This is a summary of the user testing I have performed to date. Some of the most valuable testing came during the Quick and Dirty Thesis Show, where I received feedback from several members of the public who had never seen my project before. The feedback included:

• Great project, I love the concept
• What is this supposed to be?
• Is this the actual Wikipedia?
• Is is supposed to be real?
• How did you create the pages?
• Do you have plans to expand it?

In general, most people understood the project and what I am aiming for. It was useful to see that some people are still confused about what the project is. I think this can be addressed by including a brief descripion of the project on the homepage, so that when I’m not standing next to you to explain what the project is, there will be some description to provide context.

I also showed the project to several friends, and they also remarked that it looks very similar to Wikipedia. I asked the question – if it looked nothing like Wikipedia, would it still have the same impact? And the answer was always “no.” In other words, the visual cues that the vistor receives from the Wikipedia aesthetic help create the expectation about what the site should be and how they should interact with it. What is interesting is when people take a closer look and realize that is reads nothing like Wikipedia – that their expectations are not met and they must grapple with this difference. This is where people get confused and, in my opinion, where the interesting part of the project lies.