Talk:Web usability

message: Excuse me if my form is incorrect. I'm not a Wikipedia power user.
Point 4) in the General section breaks rule 3).  Does 'right' mean 'as opposed to left' or does it mean 'correct'?
3) To remove any ambiguity [snip]
4) Put the most important thing in the right place on a web page or a web application.
Atucovic (talk) 21:04, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hum, I think it means the 'correct' place. Not sure how this breaks rule 3, you can put something on the correct place but still make it ambiguous, so you needd to apply both rules. --Enric Naval (talk) 00:35, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification (in other words, Irony) 

message: Lil112 (talk) 01:36, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference clarification request

message: Lil112 (talk) 01:51, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions for article structure

message: An other suggestion for deeper understanding of Web Usability is: Designing Web Usability by Jacob Nielsen. --MB 14:35, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions for See Also 

message: *Don't Make Me Think by Steve Krug is probably the most accessible and helpful intro to usability. 
Ronz removed my link to this. This is an *internal link* to a _stub article_ that needs expansion. How will the stub get expanded if it's not linked to another relevant theme / topic? Few people will find it. Further, the fact that this article omits Krug's work makes it far less useful, since Krug is one of the few authors that writes a "usability" guide that's actually usable. (ironically)
To the power guys who have a lot more sway than me in this Wikiworld: Please include some links to Krug's content here, as he's the only author that writes stuff that anyone can read and absorb quickly. I've struggled with hiring multiple web design firms that have little idea of their lack of usability. Given that we'll all spend about 30 years online during our lifetimes, better usability is truly a service to humanity.
(PS - on a personal note, I'm working on a usability project today, and I was hoping I'd find some really useful new stuff on the wikipedia page, but didn't find this super helpful. Can we pls improve the usefulness of this page for those seeking to learn and apply usability principles?? Many thanks -)
Thanks
Globalfix (talk) 19:10, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, "Don't Make Me Think" is a renown reference in Web usability. It's worth adding it to this article, even if it's still a stub. Dodoïste (talk) 15:51, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Don't Make Me Think]] by Steve Krug

message: I added this section to summarise the key points and goals of Usability Testing.
MB 18:49, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Conclusion

message: This is an average article on the English Wikipedia. It has some useful information, but there is/are:
*Redundancy in text in many sections; should follow WP:REDUNDANCY and WP:DUE
*Excessive use of "we" pronouns; should follow WP:NPOV
*Direct addressing of readers, lack of neutral language; should follow MOS:NOTE
*Inappropriate external links; should follow WP:EL
*Bare URLs in citations; should follow MOS:CITE AND WP:RS
Pinging article creator and active editors:
, , , ,  ,  — CrafterNova [ TALK ] [ CONT ] 12:20, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd add WP:SOAP/POV problems due to the heavy reliance on poor, non-independent references. --Hipal (talk) 15:51, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

text: This might be included in what you said above, but I'd also add that all uses of "should" should be attributed to someone, not in wikivoice. Wracking 💬 07:52, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs major copyediting, reorganization, removal of redundancy and due weight