2017 wikitext editor/Feedback/2016

Post your feedback about using the first iteration of the 2017 wikitext editor as a Beta Feature.

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).

The Editing 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.

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!

See also:

View open developer tasks – Complete workboard – Report a new bug in Phabricator – Join the IRC channel

Loading Time

When I tested the new editor some time ago, it seemed to share Visual Editor's often atrocious loading times... which are upwards of 40 seconds on many articles. The current wikitext editor loads even the largest page with almost no noticeable delay.

It appears the goal is for the new editor to eventually become the default wikitext editor. I believe the community will consider this sort of load time to be an unacceptable degradation of the current editing experience, both for new editors and experienced editors.

This should be categorized as an "actionable blocker". Loading times need to be roughly comparable to the current wikitext editor, even on large complex pages, before it is considered suitable for anything other than fringe opt-in usage. Alsee (talk) 16:42, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

I would agree that the load time should basically be a blocker to deployment beyond the beta stage. Izno (talk) 20:11, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

I've also experienced lengthly loading times, although on a slowish older PC. The editor is still clearly too slow for productive editing. 2A02:908:2F32:2C80:B8CE:2B40:B43E:EBA2 22:12, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

FWIW, on the Obama page just in quick informal testing on my machine, it takes:

• … about six seconds to load in read mode (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama);
• … about six seconds to go to old wikitext edit mode (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Barack_Obama&action=edit);
• … about seven seconds to go to source mode directly following a link (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama?veaction=editsource);
• … about nine seconds to go to visual editor mode directly following a link (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama?veaction=edit).

Switching from read to visual editor mode seems to be about five or six seconds; switching from read to source seems to be about three or four.

None of these times is great. Obviously with a faster computer/network/etc. they would be faster, and with a slower one they'd be slower. I don't think an extra second or two is critical (and the testing we've done agrees), but where users have particularly slow set-ups and yet want to do particularly big/slow things it's not likely to make them happy if they have to wait more than (say) ten seconds.

One thing I've thought about is asking users in those situations if they want to switch to the non-JS mode. This is what Google does when loading GMail, for instance. The non-JS editor is much faster, but very unfriendly — just an empty box with no tools, no help, essentially nothing. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 22:53, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

The standard wikitext editor takes six seconds to finish loading the (very rarely used) toolbar at the top, but that's not really relevant. Time to begin editing Barack Obama:

• Standard wikitext editor: 2 seconds.
• New wikitext editor: 15 seconds.
• Visual editor: particularly variable, 30 seconds and up.

Firefox. Win 7. 64 bit system. AMD quadcore 2.4 Ghz. Alsee (talk) 02:56, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

These numbers are a lot higher than what I'm seeing as well - mine are pretty close to Jdforrester's on Firefox, and faster on Chrome. Low memory could be an issue as well. ESanders (WMF) (talk) 03:06, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

• Read mode: 6 secs (mostly [5.5secs] waiting for server to start delivering data)
• Old editor: 7 seconds (again, mostly waiting for first of the data to arrive)
• New editor: 9-13 seconds (5-6 secs for first data, 2,5 before VE starts loading, which takes 2-4 seconds)
• VE: 10-18 seconds

All tests with warmed up caches. Safari and Chrome are a bit faster, but not much (1-5 seconds differences). From Netherlands, pretty new iMac and good internet connection. I also note that the first two, are significantly faster in anonymous mode, more towards that 2 second time that Alsee describes. This indicates significant delay, due to logged in users not getting purely cached data.

This is all measured to what I consider the screen to be 'interactive' as a user. Not necessarily fully finished loading completely. When you switch between modes, it seems faster, probably because i'm skipping some of that initial 5-6 seconds because that stuff already arrived.

Maybe an idea to make some screen recordings once by several users around the world? Anyway, I think there is still some space for improvement here, likely by improving on the smarts of the delivery. —TheDJ (Not WMF) (talk • contribs) 09:54, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

We actually spent a lot of time optimising VE last year, especially around the API calls. There are a lot of unavoidable costs in processing long documents in JS that the textarea editor doesn't have to deal with. We'll continue to look into this though. ESanders (WMF) (talk) 15:24, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

There are unavoidable differences. It will always be faster to load a page that contains no images, no transclusions, and little formatting than to load a page that contains about 50 images, heavy formatting, 700+ transclusions, 2000+ internal links, 900+ external links, etc.

That's why it can be faster to open large and complex pages for editing in any of the wikitext editors (except WikEd, depending upon what your settings are) than to load the same page for plain old reading. I don't believe that any reasonable person will expect any editing tool that actually displays the images, links, and other formatting on screen to be as fast to load as any editing tool that provides none of that. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:57, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Inaccurate previews

When I tested the new editor some time ago, it gave badly inaccurate previews because it did not use the same parser as the genuine article view. I have reported this elsewhere, along with a screenshot of the new editor resulting in multiple corruptions of the article preview.

It appears the goal is for the new editor to eventually become the default wikitext editor. I believe the community will consider corrupt previews to be an unacceptable degradation of the current editing experience, both for new editors and experienced editors.

This should be categorized as an "actionable blocker". The new editor must use the same parser as the genuine article view before it is considered suitable for anything other than fringe opt-in usage. Alsee (talk) 16:48, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Where was this "reported elsewhere"? Got any link and good steps to reproduce / a screenshot? Thanks in advance! AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 17:29, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

I included the screenshot here.

1. Redlinks don't render as red.
2. Black links don't render as black.
3. The third link is completely broken.
4. External links don't render as external.
5. The red styled text is completely broken, with the preview dumping fragmented raw wikitext onto the preview screen. (Holy crap!)
6. The new editor can literally display entire lines in the wrong order. (Holy crap!)
7. The new editor can randomly split one line into two. (The example uses hieroglyphs, but the issue isn't limited to hieroglyphs.)
8. Math display is broken, but that might just be an issue with the test server configuration?
9. Ref 1 doesn't show up in the references section, Ref 2 is misrendered as 1.
10. . . . There are countless other issues not shown here. For example there are multiple issues can also screw up section headings. I'm sure the Parsoid team can give you a pile of other examples. They have a project that scans hundreds of thousands of wikipages finding cases of "semantic errors" or "dirty diffs", most of which are cases which will also misrender.

I can't put the screenshot's wikitext into a Flow post. Flow literally can't save it. However I did post the wikitext on Phabricator. You can find it here. (When the Flow prototype was being built, the lead designer (Jorm) blew off countless editors who repeatedly told him that proper wikitext support was mandatory for any wiki discussion system. Flow's god-awful fake wikitext support is one of the reasons Flow has been rejected by the community. The Flow extension has been completely uninstalled from EnWiki.)

The issue with the new editor and the with Flow are directly related. They both use Parsoid rather than the genuine article-view PHP parser. Flow's problems are much worse because Flow runs wikitext through a round-trip through Parsoid. When you preview and re-edit, or save and re-edit, Flow throws away the wikitext and generates new, different, potentially broken wikitext. The new editor only does a one-way trip through Parsoid. That means the new editor saves wikitext correctly, it "merely" gets the preview wrong.

The fundamental issue is that the new editor uses a different parser than the genuine article view. That's a really bad design. Running around trying to squash bugs that I've listed above isn't a fix. That list is incomplete. Any divergence between the PHP parser and Parsoid is going to result in corrupt previews. The purpose of a preview is to see the the page the same way as when it's saved. That means using the same parser as the article view. That is the simple, obvious, and necessary solution.

The community accepts that there are all sorts of problems with Visual Editor (largely relating to Parsoid). VE is a secondary editor. Most editors don't use it. If someone chooses to work in visual mode then they are accepting the flaws and limitations that come along with visual mode. However the community is will seriously object if the WMF tries to replace the wikitext editor with an inferior editor. I believe the WMF will do a good job getting other stuff right with the new editor, but I'm concerned that load time and previews may be issues with the fundamental design. The community may consider it malicious it if the WMF tries to shove VE down our throats, trying to take away a perfectly good wikitext editor and trying to force us into an inferior "wikitext mode" in VE. Alsee (talk) 19:00, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

I had a similar issue. In userspace, previews of wikilinks go to subpages of userspace, not article space like they should do, and as they correctly do when the page is saved. i.e. when editing my sandbox [[Link test]] went to User:Samwalton9/Link test in preview but Link test when saved. Samwalton9 (talk) 19:56, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

@Samwalton9 Filed as https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T153277 ESanders (WMF) (talk) 02:42, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

This is now fixed in production; thanks for the spot! Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 05:22, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

1. preview surface not being enriched with VE's linkannotation magic.
2. preview surface not being enriched with VE's linkannotation magic.
3. parsoid, also a problem in VE.
4. this is an issue with the preview window not having the context classes that the styling requires (mw-body), as well as the preview surface not being enriched with VE's linkannotation magic it seems.
5. parsoid, same as VE. Not likely to be fixed if I remember correctly. This is an issue that basically awaits the further unification of the parser modes.
6. This is a Tidy effect. With the planned switched of the traditional parser to use HTML5 cleanup rules, this will also be the order the traditional parser will show at some point.
7. this seems fixed in production
8. this seems fixed in production
9. this seems fixed in production

Looks like a lot fewer issues than I expected based on the list. —TheDJ (Not WMF) (talk • contribs) 10:32, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Colouring redlinks basically requires an extra API call. Probably not too difficult.

Parsoid are working on the long tail of rendering issues, but in most real-world cases it is >99% accurate. ESanders (WMF) (talk) 16:00, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Gadget or script interference

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I tried to edit en:Barack Obama using the edit button at the top just to see what would happen in the standard pathological case for pageload times (since that's a concern of mine regarding this project and as well the personal benchmark for moving to 2017 wikitext editor). The editor is failing to get to the edit screen without any obvious error display (instead displaying the normal page with the URL https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Barack_Obama&editintro=Template%3ABLP_editintro&veaction=editsource ).

I was however able to make an edit on World of Warcraft.

I've got scripts loaded in en:User:Izno/common.js and en:User:Izno/vector.js.

Gadgets I've got:

• Require confirmation before performing rollback on mobile devices
• revisionjumper
• Twinkle
• Reference Tooltips
• FormWizard
• Geonotice
• Display watchlist notices
• (This loads the base style for the watchlist. Please do not disable this option.)
• Display green collapsible arrows and green bullets for changed pages in your watchlist, page history and recent changes
• Hotcat
• wikeddiff
• Replace the "new section" tab text with "+"
• Display an assessment of an article's quality in its page header
• Show radio buttons to switch between views of certain content, such as some maps
• Mark navigation links to featured (Monobook-bullet-star.png) and good (Monobook-bullet-ga.png) articles in other languages
• Enable tracking bugs on Phabricator using the {{Tracked }} template

I'll try troubleshooting later, so this is just an FYI at this time. Izno (talk) 20:05, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

The edit "screen" also fails to display when I click the section edit button. Izno (talk) 20:09, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Huh. w:en:Barack Obama opened for me in about four or five seconds. Have you tried again (i.e., to make sure that it's not a one-time glitch)?

Have you tried disabling all of your scripts? I know that User:Kephir/gadgets/rater.js has been responsible for a lot of problems with page load times for me in Firefox in the past (but I keep re-enabling it when I want to get some work done on WikiProject assessments). Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:13, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, the problem is repeatable.

As I said in the OP (perhaps badly placed), "I'll try troubleshooting later, so this is just an FYI at this time."

I'll start with the rater script and go from there when I do troubleshoot. Izno (talk) 20:14, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Okay, so final assessment:

It's not any of the gadgets or scripts.

I'm out of options here to troubleshoot. :D Izno (talk) 22:28, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

This happens at home also with Windows 10 + Firefox 50.0.2.

And now I realize the original report should have had Windows 7 + Firefox 50.1. Izno (talk) 22:36, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Also works fine for me in Chrome & Firefox. Could you open the page with developer tools open (F12) and see if there are any errors in the console? ESanders (WMF) (talk) 01:44, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Okay, some really weird behavior this morning fiddling with the console (at the work computer).

I made an attempt today, same behavior. Then I tried again after opening the tools: I actually managed to get it to the edit, but it was "old" WT editor. I guess this is a fallback? Then I tried again. Back to complete failure.

Console looks something like this (for 'complete' failure case):

          GET 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php [HTTP/2.0 200 OK 311ms]
GET 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/load.php [HTTP/2.0 200 OK 0ms]
GET 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/load.php [HTTP/2.0 200 OK 0ms]
GET 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/load.php [HTTP/2.0 200 OK 0ms]
GET 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/load.php [HTTP/2.0 304 Not Modified 170ms]
GET 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/load.php [HTTP/2.0 200 OK 0ms]
GET 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/load.php [HTTP/2.0 200 OK 0ms]
GET 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/load.php [HTTP/2.0 200 OK 0ms]
GET 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/load.php [HTTP/2.0 200 OK 0ms]
GET 
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/11/Barack_Obama_signature.svg/120px-Barack_Obama_signature.svg.png [HTTP/2.0 304 Not Modified 45ms]
GET 
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/12/President_Obama_on_Death_of_Osama_bin_Laden.ogv/220px--President_Obama_on_Death_of_Osama_bin_Laden.ogv.jpg [HTTP/2.0 304 Not Modified 45ms]
GET 
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/11/Barack_Obama_signature.svg/128px-Barack_Obama_signature.svg.png [HTTP/2.0 304 Not Modified 44ms]
GET 
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/24/ElectoralCollege2008.svg/275px-ElectoralCollege2008.svg.png [HTTP/2.0 304 Not Modified 44ms]
GET 
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fc/U.S._Total_Deficits_vs._National_Debt_Increases_2001-2010.png/220px-U.S._Total_Deficits_vs._National_Debt_Increases_2001-2010.png [HTTP/2.0 304 Not Modified 45ms]
GET 
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/84/Percentage_of_Individuals_in_the_United_States_Without_Health_Insurance%2C_1963-2015.png/220px-Percentage_of_Individuals_in_the_United_States_Without_Health_Insurance%2C_1963-2015.png [HTTP/2.0 304 Not Modified 44ms]
GET 
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e9/Official_portrait_of_Barack_Obama.jpg/170px-Official_portrait_of_Barack_Obama.jpg [HTTP/2.0 304 Not Modified 44ms]
GET 
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg/23px-Flag_of_Saudi_Arabia.svg.png [HTTP/2.0 304 Not Modified 45ms]
GET 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/load.php [HTTP/2.0 200 OK 0ms]
GET 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/load.php [HTTP/2.0 200 OK 0ms]
This page is using the deprecated ResourceLoader module "jquery.ui.widget".  load.php:24:887
This page is using the deprecated ResourceLoader module "jquery.ui.core".
Please use "mediawiki.ui.button" or "oojs-ui" instead.  load.php:1:80
GET 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/load.php

Of which the only things in the Javascript console are:

This page is using the deprecated ResourceLoader module "jquery.ui.widget".  load.php:24:887
This page is using the deprecated ResourceLoader module "jquery.ui.core".
Please use "mediawiki.ui.button" or "oojs-ui" instead.  load.php:1:80

There were a number of css failures and declarations and such, but I'm skeptical that would be the issue here. Izno (talk) 15:58, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

And now replicating this on w:Pierre-Louis Lions, oddly enough.

The link that showed up is https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pierre-Louis_Lions&editintro=Template%3ABLP_editintro&veaction=editsource . The editintro shouldn't be causing an issue, should it?

Console looks like:

          Unknown property ‘zoom’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:31147
Expected declaration but found ‘*’.  Skipped to next declaration.  load.php:1:31150
Unknown property ‘user-select’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:33364
Expected media feature name but found ‘-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio’.  load.php:1:36181
Expected media feature name but found ‘-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio’.  load.php:1:36417
Unknown property ‘zoom’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:37931
Expected declaration but found ‘*’.  Skipped to next declaration.  load.php:1:37934
Expected end of value but found ‘\9 ’.  Error in parsing value for ‘list-style-image’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:38529
Expected end of value but found ‘\9 ’.  Error in parsing value for ‘list-style-image’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:38599
Error in parsing value for ‘background-image’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:40655
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:41538
Unknown pseudo-class or pseudo-element ‘-ms-input-placeholder’.  Ruleset ignored due to bad selector.  load.php:1:41948
Unknown pseudo-class or pseudo-element ‘-webkit-search-decoration’.  Ruleset ignored due to bad selector.  load.php:1:42070
Error in parsing value for ‘background-image’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:43097
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:43644
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:44105
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:44570
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:45013
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:45693
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:46298
Error in parsing value for ‘background-image’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:47076
Error in parsing value for ‘background-image’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:47882
Error in parsing value for ‘background-image’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:50948
Error in parsing value for ‘background-image’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:51644
Error in parsing value for ‘background-image’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:52896
Error in parsing value for ‘background-image’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:53627
Error in parsing value for ‘background-image’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:54367
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:56350
Error in parsing value for ‘background-image’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:58459
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:59518
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:59926
Unknown property ‘break-inside’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:1377
Expected end of value but found ‘\9 ’.  Error in parsing value for ‘list-style-image’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:13566
Unknown property ‘speak’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:13906
Unknown property ‘speak’.  Declaration dropped.  load.php:1:18991
Unknown property ‘column-width’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php
Gadget "WatchlistBase" styles loaded twice. Migrate to type=general. See <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T42284>.  index.php:402:45
Gadget "WatchlistGreenIndicators" styles loaded twice. Migrate to type=general. See <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T42284>.  index.php:402:189
This page is using the deprecated ResourceLoader module "jquery.ui.position".  load.php:57:291
This page is using the deprecated ResourceLoader module "jquery.ui.widget".  load.php:88:942
Unknown property ‘-moz-box-shadow’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:314
Unknown property ‘-moz-box-shadow’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:546
Unknown property ‘-moz-box-shadow’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:977
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘alpha(’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:1807
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘alpha(’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:1860
Error in parsing value for ‘background-image’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:5:527
Unknown property ‘user-select’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:6:114
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:7:555
Expected declaration but found ‘*’.  Skipped to next declaration.  index.php:9:248
Unknown property ‘zoom’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:9:268
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:13:1666
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘alpha(’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:13:1890
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘alpha(’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:13:1983
Unknown property ‘zoom’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:14:83
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:14:1142
Error in parsing value for ‘background-image’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:15:1915
Error in parsing value for ‘background-image’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:15:3255
Unknown property ‘zoom’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:18:452
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘Alpha(’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:18:542
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘Alpha(’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:18:3755
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘Alpha(’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:18:3905
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘Alpha(’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:18:3980
Unknown property ‘-moz-border-radius-topleft’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:18:14462
Unknown property ‘-moz-border-radius-topright’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:18:14651
Unknown property ‘-moz-border-radius-bottomleft’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:18:14847
Unknown property ‘-moz-border-radius-bottomright’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:18:15051
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘Alpha(’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:18:15332
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘Alpha(’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:18:15549
Unknown property ‘-moz-border-radius’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:18:15585
This page is using the deprecated ResourceLoader module "jquery.tipsy".  load.php:777:171
Expected end of selector or a user action pseudo-class after pseudo-element but found ‘:’.  Ruleset ignored due to bad selector.  index.php:3:2703
Unknown property ‘user-select’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:5:612
Error in parsing value for ‘unicode-bidi’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:5:1082
Error in parsing value for ‘background-image’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:6:10243
Error in parsing value for ‘background-image’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:6:12272
Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:7:281
Unknown property ‘zoom’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:452
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘Alpha(’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:542
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:1445
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:1794
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:2385
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:3185
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:3809
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:4481
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:5028
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘Alpha(’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:5505
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘Alpha(’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:5655
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘Alpha(’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:5730
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:11000
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:16183
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:21389
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:26571
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:31756
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:36967
Unknown property ‘-moz-border-radius-topleft’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:46293
Unknown property ‘-moz-border-radius-topright’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:46482
Unknown property ‘-moz-border-radius-bottomleft’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:46678
Unknown property ‘-moz-border-radius-bottomright’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:46882
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:47299
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘Alpha(’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:47320
Expected ‘important’ but found ‘ie’.  Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘ie’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:47672
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘Alpha(’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:47693
Unknown property ‘-moz-border-radius’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:8:47729
This page is using the deprecated ResourceLoader module "jquery.ui.core".
Please use "mediawiki.ui.button" or "oojs-ui" instead.  load.php:11:84
Expected end of value but found ‘\9 ’.  Error in parsing value for ‘list-style-image’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:2:340
Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘!’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:7112
Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:7908
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘progid’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:8034
Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:8566
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘progid’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:8692
Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:9163
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘progid’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:9301
Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:9744
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘progid’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:9870
Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:10238
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘progid’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:10376
Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:10897
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘progid’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:11035
Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:11474
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘progid’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:11600
Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:11953
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘progid’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:12079
Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:12561
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘progid’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:12699
Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:13135
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘progid’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:13261
Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:13657
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘progid’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:13795
Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:14308
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘progid’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:14446
Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:15246
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘progid’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:15378
Unknown property ‘zoom’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:2:611
Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘!’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:2:1605
Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘!’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:2:1978
Use of "wgServer" is deprecated. Use mw.config instead. load.php:154:25
Use of "wgArticlePath" is deprecated. Use mw.config instead. load.php:154:25
Use of "wgScriptPath" is deprecated. Use mw.config instead. load.php:154:25
Use of "wgCurRevisionId" is deprecated. Use mw.config instead. load.php:154:25
Use of "wgPageName" is deprecated. Use mw.config instead. load.php:154:25
GET 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/load.php

Izno (talk) 20:17, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

And then again at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stuart_S._Antman&editintro=Template%3ABLP_editintro&veaction=editsource

Maybe it is the template...?

Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:10897
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘progid’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:11035
Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:11474
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘progid’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:11600
Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:11953
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘progid’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:12079
Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:12561
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘progid’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:12699
Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:13135
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘progid’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:13261
Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:13657
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘progid’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:13795
Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:14308
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘progid’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:14446
Error in parsing value for ‘background’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:15246
Expected ‘none’, URL, or filter function but found ‘progid’.  Error in parsing value for ‘filter’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:3:15378
Unknown property ‘zoom’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:2:611
Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘!’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:2:1605
Expected ‘;’ or ‘}’ to terminate declaration but found ‘!’.  Declaration dropped.  index.php:2:1978
Use of "wgServer" is deprecated. Use mw.config instead. load.php:154:25
Use of "wgArticlePath" is deprecated. Use mw.config instead. load.php:154:25
Use of "wgScriptPath" is deprecated. Use mw.config instead. load.php:154:25
Use of "wgCurRevisionId" is deprecated. Use mw.config instead. load.php:154:25
Use of "wgPageName" is deprecated. Use mw.config instead. load.php:154:25
GET 
XHR 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php [HTTP/2.0 200 OK 43ms]
GET 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php [HTTP/2.0 304 Not Modified 45ms]
GET 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php [HTTP/2.0 200 OK 79ms]
GET 
XHR 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php [HTTP/2.0 304 Not Modified 45ms]

Izno (talk) 22:21, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

This is https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T153481. 'editintro' is blocking the editor from loading. ESanders (WMF) (talk) 15:19, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Preview "oddity" w.r.t. sidebar

Team is considering options. Please suggest ideas!

When I went to preview the article, the sidebar was gone on desktop in Firefox 50.1.0 on Windows 7. Is that deliberate? I felt disoriented without the expected sidebar--not that I was planning to use it, but it wasn't a faithful representation of the end-effect (which I would guess isn't as big an issue as the topic below w.r.t. differences in parsers). Izno (talk) 20:07, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

True, it's a bit different from the regular desktop reading experience, though it's a pretty faithful view of what readers see on mobile (with some notable exceptions like infoboxes), of course.

We're still thinking about how we could make preview mode more useful — one possibility is to replace the editing surface with the preview, though that might also be confusing. I'd love to talk about any ideas you might have to make it more useful. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 21:40, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

In general, the UI of the project needs to be updated for all of the Javascript-y goodness that's developed since the original release of MediaWiki and the only-slightly-later Monobook skin (from which Vector takes an obvious chunk of inspiration). So from this perspective, I think clearing out the sidebar is a fine first step. It might get people used to how mobile works and feels (from a desktop perspective) and the associated flexibility ("responsiveness") for which a page's design should account, without being a whole separate (and large) task of designing Vector+Mobile (for the amusement of naming things, perhaps "Tensor" or "Matrix" :).

I'm just not sure it makes a lot of sense in this context--as part of the introduction of a new editor. If I were looking at such a thing from a scope perspective, that change would feel like scope creep, or like someone was trying to sneak in this change. You might face resistance to it which is unneeded in this context (VE/Parsoid/VE-inspired WT editor doesn't need help w.r.t. resistance).

I'm not entirely sure what you mean when you say "replace the editing surface with the preview".

Mostly, the biggest thing I'd appreciate from a preview mode is not having it; a side-by-side render of wikitext and preview, or perhaps, being able to side-by-side jump from editing in the wikitext form to editing in the VisualEditor. I can skip the clumsy UX step of "does this look the way I want?" and go straight to "finis". (A mode which might only work well at resolutions above 1400px or so given the penchant for floating boxes of various sorts in wiki content.) I'm fairly certain that such a thing would need to be looked at for performance issues, naturally. Izno (talk) 23:40, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

The preview is currently shown in a dialog (which we make fullscreen to be as wide as possible). "replace the editing surface with the preview" would mean replacing the area where you are currently editing the wikitext. ESanders (WMF) (talk) 01:25, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Like Flow? That doesn't seem like a horrid option, so long as there is a sensible icon to switch back (and I was meandering yesterday and know there's a task for picking a new icon). Izno (talk) 16:00, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, though we'd want to avoid confusion between editable-visual-surface and read-only-visual-surface. We'll play with some design options to see if we can come up with something along these lines. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 16:25, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Buttons

I can't find redirect button on the panel, where is it? David1010 (talk) 20:47, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Hey there, that's one of two (I think) buttons that we didn't add into the interface. In the visual editor you edit page settings like being a redirect through the "page options" dialog, and my plan is to make that available in this editor too (or possibly directly, outside of "edit mode"). Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 21:31, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Also a signature button should be there (when editing talk pages). Stryn (talk) 10:44, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

There is a signature button though - Insert --> More --> Your signature. Elitre (WMF) (talk) 12:21, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Adding a citation doesn't work

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

With the automatical "cite" tool I can generate a link, but clicking an "insert" does nothing. In the manual mode, the dialog stucks when I click "insert", and then I must refresh the page, because even a "cancel" is not working. Stryn (talk) 20:56, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

I have same problem David1010 (talk) 21:05, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Confirmed; reported as T153254. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 21:20, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

(Now fixed and deployed) ESanders (WMF) (talk) 02:04, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Missing features

https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T95100

Just tried the new editor on the English Wiktionary. I don't want to sound too negative, but at this stage there are very few reasons why I would use it. Syntax highlighting / (more importantly maybe, checking) will make a difference. The main feature I'm missing though is support for template autocompletion, not sure if that is planned? Jberkel (talk) 21:18, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

When you say "missing", do you mean features you would like to see in the future, or are these implemented in a gadget and you feel switching to this means you lose them?

Syntax checking/highlighting is very computationally expensive, and many of our users have relatively slow machines, so enabling it for all users would not be reasonable. Adding the feature for people to opt into is something we're considering.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "template autocompletion", however — is this for editing existing templates or inserting new ones? In general we've had very good feedback on the template inserting tool, though often the deciding factor is the quality of the TemplateData for the template that has been written by the template's author. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 21:28, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Missing as in what I would like to see in the future. Autocompletion I mean in the way as it is implemented in most code editors today. An example: you start to type opening braces, then the first few letters and you get presented with possible completions (all templates starting with the previously typed letters). You pick one, type a pipe symbol and get a list or the name of the first parameter, and potentially a list of possible values. This system would help users who are already familiar with templates and manual coding but sometimes forget param order or values. A typical use case would be language data on Wiktionary: the language data for a word must be entered as a 2 to 3 letter code, of which currently over 3000 exist. I know some by heart but often have to look them up. Autocompletion would massively help there.

This would work for both existing and new templates. Regarding the missing TemplateData, it occurred to me that you could try to document the existing templates based on usage, even if there's no documentation provided, by looking at occurrences and typical usage and then offer completion data based on these values. This could be done with some simple statistical analysis. Jberkel (talk) 00:22, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

I think that what you want is available in the visual editor. In the wikitext mode, you need to click Insert > Template to reach it.

The TemplateData GUI tool can 'read' most templates and suggest a list of parameters when you are creating the TemplateData block. But this needs to be done on the template's documentation, not while someone is editing (especially since a bare list of parameters does not provide important descriptive information or examples). When you edit the template, click the button to 'Manage TemplateData' at the top of the page to see how the GUI works. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 06:49, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

The "Insert > Template" dialog does provide a list of templates, but the point is that I don't want to use the visual editor, I don't want to click anywhere, I just want to type. I don't want a "wizard"-type dialog which interferes with my workflow, with modal dialogs. With the visual editor, to insert a new template, I have to:

• Click Insert
• Click template
• Type
• Click on Name
• Click Add template
• Insert data
• Click Insert

That's 5 clicks for one single template insert! And there's no option to remember recently used templates etc. so I have to go through all steps again every time.

Also, the autocompletion only works for the template name, not for the template values, so the assistance provided is quite limited. Jberkel (talk) 07:28, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

> Syntax highlighting / (more importantly maybe, checking) will make a difference.

Probably something like this (Help:Syntax_highlighting).

>The main feature I'm missing though is support for template autocompletion

Maybe something like this?:

Link_suggestions.

That would be fine for templates, and is easy to implement. However, complete support for auto-completion of template parameters is a pipe dream. A code editor can work properly because there are a finite number of tokens in a programming language (and it can store values already in a page), while there can be millions of template parameters, and their expected values (e.g. parameter = "value1").

ACE editor already supports auto completion of programming code and values entered in the same page (just press Ctrl + space), and this is already working for lua, javascript, and css pages.

Basic auto-completion could theoretically be supported in the 2017 wikitext editor, and possibly even VisualEditor. 197.218.80.235 (talk) 09:44, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

> Also, the autocompletion only works for the template name, not for the template values, so the assistance provided is quite limited.

This probably needs something like

https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T53375 .

The disadvantage though is that one would need to enter all 3000 values in your case, and populate add values to all templates that are used frequently 197.218.80.235 (talk) 10:00, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

As I said earlier, a naive statistical approach might work for pre-populating values, and would require less maintenance work. It would be a good way to “kickstart” this feature, without template editors having to add more metadata.

To illustrate: I run a data-analysis on the Wiktionary dump and parse all template usages of {{m}} (which would be {{m|en|...}}, {{m|fr|...}}, {{m|de|...}} etc). I could infer the possibly values for the first parameter to be "en", "fr", "de". Even better, I could suggest more common usages first in the dropdown.

This is obviously not going to work perfectly in all cases but it could be a good start. Jberkel (talk) 10:08, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

On a more positive note (not directly related to the new text editor though): I've just started to add a few TemplateData sections to commonly used Wiktionary templates.

I think this will definitely make casual editing a lot easier, for users who are not familiar with the “low-level” spiderweb of technical details.

The help texts could be placed a bit more prominently though, they are quite hidden at the moment. Jberkel (talk) 10:18, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Do you realize how many templates and arguments are used in wikis like English wikipedia and company? It is likely that they have more than 10000 templates, and some templates have more than 200 parameters. Multiply that with the number of possible permutations of each template value and you could have a serious problem. A parameter without an explanation and context is pointless,e.g. "fr" (fund raiser) and "tlh" (Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy ) can mean many different things.

Yes, it is possible to do a database dump and populate these parameters, but for some templates it would quickly become outdated, and wouldn't even be a very good picture of the status quo because some parameters are dependent on others, for example, a citation cannot be a book and a newspaper at the same time. It might just confuse newcomers who may add incompatible parameters, and piss off experienced contributors who have to clean up the mess added by people who don't understand how certain templates work.

Right now those who don't know what they mean are unlikely to dig through thousands of template docs to find out. But if these start getting naively exposed, they will start messing up pages at a faster rate. 197.218.80.235 (talk) 10:31, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

That's why I created https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T87444 for. There are thousands of templates to which TemplateData should be added, and resolving that bug would allow prioritizing it. Amir E. Aharoni {{🌎🌍🌏}} 13:45, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

As I said, it won't be perfect :) And yes, I realize what a mess the current template system is, but didn't expect it to be that bad. 200 parameters – that's insane.

If you just pick the top combinations the system I'm suggesting could work performantly. It's not going to help document parameters on its own but I think that when you see a list of possible completions you get a good idea of the purpose of the parameter.

Also, the point is that this would mostly help experienced users (who are also likely to use the new text editor as opposed to the pure visual editor). I'm not sure if this is the intended split of target audiences (visual editor for new / casual editors, text-based for experienced users) – @Jdforrester? Jberkel (talk) 10:44, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

> And yes, I realize what a mess the current template system is, but didn't expect it to be that bad. 200 parameters – that's insane.

Don't take my word for it, see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Citation/doc

I'd argue that one shouldn't make the situation worse by reinforcing bad practices. Templates that have an extreme amount of parameters or don't have proper documentation should be improved.

So rather than simply generating these automatically for the wikitext editor, a better solution is to use your idea to generate template data for most of them. Editors can then gradually improve their descriptions and documentation instead of simply dumping the parameters and values.

It is already possible to extract some arguments used by templates in fact the templatedata editor does this (although it will fail miserably at extracting lua arguments).

That is a already good starting point. 197.218.80.235 (talk) 11:04, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

@Amire80 IKhitron (talk) 13:34, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

How to make some custom buttons work?

In ukwiki we have a "Wikifyer" tool that does some automatic work on the pages it's been activated on, like adding some spaces between certain symbols, replacing some apostrophes with the standard ones, replacing certain simple spaces with visible non-breakable ones etc. This tool is sort of essential for unificating the ukwiki content.

In the OWE it's a button on the top panel. In the NWE it's absent. Is there a possibility to add it to the new wikitext editor? Can this be done via some script or a couple of lines in the local commons.css? If so, I could find some experienced coders from our community to implement that. I just want to know if that's possible at all. Or do we have to file a task on Phabricator to do that? Piramidion (talk) 21:38, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

It's definitely possible to write scripts or gadgets that work with the visual editor and the wikitext mode as well. It might be a little bit of work though.

For the use case of replacing content as you type, generally we advise that people consider whether an Input Method Editor might solve that problem more elegantly for their users. Recently (since ~2013) it's been possible using the new UniversalLanguageSelector system to do this. But happy to talk through that. :-) Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 21:43, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Text color

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Sorry if this has already been brought up, but the text color on the new wikitext editor looks a bit faded/unclear. When I edit using the new tool, the text in the editor is #252525, whereas the old editor color is #000000 which is much more legible (although that might be different from browser to browser, I'm not sure). I'd love to test out the new editor, but at this time I can't use it without significant eye strain. I've never had problems with the thin serif font used for wikitext, but when the color is also made unclear it's not very nice to use. InsaneHacker (talk) 22:20, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

I believe that the colour was picked for accessibility reasons to avoid eye strain and contrast issues for some users. I'll ask one of the experts to comment. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 22:55, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

I tried a second go at it today, and I've not really been having any issues. Perhaps it was a kneejerk reaction. The faded text makes it easier to focus on the line you're working on and makes everything else "disappear" and it's actually quite pleasant. Perhaps this was the intention of the designers as well. InsaneHacker (talk) 16:50, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for that; I'd be interested in how you feel in a few more days' time of using it, in case you have other thoughts / reactions that become apparent after time. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 18:50, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Either old editor or new one

If I want to test the new editor, I can't use the old one any more. Why is this required? This is really annoying.

By the way: If you ever want to set this as default, I can imagine really well that many communities won't appreciate this decision. MGChecker (talk) 22:26, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

You can use the old one again: just go back to Special:Preferences and change your settings again. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 06:41, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Of coures I can do this, but if I want to chose an editor based on the given situation, I don't want to do this every time. MGChecker (talk) 13:12, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

The team considered several approaches, e.g., three buttons (essentially 'Edit, Edit source, The other way to edit source' on every page and every section link) or asking you which of the three (or more) systems you wanted to use each time. They found none that were satisfactory.

Can you give an example of when you might specifically need one wikitext editing system over the other? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:19, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Any wiki with Translations extension needs VE/NWE (a word processor). For example, on this wiki it is next to impossible to help document your CirrusSearch software. VE/NWE would solve the "only translate stable and mature pages that don't get many changes" guideline that translations admins/bureaucrats ignore.

Translation is the one service I would momentarily lose text-editing for (and my permanent skills) and suffer word processing + mouse + slowness (loading the program, loading the full page, finding my section without a TOC). That support is missing, but looks close when I try it. Cpiral (talk) 07:45, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

I would like to test the new mode too, but when I found out that several things were missing compared to the standard editor, and that I cannot have both, I had to turn off the beta testing again.

It would be much better with all three options. If some don't want all three editors, and you want only two editors as default, there could simply be another, adjacent option that also turned on the old wikieditor. Or there could be a combined choice with three options: Only the old (beta editor turned off), only the new (as now), or both (new option). Problem solved for everyone, and I bet you would get more beta testers.

What I think I would miss the most by using the new editor is the speed of editing wikitext using the standard editor. With the standard editor, I can start editing the text almost immediately, so it doesn't interrupt my flow. With the new editor, there is the same initial speed penalty as in the Visual Editor, often several seconds on my otherwise quite fast computer (Intel i5, SSD, enough RAM), and that's annoying, especially if I only want to make a tiny correction. So I would definitely be using both if I were testing the new editor. They each have their advantages.

Another advantage of using the old editor is it's full feature set and that it is stable. You know what you get, that it works, and that you can do everything with it. The new editor is a beta, and as such comes with no "guarantee" except perhaps the guarantee that there will be bugs or missing features. Sometimes you are fine with taking that risk or not having those features, other times you want to go for the stable option with all features. Jhertel (talk) 21:48, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Which features are you missing? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 02:55, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

I think I already said that. Speed, stability and having the full feature set. You can see other posts on this page, or perhaps phabricator, for what is specifically missing or doesn't work compared to the old, stable editor. The point is not having specific features, but having all the features of the old editor available if and when I need them. And it can relatively easily be done by optionally having all three editors available at the same time.

But I'll just stick with the old one for now, combined with the Visual Editor. I'm pretty fine with those. I just wanted to take part in the beta testing, but if I can't have the old editor at the same time, I'll simply not test the beta. That was my point. I just wanted to say that, because my guess is I am not alone in making that choice.

And if there are enough beta testers, that's not really a problem. The point was more that if more beta testers were wanted, I think you/they would get that by not taking anything away from those who beta test. Jhertel (talk) 13:04, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Right now, my list of "missing features" contains exactly one item:

• the list of transcluded templates that's under the edit window

Local scripts/gadgets have generally not been converted, but they're not part of "the old editors". And there are a few reports that something is "missing" when it's actually present but not in a location that was immediately obvious to that particular editor (which is a problem, but a different problem).

So I've got one missing feature on my list. If your list is longer than that, then please help me expand mine. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:16, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining. I admit that I only superficially skimmed the other issues and that I thought there were more missing features than the missing list of transcluded templates. I am glad to hear that there aren't. So my issues are currently three: stability, speed (the delay before editing is possible) and that missing list. And speed is a real issue for me.

I could imagine speed could be an even bigger issue for people with slower computers, for instance in countries where they normally can't afford to buy a faster one. But a slow computer is currently not my specific problem, so I am just imagining that. Jhertel (talk) 06:25, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

I understand that speed depends upon your location (which WMF server your computer is talking to) as well as your processing power. I agree that it's a relevant factor for a lot of experienced editors, especially if you want to just make one quick little change.

A few wikis have some popular gadgets that will be missed by their editors. Some of the older ones can be replaced easily (e.g., using the built-in language software tools that were added a couple of year ago) but some will need to be updated. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:15, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

For me:

• Wikitext - standard
• VisualEditor - useful for minor typos, inserting citations or fixing liks
• NWE - too many missing or buggish features now JAn Dudík (talk) 08:03, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

I quickly found another need. I rather often fix page bugs that are caused by incorrect templates. But all the "Used on this page" etc links are not there. I think I can also find them trough page information, but I haven't adjusted to that yet :) —TheDJ (Not WMF) (talk • contribs) 08:40, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Have you filed this feature request already, or shall I? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 07:41, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

I filed this a while back, it's in our queue: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T149009 ESanders (WMF) (talk) 11:22, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Maybe a button could be added on the loading screen, or an option shown when the mode-switching button is right-clicked? Jc86035 (talk) 08:59, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Sllowing URL hacking would be a good middle ground to force the "new editor view", e.g.:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama?veaction=editsource&force=1

Currently anonymous users can't really test the feature at all and I'd say that's a pretty big oversight as there are always edge cases only uncovered through anonymous testing. 197.218.83.215 (talk) 09:58, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Hey 197.218.83.215, if you consider anonymous testing as in "we should expose this very early iteration of this software to our hundreds of millions readers!", I'll need to disagree with you. Even if the software was already significantly "better", it may still have occasional bugs that would confuse new users too much. Also, a person entirely new to our environment would currently have no means to figure out that this is a beta, and that feedback is highly welcome. Most importantly, since they don't know much about how wikitext works, there's an entire set of problems they just won't see ("the editor should do this, it does that instead"). Elitre (WMF) (talk) 13:56, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Not really, I meant using the direct URL to access it. Since the link won't be available in the interface most anonymous users won't even know of its existence anyway. So it is a non-issue as far as bugs are concerned.

The best people to test any interface in the world are those who have never used it. Basic wikitext (not crazy templates and parser functions) can be learnt within less than a day. Everyone who has touched a particular interface has an inherent bias because they will always compare it to something else.

Take for example the user on this very board who claimed that "comments" inside link markup should be rendered properly. They are so desperate to find flaws that they even look for contrived undocumented examples, and label it as "features" that should work rather than a flaw on the previous tools.

"Tunnel vision". 197.218.90.81 (talk) 10:43, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Of course experienced users should also test software, but they will always be biased by their prior experiences and will suggest things that may make the tool worse for new users.

Good tools take user experience into account and hide or reduce complexity of tools for novices while allowing advanced users to see them. Unfortunately, MediaWiki and its extensions often take the shortcut of one "site" fits all. 197.218.90.81 (talk) 11:10, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

I think that we're keeping the devs busy enough right now to not push this beyond the strictly opt-in-only stage. The first 100 saved edits produced more than 150 comments on the feedback pages, plus bugs and feature requests being filed directly in Phabricator.

I'm sure the team will consider making it more accessible to new contributors and logged-out editors in due course. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 07:38, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Bug in switching from VE (editing only one paragraph) to Wikitext editor

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Here I wanted to add a word within a link, which didn't work out fine. So I switched to source code editing. This resulted in doubling all parts of the article outside the paragraph I chose to edit first. Plus, it removed the article from my watchlist. Drahreg01 (talk) 23:03, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks - this looks like a bug switching from VE after using a section edit link. ESanders (WMF) (talk) 01:29, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

See https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T153276 (fixed in master) ESanders (WMF) (talk) 01:33, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

This is now deployed to the wmf.6 production branch, which means it should be everywhere except Wikipedias right now, and will be fixed on Wikipedias too within about an hour's time. Thank you for spotting this! Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 19:36, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Section editing doesn't go to the heading after saving, or pre-save the edit summary

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Two points of feedback:

I made this edit to a section. I see two post-edit differences of behavior (which may [not] be deliberate and which may [not] be desirable):

1. The URL at the end of the edit, and where my browser subsequently returned me, was https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Self-references_to_avoid . Old section editing behavior (and I'm too lazy to confirm this, so forgive me if I'm wrong) appends the edited section's id as an anchor to the URL, so I'm returned to the section I was just editing. I would suggest the old behavior is patently desirable.
2. The article history and elsewhere does not have the section listed in the edit summary. Having the section listed would be, at-best, desirable, and at-worst, required, for general rollout. Izno (talk) 23:57, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

1. Agreed
2. See https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T153245 (fixed in master) ESanders (WMF) (talk) 01:22, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

So does that mean you'll file a task for the first one? :D Izno (talk) 17:57, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

It was filed as T153297 by @Schnark (thanks!). Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 21:52, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Edit summary modal panel - return key behavior

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

When the little modal panel pops up with all the various "post-edit" activities (such as "resume editing", "save changes", "edit summary form" and etc.), I expect that pressing the return key will save my changes. Instead, pressing the return key performs no action. I believe this is a regression from previous wikitext editor behavior, and I might suggest that this would be an improvement to VisualEditing, if it's technically possible. Izno (talk) 00:02, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

See https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T153241 ESanders (WMF) (talk) 01:19, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

As in the visual editor, ⇧ Shift+Tab ↹ takes your cursor to the Save button. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 06:54, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

I'll respond on the task. Izno (talk) 18:04, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Browser is not asking do I really want to leave the page

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

If I have edited a page and then accidentally click somewhere outside the editing area, a browser should ask do I really want to leave the page. Stryn (talk) 08:18, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Interesting. Can you give details about what browser you're getting this with? Is it every time or just sometimes? Can you give reproduction steps? Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 16:28, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Both Chrome and Firefox. Happens on every pages.

I created a video (this is FF): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huGfPjWBRyM Stryn (talk) 17:41, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, that was really helpful — filed as T153346, it's a problem when you switch from VE to NWE but not in VE or NWE when loaded directly. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 18:49, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Flickering progress bar

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T153309

Cound you please make different "progress bar"/"wait clock" element for switching, less flickering and less centered. To much attention, if I doubt if VE still working, i surely can have a look in periferial area of a screen (at the bottom f.e.). Igel B TyMaHe (talk) 11:03, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi there. I added your request here: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T153309. Elitre (WMF) (talk) 12:42, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Could you give a bit more detail. I don't really understand what is wrong with the current progress bar. ESanders (WMF) (talk) 20:05, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Only that it appeares right in the center and crawls like a blue worm from left to right. Not the same animation as initial loading which is just fills the bar from left to right not crawls. I prefer no anamation at all when switching from visual to source and back. Igel B TyMaHe (talk) 20:00, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Copying and pasting errors

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This is what appears when I copy the code showed on en:Template:Other uses :

{{Other uses|Target (disambiguation)}}

...and paste it on the wikitext editor:

'''<code><nowiki>{{Other uses|Target (disambiguation)}}</nowiki></code>''' Grabado (talk) 12:34, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi Grabado, this is the result of my test on en.wp.

Can you make such an edit (even on that page, it's totally fine) so we can check what's wrong there? From the looks of it, I'd say you are pasting into the visual editor, not into the new source mode, but I may be wrong! Elitre (WMF) (talk) 12:39, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Done! Grabado (talk) 12:44, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Weird :) So what are your browser (+version), operating system, skin? (It still works correctly for me, that is, if I past the syntax including the nowiki and code tags, I get exactly the result I need, while if I just use the template syntax, the template appears.) Elitre (WMF) (talk) 12:47, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm using:

• Google Chrome 54.0.2840.98 (64-bit)
• MacOS 10.12.1
• Vector

Some weird weather-related characters (☂) also appear when I copy and paste the page title [1] Grabado (talk) 12:54, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

The umbrella bug is https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T153247 (fixed but not deployed) ESanders (WMF) (talk) 13:02, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Would that also cover the initial report, Ed? Elitre (WMF) (talk) 13:05, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

<nowiki> bug is https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T153315 ESanders (WMF) (talk) 14:26, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

2 little bugs

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I've posted this in Talk:2017 wikitext editor; reposting here to better feedback

1. editing a specific section doesn't add the section title automatically in the edit summary.
2. sometimes, after saving and edit done with the new wikitext editor and trying to re-edit the same page (without reloading), the system opens the standard editor, not the new wikitext editor. Mannivu · ✉ 12:52, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

1. is already fixed with https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T153245.
2. could be https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T153312? I'm adding your example there though (although specific examples of pages always help!) Elitre (WMF) (talk) 13:18, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Example:

1. edit https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Fringio/Sandbox "Libero" section
2. save
3. try to edit the whole page or the single section; at this point I see the traditional wikitext editor and not the new one Mannivu · ✉ 13:52, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Works for me :/ (sorry for not expanding before) Elitre (WMF) (talk) 14:05, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

I don't understand :/ Mannivu · ✉ 16:54, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

I made multiple edits to Fringio's sandbox. I usually got the new wikitext mode, but not always. One time, I got the 2010 wikitext editor, and another time I got no toolbar at all. It's possible that this is more likely if you edit a ==Section== instead of the whole page. (But I'm not sure.) Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:14, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Have a button Previsualization on the main interface

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I think it is a little weird to have to click to "Enregistrer les modifications" (in english "Save the modifications") if I want to previsualize a edit.

Because lot of people really really need to previsualize before click on a button "Save the edit".

Also if I want just to previsualize, when I haven't finished my edit, it need 2 clicks to previsualize. And for people who previsualized a lot it's very annoying.

I think the best option is to have a button "previsualize" on the pop up menu before valide the edit + have a button "previsualize" on the main interface. Nouill (talk) 13:17, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

+1. Also with "Review your changes". Grabado (talk) 13:19, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Amir has filed https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T153306 . Thanks. Elitre (WMF) (talk) 13:22, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Too complicated switching

Originally poseted at Talk:2017 wikitext editor When I have as default wikitext editor, I must switch to visualeditor and then switch to 2017 editor. What If I want to have 2017 for less clicking? JAn Dudík (talk) 13:21, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

You want the 2 edit tabs for that at the moment. On cs.wp, after opting in, I get the new editor if I click on Edit source. Elitre (WMF) (talk) 13:28, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

I personally have only one tab, [edit] (source), two tabs were confusing for me. There should be easy switching inside editor for one cick, not for two. JAn Dudík (talk) 07:27, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Just quit from beta testing because of this. Discussion pages now load too long, I prefer faster loading for discussion instead of new source editor. Three buttons or an option to switch off new source editor for discussions would be nice. Igel B TyMaHe (talk) 14:50, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Reload after save

Originally poseted at Talk:2017 wikitext editor

I tried it, and changed in visual editor part of page. Then I save it... and [2]:

• Window title is still "Editing page XXX"
• There are no categories visible
• there are no gadget outputs (OSMap)

After reload is everything OK

Then I tries edit of another page but without savig. When I canceled edit (by esc key, there is nowhere [cancel] button?) I got message on the top: "this is archived version of page.."

I am not familiar with VE, so maybe these bugs are VE related? JAn Dudík (talk) 13:23, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, thanks for moving the comment! I'm bumping it so we can take a look at it later. Elitre (WMF) (talk) 12:47, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

The window title is a known bug. Realistically, I don't expect it to be fixed very soon.

I would have expected the page to show the same categories as before your edit. Can you please try that again, and see if it's happening every time?

The gadget outputs are not updated until you re-load the page (known bug or known feature, depending upon your point of view). Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 01:49, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

adds asterix (a black sun, which indicates copy-paste errors)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

when pasting text into source edit box, it inserts an asterisk equal sign and carriage return Slowking4 (talk) 14:00, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

This is also https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T153247 (already fixed in master) ESanders (WMF) (talk) 15:27, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Doesn't work with text editing browser extensions

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I find It's All Text! useful for editing wikitext pages where the standard in-browser tools aren't powerful enough. I'm not surprised this doesn't work with the new JS-based editor, but it does mean I'll be sticking with the current textarea-based editor. Anomie (talk) 15:01, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Copy-pasting a l1 header results in unexpected feedback

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I copied the text "Zackmann08" at en:User:Zackmann08 and when I went to paste it in edit view at en:Template talk:Infobox single#Template-protected edit request on 15 December 2016, I got the following:

☀
= Zackmann08 =

It's a pretty common use case for me to grab the page heading of a user to subsequently ping them for discussion at a local page of interest. Izno (talk) 18:21, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

You're copying rich-text, and it's converting it. I've seen variations on this in my own editing, and it's annoying. (I think that triple-clicking a file name on Commons gave me the most spectacular results, but copying someone's name from a page history has worked, too.  ;-)

On the other hand, our request may amount to "Please magically know when I meant to copy plain text and when I want to preserve the formatting", which may be a bit awkward. (The copy-paste symbols are outright bugs, so we can reasonably expect to have that fixed.) Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:41, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

I can understand the desire in VisualEditor, and in fact it may be desirable to provide that same copy-pasteability in wikitext editor, but that's completely unexpected from my perspective. Is copy-pasting rich text into wiki-text a designed feature or simply a holdover from using the VE backend? Izno (talk) 20:11, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

This is T153249 ESanders (WMF) (talk) 23:14, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Feedback from a Wikivoyage usser

I'm not sure I like using the JavaScript wikitext editor for talk pages. Very few of the toolbar tools are useful on talk pages, so there's little benefit to be worth the tradeoff of speed and efficiency. However, there are a couple of features -- like being able to paste formatted text -- that could come in handy on occasion. Is there any way to be able to activate the JavaScript wikitext editor only in non-talk namespaces, and by explicit choice in talk namespaces? LtPowers (talk) 19:46, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

There's a similar request at 2017 wikitext editor/Feedback/2016#h-Either_old_editor_or_new_one-2016-12-14T22:26:00.000Z Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:04, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Previewing; Language variant conversion

• Getting preview in the same screen with editing would be much helpful than

  edit -> preview -> go back to edit -> preview

• Language variant conversion in previewing is really needed in languages like Chinese, but parsoid seems not supporting it. Alexander Misel (talk) 04:48, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Number 1 is a commonly requested and already filed task. I believe that number 2 is related to the fact that the team is still working on language variants for the visual editor, but I'll leave it to the PM to specify whether I'm correct or not. Elitre (WMF) (talk) 12:12, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Preview workflow issue

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I've been trying it out and I want to like it, but there's one thing that's driving me nuts, especially for adding a lot of content at once. (See my recent edits to en:Tomato bushy stunt virus for an example.) The preview workflow is now:

• Click "Save Changes" in the upper right (this is really unintuitive)
• Click "Show preview" in the dialog that pops up in the center of the screen
• See preview
• Click "Resume editing" in the upper left
• Find what you want to edit

First of all, that's just way too much clicking and mousing around. It also really degrades the discoverability of wikitext. One reason I've always been skeptical that wikitext is really such a great barrier is that it's very easy to play around with and look at the results, so it facilitates iterative discovery of how it works. This process is disrupted when the preview and the wikitext never appear on the same page.

Also, not too long ago we at enwiki were told that the "Save" button was going to be reworded to "publish", supposedly because clicking the preview button was perceived as "risky" and because the word "publish" has legal implications. But now the workflow is that you have to click "Save" (isn't that risky?) before you're offered an opportunity to use preview. This is separate from some of the other issues raised about preview rendering issues; it would be a problem even if previews were perfect. Opabinia regalis (talk) 05:31, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

>wikitext is really such a great barrier is that it's very easy to play around with and look at the results, so it facilitates iterative discovery of how it works.

I'd say that's a view from an experienced editor. Despite using wikitext for years, and knowing programming languages that make wikitext look like child's play, to be blunt, wikitext is horrible. Wikitext's greatest weakness is its great flexibility and lack of standards. Since there is no such thing as wrong wikitext nor "standard" wikitext users spend considerable time fighting to beating the tool into submission to render something.

As far as the workflow issue is concerned, despite randomly editing Wikimedia wikis from time to time, for all those tries it was always perplexing that people got accustomed to having the preview showing up on the same window. To make matters worse, the button to preview and save is at the bottom, and one needs to scroll down to see it then scroll up to see the preview. If that's not enough, the whole page moves around each time a preview is rendered with new content that displaces it. With all those extra pointless disclaimers added by admins, it becomes even worse because the disclaimer could be perceived as part of the page preview.

My theory was that the buttons were added to the bottom to reduce vandalism despite being a huge usability and workflow failure.

P.S. This seems entirely applicable to your scenario:

https://xkcd.com/1172/ 197.218.83.215 (talk) 10:27, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

You know, I almost linked that xkcd in my post... ;) And I completely agree on the editnotice thing.

The best-case scenario is two side-by-side panes with the wikitext and preview, but the second-best case is IMO what we have: two vertically stacked panes with the wikitext and preview. Definitely not forcing repeated three-click transitions in order to correct errors.

That wikitext is messy and not standardized isn't a problem likely to be solved by changing the interface with which it's edited. Opabinia regalis (talk) 07:19, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

There's a task filed to pull a preview button out on to the main editing bar. Izno (talk) 12:15, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

This is https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T153306 ESanders (WMF) (talk) 19:54, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The new editor in the mobile view

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Whether this new feature supports mobile view？ 星耀晨曦 (talk) 05:40, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Right now the beta feature is desktop-only. Technologically it works fine in our testing, but we're not releasing it there yet. Once we've received some feedback and we're confident that it's working well overall, we'll work on replacing the mobile Web wikitext editor to make the experience consistent between mobile and desktop. This will probably be around March, when we would hope to make it available there as a "beta channel" feature on mobile. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 05:56, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Ohh.. 星耀晨曦 (talk) 06:04, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Thumbnails in preview

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This is a minor issue, not a general workflow one, and I guess it could be either a feature or a bug :) I have thumbnails set to 300px in my preferences. When I view the preview using the new wikitext editor, I see the logged-out default size of 220px. Opabinia regalis (talk) 05:42, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Specific needs for wikisource nsPage editing

"Wikisource editing is different". It's particularly true dealing with nsPage editing, where contributors usually edit pages into a definite sequence, the original pages sequence. This means that "next page that will be edited" can be predicted. IL would be great to pre-build with a background process all the code needed to edit next page while the user edits the previuous one; this perhaps could shorten a lot that very annoying delay between edits.

Would it be possible? Alex brollo (talk) 06:24, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Edit tools

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

While using 17WE I am missing edittools under the edit field: special characters, refernece tags etc.

• E.g. <references /> or ~~~~ is very hidden in VE menu. (all user)
• In edittools there are special characters sorted by language - in VE I must search between many others (per wiki specific)
• I am missing my pre-filled summaries (via js) too. (user specific)
• I am missing other user scripts (e.g. pop-ups, useful when editing) (all users)
• I am missing list of used templates (all users)
• Other scripts (like Wikidata info) works, but I am not able to click to the link to wikidata. JAn Dudík (talk) 07:51, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Number 2 can be mitigated by creating and customizing an "often used" section of symbols that goes straight at the top of the list. You may see Help:VisualEditor/VE_as_the_main_editor#Customize_the_Special_Characters_menu, as it seems to be still missing from cs.wiki. Elitre (WMF) (talk) 12:19, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Quick switching

Hi there. So far I really liked the feature, and I always used wikitext to edit. In the other hand I would really like to see a quick way to change back to wikitext code, for example for using a gadget or similar. Right now you only have the little pencil to change to VisualEditor, It would be cool to add a new "pencil" right next to it to go back temporary to wikitext. Lluis tgn (talk) 08:47, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Translatable pages should be opened using the translate extension

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

If I click "Edit source" at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Tech/News/2016/51/fi it should open https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Translate&group=page-Tech%2FNews%2F2016%2F51&action=page&filter=&language=fi as in the old wikitext editor. Stryn (talk) 09:13, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Edit a reference/template/table visually?

One of the most useful features of VE right now is the ability to edit templates and references and tables using a visual form; templates and references use a modal panel and tables are tables.

Maybe it would be nice to be provided an option in the wikitext editor which allows me to edit those as if they were being edited from VE. (A table you could pop up in a modal panel also, if you don't want to hack at displaying the table directly in the WT editor.)

This is along the lines of my comment earlier regarding merging wikitext and visual editor, but is a much more limited scope. Izno (talk) 15:26, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Wow. The VE table editor in NWE. It could be splendid... IKhitron (talk) 15:43, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

You can just switch to VE to edit the table, then switch back again. ESanders (WMF) (talk) 22:14, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

That's suboptimal for all of the listed cases--really more of a workaround. Izno (talk) 12:18, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Sounds like wanting to have one's cake and eating it too. If one wants to edit using the source, then one should edit it using text if one wants to edit visually then one should use a Visual Editor.

Anyone who has ever spent more than an hour trying to create a tool to parse wikitext would realize how folly this request is. Wikitext parsing is incredibly problematic and complex because it was designed for humans to create not machines, and this is probably the main reason why VE is an html editor.

Creating such tools would mean not just worrying about regular wikitext for tables, but also hacky tools like <noinclude> <onlyinclude><includeonly> {{{}}} [[foo]s <tag> and parser functions. Not to mention the many nested variations of all of the above. Whatever such tool they develop would never be truly usable.

A better use of time would be MediaWiki developers first having the stones to take a hammer and kill a lot of wikitext misfeatures, and having the nerves of steal to weather the storm. 197.218.83.192 (talk) 13:10, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

197: I think maybe you miss the point of why this request comes now: they're already doing the parsing, and now it's using the same engine as VE.

You bet your ass I want my cake and to eat it too. Izno (talk) 13:19, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

I don't think of switching between the editors to use them for what they are best at as a "workaround" - that's the software being used exactly as intended. ESanders (WMF) (talk) 19:53, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Not-great workflow for automatic "Cite"

When I fill in a citation from an external website using the automatic form (for websites which do not have a good translator--and there are many), I do not get an opportunity to fill in the rest of the citation or make changes to the automated piece-parts. All I get is the "Insert" ref button.

2017 wikitext editor/Feedback/2016#h-Edit_a_reference/template/table_visually?-2016-12-17T15:26:00.000Z would help with this, but so would some part of the flow which enables me to make further changes to the citation, presumably using the same modal popup ("do you want to make changes to the automatic citation?"). This is also "a problem" in VE, but at least in VE I can proceed to edit the template visually. Izno (talk) 15:38, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Agree with this, needs an "edit" option as well as "insert". Also needs an opportunity to name the reference; currently you can only do it by editing ref tag after insertion. Opabinia regalis (talk) 07:10, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

The general idea is that first you insert it, and then you edit it (in this case, you edit the wikitext directly). I think that the fairest thing we can say about this model is that it has strengths and weaknesses. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 02:25, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

That's a bad idea in VE too, but there it only introduces an unnecessary extra click to edit the inserted citation. The behavior of the new wikitext editor is likely to introduce errors, because citation templates are fiddly and many people avoid editing them manually, and is a regression compared to the behavior of the old wikitext editor + reftoolbar. Sourcing is already such an uphill battle that making it harder to efficiently produce complete, accurate, and correctly formatted citations seems like more than a minor weakness. Opabinia regalis (talk) 05:42, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

There's some information on user research at phab:T107078. Naturally, since I personally want this change, I'm skeptical of any data that disagrees with me.  ;-) Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:45, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Me too ;) But I'm especially skeptical of data about "user behavior" that seems implausible and inconsistent with my experience as a user, and even more skeptical of statements that aren't data but allude to the existence of data somewhere-or-other that isn't available for broader review. (For example, implicit in the claim you link to is the assumption that the abandoned edits would have been desirable ones had they been made. It seems to me that it is not a bad thing if people back out of making claims if they discover they can't correctly source them.) Opabinia regalis (talk) 22:30, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

• Median edits per registered account: Zero.
• Number of edits for you and me: A lot more than zero

It's conceivably possible that you and I are not exactly typical.  ;-) Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:56, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

List of templates used / List of wikidata's items used

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

(May be the fonction exist already, but I don't see it)

I think it could be great to have the possibility to see the list of templates used in the page and the list of wikidata's items used in the page.

Unlike the usual wikieditor, I think a button could be enough, and maybe we don't have to see those two fonctions in the bottom of the wikieditor's window. Nouill (talk) 18:45, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

List of templates has a task filed.

Not sure about Wikidata items. Izno (talk) 13:15, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

This is https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T149009 ESanders (WMF) (talk) 19:59, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Brace matching

https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T15302

Brace matching is trivial to implement. There is almost never a use-case for unmatched braces. If we are not getting IDE-like auto-suggest for templates, can we at least get brace matching? Guccisamsclub (talk) 23:16, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunately the transclusion systems means there are unmatched braces, e.g. {| ...table.. {{tableend}}. It only takes one of these on the page to throw off all the matching. ESanders (WMF) (talk) 20:13, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Maybe such a use case exists, but I've never encountered it. Unless you implement a full IDE you will always have edge cases for everything. But for 99% of the time you do want matched brackets, braces, and parentheses. After all, you can alway delete the extra auto-completed brace, or have an option turn off brace matching. Alternately, you don't even have to have brace matching as the default. Take a look at the Dokuwiki editor, which has implemented auto-complete for brace-matching and bullet points. The feature can be turned off. Guccisamsclub (talk) 21:02, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

It exists indeed, but do forget about it, please. IKhitron (talk) 22:26, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

sure. i just use the visual editor now anyway on wikipedia. actually why should we forget about it? it'd be a great feature, unless you have plans to implement some really fancy code-completion. Guccisamsclub (talk) 23:57, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Redundant button to Save page

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

There seems to be a redundant button to "Save page" in the preview view of a page. Both the the "Return to save form" button at the bottom of the preview and "Save changes" button at the top seem to be doing the same thing. I guess it would be better if only one of them were kept (keeping the "Save changes" button would be a consistent choice). Kaartic ^[talk] 05:57, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

"Return to save form" in preview is for restoring form, where you can write summary. wargo (talk) 15:09, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Indeed - they should do different things. Save page will take you back to the summary page as well in case there is an error. ESanders (WMF) (talk) 19:49, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

They do different things for me, in Safari 10. User:Kaartic, what's your operating system/web browser? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 01:40, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Sorry for not being specific here. I actually thought they did the same thing because when there's no summary they seem to be doing the same thing. I didn't know that and hence reported this. I guess you could hide one of those buttons when the user reviews a change without entering a summary. Kaartic ^[talk] 03:05, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

What if wants to add summary after review? wargo (talk) 09:47, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

We are also consdering a redesign of the save workflow at the moment: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T140451 ESanders (WMF) (talk) 13:20, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

@Wargo I just told to remove one of those buttons not both of them. Currently, when a user decides to write the summary after a review, he would be taken to the "Save form" regardless of whether he clicks the "Return to save form" or "Save changes" button. Kaartic ^[talk] 15:10, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Here's what's happening for me:

1. Make changes to the page
2. Save
3. Click 'Review your changes'
4. Click 'Return to save form'
5. Type edit summary
6. Click Save

Or I can do this:

1. Make changes to the page
2. Save
3. Type edit summary
4. Click 'Review your changes'
5. Click 'Return to save form' (and change the edit summary, if I want to)
6. Click Save

But it sounds like you encountered this:

1. Make changes to the page
2. Save
3. Click 'Review your changes'
4. Click 'Return to save form'
5. Page is already saved (with no chance to add an edit summary after reviewing your changes).

Is that correct? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:28, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Not actually. What I encountered was two ways to do the first sequence in your above reply.

Way 1:

1. Make changes to the page
2. Save
3. Click 'Review your changes'
4. Click 'Return to save form'
5. Type edit summary
6. Click Save

Way 2:

1. Make changes to the page
2. Save
3. Click 'Review your changes'
4. Click 'Save'
5. Type edit summary
6. Click Save

I thought it would be better to show only one of those two buttons in the above case as both do the same thing. Kaartic ^[talk] 19:59, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. This is very useful information. Do you have "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" turned on in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing ?

When I have it turned on, then I get this:

1. Make changes to the page
2. Save
3. Click 'Review your changes'
4. Click 'Save'
5. Get bounced back to the main Save box so that it can complain that I haven't added an edit summary yet.
6. Click Save (with or without first adding an edit summary)
7. Page is saved.

When I have it turned off (and re-loaded the page twice to make sure it was really off), then I get this:

1. Make changes to the page
2. Save
3. Click 'Review your changes'
4. Click 'Save'
5. Page is saved. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:17, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

No. I have that option turned off and I still get prompted with the Summary box when I try to save without entering a summary. Moreover it's only after you have asked me do I know that such an option exists :) Kaartic ^[talk] 03:28, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Sorry about all the confusion here. I apologise for wasting your time. It seems that I have unknowingly enabled that Prompt in enwiki in which I saw this behaviour. Please do excuse my ignorance. (I almost forgot that I would be prompted when I forget to enter a summary when editing in wikitext. :) ) Kaartic ^[talk] 05:58, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

No apologies are needed. Sorting this out was actually one of the most fun things I did yesterday.  :-) Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:59, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Include a button in the toolbar to switch from the code editor to visual editor

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

It would nice and consistent if there was a button in the toolbar to switch from the code editor to the visual editor, since there is a button currently to switch form the visual editor to the code editor. Kaartic ^[talk] 06:12, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

There is. It's the pencil icon in the same place as the '[[ ]]' code editor button. It may be shown as disabled on pages that don't support VE (e.g. template pages). ESanders (WMF) (talk) 20:10, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Marking text

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T153601

When marking a large portion of text with Shift-Down_Arrow, when I pass the bottom of the text window, the text does not scroll up and marking continues outside below the edge of the window. It seems that whatever I then want to do (e.g. partially unmark using Shift-Up_Arrow), the editor always keeps the beginning of the marked area visible in the window, which makes the end invisible. Gżdacz (talk) 17:07, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Filed as https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T153601 ESanders (WMF) (talk) 19:48, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Edit description

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

The old wikitext editor produces a description, which includes the link to the section being edited. This is extremely useful when editing pages with lots of independent topics (e.g. Village pump discussions or Did-you-know proposal page) - the edit description in the watchlist indicates what the edit was about. The new editor does not do that, it indicates only the page, which is much less informative. Gżdacz (talk) 17:16, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

This was fixed in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T153245 and will be in the next relase. ESanders (WMF) (talk) 19:45, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Initial feedback from Josve05a (VE liaison for svwp)

1. After pressing "edit source" for a section, pressing "Edit source" at the top does not reload the edit window with the entire page' content, as the old editor does.
2. Formatting is saved when copying single lines, such as article titles, which causes sun symbold or h1-tags, or nowiki-tags if the copied line was in a code-tag block.
3. There is no "previously used" edit summaries. In the old code editor I could enter a single letter, and it would suggest old summaries.
4. When pasting url's and immediately typing a pipe ( | ), the pipe most often is typed before the pasted link, despite me pressing ctrl+v before pressing the pipe-button. It is a bit slow when pasting stuff, which causes typed things to be written before.
5. I did a quick ctrl-a + delete, which caused a page to be empty. I imediatly pressed the switch editor-button, and when in VE-mode the content was back as if I didn't remove it at all.
6. After saving an edit on a long page, I (my screen) end up at the bottom of the page, or under the page in the "legal footer". I'd like to be taken to the top of the article after an edit, as long as it wan't a section-edit, then I'd like to go to the top of that section header. Josve05a (talk) 22:45, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

7. When pressing "Undo" I'm still getting the old editor.

8. The style of the edit window needs changes. I don't like the grey letters...

9. On talk pages whn using this NWE I want it to add a new line at theboot, so I don't have to press enter the first thing I do. Josve05a (talk) 01:24, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, some good points here.

1. Seems sensible (edit: indirectly fixed by https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/326990/)
2. https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T153249 (fixed in master)
3. https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T153245
4. URLs are getting coverted async to links. We could bypass this for external links (although some external links end up being internal links).
5. Correct - looks like an incorrect emptiness check somewhere. (edit: filed as https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T78550)
6. Agreed (edit: this is https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T78550)
7. Agreed (edit: this is https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T78550)
8. Not sure I understand. It's designed to be consistent with VE in visual mode.
9. Can you give more detail? ESanders (WMF) (talk) 18:42, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

3 is because new edit summary field uses textarea instead of input, which uses browser's autocomplete. wargo (talk) 21:36, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Autocomplete is a different bug: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T50274 ESanders (WMF) (talk) 22:14, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

/me still likes autocomplete...saves so much time. Now I just skip summaries Josve05a (talk) 21:44, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

4 and 1: Maybe an option to turn off the "keep formating when pasting" would be good for some users (me).

8. Yeah, just personal preference that I want it to be..umm...in a separate scroll window than the entire page, and be more a "code window"...just something to get used to, but I still feel as though it isn't a "real" code window...not sure. Just something to diffentate/separate it form the left side menu...sorry.

9. When using the old editor, MW automaticly adds a blank line at the bottom. When on talkpages, this is great, because I can type : on that line. in the new editor I have to make a blank line manually and then add the :. I want NWE to add a blank line at the bottom of the text window. Josve05a (talk) 20:47, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

10. When pressing "Edit source" before page has finished loading (JavaScript?) , it will load the old editor instead. Josve05a (talk) 20:49, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

1. In the code editor of Flow, it does not keep formatting. Inconsistency between "new" editors here....@Quiddity (WMF) and Quiddity: Josve05a (talk) 20:50, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

I believe that User:Trizek (WMF) is now tracking Flow. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 22:52, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Oops yeah, old habbit... Josve05a (talk) 23:19, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Concerning specifics about Flow, please create a new thread. :) Trizek_(WMF) (talk) 14:54, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

11. I'm used to press Alt-i + alt+s to save an article as minor. Now I have to press Alt-s + Alt-i + Alt-s. More steps and different order... Josve05a (talk) 21:45, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Filed as https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T153925 ESanders (WMF) (talk) 00:10, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

12. On https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Josve05a?veaction=editsource my edit notice is "cut" and not displayed properly. I have to scroll to view some more, but the scroll wheel does not indicate that this is possible, and when scrolling, it still cuts of parts of the notice at the right side. Josve05a (talk) 23:26, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

This (#12) is probably due to the template that you're using for the page notice. The page notice seems to have a minimum width of about 430 pixels (un-zoomed), regardless of the screen width. If you go to the page notice itself, set your page zoom to zero/default, and make your window narrower, then it will eventually stop re-sizing and you'll lose the edge of the notice. I don't know why it does; the templates it's calling do not seem to have the same limitation. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:06, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

On #8 (gray letters), someone else commented on this a few days ago, and later decided that it was okay. It may be something that takes a bit of time to adjust to. (It's supposed to produce less eyestrain for most people.) Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:08, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

On #8, it may cause less eyestrain, but it is causing me to gloss over the fact that the "loading" has finished and I can edit it... Josve05a (talk) 20:59, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

It may produce less eyestrain, but it does look "greyed out" like it's not done loading yet, and the header color doesn't meet the enwiki accessibility guidelines for color contrast. Opabinia regalis (talk) 22:46, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure which particular element you're thinking of, but I strongly doubt that it violates any accessibility guielines anywhere.

The text in the editing window is #252525, which would pass the accessibility standards for contrast for large text (e.g., the <h1> page title) even if it were on a 56% dark gray background (approximately #707070). For small text, the background would need to be no darker than 44% gray (#8C8C8C). The off-white background that's being used is obviously much lighter/more contrast-y than either of those.

You can use a tool such as http://juicystudio.com/services/luminositycontrastratio.php to see what the minimum acceptable standard looks like. (The minimum ratio is 3.0 for large text and 4.5 for small text; that tool will tell you whether it passes.) If you'd like me to have a designer re-check this, then I can do that, but I think if you go look at how little contrast is acceptable, it'll be obvious that this isn't violating any guidelines. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 02:07, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

WNE and DisFixer

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I am an active user of DisFixer, a tool used on plwiki for fixing redirects to disambiguation pages. It normally offers for each such link a menu of possible choices, extracted from the disambiguation page. After making choices, a button transfers me the the diff window with wikitext editor, in which all the changes have been made automatically (with links via redirects resolved, too), and where I can insert manual corrections, if necessary. NWE does not seem to work with DisFixer. I have used it on , and got no automatical corrections. I've had to make them manually.

I would like NWE to cooperate with DisFixer. Gżdacz (talk) 11:15, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

I belive you should ask the gadget developers, not here. IKhitron (talk) 11:17, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Turns out the gadget developer in this case is on our team, so maybe you will get some NWE support sooner :) ESanders (WMF) (talk) 18:45, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Paging User:Matma Rex... Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:48, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I could probably look into this. I should get around to it this week. I have a bit of a backlog to go through after the holidays. :) Matma Rex (talk) 14:25, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Turns out the 2017 wikitext editor is not really ready to support gadgets. For now, I've just made a little tweak to make sure disFixer always ends up using the old editor. Matma Rex (talk) 17:33, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Good enough. Thanks! Gżdacz (talk) 18:05, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Signing your posts

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I am forced to manually type in "-Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 18:34, 19 December 2016 (UTC)", which is quite unfortunate. Please change this. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 18:34, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

What about ~~~~, if you don't like the button? IKhitron (talk) 18:37, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Well, he might have used that; if you don't remember to nowiki the code, then it gets converted when you save. There is more information and ideas about how to address this at phab:T153255

Atcovi, how have you normally added your signature in the past? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:34, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

By pressing a button which automatically pasted ~~~~ And whoops my bad on the first post. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 18:18, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

They looked into this a while ago, and most people don't use the signature button. However, I suppose that new editors might use it more. Also, different languages have different keyboards, and these punctuation keys aren't always in the same place.

Atcovi, if you prefer, then you can go to Insert > More > Your signature. But I think that most editors will find it faster to type four tildes instead. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:10, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

BiDi

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

The BiDi editing tool does not work with this. That's going to be a problem with a lot of RTL language wikis, where jumping back and forth to check template syntax is common. StevenJ81 (talk) 20:35, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Steven, I think I'm going to need a lot more information about this. Please have a look at phab:T153378 and phab:T153356 and tell me if those are the errors that you're encountering, or if it's something else. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:41, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

It could be also just an unability of gadgets to work with new editor. IKhitron (talk) 01:04, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Will respond in the am US EST. StevenJ81 (talk) 04:56, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The "beta" activated for me without opting-in

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Somehow, the beta features activated for me on English Wikisource, even though I did not select anything nor do I find any boxes checked when I visit my preferences. On Wikisource, the popup previews are utterly useless, and interfere with my ability to edit. But, as I said I haven't activated the beta features, so I have no means of making this nuissance go away. EncycloPetey (talk) 22:50, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

I am using Firefox 50.0.2; Mac OS X 10.9.5; Vector skin. EncycloPetey (talk) 22:51, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Have you a feature "opt in to all beta features automatically" on? IKhitron (talk) 23:00, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

No. I do not. EncycloPetey (talk) 23:08, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

To misquote Buzz Lightyear: "Popups. Popups everywhere."

I can turn off the popups by moving into the popup window and selecting "disable popups", but I need popups on other pages. And in any case, if I refresh the page, or go to another page, the popups come back all over again.

I cannot conceive of a single situation in which the Visual Editor (or this Beta adaptation of it) could ever be useful on Wikisource for doing anything. EncycloPetey (talk) 23:17, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm not really certain what you're talking about. I don't think that there are any popups associated with this Beta Feature. On the other hand, as of yesterday's changes at en.wikisource by User:Billinghurst, popups (aka NAVPOPS for enwiki folks) appears to be enabled by default as a gadget for all users.

If your problem isn't with the unexpected appearance of the gadget, can you share a screenshot of what you're seeing (e-mail's fine, if you don't want to bother with uploading it to Commons)? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 23:44, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Ugh. Good catch. That hadn't been my intent for default and I have turned it back off. Fix one thing, affect another.

Re the popups, IMNSHO it is one of the most useful tools xwiki! Such a time saver. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:07, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Spaces in infobox

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T154382
Resolved

When inserting an infobox copied from a pre-existing article, I've got lots of & nbsp; in place of spaces, which used to be there to align the '=' signs. The text was prepared in an external editor and pasted into the NWE. diff: https://pl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Granatnik_%C5%81opuskiego&diff=47925741&oldid=47916581 Gżdacz (talk) 15:31, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Hey @Gżdacz, I think this was just fixed, although it should land in production later this week. Elitre (WMF) (talk) 11:06, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Feedback about using 2017 wikitext editor on my own wiki

My MediaWiki version is 1.29.0-alpha (5b211eb), my VisualEditor version is 0.1.0 (7a8b171), my WikiEditor version is 0.5.0 (3531268), and I've enabled the 2017 wikitext editor on my wiki and I've noticed to following so far:

Pros

• The performance of both the VisualEditor and SourceEditor have greatly improved. Not only does it switch very fast between the two editors but it also loads the editors up much more faster then it used to before when I click on Edit or Edit Source buttons.
• I really like that the SourceEditor now has the same interface as the VisualEditor, and I can edit on the whole page. It's visually appealing and I'm not locked into a small window anymore on the center of the page like with the older WikiEditor.

Cons

• If I edit in the VisualEditor and swicth to the SourceEditor it keeps my edits without the need to save, but if I edit in the SourceEditor and swicth to the VisualEditor I lose my edits so I need to save before I do that. It would be good if I were to be able to switch between both of them as many times I want without the need to save the page and not lose my edits.
• If I copy-paste any link into the SourceEditor it automatically converts it to some broken external link code, which makes it very hard to edit links and references in the SourceEditor. Like for example the Following link https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/rESPR72f8ce3fa1b9ef8ee3f892cfcba38d01f2cbc143 would be converted to [/phabricator.wikimedia.org/rESPR72f8ce3fa1b9ef8ee3f892cfcba38d01f2cbc143 /phabricator.wikimedia.org/rESPR72f8ce3fa1b9ef8ee3f892cfcba38d01f2cbc143] right after I copy-paste it into the SourceEditor.
• It would be good to have Syntax highlighting in the SourceEditor.
• The 2017 wikitext editor also misses a review button or tab. Innosflew (talk) 16:37, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Syntax highlighting

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

It is really good and welcome to update the Wikitext Editor so it is as well designed as and cohesive with the Visual Editor. However, it is quite difficult to use without syntax highlighting. As I write this, I realise that wasn’t a feature of the current Wikitext Editor, but of MediaWiki:Gadget-DotsSyntaxHighlighter, to which I apparently became so used. I’m disabling the beta feature for now, but I’m really looking forward to the release of this features, as soon as it gains some colours. Nclm (talk) 17:38, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment. (I wish we had a good way to automatically tag/track all comments belonging to a certain area...) Elitre (WMF) (talk) 13:14, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Can't set "Minor edit" or watch page

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I know the title it's a little too general, but explaining correctly the issue will have made the title too long

I've noticed that if you start editing a section using VE and then change to WikiEditor the Save dialogue doesn't let you set your edit as a "Minor edit" or watch the page (I've made a screen; you ca view it here). I've tried using Chrome and Firefox and I got the issue with both browsers. Mannivu · ✉ 19:41, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Would love to be able to tab into the edit summary

In the standard editor, you could hit the tab button on your keyboard, and it would pop into the edit summary box, because its the next "fillable" next textbox. I would love to be able to do that in this interface too, where "tab" opens the edit summary and save dialogue. Otherwise, it does nothing right now. Sadads (talk) 14:46, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

I've added your suggestion for a keyboard shortcut to a related task, phab:T52961. You can also use the keyboard shortcut for "Save" to open the Save box. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:21, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I actually couldn't find the keyboard shortcut to open the "Save" box in that page. Am I missing something ? Kaartic ^[talk] 05:12, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

@Kaartic you can actually do alt + S to open the save dialogue. Sadads (talk) 14:06, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Argh! It hasn't been updated. I apologize for sending you to a useless page. It's control-option-s on a Mac, and alt-s on most other computers. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:21, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

@Sadds: Thanks for the info.

@Whatamidoing: No apologies reqired :) Just wanted to be sure that I wasn't missing anything. Kaartic ^[talk] 18:50, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

I've updated the page, but I need to make a note so I'll remember to figure out if there's anything else missing. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:01, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

If you press CTRL+/ you will see a help dialog for keyboard shortcuts (also available from the help menu). Some shortcuts will vary slightly by OS and browser. ESanders (WMF) (talk) 12:19, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Unable to "Replace a selection" with text to paste

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I tried to change a broken link in a page for which I did the following,

1. I copied the link which replaces the broken link
2. Selected the broken link in the page
3. Pressed Ctrl+V to replace the selected link with the link in the clipboard.

Expected result

The selected link (text) should have been replaced with the link (text) in the clipboard.

Actual result

The link (text) in the clipboard was appended with the selected link (text) Kaartic ^[talk] 05:20, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

This is perfect. It's now phab:T154041, almost word for word.

Feel free to file bug reports directly at phab: if you would rather. The tag is for this workboard. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:28, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting that! I just wanted to be sure that it was a common problem, so I asked it here :) Kaartic ^[talk] 02:17, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Un nouvel éditeur beaucoup plus pratique

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Bonjour les développeurs !

Je vois que vous avez sorti une nouvelle fonction plutôt sympa !

Ce nouvel éditeur wikitexte est plein de bonnes fonctionnalités, notamment :

• l'intégration de quelques raccourcis comme dans l'éditeur visuel
• le "bas" du site qui "descend" selon la taille du wikitexte
• et encore d'autre trucs bien

Il manque selon moi une chose : le bouton permettant de faire les tildes de signature. Niridya (talk) 13:42, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Je viens aussi de voir que le nouvel éditeur ne fonctionne pas sur les pages semi-protégées. Le seul bug pour l'instant ! Niridya (talk) 13:44, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Translation:

Hello developers!

I see you have released a rather nice new feature rather!

This new wikitext editor is full of good features, including:

• the integration of some of the shortcuts in the visual editor
• the "bottom" of the page "descends" according to the size of the wikitext
• and other good stuff

I miss one thing: the button to make the signature tildes.

...

I also just saw that the new editor does not work on semi-protected pages. The only bug for now! ESanders (WMF) (talk) 12:24, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

I am able to open semi-protected pages in the new wikitext mode. Perhaps this is fixed now? However, if this continues to be a problem for you, then please tell me. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:39, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback!

> le bouton permettant de faire les tildes de signature.

This is availabe in the menu. 'Insert' > 'More' > 'Signature'. Others have complained that this could be more prominent. ESanders (WMF) (talk) 12:25, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer !

It will be very useful for me. Niridya (talk) 18:30, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Copy-paste issue in Source Editor

I encountered a bug when I copy-paste a text in a lot of cases it inserts weird characters, such as ☀, and &ltnowiki> tags with the pasted text. I already talked about how it also breaks pasted urls in the following thread: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/2017%20wikitext%20editor/Feedback/2016#h-Feedback_about_using_2017_wikitext_editor_on_my_own_wiki-2016-12-20T16%3A37%3A00.000Z

Also, when I try to paste the text of links instead of pasting the only the plain text itself it tries to keep the formatting and insert it with mediawiki formatting like it's an external link, but even then the external link code is broken because it's usually cuts of the http:// or the http://www. part.

And when I try to copy like for example a text inside a heading again instead of just simply pasting the plain text it tries to keep the formatting and insert it using the mediawiki heading code(== heading ==). It does this for other types of text on the page as well, such as bold text, italic, links etc.

This makes it really hard to edit with the Source Editor sometimes. Is it would be better if the Source Editor of the 2017 wikitext editor only were to copy-paste plain text without any formatting code. Innosflew (talk) 20:04, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, these issues have already been reported and fixed (although not yet deployed). ESanders (WMF) (talk) 12:17, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

The first (black sun) is phab:T153247.

In the meantime, you can try a 'plain text only' paste. On a Mac, that's ⌘ Command+⌥ Option+⇧ Shift+V. I think it's Control+⇧ Shift+V on a Windows box. You can get the correct keys for your computer by going to the Help menu (near the Save button; looks like ? in a circle) and choosing "Keyboard shortcuts". Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:46, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Some issue on mantanaince/infobox templates. Process on the upper post. VR0 (talk) 02:25, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

new wikitext editor only enabled on namespace where visual editor is enabled

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

As I understand it the new wikitext editor is only enabled where visual editor is enabled, leading to switching between two different wikitext editor Xavier Combelle (talk) 08:32, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

No, it is enabled on all namespaces. If VE is not enabled in that NS, then switch to visual editing button is disabled. ESanders (WMF) (talk) 12:15, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

looks you are right, it seems that I used it during the time I was enabled it Xavier Combelle (talk) 20:28, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Regular expressions

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I like the new regular expression search (aside from the multiple-matches highlighting turning off immediately whenever a limit is reached on the rendered part of the page), but is there a way to search for newlines characters? \n doesn't seem to turn up anything. Jc86035 (talk) 13:18, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

This is https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T151671 ESanders (WMF) (talk) 13:51, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"Preview page with this template"

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Something I do miss when editing templates is the ability, added by Extension:TemplateSandbox, to preview another page with the changes made at the template I am currently editing. Geraki (talk) 14:50, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

I've started a description of this issue at phab:T154159. Feel free to click the edit button and expand it, or to add any other comments you have. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:39, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Inserting a link in subject line

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I tried to use NWE to post a new thread on plwiki Village Pump. I wanted to use a link in the title, but the shortcut Ctrl-K does not work there. Gżdacz (talk) 09:03, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for this note. I believe that ==links inside section headings== are officially discouraged at the English Wikipedia, for reasons of accessibility. (People use them on discussion pages, but I believe there's a guideline that tells them not to.) Does the Polish Wikipedia have a similar rule, too? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:55, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

I do not think that we have such a rule.

Many officially used tools generate such links. E.g., each "did you know that..." notification on my talk page includes a link, each notification about removal request includes a link, and so does each information about a page transferred from main back to author's sandbox. All of them can be seen on my talk page. Gżdacz (talk) 21:24, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

We do not either, btw. It seems like something local for enwiki. IKhitron (talk) 21:27, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

This affects more than links; you can't use anything in the toolbar, including the special character menu. Some of this makes sense (you probably don't want to encourage <ref> tags or images in section headings), but some of this should probably be re-considered. I've started the task at phab:T154219. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 06:42, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

We definitely need refs in secrion headings. IKhitron (talk) 06:49, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Is that common? I find zero examples of this at hewiki's Village Pump (including in the archives).

Is it desirable for a talk page to have ref tags in the section heading? I have very rarely seen ==Example<ref>Citation</ref>==, and it always seems like a mistake – perhaps understandable in articles, if the source is meant to support an entire list (it's almost always a section that contains only a list, so it's unclear where else to put it), but IMO it is never desirable on talk pages. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 07:09, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Not in village pump, only in articles. I don't think there are example in talk pages. IKhitron (talk) 09:25, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

IKhitron, the restriction I am referring to concerns only the usecase when the user clicks "New section", which appears on talk pages. In this case there is a separate field to enter the section name, and one cannot enter links and other stuff there.

This does not concern articles, where section headings are created by typing the code. Gżdacz (talk) 09:44, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. Forget about what I said. IKhitron (talk) 09:45, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

NWE and watchlist

I did an edit using NWE diff, and it appeared on my watchlist in boldface, as if it were done by somebody else.

I do not know if this is related to NWE, but I have not seen this behaviour previously. It does not happen each time - it is rather infrequent. Gżdacz (talk) 15:47, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

I can see my edits in bold about once a month. There is a bug there, I think. IKhitron (talk) 15:49, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

I think that this is unrelated to the editing tools you're using, but it's still a bug. I started a task at phab:T154196. Phabricator's internal search is unreliable, so there's a chance that an older bug report exists and just isn't find-able today. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:54, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Preview of NWE

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

When I'm previewing an edit done using NWE, arrow keys, PgDn and PGUp do not work. I have to use pointing device to navigate (which I dislike).

Win10 64 bit, Chrome 55.0.2883.87 m (64 bit), vector. Gżdacz (talk) 22:35, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

I have the same problem in Safari on a Mac, so it's probably all browsers/everywhere.

I've filed this at phab:T154334. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:50, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Weird signs when I copy-paste

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T153247

When I copy paste a phrase or a sentence into the editor it returns weirds signs like an umbrella, a sun and equals signs. Why? Orf3us (talk) 22:26, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Orf3us. This bug is phab:T153247.

The equals signs happen when you're actually copying a =Level 1 section=, which is rarely used on Wikipedia except for the page title. (One of the few pages where you'll find it used in the middle of the page is at c:Commons:Village pump, where it's used for the dates, e.g., =December 29=.) VisualEditor has retained the formatting that you copied. It's not clear whether it "should" retain that formatting, but it currently "is" retaining that formatting.

The black sun and the umbrella are because of outright bugs in the copy-paste software. The devs are working on it.

As a work-around, you can copy the page title and paste it as plain text (on a Mac, that's "Paste and Match Style" in your browser's Edit menu; I believe that the keyboard shortcut on most non-Mac computers is Control-Shift-V). You can also paste the text into a plain-text space (e.g., the URL bar or the search bar for your web browsers) and re-copy it to get just plain text. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 02:35, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello Whatamidoing (WMF)

Thank you for your elaborate answer. I do not think that I regularly copy level 1 sections, it seems to me that the equals signs comes with phrases I copy from all over the Internet. Makes sense though that copying retains the formatting but that should be an opt-in possibilty rather than default. Apart from that it is fun to try the new editor. Orf3us (talk) 06:20, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm glad that you are having fun testing it, and I really appreciate your willingness to tell me what you think.

It's really copying the HTML, so all <h1>, <h2>, <h3>, etc. headers get converted. Most editors encounter it when copying the name of a Wikipedia article (so they can link to the article), so I incorrectly assumed that were doing the same thing.

For example, if you go to the lead story in today's Aftenpost, and copy and paste the headline, then you'll get = Obama-administrasjonen med sanksjoner mot Russland = You will get == Russerne ville hjelpe Trump == if you copy and paste the section heading, etc.

I hope that this problem will be reduced soon. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:54, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Pasting links from other projects

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Today I wanted to link an article from Wiktionary in Wikipedia. Several attempts to copy the link from the browser address bar and paste between [] signs produced invariably an internal link within Wikipedia. Finally I had to create the wikicode in an external editor. The diff is pl:special:diff/48033093.

Win10 64 bit, latest chrome, vector. Gżdacz (talk) 09:25, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

This is likely https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T153624 ESanders (WMF) (talk) 13:29, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it seems to be the same bug. Gżdacz (talk) 13:36, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.