What is this task referring to exactly? The description and title are very vague. Please look at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/How_to_report_a_bug and update this task accordingly please.

I"m not sure how to make it more clear… the favicon is not HiDPI compatible, meaning it is blurry on high definition screens. Take a look at the 3rd link i included on how to prepare retina favicons.

In T168087#3355721, @Jaredzimmerman wrote:

I"m not sure how to make it more clear… the favicon is not HiDPI compatible, meaning it is blurry on high definition screens. Take a look at the 3rd link i included on how to prepare retina favicons.

Favicon on what project/site (all of them, or certain ones)?

I'm posting this comment from a laptop with a HiDPI screen, and I can see that the favicon displayed within any given Wikipedia tab on Google Chrome looks just fine.

Please consult the MediaWiki page on how to report a bug and provide clear information on where the issue occurrs, together with background information on the particular operating system/browser set-up where you can see this problem--otherwise I'm afraid there is very little than we can do.

Thank you!

As you can see in the updated task description, there are browser differences to be taken into account for.
I'm not convinced about removing white background, but there are problems we have to tackle:

• Insufficient HiDPI support – need to provide high-resolution image in icon file as well
• Probably multiple images in icon file needed for different resolutions, so Firefox which unlike Chrome doesn't do blurred scaling, gets a satisfying result.
• Removing 48x48px, this seems to have been introduced coming from a Microsoft recommendation, but did only make sense on Windows XP and from scaling perspective 64x64px (or just 32x32px like Google provides) is superior.

This icon has a large file size, ~1.6 KB, but poor quality: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/static/favicon/wikipedia.ico.

@alexhollender @ovasileva this seems more important than "lowest priority"?

In T168087#7216307, @Jdlrobson wrote:

@alexhollender @ovasileva this seems more important than "lowest priority"?

agreed

Moving this into a tracking column for web team for now, as I'm assuming DST will do this, but we're very very interested in a solution here.