Wikipedia's getting a new look

The problem here is it is absolutely not "more user friendly" to just automatically make things more WYSIWYG. When it is important to preserve content and structure rather than just presentation---as is <i>nice</i> in HTML generally but <i>crucial</i> on Wikipedia---you need to provide a tool that helps you do that, not just make it pretty.<p>I have a student who has just completed an honors project that demonstrated that if you give web novices a simple markup language and a <i>non</i>-WYSIWYG editor (but do give them a preview button) they confirm presentation but focus on content, which ultimately makes websites more usable and often prettier too. It won the ugrad research competition at SIGCHI this year, so I don't think she was out in left field on this.<p>So, short version: Wikipedia's making a big mistake here.

I've been using the beta now for about 5 months, and in my experience it's cosmetic. Those cosmetics definitely are an improvement in usability and looks.<p>IMHO, it's a small step, but in the right direction for sure.

it still blows my mind that they haven't implemented a more user friendly editor.

I can read mark-up languages (I have been using them for editing since well before the invention of HTML), so the barely changed editor seems fine by me, but I can well believe it is off-putting to most would-be Wikipedians. The best feature of the editor is preview mode, so I can get a reality check on whether I've edited correctly or not.<p>I tried out the new look in beta beginning more than a month ago. The most habit-changing change was the relocation of the search input field. But that just gets it closer to the industry standard of being in the upper right of the page, so I'm gradually getting used to that.

Will they stop talking about it and do it already? I'm tired of hearing of this new look and not seeing it 100% live yet.

I don't know, I'm pretty ok with the way the editor is now. Maybe I've just grown accustomed to it.