On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 6:26 AM, Brian Wolff bawolff@gmail.com wrote:
.. By "lower quality" I mean both subjectively, but also objectively. For example, today I was reading https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Hamilton_wins_%27incredible%27_Bahrain_race,_F1... (enwikinews is one of the few wikis I haven't overridden the font changes with css). At first I thought there was a typo in the image caption toward the end of the page, an extra space between "prote" and "stor". But no, the kerning on the font chosen is just literally that bad, that you can't tell if it is an extra space, or just a kerning error. I call that objectively bad (There's other things I don't like about the font choice, but they are more touchy-feely subjective)
I can reproduce this. It looks _very_ bad on Firefox/Fedora Core 19, and but it also appears to a lesser degree on Chrome/Fedora Core 19.
Compare it against monobook
https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Hamilton_wins_%27incredible%27_Bahrain_race,_F1...
See also the "ама" in the bold title in the first sentence of
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/?oldid=58319520
vs
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/?oldid=58319520&useskin=monobook