "modifier" et le menu des sections
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      Il ne faut pas trop surcharger cette bande
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
      .non
  3. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    oui
  4. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.
    pas pour le moment

ব্যবহারকারী নাম:MS Sakib[edit]

  1. উক্ত পৃষ্ঠায় যান, এক মিনিট সময় নিয়ে ভালো করে দেখুন, পৃষ্ঠার উপরে এবং নিচে স্ক্রোল করুন, কয়েকটি ভিন্ন ভিন্ন পৃষ্ঠাও দেখুন। আপনার প্রাথমিক অনুভূতি কি? আপনি কি বিভ্রান্তিকর কিছু খুঁজে পেয়েছেন? সুবিধাজনক? আকর্ষণীয়? (লক্ষ্য করুন, যেহেতু এটি একটি প্রোটোটাইপ, অনেক লিঙ্ক কাজ নাও করতে পারে, এবং অন্যান্য বাগ বা ত্রুটি থাকতে পারে।)
    ...পরিবর্তনটির বেশিরভাগই সুবিধাজনক ও আকর্ষণীয়। তবে কিছু বিষয় যা ভালো লাগেনি, যা নিচে ব্যাখ্যা করেছি।
  1. ধীরে ধীরে পৃষ্ঠার নিচের দিকে স্ক্রোল করুন। এখন আবার একটু উপরে স্ক্রোল করুন। কিছু কি খেয়াল করেছেন? এটি নিয়ে আপনার অনুভূতি কি?
    ...নিচের দিকে স্ক্রল করলে পাতার উপরে উইকিপিডিয়া বাটন ও ব্যবহারকারী বাটন প্রদর্শিত হয়। আবার নিচের দিকে স্ক্রল করা অবস্থায় উপরে মাউস পয়েন্টার নিলে অনুসন্ধান, আলাপ, আন্তঃভাষা সংযোগ, ইতিহাস ও দুই ধরণের সম্পাদনা লিংক প্রদর্শিত হয়।
    1. এখানে প্রদর্শিত বৈশিষ্ট্যগুলি কি আপনার জন্য উপকারী? এমন বিশেষ কোন বৈশিষ্ট্য বা ফিচার আছে কি, যা পঠন বা সম্পাদনার সময় আপনি পেতে চান?
      ... নিচের প্রস্তাব অংশে বলেছি।
    2. নতুন শীর্ষচরণে উপলভ্য নয় কিন্তু আপনি পেতে চান এমন কোন বৈশিষ্ট্য আছে কি?
      ... নেই।
  2. এখন, পৃষ্ঠার একদম উপরে স্ক্রোল করুন। কল্পনা করুন আপনি আপনার আলাপ পাতায় যেতে চান। কিভাবে যাবেন আপনি কি তা বের করতে পেরেছেন? এটি নিয়ে আপনার অনুভূতি কি?
    ...ব্যবহারকারী আলাপ পাতায় যেতে পারিনি। এখন যেতে পারছি। (অর্থাৎ, সমস্যাটির সমাধান করা হয়েছে)
  3. আপনার কোন চিন্তা ভাবনা, কোন ধারণা বা প্রশ্ন থাকলে তা যোগ করুন।
    ...নিচে যোগ করেছি

মতামত: MS Sakib[edit]

যা ভালো লেগেছে
  1. পাতার উপরে ব্যবহারকারী লিংকগুলো বিস্তৃত না রেখে একটি ড্রপডাউন মেনুর আওতায় নিয়ে আসাটা বেশ ভালো লেগেছে।
  2. আন্তঃভাষা সংযোগ বাম পাশে না রেখে উপরে রাখাটা পাঠকদের জন্য বেশ সুবিধাজনক।
  3. নিচের দিকে স্ক্রল করলে পাতার উপরে উইকিপিডিয়া বাটন ও ব্যবহারকারী বাটন প্রদর্শিত হওয়াটাও বেশ সুবিধাজনক।
  4. আবার নিচের দিকে স্ক্রল করা অবস্থায় উপরে মাউস পয়েন্টার নিলে কিংবা পাতার যেকোন স্থানে থাকা অবস্থায় মাউসের চাকা উপরের দিকে ঘুড়ালে অনুসন্ধান, আলাপ, আন্তঃভাষা সংযোগ, ইতিহাস ও দুই ধরণের সম্পাদনা লিংক থাকাটাও খুব ভালো লেগেছে।
  5. ডান দিকের পার্শ্বদণ্ডে ও ব্যবহারকারী মেনুতে নতুন কিছু প্রয়োজনীয় লিংক যুক্ত করাটা অবশ্যই ভালো উদ্যোগ।
যা ভালো লাগেনি
  1. ব্যবহারকারী মেনুতে ব্যবহারকারী আলাপ পাতার লিংক নেই। (সমস্যাটির সমাধান করা হয়েছে)
  2. বর্তমানে প্রচলিত সংস্করণ চালু করায় সময়, বাংলা উইকিপিডিয়ার আলোচনাসভায় অভিযোগ করেছিলাম, পার্শ্বদণ্ড (সাইড বার) লুকানো হলে দুই পাশে বেশ অনেকটা ফাকা জায়গা থেকে যায়। পরে তা ঠিক করা হলেও, নতুন প্রস্তাবিত সংস্করণেও দুই পাশে বেশ অনেকটা জায়গা ফাকা থাকার সমস্যাটা আবার শুরু হয়েছে।
  3. পার্শ্বদণ্ডে (সাইডবারে) সম্প্রদায়ের আলোচনাসভার লিংক নেই, যা খুবই অসুবিধাজনক।
  4. নিচের দিকে স্ক্রল করলে পার্শ্বদণ্ড খুলতে আবার পাতার একদম উপরে যাতে হয় (বর্তমানেও তা-ই)।
  5. পার্শ্বদণ্ডটি প্রয়োজনমতো বিস্তৃত হয়না। ফলে পার্শ্বদণ্ডের লিংকের লেখাগুলো পুরোপুরি প্রদর্শিত হয়না।
  6. আন্তঃভাষা সংযোগ বর্তমান রূপে থাকলে, অনুপস্থিত ভাষার লিংকে ক্লিক করে সরাসরি অনুবাদ শুরু করা যাবেনা
প্রস্তাব
  1. উপরের সমস্যাগুলোর সমাধান করা।
  2. পাতার যেকোন স্থানে থাকা অবস্থায় পার্শ্বদণ্ড খোলা-লুকানোর ব্যবস্থা থাকলে ভালো হতো।
  3. পার্শ্বদণ্ডে ও ব্যবহারকারী মেনুতে কোন কোন লিংক প্রদর্শিত হবে তা যাতে ব্যবহারকারীরা তাদের পছন্দসমূহ-তে নির্ধারন করতে পারে, সেই ব্যবস্থা করা যেতে পারে।
  4. সম্পাদনা মোডে পাতার চেহারা উন্নত করা যেতে পারে।

-- MS Sakib (talk) 06:43, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

ValeJappo[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    Some icons, such as the 'edit source' ones are quite confusing.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    A "header menu" will appear. I love this, however it should be fixed: it appears fully just when hovering it with the mouse. When you move a bit from it, it will disappear. I will make it appear when the mouse is a bit more down in respect to it, and most important, you should wait some seconds before making it disappear.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Those features are usefull, but I don't like any in particular.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      Since there is written which section I am currently reading, I would like to be able to press on it and change section.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Yes, however I belive that using the new header (or however something different from the old one, it is very boring) even at the very top would be better.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    I really enjoyed using this prototype, I hope MediaWiki will be such soon. I noticed that the sections' index disappeared: I will add it on a corner. I would also display images aligned left/right in the blank space in the corners, when possible. Also, [edit] near the sections' name is very boring: you could change it with an icon. As suggested before, I would like to see a section switch added in the header, and I would remove the old one at the very top of the pages; some icons needs to be changed.

--ValeJappo (talk) 06:43, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Nom d’utilisateur :31NOVA[edit]

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
    Un énorme recul concernant l'interface, c'est beaucoup trop petit, même la version mobile du site est plus agréable à naviguer qu'avec ce prototype. La petitesse de la place dédiée aux articles me dérange énormément. Le fait de devoir déplier la barre à gauche me dérange et en plus de cela bouge l'article ; déjà qu'il est tout petit, il doit être déplacé pour une simple barre ?! De plus, la page d'accueil est immonde avec cette interface. Néanmoins l'icône pour naviguer entre les différentes langues disponibles est utile.
  2. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    L'interface semble être intéressante pour lire des articles avec peu de texte en défilement automatique. Ça m'étonnerait cependant que beaucoup de gens fassent ça.
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      Non, aucune à part l'icône pour naviguer entre les langues.
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
      Rien ne semble manquer à première vue.
  3. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Oui.
  4. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.
    Ne pas changer d'interface.

--31NOVA (talk) 07:15, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:Persia[edit]

  1. مورد گیج‌کننده‌ای در طراحی جدید وجود ندارد و از نسخه قدیمی به مراتب بهتر است. اولین چیزی که نظر من رو جلب کرد سرعت باز شدن صفحات بود (:
    نوار خودکار می توانند به هنگام ویرایش کمک کننده باشد.
    اگر ویژگی قفل کردن نوار خودرکار به اضافه شود خوب است.
    در نسخه فارسی کره ویکی زیر نوار جست‌جو قرار دارد و دیده نمی شود.
    با اسکرول کردن به سمت پایین اگر ستون کناری هم در دسترس باشد بهتر است

با سپاس--Persia (talk) 07:20, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Utilisatrice:Datsofelija[edit]

  • Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
    Infobox trop longue à mon gout et trop étendue...
  • Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Je remarque une bande en haut de la page et j'aime bien, mais ça rappelle un peu trop facebook...
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      accèder à la liste de suivi par exemple, ou à sa page de discussion ou celle de la page qu'on modifie...
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
      Non aucun.
  • À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Oui, j'ai trouvé, cela ne bouge pas et est plutôt pratique à mon gout.
  • Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.
    Aucun autre commentaire... Datsofelija (talk) 07:25, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:Wikiviciao[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    No, pero le da un aspecto nuevo a Wikipedia, que creo que gustará bastante.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    Está bien que no tengas que desplazarte hasta el incio de la página para editar.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Si. La lista de enlaces que hay en la derecha habitualmente.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      La lista de enlaces que hay en la derecha habitualmente.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Sí, está bien.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    Me gustaría saber para cuando estarán disponibles estos cambios y si habrá una opción en preferencias para verlo como antes. Gracias. Wikiviciao (talk) 07:54, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Nome utente:Esc0fans[edit]

  1. Prenditi un minuto per dare un'occhiata, andare su e giù per la pagina, guardare un po' di pagine. Quali sono le tue impressioni iniziali? C'è qualcosa che trovi confuso? Conveniente? Particolarmente interessante? (Ricorda che dato che questo è un prototipo la maggioranza dei link potrebbero non funzionare e può capitare di incontrare altri bug o difetti).
    (en)Personally I don't like it becuase it's similar to the mobile version and users won't have the mayority of the tools on the left side. I don't like the blue color for the template like stub or copypaste: I prefer the various color because is more simple to explain how is important to do something now. Id don't like the languages menu because is difficult to find the languages and there anren't the stars of quality and the locker of a protected page on the voices. |||(it)Personalmente non mi piace perché la barra laterale con tutti gli strumenti è a scomparsa. Anche il cambio di colori degli avvisi è inutile: i colori aiutano a capire la gravità del problema. Non mi piace per nulla quel menù per le lingue e non sono segnalate i siboli delle voci di qualià o delle protezioni
  2. Scorri lentamente verso il basso la pagina. Poi torna un po' in su. Cosa hai notato? Come valuti questa tua esperienza?
    (en):In my opinion is like the actual version|||(it) penso sia uguale alla versione attuale
    1. Le funzionalità che hai visto qui ti sono utili? Ci sono altre funzionalità a cui sarebbe particolarmente utile accedere mentre stai leggendo o editando?
      (en) I find the menu in the left useless because to use lots of tools you have to open a menu and you waste time|||(it) TRovo inultile il menu laterale da aprire e chiudere perché fa perdere tempo
    2. Ci sono funzionalità che ti piacerebbe avere accessibili ma non sono presenti nella nuova header?
      (en)In this header I don't find the disambiguation marker ||| (it) Non trovo il rilevatore di disambigue
  3. Ora scorri fino all'inizio della pagina. Immagina di voler passare alla pagina di discussione. Come pensi che si possa fare? Che ne pensi di questa esperienza?
    (en) I don't like, I found it unconfortable for me|||(it) non mi è piaciuta, la ho trovarta scomoda
  4. Se hai idee, commenti o domande finali, aggiungile.
    (en) Please put the languages under the other wikis: I find too difficlut find italian when tehere's more than 10 languages ||| (it) Per favore non spostate il menu lingue con questa impostazione è difficile trovare it.wiki

P.S. i'm form it.wiki so i'll answer in English and in italian--Esc0fans (talk)

Username:Saifunny[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    The page layout is more clean and modern, similar to the mobile version. I liked it as it was before, but I think I may get used to this layout. The thing I like better in the current desktop version in comparison the the mobile version, is that it is a lot more easy to find actions.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    It's nice that when scrolling up the navbar shows the title of the article and the current section. Why isn't this also the behavior when scrolling down?
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      • The features I use most: User page, user talk, watchlist, alerts and notifications, editing a page and a specific paragraph, version history, canceling a version.
      • The features I use less, but still use: Moving a page, asking for a page to be deleted.
      • I think that editing a page should be very easy as it is now. I think that the visual-editor editing button that always appears next to the history of the article (in the Hebrew Wikipedia) should remain.
      • I like the editing buttons on every section, it's probably my most used feature.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      • I think that the watchlist should also appear outside of the hidden menu - next to the alerts and notifications buttons (as it is now). It is very useful to see the number of changes updating in live in front of my eyes all the time. Hiding it will make my Wikipedia experience harder because I'll have to explicitly click on it and go inside. I like it that you can see the changes and mark them as seen without going to a different page.
      • There is a lot of place in the side of the page. Why not to make the sidebar open by default? I find it easier to navigate in Wikipedia this way.
  1. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Actually, I didn't find how to do so. The navbar talk is probably the article talk. In the hidden menu next to the user name I didn't find that option. I think this page should also be very easy to access.
  2. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    • In the Hebrew version, the search box is covering the Wikipedia logo. I think it should move more to the left - there is a lot of empty space in there.
    • In the current desktop version it is hard to find another users' contributions page. If you can make it easy to find from the user page, as it is in the mobile version, that would be great.

Saifunny (talk) 07:58, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Gebruikersnaam:Laurier[edit]

  1. Neem even de tijd om rond te kijken, de pagina op en neer te gaan en naar een paar verschillende pagina's te kijken. Wat is uw initiële impressie? Is er iets verwarrend? Handig? Interessant? (Houdt er rekening mee dat dit een prototype is en sommige koppelingen niet werken en er mogelijk bugs of andere problemen zijn die u kunt tegenkomen.)
    Geen inhoudsopgave vind ik een gemis. Hele tekst is smal, ik wil gewoon de hele breedte van het venster gebruiken. Als ik dat te breed vind verklein ik liever het window. Verschil in opmaak tussen kopje 3 en 4 onvoldoende. Talen bovenaan is mooi, maar je moet er eerst op klikken ipv dat er alvast enkele links direct aanklikbaar zijn, dat is niet mooi: elke extra klik t.o.v. huidige situatie is teveel. Kortom: als lezer heb ik enkele verbeterpunten, maar op zich ziet het er wel mooi uit. Als Wikipediaan kijk ik er anders tegenaan: ik kan niet vinden waar ik met één klik naar mijn volglijst, mijn gebruikerspagina en mijn overlegpagina kan komen. Volglijst vind ik terug na heen en weer scrollen en
  2. Scroll langzaam naar beneden. Scroll nu een klein beetje terug. Wat valt u op? Wat is uw mening over deze ervaring?
    Je ziet het Wiki-icoontje en de naam van het artikel plus kopje waar je je op dat moment bevindt. Ook direct bewerklinks en link naar overlegpagina. Prettig! Je kunt pas naar je eigen volglijst of voorkeuren na een klik op drie puntjes (menu). Dat vind ik erg onprettig: elke extra klik t.o.v. huidige situatie is teveel. Ik gebruik mijn volglijst erg veel, en heb RSI. Ik zie ook nu pas dat de 'bewerk'-link pas na heen en weer scrollen tevoorschijn komt, dus niet als je bovenaan bent! Dat vind ik absoluut niet gewenst. Bij de nieuwe 'scroll-header' zouden geen andere functies moeten staan dan bovenaan.
    1. Is de functionaliteit die u hier ziet nuttig voor u? Zijn er functies die specifiek nuttig zijn bij het lezen of bewerken?
      Het zou heel fijn zijn als je de gifjes ook gestopt konden worden, zodat er geen beweging in beeld is. Beweging in beeld kan erg afleidend zijn voor veel lezers.
    2. Is er functionaliteit die u zou willen gebruiken die niet beschikbaar is in de nieuwe header?
      Directe link naar Special:GlobalWatchlist op meta . wikimedia
  3. Scroll terug naar de bovenkant van de pagina. Stel u voor dat u terug naar uw overlegpagina wilt gaan. Kunt u er achter komen hoe u dat moet doen? Wat vindt u van deze ervaring?
    Ik kan niet vinden hoe ik op mijn gebruikerspagina en mijn overlegpagina kan komen. Volglijst vind ik terug na heen en weer scrollen en klik op menu (is extra klik, dus verslechtering), maar mijn gebruikerspagina en mijn overlegpagina zie ik helemaal niet meer. Onacceptabel, sorry.
  4. Heeft u nog andere gedachten, ideeën of vragen?
    Lijkt voorbereiding op unificatie van gebruikerservaring op phone, tablet en desktop/laptop. Op zich mooi, maar dat kan qua schermbreedte-gebruik zeker ook anders.

利用者名:Glaceonwiki[edit]

  1. ここで手を止めて全体を見回してみましょう。まず第一印象は? なにか分かりにくい点は? 便利な点は? これは面白そうだという点は?(留意点はこれは試作版のため動作しないリンクがあるかもしれないことで、その他、バグやおかしな挙動に遭遇するかもしれません。)
    ...第一印象は見た目がシンプルで見やすいということです。モバイル版の見た目に近づいた気がします。初めは「最近の出来事」などの今までサイドバーにあった機能がどこにいったのだろうかと迷いましたが、ハンバーガーメニューを開くということが一度わかってしまえば大丈夫でした。サイドバーにあった機能はあまり使用頻度が高くないので、一つにまとめてしまうのは視認性向上につながっていると感じました。検索窓が見やすくていいですね。
  2. ページの下に向かってゆっくりスクロールします。次にわずかに画面を上へスクロールしなおします。なにか気づいた点はありませんか? この操作をしてみて何か感じたことはありますか?
    ...面白い機能ですが少しチラチラしてうざったいですね。今は1pxのスクロールでもヘッダが降りてくるようですが、例えば3行分など、まとまった量を一度に上へスクロールしたときのみ降りてきてほしいです。でなければサイズをやや小さくして、常に表示してしまうのも一案。
    1. ここで示した機能はあなた自身にとって役に立つと思いますか? (その中に)閲覧や編集をするとき、特にこれは便利だと思う機能はありましたか?
      ...ページのどこにいても履歴や編集ができるというのは、ウィキペディアン目線から見れば便利ですね。
    2. この新しいヘッダにはないけれど、使えるとよいと思う機能はなんでしょうか?
      ...上へスクロールしたときに表示されるヘッダに記事名と節名が表示されると思うのですが、その節名の隣に∨字型のアイコンを配置して、そのアイコンから他の読みたい節に飛べるといいと思いました。長大な記事を読むときでも目的の情報に到達しやすくなります。
  3. では、ページ最上部へスクロールしてください。ご自分のトークページを開きたいと想定します。どうすればよいか、わかりますか? この手順についてどう感じましたか?
    ...残念ながらトークページの開き方はよくわかりませんでした。自分のユーザー名が表示されると思しき人型のアイコンを押すことで自分の利用者ページに飛ぶのかトークページに飛ぶのか不明瞭です。できれば「…」アイコンの中に入れ込むか、吹き出しマークのようなものを配置していただきたいです。
  4. 最後に自由記述式でご意見、提案、質問をお書きください。
    ...①アラートと通知を一本化してはどうでしょうか?分ける意味があまり感じられないので。②検索窓の隣のあたりにでもGoogleの"I'm feeling lucky"よろしく、おまかせ表示のボタンを配置してみてはどうでしょう?おまかせ表示は個人的に大好きな機能のひとつなので。まあ重要度は低いですが。③記事の横幅と文字サイズをもう少し大きくしてほしいです。元のMediawikiと同じくらいでお願いしたい。特に文字サイズが小さくなったことで可読性が下がりました。文章主体のコンテンツなのだから、文章の読みやすさが何をおいても第一。

以上になります。提案や作業などお疲れさまです。ありがとうございます。--Glaceonwiki (talk) 08:57, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:Geraki[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    It looks nice and clean, but:
    • The sidebar displays a vertical overflow bar even when there is no overflow. Also the sidebar is too narrow, it will be a problem for non english wikis. Also the sidebar uses small font-size: make it at least 0.8em.
    • In a narrow window with the sidebar open, the article text overflows a couple of characters without a horizontal overflow bar (should not overflow at all). I believe that displaying the sidebar on top of the article text (like in Minerva) would be a lot better. In current Vector I am allowed to narrow the window even more and it just reflows the text up to the point I can narrow it more.
    • In a narrow window with the sidebar open, the search box dissapears and the only way to search is to scroll down to display it in the floating header.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    I like the top bar, but: I would be better to be sticky (always displayed) than appearing only when scrolling up. Make the 'W' icon be a real link as the Wikipedia logo. Why to remove the hamburger icon? Why remove the alerts and notices icons?
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      All are one click or two clicks away. Editing icons and Watch icon are the most useful. Then alert and notices icons, and for some users and wikis the Recent Changes and CP and Village Pump items in sidebar.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      Watch icon is missing when scrolling down!
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    ??? Ok. Now where did you hide it?
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    I would like the sidebar menu to float on top of the content on narrow displays like the user bar and like in minerva and timeless skins. On wider displays, depending on the user's preference about the max-width, display left of the content when on top of page, then available from the hambourger icon.

Username: Marcel Bergeret[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    I don't see the Content table, which is a problem in long articles. Also, the text doesn't fit the width of the window, it seems that it is thought to be seen in a vertical screen (which I don't envision to use in a desktop).
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    I like the top bar; the information about which section is displayed is very nice. But why hide it? In a desktop, the space on the screen shouldn't be an issue. How can I keep it always visible?
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Features are useful. I don't have in mind additional features to be added but sure there will be some. Is the top bar configurable?
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      ...
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    No, I haven't figured out how to get to my talk page...
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    ...

Nom d’utilisateur : Quarante-quatre[edit]

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
    Pour les pages comme la Lune, la Terre et autre qui ont un gros bloc d'information, je n'aime pas la nouvelle présentation qui place ce bloc au tout début, avant tout, sans bordure. C'est assez moche et moins pratique. Avant il était sur le côté et visible en même temps que l'introduction et le sommaire. Ce qui permettait de trouver certains complément d'information en même qu'on lisait l'introduction. L'idéal serait qu'il soit sur le côté "dans l'espace vide" et qu'il soit toujours visible quand on scroll sur l'article. De plus le sommaire n'est plus visible. Sur Smartphone on peut le voir en glissant le côté, mais ici il n'est plus du tout là, pour les longs articles, c'est indispensable d'avoir le sommaire pour aller à la section qui nous intéresse.
  2. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Le fait que le menu réapparait en remontant est bien. En revanche je n'arrive pas à l'utiliser, je ne sais pas si c'est dû au prototype.
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      L'appercu de la page quand on survole un lien n'est pas dispo (peut-être dû au prototype), pour moi c'est une fonctionnalité essentiel. Je l'utilise tout le temps, surtout quand je connais pas une notion, personne ou autre sans pour autant avoir à ouvrir un nouvelle article. Peut-être aussi rajouter au niveau de chaque titre de l'article une icône pour obtenir le lien hypertexte de cette section, sans avoir à revenir au sommaire. Le fait que l'interface soit épuré pour se concentrer uniquement sur l'article est vraiment bien.
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
      Peut-être savoir si l'article dans tel ou tel langue est de qualité ou non.
  3. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Je ne la trouve pas
  4. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.
    Peut-être rajouter l'icône des menus de la barre devant le texte des anciens menu qui sont en haut de l'article, pour garder une cohérence dans l'ensemble.

Username:Dim Grits[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    Heading not relevance to what I see and what me shown.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    Why navbar hidden partly (W leftside and User rightside), but not pinned on demand for navigation Title#part? Dynamic bars are not acceptable for everyone. Keep option. How call leftsidebar from bottom? Add symbol menu (☰) to topnavbar.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      The main thing is the less scrolling the better.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      It,s not easy question after few minutes introduction.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    I didn't find. Sorry, I'm very long in Wikipedia, maybe very old for those 🍆💦.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    Related pages on bottom.

Username:Tuvalkin[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    Not confusing because I’m used to crappy websites that work like this. But hugely disappointing, although not surprising, as this has been the trend for a while. Look, just make sure Monobook is undisturbed by this and I will go on working.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    Some items follow me around as I scroll, instead of being anchored in their place. It’s distracting and annoying, it’s condescending and patronizing.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      No and no.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      Maybe, but don’t worry about that. Users can develop stuff users need. You just make sure the donations our work accrues are not all squandered away to pay for stunts like this.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    The link to the talk page is, as ever have been since talk pages exist, clearly indicated. This is not the 1980s anymore, people don’t need to be taught how to use computers, really: It’s a link, click it. Stop trying to improve what’s not broken.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    It’s incredible how something that was supposed to be a grass-roots movement so quickly degenerated into the same kind of nightmare corporate-based outfits do too.

Tuvalkin (talk) 09:53, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Nom d’utilisateur:Wizly-08[edit]

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
    L'infobox est insérée de manière étrange, elle ne prend qu'une moitié d'écran sans pouvoir lire le début de l'article à gauche comme avant. De plus, sans encadrement de l'infobox, il est facile de se perdre dans la page. Le texte quand à lui est très large et ne donne pas envie d'être lu. Les bandeaux sont illisibles et ne renseignent pas clairement sur le problème.
  2. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    La galerie d'image s'affiche en vertical, ce qui oblige l'utilisateur a beaucoup "scroller" vers le bas pour passer des informations.
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      Le haut de la page est plus efficace.
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
      Le sommaire n'est pas accessible.
  3. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Sur ce point, trouver les pages de discussion ou les fonctionnalités utilisateur est plus agréable. Cliquer sur les trois petites points pour y trouver ses informations est une bonne idée, déjà standardisée sur de nombreux sites et donc devenu intuitif.
  4. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.
    Il y a de bonnes idées, mais cette version ne doit pas sortir dans cet état à cause d'un trop grand manque de visibilité et de clarté.

Kostal.david8[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    It looks strange, but that's probably just because I'm so used to the current layout. The page content seems off-center. Left navigation menu seems a little out of place. Overall it's probably easier to read due to the reduced text width. Language picker (in this form) is more annoying because you need 2 clicks to change a language compared to the current version. Style of the page/discussion/read/source header is really out of place with the newer design (and I honestly like the older "fade out" design that this header uses more).
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    Can be pretty useful for some people, but I don't feel strongly about it in any particular way.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Not really, except maybe languages. If anything, I would like to have access to page contents without having to scroll all the way up.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      Page contents would be useful.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    I would expect to click my username at the top left, but that doesn't seem to work in the prototype.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    The design looks very inconsistent in this prototype and I just feel like I like the classic design more - it's more friendly (but of course that's what I'm used to). The reduced width is something that's necessary though, as Wikipedia is almost unreadable on very wide screens.

Martin Urbanec[edit]

  1. Na chvíli se rozhlížejte, posunujte stránku nahoru a dolů, zkuste více různých stránek. Jaké jsou vaše prvotní dojmy? Je zde něco matoucího? Nebo praktického? Obzvlášt zajímavého? (Mějte na paměti, že jde o prototyp, kde většina odkazů ve skutečnosti nefunguje, a můžete narazit i na další chyby nebo jiné výstřednosti.)
    There's a lot of blank space on both sides of the page, which I don't like, because it feels "there should be something". I don't have an extra large screen in my laptop (15.6 inch), yet the space has significant size.
  2. Pomalu posunujte stránku dolů. Nyní zase trochu nahoru. Co pozorujete? Co si o tom myslíte?
    When I scroll a bit down, a part of the menu shows up (the user submenu/profile icon shows up, and the Wikipedia icon). I think the full menu should show up, as it can be helpful to immediately see talk button, or the search bar, without having to scroll all the way up. When I scroll a bit up, the full menu appears, which is an improvement, but I don't like the half-menu appearance.
    1. Jsou předváděné funkce pro vás užitečné? Jsou zde nějaké funkce, ke kterým je obzvlášť užitečné mít během čtení a editace přístup?
      Generally useful, yes. It could be useful to have the move/delete/protect convo available from the upper menu as well, just as there are icons for editing with source/VE.
    2. Jsou zde nějaké funkce, ke kterým byste chtěli mít přístup a nové nadpisy je nenabízejí?
      All features seem to be available via the old way (ie. the menu that's directly above the article title). So, I don't feel that there is a feature missing.
  3. Nyní posuňte stránku úplně nahoru. Představte si, že chcete navštívit svoji diskusní stránku. Přijdete na to, jak to provést? Jak to na vás působí?
    It looks like an intuitive way, employed by many other sites.
  4. Přidejte prosím jakékoliv vaše úvahy, nápady nebo otázky.
    I'm not sure that this would be liked by the cswiki community, considering the annoying blank space on both sides. It almost looks like it is there to add adds ;).

--Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:10, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Nom d’utilisateur : DpLed[edit]

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
    Le nouveau thème est moderne et agréable à première vue, j’aurais simplement quelques suggestions pour l’améliorer encore :
  • La police de caractère est très moderne mais je la trouve assez fatiguante à lire sur un corps de texte long. Je la verrais bien remplacée par une police à empattement — Linux Libertine serait très bien —, car ces polices sont plus agréables à lire sur un corps de texte long — c’est pourquoi presque tous les livres sont composés avec ces polices. J’agrandirai également la taille de la police, que je trouve un peu petite, ce qui fatigue l’œil.
  • J’ai remarqué que le texte commence désormais en dessous de l’infobox. J’aimais bien les infobox alignées à droite

avec le texte à gauche comme dans la version actuelle, mais s’il faut que le texte commence en dessous de l’infobox il me semble mieux que celle-ci soit centrée.

  • C’est une observation de longue date, mais si le moteur Wikimédia le permet, je préfèrerais voir le corps de texte justifié (avec ou sans coupures de mots), ce qui rendrait la page plus agréable à voir.
  1. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      J’aime bien la petite barre d’outils qui s’affiche en haut de la page, mais je ne vois pas pourquoi elle devrait être masquée quand on défile la page, cela fait un mouvement lorsqu’on remonte, ce qui peut distraire de la lecture.
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
      Il pourrait être utile d’ajouter un bouton pour modifier la page dans la barre d’outil, pour éviter de devoir tout remonter. De plus, je pense qu’il serait avantageux qu’une table des matières s’affiche lorsqu’on clique sur le nom de la partie dans laquelle on se trouve, encore un fois pour éviter de devoir remonter toute la page.
  2. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Je n’y arrive pas mais ce doit être parce que ce n’est pas encore implémenté, sans quoi je crois voir comment faire.
  3. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire....

Username:CapoFantasma97 PS: This page is damn broken[edit]

  1. The fact the article is not centered but moved to the side is quite distracting. There is too much white, it could've helped to use some light gray to split parts of the page; without a dark theme browser extension, it's unbearable to stare at.
  2. The article's header design is alright: it contains all the important features; the choice to add a language button on top is interesting, but also time-wasting, as it's another menu to open before one can access the languages. The lack of sidebars is ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE: you have lots of empty space, but you had to put it inside a useless hamburger menu, just to waste even more of your users' time... And for what may I ask since it's merely a few links, written in tiny text, that don't even make proper use of the space on the side? No one asked to make Wikipedia more like Mobile Wikipedia for PCs. While having a proper layout for the article helps with reading (including limiting the width), removing features and hiding others behind menus is just detrimental for everyone. To my understanding, some of you at WikiMedia want to "make a seamless experience among multiple device types"... well, that belief is FLAT OUT WRONG if you think it has to be done by REDUCING FUNCTIONALITY for desktop browsers. If you're smart enough, you should know that different devices have different designs, because they have DIFFERENT NEEDS. Phones have reduced screen estate, and make use of touch-screens, which does not yield accurate inputs (sausage fingers!). They need ways to make the best out of small screens, while also giving big buttons to easily touch them. PCs have large horizontal screens. They don't need to hide important elements behind menus, because there is plenty of space that would otherwise go wasted. While mice are somewhat accurate, fine prints are hard to read, so the excessively small text is a no-go.
  3. It seems intuitive enough that clicking on my username, it should take me to my userspace/discussion page. It doesn't work in the demo but seems obvious.
  4. This is terrible. The new Vector theme is instead what you should look for. Improve from that with PC user needs.

PS: The New Section button is broken. Consider fixing it, will ya? --CapoFantasma97 (talk) 10:25, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:shahramrashidi[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)

No. I think it is ok.

  1. ...
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience? No problem
    ...
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing? i have no idea now and must check it in real requirement.
      ...
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header? I think it is ok.
      ...
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience? It is good.
    ...
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    ...

Username:Civvì[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    On the Italian version of the page the text appears only at the end of the infobox, this is annoying. Plenty of empty space on the sides, at the beginning I thought this is a mobile version.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    Menu appearing and disappearing, needs some time to figure out when it appears and disappears, scrolling up, scrolling down, hovering. I don't like things like this, hopefully there will be an option to have it always there.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      I understand that this is a version for readers, I hope that editors will have the choice to stay with the current version, perhaps through an option in the preferences?
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      Do you mean the header or the disappearing header? The option to see the sidebar, at the moment you can only open the sidebar when you are at the top of the page.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    No, I couldn't figure out where it is.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    Has this all been tested with screen readers for visually impaired readers and users? Has anybody thought about asking them about UX of this prototype?

Nom d’utilisateur :Lamiot[edit]

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
    Je ne vois pas d'onglet "modifier/corriger" en haut de page (ce qui me manque un peu, qui devrait être très évident, aux moins pour les articles courts pour inviter les nouveaux à participer et les anciens à améliorer ... Je n'aime pas du tout la disposition des images les unes au dessus des autres plutôt que regroupées plutôt horizontalement (est-ce un bug ?)
  2. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    apparition d'un bandeau d'outils... je n'ai pas compris tout de suite, et il disparait trop facilement je trouve... pour les vieux comme moi, avoir le bandeau d'outils en permanence est utile (un effort cérébral de moins pour rester concentrer sur ce que je veux faire)
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      (le sommaire automatique en haut de page)...
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
      un gros bouton "modifier"... un lien "traduire cette page" ?
  3. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    non, pas trouvé... ou est-ce le mot "talk" (si oui, un peu ambigu, on peut penser qu'il s'agit d'un lien vers un chat)

Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.

    1. : la forme "très bandeau", me donne l'impression d'une adaptation uniquement pour le smartphone, elle force à défiler/scroller plus, (c'est un peu énervant quant on sait que ce serait "mieux" autrement, et => gaspillage de plus de papier à l'impression ?)
    2. Dans la box, en haut de page, je préférerai veaiment une justification du texte à gauche, plutôt que centré, et dans jun cadre... L'ancienne présentation des box, dans un cadre, avec un titre, à droite de l'introduction me semble préférable.
    3. j'aime mieux voir mon nom/ou pseudo près de ma silhouette pour me rappeler que j'ai aussi une page de présentation/dissussion, à éventuellement mettre à jour (ou pour vérifier qu'elle n'a pas été vandalisée.
    4. il y a trop de "vide" en tête de page, en particulier quand il y a une image étroite et haute (exemple).

En utilisation sur écran d'ordinateur, le bandeau bleu à gauche pourrait être permanent

Nome utente: Mannivu[edit]

  1. Prenditi un minuto per dare un'occhiata, andare su e giù per la pagina, guardare un po' di pagine. Quali sono le tue impressioni iniziali? C'è qualcosa che trovi confuso? Conveniente? Particolarmente interessante? (Ricorda che dato che questo è un prototipo la maggioranza dei link potrebbero non funzionare e può capitare di incontrare altri bug o difetti).
    Sembra più una versione mobile, che una versione desktop. Per la lettura sembra ottima, ma per chi vuole contribuire attivamente all'enciclopedia è tutto nascosto: nessuna categoria visibile, non esiste indice e da desktop mi sembra poco funzionale
  2. Scorri lentamente verso il basso la pagina. Poi torna un po' in su. Cosa hai notato? Come valuti questa tua esperienza?
    Avere un template a galleggiare da solo invece che essere integrato nel testo mi sembra una grossa mancanza: prima di implementare modifiche, bisognerebbe assicurarsi che funzionino come ci si aspetta in tutte le versioni linguistiche.
    1. Le funzionalità che hai visto qui ti sono utili? Ci sono altre funzionalità a cui sarebbe particolarmente utile accedere mentre stai leggendo o editando?
      La mancanza di un indice è piuttosto grave: come faccio a navigare velocemente verso una sezione?
    2. Ci sono funzionalità che ti piacerebbe avere accessibili ma non sono presenti nella nuova header?
      ...
  3. Ora scorri fino all'inizio della pagina. Immagina di voler passare alla pagina di discussione. Come pensi che si possa fare? Che ne pensi di questa esperienza?
    È estremamente complicato capire dove si trovi il pulsante per la mia pagina di discussione: è la campanella? il vassoio? devo aprire il menu a tendina? Troppo complicato e oscuro.
  4. Se hai idee, commenti o domande finali, aggiungile.
    Credo che allineare in modo così drastico versione mobile e versione desktop non porti beneficio a chi visita Wikipedia da PC e, soprattutto, sembra rendere molto peggiore l'esperienza di chi fa l'enciclopedia. --Mannivu · 10:40, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Nombre de usuario:Wiki LIC[edit]

  1. Tómese un minuto para mirar alrededor. ¿Cuáles son algunas de sus impresiones iniciales? ¿Hay algo que encuentra confuso? ¿Conveniente? ¿Particularmente interesante? (Dado que esto es un prototipo la mayoría de los links no funcionan puede que se encuentre otros bugs o defectos).
    Veo que se han despejado los márgenes de la hoja (al menos en la tablet que manejo), pero que no se aprovechan para dar más espacio al contenido.
  2. Desplace despacio la página hacia abajo. Ahora haga scroll hacia arriba un poco. ¿Qué nota? ¿Qué piensa de esta experiencia?
    Bien, como de costumbre...
    1. ¿Son las características mostradas aquí útiles para usted? ¿Alguna de las nuevas características es particularmente útil para tener acceso a la hora de leer o editar?
      ...
    2. ¿Hay alguna característica a la que quiera acceder que no encuentre en la nueva cabecera?
      No veo una opción para editar el artículo completo (aunque supongo que aparecerá en su momento en "Ver código")
  3. Ahora, vuelva al inicio de la página. Imagine que quiere ir a la página de discusión. ¿Cómo lo haría? ¿Cómo ve la experiencia?
    Bien, como siempre
  4. Por favor añada cualquier idea final, comentario o preguntas.
    ¿Sería posible que el texto quedase justificado a la derecha? (es decir, que el editor de texto consiguiera alinear las líneas de texto por la derecha). Por ejemplo, la web "wiki2.org" lo hace perfectamente...
    Otro problema habitual es la interferencia que se produce cuando se insertan seguidas imágenes alineadas a la derecha y a la izquierda (unas "empujan" hacia abajo a las otras). ¿Habría alguna manera de resolverlo?

Nom d’utilisateur : Jules*[edit]

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
    • L'affichage sur une largeur réduite est pratique et facilite la lecture. En revanche, l'infobox apparaît comme un cheveu sur la soupe : elle ne prend qu'un tiers de la largeur du texte et est alignée à gauche, c'est très moche. Peut-être l'afficher dans la marge ? Ou revoir son format ? [edit : visiblement c'est un bug juste pour fr:Lune, car le prototype de en:Moon affiche correctement l'infobox à droite, avec le texte de l'introduction à sa gauche.
    • Le fait que les marges blanches à gauche et à droite du texte de l'article ne soient pas de la même taille est perturbant. La marge gauche est plus large, sans doute car le menu latéral gauche peut s'y déployer. Àmha, le menu latéral gauche devrait se déployer en-dehors de cette marge blanche, et cette marge blanche devrait être de taille équivalente de chaque côté du texte.
  2. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    • Je trouve pratique que l'entête réapparaisse dès que l'on scrolle vers le haut. Mais ce serait encore plus pratique qu'elle soit réellement fixe et s'affiche en permanence (donc y compris lorsque l'on scrolle vers le bas) ; ou au moins que ce soit une option (plus utile pour les contributeurs que pour les simples lecteurs).
    • Par ailleurs, le fait que l'entête s'affiche en mouse-hover sur le haut de la page est àmha une mauvaise idée : j'ai voulu cliquer sur le lien [modifier] d'un titre de section situé en haut de mon écran, et lorsque mon curseur a voulu se déplacer sur le lien, l'entête est apparue par-dessus le titre de section et le lien [modifier], m'empêchant de cliquer. Ce n'est pas pratique.
    • Enfin, lorsque l'on scrolle vers le bas puis vers le haut et que l'entête apparaît, si l'on mouse-hover l'entête puisque notre curseur quitte la zone de l'entête, cette dernière disparaît. Ce n'est pas un comportement logique à mes yeux.
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      Oui.
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
      L'étoile pour ajouter à la LDS devrait figurer à côté des icônes d'édition et d'historique.
  3. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Non. Je vois deux icônes pour les notifications, mon nom d'utilisateur (le lien ne fonctionne pas, mais je présume qu'il mène vers la page utilisateur), mais aucun lien vers ma page de discussion. (Il y a bien un lien vers la page de discussion de l'article, mais c'est tout.)
  4. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.
    • Il serait pratique d'ajouter quelque part dans l'interface (en bas à droite) des flèches haut et bas, qui s'affichent en permanence et permettent de remonter tout en haut de l'article ou de descendre tout en bas.
    • Le sommaire de l'article devrait s'afficher (en version repliable, comme le menu latéral gauche) de manière fixe, dans l'une des marges blanches (gauche ou droite), lorsque l'on scrolle l'article.
    • Le menu utilisateur déroulant (en haut à droite) avec la liste de suivi, le brouillon, etc. est OK pour des lecteurs. Mais pour des contributeurs, un accès facile aux liens est nécessaire : ils devraient alors figurer sous la forme d'icônes directement dans l'entête.
    • Quand on est en haut de l'article, les liens « Discussion », « Modifier », « Historique », etc., apparaissent toujours de manière traditionnelle, comme ils apparaissaient avant. C'est perturbant car ils n'adoptent pas la nouvelle charte graphique utilisée pour tout le reste. Ils devraient être harmonisés avec le reste (texte + icône ; couleur noire plutôt que bleue ; suppression du fond bleuté dégradé verticalement vers le blanc ; etc.).
    • La police de caractère est très agréable, mais la taille du texte est trop petite. Je suis obligé de zoomer à 120 % pour un confort de lecture agréable.

Jules* (talk) 10:53, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Nom d’utilisateur : Aridow[edit]

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
    L'infobox et certaines images sont centrés à gauche avec rien à droite : bug ? Dans la version anglaise, je n'ai pas ce problème, mais l'infobox est trop grande (quasiment la moitié de l'espace utilisé) et tout est mal centré dedans (y compris l'image et les titres). Trop d'espace vide, trop compact, on étouffe et on s'y perd. Pourquoi les menus présents normalement à gauche sont cachés (j'ai mis plusieurs minutes à les trouver), et pourquoi faut-il scroller "à l'intérieur" alors qu'il y a largement la place de l'afficher en entier ? Il y a tellement d'espace libre que dans la version anglaise, la longue image de la section "4.1 Lunar distance" ne s'affiche pas en entier (on ne voit pas la lune). Texte trop clair. On ne peut pas ouvrir les liens dans un nouvel onglet, on est obligé de cliquer dessus. Les pages mettent du temps à changer de l'une à l'autre lorsqu'on utilise les flèches du navigateur pour reculer/avancer d'une page, et parfois lorsqu'on clique sur les liens. Certaines langues devraient être accessibles sans qu'on ait besoin de cliquer sur "langues", comme c'est le cas normalement (mais si c'est pour les cacher dans le menu de gauche, ça revient au même). Où est le sommaire ?
  2. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Le menu qui s'affiche quand on monte ou lorsqu'on passe la souris dessus est gênant, il attire trop l'attention en nous empêche de cliquer sur un lien en haut de notre écran : typiquement, si je clique sur une référence entre crochets, j'ai besoin de cliquer sur le ^ pour remonter, mais je suis obligé de scroller pour ne pas que la barre de menu s'affiche. Quand on clique sur la loupe, le bouton "search" est en plein milieu de la barre de recherche. Rien ne se passe quand on appuie sur tous les autres boutons. Les menus accessibles via "..." devraient être directement sur la barre. Si je laisse ma souris sur la barre, et que je descends, les boutons disparaissent mais la barre en elle-même reste. Pourquoi ne pas utiliser les nombreux espaces inutiles pour y placer les menus de manière permanente ?
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      Le fait de pouvoir y accéder où que l'on soit sur la plage est utile, la manière dont c'est implémenté ne l'est pas. Et non, rien qui me vient à l'esprit.
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
      L'ensemble des liens disponible en temps normal à gauche (contribuer, outils...).
  3. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Je suppose que je suis censé cliquer sur le nom d'utilisateur "L May Alcott" mais rien ne se passe. Je ne comprends pas ce que je dois répondre.
  4. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.
    J'aimerais que les utilisateurs non connectés aient un moyen de repasser à la version Vector, utilisée encore l'année dernière. Ou que mes préférences soient automatiquement changées sur tous les projets, et toutes les langues à la fois.

Ім'я користувача:Всевидяче Око[edit]

  1. Приділіть хвилину щоб озирнутись, прокрутити вгору-вниз сторінки, прогляньте кілька різних сторінок. Які Ваші початкові враження? Щось є важкозрозумілим? Зручним? Особливо цікавим? (Майте на увазі, що оскільки це прототип, частина посилань може не працювати й що можуть бути інші баги чи приклади дивної поведінки, на які Ви наштовхнетесь.)
    1- не вдалось подивитись жодної іншої сторінки (усі лінки повертають 404). Незвичним є праве поле - звузило площу самої статті
  2. Повільно прокрутіть сторінку донизу. Тепер прокрутіть трішки вгору. Що Ви помічаєте? Яке Ваше враження щодо цього досвіду?
    Попап меню - на стаціонарних пристроях непогано досить.
    1. Чи є представлені функції корисними для Вас? Чи є якісь функції, які особливо корисно мати під рукою під час читання чи редагування?
      Зараз важко сказати - потрібно спробувати працювати
    2. Чи є якісь функції, до яких Ви б хотіли мати доступ, які не представлені в новому заголовку?
      потрібно спробувати працювати
  3. Тепер прокрутіть назад нагору сторінки. Уявіть, що Ви б хотіли перейти на свою сторінку обговорення. Чи зрозуміло для Вас як це зробити? Що Ви думаєте про цей досвід?
    50 на 50. Думалось що це перехід на Обговорення сторінки яку зараз редагується - а не на власну сторінку обговорення
  4. Будь ласка, додайте будь-які фінальні думки, ідеї чи запитання.
    При "виїзді" лівого меню - неприємно смикається вміст самої статті, зміщуючись ще вправо

Username:The-ultimate-square[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    See the "final thoughts" section.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    Headers, they look nice.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Which features?
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      I don't see all the features as I can see only a couple of pages.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    No, I can't open it. The username is not clickable, notifications and alarm clock too, if I press the three dots right to the user name there is no talk page in the menu. If I needed to go to my talk page I would have to type url, unfortunately.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    Awful. I would not express myself but you asked. Actually it looks great and promising, but, you know, the problem is that it is very hard to charge. The updated theme is fine if it is working fine by all circumstances. As we can see only a couple of pages we can't tell about all the problems. And, even I see just two pages, I can already see problems
    1. I scrolled down the page, scrolled up a bit and pressed the search icon. Inside the search box I see some white space, "search" text (probably a button I have to press), and some white space again (inside the search box). What is it? A bug?
    2. Username, notifications and an alarm bell is not clickable.
    So I expect many places where problems might come up, different screen resolutions and graphs, some charts that are not responsive, long discussions, things not lookig well in Russian writing (cyrillic), etc, but I can see weird things under the most simple conditions. The-ultimate-square (talk) 12:03, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:Khairul hazim[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    This looks more like the mobile version, but better.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    The only thing it lacks is the sections part.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      The positioning of the search engine tab feels odd to me.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      Nothing. Keep it as it is.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Nothing.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    Nothing. Khairul hazim (talk) 12:23, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Имя участника:Putnik[edit]

  1. Уделите минуту тому, чтобы осмотреться, пролистайте страницу вверх и вниз, посмотрите несколько различных страниц. Какие у вас первые впечатления? Вас что-нибудь смущает? Вам удобно? Вы находите что-нибудь сбивающим с толку? Удобным? Особенно интересным? (Имейте в виду, что это прототип, в котором некоторые ссылки могут не работать, и в котором вам могут встретиться другие ошибки или странности.)
    Само верхнее меню при просмотре первой страницы выглядит достаточно удобно. Вариант при просмотре не нравится: функциональные иконки никак не подписаны, а блок языков наоборот подписан и занимает много места. Так же не нравится, что при прокрутке одно меню неочевидным образом заменяется на другое. Также в основном меню скрываются часто используемые иконки вроде списка наблюдения. Хочется иметь возможно закрепить их, чтобы они не скрывались.
  2. Медленно прокрутите страницу вниз. Теперь прокрутите немного назад. Что вы заметили? Что вы думаете об этом опыте?
    Шапка появляется и исчезает даже при прокрутке на пиксель вверх-вниз, что создаёт ненужный визуальный шум. Как минимум, должны быть пороговые значения, при которых состояние шапки не будет меняться. Но лучше, если шапка будет отображаться только при наведении на неё, либо наоборот всегда.
    1. Полезны ли вам показанные здесь функции? Существуют ли какие-либо функции, к которым особенно полезно иметь доступ во время чтения или редактирования?
      Единственная полезная функция при прокрутке — отображение текущего раздела, но есть ощущение, что его отображение можно было бы сделать ценой меньшей потери пространства. Все остальные функции не нужны при просмотре страницы, а когда нужны — то уже требуется уйти со страницы, поэтому можно прокрутить к её началу.
    2. Есть ли какие-либо функции, к которым вы хотели бы получить доступ, которые недоступны в новой шапке сайта?
      Возможно, нужны ссылки на редактирование текущего раздела.
  3. Теперь прокрутите назад до самого верха страницы. Представьте, что вы хотели бы перейти на свою страницу обсуждения. Можете ли вы понять, как это сделать? Что вы думаете об этом опыте?
    Нет. Я ожидаю увидеть её в выпадающем меню при клике на имя участника, но её там нет.
  4. Завершая свой отзыв, добавьте, пожалуйста, любые мысли, идеи или вопросы.
    Текущая реализация очень сырая и не приспособлена для работы с Википедией. Но сама идея, вероятно, имеет право на жизнь.

Nom d’utilisateur : Horza[edit]

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
    Pratique d'avoir le menu notamment la recherche qui s'affiche en continu. Marges trop grandes. Quand on clique sur une note, l'article va en bas de page automatiquement, ce qui n'est pas pratique. Il faudrait que la note s'affiche directement à coté du lien cliqué.
  2. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Le menu et les différentes fonctionnalités s'affichent. C'est une très bonne idée.
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      La recherche me semble très utile. L'édition aussi.
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
      Mon brouillon et ma page de discussion ne sont pas présents.
  3. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Je n'ai pas trouvé.
  4. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.
    Très bonne initiative mais il faudrait améliorer la présentation de l'article (sur toute la page) et accéder à mes brouillons.

Username: Modulato[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    The infobox is too wide.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    A white header pops up: interesting but not essential.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Honestly, no.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      N/A
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    I didn't find the talk page, and I don't have enough time to search further.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    N/A

Nom d’utilisateur :J. N. Squire[edit]

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
    Grosse impression de vide à cause du bug d'affichage qui met le texte principal de l'article sous l'infobox et de l'absence du sommaire. Inconsistance entre le design sobre et les onglets qui sont en dégradé. Besoin d'un peu plus de couleurs pour les icônes.
  2. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    La barre du haut disparait et réapparait selon si on monte ou descend la page, et les onglets sont intégrés dedans. Un sommaire beaucoup trop basique apparait. C'est une amélioration notable pour gagner de la place et de la lisibilité, mais on perd un peu en navigabilité. Par exemple, il faudrait que les onglets normaux affichent eux-aussi les icônes, et que le sommaire montre aussi quand on se trouve sur le résumé introductif de l'article, ainsi que les titres des sous-sections de l'article.
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      Oui. L'accès aux onglets et aux langues.
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
      Liens vers la page d'aide et l'accueil communautaire de Wikipédia. Une fonctionnalité de partage de l'article vers d'autres sites.
  3. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Oui, mais certains éléments ne sont pas cliquables dans ce prototype.
  4. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.
    Pour faciliter la navigation, le sommaire devrait être toujours affiché dans une colonne à gauche ou à droite du corps de l'article. Un sommaire pourra aussi servir à lister plus tard les tableaux et les figures d'un article.

Username:Pennenetui3000[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    For a desktop experience, I think the main text has a quite narrow space to work with, especially when there is an infobox to the right or when there are pictures. I like to have more information on the screen, with less scrolling through the article. The narrow space also means that wide tables (for example on the page "Natural satellite" under "Natural satellites of the Solar System") get cut off by the empty space on the sides, while there is enough space to show the entire thing on the screen. Also, the contents section lacks in this prototype.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    I think it's nice to not have to scroll to the very top for the buttons that are in this bar, but these do not (for me at least, with a screen of 1920 pixels wide) go on top of the article, but on the white space on the left and right. As these don't cover any information, they can as well be shown all the time, instead of only when you scroll up.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      The features shown are mainly those regarding the article, plus a user button that can open up, so they are useful for most users I think.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      User things like the Watchlist and Notices could be moved to header itself, these are features that I frequently use or things that could be important.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    I don't see any link to the personal talk page when I click on the three dots or in the rest in the header, and also not in the links on the menu left (I mean the menu with Main page, Random page, Tools, other projects, etc.), so the easiest way would be to click on my name and then to the Discussion tab.
    You must click on the three dots, then on the button "talk". Orlando 2006-2021 (talk) 08:20, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    I like the old/current layout better, it's easier to navigate and there are more things in reach with less clicks. The main update with this layout is the narrowing of the text: I think that's unnecessary to the extent it is in this form. While I can imagine the current layout is too wide on very wide screens, I do think this is too narrow.
    P.S.: there seems too be a bug with the infoboxes that they don't have a maximum width (for example on the article "Europe") which results in comically wide ones, especially with the reduced page width.

Username: Петров Эдуард[edit]

Уделите минуту тому, чтобы осмотреться, пролистайте страницу вверх и вниз, посмотрите несколько различных страниц. Какие у вас первые впечатления? Вас что-нибудь смущает? Вам удобно? Вы находите что-нибудь сбивающим с толку? Удобным? Особенно интересным? (Имейте в виду, что это прототип, в котором некоторые ссылки могут не работать, и в котором вам могут встретиться другие ошибки или странности.)

  • Очень непривычно и неудобно работать.

Медленно прокрутите страницу вниз. Теперь прокрутите немного назад. Что вы заметили? Что вы думаете об этом опыте? Когда прокручиваешь вверх слева W, лупа и название статьи и справа черные иконки, особенно иконка обсуждения, доминируют над размером и тонкостью текста (текст не жирный ведь), отвлекают внимание на себя и мешают сосредоточиться на тексте статьи. Иконки должны быть более лёгкими и тонкими. Когда иконки/действия нужны, тогда человек посмотрит прямо на панель, панель не должна перетягивать внимание когда человек смотрит на текст статьи. Полезны ли вам показанные здесь функции? Существуют ли какие-либо функции, к которым особенно полезно иметь доступ во время чтения или редактирования?

  • Иконки сбивают с толку, текстоввые заголовки были намного удобнее и практичнее.

Есть ли какие-либо функции, к которым вы хотели бы получить доступ, которые недоступны в новой шапке сайта?

  • Нет функции править код, или я ее просто не смог найти в этом новом дизайне.

Теперь прокрутите назад до самого верха страницы. Представьте, что вы хотели бы перейти на свою страницу обсуждения. Можете ли вы понять, как это сделать? Что вы думаете об этом опыте?

  • Я вообще не любитель всплывающих иконок и выпадающих меню.

Завершая свой отзыв, добавьте, пожалуйста, любые мысли, идеи или вопросы.

  • Очень неудобный дизайн. Надеюсь, что это предложение не пройдет, или хотя бы останется возможность переключаться и спокойно работать в старом привычном и удобном дизайне. Возможно новый дизайн удобнее на айфоне или планшете, но на стационарном мониторе выглядит отвратительно. Спасибо.

--Петров Эдуард (talk) 14:42, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:Lucamauri[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    I like the narrower text because it's easier to read on bigger screens. Anyway the white space on the left looks wasted: it is a placeholder for the menu which is not shown by default, one thing that might puzzle users.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    The top bar appearing and disappearing is not very easy-to-use. Since it's just few pixel high, I think it should always be there. Besides, links like Edit and Languages are not working at all
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      The fact that the title of the chapter is shown as the page is scrolled is very nice and useful.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      Not that I can immediately see
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Yes, I can identify the Discussion link, but that tab and the other on the right are identical to the ones currently in use and not really integrated into the new UI. It looks like there are now two headers wasting a lot of vertical space.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    I think that the basic view should fill all the screen like current Wikipedia: there should be a button to change the view to this narrow one. White should be limited to the body of the article, the rest of the page should use tones of gray to frame it. I think "Page", "Discussion", "Read" and all the other tabs should really be integrated into new design, not simply copied from the current one. --Luca Mauri (talk) 14:49, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Nom d’utilisateur : Trace[edit]

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
    Il n'y a pas de sommaire ; cela me manque énormément.
  2. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Le sous-titre s'affiche dans l'entête, à côté du titre. C'est pas mal. Mais dans ce cas, on pourrait également descendre d'un niveau, et mettre également les titres de section dans l'entête. Par ailleurs, un sommaire flottant, situé dans une colonne le long du texte, serait plus utile.
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      Accéder aux portails dont l'article fait partie, à sa page de discussion, à son sommaire, aux pages liées, à l'élément wikidata en permanence serait utile ; ces liens pourraient figurer dans un élément flottant présent à l'écran en permanence.
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
      Oui, la barre de gauche, avec les liens wikidata, les pages liées, etc. ; ce menu pourrait apparaître en passant le pointeur de la souris sur le logo wikipédia, par exemple.
  3. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Je ne trouve pas comment faire. J'ai cliqué sans succès sur le nom d'utilisatrice, sur l'icône adjacente.
  4. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.
    L'interface témoigne d'un effort de simplification qui est à saluer. Mais il devrait être possible de faire apparaître tous les liens de l'interface classique.

Username: Oscar Zariski[edit]

What is this rubbish? I am being taken here from a banner on the Dutch Wikipedia, without any context whatsoever being provided, and the test/feedback instructions are cryptic. Please provide context or stop spamming serious editors. And if this is a preview of things to come, I am pessimistic about Wikipedia.--Oscar Zariski (talk) 14:53, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:Betseg[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    Feels much better.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    I like the header names.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Headers and language switching are great.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      Table of contents as a table meybe?
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Nope, couldn't figure out how.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    It's really good.

Username: Svetlov Artem[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    ...
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?

Nothing changed from current design.

  1. ...
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      ...
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      ...
  2. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?

There is no link or button to talk page. Just "Notifications", "Export to disk", "User settings"

  1. ...
  2. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    ...

This design keep too small images like in 2003 where everybody save traffic on modems. There is 4K-content around, but images still display in 150x150 pixels and totally useless.

Username:lanhiaze[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    It resembles mobile version of Wikipedia. What I find inconvenient is the absence of the categories below the text. Besides, the links I used to in the left margin of the page can only be accessed from the ≡ menu if you scroll to the top.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    Well, not bad!
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      What I would like to have at hand is a means to copy a short link to a page that contains Page ID from Page Information, of the type en.wikipedia.org/?curid=19331 (links to Moon article on English Wikipedia).
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      I would like to be able to make the left-margin links appear permanently, together with classical-style language list.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    I failed to find the talk page link. I saw sandbox, preferences, watchlist and other useful links, but not talk page.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    I hope the language list in the final version will be customizable because I find it a bit cumbersome to search for a language in the current version.

Användarnamn:Paracel63[edit]

  1. Ta en minut, skrolla upp och ned på sidan, kolla på några olika sidor. Vad är dina första intryck? Är någonting förvirrande? Smidigt? Särskilt intressant? (Kom ihåg att eftersom det här är en prototyp fungerar de flesta av länkarna inte, och det kan komma att finnas andra buggar eller konstigheter som du kan stöta på.)
    Placeringen av sökrutan är bättre (man slipper trångt högerhörn, och nybörjare hittar rutan snabbare). IW-listning är konsekvent med Commons (bättre med gruppering, så länge man slipper oinloggad-versionen med hårt trunkerad lista som alltid gömmer det man vill ha). Förenklingen av "användarlisten" är föredömlig; frågan är om "Beta" ens behövs, eftersom den ju är en sektion i Inställningar. Den utfällbara vänsterspalten har dock en visuell bugg som gör att den döljer slutet på längre rader.
  2. Skrolla långsamt ned längst sidan. Skrolla nu upp en bit. Vad lägger du märke till? Vad känner du inför den här upplevelsen?
    Den löpande sektionsrubriceringen verkar smidig. Men vart har innehållsförteckningen tagit vägen (varken stationär- eller mobilvarianterna verkar synas)?
    1. Finns det verktyg här som är användbara för dig? Finns det några verktyg som är särskilt användbara att ha tillgång till under läsning och redigering?
      Jag gissar att det som idag kan visas under "Mer" fortfarande kommer att kunna synas där. På svwp har vi länk till sidvisningsverktyget där.
    2. Finns det några verktyg som du skulle vilja ha tillgång till som inte finns tillgängliga i den nya headern?
      "Header"? Har någon hört talas om ordet "sidhuvud"? ;-) Språklänkarna i den här versionen är bökigare/förvirrande, avsaknaden av innehållsförteckning obegriplig. Hamburgermenyn försvinner under skrollning, vilket är mycket opraktiskt (vänstermarginalen är nödvändig för en aktiv wikipedian).
  3. Skrolla nu tillbaka längst upp på sidan. Föreställ dig att du skulle vilja gå till din användardiskussionssida. Kan du lista ut hur du gör det? Vad tycker du om detta?
    Gissningsvis genom att klicka på den länk som skulle ligga bakom "L. May Walcott" (enligt exemplet). Gissade jag rätt? I så fall är det i samma stil som tidigare och förutsägbart. Nej, det hittade jag inte. Hur gör jag?
  4. Lägg gärna till några sista tankar, idéer eller frågor, om du har sådana.
    Jag använder här Google Chrome på macOS. IW-listningen är endast ett sökfönster med halvdold kategorilista. Här saknas visning av utvald status på olika språkversioner. En IW-listas längd är också viktig för att bedöma mängden IW-länkar (den översikten finns inte här). IW-listningen är dessutom förvirrande, eftersom språk som förekommer på flera kontinenter återkommer för varje kontinent (bristande översikt); möjlighet till att skräddarsy visningsmodellen för IW-länkar vore därför guld.

Username:Avecus[edit]

  1. No me gusta que el menú de la izquierda quede oculto. Pero aunque eso no fuera tan malo, al desplegarlo salen incompletas algunas palabras y no hay barra de desplazamiento siquiera para moverse a la derecha. Está bien clasificar los idiomas por continente, pero era mejor la lista vertical. También sobre los idiomas, creo que sería bueno poner la traducción del nombre del idioma en el lenguaje de la wiki en que estamos. Por ejemplo si estoy en Wikipedia en español, quiero que no solo diga "English", sino debajo "Inglés".
  2. Está bien eso de la W que sale. Y luego el nombre del artículo. No tengo nada en contra, aunque no me parece muy relevante.
    1. Que salga la barra de búsqueda sí es útil, aunque noté que junto al botón "search" hay una barra inútil a la derecha. Detalle de diseño.
    2. Sería mejor que al hacer click en la W saliera el menú completo de la izquierda. En el encabezado ya no aparece el menú de contribuciones directamente (traducciones etc.) solamente el botón "Contribuciones". Era mejor con las opciones. Tal vez pueda hacerse un sub-menú.
  3. En ese punto no veo diferencia.
  4. Me gustaba más sin tanto margen en los lados. Eso se podría aprovechar con otros botones u opciones de información que aparezca ahí, por ejemplo podrían hacerse anotaciones por parte del usuario, aunque sea para su uso personal. O podrían salir ahí las "quick hints", es decir primer párrafo de los artículos de enlaces interwiki. De todos modos, me gusta más sin márgenes. En este nuevo modo me siento como cuando entro por error a la versión para móvil desde mi laptop.

Όνομα χρήστη:FocalPoint[edit]

  1. Αφιερώστε ένα λεπτό για να κοιτάξετε γύρω, κυλίστε προς τα πάνω και προς τα κάτω στη σελίδα, κοιτάξτε μερικές διαφορετικές σελίδες. Ποιες είναι μερικές από τις αρχικές σας εντυπώσεις; Βρίσκετε κάτι συγκεχυμένο; Βολικό; Ιδιαίτερα ενδιαφέρον; (Λάβετε υπόψη ότι επειδή αυτό είναι ένα πρωτότυπο ορισμένοι από τους συνδέσμους ενδέχεται να μην λειτουργούν, και ενδέχεται να υπάρχουν άλλα σφάλματα ή ιδιοτροπίες που θα συναντήσετε.)
    This version of interface is focused on content, which is good. Yet the wikipedia in other languages issue remains. We have so extensive info in wikidata. Why, in the other language wikimedias selection menu, do I have to write only "Deutch" and it does not recognize "German", "Allemand", "Tedesco", "Γερμανικά"?
  2. Κάντε κύλιση προς τα κάτω στη σελίδα αργά. Τώρα κυλίστε λίγο προς τα πάνω. Τι παρατηρείτε; Τι πιστεύετε για αυτήν την εμπειρία;
    This is acceptable. I like the appearing menu if you go up, but I would not mind a constant menu-line on the top either.
    1. Είναι χρήσιμες για εσάς οι λειτουργίες που εμφανίζονται εδώ; Υπάρχουν χαρακτηριστικά που είναι ιδιαίτερα χρήσιμα για πρόσβαση σε όλη την ανάγνωση ή την επεξεργασία;
      yes
    2. Υπάρχουν λειτουργίες στις οποίες θέλετε να έχετε πρόσβαση και δεν είναι διαθέσιμες στη νέα κεφαλίδα;
      User contributions are missing. It is good that they are there. The option for translation is missing. This is crucial.
  3. Τώρα, κάντε κύλιση πίσω στην κορυφή της σελίδας. Φανταστείτε ότι θα θέλατε να μεταβείτε στη σελίδα συζήτησής σας. Μπορείτε να καταλάβετε πώς να το κάνετε αυτό; Τι πιστεύετε για αυτήν την εμπειρία;
    It seems to be I have to go to the very top of the page. Maybe acceptable, but I prefer to have the option all the time.
  4. Παρακαλούμε προσθέστε οποιεσδήποτε τελικές σκέψεις, ιδέες ή ερωτήσεις.
    The Wikipedia in other languages issue remains. We have so extensive info in wikidata. Why, in the selection menu, do I have to write only "Deutch" and it does not recognize "German", "Allemand", "Tedesco", "Γερμανικά"? What if I want to write the word "Chinese"?
    User:FocalPoint, In the usual Wikipedia, this is actually possible. Try it! It's probably a limitation in the prototype that it's not possible to do it. (Clarification: I'm not a developer of the new skin, but I was involved in developing the language selector in the usual Wikipedia. I've just noticed this comment, and wanted to respond.)
    User:SGrabarczuk (WMF), please pass on to the developers that if they use the usual ULS component in the prototype, it should be easy to connect the search box to the language search service that will make searching for any language in any language possible. --Amir E. Aharoni {{🌎🌍🌏}} 16:14, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
    @Amire80, thanks for pinging me and for this tip! The team is interested in the opinions on the two functionalities we're testing, namely, the sticky header and user menu. We are aware that this prototype is buggy in other aspects. Such information are just irrelevant to the data the team intends to collect, examine and take as a basis of any decisions. SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 17:07, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Amir E. Aharoni, OK, you are good! I suppose you mean that it works on the tablet/phone version. I tried it from my phone and I agree it works. I do not find how to make it work on the desktop version - maybe it is my fault I can hover and see it in local and home language well done - but I cannot search. Now, having congratulated you (indeed congrats), here is a suggestion for a small improvement: There are languages with accents (like Greek for example). Your excellent tool is not working like the general wikipedia "Search box", which is working no matter the accents. Your tool works using a library of the "correct" terms, with the accents and all. You can improve it (a little bit) by allowing the same terms without accents. (Γαλλικά - ΟΚ, Γαλλικα - not OK) (Πολωνικά - ΟΚ, Πολωνέζικα - not OK). If it easy do it. If not, do not. --FocalPoint (talk) 18:14, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Actually no, User:FocalPoint, I wasn't talking about the phone version. Only on the desktop version you can search for any language in any language. The mobile version is more limited in this regard. If you are curious, you can read a very detailed comparison of the different versions on the page Interlanguage links/Implementation comparison. I'm not sure why doesn't it work for you in the desktop version. Do you see the "X more" button?
I will test your report about the accents—thanks a lot for that! Amir E. Aharoni {{🌎🌍🌏}} 18:37, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
User:Amire80, now I know what happened. At some point (years ago), I turned off the short language list, because I could not persuade it to keep the languages I wanted and since then I have the long, full list of languages. So... of course I do not see the "X more" button.. (I do not even know where is this short list / long list switch - .... just found it) . You see... I am a demanding customer - I think I gave feedback about it (not being able to define languages to show) at the time. I will turn it back, just to see how it works now. Nice talking to you. Have a nice Saturday. --FocalPoint (talk) 18:57, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
User:Amire80, my note about accents is not valid on desktop mode. This thing works extremely well, it is quite resilient. Big congratulations. I think that it is valid on the phone mode, but still, you have to be insistent to make a mistake, ignore the proposal and go and put the final letter without an accent. No, just ignore it. No worth spending time to "fix" it. It is ok. --FocalPoint (talk) 19:19, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:Amire80[edit]

I won't understand "231 Languages" if I don't know English

When scrolled down: Noticed the "W", which is not great because it's Latin-alphabet centric. A globe or a puzzle piece would be nicer, perhaps in addition to W.

Noticed the person icon. It would probably be more useful for me to have search and languages.

If I click the Person icon, I see mostly personal-related things, which is OK, but I'd fix some stuff:

  • If I scroll down, then all the way up using Command-↑ (Ctrl-Home on non-Mac keyboards), I see "Moon | External links" at the sticky bar. That's probably a bug in the prototype, but I suspect there's a chance you'll drag it to the actual software. At the top of the article it should just say "Moon".
  • Merge "Alerts" and "Notices" already. I never understood why did the Echo designers split them. The differences between them is totally unclear to me. Perhaps you should also make them more prominent, because they are perhaps the most frequently used personal tools, or at least they should be.
  • I'm not sure where will the Sandbox lead. It can be a lot of different user sub-pages.
  • Where's the link to my user talk page?! I couldn't find anything that looks like it.
  • Consider putting preferences towards the end, as it is in many other apps. Some experienced Wikimedians may think that it should stay in the same place, but since the design is changing so strongly anyway, it's an opportunity to move things around even more.
  • Consider removing the separate "Beta" link. It's almost the same as preferences.
  • Translations and Uploaded media came from Content Translation. The idea behind is that translations and media uploads are kinds of contribution, and that more types of contribution will join later. Also, that pop-up is shown only to people who enabled the Content Translation beta feature. This idea never developed much further, and now it may be a bit out of place. Media uploads is basically a part of the user's own contribution list, and Translation is more of an entry point, and it's quite different. I recommend consulting with the designers of Content Translation about redesigning this entry point.
  • The "Gadget" link is totally weird and I don't know what does it do.
  • I see a clock, and I don't quite know why. Maybe it's because on some wikis there's a gadget that shows the UTC clock and purges a page, but I'm not sure it's totally right to show it to everyone. It requires some more design thought.

If I move the mouse back up:

  • I see a search box. It's good. Wikimedia designers have been speaking about a persistent search box since at least 2014, of maybe even earlier, and it's about time to finally do it. I'd actually be happy to see it always persistent, and not just appearing upon scrolling or moving the mouse. Perhaps you can give that as an option, and I'll be fine with having that as the default option.
  • I'm really not sure about the [[ ]] is bad. Sorry. It may be clear to very experienced Wikimedians, and perhaps they are the target audience for it, but I'd dedicate more thought and research to it.
  • I guess that the pencil icon opens the Visual Editor. It should probably be the first one, before source editing (on the left for LTR wikis, and on the right for RTL wikis). Or maybe it should even be separate and not between other toolbar buttons. More importantly, for people who don't know that Wikipedia can be edited, I'm not sure it makes everything clear.
  • History and talk are easy to guess, but I am an experienced Wikimedian, and I'm not sure it's good for inexperienced people. I also imagine myself as an experienced Wikipedian trying to explain this to an inexperienced one over the phone: "Click that icon with the bubbles." Will a person who has never seen this icon understand what "bubbles" are? Same for the history icon: how do I describe it in words? "Clock"? "Circular arrow going backwards"? I strongly recommend not removing the labels.

More comments:

  • It's probably just a mistake, but the textual tab at the top of the page is "View source". If it's "View source", then how can the page be edited? And this also makes me think which icon will be used on pages that the user has no permission to edit.
  • "Edit" links at each section look the same as always. This is also extra-weird because the top tab says "View source". When a user cannot edit a page, the section edit links don't appear at all.
  • I started from it, and I'll repeat it again: It's great that the Languages button is at the top, and it may make finding it relatively easier for people, but it would be even better if it showed actual language names, to make people who don't know English find it even more easily.
  • The number in the label "231 Languages" is certainly interesting to some Wikipedians, even to myself, but nevertheless its practical utility for the wide audience of readers is not so clear. Advertising that we have a lot of languages is cool, but can we do something more useful with that button, for example put something there that will get more people write a translation of that article to their language. We should show ALL languages there, not just those in which there is an article (see https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T235157 .)

Thanks! --Amir E. Aharoni {{🌎🌍🌏}} 16:08, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:TehFrog[edit]

  1. The design is pretty clean and i like it. However, the infobox is wider than it should be for some reason.
  2. It's a great idea; i noted the page header to show up. It's a great change since before you had to go to the top of the page to access the main page, the talk page, the user's page, etc.
    1. Yes, all are fundamental and helpful.
    2. No.
  3. Yes, because those tools are hidden in the button to the right of the user's page link. Just like in the old times (but more concise).
  4. This remind me of the mobile web version. Is clean and easy to use. But the biggest problem is the fact that i can't see the index: it's the most important feature on long pages!

Username:LPfi[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    I like getting back screen real estate by not having the wide left margin. Finding the items that usually are there took a while, but I suppose new users will find them quick enough. What really bothers me is the iw (I have chosen the traditional language list): I have to do a search for the language, i.e. move from mouse to keyboard and back, as the "compact" list is unusable – no change in that. The search box was also annoying, as I could not right click on the items to open in a new window; I hope I can keep the monobook boxes and normal right click behaviour. The top margin had a lot of unused space between Discussion and Read, but still Move was in More (and Edit/View source was missing). I suppose that will be fixed.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    I get the title, search box and a language tool. Usually this behaviour is annoying (stealing real screen estate), but here I think it is unintrusive.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      It might be useful in long articles (I haven't made up my mind), but I don't like to have to search for pages that I know, so unless I get my Go box (which can handle "Wikibooks:sv:Category:C") it is of little use for me. The language tool does not work for me in this prototype and I don't use it normally so I suppose I won't use it.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      A right clickable Go, and perhaps the Wikidata item, Commons category and talk page (as right clickable). A quick bookmark could be nice, but I suppose that would be overengineering.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    There is the Discussion tab as before. No problem (except that it takes me to the wrong page in the prototype).
    Ah! My talk page. Not at once, but I'd try the three dots and find it. One oddity: I don't get real links, which would show in the status bar. I hope that is only a prototype glitch.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    I want to keep the Go box and the traditional language list. The user page, alerts etc. should be more discrete for me (I know they are there, so they don't have to scream). The search box could also be smaller. Otherwise I think it looks clean and nice.
I didn't notice the ToC missing. It is a must. –LPfi (talk) 16:38, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:Remagoxer[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    This seems pretty simple, certainly not confusing. The use of a new font (on Windows, Segoe UI) is a nice touch.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    The floating header only appearing upon scroll-up is... a bit pointless to me. If the logo and user button appear all the time, why not have the full, opaque header there at all times?
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      The features here would be useful to me as the most frequently used ones. I can't think of any that are missing.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      Not that I can currently think of.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    While it seems pretty easy to find my talk page, I do think it'd be convenient to have that as one of the few options not under the three dot menu. The talk page is a very commonly used one.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    Overall this is a step in the right direction. I have a few minor issues with the current design (where is the table of contents?) but this is a nice start. The sooner we can get rid of those gradient buttons... Remagoxer (talk) 16:46, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:FF-11[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    There's a big link to the user page in the top left corner. When editing Wikipedia, I normally don't need to go to that page. To go to the actually useful pages (the user talk and the watchlist, I have to click twice. In order to open the left side menu, I have to scroll all the way up. I think, it would be mouch nicer as some kind of drop down or so that can be opened from everywhere on the page and automatically closes after a new page was opened (Otherwise no one would klick the hamburger icon more than once because it's too inconvenient to close the menu and open it up again when it's used the next time. Howerver, I actually like how clean it looks. Why is the time when the page was loaded shown in that user drop down menu?
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    The buttons are in a wrong order. When you want to go to the talk page, you in the past went to the top left. In that new menu, you have to go to the right. Once I touch that menu with the mouse, it disappears. It's weird to see the menu bar go when moving the mouse accros it when I open or close the page. However, the menu SHOULD disappear if it was opened by hovering the area with the mouse
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      I think, I could also just scroll to the top of the page, that's most of the times not inconvenient but the features offered are nice.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      I would like one-click access to the notifications and buttons to revert (please not just undo) or patrol (and please on German Wikipedia, to flag the revision as "sighted"/"reviewed" using JavaScript) a change if a diff is shown or just to patrol/review/sight if a pending revision (newer than the last patrolled/reviewed/sighted revision but NOT a diff) is shown.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Click “•••”? No. It's not there. So I have to click first “L May Alcott” and then “talk”? That doesn't mean just clicking twice but also downloading two pages form the server so you have to wait a second between the two clicks and your internet provider is happy to bill you the double amount of money for opening the talk page. However, that improvemnt is not for mobile phones.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    I'm not sure if showing the section title in the top bar is really that useful and it even doesn't work well on two-column pages like the main page. I would like a feature that shows a table of contens drop down when clicking there. Otherwise I suggest the complete removal of that feature.

I will sign my post even if it's not requested: FF-11 (talk) 16:42, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Username: stjn[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    • I find the fact that there are 4 toggles (3 dropdown menus and a hamburger menu) incredibly frustrating. It goes counter to what we are trying to teach people on wikis themselves, which is that hiding content should be the last resort. There is neither the lack of screen space (on desktop widths) nor the lack of bolder ways to rearrange the navigation in a presentable manner to justify this. Sure, the toggleability of the hamburger menu will be remembered, but the fact that so much stuff is hidden behind a button after a button after a button is not modern or sleek, but rather speaks to poor design choices (and lack of conviction and courage present in all prototypes of new Vector).
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    • I hope that the animations on these elements will be disabled for people preferring reduced motion. Otherwise, it will be an accessibility violation. Other than that, I’m sure some will find this helpful, but that someone is not me. In fact, I would probably find a way to hide the scroll-to-top header because those are usually annoying. But at least the design choice of having 3 toggle buttons is justified here, unlike everywhere else.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      • No. Access to such things as talk page and watchlist without additional clicks from the top header would be immensely more helpful to me and, I suppose, others, rather than this eye-candy exercise.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      • It seems like I won’t use the new Vector until 2030 at least, so I don’t care. In fact, I despise scroll-to-top headers (but have no problem with sticky headers themselves) because they draw too much attention to themselves. I don’t like how it hides itself after you use it, that seems to be an excessive animation that happens for no reason. If you displayed it one time, display it for the whole time until another scroll happens.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    • I can figure out, but I don’t like the experience one bit. No one can accuse this design of not having necessary vertical space to display the links in their entirety, so you should do that instead.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    • I actually don’t think any of my feedback will be heard here (you can only hear so much in the noise of thousands of people that sure might like something in this design), so that’s why I took a more direct (some might say abrasive) approach to it. Still, I urge the design team to, at least, present their actual vision of new Vector’s design instead of doing this Frankenvector where nothing matches, and everything seems like it was designed by robots that are driven by pure algorithmic thought (what if we do this, what if we do that, without any cohesive design direction) instead of actual humans. Then I’d stop wondering why the hell some wikis have willingly subscribed themselves to this weird thing.

With great sadness, stjn[ru] 16:59, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:[edit]

Во первых. Если находиться в режиме WYSIWYG редактора (я не сильно подкован в терминологии википедии и если у вас редакторы называются как-то специально, то я этих названий не знаю) при работе с опросом - ничего не происходит и если перейти из него на редактор исходников, то открывается пустая страница. Тольк после перезахода на страницу опроса с заранее выбранным редактором в режиме исходников - нажатие на кнопку оказывает правильное действие - собственно открывает текст для редактирования. Если вы хотите собрать мнение обычных людей, то это НЕ метод опроса. Если движок Wiki не позволяет сделать дружественный интерфейс для опроса - используйте сторонние инструменты. Риторический вопрос - кому вообще могла придти в голову идея организации опроса подобным образом.

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)

Страница выглядит намного уже, чем экран - читать неудобно. В первую очередь страница должна быть удобна для чтения - за этим люди (как мне кажется) приходят на Википедию. В начале страницы от верхнего края есть полстраницы пустого места - всякие ссылки на обсуждение и сторию и т.п. Наверное вверху должна быть строка поиска и дальше СРАЗУ должен начинаться текст. Инструменты дискуссий, истории и пр. должны быть где-то во всплывающих меню, поскольку для меня, как для обычного пользователя это просто мусор.

  1. ...
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?

Абсолютно бесполезная верхняя полоса. Считаю, что такая полоса нужна только в режиме редактирования. То есть если я где-то поставил настройку, что я потенциально хочу редактировать сейчас страницы, тогда сверху можно иметь кнопки для перехода в редактор. В стандартном случае достаточно кнопки в левом нижнем углу - перейти на начало. А в шапке иметь базовые инструменты навигации по Википедии (поиск) и кнопки для вызова всплывающих меню.

  1. ...
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?

Нет, абсолютно бесполезно.

    1. ...
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?

Из того чего действительно не хватает - всплывающее оглавление от левого края страницы. Для длинных документов без оглавления сложно. Хочется, чтобы я подвел мышку к левой части экрана и появилось оглавление страницы, откуда я могу перейти любой подраздел, при уведении мыши с оглавления - оно должно скрываться, освобождая место для чтения. Оглавление может появляться над текстом страницы, поскольку при работе с оглавлением текст, обычно не важен. Так же возможно страница должна перерисовываться под размер экрана каждый раз, но возможно это вызовет неприятное мелькание при частой работе с оглавлением.

    1. ...
  1. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?

Я не знаю что такое talk page и она 100 лет мне не нужна. Опять же, возможно это нужно активным редакторам, но вот пусть они быстрый доступ к talkpage и прочим редакторским плюшкам включают в настройках, а обычных читателей оставьте в покое. Это не социальная сеть.

  1. ...
  2. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    ...

Есть такая типовая ошибка у инженеров когда сами инженеры выбирают характеристики системы, исходя из того, что им кажется нужно эксплуатанту. К сожалению, зачастую супер-навороченные функции оказываются ненужны, а нужные - не реализованы. Вот ровно сейчас такую ошибку и пытаются совершить. При этом еще и отсекая крайне нетиповым методом опроса целевую аудиторию. Тенденция удручающая...

Username:Tremendo[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    Text is centered, font looks different. I liked the menus on the side, e.g. to switch languages.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    The bar disappears and comes back, looks useful.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      ...
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      ...
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    I like the icons, the Watchlist is the one I would like to have access to without going through the 3 dots. I twould be nice to show the preferred icons.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    ...

Nome utente:ValterVB[edit]

  1. Prenditi un minuto per dare un'occhiata, andare su e giù per la pagina, guardare un po' di pagine. Quali sono le tue impressioni iniziali? C'è qualcosa che trovi confuso? Conveniente? Particolarmente interessante? (Ricorda che dato che questo è un prototipo la maggioranza dei link potrebbero non funzionare e può capitare di incontrare altri bug o difetti).
    Il primo template non va bene occupa troppo spazio, il testo deve scorrere attorno altrimenti si allunga troppo la pagina. Inoltre c'é troppo spazio bianco ai lati (uso una risoluzione full HD)
  2. Scorri lentamente verso il basso la pagina. Poi torna un po' in su. Cosa hai notato? Come valuti questa tua esperienza?
    Barra superiore sempre presente, questo è comodo se rimane di quelle dimensioni
    1. Le funzionalità che hai visto qui ti sono utili? Ci sono altre funzionalità a cui sarebbe particolarmente utile accedere mentre stai leggendo o editando?
      Qua tutto bene
    2. Ci sono funzionalità che ti piacerebbe avere accessibili ma non sono presenti nella nuova header?
      Al momento va bene
  3. Ora scorri fino all'inizio della pagina. Immagina di voler passare alla tua pagina di discussione utente. Come pensi che si possa fare? Che ne pensi di questa esperienza?
    Immagino che basti cliccare sull'icona con il nome utente, ma non funziona
  4. Se hai idee, commenti o domande finali, aggiungile.
    C'é quasi il 50% della larghezza della pagina che non viene sfruttata (ai lati) Perché?

Username:Xia[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    I like the new design, however, I think the text width is too small. On a larger monitor the sides look too empty, and it's very annoying to read a small block of text in a large empty space. it's even worse if you have infoboxes that reduce the text width even further, if you click on Earth in the test page, you will see what I mean, the infobox takes up almost 2/3rd of the entire text width.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    the toolbar is nice but it should be fixed, it took me several tries to actually capture it with the mouse, it kept just disappearing too fast.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      the language feature is useful.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      link to the wikidata entity/add interwikis link and Commons. Especially that the sidebars are hidden by default.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    it's okay, might not be straightforward enough for newbies though.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    the intro section of articles should be editable by default, especially with such long articles as this one.

Alaspada[edit]

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
    Je ne trouve pas beaucoup de différence avec l'ancien habillage Vector que j'utilise. Je trouve la présentation plutôt faite pour les téléphones portables que pour les ordinateurs de bureau. Police inadaptée. Manque les portails. Présentation générale à revoir pour les ordis.
  2. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Je trouve particulièrement notable l'absence de certaines barres d'outils. Pas de défilement rapide pour remonter en haut de page ou descendre en bas de page.
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      Oui évidemment utile. Quand on utilise pas l'ÉditeurVisuel, comment faire une modif sans ces outils ?
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
      J'utilise beaucoup la barre d'outils wikEd. Les catégories aussi, autrement rien.
  3. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Je ne vois pas de différence avec la majorité des sites internet ! ? ! ?
  4. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.
    Je ne comprends pas ce que cette nouvelle présentation apporte sinon qu'une sorte de rapprochement, une tentative de compromis, avec les téléphones portables.
    Cordialement -Alaspada (talk) 17:30, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

שם המשתמש:Yuval CT[edit]

  1. קחו דקה והסתכלו סביב, גללו מעלה ומטה בדף, הסתכלו בכמה דפים שונים. מה הרושם הראשוני שלכם? האם אתם מוצאים משהו מבלבל? נוח? מעניין במיוחד? (זכרו שמפני שזה אב-טיפוס, רוב הקישורים לא ממש עובדים, וייתכנו באגים נוספים שתיתקלו בהם.)
    הפונט קטן. אני מניח שאפשר להגדילו, אבל הפריסה של הטקסט מאוד צרה, כך שככל הנראה התצוגה תהיה משובשת. התפריט לא מופיע מיידית, והוא גם מתנגש עם הלוגו של ויקיפדיה.
  1. גללו למטה בדף לאט. עכשיו גללו למעלה בדף לאט. במה אתם מבחינים? מה אתם חושבים על החוויה הזאת?
    בגלילה למטה, כל הכותרות נעלמות. בגלילה איטית מעלה, מופיעות הכותרות בצורת פירורי לחם. זו חוויה נעימה, אבל הייתי מעדיף שהכותרות האלה יופעלו כבר בעת הגלילה למטה.
    1. האם הפיצ'רים המוצגים כאן מועילים עבורכם? האם הפיצ'רים יעילים בזמן קריאה או עריכה?
      החלוקה לשפות לפי קבוצות הרבה יותר נוחה מרשימת השפות בגרסה הקודמת.
    1. האם יש פיצ'רים שתרצו לגשת אליהם שאינם זמינים בכותרת הדביקה החדשה?
  1. כעת, גללו חזרה לראש הדף. תארו לעצמכם שתרצו לעבור לדף השיחה. האם אתם יכולים לעשות זאת? מה אתם חושבים על החוויה הזאת?
    אני מניח שאני לוחץ על הקישור ל'שיחה'...
  1. אם יש לכם מחשבות אחרונות, רעיונות, או שאלות, הוסיפו אותם.
    תעדכנו גם את הקישורים בסלולרי, צריך להוסיף קישור לשיחה ולהסטוריה.

LDiCesare[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    ...
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?

There's a band at the top which appears. I don't really like it since I think I'll never use it. I'd rather it remained there all the time or not. It disappears and pops back in if I put my mouse to the top the move it away. I really don't like that. The thing which is most unsettling is that when you're at the top of the page, you don't have the same UI at all. I might get used to clicking on the Edit button at the top, except it's not there if I'm at the top of the page. Plus I usually edit a particular section, so these edit buttons are mostly useless.

  1. ...
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?

No. None.

    1. ...
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?

No.

    1. ...
  1. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?

I never go to the talk page so I don't care. However, the icons have no title, explanation or mouseover, so they are rather confusing.

  1. ...
  2. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    ...

Username:Srđan[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    It's pretty standard for a wiki. Nothing really confusing or particularly interesting.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    I like sticky headers, and I wish that the whole header would be displayed at all times, not just when you mouse over the top.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Everything seems fine. From the buttons available in this prototype, the View history button seems like the most useful to have at all times, as the edit links are next to section headers one would want to edit anyway.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      I'd like to be able to click the section name in the header and then jump to a different section.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    I can, and it seems fine. I don't really visit my talk page unless I have a new message, which I get a notification for anyway, so it being in the "..." menu doesn't really bother me.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    Which I click the search box, the search field expands to the left slightly. I don't know if that's a bug or not, but it's quite distracting. Also, I'm not a huge fan of the font stack that's being used on the page ("San Francisco" on my system).

Username:Valepert[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    too much white space, clicking on the hamburger icon cause the text to move (it's a little nauseating).
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    I think the icon appears/disappears to fast, without any indication of the meaning (I need to mouse over to understand them)
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      move action
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      change page fast, maybe editing the title, without jump into the search menu
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    the button is very hidden (and use the same/similar icon of article talk).
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    categories are missing, some page with large tables are not full visible (for example "2020 Formula One World Championship" key tables on the right)

--Valepert (talk) 18:50, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Feedback by Riha[edit]

  1. Na chvíli se rozhlížejte, posunujte stránku nahoru a dolů, zkuste více různých stránek. Jaké jsou vaše prvotní dojmy? Je zde něco matoucího? Nebo praktického? Obzvlášt zajímavého? (Mějte na paměti, že jde o prototyp, kde většina odkazů ve skutečnosti nefunguje, a můžete narazit i na další chyby nebo jiné výstřednosti.)
    I used Firefox 87.0. The left (W) and right (person) icons disappeared when I used smaller window, but there was space enough before and after them. Could the icons be seen on smaller windows too?
    Hamburger is OK. Could it be part of user setting (on/off)? Three dots on the right side is OK for me.
  2. Pomalu posunujte stránku dolů. Nyní zase trochu nahoru. Co pozorujete? Co si o tom myslíte?
    Good idea!
    1. Jsou předváděné funkce pro vás užitečné? Jsou zde nějaké funkce, ke kterým je obzvlášť užitečné mít během čtení a editace přístup?
      Chapter name is good, but how can I move to the next chapter?
    2. Jsou zde nějaké funkce, ke kterým byste chtěli mít přístup a nové nadpisy je nenabízejí?
      Search access is too slow (one more click) - could keyboard shortcut be seen when mouse goes over the symbol? What is the Talk symbol next to the History symbol? Is it for article discussion?
  3. Nyní posuňte stránku úplně nahoru. Představte si, že chcete navštívit svoji diskusní stránku. Přijdete na to, jak to provést? Jak to na vás působí?
    Yep, Talk symbol under three dots. OK.
  4. Přidejte prosím jakékoliv vaše úvahy, nápady nebo otázky.
    ...--Riha (talk) 19:36, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Käyttäjänimi:T.Antero[edit]

  1. Katso hetkinen ympärillesi, vierittele sivua ylös ja alas ja tarkastele muutamaa eri sivua. Mitkä ovat ensivaikutelmasi? Huomaatko mitään hämmentävää? Kätevää? Erityisen mielenkiintoista? (Muista, että koska tämä on prototyyppi, osa linkeistä ei oikeasti toimi, ja saatat törmätä muihinkin bugeihin ja oikkuihin.)
    ...Uusi ulkoasu hieman yllätti minut
  2. Vieritä sivua ensin hitaasti alaspäin. Vieritä sitten sivua hieman takaisin ylöspäin. Mitä tapahtuu? Mitä mieltä olet tästä ominaisuudesta?
    ...Hämmentävää mutta kätevää se että kun mennään takaisin ylöspäin alaotsikot tulevat näkyville
    1. Ovatko ominaisuudet sinulle hyödyllisiä? Onko jokin ominaisuuksista erityisen hyödyllinen lukemiseen tai muokkaamiseen?
      ...Uudet ominaisuudet eivät kovin höydyllisiä ole minulle mutta viitteiden lisääminen on aina ollut erityisen höydyllinen minulle muokkaamisessa
    2. Onko jokin ​​ominaisuus, jota haluaisit käyttää, mutta ei sisälly uudistettuun ylälaitaan?
      ...Ei nyt tule mieleen
  3. Vieritä sivu nyt niin ylös kuin mahdollista. Kuvittele olevasi menossa keskustelusivullesi. Saatko selville, miten se tehdään? Mitä mieltä olet tästä kokemuksesta?
    ...Keskustelusivuista ei ole kovin paljon muistikuvia mutta keskustelusivusta on jäänyt kuitenkin hyviä muistoja
  4. Kerrothan lopuksi vielä muita viimeisiä ajatuksiasi, ideoitasi tai kysymyksiäsi prototyypistä.
    ...Wikipediaa ei ehkä tarvitsisi kokonaan uudistaa mutta ymmärtää tuon jotenkin vaikka olen viime aikoina miettinyt sitä onko perinteisille fonteille kuten Arial ja Times New Roman vielä käyttöä internet-sivustoissa ja -yhteisöissä

Username:Lordakryl[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    I am using a MacBook 15" display, and left and right side of the page are really empty now. It means that I have to scroll more to read the same article.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    Probably good for a phone, but not for a desktop.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Usually when I am reading Russian version, I do often switch to the English or German versions because they have more information. It was usually on the left side, and to switch the interwiki language in the "good old" design, I was just scrolling to the top and clicking on the 1st or second item in the interwiki list. Now to switch to another interwiki, I have to search for the interwiki list, and I have found 2 options for it: on the top-tabs when they are visible ("Read", "View source", "View history" and "More" buttons/tabs), OR on the the top sticky menu, when I am not on the top of the page. Top menu and top-tabs are super inconsistent. I would prefer to have an access to a interwiki list always on the same place. With the new design I have to check it in 2 places, depending on where I am on the page (top or middle). I think the top sticky menu should not switch to another view so radically when I am scrolling up to the top. All buttons on the top sticky menu and all top tabs/buttons should be the same (same order, same position, same size). I have to do more clicks to move to the English/German/Russian Interwikis, which I am doing pretty much every time I am using Wikipedia. I need an access to the recent interwikis with 1 click, as it was before. Number of languages in the top sticky menu. (I see "233 Languages" near the Interwiki-Button). Why do I need it every time I see the page? I would prefer to use this place for the links to my favorite language versions (or just save the place).
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      The link that I need every time is "My Watchlist". It is called watchlist because I am watching it, and I think it should be visible somewhere by default, not hidden behind the small button in the middle of the new header menu.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Finding the Talk page is easy, and hiding it in the top sticky menu is a good idea, I do not need to see it every time, only maybe when I have a new message (and it is usually displayed as a number in the Talk Button which is still op the top).
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    Right side: use the it as before, do not leave it empty. It also will break some wide templates and will give a horisontal scroll. Left side: hiding the left side menu is not really giving me anything. It is not a Photoshop where people should concentrate on what they draw. Left menu was giving me the idea that I am on the Wikipedia and was providing an access to quick links. Now to get something from the left menu, I have to scroll to the top and enable it (and the new menu looks smaller and uglier than before). I cannot enable the left menu being in the middle of the page, I have to scroll to the top, find the menu ("3 lines") button and click on it. If you would like to play with the left menu, I would prefer to have it always ("sticky") on the left side.

-- Lordakryl (talk) 20:39, 2 April 2021 (UTC).

Username:NGC 54[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    The width of content is to small. The logo should not be changed; this smaller version of the logo does not look well. Also, the logo is an important thing; it should be remarkable, because it is the symbol that identifies the site. If you make the logo be smaller, the symbol losses its power. The new sidebar is annoying. All looks empty. But I like that the search box shows images and short descriptions.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    There are too many brusque changes to menu.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      I am not sure what to say about the position of the Wikidata links (the versions in other languages) and the position of the search box.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      The fact that the personal tools are collapsible is a waste of time.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    I would not like to waste my times trying to acces my talk page clicking on an additional button.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    I think that the current Vector could be improved, but overall, I think that this is not a good option.

Username: Jiří Komárek[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    Cleaner design, evolution instead of revolution. The search is missing if you scroll down. It appears if you hover over the top part (took me a while to realize). Also, the animation when you hover over the top part is not appealing (first, the panel appears quickly. Then everything on the panel slowly starts to appear)
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    Good! But you need to know about this :-)
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Language switch is IMHO better solved in the current style.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      Link to Wikidata entry.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Found it on the second click (first idea - click on my name. BTW: why not to hide all these four entries in the top right corner under one - my username?)
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    I would love to see something even more radical, but I really like this change :-) Certain things are a bit confusing (e.g. there is a "hamburger menu" in the top left corner similar menu in the top right corner). But I am in support of your update!

Username: Mr. Lechkar[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    A more modern version of the current design, the font looks better for reading. Although there is much less text width specifically, which is a bit inconvenient.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    New header, Wikipedia logo at the left, article and section name next to it and user dropdown menu on the right. I think this seems a bit particularly useful.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      More or less. Much easier to search or switch between languages directly to be precise.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      An edit button and talk button would be a nice addition for the header.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Going to the "..." button and opening Talk from the dropdown menu. Although I would rather prefer the dropdown from the username button instead of a new separate one.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    While I think that the design looks more modern, it slows down my Firefox browser significantly when I open it. I'd also recommend keeping the option to use the legacy design by default, for those including myself who are more used to that. Thanks.

Username:Noxian16[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    My very first impression: I dislike the empty margins at the sides, I prefer the old version where I can see more of the article at any given time.
    It seems like the (very useful) mouseover preview of articles is no longer working but that could just be the prototype. I'm not a fan of hiding the left hand menu behind a "hamburger menu" that one needs to click to access it. I also noticed previews of article images when using the search bar, which could be useful but it raises concern about potentially showing inappropriate images when unintended.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    The scrolling header which I find distracting.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Although I find the scrolling header distracting I think the section title could be useful in some cases but it's not something important for me personally. Other than that, I don't find any new feature useful even hypothetically.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      As I said before, I dislike hiding the left hand menu behind an extra click, especially considering there's even more empty space at the sides on the new site than there was before. Also, I like having a few languages on the sidebar for quick access which includes my native language (Polish), and Simple English which I use occasionally for quick summary of long articles of complex concepts. Now I'd have to manually search for the aforementioned languages in the new language selection menu.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    The triple dot menu which, as I said before about the "hamburger menu", hides the menu behind an extra click for no real reason.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    I don't think this is a needed change at all, considering I find the old design much more user-friendly, but if it needs to be implemented then I ask for the old design to be still available for people who prefer it.

Username:Error[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    The image in the infobox is aligned to the left. There are empty margins on both sides. The inter-language links are on top
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    The box floating on the top shows a section name but it is the current section but the previous one.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Not much.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      It should be a clickable link to the section start or the previous section. Page history, maybe.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    I found the talk page but I expected it to be on a drop-down menu from the user name
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    Inter-language links are too emphasized.

Username:Хтосьці[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)

I couldn't find table of contents! I often use tables of contents when I want to find certain information, to quickly skip to the relevant section of the page.

The language selector now requires one more click. This is inconvenient for me, because I often use Wikipedia to learn how things are named in different languages (e.g. I would one a page in the English or Russian Wikipedia and then move a different language. I feel the interface makes this particular use case harder.

  1. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?

There is a top bar that appears and disappears, like URL bar in mobile Firefox. I don't like this. It's distracting, and it's not adding any value for me: I can scroll back up anytime by pressing Home anyway.

    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?

No. A useful feature to have would be a consistency of interface, that is, not having to get used to a new interface.

    1. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?

Wikidata item. I sometimes used it when editing.

  1. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?

Сlick on the username ("L May Alcott" in this example) and then click on the "Discussion" tab (not available in the prototype).

  1. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.

In general, the changes are okayish. I don't like them, but I could probably get used to them.

Username:ArshiaKhosraviPour[edit]

یک دقیقه به اطراف نگاه کنید ، صفحه را به بالا و پایین بروید ، به چند صفحه مختلف نگاه کنید. برخی از برداشت های اولیه شما چیست؟ آیا چیزی را گیج کننده می دانید؟ راحت؟ به خصوص جالب است؟ (به خاطر داشته باشید که از آنجا که این نمونه اولیه است ، برخی از پیوندها ممکن است کار نکنند ، و ممکن است اشکالات یا سوالات دیگری نیز وجود داشته باشد که به آنها برخورد خواهید کرد.)

نسخه مدرن تری از طراحی فعلی ، قلم برای خواندن بهتر به نظر می رسد. اگرچه عرض متن به طور خاص کمتر است ، که کمی ناخوشایند است.

به آرامی به پایین صفحه بروید. حالا کمی به بالا بروید. چه چیزی را متوجه می شوید؟ نظر شما در مورد این تجربه چیست؟

نام ، آرم ویکی پدیا و جستجو در سمت چپ ، نام مقاله و بخشی که در آن هستیم در وسط و منوی کشویی کاربر در سمت راست. و همچنین یک منو در کنار صفحه که وقتی آن را باز می کنیم کل بخش های مقاله در آن می آید برای دسترسی راحتر من فکر می کنم این کمی مفید به نظر می رسد.

آیا ویژگی های نشان داده شده در اینجا برای شما مفید هستند؟ آیا ویژگی هایی وجود دارد که دسترسی به آنها در طول خواندن یا ویرایش بسیار مفید باشد؟

کم و بیش، تقریبا. به طور دقیق جستجو یا جابجایی مستقیم بین زبانها بسیار ساده تر است.

آیا ویژگی هایی وجود دارد که بخواهید به آنها دسترسی داشته باشید و در عنوان جدید موجود نباشد؟

یک دکمه ویرایش و یک دکمه مکالمه افزودنی و دکمه کشویی بخش های مقاله برای دسترسی راحتر  

اکنون ، به بالای صفحه بروید. تصور کنید می خواهید به صفحه بحث خود بروید. آیا می توانید بفهمید که چگونه این کار را انجام دهید؟ نظر شما در مورد این تجربه چیست؟

رفتن به دکمه کاربر کشویی در سمت راست و باز کردن و انتخاب Talk که دو تا گزینه بحث مقاله و بحث کاربر در آن وجود دارد که ما بحث مقاله را انتخاب می کنیم

لطفاً هرگونه افکار ، ایده یا سوال نهایی را اضافه کنید.

به نظر من بهتر است اینهایی که در جواب سوالاتتان گفتم اضافه کنید و همچنین لطفا در ویرایش گزینه ای بگذارید که جای متن (راست ، وسط و چپ ) را می توان ویرایش کرد با تشکر.

Username:Gżdacz[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    I soon realized the top bar, but only much later the small head icon with my personal items. It is located outside of the area where I expect anything to happen and it is therefore hard to notice for me.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    The idea of a bar with controls which pop out or hides at the top is nice. I find it confusing that the locations of the tools is different from what I find when I get to the top of the page. I often click on the tools automatically where I expect them to be and this might bug me, because now there will be two "usual" locations. The access to my personal items when I scroll down is nice, but again it is somewhat confusing that the head icon changes location when I get to the top of the page.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      It is nice that I can start editing the whole article being in the middle of it, where only section edits are available normally. Access to language versions is more complex now. I use an option to have a few most useful language versions available always, and the list of all of them accessible by a click. Now I will be limited to the list of all languages and will regard it as a change for the worse.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      I would like to have "Add to watchlist". "Visual edit" is spurious (as of now), because I do have this option at each section header (this might be an add-in I use), and VE invariably edits the whole article - so this link already serves as a shortcut for me. Added after a while: Wikidata access.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    I could easily find where my talk page is. However, items in the menu under three dots are not exactly the same and in the same order as in the menu the small head visible during scrolling opens. I like consistency in this regard very much.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    I notice some problems with openinig and closing the menus when scrolling. Sometimes they hide by themselves, sometimes they stay on the screen. I assume it to be a small flaw of the mockup.

Имя участника:Иван[edit]

  1. Уделите минуту тому, чтобы осмотреться, пролистайте страницу вверх и вниз, посмотрите несколько различных страниц. Какие у вас первые впечатления? Вас что-нибудь смущает? Вам удобно? Вы находите что-нибудь сбивающим с толку? Удобным? Особенно интересным? (Имейте в виду, что это прототип, в котором некоторые ссылки могут не работать, и в котором вам могут встретиться другие ошибки или странности.)
    ...Отличная идея с обновлением. Первые впечатление — восторг, но потом я немного растерялся и испугался, что удалили все те кнопки к которым я привык. После того, как я разобрался, данная версия показалась мне намного эргономичнее и приятнее для чтения.
  2. Медленно прокрутите страницу вниз. Теперь прокрутите немного назад. Что вы заметили? Что вы думаете об этом опыте?
    ...Интересная идея с добавлением шапки. Давно пора. Отлично!
    1. Полезны ли вам показанные здесь функции? Существуют ли какие-либо функции, к которым особенно полезно иметь доступ во время чтения или редактирования?
      ...Затрудняюсь ответить
    2. Есть ли какие-либо функции, к которым вы хотели бы получить доступ, которые недоступны в новой шапке сайта?
      ...Не смог найти место, где спрятаны избранные статьи на других языках. Если данная функция останется в языках, то вполне удобно. Если будет иная, отдельная кнопка, то такой вариант мне кажется более удобным.
  3. Теперь прокрутите назад до самого верха страницы. Представьте, что вы хотели бы перейти на свою страницу обсуждения. Можете ли вы понять, как это сделать? Что вы думаете об этом опыте?
    ...Да, вполне интересная задумка. Мне понравилась.
  4. Завершая свой отзыв, добавьте, пожалуйста, любые мысли, идеи или вопросы.
    ... Хотелось бы заметить, что во время прочтения статьи, я не смог переключить язык через всплывающую шапку, а лишь поднявшись вверх, через основную кнопку.

Мне кажется, была бы интересна идея для возможности открытия двух и более страниц в одном окне, будь то разные страницы или же одна на разных языках. Иногда удобно просматривать страницы на другом языке, сравнивая с основным. Делать в разных вкладках браузера не так удобно, поскольку частые переключения сбивают с толку, отвлекают. С использованием шапки можно реализовать данную функцию, закрепив дополнительные страницы на ней. Вполне удобная и интересная функция будет. Спасибо! Шамов Иван (talk)

Username:Ddxfx[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    I like the simple design, but the article part is too narrow.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    COOOOOLLL! More features.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      It was useful, I don't think I would need any other features.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      No.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Click Discussion.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.

Ddxfx (talk) 07:54, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Username: Elirianna[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    The page obviously looks cleaner, except for the margins that don't adjust to my screen (1920×1080), leaving light grey bands on both side. This could be fixed. 50 % of the page's width is now unused, and the text is not centered (the left margin appearing around 25 % wider than the right one), this could be improved by removing these excessive margins (maybe with a full width option).
    The table of content is missing, and this is clearly a loss. If it is hidden for the sake of aesthetics, I think a hide/show button would be better than just removing it.
    I am not convinced by the new position of the language menu. Being with all the others seemed more logical.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    The section name appearing is a nice touch, but since most of the paragraphs fit in the screen, it is often not necessary.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      The toggle able tab on the left seems to be a good idea.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      There could be options to always have the menu tab visible, and always being visible when scrolling down.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    It seems very similar to the current talk page button, but since it doesn't work for me, I do not have anything else to test.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.

Username: Orlando 2006-2021[edit]

  1. "Neem even de tijd om rond te kijken, de pagina op en neer te gaan en naar een paar verschillende pagina's te kijken. Wat is uw initiële impressie? Is er iets verwarrend? Handig? Interessant? (Houdt er rekening mee dat dit een prototype is en sommige koppelingen niet werken en er mogelijk bugs of andere problemen zijn die u kunt tegenkomen." Dit is allemaal goed. Ik vind het bijzonder handig dat er een balk verschijnt die mij toelaat om mijn gebruikersdetails na te kijken, zonder dat ik helemaal terug naar boven moet. Ook heb ik de impressie dat de bewerker nog niet werkt (zie foto).
    De bewerker werkt duidelijk niet...
    Verder is dit goed.
  2. Scroll langzaam naar beneden. Scroll nu een klein beetje terug. Wat valt u op? Wat is uw mening over deze ervaring? Zie eerder.
    1. Is de functionaliteit die u hier ziet nuttig voor u? Zijn er functies die specifiek nuttig zijn bij het lezen of bewerken? Ja, ik kan sneller op bewerken drukken... Niet dat he wert, natuurlijk.
    2. Is er functionaliteit die u zou willen gebruiken die niet beschikbaar is in de nieuwe header? Ja, om het artikel te vertalen naar een taal waar het nog niet in bestaat.
  3. Scroll terug naar de bovenkant van de pagina. Stel u voor dat u terug naar uw overlegpagina wilt gaan. Kunt u er achter komen hoe u dat moet doen? Wat vindt u van deze ervaring? Ik vind het zeer gemakkelijk om terug te vinden: gewoon op de drie punten drukken en het eerst van boven.
  4. Heeft u nog andere gedachten, ideeën of vragen? Ja, waarom is het zo op mijn scherm gewrongen, alsof ik een half zo groot scherm heb? Is het niet veel nuttiger om hett de text automatisch te laten passen, met een programma dat je schermgrootte nakijkt?
  5. Aannemend dat de bewerker werkt, is dit goed. Orlando 2006-2021 (talk) 09:11, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Όνομα χρήστη: Παναγιώτης Βιδάλης[edit]

  1. Αφιερώστε ένα λεπτό για να κοιτάξετε γύρω, κυλίστε προς τα πάνω και προς τα κάτω στη σελίδα, κοιτάξτε μερικές διαφορετικές σελίδες. Ποιες είναι μερικές από τις αρχικές σας εντυπώσεις; Βρίσκετε κάτι συγκεχυμένο; Βολικό; Ιδιαίτερα ενδιαφέρον; (Λάβετε υπόψη ότι επειδή αυτό είναι ένα πρωτότυπο ορισμένοι από τους συνδέσμους ενδέχεται να μην λειτουργούν, και ενδέχεται να υπάρχουν άλλα σφάλματα ή ιδιοτροπίες που θα συναντήσετε.)
    Η γενική άποψη είναι ωραία. Η γραμματοσειρά είναι πιο «φιλική» και μου αρέσει. Νομίζω σου δίνει επίσης την εντύπωση ότι μπορείς να εστιάσεις στο κείμενο που θες να διαβάσεις πιο εύκολα.
  2. Κάντε κύλιση προς τα κάτω στη σελίδα αργά. Τώρα κυλίστε λίγο προς τα πάνω. Τι παρατηρείτε; Τι πιστεύετε για αυτήν την εμπειρία;
    Η μπάρα που εμφανίζεται όταν (ξάνα)ανεβαίνουμε προς τα πάνω είναι πολύ ενδιαφέρουσα. Επίσης πολύ βολικό είναι το γεγονός ότι κοιτάζοντας στην μπάρα μπορείς να δεις σε ποια ενότητα του κειμένου είσαι, κάτι που βοηθάει πολύ ιδιαίτερα σε μεγάλα λήμματα. Ακόμα, είναι ωραίο που στα δεξιά της μπάρας είναι μαζεμένες κάποιες βασικές λειτουργίες του λήμματος (εννοώ την οπτική επεξεργασία/ επεξεργασία κώδικα, το ιστορικό, την συζήτηση του λήμματος και φυσικά τις άλλες γλώσσες στις οποίες υπάρχει αυτό το λήμμα)
    1. Είναι χρήσιμες για εσάς οι λειτουργίες που εμφανίζονται εδώ; Υπάρχουν χαρακτηριστικά που είναι ιδιαίτερα χρήσιμα για πρόσβαση σε όλη την ανάγνωση ή την επεξεργασία;
      Οι νέες λειτουργίες τις θεωρώ αρκετά χρήσιμες, τόσο για έναν περιστασιακό επισκέπτη της Βικιπαίδειας, όσο και για τους μόνιμους χρήστες της.
    2. Υπάρχουν λειτουργίες στις οποίες θέλετε να έχετε πρόσβαση και δεν είναι διαθέσιμες στη νέα κεφαλίδα;
      Αν και η γενική άποψη της νέας εμφάνισης είναι θετική, ναι υπάρχουν δύο λειτουργίες στις οποίες θα ήθελα να είχα πρόσβαση πιο άμεσα αλλά δεν υπάρχουν. Πρώτον και σημαντικότερο θεωρώ ότι είναι αστοχία η έλλειψη πίνακα περιεχομένων. Εγώ προσωπικά νομίζω ότι ο Πίνακας Περιεχομένων είναι χρήσιμος, ιδιαίτερα σε μεγάλα άρθρα. Δεύτερον, λιγότερο σημαντικό, αν και είναι ωραία η νέα θέση των άλλων γλωσσών του άρθρου, εγώ θα ήθελα να είχα μία πιο άμεση πρόσβαση σε αυτές.
  3. Τώρα, κάντε κύλιση πίσω στην κορυφή της σελίδας. Φανταστείτε ότι θα θέλατε να μεταβείτε στη σελίδα συζήτησής σας. Μπορείτε να καταλάβετε πώς να το κάνετε αυτό; Τι πιστεύετε για αυτήν την εμπειρία;
    Η νέα θέση με τις λειτουργίες του χρήστη είναι πολύ βολική και ωραία.
  4. Παρακαλούμε προσθέστε οποιεσδήποτε τελικές σκέψεις, ιδέες ή ερωτήσεις.
    Δεν έχω να προσθέσω κάτι, τις δύο πολύ μοκρές ενστάσεις μου τις είπα λίγο πιο πριν. Πολύ καλή δουλειά! Μπράβο!!!

Username:New Soviet Russia[edit]

Старый дизайн получше, в нём чувствуется какое-то чувство энциклопедии, особенно благодаря левому меню и тому, что текст доходит до одного из краёв монитора (правого), тем самым уменьшая не удлиняя страницу вниз.

В новом же все напихано в середину, сама же страница станет в разы больше, то есть, вместо так сказать "книги" мы получает довольно длинный текст, который не особо приятно читать.

По итогу, для меня более приятнен первый вариант, он как раз передает атмосферу энциклопедии, а второй скорее аля "молодёжный" сайт.

Новая версия.
Старая версия

Также куда-то пропало содержание...

Ім'я користувача:Olvin[edit]

  1. Приділіть хвилину щоб озирнутись, прокрутити вгору-вниз сторінки, прогляньте кілька різних сторінок. Які Ваші початкові враження? Щось є важкозрозумілим? Зручним? Особливо цікавим? (Майте на увазі, що оскільки це прототип, частина посилань може не працювати й що можуть бути інші баги чи приклади дивної поведінки, на які Ви наштовхнетесь.)
    На моєму ноуті (Google Chrome, Версія 89.0.4389.90 (Розробка) (64-розрядна версія)) стаття не заповнює праву й ліву частині екрану. Там порожнє місце. Заповнення настає коли в оглядачі збільшити масштаб до 150%. Це якось незручно. У поточній версії подібне лише ліворуч. А діалогові елементи зрозумілі.
  2. Повільно прокрутіть сторінку донизу. Тепер прокрутіть трішки вгору. Що Ви помічаєте? Яке Ваше враження щодо цього досвіду?
    Прокручування вниз призводить до появи у верхньому куті великої літери W. Коли на неї навести мишу, з'являється динамічного рядок меню. Коли після прокручування вниз зробити прокручування вгору, той же рядок (динамічного меню) з'являється знову (вже без без наведення на W). Спочатку я не зрозумів навіщо воно. Потім наче дійшло — іноді під час редагування потрібно дістатися до верхніх (статичних) пунктів меню (пошук, історія тощо). І якщо стаття велика, доводиться довго прокручувати вгору, що вельми незручно. Я так розумію, динамічне меню покликане усунути цю незручність.
    1. Чи є представлені функції корисними для Вас? Чи є якісь функції, які особливо корисно мати під рукою під час читання чи редагування?
      Мабуть, нові функції мають бути корисними (для мене). Більшість функцій, потрібних для редагування, налаштовані у мене окремо (у вікні редагування). Однак, не знайшов переходу на сторінку Вікіданих (в моєму поточному лівому бічному меню таке є, і без нього вже важко). Щодо функцій для читання... Нічого не спадає на думку.
    2. Чи є якісь функції, до яких Ви б хотіли мати доступ, які не представлені в новому заголовку?
      Статистика відвідування. Це індивідуальне. Але, підозрюю, у кожного є якісь індивідуальні уподобання.
  3. Тепер прокрутіть назад нагору сторінки. Уявіть, що Ви б хотіли перейти на свою сторінку обговорення. Чи зрозуміло для Вас як це зробити? Що Ви думаєте про цей досвід?
    Отже, перейти на свою сторінку обговорення?... Замислився на секунду. У лівому правому верхньому куті є трикрапки, мабуть там? Так, справді там.
    На своїй сторінці обговорення рідко пишуть з власної ініціативи — зазвичай там діалоги за чиїмось зверненнями. Для таких випадків у мене налаштовано сповіщення, отже, окремий пункт у меню для цього не так вже й потрібен.
  4. Будь ласка, додайте будь-які фінальні думки, ідеї чи запитання.
    Взагалі не бачу функцій із поточного бічного меню (посилання сюди, статистика відвідувань, підсторінки, портал спільноти). І як до них дістатися — не зрозуміло.
    @Olvin: Ви натискали на кнопку "бургер" зліва вгорі (на скріншоті поруч її добре видно). Там, здається, все, що Ви згадували Богдан Панчук (talk) 16:57, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
    Кнопку не натискав. Там і справді є бічне меню (якого мені не вистачало). Але:
    • Та кнопка зникає, щойно опуститися хоча б на один рядок униз. Щоб дістатися до неї знову, потрібно повернутися до самого верху сторінки. Це незручно. І до того ж, треба ще знати, що кнопка там з'явиться, бо інтуїтивно цього незрозуміло.
    • Бічне меню з'являється на порожньому місці ліворуч. Який сенс приховувати меню, коли місце все одно залишається порожнім? Логічно було б показати таке меню від початку, кнопкою згортати його (якщо воно не потрібне), а звільнене місце — заповнювати.
    --Olvin (talk) 18:14, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
    @Богдан Панчук: Звісно моя пропозиція радше для широкого екрану (ноут). Для мобільної версії може й навпаки. --Olvin (talk) 18:19, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Negative feedback on rendering[edit]

My general comment: I was thinking that the alignment between the Wikipedia mobile UI and the Wikipedia desktop UI was in the direction to increase usability of the mobile UI until it reaches the same level as desktop UI. This second prototype seems to achieve this alignment by a significant downgrading or, if you prefer worsening of the usability of the desktop UI leading to a bad user experience. Negative points:

  • Left navigation bar comes always hidden when you navigate from a page to another one, without this implying recovering space. Simply, you still have a persistent empty column and have to click to fill that space with the usual navigation link set. What's that for? I would have understood hiding the left navigation column in favour to use that space for widening the article space. But keeping the article space always the same, simply showing or hiding the links to me makes no sense. If that space is wasted anyway, the why not keep the navigation links always visible, as in the current desktop interface?
  • Rendering of Infoboxes is awful. The "classic" interface renders Infoboxes usually rendered on the right side, flowing with the article text. Now in this prototype they are displayed on top of the article text, not flowing with the text, with a lot of white space on the right. The text is displayed immediately below and not aside as today and the feeling is of a poor/incorrect article rendering. I have to scroll down the Infobox to start reading text when today I have both at the same time at a glance. I understand this rendering makes lot of sense if I'm browsing the articles with a 7" smartphone display. But this rendering makes no sense at all when I'm using a 27" 4k display monitor on my desktop. It's a useless waste of screen estate, not to talk about the excessive font size used for Infobox rendering.
  • Why there's a lot of unused window space on the right side of the article? What's for? Yet another waste or screen real estate, just to allow a pop-up menu on the right top not to overlap the article text? You're supposed to be addressing a desktop/laptop monitor, not a smartphone vertical display. Responsive design should be modified so to avoid this big waste of space.
  • Bottom line: are we rendering encyclopaedia articles or social network posts? I had the feeling this new prototype goes more in this latter direction than in the first one. I can understand Facebook or Twitter look and feel if I'm browsing social, I don't understand Facebook or Twitter look and feel if I'm browsing Wikipedia

Sorry for being very direct, my intention is not being rude and I respect the lot of work and effort done to develop this interface and appreciate this effort. But frankly speaking, my feeling is that there is something in the very basic design approach that needs to be adjusted. My feeling is not that I'm browsing "modern pages". My feeling is that I'm browsing "disorganised pages". --L736E (talk) 14:51, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:XanonymusX[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    I am already using new Vector, the further developments of this prototype seem logical to me. However, the sidebar looks ugly with the scrollbar, just let it show in full height.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    I do like the sticky header concept, though I am a bit worried that this could clash with tables in the page content that might use sticky headers as well (try this page on dewiki, for example). I also still miss a button to jump back to the top (maybe in the lower right corner?), even though that has become less important now with the sticky header.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Yes, some unnecessary scrolling can be avoided this way.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      I would prefer to have all (standard) functions from the more dropdown available there as well (move, first of all, but also including admin tools as protect, block, delete).
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Yes, seems alright.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    Regarding the languages: I agree with the idea of making them available more prominently. But: it is essential that the quality badges (quality, featured) are shown next to the language links, just like they are now; I hope that is possible in the new dropdown.

Thanks! --XanonymusX (talk) 15:21, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

  1. Comment from an informed observer: In the Compact Language Links feature as it is currently deployed on Wikipedia, this already works as XanonymusX requests. The current ULS supports it. This simply has to be preserved. --Amir E. Aharoni {{🌎🌍🌏}} 16:33, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Just gave it a try with the Compact Language Links (never used those), and it works indeed, wonderful! Thanks--XanonymusX (talk) 16:46, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:Svízel_přítula[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    I find it confusing how the mid-page header is completely different from the top-of-the-page header. Can't the search bar be beside the article and section title, or always hidden?
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    The headers comes up and shows what section you scrolled to. I find this very useful for navigating the page.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      The access to editing and translating is definitely helpful. The search bar is probably even more useful.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      Perhaps the entire "contents" section as something like a dropdown for quick navigation?
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Hover over where the navbar would be and click on the talk icon. I had to search for that icon a bit, but it's pretty obvious. It's not obvious, hovever, that there is a navbar to reveal. Maybe some form of thin bar at the very top that shows it's there? Or maybe have it appear at first, and then visibly hide? I'm also not sure it's big enough to justify hiding it.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    The Page/Discussion/Read/View sourse tabs at the top of the page look horrible in this context and should perhaps be replaced by the header completely?

Uživatelské jméno:NoJin[edit]

  1. Na chvíli se rozhlížejte, posunujte stránku nahoru a dolů, zkuste více různých stránek. Jaké jsou vaše prvotní dojmy? Je zde něco matoucího? Nebo praktického? Obzvlášt zajímavého? (Mějte na paměti, že jde o prototyp, kde většina odkazů ve skutečnosti nefunguje, a můžete narazit i na další chyby nebo jiné výstřednosti.)
    ...Nefunguje přizpůsobení šířce monitoru--NoJin (talk) 16:12, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
  2. Pomalu posunujte stránku dolů. Nyní zase trochu nahoru. Co pozorujete? Co si o tom myslíte?
    ...
    1. Jsou předváděné funkce pro vás užitečné? Jsou zde nějaké funkce, ke kterým je obzvlášť užitečné mít během čtení a editace přístup?
      ...
    2. Jsou zde nějaké funkce, ke kterým byste chtěli mít přístup a nové nadpisy je nenabízejí?
      ...
  3. Nyní posuňte stránku úplně nahoru. Představte si, že chcete navštívit svoji diskusní stránku. Přijdete na to, jak to provést? Jak to na vás působí?
    ...Tuto část bych neměnil, fungovala dobře v předchozím uspořádání a není důvod ji měnit--NoJin (talk) 16:12, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
  4. Přidejte prosím jakékoliv vaše úvahy, nápady nebo otázky.
    ...

Nom d’utilisateur : Trizek[edit]

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
    La présentation de Wikipédia est encore plus épurée. C'est un plaisir pour la lecture !
  2. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    La barre d'outils disparaît, ce qui est assez perturbant. Personnellement, je la laisserai toujours visible, pour rappeler qu'il est toujours possible de modifier l'article, de laisser un message en page de discussion ou de consulter l'historique. Au moins le faire pour les personnes connectées, qui sont celles qui travaillent sans doute le plus sur les articles.
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      Quand la page est chargée, et qu'on n'a pas commencé à scroller, on conserve les vieux onglets de modification, d'historique, etc. J'espère qu'il seront conservés, car bien utiles pour immédiatement être utilisables, mais rafraîchis ! À moins qu'ils ne soient replacés par la nouvelle barre ? Ce serait une bonne manière d'avoir une expérience unifiée, car pour le moment, les onglets et la nouvelle barre changement totalement les uns par rapport à l'autre.
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
      Le moteur de recherche est accessible, mais certaines personnes pourraient croire qu'il permet de rechercher dans la page. C'est une possibilité qui serait à mon avis intéressante à avoir : un bouton « rechercher sur le site », un « rechercher dans la page ». Il existe une fonction de recherche dans la page dans tous les navigateurs, mais rares sont les personnes qui en connaissent l'existence.
      J'indiquerai quelque part en haut de la page, ou dans cette barre de navigation, quand la page a été modifiée la dernière fois. C'est une manière de montrer la réactivité (ou non) l'activité de Wikipédia, et, pourquoi pas, une nouvelle indication d'une possible participation.
      Le sommaire est devenu invisible. J'ai bien vu que la barre de navigation indique où je suis (par le titre de section), mais cela n'est visible que quand je fait remonter la page. Il n'est apparemment pas possible de consulter le sommaire quelque part, à moins que le prototype le fonctionne pas chez moi ?
  3. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Le lien est caché dans un menu. Personnellement, cela me dérange assez peu, car j'ai tendance à explorer ce qui se cache derrière les « ... », et à ne quasiment passer que par les notifications pour accéder à ma page de discussion. J'ai des craintes pour d'autres personnes, dont les débutantes, qui sont souvent perdues face à une interface nouvelle, et pour qui il est parfois difficile de savoir où aller. Il faudrait bien prendre en compte dans les tests l'utilisation des notifications, car celles-ci ne sont sans doute pas bien prises en compte et lues (je connais pas mal de personnes avec 99+ notifications non lues !).
  4. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.
    Des options pour lire la page et immédiatement accessibles seraient bienvenues : mode nuit, possibilité de changement de la police d'écriture, rechercher dans la page, justifier le texte...
    Merci pour vos efforts sur ce travail ô combien nécessaire ! Trizek from FR 18:44, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Nom d’utilisateur :Pymouss[edit]

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
    J'ai vérifié plusieurs fois que je n'étais pas en visualisation pour mobile mais bien sur celle pour ordinateur. C'est bien le cas ; il y a donc encore énormément de travail à faire !
    Les marges latérales sont beaucoup trop importantes (c'est déjà un défaut majeur du skin développé récemment) : c'est une inutile perte d'espace, ça nuit vraiment à la lisibilité. L'infobox collée en haut de l'article est une très mauvaise idée. En bas, c'est très déstabilisant d'avoir les palettes de navigation déployées d'office, là encore, on est frappé par le vide qui ne donne vraiment pas envie de lire l'article jusqu'au bout (gros point de vigilance là-dessus : des articles avec des palettes de navigation pléthoriques, il y en a beaucoup sur fr:wp !). En cœur d'article, les galeries sont explosées : encore du blanc supplémentaire avec la très désagréable impression d'avoir une segmentation entre le rédactionnel et des listes d'images , de surcroît de très petite taille.
    En résumé, on garde une impression de grand vide alors que c'est ici un AdQ et qu'en plus c'est un article existant dans plus de 240 versions linguistiques. Toute la richesse de Wikipedia est délayée par ce skin.
  2. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Où que l'on soit, on voit apparaître le bandeau qui est en haut de page, dans le skin actuel. Pourquoi pas... Cependant, quand on est sur un ordinateur de bureau, on a une touche "début" qui permet de remonter en haut d'une page web, donc l'intérêt me semble plutôt limité. Peut-être que c'est dû à mon navigateur (Firefox sous Ubuntu), mais quand je clique sur les icônes, rien ne se passe. L'idée de pouvoir accéder accéder à certaines fonctionnalités personnalisées quand on passe sur l'icône de son profil est plutôt intéressante, en revanche.
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      Pas grand chose d'utile pour moi. En plus, les fonctionnalités permettant d'avoir au survol un aperçu des articles et des références (ancien Pop-up) semblent avoir disparu.
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
      Les aperçus au survol (cf. supra)
  3. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    On y arrive en cliquant sur les points de suspension à droite de son username. C'est pas trop compliqué. J'imagine que l'on verra les notifications apparaître clairement en cas de message.
  4. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.
    Un gros travail de réintégration des fonctionnalités reste à faire. Ces grandes marges latérales sont vraiment très déstabilisantes quand on a un écran standard, plus large que haut.

Username:Sadenäyttely[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    The very first thing I notice is that it renders very slowly.. And upon closer inspection realise that's because it uses megabytes of JavaScript just to display basic text. Really? The browser can already render text just fine, I see no reason not to send it to the browser as pre-processed HTML. I hope this is just a quirk of the test version and the finished version is going to work without JavaScript.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    It's not particularly great experience.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      The features are useful, just not when reading. I'd like those options be available in the beginning of the page as well. What would be very useful during reading is table of contents. I can't find it in the new UI. Since there is so much empty space in the sides, why not put it there?
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      If by new header you mean the top header, editing is the biggest missing one. There's plenty of empty space for such an often needed feature next to the talk page link.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Yes, I can. It's quite easy. I just hope editing would be as easy, I don't like having to first scroll down and up and hope that the menu chooses to stay visible. There's plenty of space in the same bar where the talk page link is, editing should be right next to the Discussion. Also, the 'More' seems a bit pointless when there is so much empty space there.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    I don't want my desktop to be more like a smartphone. Smartphones have very small screens and have completely different input methods. I agree that the whitespace around text improves readability, but it annoys me greatly when I'm using a desktop with the browser window maximised at 1920x1200 resolution, and I still have to constantly scroll back and forth horizontally, whenever I want to look around a table full of information. Not all tables can be shrinked to fit into 960px, and readability would be improved if the table could use as much horizontal space as the screen had to offer. Overall this seems like a major downgrade from the old Vector. I guess crippling the desktop UI is one way to make it feel consistent with the mobile UI. I would much rather you make the mobile UI work better than bring down the desktop/laptop UI.

Sadenäyttely (talk) 22:07, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:Nearthel[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    Space is way less optimized. Too much margin on the sides and the infobox is too wide
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    Buttons appear on top. As I'm using Opera, I can quickly go to the top with one click and come back to wherever I was, so for me it's mostly irrelevant, but it's definitely useful on other browsers.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      They're indeed useful. I really like having two buttons both for visual edit and source edit.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      I can't think of any crucial one. But there's probably enough space to fit links to other Wikimedia pages with the same subject.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    The 3 dot symbol for an expanded menu is very common, so it's the first place I'm looking. That's perfectly fine.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    Overall, the changes are for better. However, my first impression still holds, I want to be able to read as much information as possible without needing to scroll. Keeping the current margins and infobox width would be better.

שם המשתמש:שמיה רבה[edit]

  1. קחו דקה והסתכלו סביב, גללו מעלה ומטה בדף, הסתכלו בכמה דפים שונים. מה הרושם הראשוני שלכם? האם אתם מוצאים משהו מבלבל? נוח? מעניין במיוחד? (זכרו שמפני שזה אב-טיפוס, רוב הקישורים לא ממש עובדים, וייתכנו באגים נוספים שתיתקלו בהם.)
    יפה מאוד, הגיע הזמן לשפר את הממשק
  2. גללו למטה בדף לאט. עכשיו גללו למעלה בדף לאט. במה אתם מבחינים? מה אתם חושבים על החוויה הזאת?
    די מזכיר את הממשק לניידים
    1. האם הפיצ'רים המוצגים כאן מועילים עבורכם? האם הפיצ'רים יעיליים בזמן קריאה או עריכה?
      ...
    2. האם יש פיצ'רים שתרצו לגשת אליהם שאינם זמינים בכותרת הדביקה החדשה?
      ...
  3. כעת, גללו חזרה לראש הדף. תארו לעצמכם שתרצו לעבור לדף השיחה. האם אתם יכולים לעשות זאת? מה אתם חושבים על החוויה הזאת?
    מאוד נח, אני בעד
  4. אם יש לכם מחשבות אחרונות, רעיונות, או שאלות, הוסיפו אותם.
    בפסקה הערות שוליים, אולי כדאי שגם בהערות עצמן יופיע המספור

اسم المستخدم:Mr. Ibrahem[edit]

  1. نطلبُ منك -لطفًا- أن تقضي دقيقة في تأمل هذه الصفحة طلوعًا ونزولاً وفي افتح بعض الروابط فيها. أخبرنا الآتي: ما هي انطباعاتك الأولى؟ هل تفهم الغرض من هذه الصفحة؟ هل تجدُها مربكة؟ هل تجدها مفيدة؟ (نرجو أن تتفهم أن هذا نموذج أولي، لذا قد لا تعمل جميع الروابط، كما قد تكون هناك بعض الأعطال أو المشاكل العرضية).
    جيدة
  2. انزل ببُطءٍ إلى أسفل الصفحة، ثم اصعد مرة أخرى إلى أعلاها. هل لاحظت شيئًا؟ هل لديك رأي بما شاهدت؟
    رائعة
    1. هل الميزات التي تحتويها الصفحة مفيدة لك؟ خصوصًا إن كانت متوفرة أثناء قراءة وتحرير صفحات ويكيبيديا؟
      نعم بالفعل
    2. هل هناك أي ميزات مفقودة ترغب بأن تراها في الرأسية الجديدة؟
      ربما
  3. نطلبُ منك -لطفًا- أن تعود إلى أعلى الصفحة الآن. تخيل أنك تريد الوصول إلى صفحة نقاشك على ويكيبيديا، هل تعرف كيفية الوصول إليها من هذه الواجهة؟ ما هو رأيك بذلك؟
    ممتازة
  4. يمكنك هنا إضافة أي أفكار أو أسئلة أخرى لديك.
    لا

Nom d’utilisateur : Le Paragone[edit]

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).

(+) Masquage de la colonne de gauche, qui contient des fonctions assez peu utilisées comme "créer un livre", ça aère un peu l'interface et c'est plus en phase avec le web d'aujourd'hui où les menus latéraux se raréfient.
(+) Accès interlangue visible dès le haut de la page
(-) L'infobox est trop large, avec une image alignée à gauche qui plus est, c'est disgracieux et je ne comprends pas ce qui motive ce changement
(-) L'accès interlangue ne met pas d'abord en avant les langues que l'on a l'habitude de consulter. Du coup ça force à cliquer. J'aurais aimé avoir en lieu et place de ce menu fourre-tout mes 5 langues les plus utilisées puis un menu "+" qui me permet d'en chercher davantage.

  1. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Je pense que c'est bien d'avoir un menu sticky mais je ne comprends pas l'intérêt de faire varier ses éléments affichés selon qu'on scrolle vers le bas ou vers le haut. Je trouve qu'il serait pertinent d'avoir en permanence le titre de la section lue par exemple. D'ailleurs je trouve que les fonctions du menu en scroll vers le haut sont toutes pertinentes mais en scroll vers le bas, ça ne sert à rien. Franchement, si on tient à préserver un changement d'état entre le scroll vers le bas et le scroll vers le haut, autant ne pas montrer du tout de menu en scroll vers le bas parce que le simple logo "W" à gauche et l'icône du compte à droite, d'une part ça ne sert à rien mais en plus c'est perturbant parce qu'on pourrait vraiment croire que ce "W" est juste un bug visuel, une lettre qui se balade en dehors de sa zone.
    Je remarque aussi que la fonction de recherche est problématique parce que si on commence à remplir un champs de recherche et que finalement on se ravise, quand on va remonter la page, on va avoir toute une colonne de suggestion de résultats qui va s'afficher et prendre une place significative de l'écran pour rien, parce qu'on avait abandonné la requête.
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      Les liens interwikis, le bouton pour modifier le code et le bouton pour modifier avec l'éditeur visuel
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
      - Oui, c'est tout bête mais je pense que la seule différence entre l'état du menu selon qu'on défile vers le bas ou vers le haut doit être de proposer un bouton pour remonter directement tout en haut de la page, d'ailleurs il ne faut pas forcément afficher ce bouton dans le menu, il pourrait être flottant dans le coin inférieur droit de l'écran mais je pense que cette fonction est pertinente au vue des usages contemporains et du peu de personnes qui connaissent la touche de clavier permettant de faire ça.
      - Le masquage du menu-colonne de gauche invisibilise les liens interwikis. Or, je pense qu'il est très utile de pouvoir accéder rapidement à la page wikicommons ou à l'item wikidata correspondant à l'article, c'est le genre de fonctionnalité que j'utilise tous les jours donc je serais déçu de devoir à chaque fois cliquer sur le burger menu pour ça. Il pourrait être utile de faire un bouton fourre-tout comme pour les langues dans le menu sticky qui permette d'accéder aux liens interwikis.
  1. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    C'est facile à trouver, ce sera bien quand le bouton sera fonctionnel. Je n'utilise pratiquement jamais la fonction de discussion donc je ne sais pas si c'est très utilisé et c'est très pertinent de mettre ce bouton ici mais pourquoi pas.
  2. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.
    - Un bouton fourre-tout bien visible pour les liens interwikis
    - Un sticky menu qui reste le même qu'on monte ou qu'on descende la page
    - Un bouton flottant qui permette de ramener l'utilisateur tout en haut de la page

Nombre de usuario: Eunice Editrix[edit]

  1. Tómese un minuto para mirar alrededor. ¿Cuáles son algunas de sus impresiones iniciales? ¿Hay algo que encuentra confuso? ¿Conveniente? ¿Particularmente interesante? (Dado que esto es un prototipo la mayoría de los links no funcionan puede que se encuentre otros bugs o defectos).
    Me parece que la presentación es visualmente agradable, sobre todo la barra superior con las opciones. Ahora bien, una cosa que no entendí fueron los espacios al costado del artículo. El de la izquierda lo entiendo para dejar espacio para el menú de enlaces desplegable, pero el de la derecha no parece tener propósito y quita espacio
  2. Desplace despacio la página hacia abajo. Ahora haga scroll hacia arriba un poco. ¿Qué nota? ¿Qué piensa de esta experiencia?
    La barra superior una vez que me desplazo para abajo es conveniente; lo único es que no me quedó claro en el momento que se volvía opaca y mostraba más cosas al posar el cursor sobre ella; también me pregunto si esta nueva presentación anará bien en máquinas más viejas o conexiones lentas (no sé de informática, ojo).
    1. ¿Son las características mostradas aquí útiles para usted? ¿Alguna de las nuevas características es particularmente útil para tener acceso a la hora de leer o editar?
      El menú de idiomas a la mano me es útil ya que suelosaltar de una versión de Wikipedia a la otra. Los botones de edición en la barra superior parecen útiles sobre todo si se aplican sólo a la sección actual.
    2. ¿Hay alguna característica a la que quiera acceder que no encuentre en la nueva cabecera?
      No en particular
  3. Ahora, vuelva al inicio de la página. Imagine que quiere ir a la página de discusión. ¿Cómo lo haría? ¿Cómo ve la experiencia?
    Haría clic en el enlace en la pestaña al lado de la pestaña de la página. Da la impresión que se quiere hacer que haya una transición más sutil entre artículo y discusión, lo cual no estaría mal.
  4. Por favor añada cualquier idea final, comentario o preguntas.
    Mi único comentario es que tengan muy en cuenta las máquinas viejas, las conexiones lentas y las pantallas pequeñas a la hora de diseñar. No sé si eso cambiaría muco el diseño final pero es mi principal preocupación. Ni mi máquina ni mi conexión son las mejores y aun así me anda bien la página prototipo; pero no sé si ese es el caso en general.

Tên người dùng: BossLeader[edit]

  1. Hãy dừng một phút và nhìn quanh, cuộn lên xuống trong trang, xem một vài trang khác nhau. Ấn tượng ban đầu của bạn là gì? Bạn có thể có gì gây bối rối không? Có thấy tiện lợi không? Hay đôi chút thú vị? (Lưu ý rằng vì đây là nguyên mẫu nên hầu hết các liên kết không thực sự sử dụng được, và có thể có bọ hoặc lỗi khác mà bạn sẽ gặp phải.)
    ...
  2. Hãy cuộn trang xuống thật chậm. Rồi giờ cuộn lên một chút. Bạn chú ý thấy điều gì? Bạn nghĩ sao về trải nghiệm này?
    ...
    1. Những tính năng được trình bày ở đây có hữu ích với bạn không? Có tính năng nào đặc biệt hữu dụng để tiếp cận khi đang đọc hoặc sửa đổi không?
      ...
    2. Có tính năng nào bạn muốn tiếp cận mà lại không có sẵn trên header mới không?
      ...
  3. Giờ hãy cuộn lại lên đầu trang. Hãy tưởng tượng bạn muốn đi tới trang thảo luận của mình. Bạn có thể tìm ra cách để làm việc đó không? Bạn nghĩ sao về trải nghiệm này?
    ...
  4. Hãy bổ sung thêm bất kỳ câu hỏi, ý tưởng hay suy nghĩ nào của bạn.
    ...

Username:Mickie-Mickie[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    The UI layout has been changed with more redundant empty space left on screen and over-sized graphic description sections on the right hand side. Nothing is confusing, but indeed not very convenient since the section index menu is gone. The interesting part is the emphasis on graphics and the "Sister Projects" section.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    The section index menu is not displayed for quick jump between topics, and the Expand/Collapse buttons also disappeared on the top right corner of Category UI, which makes the long articles inconvenient to browse since only relying on the scrolling up/down feature.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Many feature are relocated in different positions, however adaptable and still useful without problem, though it is strange whether this layout change is really necessary?
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      Yes, there are 2: A) The section index menu to jump to the sub-topic without wasting time in scrolling on the long articles; B) The Expand/Collapse button on the Category menus which can shorten the page length in display when needed.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Yes, it is renamed as the "Discussion" tab, but still significantly identifiable.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    The basic description section on the right hand side of page takes too much width by default and does not change proportionally in the narrower browser window mode, which may become an visibility issue.

نام کاربری:Mohammad ebz[edit]

پیشنهاد : لطفاً برای راحتی بیشتر برای نوشتن و ویرایش کردن یک مقاله در نوار ابزار بالایی صفحه که ظاهر می‌شود گزینه راست چین و وسط چین و چپ چین را اضافه کنید و همچنین ابزار راست به چپ نوشتن یا چپ به راست نوشتن را مثل ورد را اضافه کنید. ممنون

(en) suggestion: For added convenience of writing and editing an article, please add the right-alignment, center-alignment, and left-alignment buttons to the toolbar at the top that appears in the top toolbar when you are editing , also add the right-to-left or left-to-right button like Microsoft Word software. Thank you

sign Text positions
sign Text directions

نام کارری:mohdmmad.darg[edit]

Mohammad.darg (talk) 06:49, 4 April 2021 (UTC).اگر بشود در ترجیحات تنظیم کرد که کدام زیر بخش ها(ی نام کاربری شما)در سه نقطه نمایش داده شوند بسیار بهتر میشود

DavidBourguignon[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    ... Very nice look and feel, close to a real book page. It would be nice if blank space (right and left) could be filled in with contextual information when the user requires it, or with user annotations/comments, even little drawings, this appeared sometimes in medieval book margins. This is a great tradition of user-generated content and dialogue between readers.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    ... Very good removal/appearance of information when this is necessary. We need more of this! :-)
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      ... Definitely: the possibility to download the page as PDF/MS Word/plain UTF-8 text with standard Markdown format/ would be very useful
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      ... Definitely: switching to other versions of the same article in other languages. IMHO this cross-language collaboration is an aspect of Wikipedia that currently needs improvement. What about signing a partnership with DeepL.com (a German AI company) to leverage their automatic translation power to the benefit of humanity? They could be interested.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    ... I think the talk page feature from Wikipedia is a bit cumbersome. IMHO it should look like a Facebook wall, with posts and comments, but it does not. What about moving the talk page in the margin of the book page, as annotations you could display/hide on demand? (See previous comment.)
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    ... Great job, please continue innovating, the book metaphor is a great UI idea! Contextual annotations in the margins could be a way for users to discuss a topic of the page, in a very natural and useful way. Thanks in advance!

User: Dragonify[edit]

  1. Like most people said, there are just too many unnecessarily wasted space on both sides of the page. Why bother hiding the left side navigation when you're not even gonna put the space into use? It gives me a feeling that I'm viewing a mobile site on desktop. It would also be nice if you keep the very light blue aesthetic around the page like how it used to be. It feels too bland. Though I do like the look of the top navigation, but again, a little color would be nice. The left navigation has an unneeded scroll bar, and it doesn't follow you when scrolling the page, but that will probably be fixed. And, again, it needs some color.
  2. The logo and the user icon follows, and top navigation appears when you hover over there! It's pretty nice, especially with how it shows you the heading of the part you are currently at.
    1. They are all pretty useful stuff, the search feature, the edit and edit source button...
    2. There's not really any existing feature that I would need to be added, but since you have the heading feature, why not have it opens the table of content when clicking on the heading? I would imagine it being very useful to navigate around the page.
  3. It was pretty easy to find my talk page, though it's not very that complicated anyway. (Note: I also noticed there's a clock feature in the menu? I don't think having that there is convenient, maybe at the bottom of the page or somewhere visible.)
  4. Right now, the emptiness and the blandness are the main problems. The features are great, just the design isn't. Make the site stands out! Don't make it look like a freaking white paper jeez.

Nom d’utilisateur :bpierreb[edit]

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
    Les images sont positionnées les unes après les autres en laissant du vide à côté. Il serait plus judicieux et esthétique de les mettre côte à côte.
  2. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Bien, ce serait encore mieux si le bandeau restait toujours en haut.
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      Un sommaire fixe devrait resté sur le coté ou en haut pour pouvoir y accéder à n'importe quelle instant. Un sommaire sous forme enroulée (déroulable si la souris passe dessus). D'ailleurs il n'y a plus de sommaire , ou alors je n'ai pas réussi à le trouver.
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
  3. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Oui, je n'en pense rien.
  4. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.
    la mise en page est "trop en longueur", parfois tout y est mis bout à bout en laissant de la place vide sur la droite de l'écran. Les images mais aussi le texte qui remplace l'info-box au début de l'article.
    Il faudrait numéroter les chapitres en utilisant des nombres (tête de chapitre : 1.0.0.0 ; sous chapitre : 1.1.0.0 ; etc...) Dans un article long comme celui-ci, on ne sais plus où on en est quand on se promène dedant ; avant aussi dans le même article j'avais l'impression d'être un peu noyé ne plus savoir où j'étais
    Dans l'ancienne version il y a un résumé de l'article, placé avant le sommaire. Comme il n'y a plus de sommaire ce serait bien de mettre en titre «résumé» avant le texte du-dit résumé.
    Je préfère l'ancienne version à laquelle il faudrait faire quelques améliorations , mais pas de changement radical de mise en page. Gardez la vieille version mettez y un sommaire accessible à tout instant, numérotez les chapitres, sous chapitres, etc. Le bandeau titre fixe en haut de la page c'est une bonne idée, un sommaire déroulable pourrait y être intégré.
    Quand on passe la souris sur une image, on voit que l'on a la main et que l'on peut cliquer pour ouvrir l'image en grand, mais par expérience je sais que certaines personnes ne le comprennent pas. Un mini texte devrait apparaître à côté : «cliquez pour agrandir» et que l'image s'ouvre d'un clic gauche systématiquement dans un nouvel onglet ou dans une fenêtre flotante, et du clic droit tout les choix.
  5. Merci de m'avoir demandé mon avis.

« Bpierreb (talk) 10:03, 4 April 2021 (UTC) »

Username:Uconhe[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    Before I scrolled the page, I noticed that a bar of buttons has moved from the left to the top. This was different from the English Wikipedia, and more similar to French Wiktionary.
    페이지를 스크롤하기 전에는 버튼들이 왼쪽이 아니라 위로 간 게 보이네요. 영어 위키백과보다는 프랑스어 위키낱말사전과 닮았어요.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    Oh, there is a bar that I can check many things: the name of the article and section I am reading, the direct button to access the page history and talk page, and the wikipedia main article! That's great and as for the useful features, see my answer of the next question.
    오~ 많은 걸 확인할 수 있는 버튼 창이 있어요! 제가 읽고 있는 문서 이름과 문단 이름, 문서 역사와 토론 문서로 바로 접근할 수 있는 버튼, 그리고 위키백과 본문이요!! 정말 멋있네요~ 쓸모있는 기능은 아래 질문에 답했습니다^^
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      The bar of buttons that appears when I scroll up a little bit is very cool. I don't have to scroll to the very top end in order to search for another articles, or edit the page.
      살짝 아래로 스크롤했을 때 나오는 버튼 창이 정말 멋있네요. 다른 문서를 검색하려고 또는 문서를 편집하려고 이제 맨 위로 안 가도 되니까요.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      For me, I think it's perfect! lol
      저에게는 완벽한 것 같네요! ㅋㅋㅋ
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    I can just scroll a little bit to click the talk page button! That's absolutely good.
    토론 문서 버튼을 누르려고 살짝만 위로 스크롤 하면 돼요! 대박.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    Thank you for regularly updating the interface of wikipedia!!
    정기적으로 위키백과의 인터페이스를 업데이트해주셔서 감사합니닷!!

--Uconhe (talk) 10:09, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Username: GeXeS[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    It's obviously been made for viewing on mobile devices with vertical screens. Completely useless, if it's meant to be a "desktop improvement". Lots of unused white space on sides causes uninvited overglow of the screen. I don't get the idea behind "sticky headers" at all. No idea what is that good for.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    Dynamic desing is something which makes sense - again - in portable devices, where you need to save space. You don't need that on desktop screens. I miss having the upper bar ready at all times, I dislike it reappearing on scrollup, and I dislike the roll-down personal menu.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Not useful. Even the drop-down language menu is a nuisance. I hate Wikipedias that use this feature.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      None I can think of.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Yes, the drop-down menu. I don't like the idea.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    Please don't attempt to be "modern" at all costs. Stop making webpages bulky and over-styled for the sake of slower computers out there. Wikipedia, as I perceive it, is a text-based, cost-effective "tool". So please keep it that way. Thanks!

Username: Lost Lont[edit]

Initial impression: More focus on the content. First the empty sidebars seemed weird, but that's a matter of habit. The shorter lines are indeed readable. However when a paragraph contains images or tables text ends up being very short, like 80 characters instead of 150, which feels like reading it on a mobile device even if you use a PC monitor. Maybe moving these non-text items fully or even just partially to the now empty sides would be helpful. Overall, sections with mostly text are better, but sections with other contents it's too packed. So much I'd dare saying it's worse.

Nome utente: Leo Pasini[edit]

  1. Prenditi un minuto per dare un'occhiata, andare su e giù per la pagina, guardare un po' di pagine. Quali sono le tue impressioni iniziali? C'è qualcosa che trovi confuso? Conveniente? Particolarmente interessante? (Ricorda che dato che questo è un prototipo la maggioranza dei link potrebbero non funzionare e può capitare di incontrare altri bug o difetti).
    Lo spazio ai lati a mio avviso risulta eccessivo
  2. Scorri lentamente verso il basso la pagina. Poi torna un po' in su. Cosa hai notato? Come valuti questa tua esperienza?
    La presenza di header a scomparsa con il nome del paragrafo che si sta leggendo, probabilmente può essere d'aiuto nelle voci più lunghe e complesse.
    1. Le funzionalità che hai visto qui ti sono utili? Ci sono altre funzionalità a cui sarebbe particolarmente utile accedere mentre stai leggendo o editando?
      Si tratta di comodità a mio avviso non determinanti. Anche attualmente leggendo una pagina dell'enciclopedia non mi sono mai detto "...ci vorrebbe..."; in ogni caso l'abitudine ad un formato non indica che il formato non sia migliorabile.
    2. Ci sono funzionalità che ti piacerebbe avere accessibili ma non sono presenti nella nuova header?
      Rivoglio immediatamente l'indice... se non ve lo siete clamorosamente dimenticati, beh sappiate che è una mancanza terribile!
    3. Ora scorri fino all'inizio della pagina. Immagina di voler passare alla tua pagina di discussione utente. Come pensi che si possa fare? Che ne pensi di questa esperienza?
      Anche in questo caso nessun problema; funzionalità abbastanza intuitiva, in linea con diversi applicativi già in uso quotidiano (mi ricorda un po' l'home banking che uso...). Niente di rivoluzionario ma nuovamente abbastanza comodo ed user friendly.
  3. Se hai idee, commenti o domande finali, aggiungile.
    Al momento non mi viene in mente altro

Имя участника:WM wm WM[edit]

  1. Уделите минуту тому, чтобы осмотреться, пролистайте страницу вверх и вниз, посмотрите несколько различных страниц. Какие у вас первые впечатления? Вас что-нибудь смущает? Вам удобно? Вы находите что-нибудь сбивающим с толку? Удобным? Особенно интересным? (Имейте в виду, что это прототип, в котором некоторые ссылки могут не работать, и в котором вам могут встретиться другие ошибки или странности.)
    ...
  2. Медленно прокрутите страницу вниз. Теперь прокрутите немного назад. Что вы заметили? Что вы думаете об этом опыте?
    ...
    1. Полезны ли вам показанные здесь функции? Существуют ли какие-либо функции, к которым особенно полезно иметь доступ во время чтения или редактирования?
      ...
    2. Есть ли какие-либо функции, к которым вы хотели бы получить доступ, которые недоступны в новой шапке сайта?
      ...
  3. Теперь прокрутите назад до самого верха страницы. Представьте, что вы хотели бы перейти на свою страницу обсуждения. Можете ли вы понять, как это сделать? Что вы думаете об этом опыте?
    ...
  4. Завершая свой отзыв, добавьте, пожалуйста, любые мысли, идеи или вопросы.
    ...

Добрый день. Не увидел в новом интерфейсе чего либо полезного на первый взгляд. 1. Шрифты страницы отвратительные. На экране 4К 27 дюймов в 100% и ином разрешении масштабируются так, что дальше эту страницу и смотреть не хочется. Неудобно для глаз. Такое впечатление, что при изменении масштаба они меняются с одного типа на другой. И при некоторых масштабах шрифт как будто бы таймс с очень тонкими некоторыми линиями. 2. Левая уплывающая панель, при появлении в некоторых пунктах длинный текст скрывается под бегунком. 3. Да и вообще какой смысл скрывать левую панель, если вместо нее текст страницы не расширяется, а просто остается пустое место с логотипом вверху. 4. Так как я не знаю английский язык, то предложение смотреть на страницу на которой заголовки в панелях англоязычные срезу же отбивает интерес ее смотреть и вдаваться в подробности. 5. Лично мне было бы очень желательно иметь возможность либо быстрого перехода на русскую страницу темы или же на возможность вызвать автоперевод страницы. 6. В изменении правой панели не увидел ничего полезного, но может быть не понял смысла зачем это надо. 7. На мой взгляд в горизонтальных меню, где есть избыток свободного места, логично было бы на выбор пользователя предложить выводить либо иконки, либо текстовые наименования иконок или некоторых иконок. 8. Как пользователя меня очень и очень интересует возможность использования MadiaWiki для своего домашнего сайта. У меня есть NAS Synology, на который я MadiaWiki поставил. Все работает. Но как же много времени надо, чтобы хотя бы создать что то начальное и создать правильно. 8.1. В этой связи ищу и не нахожу внятных вводных разъяснений как правильно создавать собственные страницы в MadiaWiki. Очень нужны такие пояснения, но не с момента как это делать в имеющемся интерфейсе, а в исходном интерфейсе MadiaWiki, в котором нет части функций, которые есть тут, то есть включая пояснения как редактировать/изменять правую панель шапку, с добавлением нужных пунктов. Например, интересует создание страниц персон, в части собственной генеалогии - о родственниках. Вводные пояснение как это сделать, данные в рамках этого проекта, но применительно к собственному личному сайту, добавило бы понимания в области сайтостроения, в части того, как все администрируется и как не допустить грубых ошибок, участвуя и в проектах Викимедии. 9. Очень интересует описание всех проектов Викимедии, с графическим внятным пояснением их связей, с пояснением того, почему интерфейс в разных проектах разный, каким образом можно некоторые страницы из проектов Викимедии перенести на свой собственный сайт и на нем структурировать их по своему усмотрению. Интересуют больше всего технические руководства, которые могут быть часто востребованы для домашнего применения. В том числе руководства / страницы о создании собственного сайта. Так как некоторые руководства, возможно считающиеся элементарными для продвинутых пользователей и профессионалов, становятся сложнопреодолимым препятствием для получения начальных знаний для простого обывателя. С уважением, Виктор

Username:Wouterhagens[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    De kolom rechts is zeer breed in de Engelse versie. In het Nederlands “normaal”. Waar zijn de links naar Wikidata, Commons (behalve helemaal aan het eind, maar is dat een manueel toevoegde link of die gecreëerd door wikidata?), print, tools, etc. alles wat normaliter in de linker kolom van een wikipedia artikel staat. Ik mis een makkelijker overzicht van de wiki’s in andere talen. De brede lege linker kolom waar anderen over spreken is niet te zien bij gebruik van een iPad, maar wel bij een desktop computer. Gebruik die lege linker kolom om weer alles in te zetten wat er nu is weggehaald.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    Ik zie een letter W meeschuiven. Later heb ik ontdekt dat je daarmee een search kunt doen, maar het nut zie ik niet en het is heel onduidelijk dat daar de letter W voor is. Een vergrootglas is beter. Ik mis een inhoudsopgave aan het begin van het artikel. Handig zou zijn de mogelijkheid om direct naar de inhoudsopgave te kunnen springen via een tab (go to top) bij elk onderdeel en een om naar het eind te gaan om te zien welke categorieën er vermeld worden. Waar zijn die gebleven???
    Het blijkt niet meer mogelijk om de lettergrootte te veranderen met CMD + of CMD -.
    Al met al vind ik het een extreem slechte verandering door amputatie van alle links die normaal in de linker kolom staan en de categorieën onderaan. De desktopversie op een iPad die maar een gedeelte laat zien en het niet kunnen veranderen van de lettergrootte.

Username:PiotrekD[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    I miss the old (i.e., the current) Vector sidebar.
    Some infoboxes are broken – https://people.wikimedia.org/~jdrewniak/dip/p4.html#/en/wiki/Europa_(moon).
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    When I scroll down, only the Wikipedia logo and the personal logo remain at the top. When I scroll up, the whole upper bar appears. Is this the expected behavior or a bug? (I use Pale Moon.) If that's the way it should be, I find it confusing.
    Oh, now I noticed those “talk”, “history”, “edit” and “edit source” buttons. They have no icons on Pale Moon, they can be noticed by hovering the cursor over the bar. Also, they do nothing when clicked.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      What features do you mean?
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      No.
      Or… maybe… an ability to add some special pages selected just by me?
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Unless something is broken, I can open my talk page by selecting the “…” button and choosing the right option. I prefer to have it always visible, which is the way it is placed now. (By the way, what about accessibility?)
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    If you need more details, feel free to contact me.

Uživatelské jméno:Tauchman Martin[edit]

  1. Na chvíli se rozhlížejte, posunujte stránku nahoru a dolů, zkuste více různých stránek. Jaké jsou vaše prvotní dojmy? Je zde něco matoucího? Nebo praktického? Obzvlášt zajímavého? (Mějte na paměti, že jde o prototyp, kde většina odkazů ve skutečnosti nefunguje, a můžete narazit i na další chyby nebo jiné výstřednosti.)
    ... Osobně si myslím, že karty stránka, diskuse apod. by mohly lépe korespondovat s novým vzhledem
  2. Pomalu posunujte stránku dolů. Nyní zase trochu nahoru. Co pozorujete? Co si o tom myslíte?
    ... Zajímavé, zlapšuje to orientaci.
    1. Jsou předváděné funkce pro vás užitečné? Jsou zde nějaké funkce, ke kterým je obzvlášť užitečné mít během čtení a editace přístup?
      ...
    2. Jsou zde nějaké funkce, ke kterým byste chtěli mít přístup a nové nadpisy je nenabízejí?
      ... Nemohu najít automaticky generovaný obsah.
  3. Nyní posuňte stránku úplně nahoru. Představte si, že chcete navštívit svoji diskusní stránku. Přijdete na to, jak to provést? Jak to na vás působí?
    ... Ano, je to podobné mobilní verzi.
  4. Přidejte prosím jakékoliv vaše úvahy, nápady nebo otázky.
    ... Bylo by dobré zdokonalit překlad.

Bad font[edit]

Bad font: "body{font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, "Segoe UI", Roboto, Oxygen-Sans, Ubuntu, Cantarell, "Helvetica Neue", sans-serif;".
The font Verdana is best for the eyes. We also need a dark theme. Kurononame (talk) 18:23, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Good for readers, but...[edit]

I interprete this as if you want the readers to get a good experience; it is easier to read text that is not too wide, so it is narrowed, it may be disturbing to have a lot of links stealing attention from the reading etc.

Also the appearance matches mobile platforms better, which i also a trend. To adapt platforms so they look identical in both desktop and mobile.

But, Wikipedia is much more than a place just to go in and read. We want everybody to participate in the community and in improving Wikipedia and its articles. You are of course aware of this, so you must have done some research. Is it really favourable to hide all the links to community and communication?

The language link, which I find very useful as a reader. I use it as a glossary a lot. They are placed in a much better and clearer way than previous.

I am guessing the wider infobox sample article is a bug.

But please, any improvement should highlight the links to community and cooperation. Not hide.

--LittleGun (talk) 19:27, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

User:Tohaomg[edit]

  1. Приділіть хвилину щоб озирнутись, прокрутити вгору-вниз сторінки, прогляньте кілька різних сторінок. Які Ваші початкові враження? Щось є важкозрозумілим? Зручним? Особливо цікавим? (Майте на увазі, що оскільки це прототип, частина посилань може не працювати й що можуть бути інші баги чи приклади дивної поведінки, на які Ви наштовхнетесь.)
    First of all, the text of the page is a narrow strip on my wide screen. A lot of white space on the sides, which is not a positive experince. Secondly (it may be very personal, but anyway), when I see mobile version (and this interface looks a lot like mobile version), I instinctively search for "Full version" button, because I am already used to that mobile version has very limited functionality compared to full version.
  2. Повільно прокрутіть сторінку донизу. Тепер прокрутіть трішки вгору. Що Ви помічаєте? Яке Ваше враження щодо цього досвіду?
    Article is not that long, but I had to make a dozen of rotations of my mouse wheel.
  3. Чи є представлені функції корисними для Вас? Чи є якісь функції, які особливо корисно мати під рукою під час читання чи редагування?
    As for reading, it is fine. As for editing, I do not know.
  4. Чи є якісь функції, до яких Ви б хотіли мати доступ, які не представлені в новому заголовку?
    Categories bar is missing.
  5. Тепер прокрутіть назад нагору сторінки. Уявіть, що Ви б хотіли перейти на свою сторінку обговорення. Чи зрозуміло для Вас як це зробити? Що Ви думаєте про цей досвід?
    Yes, it is clear.
  6. Будь ласка, додайте будь-які фінальні думки, ідеї чи запитання.
    There are hundreds of bugs in the interface and in the engine, which were reported on Phabricator and never solved, so I kindly suggest that resources are applied to correct those bugs, instead of applying them to develop a new interface from scratch.

Easier to navigate menus[edit]

Some menus, especially in commons are absolute banger to use. They could be be simpler

User: Pmwiki1, enwiki

利用者名:Udaijin[edit]

This feedback is for the Japanese version.

  1. ここで手を止めて全体を見回してみましょう。まず第一印象は? なにか分かりにくい点は? 便利な点は? これは面白そうだという点は?
    ...コンテンツの幅が従来より狭まり特に情報量の多いページでは読みやすくなったと感じました。ただしこの感覚は個々人で異なるものですので、フォントの大きさとコンテンツ幅の設定について、ある程度の裁量をユーザーに持たせるとより快適になると思います。また、英数フォントについてですが、横幅が狭く潰れて見えるため、もう少し幅の広いフォントの方が読みやすいです。
  2. ページの下に向かってゆっくりスクロールします。次にわずかに画面を上へスクロールしなおします。なにか気づいた点はありませんか? この操作をしてみて何か感じたことはありますか?
    ...ページのどこにいても(下部に移動していても)ヘッダやナビゲーションにアクセスしやすくなっており実装が待ち遠しいです。ただ、上にスクロールやマウスオーバーでヘッダが表示されるのは便利な反面チラチラして鬱陶しく感じることもあるため、常時表示させることはできないのでしょうか。面積も小さくデザインもシンプルなため読み物の邪魔にはならないと思います。
    1. ここで示した機能はあなた自身にとって役に立つと思いますか? (その中に)閲覧や編集をするとき、特にこれは便利だと思う機能はありましたか?
      ...ページ名横のセクション名は閲覧時にいま何について読んでいるのかが分かりやすくなりました。また、違う言語版のページを見たいことがよくあるので従来のように上まで戻り左のメニューから選ぶという手順を踏まなくて良いのは個人的に嬉しいです。編集関連のボタンはすぐに目的のページに移動出来て便利です。
    2. この新しいヘッダにはないけれど、使えるとよいと思う機能はなんでしょうか?
      ...ハンバーガーメニューもくっつくいてくるか常時表示されると便利だと思います。
  3. では、ページ最上部へスクロールしてください。ご自分のトークページを開きたいと想定します。どうすればよいか、わかりますか? この手順についてどう感じましたか?
    ...わかりやすく迷うこともありませんでした。アカウント名の下にドロップダウンリストとして出てきたり、アカウント名の横に利用者ページのアイコンと会話ページのアイコンが並んぶようにするのも良いかもしれません(利用者ページ関連/設定関連という区分けをイメージ)。
  4. 最後に自由記述式でご意見、提案、質問をお書きください。
    ...(現行のものもそうですが)通知のアイコンが何を表すものなのかが分かりにくく感じています。また、(上スクロール/マウスオーバーで表示される)ナビゲーションの利用者個人設定関連(胸像アイコン)と編集閲覧関連との間に何らかの区切りデザイン(背景色の区別や|を入れるなど)があるとより直感的になると思います。

開発お疲れ様です。新しいインターフェイスの完成を楽しみにしております。

اسم المستخدم:omda4wady[edit]

There is an issue regarding search box location on Arabic GUI

Nom d’utilisateur : gerardgiraud[edit]

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes.
  • Quelles sont vos premières impressions ?
  • Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ?
    • L'infobox est au centre et non sur le côté droit
    • L'entête de l'article apparait après l'infobox ce qui est un fausse bonne idée selon moi
    • Les modèles en bas de la page ne sont pas "rétractables" donc prennent beaucoup d'espace dans l'écran
    • Pas de galeries : les images sont affichées l'une à la suite de l'autre ce qui est moins confortable pour l'œil.
    • Il y a du vide sur le côté gauche de l'écran.
    • Pas de sommaire.
  • vous semble pratique ?
  • particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
  1. Je ne trouve pas de fonction originale par rapport à l'ancienne ergonomie.
  2. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Pas de différence avec l'ergonomie habituelle si ce n'est cette sensation de "vide" ou de "sobriété" du fait des espaces à gauche et à droite de la page.
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      La fenêtre recherche située en haut de l'écran
      Les paramètres en haut à droite
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
      ...
  3. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    L'onglet est au même endroit, donc aucun problème pour y accéder.
  4. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.
    1- Y aura-t-il dans l'avenir possibilité de disposer d'un "kit" de fonctionnalités permettant de transformer l'écran de modification du code en un véritable éditeur où l'on puisse, par exemple, faire des recherches / modifications en série (exemple : remplacer en série "toto" par "tata") ? J'ai essayé via les paramètres d'utiliser les fonctions d'éditions avancées mais je n'ai pas été convaincu du résultat (notamment les couleurs qui envahissaient l'écran) et suis revenu à l'ergonomie standard. Pour les modifications en série, j'utilise désormais mon éditeur LibreOffice.
    2- Pourra-t-on avoir possibilité de purger certaines versions inutiles (par exemples celles où l'on ne modifie qu'une simple faute d'orthographe ou de signe de ponctuation) ? Cela permettrait de décharger les serveurs d'une version complète d'une page qui ne diffère de la précédente que d'une simple virgule ?

Merci de vos travaux indispensables pour la vie de cette encyclopédie que nous adorons tous et moi-même en particulier. Gerardgiraud (talk) 06:24, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:Pa2chant.bis[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    I looked french and english pages. It is just awful. Pour la page en français, gros problèmes d'affichage (les mêmes que mentionnés par TED) : infobox à gauche, texte en dessous, photos isolées à gauche avec du blanc en regard.
    Il manque le sommaire, qui est essentiel pourtant.
    Il y a une énorme régression de l'affichage (mentionnée par plusieurs autres utilisateurs dont je n'avais jamais compris le problème, mais là je comprends) :
    • sur la page en français, le nombre de caractère par ligne est fixe. Si on dézoome pour afficher plus de texte à l'écran, il y a simplement des espaces vides à droite et à gauche du texte.
    • The same for english page
    Avec un zoom à 150 %, l'icone d'accès aux autres versions linguistiques disparaît.
    Le bandeau de navigation à gauche a disparu : impossible de voir d'un seul coup d'oeil quelles autres versions linguistiques existent, ni lesquelles sont en ADQ. Impossible de trouver le lien vers wikidata.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    Oui, j'ai remarqué, la barre de recherche apparaît. C'est prodigieusement agaçant, lorsqu'on souhaite naviguer rapidement vers d'autres pages : au lieu de saisir simplement le nom de la page recherchée, il faut se livrer à la manipulation de descendre et remonter. De plus l'affichage est quelquefois fugace et il faut parfois s'y prendre à plusieurs reprises pour conserver l'affichage de la barre de recherche.
    Quelquefois, l'affichage du niveau 1 de section apparaît, mais de façon aléatoire (je viens d'essayer d'y accéder de nouveau à 3 reprises, sans succès). L'affichage du niveau 1 de la section pourrait avantageusement être remplacé par un affichage du sommaire, avec le nuveau sur lequel on se trouve.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Sans scroller vers le haut de la page, juste en déplaçant le pointeur vers le haut, on accède aux fonctions de modifications (très bien), d'historique et PDD. Et on accède aussi à la barre de recherche, mais la différence entre scroll et pointeur n'est pas très intuitive.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      wikidata element, featured articles
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Oui, mais rien de mieux qu'avant
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    PLEASE, DON'T IMPLEMENT THIS VERSION : 1 good point, too many bad points. --Pa2chant.bis (talk) 06:38, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Käyttäjänimi: Stryn[edit]

  1. Katso hetkinen ympärillesi, vierittele sivua ylös ja alas ja tarkastele muutamaa eri sivua. Mitkä ovat ensivaikutelmasi? Huomaatko mitään hämmentävää? Kätevää? Erityisen mielenkiintoista? (Muista, että koska tämä on prototyyppi, osa linkeistä ei oikeasti toimi, ja saatat törmätä muihinkin bugeihin ja oikkuihin.)
    A lot of ugly white space on both sides. I can't open the left pane if I'm not in top.
  2. Vieritä sivua ensin hitaasti alaspäin. Vieritä sitten sivua hieman takaisin ylöspäin. Mitä tapahtuu? Mitä mieltä olet tästä ominaisuudesta?
    It's better if you just completely remove the old history, edit etc. buttons if they are in this new header.
    1. Ovatko ominaisuudet sinulle hyödyllisiä? Onko jokin ominaisuuksista erityisen hyödyllinen lukemiseen tai muokkaamiseen?
      Easier to start editing the page if you're not in top.
    2. Onko jokin ​​ominaisuus, jota haluaisit käyttää, mutta ei sisälly uudistettuun ylälaitaan?
      -
  3. Vieritä sivu nyt niin ylös kuin mahdollista. Kuvittele olevasi menossa keskustelusivullesi. Saatko selville, miten se tehdään? Mitä mieltä olet tästä kokemuksesta?
    Needs one extra click to find out, why not make it open while hovering?
  4. Kerrothan lopuksi vielä muita viimeisiä ajatuksiasi, ideoitasi tai kysymyksiäsi prototyypistä.
    You should reduce white space, at least make some settings to modify this for active users.

Username: Jayro79[edit]

  1. Prenditi un minuto per dare un'occhiata, andare su e giù per la pagina, guardare un po' di pagine. Quali sono le tue impressioni iniziali? C'è qualcosa che trovi confuso? Conveniente? Particolarmente interessante? (Ricorda che dato che questo è un prototipo la maggioranza dei link potrebbero non funzionare e può capitare di incontrare altri bug o difetti).
    Il font è migliore del precedente, più nitido e leggibile a mio parere. Il box template invece non va: dovendo raccogliere i dati ed accompagnare la lettura era molto più utile sul lato destro della pagina come in precedenza. Il menù a tendina è brutto esteticamentee non è raggiungibile scorrendo la pagina. Inoltre la pagina è troppo bianca.
  2. Scorri lentamente verso il basso la pagina. Poi torna un po' in su. Cosa hai notato? Come valuti questa tua esperienza?
    Non ci sono grandi differenze con la versione precedente, se non che la pagina è più stretta e diventa meno leggibile, soprattutto perché le immagini sono più invasive.
    1. Le funzionalità che hai visto qui ti sono utili? Ci sono altre funzionalità a cui sarebbe particolarmente utile accedere mentre stai leggendo o editando?
      Più facile iniziare a modificare mentre si legge.
    2. Ci sono funzionalità che ti piacerebbe avere accessibili ma non sono presenti nella nuova header?
      No
  3. Ora scorri fino all'inizio della pagina. Immagina di voler passare alla tua pagina di discussione. Come pensi che si possa fare? Che ne pensi di questa esperienza?
    Potrebbe essere più semplice se cliccando sul nome si venisse reindirizzati direttamente alla propria pagina.
  4. Se hai idee, commenti o domande finali, aggiungili.
    Il problema principale a mio avviso è la gestione dello spazio della pagina. I bordi bianchi sono troppo larghi, la lettura ne risente sopratutto per le pagine più lunghe. Anche il menù principale non riempie a sufficienza lo spazio, mentre il box template è mal posizionato.

Ferdi2005[edit]

  1. Prenditi un minuto per dare un'occhiata, andare su e giù per la pagina, guardare un po' di pagine. Quali sono le tue impressioni iniziali? C'è qualcosa che trovi confuso? Conveniente? Particolarmente interessante? (Ricorda che dato che questo è un prototipo la maggioranza dei link potrebbero non funzionare e può capitare di incontrare altri bug o difetti).
    Mi pare che non sia una proposta bellissima, anzi... È molto confusa, utilizza una minima parte dello spazio che potrebbe utilizzare: su uno schermo intero il sistema del menu hamburger che collassa è completamente inutile, dato che comunque ci sono dele bande bianche laterali che potrebbero essere utilizzate per il contenuto della voce ma non lo sono. L'infobox dovrebbe stare a destra, come al solito, almeno a dimensione full-screen, così invece si lascia spazio inutilizzato e si dà meno rilevanza al contenuto della voce. Sicuramente è un grandissimo peggioramento rispetto alla situazione attuale.
  2. Scorri lentamente verso il basso la pagina. Poi torna un po' in su. Cosa hai notato? Come valuti questa tua esperienza?
    C'è una piccola navbar che appare quando si va in alto. Questa è una piccola chicca carina, l'unica cosa passabile di questo prototipo.
    1. Le funzionalità che hai visto qui ti sono utili? Ci sono altre funzionalità a cui sarebbe particolarmente utile accedere mentre stai leggendo o editando?
      Sembrano abbastanza utili, in realtà c'è un gadget che fa la stessa cosa su Wikipedia in italiano rendendo fisso l'header della voce, ma in realtà pur avendolo attivo torno sempre sopra per fare tutte le operazioni. Penso sia una questione di abitudine.
    2. Ci sono funzionalità che ti piacerebbe avere accessibili ma non sono presenti nella nuova header?
      Mi pare molto completa, quindi no.
  3. Ora scorri fino all'inizio della pagina. Immagina di voler passare alla tua pagina di discussione utente. Come pensi che si possa fare? Che ne pensi di questa esperienza?
    C'è il menu coi tre pallini, posso cliccare lì e poi su talk.
  4. Se hai idee, commenti o domande finali, aggiungile.
    Meglio aggiungere la nuova navbar e lasciare stare tutto il resto... C'è un piccolo problema: la navbar che appare quando scorro giù e poi su sparisce quando vi avvicino il mouse, richiedendo un ulteriore passaggio per poter fare qualcosa.

Logged in[edit]

I follow a link to this and post a comment and am not logged in. a) why send me to a link where SUL doesn't work? b) why not clearly warn about this? c) yes, there was a warning, but that wasn't clear enough. 2001:984:F34D:1:5DB0:980B:6CB8:A92F 10:18, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

نام کاربری:ahangarha[edit]

  1. یک دقیقه وقت گذاشته و کل صفحه را نگاه کنید، آن را بالا و پایین کنید و به صفحه‌های دیگر نگاه کنید. برداشت اولیه شما چیست؟ چیز گیج‌کننده‌ای پیدا کرده‌اید؟ آیا نمایش صفحه مناسب است؟ جالب است؟ (به یاد داشته باشید که در نمونه اولیه بسیاری از پیوندها کار نخواهند کرد، و احتمالا به مشکلاتی برخورد خواهید کرد.)
    I like to see there is less distraction and I can focus on reading the article itself.
  2. به آرامی در صفحه پایین روید (از نوار لغزان استفاده کنید). حالا دوباره کمی به بالا برگردید. متوجه چه چیزی شدید؟ نظرتان راجع به این تجربه چیست؟
    The menu on top is good.
    1. آیا ویژگی‌هایی که در اینجا دیدید برایتان مفید هستند؟ آیا ویژگی خاص دیگری هست که بتواند برای خواندن یا ویرایش صفحه مفید باشد؟
      I think so. I just need to get used to it. I think it is good.
    2. آیا ویژگی‌هایی وجود دارند که دوست دارید از طریق سرآیند صفحه در دسترس باشند اما نیستند؟
      Nothing in my mind now.
  3. حال به بالای صفحه برگردید. فرض کنید که می‌خواهید به صفحهٔ بحث خودتان بروید. آیا می‌توانید راهش را پیدا کنید؟ نظرتان راجع به این تجربه چیست؟
    I don't feel any significant differnce
  4. اگر ایده یا پرسش نهایی دیگری دارید لطفاً آن را وارد کنید.
    ...

Uživatelské jméno:MKBEN[edit]

  1. Na chvíli se rozhlížejte, posunujte stránku nahoru a dolů, zkuste více různých stránek. Jaké jsou vaše prvotní dojmy? Je zde něco matoucího? Nebo praktického? Obzvlášt zajímavého? (Mějte na paměti, že jde o prototyp, kde většina odkazů ve skutečnosti nefunguje, a můžete narazit i na další chyby nebo jiné výstřednosti.)
    Lepší nepřítelem dobrého... Na větších monitorech zrůdné plýtvání místem
  2. Pomalu posunujte stránku dolů. Nyní zase trochu nahoru. Co pozorujete? Co si o tom myslíte?
    Samoúčelné hrátky s javascriptem.
    1. Jsou předváděné funkce pro vás užitečné? Jsou zde nějaké funkce, ke kterým je obzvlášť užitečné mít během čtení a editace přístup?
      Ne.
    2. Jsou zde nějaké funkce, ke kterým byste chtěli mít přístup a nové nadpisy je nenabízejí?
      Ne
  3. Nyní posuňte stránku úplně nahoru. Představte si, že chcete navštívit svoji diskusní stránku. Přijdete na to, jak to provést? Jak to na vás působí?
    Proboha, proč tak nelogicky?
  4. Přidejte prosím jakékoliv vaše úvahy, nápady nebo otázky.
    ...

نام کاربری:علیرضا خدارحمی[edit]

  1. یک دقیقه وقت گذاشته و کل صفحه را نگاه کنید، آن را بالا و پایین کنید و به صفحه‌های دیگر نگاه کنید. برداشت اولیه شما چیست؟ چیز گیج‌کننده‌ای پیدا کرده‌اید؟ آیا نمایش صفحه مناسب است؟ جالب است؟ (به یاد داشته باشید که در نمونه اولیه بسیاری از پیوندها کار نخواهند کرد، و احتمالا به مشکلاتی برخورد خواهید کرد.)
    ...
  2. به آرامی در صفحه پایین روید (از نوار لغزان استفاده کنید). حالا دوباره کمی به بالا برگردید. متوجه چه چیزی شدید؟ نظرتان راجع به این تجربه چیست؟
    ...
    1. آیا ویژگی‌هایی که در اینجا دیدید برایتان مفید هستند؟ آیا ویژگی خاص دیگری هست که بتواند برای خواندن یا ویرایش صفحه مفید باشد؟
      ...
    2. آیا ویژگی‌هایی وجود دارند که دوست دارید از طریق سرآیند صفحه در دسترس باشند اما نیستند؟
      ...
  3. حال به بالای صفحه برگردید. فرض کنید که می‌خواهید به صفحهٔ بحث خودتان بروید. آیا می‌توانید راهش را پیدا کنید؟ نظرتان راجع به این تجربه چیست؟
    ...
  4. اگر ایده یا پرسش نهایی دیگری دارید لطفاً آن را وارد کنید.
    ...

Имя участника: Ivan-r[edit]

  1. Уделите минуту тому, чтобы осмотреться, пролистайте страницу вверх и вниз, посмотрите несколько различных страниц. Какие у вас первые впечатления? Вас что-нибудь смущает? Вам удобно? Вы находите что-нибудь сбивающим с толку? Удобным? Особенно интересным? (Имейте в виду, что это прототип, в котором некоторые ссылки могут не работать, и в котором вам могут встретиться другие ошибки или странности.)
    Идеи странные. Выглдяит так, как будто меняли «хоть на что-нибудь». Слишком много JS. Это будет всегда иметь проблемы с использованием. Иконки выглядят чрезмерно чуждо. Общий стиль оформления по умолчанию стал ещё ярче, и это чрезмерно слепит. Как боковая панель скачет, разговор отдельный. Это не выглядит как что-то реализованное профессиональным разработчиком. Хотя идея сворачивать маловостребованные ссылки всё же хорошая.
  2. Медленно прокрутите страницу вниз. Теперь прокрутите немного назад. Что вы заметили? Что вы думаете об этом опыте?
    Интересно, хорошо задумано. Нужна полировка.
    1. Полезны ли вам показанные здесь функции? Существуют ли какие-либо функции, к которым особенно полезно иметь доступ во время чтения или редактирования?
      Раз уж взялись такое делать, то сделали бы плавающее оглавление. Вот это было бы полезно. А избавлять от слов в угоду значкам — плохо (нужно дополнять, а не заменять).
    2. Есть ли какие-либо функции, к которым вы хотели бы получить доступ, которые недоступны в новой шапке сайта?
      Функция возврата к старой шапке.
  3. Теперь прокрутите назад до самого верха страницы. Представьте, что вы хотели бы перейти на свою страницу обсуждения. Можете ли вы понять, как это сделать? Что вы думаете об этом опыте?
    Неудачно. Очень. Я догадался лишь из-за наличия сходного опыта в другом проекте.
  4. Завершая свой отзыв, добавьте, пожалуйста, любые мысли, идеи или вопросы.
    Может всё таки Timeless?

Ivan-r (talk) 13:35, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Nome de utilizador:GoEThe[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)

The only thing I found a bit confusing was that the main text would jump when collapsing the left sidebar. I enjoyed the reading experience, with the collapsing top bar following the reader and the title / section title showing up on there. I think it would probably be useful if at least those two (and perhaps the search icon) would remain visible at all times. I think the whole top bar looks much more functional with most of the icons hidden away. Would it be possible to have some of the icons always visible through some user-defined preference? What will happen when clicking on the "W" in the floating top-bar? Show the main page or show the left sidebar? I think either could be confusing if not clearly marked.

  1. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?

As I mentioned above, I like the look of the top bar, and the floating bar with the title / section title. Not sure if I like the buttons disappearing, perhaps they should be always visible.

  1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?

I think these features are mostly useful for reading. It does allow you to focus on the text when editing, while features are still available at a click.

  1. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?

Like I mentioned before, I think it would be useful to have a user preference setting to allow fixing a few buttons on the top bar.

  1. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?

Not sure if it is clear that link is to your personal talk page or the article talk page.

  1. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.

Nom d’utilisateur :Golmore[edit]

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
    L'Infobox est mal placée, son titre aussi. Elle n'a plus de bords, comme sur mobile, ce qui enlève un peu de son côté box. La police a été uniformisée avec l'interface mobile. La police utilisée dans le prototype (identique à celle de la version mobile) est plus agréable que celle utilisée pour les appareils sous Windows, mais pas plus que celle pour Mac. Les aperçus d'articles ont été remplacés par des infobulles. Les sous-sections ne sont plus soulignées, le sommaire a été supprimé. Il pourrait être replié par défaut, mais le supprimer ne fait que retirer une fonctionnalité utile sans apporter de bénéfices. Les galeries ne s'affichent plus correctement. Des bandeaux article détaillé, il ne reste plus que le texte, sans bande gris clair, sans icône de loupe. Certains modèles ne s'affichent pas correctement, comme. Les bandeaux en haut de page (comme {{à recycler}} en haut de cette page) n'affichent plus de bords, mais surtout, ils n'ont plus de couleurs, qui spécifient le niveau de gravité du problème et attirent l'attention dessus. Les palettes en bas de page (comme sur cette page) ne s'affichent plus correctement, elles transforment les caractères "•" en puces de retour à la ligne. Elles ne sont plus repliables. Les bandeaux de portail en bas de page ne s'affichent pas correctement non plus. Les catégories ne sont plus affichées. Actuellement, elles sont déjà très peu utilisés par les lecteurs, il faudrait les mettre en valeur, peut-être en haut de page ou sur le côté. Les pages de catégorie (comme celle-ci) n'affichent que le contenu de la page wiki, et plus les pages qui y sont catégorisées et les liens vers Petscan, l'arborescence, etc. La barre de recherche pourrait être décalée vers la droite, car, avec ce prototype, il y a un grand vide entre la recherche et les notifications.
  2. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Le menu utilisateur apparaît en haut à droite, ainsi qu'un favicon, à gauche, qui semble inutile, puisqu'il ne se passe rien quand on clique ou qu'on passe la souris dessus. Je pense qu'il devrait être remplacé par le logo du wiki et qu'il devrait amener vers la page d'accueil quand on clique dessus. Quand on remonte la souris, un icône pour la boîte de recherche, le titre de la page (ainsi qu'un signe | suivi du titre de la section dans laquelle on se situe), des liens vers la page de discussion, la modification, l'historique et les liens interlangues apparaissent. C'est une fonctionnalité utile, mais pourquoi ne pas faire apparaître les éléments que je viens de citer dés que l'utilisateur fait défiler la page, sans avoir besoin de faire remonter la souris ? De plus, quand on n'est pas en haut de la page, on ne peut pas déplier le menu de gauche.
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      Elles ne me sont pas utiles, car j'utilise les raccourcis clavier.
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
      Je ne sais pas, puisque les gadgets et autres scripts que j'utilise ne s'appliquent pas dans le prototype ? Mais est-ce que les gadgets du type de seront encore disponibles avec cet interface ? Ou encore ceux comme mw:XTools/ArticleInfo.js ou l' ?
  3. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    Oui, j'y arrive, c'est très facile. Je ne comprends l'intérêt ni des liens bêta et gadgets, qui ne constituent qu'une sous-partie des préférences (Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-beta pour les fonctionnalités bêta, par exemple), ni de l'horloge analogique, qui n'est pas mise à jour en temps réel, alors qu'il existe des gadgets qui affichent une horloge mise à jour toutes les secondes sans avoir à recharger ou purger la page.
  4. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.
    Est-ce que les gadgets du type de seront encore disponibles avec cet interface ? Ou encore ceux comme mw:XTools/ArticleInfo.js ou l'éditeur de description courte ? Je pense que, comme pour la version récente de Vector, cette interface ne devrait, dans un premier temps, être activé que de manière optionnelle par les utilisateurs dans les préférences.

Username: Tommy Kronkvist[edit]

Testing. Looks fine to me.
Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 16:08, 5 April 2021 (UTC).

Uživatelské jméno:JAn Dudík[edit]

  1. Na chvíli se rozhlížejte, posunujte stránku nahoru a dolů, zkuste více různých stránek. Jaké jsou vaše prvotní dojmy? Je zde něco matoucího? Nebo praktického? Obzvlášt zajímavého? (Mějte na paměti, že jde o prototyp, kde většina odkazů ve skutečnosti nefunguje, a můžete narazit i na další chyby nebo jiné výstřednosti.)
    Zbytečně úzké. Ve vzhledu monobook potřebuji 8x zascrollovat, zde 15x abych se dostal dolů.
  2. Pomalu posunujte stránku dolů. Nyní zase trochu nahoru. Co pozorujete? Co si o tom myslíte?
    Navigace nahoře je docela fajn, uvítal bych, aby šlo zobrazit celý obsah.
    1. Jsou předváděné funkce pro vás užitečné? Jsou zde nějaké funkce, ke kterým je obzvlášť užitečné mít během čtení a editace přístup?
      Sbalení uživatelského menu pod jednu ikonu je na jednu stranu fajn, na druhou se tím více skryje gadget hodin a přístup na sledované stránky.
    2. Jsou zde nějaké funkce, ke kterým byste chtěli mít přístup a nové nadpisy je nenabízejí?
      chybí polovina věcí z levého menu, které někteří editoři často používají. Až po delší chvíli jsem přišel na to, že se dá sloupec zobrazit a skrýt. Ovšem jen v případě, že jsem úplně nahoře. Uvítal bych dostupnost menu kdykoliv, když už je horní lišta plovoucí.
    1. Část editorů nikdy nepřijala sbalené mezijazykové odkazy a existují gadgety, které je ukazují v původní formě. Tento vzhled jim opět nutí podobu, která jim není příjemná.
  1. Nyní posuňte stránku úplně nahoru. Představte si, že chcete navštívit svoji diskusní stránku. Přijdete na to, jak to provést? Jak to na vás působí?
    Dá se, horší je skrytí odkazů na sledované stránky.
  2. Přidejte prosím jakékoliv vaše úvahy, nápady nebo otázky.
    Doufám, že tento vzhled bude jen volitelný, monobook mi stále přijde nejlepší pro editory a správce (dostupné přesouvání a mazání bez nutnosti rozbalování), klasický vector pak přehlednější.

Nazwa użytkownika:Nux[edit]

  1. Poświęć minutę, żeby rozejrzeć się po stronie. Przewiń stronę w górę i w dół, spójrz na kilka artykułów. Jakie masz pierwsze wrażenie? Czy coś jest niejasne lub mylące? Wygodne? Szczególnie ciekawe? (Pamiętaj, że to tylko prototyp i niektóre linki mogą nie działać, a ponadto możesz zauważyć inne błędy czy niedociągnięcia).
    Strona jest pusta. W złym sensie. Nie mam pod ręką moich narzędzi.
    Nic nie jest wyrównane. Logo wystaje nad W w "WikipediA". Wyszukiwarka jest poniżej "A". Elementy z prawej również nie są w linii wyszukiwarki. Wiele osób pewnie tego nie zauważy świadomie, ale moim zdaniem to jest taka rzecz, które psuje to ogólne wrażenie dla wszystkich (nawet jeśli nieświadomie).
    Infoboks jest zbyt szeroki (artykuł Księżyc). O wiele szerszy niż w oryginale.
  2. Przewiń stronę powoli w dół. Następnie przewiń odrobinę do góry. Co zauważasz? Co o tym myślisz?
    Tollbar przypięty na górze fajny. Ale wolałbym mieć możliwość przypięcia go na stałe (żeby był widoczny przy przewijaniu w dół). Albo żeby przynajmniej się nie chowało zaraz po zjechaniu myszką (mouseout).
    "W" z tego paska jest jakoś na w połowie bocznego paska (zamiast wyrównane całkiem do lewej). A ikonka menu użytkownika jest wyrówna całkiem do prawej (tak jak powinna). To mi się nie podoba zdecydowanie (powinno być wyrównane konsekwentnie, czyli rozciągnięte na całą stronę).
    1. Czy widoczne funkcje są dla Ciebie użyteczne? Czy są funkcje, do których chcesz mieć szczególnie łatwy dostęp, czytając lub edytując?
      Brakuje mi watch/uwatch star.
      Nie ma możliwości pokazania sidebar. Zwłaszcza elementów dotyczących danej strony (Tools/Narzędzia, Eksport).
    2. Czy są jakieś funkcje, z których chcesz korzystać, których nie widzisz w nowym pasku górnym?
      j/w
  3. Przewiń na samą górę strony. Wyobraź sobie, że chcesz przejść na swoją stronę dyskusji. Czy wiesz, jak to zrobić? Co myślisz o tym sposobie?
    Nie jestem pewien, bo nie działają przyciski z prawej... Ale domyślam się, że przez menu musiałbym wchodzić.
    Nie, nie podoba mi się takie zwijanie. Mam nadzieję, że będzie opcja by tego nie robić.
    Nie podoba mi się również ikonizacja wszystkiego. Do pory nie wiem co ma przedstawiać prawie kwadratowa ikonka wyglądająca trochę jak iPhone. Wolałbym, żeby ikonki były tylko do podstawowych rzeczy.
  4. Dodaj inne końcowe przemyślenia, pomysły lub pytania.
    Wyciągnięcie zmiany języków uważam za dobry krok. Może osobne menu do narzędzi artykułu by się przydało (linkujące, wkład użytkownika dla stron użytkowników itp). Może w ramach obecnego menu "więcej", w którym jest teraz tylko funkcja "Przenieś".
    Ogólnie jestem przeciwny domyślnym ukrywaniu przydatnych linków. To jest moim zdaniem fałszywe poczucie porządku (zamiatanie pod dywan, a nie sprzątanie). Natomiast do czytania artykułów fajnie by było mieć jakiś tryb skupienia na treści. Ukrycia funkcji zbędnych przy czytaniu.
    Sidebar obawiam się, że w tej wersji kompletnie nie działa jak dla mnie. Może to nie było przedmiotem tych testów, nie wiem... Zawijanie tekstu nie działa. Teksty są ucięte (wersja polska). Pojawia się jakiś dziwny scroll. Sidebar wysuwa się też nie wiadomo z czego (z jakieś pustej przestrzeni obok artykułu). I też nie wiem do czego to jest wyrównane, bo na pewno nie do przycisku, który wysuwa sidebar. Ani do brzegu strony (jak można by się spodziewać). Ani do brzegu artykułu.

Yomomo[edit]

In most cases I m using the timeless skin, which has some similarities with your proposal. Anyway. To my opinion:

  • the bar on the top should always be there and not vanish.
  • you could just make an arrow (on the right bottom corner) that leads you always to top.
  • the bar that appears when I scroll up looks nice. So it could stay on top and just replace the previous form for editing discussion and so on. The languages could stay in the bar on top, next to the search field.
  • the article could have the whole width... and bars can appear when needed, so I find it a good idea, when the bars are collapsible, and if we do this, the text can have the whole width.

Username:Глюкавый[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting?(Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    The content takes a half of my laptop screen, another half of the screen is blank. This is quite confusing unlike usual wikipedia experience. Why wasting half of a space?
    The French version of the article has a very weird layout, but maybe it is in the prototype only (I hope). The info bar is not top-right fixed, but is left-adjusted and moves the text below. Gallery images are just lists.
    The top bar with all the links including language seems convenient, but it is totally irrational to use vertical space instead of sidebars, leaving lots of space on both sides.
    Where is the table of contents?
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    That's reasonable and convenient. Even more so thanks to the fact that the header is available on mouse hover with even no need to scroll.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      The repertoire of features there is just as it should be.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      None
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    It is unexpected that clicking a username and its icon does not do anything. The talk page would be appropriate there (or a personal page).
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    Please, leave a way to use the full width of the screen. Scrolling is waaaaay more annoying than reading long lines.

Username: Wammes Waggel[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    Initial impressions:
    1. There is no table of contents (at least I cannot find it)
    2. Categories are nowhere to be found either. This has been SO aggravating to me on the Wikipedia Android app. And now they will disappear on the desktop as well?
    3. To view the menu on the left, I have to press the hamburger button. The menu then appears on a bit of screen that was empty. So why not show it in the first place? Oh wait, that's probably useful on a very narrow screen (on a smartphone); well on a desktop it is a nuisance.
    4. only the center of the screen is used, so a large amount of my screen is unused and wasted; again, this is nice for a smartphone, not a desktop (see screenshot below)
    5. This seems to be a website that is created for mobile (small, tall, narrow screens)
    6. on a multi-screen window (extended to span both my displays) the new "floating" menu appears exactly in the middle of the right hand display, not in the middle of the window. (see screenshot below)
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    I notice the letter "W" in a square white box hovering near the top of the window. Its use is unclear (looking more closely later show a mysterious "head" icon at top left of the window). More scrolling shows the section title next to the "W". Only after some more time I noticed the extra icons at the far left, outside the white area of the screen.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      The features shown are useful to me, however the functionality was already there and accessing them is far less easy. Just keeping them in a non-scrolling part of the window would be more useful than this new setup.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      The table of contents would be nice to have on hand. That is very well done in the Android app.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    There is a chat icon with "talk" hover text, which suggests some sort of chat function. I suppose that is the link to the talk page. If so, it's quite misleading: it a written "talk" page, not a chat window. For languages that don't call it a talk page (but e.g. a "discussion page" - not related to talking) this chat icon would be even worse.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    1. A lot of newfangled stuff that doubtlessly will use more resources than the old setup, making the pages slow and sluggish, certainly on older hardware, discouraging the use of Wikipedia on older hardware.
    2. Essential elements are missing: table of contents and categories. I get the impression that there is a desire to get rid of categories altogether as they are invisible in the android app as well.
    3. I suggest to test the new setup on a full-screen window on a large display like the LG 86BH5C (extreme aspect ration 32:5) or on a multi-screen display. I predict it will be unsatisfactory.

Example screenshot of a window this is very wide (excessively so, just to make the point): Moon page screenshot.jpg Wammes Waggel (talk) 21:19, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:Роман Рябенко[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    The first thing I notice is that the left bar hidden. I don't find the left bar intrusive. When it's hidden, I get empty space instead, which gives no benefit to me. I use items from the menu from time to time. The one I keep in mind right now is the "Wikidata item", possibly the link to Commons too. With the sidebar hidden, I will have to open it to check even just to learn whether the Wikidata item exists.
    Another idea is that the table of contents would fit nicely to the left on a long articles like this.
    Next thing I noticed are the "Watchlist" and "Contributions" links hidden behind a drop-down menu. I use them all the time to check on how my latest edits were accepted. I expect those items to be right in front of me for easy access.
    I visited the article "Natural satellite". There, in the section "Natural satellites of the Solar System", is a broad table. On a MacBook Air, the table is cut on the right side and cannot be scrolled horizontally.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    The experience of the top bar appearing is quite smooth. The reminder of the name of the section immediately looks cool. It seemed an eye-catching but unnecessary decoration for some time, but then I noticed that, when I scroll up for a particular section, I can see that I reached it before I reach the beginning of the section, which might be useful during scrolling up.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      It's nice to see the shortcuts for the talks page, the history, and the language version to follow me. It's often that I want to go to them in the middle of the page, so I often have to scroll up for them. As to the editing links: they are unnecessary in the top toolbar as we already have them in the text and can easily switch between editors, once the editing mode is opened.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      I would like to have easy access to the table of contents somehow for easy navigation. It's surprising that the hamburger menu to the left is not available when I scroll, so I still have to scroll up to access "Wikidata item". I see my account icon following me down the page: I cannot see whether I can test it, but it would be nice if it could show me if I have notifications. Having access to bookmark the article or check whether it is bookmark while in the middle of the article should also be useful.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    I see the talk page under my account icon. No problem to reach. I usually get there from a notification anyway.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    It appears to be a positive design change because it can cut scrolling time, but I would like the space to the left be used during scrolling for navigation in the article. Converging the mobile and desktop interface, if possible at all, might also be a good idea for consistency. I tried to open the page while blocking JavaScript, but it returns just an empty page. This is not the case with the current interface which allows for browsers without JavaScript support. The final design should allow for a functional access without JavaScript, may be as a backup solution.--Роман Рябенко (talk) 21:51, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:Brugna[edit]

Honestly, I don't like. It seems a mobile oriented version. Why an user should press a button to display information that can be fixed in a 16:9 standard display? And I think that the main text of articles is too narrow, this is what I dislike of the french version of Wikipedia

Username:Csisc[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    The upper part is interesting as it makes navigation much easier. However, this can generate problems to people from the Global South having poor internet connection with a limited speed.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    The upper part reappears. This is interesting as you do not have to go to the top of the Wikipedia page to access history records.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Yes, the services are useful.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      Theklan has proposed to move the "In other projects" part in the left side to the header so that readers can clearly see the other Wikimedia projects and access to them for curiosity. They can be featured as icons.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    This is not difficult. The header is intuitive.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    The bottom of the page with the license information and credit to MediaWiki and WMF is removed from the Wikipedia interface. It will be interesting to solve this matter.

User:Laurent Glaviano 2[edit]

No, I don't want to touch our Wikipédia ! This prototype is not good for me!! Help!! Au secours!! I am not easy in english and I continue in french, thank you for your attention. NON, NON, SURTOUT PAS!! Je trouve cette nouvelle présentation CATASTROPHIQUE!!! Ce serait même une MUTILATION de l'accessibilité des contenus de l'encyclopédie, et il n'y a aucun gain dans le visuel et ni pour la lisibilité. En faire la présentation par défaut de l'encyclopédie serait une catastrophe et un scandale.

Les justifications pour opérer ce changement sont très douteuses : il n'y a pas besoin d'unifier les visuels des différents projets wikimedia (qui se ressemblent déjà pas mal), et l'identité visuelle d'une encyclopédie peut permettre de la repérer plus vite, elle a une grande importance pour l'expérience de lecture, il faut donc éviter de la modifier inconsidérément car cela déstabilise les lecteurs. Et ce n'est pas parcequ'une présentation est plus "à la mode", qu'elle estforcément meilleure. Il vaudrait mieux travailler à unifier les wikisyntaxes diverses, ce qui permettrait de contribuer plus facilement en passant de Wikipédia au Wiktionnaire ou à Commons ou à Wikisources. Tout en conservant leurs caractéristiques visuelles distinctes et différenciantes, ce qui permet de les identifier d'un seul coup d'oeil.

Défauts principaux du prototype :

  1. Too small : la police de caractère est trop petite et trop pâle, elle est presque ILLISIBLE.
  2. Lost Space/Place perdue : l'infobox est à gauche sous le titre, et il y a donc une place verticale perdue considérable. Et l'information sur la page est trop pauvre d'emblée.
  3. Poor and more confusion : je ne trouve pas la nouvelle présentation plus aérée. Je la trouve surtout plus pauvre, et même au contraire plus confuse.
  4. Disappearence of summary : on n'accède que trop tard et trop loin au résumé introductif. Avoir l'infobox à droite et le résumé introductif en regard est très important pour opérer des rapprochements, au moins lors de la lecture sur ordinateur.
  5. Il n'y a plus de sommaire qui permet d'avoir une vue d'ensemble du plan de l'article et d'accéder directement à la section qui nous intéresse.
  6. Etc.

En résumé, la version classique du même article que j'ai consultée en vis à vis est bien meilleure pour une consultation sur ordinateur. Quant à la consultation sur smartphone, elle est déjà très "verticalisée" (car l'écran est plus allongé et souvent utilisé verticalement), et l'infobox y précède déjà le résumé introductif (ce qui n'est pas forcément pertinent), et le sommaire y est déjà réduit aux seuls titres des sections principales, sans vue d'ensemble du plan de l'article. Ce qui fait d'ailleurs que la consultation sur smartphone est beaucoup plus pauvre que la consultation sur ordinateur. Il faut éviter d'importer les défauts du smartphone sur l'ordinateur!!!

IT'S NOT BETTER!!! Donc avec la nouvelle présentation ON NE GAGNE RIEN ET ON PERD BEAUCOUP! S.O.S.!!! Et surtout : ne pas l'imposer à tout le monde par défaut.
NE CHANGEZ RIEN! DON'T CHANGE, PLEASE! Merci de votre attention.

Utilisateur:Laurent Glaviano (sur Wikipédia en français).--Laurent Glaviano 2 (talk) 23:38, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Nome utente: BandiniRaffaele2[edit]

  • Prenditi un minuto per dare un'occhiata, andare su e giù per la pagina, guardare un po' di pagine. Quali sono le tue impressioni iniziali? C'è qualcosa che trovi confuso? Conveniente? Particolarmente interessante? (Ricorda che dato che questo è un prototipo la maggioranza dei link potrebbero non funzionare e può capitare di incontrare altri bug o difetti).

È pessimo.

  • Scorri lentamente verso il basso la pagina. Poi torna un po' in su. Cosa hai notato? Come valuti questa tua esperienza?

È inutile.

  1. Le funzionalità che hai visto qui ti sono utili? Ci sono altre funzionalità a cui sarebbe particolarmente utile accedere mentre stai leggendo o editando?

No.

  1. Ci sono funzionalità che ti piacerebbe avere accessibili ma non sono presenti nella nuova header?

No.

  • Ora scorri fino all'inizio della pagina. Immagina di voler passare alla pagina di discussione. Come pensi che si possa fare? Che ne pensi di questa esperienza?
  • Se hai idee, commenti o domande finali, aggiungile.

Sinceramente la grafica è molto peggiorata sia da computer che mobile; in particolare i Template si sono rimpiccioliti.--BandiniRaffaele2 (talk) 02:59, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:William Ellison[edit]

I find that this new presentation CATASTROPHIC ! I see absolutly no advanrage over the existing presentation and lots of disadvantages.

  1. No summary
  2. The white spaces on the left and right
  3. The left vertical menu (very useful) no longer exists
  4. The links to the user details is a slight improvement over the existing display.
  5. Scrolling up and the appearance of the research bow is also a slight improvement that is worth incorporating.

Nothing esle seems to be better !!


  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    ...
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    ...
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      ...
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      ...
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    ...
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    ...

利用者名:Tōjichi[edit]

  1. いいデザインになったとは思いました。現在の(一部の人に言わせると)デザイン性のなく不格好なデザインからは印象がよいものになったというのが私の第一印象です。しかし、どこかまだ不格好なような気がします。
  2. ヘッダに現在の位置などが新たに表示されるようになったことに気が付きました。便利だと感じました。
    1. 自身にとって役に立つと思います。特に、検索機能や自身のアカウントなどがいちいち上までスクロールしなくても表示されたことは、私の長年の夢がかなったと言っていいことです。
    2. 「この新しいヘッダにはないけれど、使えるとよいと思う機能」はありません。完璧です。
  3. 一瞬、アイコンをダブルクリックしても反応しないことに戸惑いました。しかし、後にやり方がわかりました。もう少しわかりやすいやり方はないのでしょうか?しかし、私自身もいいアイディアは持っていないので、何とも言えません。結果として、これで十分であり、新しいガイドのページなどをもうけるのが最善だと思います。
  4. 前述の通り、いいデザインになったとは思い、現在の(一部の人に言わせると)デザイン性のなく不格好なデザインからは印象がよいものになったというのが私の第一印象です。しかし、なんとなく現在のフランス語版ウィキペディアのような印象を受けました。それは、洗練されているという事以上に、以前に比べて一面にあらわされる情報量が少なく、どこか不完全で、物足りない印象を思わせてしまうものだと思います。また、ウィキディアは百科事典であるため、デザインよりも、実用性や情報について優先すべきであり、現在のデザインのまま保留という形がよいと結論付けました。総じて、現在のウィキペディアのデザインの方がよく、もしもデザインを改変するならば、無用な混乱を引き起こすことは予想に難くないものだと考えました。あと、Wikipediaのロゴは今の物でいいと思います。

Username:Schlosser67[edit]

I prefer MonoBook over Vector, but I was curious, so here's my 2 cents worth: By and large, the prototype looks usable, but there are several things I don't like, and others that I don't think are necessary, at least not for a desktop display. I'd rather keep the language list fully visible in the menu on the left side which find it easier and quicker to navigate. Also, the new type of collapsible menus may be useful on small screens, but again, on the desktop I find it more convenient to have them open in the old-fashioned way. The limited content width is nice to have, but practically the same effect can be achieved by simply varying the size of the browser window. Lastly, I'd prefer a serif font for the text.
PS: I agree with those who commented before on the excess of white space. --Schlosser67 (talk) 06:40, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Username:Sabas88[edit]

  • The floating-header should appear completely when scrolling down as well (defaut to headroom--pinned), and with no animation possibly
  • In print preview the floating menu is appearing on each page hiding a couple of lines each time
  • The main menu (sidebar) opens from the hamburger to show with a disabled scrollbar, it should be given more space horizontally, on the current style overflow:hidden and min-width:200 px look nice
  • The appearance of the article-header should conform with the floating-header, instead it is currently the old one and it's confusing (ideally it should look the same which "expands" to the floating version when scrolling)
  • In the user menu there's an entry "18:05:22" which is confusing, it's a clock?
  • Each menu entry should have a tooltip explaining the function (also for accessibility)
  • In some editions there would need some rework of css, example in itwiki the infobox template is displayed as block instead of floating to the right so it looks bad.
  • The hamburger menu could appear only below a certain threshold (1200px?), and for higher resolutions the sidebar should be visible by default
  • The language selector may be due for a redesign itself, I don't really find it usable

--Sabas88 (talk) 09:08, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Nom d’utilisateur : Caille_Rotie[edit]

very bad ideas :

  • (-) no table of contents
  • (-) infobox in first + no border on the infobox

Mes réponses au questionnaire :

  1. Prenez une minute pour observer la page, la faire défiler, observer plusieurs pages différentes. Quelles sont vos premières impressions ? Est-ce que quelque chose vous dérange ? vous semble pratique ? particulièrement intéressant ? (Gardez en tête que ceci est un prototype, donc il se peut que certains liens ne fonctionnent pas ou que vous rencontriez d'autres bugs ou bizarreries).
    (-) c'est désagréable : j'ai l'impression d'être sur l'interface mobile. Je n'ai pas accès au résumé, seulement à l'infobox qui avant était en haut à droite. Elle contient des informations synthétiques, ce qui est différent d'un texte d'introduction. La version "ordinateur" doit garder la présentation suivante : texte à gauche, images et tableaux de données à droite. (article testés : Lune, Chine). Le problème n'apparait pas sur les articles simples (comme Poids) qui n'a pas d'infobox.
    (-) Faire disparaitre le menu à gauche n'a de sens que pour élargir la zone de l'article et afficher des informations sur un tableau large. Actuellement, la zone de lecture n'est pas élargie, donc c'est inutile : ça crée juste du blanc à droite et à gauche. Par défaut, j'afficherais le menu, quitte à avoir un bouton pour l'escamoter.
  2. Faites défiler la page lentement. Puis remontez un peu. Que remarquez-vous ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    (+) Ajout d'un menu fixed en haut qui s'affiche quand on remonte : oui, c'est très bien. (je ne l'avais pas vu tellement c'est confortable !! )
    (+) merci pour le menu de changement de langue en haut à droite ! c'est super ! Le mettre aussi sur le menu basique ? (Ah, il est à droite du titre : je le mettrais au même endroit sur les deux présentations)
    (todo) Ajouter le burger bouton sur le sticky menu pour qu'il soit toujours visible pour pouvoir ré-afficher le menu à gauche
    (todo) afficher le menu gauche par défaut, avec un bouton pour le masquer.
    (-) il manque un bouton pour retourner tout en haut (ou retourner au sommaire)
    1. Est-ce que les fonctionnalités présentées ici vous sont utiles ? Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles il est particulièrement utile de pouvoir accéder pendant qu'on lit ou qu'on modifie une page ?
      (+) changer la langue : oui, très utile.
      (+) Affichage du titre (T1) de la section : oui, très utile.
    2. Y a-t-il des fonctionnalités auxquelles vous souhaiteriez pouvoir accéder, mais qui ne sont pas disponibles dans le nouvel entête ?
      (todo) Avoir le menu de changement de langue toujours au même endroit (en haut à droite, et pas sur le titre de l'article)
      (todo) Ajouter la possibilité d'élargir la zone d'affichage (pour les tableaux larges)
      (todo) naviguer par le sommaire
        • idée : section suivante/ précédente ? (à tester)
        • idée : bouton "retourner en haut"
        • idée : bouton "aller au sommaire"
      (-) comportement étrange : je défile vers le bas, j'ouvre le menu Profil, je remonte (le menu disparait : ok). Je redescends : le menu réapparait sans que j'ai cliqué dessus, c'est étrange ! Un menu toujours affiché est peut être beaucoup plus simple ! (sticky menu toujours visible)
  3. À présent, remontez tout en haut de la page. Imaginez que vous souhaitez accéder à votre page de discussion. Arrivez-vous à trouver comment faire ? Que pensez-vous de cette expérience ?
    (+) Menu "profil" > "Talk" = très bien.
    (+) Menu "profil" > très bien en général !
  4. Faites part ici de tout commentaire, idée ou question complémentaire.
    (+) Merci pour cette évolution ! Merci pour la consultation ! Bon courage pour dépouiller les commentaires !!
    (+) choix de police : Ok
    (-) choix de couleur de police : mettre un peu plus foncé ?
    (-) les sous-sections ne sont plus soulignées : dommage, c'était plus clair avec le trait en pointillé sous le sous-titre.
    (-) attention à remettre toutes les mises en forme spécifiques (article détaillé, galeries d’images, palettes, catégories, etc...)

Caille Rotie (talk) 08:35, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Nom d’utilisateur : Burdigo[edit]

Je ne trouve pas la police plus intéressante et de surcroît, il est plus difficile d'accéder au sommaire.

Franchement, j'ai du mal a voir l'intérêt, sauf si Wikipédia change de but et abandonne le statut d'encyclopédie. Ce qui fait l'encyclopédie est la possibilité de synthèse (sommaire) et de liens. Or, là, d'emblée, on a un joli texte et de belles images. Quel intérêt ? --Burdigo (talk) 08:18, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

La nouvelle proposition est consternante. Elle n'apporte rien. Les deux bandes blanches de chaque côté : deux espaces inutilisés. Est-ce parce que c'est la mode actuelle ? Le but d'une encyclopédie n'est-il pas l'accessibilité et n'est-ce pas la possibilité qu'offre ces deux blocs ? Donc : CATASTROPHIQUE ! La nouvelle police n'est pas plus lisible, le sommaire est renvoyé bien loin. Cette proposition serait excellente s'il s'agissait d'une revue, mais devient consternante pour une encyclopédie (un sommaire, des liens).

--Burdigo (talk) 08:23, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Nome utente:Mastrocom[edit]

  1. The design is very mobile-oriented: the location of the article is too much central, and this makes the size-font tiner and more difficult to read. It should occupy a wider area of the screen. Moreover, if I'm at the beginning of the page and I scroll down the navbox on the left, I'd like to scroll it down till the end without scrolling more the main page
  2. I like the pop-up menu while scrolling down, it shows the name of the paragraph I'm reading and some user functions
    1. In the list of the other linguistic versions I'd like to see a function like "Link to", so I could link my new page to an existing linguistic version without open Wikidata
    2. I'd like to see "Mark as verified" somewhere
  3. It's very intuitive, I could go to dots to access my talk, my preferences and so on
  4. Give the chance to keep the old version too

Username:Belteshassar[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    Infobox feels too big when it takes up half the page width. No TOC makes it hard to get an overview of the article.
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    Hiding the top interface definitely makes it less distracting. I like the simplified interface that pops up if I move my mouse up, but it is confusing that the style and icons do not match what was at the top of the page before.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      I like that it shows the heading of the current section. Could there be a way to expand this into the full TOC of the article for easy navigation?
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      Add to watchlist
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    It's a bit odd that the menu moves from the avatar icon to the three dots icon when I scroll up. I would expect the menu button to incorporate the same graphical element in both cases
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    ...

Juandev[edit]

  1. Well it looks good to me.
  2. I wonder if there is to much free space on both sides, that we may develope the system of inline comments like Google or Microsoft have for editors/loged in users. Now we use the discussion pages, whith topics which often links to someting on the page itself. So have the notes on the right site anchored to the text might be also and interesting features.
  3. Secondly I am not sure, weather we need so much tabs on the top. The logic of these tabs are not obvious on the first look. And maybe non logged in users does not need them all.
  4. And maybe some zoom in feature wood be good.
  5. The menus bar on the top is useless at this stage. If one cannot test it how it works, hard to leave the feedback. But for example the search tool, I would expecte it searches for a string within the article not with the wikipedia. But for editors it would be annoying to activate the wikipedia dialog box this way I think.
  6. Yes, thats fine, I would expect it somewhere there.
  7. It would be nice to provide demo version, which also works for editing, without that its just guessing.

Username:Ponor[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    Neat, modern, LOVE it! Body font size is too small on my laptop screen (HiDPI 3200×1800 Dell XPS 13, Firefox @FedoraLinux), there's too much white space between the lines, and text lines are too long, 160 characters or so. It's nice to have a clear Wikipedia stuffuser stuffarticle stuff separation. I did not like that the W drawer has a thick gray bar, that's unnecessary and looks like a design bug. In-line citation links were not showing on mouse hover, I'd like to have those without the need to jump to the bottom of the article and back up (but where?).
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    I LOVE the sticky header, and I absolutely love that it shows section titles. I think it should be visible at all times (for those who want it), not only when scrolling up. That often feels jerky (header popping in and out), especially when interacting with it with the mouse: when sticky header is showing, and I reach for one of the icons and miss it (that's quite easy to do), or if my pointer ends up being too close to the header, the header will pop in and out, uncontrolably. Another reason to have it always on (as an opt-out feature).
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Section titles are quite useful. Icons should be put in the same order as the actions that are listed on top of the page: Discussion – Edit – Edit source – History. Languages drop-down menu should be shown only as an icon, no text, just before the article title. Titles in other languages in the drop-down menu could be rendered using the title font, with the addition of the corresponding language code.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      "Watchlist" is the page I check often and would like to see the star icon in the header.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    This is fine. I don't think I visit my talk page too often. If there's a message it will be shown by the bell icon. The only nuisance is that the page discussion icon and user talk icon are the same.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    I will send you a few mockups by email. Vertical lines in the header and the sidebar show at different places on different screens and often look like they're out of alignment. Most are not needed.

Username:Vega[edit]

  1. Take a minute to look around, scroll up and down the page, look at a few different pages. What are some of your initial impressions? Do you find anything confusing? Convenient? Particularly interesting? (Keep in mind that since this is a prototype some of the links might not work, and there might be other bugs or quirks that you’ll come across.)
    "View source" at the top of the page is somewhat confusing, as it doesn't imply "editing"; even more so since when scrolling down, an "Edit" button does appear. Besides, the infobox is too large (on my laptop anyway).
  2. Scroll down the page slowly. Now scroll back up a bit. What do you notice? What do you think of this experience?
    Nice! Section titles appearing in the header are a great idea. To expand on it, displaying sub-sections would further help navigate the articles (especially since WP doesn't use section numbers nor "sliding" tables of contents).
    Wikipedia's beautiful logo is too small or disappears altogether when reading :-/ A simple "W" seems somewhat bland to me.
    1. Are the features shown here useful to you? Are there any features that are particularly useful to have access to throughout reading or editing?
      Quick access to tools is very useful indeed. Since vertical space is more expensive than horizontal one (I understand the opposite is true on smartphones...), the quick access frame could be more practical and more visible if it were placed in the left margin instead.
    2. Are there any features you would like access to that are not available in the new header?
      Advanced tools : edit section, get link to this section, etc.
      And have my nickname displayed, or another trick, so I know I am logged in.
  3. Now, scroll back to the very top of the page. Imagine you would like to go to your talk page. Can you figure out how to do that? What do you think of this experience?
    Yes. It is far too impractical. I click the Watchlist and Translations many times a day, I can't imagine having to make one more click to reach them.
  4. Please add any final thoughts, ideas, or questions.
    I seem to have a bug where, if I make the search bar appear, I then can't switch back to the article and section titles.
    On PC, the blank spaces on each side of the screen aren't much appealing and could be put to use (see above).

Nombre de usuario:davidhs0[edit]

  1. Tómese un minuto para mirar alrededor. ¿Cuáles son algunas de sus impresiones iniciales? ¿Hay algo que encuentra confuso? ¿Conveniente? ¿Particularmente interesante? (Dado que esto es un prototipo la mayoría de los links no funcionan puede que se encuentre otros bugs o defectos).
    Hay mucho espacio vacío a los lados (está hecho para pantallas de 1024 y la mía es de 1366, hay 1/4 sin utilizar).
    La fuente es más pequeña y se lee peor (si se aumenta un 10 % queda como está en Wikipedia). Las líneas de la fuente son más finas o grises, se lee peor.
    Hay menos información arriba, faltan muchas cosas ocultas en el menú "...".
    Me gusta el acceso a idiomas en un menú al comienzo del artículo. No es algo que se utilice mucho y me gusta más así que desplegado en la zona lateral.
  2. Desplace despacio la página hacia abajo. Ahora haga scroll hacia arriba un poco. ¿Qué nota? ¿Qué piensa de esta experiencia?
    Me gusta la barra superior con:
    • Acceso a idiomas. No es algo que se utilice mucho y me gusta más así que desplegado en la zona lateral.
    • Menú con opciones del usuario. Me gusta que no se oculte al mover el ratón fuera.
    • Búsqueda.
    • Título del artículo y la sección.
    Pero:
    • Se esconde muy rápido, al quitar el foco. Podría dejarse fija, sin esconder (o que el usuario elija en configuración).
    • No me gusta que se añada o quite información según donde apunte el ratón. Debería mostrar siempre todo.
    • Hay que dar a la lupa para ver la caja de búsqueda (1 clic extra). Podría mostrarse siempre la caja (o que el usuario elija en configuración).
    • Si muestra la caja de búsqueda se oculta el nombre del artículo y la sección. Me gustaría ver todo.
    1. ¿Son las características mostradas aquí útiles para usted? ¿Alguna de las nuevas características es particularmente útil para tener acceso a la hora de leer o editar?
      Todo es útil.
    2. ¿Hay alguna característica a la que quiera acceder que no encuentre en la nueva cabecera?
      Todas las opciones del usuario están en el menú de usuario y requieren 1 clic extra para acceder a ellas. Podrían mostrarse algunas en la barra (las que el usuario elija en configuración).
  3. Ahora, vuelva al inicio de la página. Imagine que quiere ir a la página de discusión. ¿Cómo lo haría? ¿Cómo ve la experiencia?
    La página de discusión del artículo está junto al artículo, esto no ha cambiado.
    La página de discusión del usuario está en el menú de usuario. Es fácil de acceder.
  4. Por favor añada cualquier idea final, comentario o preguntas.
    No veo la tabla de contenidos y es algo muy útil.