Review of Wikipedia / Mediawiki

Wikipedia / Mediawiki Reviewed 22 Sep 2011 · Average score 66%

Summary

This site can be awkward to use with just a keyboard due to tabbing issues. It is also awkward for users who cannot view to captcha to sign up as no alternative is offered so that they can then get their own account set up. They need to resort to asking for help from Wikipedia.

Detailed Results

#	Test	Outcome	Notes
1	Login, Signup and Other Forms Accessible	33%	Ina standard web browser, the form input fields are not read out by a screen reader, but they are interpreted well by WebbIE. There is no alternative for the sign-up form captcha, but the user is given the means to contact Wikipedia and have someone creat
2	Image ALT Attributes	67%	The wikipedia logo and other small icons do not have alt tags for them, but the majority of other images do. The images in the wikis have the option of adding an alt tag to an image, but it is often the case that they are not added to the picture. The sit
3	Link Target Definitions	67%	The navigation links are defined clearly and used properly in their context. There are a lot of inline links in the wikis that are not all in context and can be confusing to readers. There is an alternative means of navigating the site via the search util
4	Frame Titles and Layout	100%	N/A - no frames are used in the design.
5	Removal of Stylesheet	100%	The website still allows full access to content and navigation without a style sheet in place. The document structure doesn\\\'t seem to be affected either.
6	Audio/Video Features	0%	There are some audio clips on wikipedia and they do not offer any means to add text alternatives.
7	Video/animations - audio descriptions	33%	The only animations are animated gif images, which are treated like images and have the potential to have alt tags.
8	Appropriate use of Tables	67%	There a few tables for page layout, but they do not hinder the user in navigating the page.
9	Tab Orderings Correct and Logical	33%	The tab order is confusing as some of the links in the header can only be tabbed into after tabbing through the entire page. Also, the tabbing works through both the left and right side columns, before getting to the main content. There is no \\\'skip to
10	Page Functionality with Keyboard	100%	All aspects of the web pages can be accessed with a keyboard.
11	Accessibility of Text Editors	67%	There are some tools for accessibility, but they are quite limited. Shortcut keys and instructions are offered on the page. The tab order for the text editor is extremely confusing.
12	Appropriate Feedback with Forms	100%	Feedback given is necessary and appropriate.
13	Contrast and Colour Check	100%	The site is easy to read and the information displayed is clear.
14	Page Integrity when Zooming	67%	The content is readable and the layout is mostly unaffected. The header bar collapses into itself when zoom in too far, but the search box can still be accessed.
15	Text size, style, blinking elements and Readability	67%	There are no blinking element (that I\\\'m aware of) but the font size can be quite small in places.