I really appreciate the thought that went into this, but it still misses the mark for me.
It's nice to look at it, but I can't help but feel like accessibility took a backseat to aesthetics. Wikipedia's ugly and utilitarian, but it's fast and accessible across a wide range of connection speeds and devices. This is what Wikipedia is about: Getting information to as many people as possible. Anything that hinders that is wrong, in my opinion.
I think there would be significantly more value in picking an "awkward" article and making stylistic changes to improve readability and possibly page performance.
I really appreciate the thought that went into this, but it still misses the mark for me.
It's nice to look at it, but I can't help but feel like accessibility took a backseat to aesthetics. Wikipedia's ugly and utilitarian, but it's fast and accessible across a wide range of connection speeds and devices. This is what Wikipedia is about: Getting information to as many people as possible. Anything that hinders that is wrong, in my opinion.
I think there would be significantly more value in picking an "awkward" article and making stylistic changes to improve readability and possibly page performance.