Wikipedia.org, along with all wiki's, present many design challenges. Because a wiki's content is primarily provided by users, the design must be flexible and dynamic enough to accomodate a broad range of both information and media. Wikipedia's site has a "barebones" feel, which can probably be attributed to its non-profit nature. While critiquing wikipedia's design, one must keep in mind that their bandwidth is limited, and because of its poplularity is often very slow during peak times. Thus, one must count out large graphics files and any other design feature that might slow down the site or make it less accessible to its international clientele.

The front page is fairly sparse, and serves its purpose as a portal to its "main page" written in each language it supports. It does not use any sort of flag to denote the languages, which could make it slightly easier to navigate (though too many graphics may serve as a strain on the server).

The front page of Wikipedia.org features the logo surrounded in a circular fassion by each of the primary languages it is composed of. The logo is a great reflection of the intent of the site itself. It combines the elements of a globe, characters from different languages, and pieces of a puzzle, of which a few are missing. Together, these elements do a very good job of describing the role of Wikipedia. The globe sends the message that both the content and the authors of the material are culled from all over the world. The interlocking pieces of the puzzle convey how the articles are linked together, and the puzzle is incomplete to convey how the wiki is an ongoing, never finished work. Letters from various foreign languages fill in each puzzle piece, denoting the diversity of languages in which the wikipedia is written, and the diversity of the subjects for which it has articles. Cleverly, the smaller version of the icon rests in one of the puzzle pieces.



This distinctive "W" can also be found as Wikipedia's icon when used as Firefox's built in search bar option, and to the left of the URL.

While the concept of the wikipedia logo is great, I think it can be taken farther. While I can imagine a more interactive logo that has hotspots and changes states according to mouse-overs, this type of thing may detract from the message neutrality and simplicity displayed across the rest of the site. As encyclopedias are often thought of as dry, boring docuements, the lack of color in wikipedia's logo doesn't do much to make one think differently about this one. A few distinctive colors such as red and yellow would make the logo more eye catching, and more memorable as well. The characters inside the puzzle peices could be written in the same set of colors so that they would be more eye catching. Indeed, choosing just one color other than black and white would allow the logo to remain simple, yet make it more memorable and less bland.

Wikipedia's main page is probably where the designers intended most users to start a visit, as it has a new featured article each day that keep visitors interested in checking in often. Interestingly, the design on the main page (and most of the rest of the site) is different than on the language portal page. At the top edge, we see a grey and white sunburst design that seems to orignate from the middle of the page. This design is found throughout the site, and is probably intended to serve as a neutral background for its wide bredth of articles.

At the top of each of the articles are several tabs that pop seemlessly out of the document. These are well placed to catch the eye, and are intuitive to use. However, they are in plain text and could be spruced up and made easier to see if they were turned into colorful text or textured buttons.

The left column has a similar aesthetic, and is composed of "Navigation", "Search" "Toolbox", and "Other Languages" sections in that order. Wikipedia is a highly search intensive site, yet the "search bar" seems burried under much less frequently used features in the "Navigation" list. I would suggest putting search bars at more prominent locations at the top and bottom of each page instead, as it doesn't seem to belong with the other links on the sidebar. While turning eacher category into a rollover image that expands to show links may not be an option, I would at least spruce up the links that are there. The links in the sidebar are in plain text with the same dull blue-green bullet point next to each of them. I would color code each of the bulletpoints based on category, and when possible have a small icon next to each of them to give a visual clue. One example would be to put a $ symbol next to the "Donations" link.