(Rated by 4 people, viewed by 151 people)
GirlsWhoGeek has 4 Reviews
Below are the reviews left by other members on GirlsWhoGeek. Jump to review form?
LydiaHilda gave it
on 5th Jul 2011 and said:1. First Impression:
"Very organized & clean", was my first thought when I saw your site. It was very welcoming, and the colours you have chosen are very suitable and subtle for a tutorial site like yours. The name of your site is very unique. But, right of the bat I noticed that there are too many boxes on your site. It makes it harder to look for something.2. Layout
Your header is very unique. Quite different from the site's I've seen. Adding a HTML element to the header really matches the purpose of your site - a tutorial site. Very good. But, I feel you could make the header size a little bit bigger.
Your navigations are easy to look for. Good. But the colour of the navigation font is too light. Maybe you could darken it a little bit.
Let's move on to your sidebar. It looks like the size of the header of your sidebar is smaller than the font itself. You must make sure the header stands out than the contents. I don't think you need the categories section as your visitors can already see them under the navigation. On the right side of your sidebar, the tweets look a lil bit unorganized. In fact, it doesn't look like a tweet at all.
Your layout looks the same in most of the browsers. Good job.3. Coding
According to the HTML validator, you have 2 errors and 4 warnings. This errors are minor ones. Some are in fact from the premade layout itself.
You included a < symbol in your slogan on the header. It is a HTML element. So rather than using < it's better to use& lt;. Remove the spacing before you use.4. Content
About: Everything okay in this section.
Tutorials: Your tutorials are all very good in fact. Beautifully explained.
Articles: Okay, you can add more.
FAQs: Good, but I'd prefer if there was a section where people can submit their questions rather than going to the forum all the time.
Tools: I love your code converter!
Contact: No comments. Good.
Forum: I love the fact that you have a forum on your site since its a tutorial site. Fantastic.5. Grammar
I tried to look around; all grammar & English seems perfect.6. Conclusion
A very helpful tutorial site. I wouldn't suggest you to use too many colours, as your site is a tutorial site, and it looks just nice. Try to improve a little bit in the organisation of your site. Above all, a perfect site I guess.Using Firefox on Windows | Report This?
scalivurpr gave it
on 30th Jun 2011 and said:Hi
I really dig your site, been a newbie in the webpage market really was very usefull your website. Have the answer to some of my questions and illuminate me in some dark areas that I have in my website creation. Is a very helpfull website, but I would like a little more information maybe about how to find the basics thing like the facebook and how to deal with some problems that the facebook plugin have. Maybe more information in the website planification and advertisement. I like you have a forums where maybe all my question can be answer. I really like your website and the organization is cool. Good luck.Using MSIE on Windows | Report This?
fugabutacus gave it
on 29th Apr 2011 and said:I think the design of the site is fantastic. It's a little bland, but while adding color might spice it up a bit, it could also destroy the simplicity, which is what makes the design fantastic. Maybe if you added a bit of color in the header only? It could help.
The first thing I notice was the logo, which I love. it's simple and it links perfectly to your subject matter. One little thing that bugs me is the / being on the wrong side, but that's just a little thing I could get used to.
The navigation is very simple and easy to find your way around, perfect for your audience who are likely to know what they're looking for.
The very idea itself is fantastic. Lots of teenage girls get into web design, but aren't particularly geeky or tech savvy. You've understood your audience perfectly and designed your site perfectly for that audience.
Using Safari on Mac | Report This?
amphigory gave it
on 6th Apr 2011 and said:I've been meaning to review GWG for a while, the sole reason because its design settled beautifully with me. Without further ado, picking apart GWG, piece by piece. :)
1. INTRO
Already announced my delight of the front page design, though I did notice later on a small bit that made me like it not-so-much: the fact that it's a pre-made (albeit paid) theme. That said, at least you picked a nice one. (And I know you're swamped with tons of things already, so that's forgivable.)
2. THE DESIGN
There's not an enormous amount I can put here, but I do have a few nit-picks, two of which concern the navigation.
Firstly, the "current" status on links is extremely bold. If I weren't on a netbook and could see more than a thumb's length vertical screen, I'd constantly be looking at the current page link in the navigation while reading an article. In terms of the rest of the design, which is subtle enough to spend a couple minutes giggling about new details one might notice, the navigation looks awfully out of place. Not to mention I hardly think you want visitors staring at the navigation when they should be reading the page. Obviously it needs to stand out enough to let a user know it's the current page; perhaps using a level of grey similar (probably a little darker) to that of content box shadows? Using a gloss effect with that shade would tie in with the rest of the design.
The second issue is with the look of drop-down menus. It's easy enough to distinguish between what is and isn't a sub-menu, but the indented padding bothers me. Giving
ul.nav ulabout a 15-pixel left-margin should work (maybe even just with theleftproperty, as there's alreadytop, but I didn't see any position declarations).The last thing is the lack of consistency in blog teaser positions. It's the one big downfall of HTML, that floated list items don't naturally align to the top of the item above it (first stand-out example is in the PHP tutorials category. A List Apart has a bunch of great ideas for getting lists to behave. They're not quite in terms of how you have your blog set up, but they're easy enough to modify. What I'd personally suggest is getting the list of articles, then splitting it into two separate lists, where one is floated to the left and the other to the right, rather than floating each item. Obviously when you split it into two, you'll have to alternate (or by thirds when viewing a category) so you can keep the same chronology:
$i = 0;
foreach ($articles as $article) {
if ($i % 2) {
$right[] = $article;
} else {
$left[] = $article;
}
++$i;
}I'm sure you could probably just suggest the changes to ElegantThemes, too.
3. THE STRUCTURE & UX
In general, the main site is pretty easy to follow. As with the design, few things to comment on.
One of the huge qualms I have with site-forum combinations is that the software used for each is generally designed to run on their own. bbPress integrates with WordPress well enough, but the default installation gives a user no indication that the forums are in fact part of the site as a whole. From what I can tell, there's no link back to the main site. That also contributes to some confusion when reading threads. For example, one might arrive at the recent "Build-a-Blog" thread via search engine. Clearly it's discussing something offered at GWG, but a casual user will have no idea where to find it. By having the main GWG navigation sitting on top of the forums, you then give everyone immediate access to the site as a whole. As a result, both humans and search engines alike are happy.
It just feels weird that the forums have their own design. While it does use the same color scheme, but I think the stand-out differences really add to that separate site aura. Maybe it wouldn't be quite as obvious if it had the main navigation in there.
Some smaller detail-Nazi incidents:
- When hovering on a button, the text color is the same as bbPress' default.
- The forums and main site have different document title formats. I'm more partial to the style on the forums; maybe pull that to the main site as well? ("Category « Girls Who Geek" rather than "Category | girlswhogeek.com".)
- ARGH! RSS feed on the blog. Where is it? (I'm sooner to subscribe to the blog than an individual forum thread.)
- On blog entries, the meta data keeps confusing me. When I see a date isn't a link, I automatically assume the name isn't a link, but rather the word "by" is. Sure, using that style strays from the norm, but I think it's a pretty productive norm.I was just about to push submit, but I noticed one other thing that made me pause and think. I'm not normally one to pick out spelling, but this just didn't seem to flow right (from "Blogging Platforms / CMSs" under "Scripts"):
Use this forum to blogging platforms or CMSs for your site.
There's something about the "to" that makes me read and re-read. Or it could just be the awful rib pain right now.
4. AUX FINS
Fantastic site. In my opinion, it needs some small tweaks here and there, but it's something that really has the potential to stand out among the masses. It's so hard finding a dedicated programming community that actually looks nice. I would have joined, but there's a clear gender boundary that might get in the way. :P
Using Firefox on Linux | Report This?
Jem's Response:
Merci beaucoup :)
Some of the problems are because of the free theme / some out of laziness on our part. Hopefully when we redesign with a bespoke layout (coming soon, I hope) I can use this as a base point to not re-make mistakes that are being made at the mo'. (And I'll try to fix up some of the minor stuff in the mean time.)
re: gender boundaries ... there's always boyswhogeek.com ;) Seriously though - we're happy to have anyone and everyone use the site. It's only because of the GRRL in codegrrl that we decided to go with the current name (CG had plenty of male members... and some I was never quite sure about!)
Write Your Own Review
Leave your feedback for GirlsWhoGeek below, and remember - the longer your review, the more points you receive. Don't forget to look at things like style/design, content, coding and originality as they will all help to improve the quality of your review.
You have to be logged in to write a review.