Not a launch priority, but worth considering shortly after that. As a user, I would like the revision pages to look a bit cleaner. I am not a designer, but the following things stand out as a user: First screenshot: * Do empty fields (like Tags and Keywords) need to be listed? * Is the "t" link necessary? If nothing else, could we make it more descriptive? * Are the arrows (>) in the margins necessary? * What does the "2" in the first line of the margins represent? * In the diff, some words are broken up between two lines. Can we force line breaks to occur at word boundaries only? Second screenshot: * The icon next to the button "Compare Selected Revisions" stands out strongly. Could we make it "fit" into the rest of the page better?

Actually, a couple more: * Could we add columns headings to this table? * Could we make the link back to the main article more obvious? Maybe even something like the "Back to History" link from screenshot 1. Again, I'm not a designer, so please take my thoughts with a grain of salt.

Like bug 756266, I think this should be one of our top priorities after launch. Seems minor, but I feel it could really hurt the site's image. "The interface is the product" to many people.

Er, I meant bug 771650.

I think these pages still need some UX love, but most of John's suggestions/comments above are either not applicable since the redesign or aren't necessarily good ideas. Stephanie, any chance you have thoughts?

I think we should close this bug as fixed by the redesign. And open a new one about current problem. Having to parse old screenshots and ideas just make it less clear about what the current problem are. Also we are discussing priorities now, so it is better for Stephanie not to start looking at this before we know if we want work in this area for Q3.

Agree - closing...

Bug is closed, clearing the needinfo request for me.