Description

This task focuses on creating clickable design prototypes for alternative Explore Feed experiences and conducting targeted evaluative research to help Design and Product narrow down a preferred direction.

The goal is not to validate a final solution, but to compare top priority experience patterns across feed structure, content presentation, onboarding, personalization, and freshness—grounded in existing user research and industry-standard patterns, while remaining appropriate for Wikipedia’s values and constraints in order to inform two proposed final design solutions

Hypothesis

If we design and test alternative Explore Feed formats, personalization approaches, and content types, we will identify the experience patterns most likely to increase user engagement and app retention.

Must Haves

Clickable design prototypes

Create interactive prototypes that explore '''industry-aligned but Wikipedia-appropriate''' variations of the following:

Feed structure & interaction

• Vertically scrolling feed as the primary navigation pattern

• Selective use of:
  • Horizontal groupings (e.g., topic collections, related content)
  • Swipe gestures to preview content or dive deeper into an article or cross article topic

• Exploration of:
  • Card-based feeds
  • Hybrid feeds (cards + previews)
  • Progressive disclosure from lightweight “content snacks” to deeper reading

Content previews

• Combination of text and visual content

• Section-level snippets vs. image-led teasers

• Clear signals for:
  • Depth (preview vs full article)
  • Why content is shown (topic, freshness, relevance)

Onboarding & customization (elevated priority)

• Prototype onboarding flows that allow users to tailor their feed by:

• Selecting interests or topics (articles and/or categories)

• Starting from:
  • Pre-populated or trending suggestions
  • Optional search for any topic or articles as seeds (e.g. discover on Android)

Comparing:

• Guided onboarding flows (e.g., short questionnaires)
• Lightweight “pick a few to start” flows

• Testing skip behavior and its impact on comprehension and engagement

Include:

• A short “preparing your content” state to set expectations and add a sense of personalization
• Optional, contextual notification prompts (e.g., topic-based rather than global opt-in)

Instructional guidance

One-time, lightweight guidance such as:

• “Tap to preview or save”
• “Swipe to go to the full article”

Explore:

• In-context overlays vs onboarding-time instructions

Movement impact

• Concepts that communicate Wikipedia’s value, trust, or movement impact

• Explore placement options:
  • Inline within the feed
  • Contextual moments tied to content

Content freshness & variety

• Explore freshness signaling via:
  • Language (e.g., “Trending”, “New”, “Today”)
  • Light timestamps where appropriate

• Test placement of games and interactive content:
  • Within relevant topical sections
  • Its own space

Design Research Plan

The research should be '''comparative, directional, and time-boxed''', focused on narrowing options for a two solutions.

Research goals

• Identify which onboarding and customization patterns:
  • Shorten time to “aha”
  • Improve understanding of what the Explore Feed is for

• Compare feed structures that feel:
  • Engaging without being overwhelming
  • Familiar yet meaningfully refreshed meeting modern users expectations
  • Fits with our content type

• Understand how users interpret:
  • Personalization cues
  • Freshness signals
  • Instructional guidance

• Have elements that encourage repeat use

Methods

• Moderated remote usability sessions
• Comparative preference testing
• Userlytics with evaluative prompts

Participant considerations

• Users familiar with Wikipedia
• Mix of:
  • High-frequency Wikipedia app users
  • Low-frequency or unaware Wikipedia app users
• Exclude people who do not or would never use apps

Guardrails

This research should explicitly avoid steering toward:

• Heavy social mechanics (likes, comments, reactions)
• OS-divergent experiences (iOS vs Android vs tablet)

Deliverables

• Clickable design prototypes covering the concepts above

• Research summary outlining:
  • Strengths and weaknesses of each approach
  • Clear signals on which patterns to pursue, combine, or discard

• Open questions and risks to resolve in subsequent phases

• Two design flows (low fidelity wireframes are acceptable)

---

Due by February 21

Reference Docs: Comparative Review, Design Research