Hi, im fuser from Wikli beta ( Wikli beta ). This is a Wikipedia search engine. I heard many people complaining about Wikipedia's inner search mode. Some people said it only shows the title of the article and that is not user friendly so they preferred to put in Google " wikipedia xxxxx" instead of going into Wikipedia and search. Thats why i created Wikli. Its the easiest and most simple way to search through all of Wikipedia's content.

What do you think about the design, logo (i know theres a logo review forum but i dont want to put another thread only for the logo.. i would do it if i had to logos and wanted an opinion on which one to choose but its not the case right now) , functionality etc.. Would you use it when searching for something in Wikipedia?

All comments will be taken into consideration!

Thanks, fuser

__________________

It's a nice idea, though I'm not sure what more it does that a google search.

The home page needs a tag line to explain what it is. It does not seem possible to make successive searches without going back to the home page - and there is no 'home' button. The bottom links are below the fold on my notebook...

__________________
Paul Bilton design services ~ Sites not Sights

It's a pretty simple, yet useful concept. I take it you're just serving Google results, but filtered to only show the .wikipedia.org domain...? The logo is very nice and 2.0-style, but if you're looking further ahead you may want to design your own from scratch - it looks to me as if you've used a couple of generators and pre-designed badges that I've seen on the net.

However, I fail to see how going to your site is easier than simply typing 'wikipedia xxxxx' into their Google Toolbar or even Google itself. It's a nice idea, but I don't really feel that it gives the user anything different or saves them any time or effort.

__________________
-tamecrow | UK SEO Company | Follow me on Twitter...

The site doesn't seem like it is any more useful than doing a Google search, as has been mentioned above. All it does is give a rehash of a Google search, and it includes talk and other non-article pages that are very likely not what the user is looking for. Honestly, there are better wikipedia search sites out there - wikiwix is probably the best (wikiwix.com) because it limits results to articles, and it pulls information directly from the wikipedia index, displaying information that is not even available in a Google search, such as category information. The site is far from perfect, but can give you some ideas that may help you make your site more effective.

__________________
The best way to learn anything, is to question everything.

Except for it being specific to searching a site that has been through the wringer for their inaccurate information, I really don't see any use in the site.

__________________
www.geocities.com/rayasroost/index.htm
No money for a hosting site with no ads.

Conceptually, it's fine. It works well, there's no "fluff" (flashing ads, junk links or scrolling noise) and the site runs pretty fast.

From a readability standpoint, I'd recommend that you change the results pages so that you're reading darker text on a light (white) background. The url's listed at the bottom of each result are pretty much intelligible.

While the dark page background really seems to *pop* your logo, it'll look just fine on white as well. You've already applied drop shadows and reflections, so consider changing the background colour as well.

Additionally, consider that some users may wish to print results pages. With the background as dark as it is, they'll use a quart of ink or a pound of toner per page and it won't be readable.

Every time I see a site that uses dark pages similar to what you've done, I get the impression I'm on a L33t haxor site (circa 1996), that every click is going to spawn a bajillion pr0n popups or have some rogue script attempt to install a backdoor trojan.


.02

__________________
.
Printer ink & toner cartridges in Canada | Integrated Web Payroll, Online HRMS Tools with Employee Time & Attendance

I think that the chocolate colored background is offputting. I like the color, but maybe it could be a border and the results should definitely be on white. The logo seems friendly enough. But maybe your positioning statement should go directly under the logo. So I see logo, "what is is" then searchbox.

__________________
Austin video production - Full service corporate, non-profit and broadcast video production - Video production Austin

Hi, thanks everybody...

Ive included a firefox extension...

What do you think?

Thanks, fuser

__________________

[sarcasm]

That's wonderful.

I think you're on to something. Perhaps you could make the page more sticky by turning everything darker, including the text!

Yep, dark as humanly possible. Make it challenging for viewers to decipher objects on the page. It makes people feel good about themselves and bolsters their self esteem when they accomplish seemingly impossible tasks when thousands of others would just give up and move on.

It's not quite dark enough because I was still able to find a grammatical error. On the other hand, maybe it is dark enough if you missed it, or was this intended to be an "easter egg"?
Man, that was clever, you almost got me with that one. See, now I feel a sense of accomplishment. So empowered!

It's especially cool when you click on a search result in a page with a dark background then go immediately to a white page. I really enjoyed the way my eyes jutted back in my head and I couldn't see anything for a few seconds. What a great feature.

[/sarcasm]

__________________
.
Printer ink & toner cartridges in Canada | Integrated Web Payroll, Online HRMS Tools with Employee Time & Attendance

Ive changed it... what people liked less were the colors so what do you think now?

Thanks, fuser

__________________

I hate to sound harsh, but I still don't see the point.

__________________
-tamecrow | UK SEO Company | Follow me on Twitter...