-
51 votes
-
Highlighting text in Wikipedia scrolls up too fast?
To be honest I have some problems explaining what I mean, which might be why I can't find a solution or explanaition for it. I use firefox on Linux and out of habit i highlight text while reading...
To be honest I have some problems explaining what I mean, which might be why I can't find a solution or explanaition for it.
I use firefox on Linux and out of habit i highlight text while reading it. I always did that and it helps me to read a lot faster and to relax my eyes while reading. It's something i don't think i can get rid of, even if I tried, it's just so deeply burned in.
As well I use to scroll the text I'm reading to the top out of the same reasons or maybe it's just habit as well, but I realised I cannot get rid of it as well :-)So no to my problem:
Usually this works flawless, i can highlight text and have the cursor where I'm reading in the topmost visible line. But for some strange reason this does not work in the "new" wikipedia layout. where if I highlight text in the upper third of the page it scrolls upwards quite fast which just fucks up everything and makes my day bad. (this behaviour is not present in the old design which e.g. the germand wikipedia still uses)Is it me?
Is it my browser?
Is there a way to get rid of this, so I can keep my workflow while reading and learing on wikipedia? Is somebody else observing this behaviour?
Where can I even start to look for a solution? I don't even know what to look for.It truly bothers me, as I'm close to every day on it, and it might be my favorite website.
I heard there is a way to switch to the old wikipedia layout, which might be a workaround. But I actually like the new Layout a lot, so if there is a way to avoid that it would be great :-)18 votes -
US documents say Project 2025’s creators The Heritage Foundation want to dox Wikipedia’s volunteer editors of pages related to Palestine conflict using powerful tools
33 votes -
US based The Heritage Foundation plans to ‘identify and target’ Wikipedia editors
81 votes -
Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court
78 votes -
The editors protecting Wikipedia from AI hoaxes
18 votes -
Wikipedia’s mobile website finally gets a dark mode — here’s how to turn it on
27 votes -
Wikipedia's Philosophy game: A breakdown, and how someone broke it
10 votes -
An archive of Wikipedia from Thursday, December 20, 2001
18 votes -
The Hofmann Wobble - Wikipedia and the problem of historical memory
6 votes -
Pakistan blocks Wikipedia for 'blasphemous content'
5 votes -
Unpopular opinion: Wikipedia's old look was much better than the new one
I say that after throwing some caution to air because I understand that every new thing has some initial resistance or pushback due to the "past comfort zone" effect. But having said that, I feel...
I say that after throwing some caution to air because I understand that every new thing has some initial resistance or pushback due to the "past comfort zone" effect.
But having said that, I feel the aesthetics of the old site was much better than the new one. But then again, I'm from the old-school world who also prefers old reddit to the new one in browsing experience, so my opinion could be biased! But even considering the modern web design, don't you think the black icons on the top right have a somewhat odd look? And the "21 languages" feels a bit verbose, the I10N icon already conveys what that dropdown is about? And finally, that scrollable sidebar on the left looks a tad ugly?
I just hope this is just a beta stage or something of Wikipedia's new version and a better one will evolve soon! But that's just one humble unpopular opinion, me thinks!
15 votes -
A ragtag community is keeping this aughts Wikipedia gadget alive
7 votes -
Evidence suggests Wikipedia is accurate and reliable. When are we going to start taking it seriously?
17 votes -
She spent a decade writing fake Russian history. Wikipedia just noticed.
8 votes -
Wikipedia is declining: In defense of inclusionism (2018)
11 votes -
High readability Wikipedia
9 votes -
Wikipedia is finally asking Big Tech to pay up
21 votes -
The great Wikipedia titty scandal
36 votes -
Wikipedia turns twenty years old
18 votes -
Almost Wikipedia: Eight early encyclopedia projects and the mechanisms of collective action
9 votes -
How a raccoon became an aardvark
7 votes -
The English Wikipedia has reached 6,000,000 articles
21 votes -
The culture war has finally come for Wikipedia
35 votes -
The North Face and Leo Burnett Tailor Made manipulated Wikipedia for marketing purposes
22 votes -
Wikipedia’s refusal to profile a Black female scientist shows its diversity problem
13 votes -
The language Wikipedias in German, Czech, Danish, and Slovak are "blacked out" for twenty-four hours to protest the EU Copyright Directive
14 votes -
Facebook, Axios and NBC paid to manage their reputation on Wikipedia
11 votes -
A third of Wikipedia discussions are stuck in forever beefs
18 votes -
The Internet Archive fixes nine million broken links on Wikipedia
16 votes -
Russian Wikipedia reaches 1,500,000 articles
15 votes