### a few comments * the properties are highlighted, not the more important values * the items in the Identifier and Wikipedia link boxes should be aligned * the contrast is very low in the "Berlin, Germany" line ### questions Is there a good reason for: * the blue boxes? * the gradient in the boxes on the right? * How do you count the number of discussion topics? * Why not integrating this number in the discussion tab on the top. * Are there so many discussions on wikidata items, that a so prominent discussion box is appropriate? ### general notes Maybe you should consider the the theory of data-ink-ratio: "A large share of ink on a graphic should present data-information, the ink changing as the data change. Data-ink is the non-erasable core of a graphic, the non-redundant ink arranged in response to variation in the numbers represented." http://www.infovis-wiki.net/index.php/Data-Ink_Ratio Here are two blog posts you should read: http://darkhorseanalytics.com/blog/clear-off-the-table/ http://darkhorseanalytics.com/blog/data-looks-better-naked/ Lukas Am Di 24.06.2014 17:46, schrieb Lydia Pintscher: to be ;-) _______________________________________________ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l

### a few comments * the properties are highlighted, not the more important values

* the items in the Identifier and Wikipedia link boxes should be aligned

* the contrast is very low in the "Berlin, Germany" line

### questions Is there a good reason for: * the blue boxes?

* the gradient in the boxes on the right?

* How do you count the number of discussion topics?

* Why not integrating this number in the discussion tab on the top.

* Are there so many discussions on wikidata items, that a so prominent discussion box is appropriate?