Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Usability/Main Page/Draft/Header poll

message: ===Portals in banner, large===
#Support; the single, mostly white large banner helps to reduce the feeling of clutter, and I like the larger number of portal links.--ragesoss 21:06, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Who needs "showy"? It's very modest and as the shortest alows you to see the content below. I don't think the eye just passes over it. Besides, we DON'T want to make a big deal with icons, which have had opposition at every turn.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 13:19, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia needs showy.  That's who.  Modesty is completely irrelevant and not the goal, and wikipedia is not a person, besides "Many a peacock hides his feathers and calls it his pride."  And I think I made my point clear when I said the eye passes over it - it's clear what I believe the weakness is - so what's your point?  Each person can judge for themselves, I was just begging the question.  Regarding icons having opposition at every turn:  I don't know what you're talking about, but they've definitely had some substantial support in this poll. I think you're taking your own opinion and projecting it on the community. Kevin Baastalk 22:51, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Voting/Discussion

message: #Support; the single, mostly white large banner helps to reduce the feeling of clutter, and I like the larger number of portal links.--ragesoss 21:06, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Portals in banner, large

message: ====support====
#Support. Good number of portals and better icons. Gflores Talk 01:29, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Search banner, 10 portals, alt. icons

message: #Support. Good number of portals and better icons. Gflores Talk 01:29, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: support

message: #Oppose. While I like being able to distinguish icons more by color and shape, this particular set is too cartoony and XP-like.--ragesoss 21:10, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: oppose

message: ====support====
#Support.  Portals should be given more attention, wikipedia needs to look well-organized and like it covers a wide-range of topics (is discursive). Kevin Baastalk 00:35, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Search banner, 15 portals

message: #Support.  Portals should be given more attention, wikipedia needs to look well-organized and like it covers a wide-range of topics (is discursive). Kevin Baastalk 00:35, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: support

message: #oppose. Iconified portals take up too much room.  Also, the economics icon is square and ugly.--ragesoss 21:08, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: oppose

message: # Support. Two things - we need a prominant search, and icons distract too much - Trevor MacInnis (Talk | Contribs) 00:31, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Who needs "showy"? It's very modest and as the shortest alows you to see the content below. I don't think the eye just passes over it. Besides, we DON'T want to make a big deal with icons, which have had opposition at every turn.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 13:19, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia needs showy.  That's who.  Modesty is completely irrelevant and not the goal, and wikipedia is not a person, besides "Many a peacock hides his feathers and calls it his pride."  And I think I made my point clear when I said the eye passes over it - it's clear what I believe the weakness is - so what's your point?  Each person can judge for themselves, I was just begging the question.  Regarding icons having opposition at every turn:  I don't know what you're talking about, but they've definitely had some substantial support in this poll. I think you're taking your own opinion and projecting it on the community. Kevin Baastalk 22:51, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Search banner, 11 portals, no icons

message: #Oppose.  Too many undifferentiated links, unclear; fades into oblivion - the eye just passes over it. Kevin Baastalk 00:13, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Who needs "showy"? It's very modest and as the shortest alows you to see the content below. I don't think the eye just passes over it. Besides, we DON'T want to make a big deal with icons, which have had opposition at every turn.--HereToHelp (talk • contribs) 13:19, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia needs showy.  That's who.  Modesty is completely irrelevant and not the goal, and wikipedia is not a person, besides "Many a peacock hides his feathers and calls it his pride."  And I think I made my point clear when I said the eye passes over it - it's clear what I believe the weakness is - so what's your point?  Each person can judge for themselves, I was just begging the question.  Regarding icons having opposition at every turn:  I don't know what you're talking about, but they've definitely had some substantial support in this poll. I think you're taking your own opinion and projecting it on the community. Kevin Baastalk 22:51, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Oppose