Post your feedback about using the first iteration of the 2017 wikitext editor as a Beta Feature. While you can disable it by unchecking the New wikitext mode checkbox in your Preferences (Beta tab), the Contributors team welcomes your feedback and ideas, especially on user interface decisions and the priorities for adding new features. All comments are read, in any language, but personal replies are not guaranteed: the team will try and go through reports here at least once a week. Need more attention? Report directly in Phabricator. You can learn how to structure well your submission.
If you are reporting a problem directly on this page, please include your web browser, computer operating system, and wiki skin (usually Vector, sometimes Monobook). Also, while editing to reproduce a problem, please try to append &safemode=1 at the end of the URL; if the problem disappears, you are using a gadget or script that interferes with the editor.
We are trying to keep the page tidy by providing links to relevant tasks while closing threads. You can help by adding {{tracked|T######}}. By all means, feel free to re-open a thread if you need to!
Another question: Is the cursor always misaligned by the same amount (e.g., wrong by 5 mm), or does it change (e.g., wrong by 5 mm at the start of the line and wrong by 1 cm at the end of the line)?
Long citation templates and tables can get in the way of reading the article text in source code view, so the ability to fold templates would be a useful addition to the new editor.
The English Wikipedia has decided to reject this class of ISO standards-compliant dates. I find it annoying, too.
Years ago, I heard editors justify this rule because of the fear was that future editors would not be able to tell whether 2001-02 meant two years (2001–2002) or a year and month (February 2001). However, there is no possibility of confusion any source after 2012, and only a tiny fraction of dates from 2000–2011 would be potentially confusing and not banned by the English Wikipedia's MOS.
In the last discussion I had on this, we couldn't even agree about whether the MOS rule applies to what's typed in the wikitext vs what's shown to readers. (For example: So long as the reader sees July 2021, does it matter if I typed |iso-date=2021-07 in wikitext?)
Is there an option to turn off the autosuggest in edit summary without turning off the browser option? As the current default editor doesn't have autosuggest and I didn't need to tweak my browser option.
In addition for syntax highlighter, templates, magic words and bolded words are not bold hence would like to request it to be bold like in the current editor. If this is new behavior for templates and magic words, I think I can accept it. However, for bolded words, it should function the same as italics words where there is no need to click preview to confirm if it's working because the editor (wikitext mode) would display it as italicized automatically when the sentence/word is applied with italics.
There is no way to turn off the edit summary search. (It searches your most recent 200 edit summaries at that wiki.)
Because of limitations in the original CodeMirror (syntax highlighter) software, they have to choose between not having bold (and anything else that changes the width/size of characters) in the 2017WTE, or not having it be readable in some web browsers (e.g., Firefox). Unless CodeMirror gets a substantial update – which seems doubtful – we won't get anything displayed in bold text.
Okay I would like the option to turn off the edit summary autosuggest if it could be implemented as an option feature that could be turn on/off via the preferences.
Hopefully, CodeMirror get updated for 2017WTE, so bold text works correctly in Firefox.
Thanks you for taking the time to reply. Cheers and have a good weekend.
Hi! I really love the 2017 Wikitext editor, especially some of it's features like Citoid and iinteigration the visual editor. After using it, I have a few suggestions.
When created a redirect, append ?redirect=no to the end of the URL so you stay on the page.
Preview: I know this is unlikely to be implemented, but not that I have to click 4 times to see a preview and go back to editing, it has massively discouraged me from using the preview button. It would be nicer if it was just to the left of the "publish" button or similar.
I'm glad that you like it. I find that I'm more likely to use m:Help:Keyboard shortcuts to preview a page. The exact keys depend on the type of computer, but it's Control+⌥ Option+p on a Mac.
One of the editor's container elements has the mw-parser-output class. While that makes a lot of sense when editing on visual mode, applying it to source editing mode may cause leakage of styles which are meant to be applied to Wikitext output, not to source code view.
This may become especially problematic when using syntax highlighting, as styling may ruin the alignment between the invisible textarea element and the visible p elements, making it almost impossible to edit. Example: https://community.fandom.com/f/p/4400000000003199281
I would suggest removing that class when the wikitext mode is active. ~~~~
I've enabled the New wikitext mode on Beta preferences, and it makes the "Edit source" mode unusable from Firefox on Android. The caret is shown at a different point to where the text is inserted (see images below). The same problem appears on Firefox Beta for Android.
2) The window scrolls automatically to the top of the text area.
The editor field scrolls to the top
3) I scroll down to the paragraph I want to edit. The caret is shown where I tapped the screen (as seen in Image 1). But when I type "Example text", the text is entered here instead:
The typed text is placed at a different point of the text field
The interface has problems also when selecting text by long-pressing and dragging the finger; the drawn selection box is not vertically aligned with the text.
It is possible that the extension is interacting with some of my scripts at commons.js or commons.css for the old editor.
Changing user scripts and community gadgets to work with the 2017 editor is the responsibility of the owners of that code. In that particular case, have you asked Ohconfucius? It might be pretty trivial, or it might be a fair bit of work for them to fix their code to work in both editors.
I really do love the 2017 wikitext editor, I really do, but a lot of my scripts only work on the default one, and it is quite frustrating having to constantly go to the beta panel and switch it on and off. Is there a quicker way to switch editors than this?
When I need to invoke one of the older wikitext editors, I hand-edit the URL to say &action=submit instead of &action=edit or &veaction=edit. This is not exactly convenient, but it is 100% reliable and quicker than changing preferences.
@Sportzpikachu's version for some reason doesn't work on Pale Moon 28.17.0. It's attempting to contact "intake-logging.wikimedia.org" when I try to use it.
