Design of HowToConvert.org is certainly shiny and full of eye candy with transparencies, rounded corners and a beautiful blue splash in the header. It looks like it's floating on top of a glass plate or with some stretch of the imagination a glass table surface. Transparency style reminds a bit of panels in modern operating systems such as Windows Vista, Windows 7, OS X and KDE4 desktops. In any case a pleasant it's pretty and pleasant.

The sidebar looks pretty good as well with its soothing light blue background color, style of block titles and bullet point icons for links to recent posts. I also quite like the rounded search box. Main content area is stylish as well mostly due to the light shadowy background of teasers and the TV icon. But this is where some issues come to the fore.

The TV icon is on the very edge of the background border and there's unused empty space to the left of the teaser text. My guess is this is where teaser image would be if it was available, which would be great if they were on every teaser. Otherwise, that white space should probably be filled by the teaser so that the title and teaser are aligned which would look much neater.

Article pages could use some fixing as well. The light shadow frame is visible at the end of each article where the text ends up displaying on its borders rather than within them and the text overall seems a little too close to the edge of the white area making it feel a little crammed.

Aside from that a lot of articles are really badly disrupted by two square ads displaying within them, often positioned on top of each other. When I look at these ads and what they do to content I almost see them as some kinds of big blobs that clog the natural flow of content. For example, this one is really clogged. Square ads are positioned in such a way as to make a barrier between the beginning and the rest of the article. You probably don't need to take my word for it as it's quite possible some users might find this way of showing ads rather obnoxious.

Probably the best looking thing on article pages is the comment form.

Design Rating: 7/10

Focus:

The focus of HowToConvert.org is obviously on providing tutorials on how to convert one thing to another. Specifically, judging from content available, but also as may be expected, it's about various technological conversions from one digital format of music or video to another. It wouldn't be a bad idea to have an about page explicitly outlining the purpose and focus on digital conversion though.

Focus Rating: 10/10

Content:

Tutorials on HowToConvert.org typically start with a description of the involved formats and their properties and then continues with three short sections; "things you will need", "instructions" and "do's (or don'ts)" which are set up as simple bullet lists. Instructions are a numbered list of steps to follow in order to complete the conversion. This makes these articles quite brief, but useful and easy to follow. The introductory text however in some cases could be split into two or more paragraphs as it looks like a wall of text, especially if squeezed in by ads.

There's overall 23 articles available which isn't bad, but isn't a terribly large number either. But then again if it's only digital conversions that are being covered there's only so many of the conversions people may typically be looking for.

Content Rating: 8/10

Color scheme and especially the header artwork of this style is quite pleasing. The logo/header elegantly represents the purpose of the site by drawing a silhouette of a man, with a hat no less suggesting a kind of personality, and underlining the blue-white title of the site. The man is blue colored and thus the word representing "his" biography is too. That's pretty nice work.

Aside from that however, the design of the site is based on a theme I've seen in some of the previously reviewed sites. It contains an elegant distribution of teaser blocks in the main content area of the homepage and other article lists with a simple sidebar on the left. It looks and feels quite modern and does a good job at presenting the content in a pleasant manner.

There are however some of the same issues I've noticed with this kind of theme before. Namely, teaser blocks cut the titles and teaser text in middle of a sentence and sometimes word and seem to have a surplus of white space below the teaser and the "read more" link. The gray bar of the home link as well as the color of the search box input field seem a little too dark for their current background being almost indistinguishable on some LCD monitors (albeit depending on angle and settings).

I also typically suggest that a search widget be put on the gray bar with the home link, allowing the spacing between the header artwork and it to be reduced, putting more of the content above the fold and also creating some free space for a possible banner ad in the header area.

Other than that there isn't much to say except my usual comment on square ads inside of article content which, while not always, sometimes sit on top of each other creating a rather large disruption to the content flow.

I could only suggest, if further look and feel improvements are to be desired, to add teaser images both to teaser blocks in article lists and on article pages themselves.

Design Rating: 9/10

Focus:

Since it has a descriptive name the focus of Biography Archive is apparent, not that a nice welcoming about page wouldn't be a good idea. All of the content on the site is nothing but just that, biographies. Enough said.

Focus Rating: 10/10

Content:

This site contains a pretty impressive number of biographies, total of 241, covering people from politics, music, actors, business people and so on. Articles are fairly short and present a relatively condensed overview of these people's live usually with sections starting with early life including time and place of birth and continuing with their an overview of their life journey, special achievements or remarks.

I have a feeling some paragraphs could be split into shorter ones in some articles according to a sample I took a look at. But other than that I think their overall length and splitting into sections makes them fairly easy to follow.

Content Rating: 10/10

Well to be perfectly honest I just reviewed a site that uses this theme, which I suppose says at least a little about this design (not necessarily as an indictment of using a theme, but rather in terms of there being similar issues and/or benefits). The difference is that the color scheme is red, but with blue links and teaser titles are smaller, which is actually a good thing as it ensures that the alignment between teaser blocks is kept.

Other than that pretty much the same issues persist. From the minor one at the bottom of the sidebar where two blocks are displayed side by side causing what seems to be unnecessary clutter (since the categories block is almost empty) to the rather serious issue of teaser images displaying as broken links, that is, missing images causing a blow to site's professional appeal. There is also no pager at the bottom of the homepage that would ease faster browsing of available articles.

Aside from that the article pages are sometimes disrupted by two square ads which sometimes stand on top of each other. And speaking of ads, their color style could be edited to better match the scheme of the site. Currently the in-content square ads seem to use just the default color scheme and the skyscraper in the sidebar uses a black one, yet the links of the site are darker blue.

Design Rating: 6/10

Focus:

What's the focus of this site? "What Does X Stand For?"

The answer is indeed within the question which happens to be the entire name of the site and reflects the format of all articles published on it. It is another example of a site with a strong axis between its name and its article titles communicating a strong focus. I still think, if anything then for the sake of redundancy, that a nice about page welcoming people to the site and explicitly saying what kinds of "X" may it cover since some are acronym's, some words and some are terms.

That said, X's covered come from a variety of areas, from technology to politics to culture.

Focus Rating: 10/10

Content:

Before going any further it may be worth noting that the first among the most popular posts displayed in the sidebar is actually a test post with all-caps title and a filler "lorem ipsum" content. Needless to say this should be removed.

That said, content of WhatDoesXStandsFor.com includes nearly one hundred articles explaining the meaning of various terms and acronyms, not just stating what they stand for, but also explaining quite a bit more about what the term represents including such information as its properties, history and so on. For those who aren't interested in the details and are just wondering what the term or acronym is, the basic info is usually provided at the beginning of the article.

Perhaps that could be made a little more explicit by simply including a line of bold text simply saying something like "WD-40 stands for 'Water Displacement 40th attempt'" before the article. This would help all the skimmers and those who wish to find out more can read the article.

Content Rating: 9/10

WhatCauses.net appears quite simple, but in a somewhat elegant manner. There isn't much eye candy to go around, just a simple title and plain blue background color on menu and block bars. There are a few nice elements that elongate the elegance of it a bit; the thick gray vertical borders around the site and border style of sidebar and teaser blocks with a thick light gray border on the left and slight barely visible dotted border on the bottom (at least on teaser blocks).

There are a few things that detract from said elegance somewhat as well; the two side by side blocks (categories and advertising) within the sidebar and a misalignment of teaser blocks when one of the side by side teaser blocks have its title occupy two lines, which happens once on the homepage.

Of course, the most obvious and glaring problem is that all teaser images on the homepage which were apparently intended to display do not display, and in fact show a missing image icon giving the site an incomplete feel and seriously detracting from the appearance of professionalism. They show up on some of the further pages of content teasers significantly improving the look and feel of the site where they do.

Fixing this and the other more minor issues mentioned above would be significant improvements, but to make it more impressive it could also use a nicer header as at least the site title displayed in a more attractive style and perhaps also featuring a logo design.

Design Rating: 6/10

Focus:

"What Causes", as the title of the site, may sound a bit odd at first because the word "causes" may be read as a noun when it actually makes more sense as a verb. The titles of articles on the site fix that possible impression instantly as they're simply questions asking "what causes X". Apparently, the site's focus is on providing information about causes of certain "things" which may be diseases or conditions, emotions etc. Pretty much all of it is related to human health and conditions.

An about page may be useful to describe the purpose of the site more explicitly. It takes browsing through all the content to see it actually covers only health related causes whereas one may assume it will describe causes of such things as natural phenomena.

Focus Rating: 9/10

Content:

We're offered one hundred articles describing causes of various diseases and health related conditions in form of not too long articles not all of which follow the same outline. Some have no sections and others, although most of them, start by an introduction and defining of the condition and then a section on causes outlining and describing various causes in subsections.

One thing I observed in the sample of articles I reviewed is that the introductory paragraphs tend to be a little long so I'd just, at least as a matter of reminder, warn towards making paragraphs shorter so they're easier to follow. All in all however, articles appear to be to the point and rich with relevant and potentially useful information and the site definitely delivers as far as providing information about causes.

The right sidebar also offers a featured video block currently featuring an illustraive video on the causes of a heart attack.

Content Rating: 9/10

DiseaseSymptoms.org presents a design that seems well fit to its topic with a predominantly red color scheme, a well known symmetrical medicine logo and a medical red cross symbol next to a 3D rendering of the word "Medical". Other than that the site is fairly light on bells and whistles and remains rather simple.

A few possible improvements come to mind on just the homepage. A search box for searching the site is missing. Sometimes the upper link ad unit displays a search box which may lure people to it, but it doesn't search the site. Speaking of the link ad, it might be better positioned within the bar holding the "home" link as there appears to be enough horizontal space for it and this would perhaps slightly reduce the sense of clutter already contributed to by the square ads. Also, the advertising block could look better if the ad within it were centered.

Article pages look good, I like the red square style of bullet points, but some articles are a little disrupted when two square ads end up positioned too close to each other. There's one issue with hovering of the "share and enjoy" buttons that I wasn't sure how to describe so I made a screenshot (picture's worth many words):

Finally, I believe it might be worth trying to rearrange the layout of the site to something more efficient. Instead of using three columns it seems like it could easily make due with only two. The advertising block on the right could be moved to the bottom of the left column and the content column could be allowed to expand over the area currently occupied by the right one. Of course it could go the other way around leaving the right column and moving the left stuff to it as well.

Design Rating: 7/10

Focus:

"If its a symptom we will tell you", says the slogan of Disease Symptoms dot org. I suppose that means that if you feel something and wonder it may be a symptom of a disease this site will tell you, which sounds good. In any case the focus is obvious and the content aligns with it consistently. Hypochondriacs beware. ;)

Focus Rating: 10/10

Content:

This site offers over 50 articles covering the definitions of subject diseases, their symptoms, causes and treatment, often using bullet points which make the information easier to read. They're overall fairly brief and so might not necessarily be too comprehensive, but they probably don't need to be for most people. They cover the symptoms, which is what the site's title and slogan promise, and offer additional basic information.

Content Rating: 10/10

I'm fairly pleased with what I see on WhoDiscoveredIt.com. Background pattern and background images of block titles, header graphic, RSS graphic, font style, comment form and button styles all conspire to make for a really elegant look. The header graphic showing a man peaking behind the site, at least in my imagination, almost suggests a "discovery" of something on the other side of one from which that guy is looking, perhaps a discovery of this very site. :)

I also like how visited links are visibly marked.

Only the header title remains distinct from the elegance of the site in that it is really just a big plain text. Other issues are also fairly minor. The footer links to XHTML and CSS validation, but there are a couple of XHTML errors preventing it from validating which is so close it might actually be worth fixing. And finally ads on some articles might be a little too much, that is, shorter articles with less content get a bit cornered by the two square ads.

I would also like to observe that the area containing the "home" link might be large enough to fit all category links as a horizontal main menu, so the categories don't have to display in the sidebar while this area of the header might look a little more complete. It actually seems made for a menu with more than just a home link.

Other than that, it's hard to find further faults with the site's design or make any more significant suggestions. Whether it's a theme or a unique design it's a pretty good work.

Design Rating: 9/10

Focus:

As a site called "Who Discovered It" and all article titles starting with "who discovered" determining the purpose of the site is no guesswork. It's of course, obvious and there's hardly anything else that needs saying here. Maybe there could be an about page to make further connection to the user, but it isn't a real necessity in this respect.

Focus Rating: 10/10

Content:

WhoDiscoveredIt.com apparently covers many different kinds of discoveries involving medicine, archeology, astronomy, physics and so on. In answering the question of who discovered it the site also provides further information about the object of discovery such as how was it discovered, what was its significance and history and so on. Nevertheless the articles are brief enough to keep the attention of an interested reader easily and split into subsections for easier digesting. There is nearly 100 articles available.

Content Rating: 10/10

Fresh, cool and perhaps even somewhat futuristic Who Invented It dot net looks quite appealing. The header has some simple eye candy in form of a blue background gradient and white and shadowed title written in a modern soft font type. The smooth shift between blue and gray adds it that bit of futuristic feel as these two colors are typically used to create futuristic settings. After all, inventions are a big part of what makes our future what it is.

I also like the rounded corners at the bottom.

The upper part of the main white area contains a nice horizontal menu on gray gradient background with white round tabs on hover. All categories fit nicely into this bar except one which is ironically "uncategorized". Perhaps it doesn't need to be displayed here or could be removed and move content in it to other categories. Otherwise it does ruin the horizontal menu experience a bit.

There aren't many other issues, just a few imperfections. Some titles and teasers in teaser blocks are cut off, sometimes in the middle of the word or sentence. There seems to be a little too much space in teaser blocks as well below the "read more" link.

The site could also use a search box which would probably best be positioned on the right of the white bar above the horizontal menu containing the "home" link. Other than that I'm hard pressed to find other suggestions to make. Perhaps there could be less ads within content (like just one square box instead of two especially where the second one seems out of place next to the "share and enjoy" widgets), but unlike some other similar sites I reviewed they're a little less problematic in these articles. While this site also appears to be based on an existing theme some of the other sites I've seen use, it seems to be much more customized and thus appears much more unique. For this type of site it also seems to be working quite well.

Design Rating: 9/10

Focus:

WhoInventedIt.com is another simple content site with obvious self-explanatory name and titles. It's called "Who Invented It" and all of its article titles follow a "who invented x" format. I hardly need to say anything more so I'll just throw in a usual "it's never a bad idea to add an about page with some highlights and introduction" advice. There, I just did. :)

Focus Rating: 10/10

Content:

As far as the amount goes this site isn't lacking. There's whole of 234 articles to sift through, all about who invented what. Articles don't just tell you who invented it however, they also tell quite a bit more about the invention, its significance and history and other details in well written, but still not overly long winded articles. Inventions covered are also not limited only to technologies and specific material products, but a lot more including sports, professions and various cultural traditions.

If you're wondering about who invented something there's a good chance WhoInventedIt.com has it covered. It does need a search box however, as mentioned in the design section!

Content Rating: 10/10