YOU CAN EDIT THIS PAGE! Just click any blue "Edit" link and start writing!


Jump to: navigation, search

Talk:Main Page/New new layout

10,895 bytes added, 22:24, 2 December 2003
I commented on my Main Page draft on Talk:Main Page/test
:So, why don't we build a bridge between those so-called HTML-haves and HTML-have nots. I made [[Main page/test]], where we can test things out and try to make a page that both looks good and is not too difficult to edit. That should be possible, no? I started with copying what I have in my user space at this moment. Anyone who's interested? But keep in mind: it should be nice and simple at the same time. [[User:Dhum Dhum|DhDh]] 11:51, 24 Nov 2003 (PST)
So, I just filed a RFE against MediaWiki in SourceForge asking for a table markup language. Turns out there already is an undocumented one, which will be in the next stable release. Looks like we'll have a Wikimarkup table-based Main Page sooner rather than later... --[[User:Evan|Evan]] 18:57, 28 Nov 2003 (PST) ---- Hey, so what happened to the above idea? I'm talking about wikitravel on bootsnall and I just got this comment: ''My first impulse was to look up local info to see how everything was structured and what kind of entries were being made. ''Problem was, other than the search feature (which I don't like using) I couldn't find a simple way there. I want to be able to click through to get to where I'm going. ''ie: Index > N. America > Canada > British Columbia > Vancouver ''Maybe I was missing the easy way to look that up?'' And I actually didn't know what to say. How do we expect people to get to the content? I'm wondering if we need to think a bit more about readers and not just contributors (ie we head to the recent change or something and start from there).... comments? [[User:Maj|Majnoona]] ::So can we add a link to [[List of countries]] from the front page? And maybe one to the content that was in the destinations page? I know that was too much stuff for the front page, but I didn't realize it was totally gone... [[User:Maj|Majnoona]] :::You worked on it! B-) Anyways, although I originally proposed it, I agree that the loss of the destinations section might be a little much. After all, most people who are going to be coming to Wikitravel's main page will be looking for travel info, not looking to share. (Sad but true). What if we did this? Welcome to Wikitravel! Blah blah blah! +----------------------------------+ | Destinations | +----------------------------------+ | | | | | | | | +----------------------------------+ +--------------+ +-----------------+ | Featured | | Community | +--------------+ +-----------------+ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +--------------+ +-----------------+ +----------------------------------+ | Logbook | +----------------------------------+ | | | | | | | | +----------------------------------+ It'll scroll and stuff, but... Well, I don't know how to fit it all in, otherwise. --[[User:Evan|Evan]] 14:30, 1 Dec 2003 (PST) ---- So, I've been thinking about the main page, and looking over Nielsen's [ Home Page Design Guidelines]. I'm not going to copy them here, so you should look at them; but here's my comments on each: # Our tagline is more than one sentence, but I think we meet this. # Our title tag -- weird, I never thought about this -- is actually "''name of page'' - Wikitravel". I can't tell which is better or worse -- it might be nice to reverse that for the Main Page. # We have an "About Us" page (actually, lots of them), and we group them together. This is good. # This is where I think we fall down. I'll say below what I think our 1-4 tasks are. # Got it. # We have "featured" stuff, but not really any examples. More on this below. # This one seems fine -- our [[Wikitravel:article naming conventions|article naming conventions]] almost demand it! # We don't do this. Probably should, too. # We hardly have any images -- probably fine! # Again, fine -- just one image (the logo, and only on one skin). I'm counting 6 out of 10. Not bad, but we can do better. Now, about our viewers' goals. Here's the four goals I think people coming to the main page have: # '''Find information about particular travel information.''' These people are casual browsers who think of us as a travel guide. That's great! Because that's what we are. We have to accommodate these people, because... well, that's our goal! Make a travel guide! Duh! B-) # '''Find out what kind of information we have.''' These people have heard about Wikitravel, and want to look us over before they decide whether we're any good, and whether they're ever going to come back. It's good to accommodate these people, because they will either join our effort themselves, or give us good word of mouth. # '''Find out what Wikitravel is about.''' These people have heard about Wikitravel, and want to know more about the project. Similarly, we want these people to get what they want, since they may join us or tell someone else who will. # '''Start editing, discussing, policy-making, whatever.''' These are people who are Wikitravellers already, and they want to know what's going on, what's new, whose articles are featured, etc. Considering that this is ''us'' B-), of course we want these people to get what they need. You can kinda divide these goals into a matrix of two variables: purposeful versus browsing, travel information versus Wikitravel information. There's a gradation from the first to the last: purposeful about travel info, browsing travel info, browsing project info, purposeful about project info. Anyways, I'm thinking that maybe we can divide the main page into two big sections instead of three: travel info, and project info. I think doing it side-by-side would look weird, so maybe we can do it top-to-bottom. Another thing I'm thinking is that we can kinda borrow the same layout, for the travel info, that the [ Open Directory] has (and lots of other directory sites -- I think Yahoo! did this first). Lastly, I'm thinking that the "featured" section would become our base, but more geographically oriented than not. So, we combine "featured" and "destinations". Here's what I'm thinking: Welcome to Wikitravel. Blah blah blah. We are so great. +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ | Wikitravel Guides | +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ | | | Asia Africa | | Bangkok, India, Tokyo, Cairo, Capetown, Zaire, | | Angkor Wat, more... Timbuktu, Madagascar, more... | | | | Europe Australasia | | Oradea, France, Flanders, Hobart, Christchurch, Perth, | | Barcelona, more... New Guinea, Sydney, more... | | | | North America South America | | Santa Barbara, Boston, Lima, Argentina, Rio de Janeiro,| | Banff, Florida Keys, more... Caracas, Surinam, more... | | | | Island nations Phrasebooks | | Jamaica, Havana, Papeete, French, Spanish, Romanian, | | Tahiti, Guam, Fiji, more... Dutch, German, more... | | | | Itineraries Travel topics | | Two weeks in Vietnam, Driving in Australia, tips for | | Hiking in New Zealand, more... flying, Common scams, more... | | | +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ | Wikitravel Project | +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ | (pretty much what we have in "Community" right now) | | | | Logbook | +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ Some points about this: note that nothing's called "featured". Like DhDh said, if it's on the front page, it's featured! Duh! B-) Second, I figured it'd be better to put the project stuff after the travel stuff, since people looking for project info will probably feel more comfy about scrolling down to look for it than people looking for travel info. That top table might actually fit three or even four across, rather than two across. That's OK! This looks a little more like DhDh's first pass at this, too. Lastly, I wonder if we should maybe do some "pull quotes" -- one or two sentences from good articles, with links to the article. That'd be pretty fancy, and would show off our good stuff. OK, that's my thoughts for now. --[[User:Evan|Evan]] 19:45, 1 Dec 2003 (PST) :After reading all this I must say I agree with most things said above (guidelines and 4 goals). When I took out the “Destinations” part I tore it out with roots and all –- and that was probably too much. So I like the idea of having two sections on the main page. I do have some remarks though: :*I think we should make a difference between the purely geographical part of the “Guides” section and the rest (itineraries, phrasebooks, travel topics, etc.) The geographical part will most probably be quite stable over time, but the other part will not (new expeditions worth mentioning will be created, etc.) Within this section it could be separated by a horizontal line or made a separate column. :*The same goes for the “Project” section: separate the “Community” and “Logbook” parts in the same way. :*The geographical subdivision by continental regions is fine, but which articles are we going to put under them? It seems to me that this is done a bit randomly in the example. :*About point 8 (top ten guidelines): we could include a “Main Page/Archive” page. :[[User:Dhum Dhum|DhDh]] 08:56, 2 Dec 2003 (PST) ::Good point about the continental sections, etc. What I was thinking was that the directory part, on top, would act ''both'' as an entry way into our geographical hierarchy, ''and'' as a "Featured" section. We could rotate in different articles from all levels of the hierarchy -- cities, regions, districts, countries, sections, etc. -- in that right-under-the-continent part. That way, we can highlight our best articles, ''and'' help people navigate the site. Anyways, that was the idea. --[[User:Evan|Evan]] 09:24, 2 Dec 2003 (PST) :OK, if the idea is to have a combination of the two, I'm all for it. I'll try to experiment a little with the test page. Luckily we didn't throw it away :-) [[User:Dhum Dhum|DhDh]] 12:25, 2 Dec 2003 (PST) ::I commented on my Main Page draft on [[Talk:Main Page/test]] [[User:Dhum Dhum|DhDh]] 14:20, 2 Dec 2003 (PST)

Navigation menu