Team 1
Likes:
-
- The Greenspring Review logo with the year it was established
- The link to the Spring 2020 magazine is the first thing you see
- The search bar
- The event count down
- I like that all of the menu options are laid out to see
Dislikes:
-
- The books on the side
- The layout of the submission guidelines
- The About Us page group picture
- The “Contact us at this email”
- The Lack of Social media presence
Team 2
Likes:
-
- The Greenspring Review logo
- Featured issues
- Share the story buttons
- The Submission section
- The font that important words are written in like “submit” and “featured issues.”
Dislikes:
-
- The large size of the Greenspring Review logo
- The navigation of scrolling and the logo disappearing
- The way the magazine’s Issues were organized
- The quotes on the about page
- The website is too bright
Team 3
Likes:
-
- The linking of social media to the home page
- The circles for the profile pictures
- Being able to like post
- The pictures that accompanied every issue
- The search bar
Dislikes:
-
- The blue font of “The Greenspring Review”
- The Typewriter image
- The submission guidelines being under the submission form
- The pale colors of the website
- There are no names or information about the team members
Overall, my favorite website was team one’s website because, although the books were overwhelming, the website had personality. I liked the logo especially, I felt like it was both very pleasing to look at and entertaining but professional. I also liked the message behind the oak leaf. I like that the website was very functional as well. The platform was nice. However, there are a lot of things from Team three that I feel would benefit team one such as the use of pictures to accompany the issues and post, the circle format around the pictures of the team, and the ability to “like” post which I feel like is very important. Also, the emphasis on social media was nice. What I liked from team two was the idea of having featured work being the first thing you see.