Have you guys tried the new Wikipedia interface already? It's currently in open Beta for people with Wikipedia accounts (free registration).
Its barely a noticeable difference. Interface is 90% the same, just added some gradients to the tabs up top.
Content is KING, sir. That's why it's so popular. People don't go to WikiPedia to see a silly flash animation and then have to click "Click to enter this site!" like so many others do. I don't see how "awful" their page UI is. Please ellaborate.
WikiPedia 's front page (http://wikipedia.org/) is a glorified search box. Most people do not go through the front page. Most get to the site via Google (another web site with a search box on the front page). But if one (woke up from a 10 year coma and then) went to WikiPedia's front page, how would one find out what the web site is all about, from the front page. There is no About Us link. (There is a WikiMedia Project button way at the bottom.) There is no *mission* statement. There is no *donate* button. There is no "10 most popular articles for today". There is no explanation why one should trust a crowd sourced, anonymous encyclopedia article, with minimum editorial oversight. etc. Most of the standard front page stuff can be found once you click through on a language, e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page. But that is not the front page.
How do you know this? Did you do some research? I know lots of people who DO use the main page, sir, but I wouldn't say "all do" or "most don't." That wouldn't be right. I still wouldn't agree that it's awful as you put it initially. They don't want you to donate right off the bat. They want you to search. They want you to choose the proper channel as far as language. I don't think it's awful. Awful is such a harsh word. Don't say awful, man.
Here you go: Wikipedia data memo dated April 2007 I work for a content website (http://cnx.org/). The 70% roughly corresponds to what we see as well.
Ok... fair enough for you, but... where is "Hitwise" getting these stats...? I still don't say the main page is "awful." You must agree with me on this... it's not like people don't go there first because it's not pretty. You know? Besides, people find out about WikiPedia because people link to it via their sites, therefore getting spiders and robots going through the entire WikiPedia site and filling search engines' indexes with their results. It's not WikiPedia's fault this has happened this way. FYI, link to cnx.org FAIL.
I actually agree. I probably should have used "simplistic" instead of "awful". The search box is WikiPedia's mission statement. Same thing can be said for Google. From my standpoint, a website with a incredibly simple UI like WikiPedia is not necessarily a bad thing, in all cases. UI professionals may disagree. I can see their point as well. People spend 10 seconds looking at a front page, deciding whether to stay or surf on. Simplistic UIs do not encourage the former. But Google keeps directing traffic back to WikiPedia (for very good reasons) and eventually users get past the first impressions. This is the typical battle of the First Time User use case versus the Return User use case. The First Time user has much different needs than the Return User. The WikiPedia Return User wants to search the d*mn site and not navigate around the mission statement et. al.
