What's wrong with this site?

Question

Design

Hello, I don't know if this is allowed by the rules, however, I will ask you for help. I am making a website for a state competition. I myself am not a designer, however, the customers decided that they were very much a designer. And that's what happened. I see that the site is not very good, I don’t like it very much, but there are no thoughts.
Express your opinion, tell us what to add and what to fix. I will be very grateful!
Personal account
Order page
Profile
From there you can jump on the links (links in the footer have not yet registered).
A separate request - no unnecessary jokes, sarcasm and irony. Constructive criticism. What and why you don't like it.

Answer 1

I'm a cameraman, not a designer, but I'll try to bang.
On the main page :
1) Perhaps it is worth adding the ability to select the language of the site - digital age & multicultural communication & open world blah blah ...
2) It's not intuitively clear to me why this site is what you can do there. The name of the level of housewives (normal for government services, I think) does not answer the question: What exactly can "I myself" do here? And this, in my opinion, should be reflected in the cap. Whether in the title, in the slogan, or in some other way.. Immediate identification of what this site is is required.
You can answer me that you solved this problem with a banner (or whatever it is called, knowledgeable people will correct me), which is right after the header. Partly yes, but this banner is a tool, so to speak, for commenting, explaining, and not a basic information block. Maybe it's personal, but for me, all sorts of banners that are now associated with sliders (with 2-5 slides) are all additional information.
3) Why "Simplify business procedures" and not "Simplify". Your site - your service - is a simplification and it doesn't matter if it consists of many sub-services - simplifications))) It only confuses. Everything unimportant - goes down.
4) The fact that the header remains is great. But the fact that it becomes dark when scrolling - it attracts the attention of a sharp change in its tone. It seems to me very wrong to draw attention there, especially at the moment of scrolling, when attention is directed down (where the scroll is). In addition, on a dark background, the gray font becomes unreadable. If the presence of a header is always necessary, then from the existing state. sites I like option-1 , option-2 and option-3
4) Leveling! On the rest of the pages, it's even weirder, but here "Digital City..." for some reason moved to the right relative to the logo. I didn't find any motivation.
5) The "How to get the service you need" block begins either as a transition from the previous block, or how not to assign a new block ... I would somehow make it clearer about the completion of one block and the beginning of another.
According to the profile page :
1) Alignment! "Myself" on one line, the site navigator on the other, the user's logo on the third, applications on the fourth. Well, at least the icons under the applications are aligned)))
2) Even if there are two icons and there is nothing to fill these 25 percent of the page vertical, then, it seems to me, somehow it is necessary to let the user understand that there is not a white sea of ​​emptiness under the icons. In an interesting way, they entered tax.ruif you enter your personal account, there is first a large banner "You do not have any positions", and then, like you have two icons, under which there is a footer. The banner just eats up this empty space, making it possible to put the footer right after the icons. Or raise the footer higher, as you did on this page .
On this page :
1) Headings ("Energy saving", "Gas supply", etc.) are indented from their block and not indented from the previous block, which is strange. Apparently, it should be exactly the opposite, so that the heading is closer to its own, and not to the "foreign" block of information.
2) Very cool animated square checkers. Even she knows if it's good. I wanted to play around and poke at different squares. In short, the severity of the site does not support this - for a single style, I would leave the animation, but would reduce its effectiveness. In general, it’s even cool - it relaxes a little from the boring filling of bureaucracy.
3) Passport data, date of issue. I would replace the down arrow (on the drop-down calendar) with the calendar icon. And the arrows that allow you to change the value +/- point of one of the values, I would put right below and above the value being changed - right above and below the day, month, year. Of course, when choosing a day, the arrows over the month and year are not visible.
4) Optionally - I would highlight the "Submit" button relative to ordinary management tools, because its action, so to speak, is not reversible and requires special attention (confidence in the correctness of filling out the form) when pressed. But this is a classic of landings))
5) In the footer, I would replace the words "FAQ" with a smiley showing the middle finger.. Just kidding))
All the main things that caught my eye.

Answer 2

Sadly.

Answer 3

listen, it’s very good,
well, for the gradient, only once on the hands, otherwise everything is at the level of aesthetes, you can only find fault

Answer 4

It came out okay. When viewing, an association immediately arises - something state, something official.
The only thing that draws attention is the color scheme. Well, that is, somehow dull chtoli. Probably the emphasis is on color-blind people, chtoli :) But at the same time there are no extra elements, there are no bright spots either. In some places the elements are in one style, right there in the next section in another - well ... aesthetes will pay attention, I personally as a user would not be bothered at all.

Answer 5

Well, it worked out okay. Go through spelling and punctuation, correct the jambs found by a group of comrades from above. And in general - Mr. the site should be strict, concise and fast, without any whistles. Well, you can herax-herax in production)