Talk:Welcome to Citizendium/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
imported>Nancy Sculerati |
imported>Joe Quick |
||
Line 180: | Line 180: | ||
I like #2-the walking figures. But both are good. [[User:Nancy Sculerati|Nancy Sculerati]] 14:14, 26 March 2007 (CDT) | I like #2-the walking figures. But both are good. [[User:Nancy Sculerati|Nancy Sculerati]] 14:14, 26 March 2007 (CDT) | ||
Yeah, I definitely prefer the walking figures, although the face is also much clearer now. I also really like the new Arts button, BTW. Great work on this project. [[User:Joe Quick|--Joe Quick]] ([[User talk:Joe Quick|Talk]]) 23:51, 26 March 2007 (CDT) | |||
== ''''''A place for geezers'''''' == | == ''''''A place for geezers'''''' == |
Revision as of 04:51, 27 March 2007
Should we add some extra entry point articles to the main page? Please add your ideas below. --Larry Sanger 15:47, 13 March 2007 (CDT)
Probably we should stick to lists, overviews, and summary-type topics. Otherwise we end up making decisions about what individual topics within a field are most important--when the decision is almost always going to be completely arbitrary. That rules out the following suggestions (all of which are, obviously, extremely important topics for articles):
- Topics that are (though important) not broad enough to include: Evolution - Tectonics - Magnetic North - e and i and pi - Isaac Newton Albert Einstein - Adam Smith and Karl Marx - Montessori Teaching - Psychoanalysis - Football (soccer) and American Football :) - Natural Law
--Larry Sanger 20:43, 13 March 2007 (CDT)
- Natural Science
- Astronomy - the planets or list of planets
- Biology -
- Chemistry - the elements
- Computers - most common programming languages
- Earth Sciences
- Engineering
- Health Sciences - human body - how drugs work - human physiology
- Mathematics
- Physics - Light - Sound
- Social Sciences
- Anthropology
- Archaeology
- Economics -
- Education -
- Geography - countries of the world (or?) World Gazetteer
- Law
- Linguistics - English language - major world languages - how languages develop - origin of speech
- Politics - political ideologies or list of political ideologies
- Psychology -
- Sociology
- Humanities
- Classics - ancient Rome - ancient Greece
- History - outline of world history
- Literature - major works by language
- Philosophy - outline of the history of philosophy - Western philosophers
- Religion - world religions or list of religions or list of world religions
- Arts
- Architecture
- Music - list of musical genres (or whatever) - history of Western classical music - (or?) musical instruments
- Theater
- Visual Arts
- Applied Arts
- Agriculture - list of crops
- Business - major world corporations
- Healing Arts - alternative or complementary medicine
- Journalism - major world newspapers
- Library and Information Science
- Media
- Military - modern weaponry
How about quit trying here to find one or two additional specific lists per topic and instead add one additional generic entry per topic (maybe even as an icon) which leads to a "Most commonly looked up in XXXXX" page. This might be generated automatically from search results (using the Workgroup association as criterium where to list it), but I'm not sure if we really want that (who knows what comes out of that). Alternatively we could create that article based on our opinion what non-experts in the topic would most probably want to (or should) look at. So for Physics (where I'm non-expert) I could imagine links to Speed of Light, Fusion, Einstein, Entropy, ... on such a page. Would make the proposal process here less of a problem. --Markus Baumeister 13:58, 14 March 2007 (CDT)
One problem with the suggestion is that it is the sort of thing that CZ is set up to counteract! The Internet is full of projects that automatically aggregate popular opinion. What people are looking for in CZ is meaningful, human-created, reviewed information. Speaking for myself, I'd be much more interested in seeing a link to an outline of the history of the world than "most-searched-for history topics." --Larry Sanger 14:10, 14 March 2007 (CDT)
Sorry to ask, but you did read past the forth line of my proposal (past the "I'm not sure if we really want that"), didn't you? --Markus Baumeister 19:09, 14 March 2007 (CDT)
I admit that sometimes I do read some messages rather quickly, if I have time to answer them at all. Anyway, even a human-constructed list of "top X articles" is of only limited interest and value: we actually recently deleted a whole set of such category pages (e.g., we removed all articles from Category:Philosophy Workgroup (Top)). Anyway, of more interest to most users and contributors is something relatively specific, not generic. For both groups of people, "top philosophy articles" won't be as interesting as "outline of the history of philosophy" (for example). --Larry Sanger 19:46, 14 March 2007 (CDT)
Workgroup icons
I didn't comment when they appeared (not at all like me!), but I love the icons and the new look to the Main Page. It's gorgeous altogether and really getting distinctive.However, I think the buttons could be played with- I admit it's idiosyncratic but every time I see NS I think it's my initials, and I will spare you my reflexive read of "AAS". What about just N for natural sciences and AA for Applied Arts & Sciences?, or can we have symbols that are not letters? Are there any universal symbols for these? Nancy Sculerati MD 12:07, 18 March 2007 (CDT)
- We can use anything at all. The changes would be trivial since I have all of those files as layers in photoshop.
- Another aspect that struck me recently is the sciences blue (for boys) and the arts pink/red (for girls) subliminal message. I think it could be avoided by removing the red/pink for arts, especially since it is a terrible match with the green AAS from a colour blindness perspective. Although, with respect to colour blindness, I'm not sure if we need to consider this more as long as we have symbols or letters too.
- With regard to acronyms, is AA any better than AAS? Or is it OK to imply all who participate in the applied arts are alcoholics? ;) Chris Day (Talk) 12:23, 18 March 2007 (CDT)
Well, nice little icons would be better than letters anyway. NS => test tube. SS => idealized person/human head. H => book. A => tiny but still recognizable reproduction of some famous piece of art. AAS => bridge. R => joystick; or generic ball. --Larry Sanger 12:31, 18 March 2007 (CDT)
- [Edit Clash] By the way, I had originally considered pictorial rather than letters, but did not want to waste time if the buttons proved to be unpopular. The letters were just the easy option. Obvious chioces might include a book for humanities, a flask for natural sciences (or cartoon atom), paint palette for arts, possibly a drafting compass for applied, a football of sports? You get the idea. What best represent these supercategories? If you come up more ideas I can show you what they would look like in practice. Chris Day (Talk) 12:36, 18 March 2007 (CDT)
It's a great button. The problem with recreation as a category is that includes everything from antique collecting to the dog and cat and tropical fish fancy to stamps & coins- as well as sports and games.I think this is good for now, but maybe someday it will be the sports button and we'll have something more abstract for rec. Nancy Sculerati MD 18:02, 18 March 2007 (CDT)
- Why not more abstract now, but what? I'll sleep on it. Any ideas welcome. Chris Day (Talk) 20:34, 18 March 2007 (CDT)
Tried a Roman viaduct for the applied arts but is a dead loss for the small buttons. . back to the drawing board. Something like cisco systems logo might work. Chris Day (Talk) 00:26, 19 March 2007 (CDT)
About all I can think of is the infinity symbol! Or an asterix, I don't know that either is better. I think the buttons are great. If you made them 20% larger would they still work? The viaduct might work then- or maybe a roman arch. I admire both your photoshop skills and artistic eye. Nancy Sculerati MD 05:04, 19 March 2007 (CDT)
Hi Chris,
Whatever you do, can you get the buttons done fairly soon? In the interests of presenting a good face to the public for launch? --Larry Sanger 20:34, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
- Sure do we have a date? Chris Day (Talk) 21:38, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
- I'd prefer not to answer that question for very mysterious reasons. The sooner the better, please. --Larry Sanger 23:53, 21 March 2007 (CDT)
I have been playing around with three different buttons. Can i get some feed back on the ones below? Thanks Chris Day (Talk) 14:36, 23 March 2007 (CDT)
Hi Chris, thanks so much for your work on these. I like the NS, SS, and Rec icons now on the front page. I don't recognize what the AAS icon means (I'm really an ignoramus about some things). As to the new ones, what would be using the large icons for? As to the smaller icons, I prefer A to E; F to B (simply because it's darker); G to C (I can't tell what C is supposed to be without the larger icon above it); and D to H (H has no definite associations, doesn't seem to suggest recreation particularly). A book for humanities and a paintbrush for Arts would do it; a bridge for AAS, but I'm not so sure about that one. --Larry Sanger 14:47, 23 March 2007 (CDT)
- The current AAS one on the main page is a dud. it was meant to be a Roman viaduct. Instead it looks like a blob. I intend to redo it.
- As far as the size is concerned the big ones will never be used. In the table above, it was just to make it easier to see. FYI, the small and big versions above are the exact same file. Thanks for the comments, will try and finish up the others soon. Chris Day (Talk) 14:52, 23 March 2007 (CDT)
While you're in designer mode, could I ask you to do something else? Could you add the word "beta" in some fancy way to Image:Logo400gr.jpg as well as Image:Logo900gr.jpg, and for use on [1] ? That would be great! --Larry Sanger 15:08, 23 March 2007 (CDT)
- Assuming you like the beta logo that is already on the main page here are two options.
- I can probably create anything you want so if these are not the sort of thing you had in mind, please suggest away. Chris Day (Talk) 15:49, 23 March 2007 (CDT)
These are really nice. Good work. My preferences are the same as Larry's except that it really bothers me aesthetically that the flask and the hand have such different orientations. I'm probably alone in this, but I would like to see the flask on A mirrored vertically. --Joe Quick (Talk) 15:53, 23 March 2007 (CDT)
- I can easily flip the flask. here is a more fun beta version. Chris Day (Talk) 16:06, 23 March 2007 (CDT)
Wow, great! Can you do the diagonally oriented "beta" but without the nails? Let me see now... I'm not sure I'll want to stick with the nails, but I don't like the "beta" being horizontal, potentially interfere's with a first-time user's being able to recognize that it's a key. But let me try it out on the front page! --Larry Sanger 16:34, 23 March 2007 (CDT)
- Got to run now. I replaced the main page picture with your preference. Any tweeks i can do later, if necessary. Chris Day (Talk) 17:10, 23 March 2007 (CDT)
I admire your work, Chris. I agree with both Lary and Joe about specific preferences- except I think the different orienations of the hand and flask are better, because they give more information with a quick glance that identifies each uniquely. Do they have to be next to each other on the list? That's what makes the different orientation disturbing, those two are the most grossly alike-but flipped. The hand could be used for applied arts or humanities if you could think of switches. I don't think it's a natural symbol for the Social Sciences, maybe a crowd would be - or two adults facing each other. Nancy Sculerati MD 16:45, 23 March 2007 (CDT)
- I'll try the heads facing each other. In general people look like blobs on the tiny buttons. The hand is very distinct. But i agree it could easily be AA or H. Chris Day (Talk) 17:10, 23 March 2007 (CDT)
- Or just a single head. --Larry Sanger 21:14, 23 March 2007 (CDT)
- Nancy could definitely be right about the orientation, but as it stands, NS and SS are next to each other on the workgroups page. I like G for social sciences, so the hand would be free but a hand for applied arts or humanities strikes me as strange. I like an open book for humanities. Dunno about AA. --Joe Quick (Talk) 01:16, 24 March 2007 (CDT)
I think the hand works fine for applied arts (except for library science, but even there we have writing, all by the hand of man, so to speak.). The hand does not suggest social science to me in any way, but human faces would, especially if more than one and interacting-two profiles talking, facing each other could do it, maybe - for social science. The ball is good for recreation, the flask is great for natural sciences, a paint brush for Arts and an open book for the humanities. Unless you can think of better, Chris. Nancy Nancy Sculerati MD 12:19, 24 March 2007 (CDT)
- OK, now live on notice board means a timline is not so relevant. Will get up new buttons as soon as possible. Chris Day (Talk) 14:47, 25 March 2007 (CDT)
I hope these icons will do for now? The bridge and art palette could be a lot better. Still struggling to make shte heads looks anything other than blobs on the small button. Chris Day (Talk) 03:27, 26 March 2007 (CDT)
What good work! If you make the heads on the small button black (or dark-high value,) rather than the space between, I think it might then be obviously two heads. It's coming across as a trophy because the space between is what's emphasized. One reason I like the hand better for Applied Arts is because of the popularity of the internet for health and healing arts topics by the public (I can give you references, in general this is said to be the biggest use of internet for people seeking general academic-type information)- the bridge is more strictly engineering. The hand works for each major subdiscipline listed under Applied Arts. No strong opinion on its orientation. Nancy Nancy Sculerati 09:54, 26 March 2007 (CDT)
A huge improvement--thanks so much, Chris. --Larry Sanger 09:18, 26 March 2007 (CDT)
I still like G (from above) for SS. In the smaller size, the human silhouettes are much clearer. --Joe Quick (Talk) 12:18, 26 March 2007 (CDT)
- Hi Joe, I think you might be right. If I made the silhouettes more black then G could be even better. It is very hard to get a face to look like a face on the small button. Everything to date looks like a blob. Chris Day (Talk) 12:30, 26 March 2007 (CDT)
I like #2-the walking figures. But both are good. Nancy Sculerati 14:14, 26 March 2007 (CDT)
Yeah, I definitely prefer the walking figures, although the face is also much clearer now. I also really like the new Arts button, BTW. Great work on this project. --Joe Quick (Talk) 23:51, 26 March 2007 (CDT)
'A place for geezers'
I would like to see a section in each topic for the memories of the people involved in the initial phases or actual events. This would not be construed as an addition to or modification of the facts... and should be understood as personal observations that may add richness to the dryness of historical fact. Many personal remembrances (WW II survivors, holocaust survivors, Freedom Marchers, space pioneers, etc) will be lost forever if not recorded soon. Ron
See CZ:Topic Informant Workgroup! --Larry Sanger 10:24, 26 March 2007 (CDT)