Board Thread:New Features/@comment-168424-20181227041434/@comment-3218221-20190130014419

Re: my concern they're prioritizing mobile users over desktop users, I want to point out that the very first paragraph of the CF wiki includes this: "the Fandom app proves two important lessons that we’re bringing to Community Feeds..."

The Fandom app. The mobile app. Pardon me, but...what? Does this not suggest that Community Feeds, a feature in development for desktop along with mobile, was conceived and developed based on user behavior studied in the mobile app?

That "user research" -- so, Fandom app user research then, or not? Are they saying user behavior on the Fandom app reflects the behavior/desires of users on the other platforms, or is this research cross-platform after all? Boldly attributing their latest "we gottem this time" grasp on user desires to lessons learned via the FANOOM app fills me with trepidation.

"Most visitors never see the main page..."

Visitors overall, across desktop and mobile sites? I really wish they could (or would?) share the statistical analysis that led to this conclusion (and that they were more forthcoming with actual numbers in general, but I digress).

So...while looking at pageviews via Insights for individual wikis is very obviously not broadly applicable data/data that reflects average global behaviors (or even reflective of local pages' long-term/overarching use), I can't help but think of all the times I've looked at PopularPages on various wikis and seen their respective homepages consistently be near the top for 1-week and 4-week views.

Here's the homepage topping both lists for the Muppet Wiki; second place for Redwall, same for the Alvin Wiki, top for the Saints Row wiki...and yes one could easily cherrypick examples and once again I don't mean to say they're evidence of large trends. All I mean to say is that it's not hard to look at FANDOM's wording and think homepage traffic must be in the gutter, when that's not the case for a lot of wikis. Now, bouncing frequency/length of stay on homepages is another matter--we'll see if I get to that later.

"...and when they do they don’t find the content or community engagement they’re looking for."

This point is one I can't flat-out reject, since countless wikis out there do have underdeveloped (or sometimes overdeveloped) or disorganized homepages that aren't much use to anyone (I will quietly admit I have neglected the homepages of wikis I've founded--ones that don't get too much traffic to be fair, but that's no excuse. When one is solo contributing, one initially tries to prioritize adding wiki content first, homepage development second...)

...So you know what, fine. I'm sure Staff is to no small degree thinking of these types of wikis, ones that haven't had the time/manpower/skills/energy to develop the homepage and, well, if they weren't doing much with the homepages in the first place, why should they complain? Or so the logic might go.

However, my major, glaring concern with this is that there are very clearly wikis out there with great homepages: well-maintained; well-organized; well-designed... so if FANDOM were majorly or solely operating on the above reasoning, they'd be painting over cracked drywall and rich wallpaper unilaterally, never mind that the latter may have looked/worked better before.

The presumption, "they're not finding the content they're looking for" is confident in its generalization, but I have to assume they're basing this on the bounce frequency/how long people are staying on the home page, and how they're navigating away from it.

Also, I can't help but shrug helplessly at "community engagement" in particular, since Staff have said in previous statements that visitors (paraphrase, off top of my head) "tend to visit wikis to look up specific quick bits of info before bouncing" and not really linger--suddenly these visitors are looking for and desire community engagement?

Which is it, again? To be fair, I expect they (if they haven't already) might say something like, "previously they weren't looking for Community engagement because it wasn't an obvious option, but Discussion makes it easier than ever to engage in the community and did I mention Discussion takes up the majority of the landing page right now? No?"

("Users are looking for many different kinds of content" / Gee, you think? Not to be snarky. They clearly do think personalization is key, since homepages like top navs can already direct users to all sorts of diverse content. 'Dynamic' content...)

You know, if Personalization is actually working for the Fandom app, that's fine and dandy. Not that I know the nuts and bolts of the app experience, but given how mobile site homepages have never been the greatest, it's not a bad if they're trying to make the mobile experience more usable/navigable...right?

But a tiny screen where tapping on large icons (a la the one in CF's explore module) is easy and convenient is a far cry from the space and functionality a desktop/laptop/even tablet's screen can offer, so what could be ideal/full of potential for one could be...relatively unnecessary for the other.

"Discussions (without CF) makes it very hard (only if you click the wordmark)..."

Quick question: is clicking the wordmark (or the [second] wiki title, if the admins haven't hidden it) to return 'home' something you consider unintuitive or not particularly easy? I feel like I must be reading that the wrong way, since it's standard practice across plenty of sites. Are you perhaps referring to the mobile site experience? (Since I pretty much never use the mobile site, I'd have to take your word on it). Because the wordmark/topnav seems to be easy to access when looking at Discussions via desktop.

Also, random thought, but I wonder if anyone ever stops to consider that regular visitors to wikis may start typing the wiki address and hitting enter on the first autofill that appears? The first autofill suggestions are not necessarily going to be the homepage--for instance, when I started typing for the Muppet Wiki...well, I hit enter on the first autofilled suggestion, which was Rowlf's article. Thus, I didn't immediately land on the homepage.

I say random because I had no sleep last night and I apologize if this post is in part repetitive or incoherent; I'm very tired. Suffice it to say, I worry that CF is a sign they're actively thinking of mobile users at desktop users' expense, they may be thinking that what will work on the Fandom app specifically just might work for the desktop experience too...

..and thinking like that, while not devoid of insightful opportunity, can be careless.

Another thing (again? sorry - I should try to edit this post down later)... if Personalization entails manual picking-and-choosing to some degree, then I could see an attempt at a desktop equivalent being "having users pick and choose modules/categories/etc" to view on the landing page...not that I'd necessarily think that's a good thing (that I thought of customizable modules at all is because they were the first thing to come to mind when I saw Personalization/picking content one wants to see...then I realized I was thinking outside the module).

I guess I'm left just as flummoxed as Andrew when it comes to the "personalization / unification" line, in the end. What is FANDOM's vision for personalization, and when does personalization become "too much" and threaten unification?

Ugh. And as someone who doesn't like how FANDOM and Reddit and other sites have been to varying degrees clamping down on customization (e.g. limiting CSS/JS site-wide)...who really values having customization as an option... I want to remind FANDOM - lovers of unification that they are - that homepages ''are' in themselves a 'unifying' experience on platforms?

If all users are visiting the same local homepage (ignoring how embedded ads will push down siderails and what not), then that's local consistency. I'm thinking polls: on a static homepage, you can ensure that all visitors see a poll and have the opportunity to vote in it - but replace that with the Discussions module, and suddenly you have a scrollable feed and a lower chance all 'landing page' visitors will see the polls you hope they vote in.

(I don't know about you, but scrollable feeds--what do people do with those? They scroll. They don't linger especially long, flitting through information fast, and is that really more ideal than having a static homepage with content of finite length?)

I am definitely rambling by now and again - sorry. Maybe some of this will be readable in the morning.