And yet, moving to a design that highlights a 'main graphic', or bit of hand-crafted typography, could actually prompt that volunteer work when people notice it's missing.
Do you design for the worst-case, where you're lucky to get a little attention from overworked volunteers working outside their areas of competence? Or for a more hopeful case, where any gaps in the design will signal an opportunity for eager, precocious volunteers to do more?
I believe Wikipedia has had good success in the past with campaigns to fill in CC-licensed rich media, especially volunteer photographs, where they've been missing.
This misses some of the point of the front page. "Featured Article" (FA) status is one of the most important incentive schemes on the site. It's a case where what's good for the front page is also good for the community. There's nothing intrinsically good about having a nifty icon for a story, and not every contributor working to lift some obscure article to FA status is going to have that resource available.
Do you design for the worst-case, where you're lucky to get a little attention from overworked volunteers working outside their areas of competence? Or for a more hopeful case, where any gaps in the design will signal an opportunity for eager, precocious volunteers to do more?
I believe Wikipedia has had good success in the past with campaigns to fill in CC-licensed rich media, especially volunteer photographs, where they've been missing.