NYT is an interesting case study for us. Online newspapers generally adopted a deliberately old fashioned look and feel because they strongly believed (and have some evidence) that traditional presentation enhances credibility. Newspapers modernize presentation very conservatively on paper and only rarely change paper size or key fonts. Mastheads are deliberately intended to look 100 years old. Their online presentation less rigid, but generally echos the paper version. I note that although they are modernizing and incorporating some of this decades web presentation trends (more whitespace, bigger pictures, less clutter) they are still using a serif font. Most web sites (including Wikipedia) use sans serif fonts. The ones that don't are often doing it on purpose to evoke feelings of old fashioned credibility. Notable examples are practically all online newspapers (even many that never had a paper version like the Huffington Post) and britannica.com. If we ever put significant work into our online style I suspect we'll have similar parameters to the NYT redesign, less clutter, more whitespace, but keeping the overall feel strongly connected to the old version because it is what users associate with our brand. I doubt we'd change font. Modernity is a selling point for us, not a weakness. We need to modernize to keep us out of that awkward spot that brands, buildings and hobbies fall into where you are no longer new and fashionable, but are not yet a 100 year old tradition. Luke Welling On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 2:18 AM, Fabrice Florin <fflorin(a)wikimedia.org> wrote: _______________________________________________ EE mailing list EE(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ee

Have you checked out the mobile site (en.m.wikipedia.org <http://en.m.wikipedia.org>) recently? We're moving slowly in that direction – though our watchlist star doesn't spin... yet :)