No. Our default skin is terrible. We have to implement something which is easily usable by the masses who read Wikipedia. Let's work on a good clean, cross-platform and -browser design which does not turn newcomers away. Our current Phase3 skin can remain as an option. Any registered user is free to set their own skin -- so registered users who prefer Phase3 skin can simply change their preferences!

Richard Grevers wrote: I have already said what is terrible about it. I don't want to repeat myself. Read the archive. I *had* thought that we needed to rethink our skin system from scratch. If everybody else is happy to keep making tweaks and not address the main problems, fine. I've just wasted my weekend working on designs, but never mind.

Erik Moeller wrote: My idea for a roadmap was this: 1. Create a new default skin that is more friendly to newcomers & casual readers. (Maybe even alter eveyone's preferences so people on Phase3 skin stay on Phase3 skin.) I don't think that what registered users like is as important as what is sound design and clear for unregistered users. Check my earlier post on "Lusers' eyes glaze over when faced with Wikipedia pages". 2. I can cope with PHP well enough to program this under the current skin system. 2b. Tweak the Phase3 skin so it's a little better. 3. (long term) Work on a template system 4. recode existing skins as templates and add new ones In the meantime, please could someone answer my question: I have CVS access. How do I put things on the text server?

Erik Moeller wrote: Well so far I've been happy to read people's comments and criticisms and make changes. (see the comment pages on Meta). I'm quite prepared to do that -- go through many cycles of development, comments, development, comments. I *did* say early that my intention was that we'd keep Phase3 skin as one of the user preferences. But we *badly* need a more n00b-friendly skin. (For example: I have been trying to get Wikipedia bookmarked in all libraries across my area, but the way it looks at the moment, most people just find it too confusing -- people have to remember: lusers start reading at the top left and keep going. At the moment, they think our site is called "Main Page <http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page> | Recent changes <http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Recentchanges> | Edit this page <http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Main_Page&action=edit> | Page history <http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Main_Page&action=history>") However, if this turns into Yet Another Vote In Which Nothing Gets Decided, then I think my time is better spent .... hmmm... playing Solitaire. Instead of many skins competing for votes, I would rather have a small core of designers work on one project, and get feedback from wikipedians at large to gradually reach something we're happy with. (I don't recall we voted on Magnus' PHP script, or Lee's Phase 3. ;) ) Thanks.

Tomasz- It counted stubs before as well. Virtually every stub has a comma. Furthermore, the old method broke several non-English counts, which is why we changed it. Many people simply disagree that stubs should not be counted, so they have voted accordingly. The new method only counts stubs that are wikified. You are free to disapprove of the result, but you are a small minority. Regards, Erik

Tomasz- 6.43% on en:, actually, and that doesn't count the new articles that were created between May 14 and May 25. The new count system simply gets more articles which are not in prose format but which do contain links, such as lists. What I remember is that people on some Wikipedias inserted commas into articles to have them counted. That, again, is a matter of opinion. You will have to live with the fact that not everyone agrees with yours. Regards, Erik