Wikipedia is getting its first desktop redesign in 10 years

Wikipedia is getting its first desktop redesign in 10 years
The entire redesign should be complete by the end of 2021
September 23, 2020
https://www.theverge.com/2020/9/23/21453300/wikipedia-desktop-redesign-2021

Wikimedia Foundation: Wikipedia is getting a new look for the first time in 10 years. Here’s why.

 

Not sure what to think about this, let's hope they don't mess things up, because this could be a case of don't try to fix things that aren't broken.

 

Looks good, a lot of improvements for better usability and direct access.

 

My feelings exactly.

 

+1

 

Totally agree.

 

Wikipedia's first desktop design update in a decade doesn't rock the boat
By Jon Fingas @jonfingas - January 18, 2023

Wikimedia Foundation: Wikipedia Gets a Fresh New Look: First Desktop Update in a Decade Puts Usability at the Forefront

 

On first sight, I'm not too happy with it. I don't like the big sidebar which leaves less room for text. Seriously, the world has a lack of web designers who actually know how to develop good looking and handy, non cluttered websites. I just visited bloomberg.com and I couldn't believe my eyes, what a mess!

 

The 'Toggle limited content width' button (bottom right corner) helps a bit, it removes empty space on both sides, but the left sidebar is still needlessly wide.

 

I don't think it looks too bad. I'm more disappointed that it is accepted as the standard for an encyclopedia these days when several years ago it was not considered reliable enough to quote from for research papers and such. I don't think it's any better today, there is just nothing else left.

 

One of the reasons being this is a mammoth task that requires one basic resource - money.
Regular users will be aware of the pleas for donations that are appearing more and more often.

 

I am kind of surprised that it is considered a reliable source of information by anyone when Wikipedia itself does not permit citations from its own articles.

Here is a general disclaimer by Wikipedia for anyone using Wikipedia.

Apart from that I am OK with the redesign. It is not a radical change, in fact they did not change much, which is a good thing. If someone does not like the new look they can always change back to the old one by choosing Preference>Appearance>Skin>Vector legacy (2010)

 

The sidebar can be hidden, but then it leaves big empty margins on the left and right. I do not know why they designed it like this unless they are planning to put ads there in the future.

Edit: Never mind, I was was able to adjust the margin width by unchecking the "Enable limited width mode" option under Preferences>Appearance>Skin Preferences. The articles now fill the entire width of my screen with the sidebar hidden.

 

Good point. I miss professionally written hard copy encyclopedias. I guess they can be found used.

 

How to hide this sidebar? I don't see any options.

 

Thanks very much for mentioning, I had overlooked that option.

At the top of the sidebar, there is "Contents [hide]".
Click 'hide' to hide the sidebar.
Sidebar contents are now accessible by the 'hamburger' menu's.
The 'Toggle limited content width' (bottom right corner) together with the 'hide sidebar contents' option fills the page out nicely.

 

I don't get to see it, do you need to be logged in or what? I see no options on top or bottom of the page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netflix

 

Could it be different in different browsers? I use Firefox 109.0 (snap, Kubuntu).
I see "Contents [hide]" in the (left) sidebar.
In the bottom right corner I see a square that with mouseover shows "Toggle limited content width".

 

Weird, I didn't see it in Vivaldi, but it was because of uBlock, don't ask me how this is possible. Now I do get to see the ''hide sidebar'' option, but no ''toggle limited content.'' I will take another look on other pages.

 

I don't see a "toggle limited content width" square anywhere on my screen as well. I am on Firefox 107.0.1 (Windows). Disabling uBlock origin does not show that button either. It is strange but maybe the website appears differently to same browsers from different OS's.

However, I believe that toggle button has the same effect as unchecking the "Enable limited width mode" option under Preferences>Appearance>Skin Preferences.

 

Me too. I used to love browsing encyclopedias in a library when I was a kid. The big problem now with hard copy encyclopedias is that they are no longer updated. Collier's Encyclopedia's last hard copy was in 1997, before they got bought out by Microsoft and became Encarta. Encyclopedia Americana's last hard copy was in 2006 and Britannica's was in 2010. Thankfully the last two are still being updated and available as a subscription online, but I haven't felt the need to buy a subscription. It most likely is because of Wikipedia and the internet in general, I can always find good authoritative articles, if not at Wikipedia, then somewhere else online nowadays.

 

Preferences > Appearance > Skin Preferences > (uncheck) Enable limited width mode, are preferences that I don't see in Wikipedia, on Firefox 109.0 snap on Kubuntu.

 

That's what I don't like. Books don't get updated but the internet could say something different every day. I don't think it's actually that bad but it could be and how many would notice?

 

So I did some testing, installed a portable version of Firefox 109 and 104, with clean profiles, and the toggle button is available on both. So it must be some setting in my current profile that is blocking the button for me. The preference "Enable limited width mode", under "Preferences>Appearance>Skin Preferences" was available on both 109 and 104 for me. This was on 64 bit version of Firefox on Windows 10.

Edit: I tested under a VM on Firefox 109, snap Ubuntu and that preference "Enable limited width mode" is present on the snap version of Firefox.

 

You are right. When I am trying to learn something new, I usually consult 3-4 articles on different but trustworthy websites. It has served me well. This way firstly, it gets rid of bias and secondly, in between 4 authors, if one missed something, chances are the others will probably include it in their articles.