Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

Isn't the whole point of an encyclopedia to be text laden?

That Wikipedia is already so successful seems to suggest to me that it is very consumer friendly.

I'm not saying this will replace Wikipedia and I'm not saying there's a problem with Wikipedia as it is - I'm just saying that there are use cases where everything is not a nail.

I'll bet you that 90% of the time you hit up Wikipedia you'll only read the top paragraph. At least that's what I do and I've seen more people use Wikipedia like that.

In fact, I love duckduckgo's 0-click result because of exactly that.

I wasn't suggesting you were saying that, I was only making a point related to your two criticisms:

Wikipedia is not very consumer friendly. It's dull looking and the entries are usually filled with a lot of text.

That you read the abstract at the top of the article suggests to me that the article structure is very efficient (and arguably consumer friendly) in that they provide the TLDR summary above the fold, which nullifies the problem that the full article may have too much text.

By the way, my use case for Wikipedia tends to have me reading the complete article more than just the abstract, because I'm usually in research mode when I use Wikipedia. Of course, everyone has a different use case, and I suspect your use case is more common than mine.

No, I would say Wikipedia is very research and student friendly.

Most non-tech people I know would have probably looked at Wikipedia once or twice. I would say Wikipedia is barely scratching the surface of delivering knowledge to the general person on the street.

There is definitely scope for delivering wikipedia information in an alternative format. Particularly through mobile devices. It's like when Facebook was still limited to universities and was yet to bust out into general use.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact