User blog comment:BertH/Layout and navigation updates coming October 3/@comment-4528041-20120920151403/@comment-1025281-20120921003410

Even ignoring your "it's ugly" complaint, which is really a subjective judgement, you make a rather big leap of faith in suggesting that the only reason Wikia's tracking shows more clickthrough on the new navigation is because it's in more places. You can't make that kind of assertion without knowing the methodology behind collecting the data. It's possible (and I would say probable) that Wikia doesn't rely on the third grader-like technique of just counting up total clicks on both sides of the divide, especially when the number of wikis on either side is not equivalent (60% vs. 40%). You may differ on opinion, but please don't make stuff up.

Your point that big wikis have no use for more menu options is intuitively wrong. Surely big wikis have more categories of content that could be covered with menus. Surely you can research the kinds of content your readers want to access most, rank them, and put more of the top categories in a bigger menu, rather than fewer in a smaller one. Evidence that big wikis do make more navigation menus useful? RuneScape.

Finally, you assert that there's no proof this method is easier to use. There isn't any proof. But there's also no proof that it's any harder to use either. However, this way, there are more links, increasing its usefulness to the reader. So until there is proof either way, this is a moot point.

Feeding misinformation, or just making a valid statement of opinion?