Yep. I just made you sing a DJ turntable scratch disk remix by reading the title. So what is this really about? Wikipedia—Our friend—a teacher's nemesis. Why? Credibility quite obviously, the fact that it may be changed by any person, and now you research paper has a nice twist. I know you may reading through many blogs today so how about we start with some fun images, establishing the mood of Wikipedia.
Alright, the case study. It is a beautifully lay'd out, easy to read and quite relatable. As I have understood to get full credit on these, I need to follow a specific rubric headlines, questions and answers, kind of wish to go on a tangent though and just enjoy the experience and write what flows out of my mind.
____
Firstly,
What is the experience, and who is the audience?
The experience at first is horrifyingly busy, with not enough clear hierarchy. Reading through a wall of text is overwhelming that even it cannot save your grade before you leave for something else. Now thats a love story. Wikipedia has main pages with news that rarely ever gets any visit, its usually a user is directed straight from google to a search result.
The goal with this was to make something look credible, a cleanly lain out easy to read encyclopedia, with an easy index to follow, beautiful visuals and breaks, credible sourcing, and honestly I think it could be a big hit. Users wont have to feel bad at donating $3 or $4 to support the initiative. Imagine it being like a museum experience of knowledge, this really has lots of potential!
Our audience ranges from every day people to a more focused demographic of kids and young adults. But what about adults and older people? Yes of course. When you ask a digital assistant such as Siri, Google assistant, Bixby, or Amazons Alexa, their replies filter from wikipedia!
Below we have our beautiful study on users of different skill levels and age range, as well as touchpoint or annotations on the user experience as they move throughout the site. Spoiler; they all end with disappointment. Oh and they had actual interviews with users.
What about this example is provocative/interesting?
The case study explores a service a lot of people take for granted. Alex does a fine job on his case study, in the research phase and development of making this website something better and potentially more accepted.
I think its quite neat seeing the process of another designer in their quest to change the world. Sometimes as the one doing it, it may seem like a chore. It shows us designers have more meaning than per-say an artist drawing abstract forms on a canvas. It takes research, sketching, wireframing.
The final result is quite successful, it stays true to what Wikipedia was but with a much needed refresh, shame its not real. If I were to change the design in any other way was the ability to read it in a better reader view such as books, and push the headline contrast even more, really let the type speak as the visuals do, that we captivate both a younger and older audience at the same time, boldness for the young, legibility for the old. Finally and most importantly, we need to reestablish the credibility by showing edited history and the credentials of those that have input on information, a comment system may help if the community is willing, and we have one killer product.
Have a good day Lauren. :)
Comments
Post a Comment