Reviews for Wikiwand - knowledge, with context
Wikiwand - knowledge, with context by Wikiwand
Review by Fatyanoor Ashfa
Rated 3 out of 5
by Fatyanoor Ashfa, 4 years agoI don't think this is for me - it's so unlike Wikipedia. I did start to appreciate it after trying it for some time (I especially like the nav bar on the left), but I also encountered quite a lot of issues, so I think I'll stick to regular Wikipedia in the meantime.
- Infoboxes look terrible. Images are off-center and the infobox is too close to the body of the article.
- Tables are sometimes split up when they have multiple headers.
- I also think content in tables needs more horizontal padding.
Dark mode certainly needs more work.
- Some elements still have a light background and the light text on it is difficult to see.
- Links in dark mode are gray, which is absurd.
- The text is a bit too bright for me. Either a lighter background or darker text would be easier on the eyes.
- Page previews disappear too slowly when my cursor moves away from it. Waiting for one to go away gets annoying when I'm trying to read the article content.
- The font looks horrid when both italicized and bold.
I understand that some of these issues might be caused by Wikipedia's own architecture, but I'm opting out regardless.
- Infoboxes look terrible. Images are off-center and the infobox is too close to the body of the article.
- Tables are sometimes split up when they have multiple headers.
- I also think content in tables needs more horizontal padding.
Dark mode certainly needs more work.
- Some elements still have a light background and the light text on it is difficult to see.
- Links in dark mode are gray, which is absurd.
- The text is a bit too bright for me. Either a lighter background or darker text would be easier on the eyes.
- Page previews disappear too slowly when my cursor moves away from it. Waiting for one to go away gets annoying when I'm trying to read the article content.
- The font looks horrid when both italicized and bold.
I understand that some of these issues might be caused by Wikipedia's own architecture, but I'm opting out regardless.
667 reviews
- Rated 5 out of 5by Firefox user 19114790, 14 days ago
- Rated 1 out of 5by Sciky, 20 days agoThis used to be a great extension, but now it's a bloatware full of ads for its AI, what a shame
- Rated 1 out of 5by Indiana Moon, a month agoIt does not "enhance user experience" as stated in the add-on description section. It was good once.
Enshittification! - Rated 2 out of 5by Firefox user 19063414, 2 months agoWikiwand was great, but now it's infested with AI popups, ads and the constant bugging to make an account. A shame because it used to be a great tool, now it's more work to click all the nonsense away.
- Rated 5 out of 5by Wamida, 2 months ago
- Rated 5 out of 5by carl, 2 months ago
- Rated 1 out of 5by Firefox user 14503325, 2 months ago
- Rated 1 out of 5by Firefox user 19040033, 2 months agoUsed to be a great addon but now totally destroyed by the Ads and AI
- Rated 5 out of 5by Firefox user 14706773, 2 months ago
- Rated 1 out of 5by Ally Simy, 2 months ago
- Rated 1 out of 5by Firefox user 19035698, 2 months agoEnshittification everywhere. Was a very nice plugin to cleanly read wikipedia, now cluttered with AI and ads
- Rated 1 out of 5by LCM, 2 months agoThey had the nerve to actually BLOCK people from accessing entire wikipedia pages. You are required to watch an ad before you can access the page. This is allegedly to have access to their "wikicontent," which is not needed or desired. This app used to be good. But pulling this crap was a step too far. You CANNOT BLOCK ACCESS TO WIKIPEDIA TO MAKE MONEY FROM ADS.
- Rated 5 out of 5by Firefox user 17979558, 2 months ago
- Rated 1 out of 5by Milan Regec, 2 months agoAll it does now is infest your Wikipedia with ads. Don't bother installing and I highly recommend uninstalling it if you already did so. Even when uninstalled, it keeps coming back and keeps stealing all Wikipedia links.
- Rated 1 out of 5by Firefox user 18996590, 3 months ago
- Rated 1 out of 5by Toccetness, 3 months agoAd-required, AI-driven slop. Went from premiere readability to money-driven corporation. Do not install.
- Rated 1 out of 5by Firefox user 17669402, 3 months agoAs many other reviews say. initially a good idea, now, full of AI slop i don't want.
- Rated 5 out of 5by marii, 3 months ago
- Rated 4 out of 5by Firefox user 17852983, 3 months ago
- Rated 4 out of 5by Firefox user 16307622, 3 months ago
- Rated 5 out of 5by Ok Google, 4 months ago
- Rated 5 out of 5by Firefox user 12391569, 4 months ago
- Rated 1 out of 5by Wolphie, 4 months agoUsed to be a great extension/addon. Ruined by AI slop that apparently needs to appear everywhere now. Plus constant popups everywhere if cookies are cleared. Sad to see such a beautiful piece of work fall so low.