Wikipedia's crappy new website! - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 20, 2023, 10:51:18 pm
content: What's with all the white space?I hate websites like this. Is there a plug-in or something to get rid of that crap and bring the old site back?

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 20, 2023, 10:58:04 pm
content: If you log in, you can go back to the old style as a theme. (It's called Vector, and it's very similar to Monobook too.)But given the revolt so far I expect there to be a reversal or modification of the style. I also am not a massive fan; whilst the modern look is a bit 'cleaner', it's reduced the usable area of the screen so much!

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 20, 2023, 11:02:53 pm
content: Quote from: tom66 on January 20, 2023, 10:58:04 pmI don't have an account and have no intention of creating one.Is there a revolt? If so, I'm glad it's not just me!

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 20, 2023, 11:37:12 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on January 20, 2023, 11:02:53 pmHaven't you seen? It's now more welcoming for all those woke happy people on this picture. Look at how happy they are.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 20, 2023, 11:40:54 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on January 20, 2023, 11:02:53 pmWell, you'll have to enjoy the default style then. You could create an account with a 10 minute mail type address, you don't need to provide any PII.

author: Infraviolet
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2023, 02:04:34 am
content: I've seen the new interface too. In my browser a lot of any article page is now taken up by a very fat left-side sidebar with article contents listed in a very ugly manner. I'm shocked wikipedia has changed like this, I think their original formatting had become a classic interface replicated by many other websites (particularly encylopedic type websites on all manner of subjects) on account of its practicality. I think, despite the issues many wikipedia articles and the foundation's leadership have had, that the old interface and styling had almost come to symbolise "trust" in some sense too "here is a website that just wants to provide you text and images rather than show off their web design skills". Very, very stupid of wikipedia to change the interface.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2023, 02:05:59 am
content: It sucks, just like the new eBay search sucks. Same kind of completely dumb design.

author: Canis Dirus Leidy
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2023, 04:35:48 am
content: Quote from: Zero999 on January 20, 2023, 11:02:53 pmSo far, it is possible to evade the party line by manually adding "useskin=vector" option to URL, or withuser script.

author: sleemanj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2023, 06:18:11 am
content: The design isn't great, but it's not terrible either.If you want less side-whitespace (and easier eyes) zoom in a bit, it's responsive and will eliminate the side-whitespace to make better use as the zoom increases.Being middle-aged, I zoom most sites these days, including EEVBlog which I have set at 175%CTRL-mousewheel zooms, for those who don't know these things.

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2023, 09:45:11 am
content: Quote from: tszaboo on January 20, 2023, 11:37:12 pmReminds me of Terry Davis somehowAnyway, this new layout actually makes better use of screen estate for me. I browse with MalwareScript disabled by default. The old sidebar with language choices has disappeared (I can still change language in the top right corner, good enough) and the new sidebar with ToC does not appear (and neither does the stupid banner).Try it - life gets better without MalwareScript(Also, Wikipedia has a far worse problem with content than with design)

author: Calambres
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2023, 10:03:00 am
content: Quote from: Canis Dirus Leidy on January 21, 2023, 04:35:48 ammore precisely "?useskin=vector" as inhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?useskin=vector

author: voltsandjolts
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 21, 2023, 11:02:52 am
content: I like the shorter word count per line and zooming uses all screen space, if that annoys.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2023, 12:17:06 pm
content: Zooming enlarges the font and stuff.I think the issue is not the white space per se, but the reduction of content in order to have that white space. If the content were naturally smaller (that is, there was little of it) then the white space would be fine. Zooming in doesn't increase the content density back to what it used to be, it just distributes the white space between the letters instead.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2023, 12:28:53 pm
content: There's a very simple way to fix the skin - just give an option to expand the content to fill the full page.

author: hans
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2023, 05:39:36 pm
content: Half of the internet is designed in this retarded way. Some sites only occupy 50% of screen width on a 1080p screen, so that's 25% on 4K with same DPI settings. I zoom into 150% on most sites as it relieves some eye strain. It's kind of strange since a lot of webdevs claim to make fluid layouts that are suitable for mobile, small and large displays. But then they are still able to produce this kind of crap. It's very annoying.But honestly less annoying than some other website features: like cluttered navigation systems, high amounts of padding, websites that are completely decorated in ads (hmm, maybe that's why people use adblock to get a sane internet, and maybe that's why they reserve all that empty space?)..Or shit likehoverdropdown menus drive me crazy, they are the worst (goodbye accessibility for the less well coordinated among us, and goodbye usage on phone)I've used a restyling plugin for many years with custom CSS scripts, but as soon the news got out that the plugin was infected I uninstalled it and didn't look back. Going to large efforts of customization only makes my system installations less portable across multiple machines or reinstalls, which is also something I've started to hate since it increases the effort threshold to switch systems for me (I daily drive 3-4 computers on a day).

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2023, 05:43:16 pm
content: Quote from: hans on January 21, 2023, 05:39:36 pmWide screens are another idiocy and a problem in itself which has nothing to do with web design.I miss 4:3.

author: DimitriP
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2023, 09:07:57 pm
content: Quote from: magic on January 21, 2023, 05:43:16 pmYou can say that again!!The only reason I don't miss 4:3 is I USE 4:3The other cure for the wide screen blues is to have enough space so at least one monitor is in portrait mode. Makes reading datasheets and TLDR posts so mush easierAnd of course, last but not least ,I almost never use maximized windows especially on a wide screen, unless watching video.As for people that "need" to have a "clean" desktop" with only a single window or tab displaying at a time maximized, they make pills for that.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2023, 09:42:53 pm
content: Quote from: voltsandjolts on January 21, 2023, 11:02:52 amThat's personal preference and was possible to achieve with the old website by resizing the window. See the attached screenshot, showing the old site in a window sized to give the same number of words per line as the new one, including the tab bar at the side as a bonus. There is no reason to bugger it up for everyone.

author: Marco
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2023, 09:50:12 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on January 20, 2023, 11:02:53 pmDo you use tampermonkey or similar? There are scripts.

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2023, 09:55:16 pm
content: Just disable scriptsThis way it works better than the old version.from me for this change.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2023, 10:03:49 pm
content: Quote from: Marco on January 21, 2023, 09:50:12 pmI've just installed them, but it won't help me at work, where they're blocked.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2023, 10:12:40 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on January 21, 2023, 09:42:53 pmGiving users a choice? It's not the XXth century anymore!

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2023, 11:22:44 pm
content: Quote from: magic on January 21, 2023, 05:43:16 pmBuy an ultrawide screen, and have 2 browser side-by-side.Or a super ultrawide, 32:9 and use it instead of 3 monitors.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2023, 11:39:27 pm
content: [Screenshot: 1920x1080]Eeesh, who reads at maximum screen size?Narrow columns are more readable; it's good design on their part.(Related: surprised no one's complained that this forum renders poorly >2440px, at least on the default theme. Perhaps there is some hope left after all?...)Tim

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2023, 12:15:18 am
content: I absolutely hate that style, it has been all the rage for close to a decade now. Text and graphics floating free in a sea of blinding white. A dimmer shaded background and some lines or shadows to break things up into logical groups makes everything so much easier on the eyes.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2023, 12:19:22 am
content: Quote from: magic on January 21, 2023, 05:43:16 pmWide screens are great for video, and they're nice for software that has toolbars on the sides, but I do like 4:3 better for browsing. I almost never use anything fullscreen though, I typically have 2-3 programs going at once spread out across the screen. A widescreen monitor is almost wide enough for two side by side browsers.

author: hans
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2023, 09:01:04 am
content: Indeed, I like widescreens because it gives options. A vertical monitor is great for text work, but that's pretty much the only thing it excels at. Practically it's a long single column format. Watching media is possible as a side-gig, but you'd be watching 16:9 content at 32% of the original size if I'm not mistaken. Maybe you could stack 2 windows for multi-tasking, but the separation needs to be clear in order not to confuse.On 16:9 you can easily work with 2 documents or code files side-by-side and have room to spare for window panes, especially on 1440p or 4K (IMO 1080p is the resolution from 10 years ago, well for desktop monitors that is).On 21:9 you have a 7:3 aspect ratio, which is very close to 2x 4:3 side by side without bezels. However, if you don't want to columnize your desktop, then such a monitor is also great for media consumption (bigscreen movies) and gaming for it's immersion. If I fly planes in MSFS I prefer VR, but if I do use 2D from time to time I really like a large FOV a widescreen offers. A 4:3 aspect feels almost like looking through a shoebox, or zooming out so much that big part of your screen is the roof in order to get the FOV (with the out-of-proportion distortions that go along it).But those are just my 2 cents. I don't think either is right/wrong, it depends what you do with your computer and how.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2023, 01:27:56 pm
content: Quote from: T3sl4co1l on January 21, 2023, 11:39:27 pmI often prefer a narrower view, or larger text, but that doesn't change the fact that I hate the new Wikipeda. If I want a narrower view, I resize the window. It also means I can have something else on the screen, rather than it being wasted with white space. Widowed operating systems have been ubiquitous since the invention of the Internet. There's no reason for this madness.

author: berke
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2023, 05:56:06 pm
content: I was expecting way worse, like new Reddit worse. But it's not too bad. I prefer the old one, but the new one is bearable enough that I probably won't append&useskin=vectortoo often. If you make the window arrow the navbar even disappears.Many websites these days recklessly put giant backgroundvideosand are turning into gesture-based semi-interactive animations with transition effects... and instead of the content you're looking for you just get 3-5 PR bullet points. No I don't live in a cave and yes I do have multi-gigabit fibre. No I still don't want to watch videos on your website, I came for an application note.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2023, 08:11:39 pm
content: As I hinted, it's all about giving users a choice, but it's not a thing anymore these days. Users can just go fuck themselves.Yes, long articles are (usually) easier to read with relatively narrow columns, that has been known for centuries ever since we have written books. Also, narrow columns are good either for narrow books - or if the book or magazine is wider, then we use multi-column layouts. So, to be consistent, make the fricking Wikipedia multi-column. It will be easier to read and fit more within a given page. Or maybe people have become too stupid to know how to read multi-column text?And, software applications are not books or magazines. One can resize windows to our heart's content and get the width we like. Isn't that wonderful? Why bypass that? Maybe with the ever-growing reasoning that most people are just too stupid to know what's best for them? I guess?Oh well.

author: jonovid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2023, 08:29:35 pm
content: the website! that was begging for money just a few times in 2021-2022.in so trying to please everyone but ends up completely failing to do so IMO.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2023, 09:40:59 pm
content: Would be interesting to do multi-column responsive, including images and tables appropriately. I think at a certain point, browsers themselves are the limitation -- this could be solved with adequate JS if nothing else, but then you're already assuming the reader is using JS. And a typesetting library in JS is a somewhat ponderous thing to create, depending on how in-depth you want it......Which is a thing, too, browser support I mean, but a relatively recent one:https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/column-countProbably, combining that with responsive (flex-box etc.) elements would turn out okay. How much that can be done automatically (say as a theme on a Wiki) versus requiring document structure to support it, I don't know.On the upside, most readers are on smartphones, with a narrow screen and vertical orientation, so a single-column layout is quite promising there. Desktop users are in the minority, where some grumbling is acceptable -- mind, still a sizable minority, so flexible support is very much encouraged.(Not to mention support for stuff like high-vis user stylesheets, screen readers, and other accessibility options that are rarely considered by devs!)Tim

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2023, 09:47:54 pm
content: Quote from: T3sl4co1l on January 22, 2023, 09:40:59 pmI don't think multi-column is that complicated. Sure might take some work to make it look good for all articles. Possibly that would require authors of articles to check in both modes and make some adjustments especially for images.Quote from: T3sl4co1l on January 22, 2023, 09:40:59 pmI wouldn't call that an "upside". It's very likely the rationale for those designs, sure. But it's quite problematic that the desktop uses are becoming completely ignored. You still can't beat desktop UI for any serious work. Mobile stuff is OK when you're on the go or want to quickly check some stuff out.

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2023, 09:55:41 pm
content: And how would you do multi column if it doesn't fit on one screen?Exactly 1/N of the content per column? So you see the middle of the article at the top with 2 columns?Or one column per screen height, scroll for more columns horizontally?Seems crazyWhy can't you guys just disable JS to make this new layout work properly and stop ranting?

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2023, 10:03:13 pm
content: QuoteHow do they do it in, say, pdfs? You fill a window length then switch to the next column (the number of columns being determined by the window width). Page instead of scroll, or scroll if there is just one column.I am sure there are other ways. Once the technical part - the flowing from one column to the next, and the arrangement of columns - is sorted then how it's actually served to the user is merely a user preference.

author: strawberry
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2023, 10:11:56 pm
content: xerox alto style rulz16:9 I guess column drivers are linear and low speedor film roll is smalleror more compact laptops

author: MrMobodies
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2023, 10:14:56 pm
content: As I understand it now, it is just a new skin that they apply as the default.I raised the concerns in the discussions when they were trialing it in 2020 about fixed nav toolbar headers, dimming overlays and spinners for anything fixed to have a close button to hide it. Fortunately I see it doesn't have a fixed nav toolbar there yet and the side bar as a fixed element is closable.What I don't like is when I open left side bar the contents get shifted to the right.Just found this in web desktop improvement discussion:https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Reading/Web/Desktop_Improvements#c-The_Discoverer-20230116155200-AHollender_(WMF)-20230116141000Quote*What, and make it larger and deny them a choice that they once had before?My proof that they have taken something that was never really a problem before to now turn it into a nuisance for those who don't want it stuck there constantly.I wonder did they even ask their users (who actually use it) if they want the fixed nav toolbar on the main page they set to not only be double in size but to be everywhere else as they scroll to read the contents?I don't see any fixed header there yet but one person requesting how to force this on every user using it in that country specific version by fixing it in the skin to always show (I thought that was the point of choosing templates) goes to show that they have no regards for user preference.Quote from: SiliconWizard on January 22, 2023, 08:11:39 pmAs above decided by ONE person.Joke:User:I will not have that thing rammed into my face constantly I find it intrusive and distracting.Developer:How else are you suppose to browse websites?User:Like before... it wasn't problem then was it?Developer:It is like a stair case handle. No handle, you risk falling down and getting lost.User:I am not stupid you know. What part of "I don't want it stuck there constantly" don't you understand.Developer:No!User:I have just hidden the elements with Adblock (not used to block ads as in the name if you ask) to stop it sticking there and that is me saying NO! to you.It is my browsing area keep your hands of it.Now if you don't like or can't understand that you can go and F*** yourself.As you care about it so much why don't you just plaster that nav toolbar all over your website and forget about the contents as you seem care more about it than anything else than the guests be left alone trying to read the articles in peace.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2023, 10:27:57 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on January 22, 2023, 10:03:13 pmMulti-column has been a solved problem in publishing for a few centuries. We send stuff to mars but we can't get a browser to display text in multi-column?Word processors have been able to do this even on machines running at a few MHz. Come on.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2023, 10:38:45 pm
content: Quote from: T3sl4co1l on January 22, 2023, 09:40:59 pmThat's a straw man, as there's a separate site for mobile browsing.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2023, 12:36:35 am
content: On Wiki yes; but speaking more generally.Tim

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2023, 07:01:46 am
content: Quote from: T3sl4co1l on January 21, 2023, 11:39:27 pmI do, my PC screen is still 22inch something. It's not that big, having smaller windows don't make sense here.But what hurts me most is the all white - no contrast. Really hurts my eyes

author: Psi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2023, 07:25:40 am
content: Quote from: tszaboo on January 21, 2023, 11:22:44 pmYep, cant stress enough how awesome it is to have an ultrawide like the 49" Samsung neo G9 (5120x1440)It's pretty much intended for gaming but damn is it awesome for working.3 apps open side by side ftw.(If you're thinking you'd need to buy a new GFX to drive it, na you prob don't. If you can drive two 2560x1440 displays then you can drive it. It can pretend to be 2 monitors to the OS. You only need a new GFX if you want to drive it at high frame rates like 120 up to 240hz)

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2023, 09:27:28 am
content: Quote from: Psi on January 23, 2023, 07:25:40 am1440 vertical resolution was available in 1990s and I can get more rotating 1920x1200 vertically.Which is what I often do for working with text. 1200 horizontally barely cuts it, but it's similar to the 1280x800 that used to be popular so most things still kinda work.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2023, 09:45:32 am
content: @Psihow do you tell windows to arrange windows automatically in three? There is the shortcut for arrangin side by side, but AFAIK it only works with twoI would not want to do that manually all the time

author: Psi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2023, 10:23:42 am
content: Quote from: JPortici on January 23, 2023, 09:45:32 amIf you install Microsoft powertoys you can setup the FancyZones to work however you want.https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/powertoys/fancyzones

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2023, 10:31:33 am
content: QuoteA windows manager, likeActual Desktop Divider, does the trick. I use this for quickly setting different layouts on a 4K screen depending on activity. The example shown on that page is tame, just splitting the screen into four. One of my layouts is shown below - there two Word documents and a PDF viewer side-by-side, plus Word search windows and some other stuff below.In operation, you drag a window and press CTRL (it's configurable) whereupon the layout is displayed and you drop the window into whichever divider you want. Easy to undo as well (which was a nice surprise). Change layouts at the click of a context menu.If you are tempted by that I'd suggest not getting the individual parts and just go for the full-fatActual Window Managerwhich contains the divider and a whole lot more for much less than the indiviual components. I don't get a kickback or anything on this! Just one of those utils that gets installed on a new PC as a matter of course.

author: newbrain
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2023, 11:22:20 am
content: Quote from: JPortici on January 23, 2023, 09:45:32 amIf your display (physical or remote desktop) has a wide aspect ratio, Windows 11 22h2 will do that for you.When you start dragging a window, a translucent bar appears at the top, drag the window over it and a choice of arrangement will pop up, complete by dragging on the one you prefer.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2023, 11:51:00 am
content: Nice! Thanks guys

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 23, 2023, 01:08:04 pm
content: Quote from: Psi on January 23, 2023, 07:25:40 amMy only problem with these screens is that they are 2x more expensive than the equivalent 27" monitor setup. But for work, if budget is no issue (and wouldn't have a setup already) this is what I would use.For home/gaming I think I even going to go the other direction. I've been using a 35" Ultrawide for 8 years now, it's great, but I would like to have an IPS panel instead of the MVA. Or even an OLED. And more pixels. I don't know why getting 3840x1600 would be that difficult, but apparently it is. So I'm seriously considering buying a 40" 4K screen and using it in widescreen mode most of the time. Crazy me, I know.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 04:40:55 pm
content: QuoteLike that page with the under-the-frames pictures? No thanks! Images should be relevant to the page, not there to fill white space that's too blank.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 16, 2023, 10:19:45 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on February 16, 2023, 04:40:55 pmWell anything to mask his spam, now in spam heaven - or hell!