Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page is a translated version of the page Help:VisualEditor/FAQ and the translation is 49% complete.
Outdated translations are marked like this.
Other languages:
Avañe'ẽ • ‎Bahasa Indonesia • ‎Cymraeg • ‎Deutsch • ‎English • ‎Ido • ‎Kreyòl ayisyen • ‎Lëtzebuergesch • ‎Mìng-dĕ̤ng-ngṳ̄ • ‎Nederlands • ‎Scots • ‎Sunda • ‎Tagalog • ‎Tiếng Việt • ‎Türkçe • ‎Zazaki • ‎asturianu • ‎azərbaycanca • ‎català • ‎dansk • ‎eesti • ‎emiliàn e rumagnòl • ‎español • ‎euskara • ‎français • ‎føroyskt • ‎galego • ‎hrvatski • ‎italiano • ‎lietuvių • ‎magyar • ‎norsk bokmål • ‎polski • ‎português • ‎português do Brasil • ‎slovenčina • ‎slovenščina • ‎suomi • ‎svenska • ‎čeština • ‎Ελληνικά • ‎български • ‎русский • ‎саха тыла • ‎српски / srpski • ‎українська • ‎հայերեն • ‎ייִדיש • ‎עברית • ‎العربية • ‎سنڌي • ‎فارسی • ‎پښتو • ‎বাংলা • ‎தமிழ் • ‎తెలుగు • ‎ქართული • ‎中文 • ‎日本語 • ‎한국어
PD 注意:當您編輯本頁面時,即同意以CC0協議授權您的貢獻。您可以在公有領域说明页面找到更多信息。


目前的发布计划刊登在mw:VisualEditor/Rollouts。从2013年以来,超过一半的维基百科为所有用户提供了可视化编辑器作为选项。 可视化编辑器已在除维基词典和维基文库外,所有维基媒体基金会项目上,作为测试功能为所有登录用户提供。
我发现了可视化编辑器的使用问题. 我如何向你提供信息并修复此问题?
如果你想的话, 请在 "可视化编辑器" 反馈问题 . 众多的大型Wiki上有个专用于反馈可视化编辑器的页面; 参见 Wikidata 上的列表. 此外,在mediawiki.org上也有反馈中心.
要继续使用wiki文本编辑,点击“编辑”旁边的“编辑源代码”按钮即可。在每个段落的编辑连接中,您可以点击“编辑”右侧的“编辑源代码”按钮编辑段落源代码。 在那些可视化编辑器仍是一个测试功能的Wiki上,您可以反选您偏好设置上的测试一栏; 在其他的Wiki上,您可以在编辑中反选暂时性禁用仍处于测试中的可视化编辑器 选项.
我可以在可视化编辑器使用我熟悉的维基标记么,例如[[ ]]和{{ }}?
构造维基百科及其姊妹计划的现代化编辑界面是个技术挑战,但使用现代化的web技术和标准使之成为可能。不幸的是,一些浏览器不支持我们在可视化编辑器需要的很多功能。我们正在尽最大努力支持非常多的常见浏览器:可视化编辑器在很多主流web浏览器的最新版本中正常工作:Firefox 15及以上、Iceweasel 10及以上、Safari 7及以上、Chrome 19及以上、Opera 15及以上、微软IE10和IE11。对IE9的支持已有计划。试图解决旧浏览器的局限性将使得我们忽略多数用户的利益。我们强烈建议您升级您的浏览器,如果不能,那么您可以继续使用原生wiki文本编辑器。(技术信息。)
Building a modern editing interface for Wikipedia and its sister wiki is a technical challenge, but it's possible using modern web technologies and standards. Unfortunately, some browsers don't support many of the features we need for VisualEditor. We're doing our best to support the most common browsers: VisualEditor works well with recent versions of the most popular web browsers: Firefox 15 and up; Iceweasel 10 and up; Safari 7 and up; Chrome 19 and up; Opera 15 and up; Microsoft Internet Explorer 10 and up; Edge 12 and up. In some browsers, such as Internet Explorer 9, a warning message will still show up, but users shouldn't experience any major problems editing. Trying to work around the limitations of older browsers would divert resources from improvements that would benefit the majority of users. We encourage you to upgrade to a supported browser and, if you can't, to continue to edit using the source wikitext editor. (See target browser matrix for specific details.)
Does VisualEditor work with Wikisource's ProofreadPage, or Wiktionary's templates, and other features that Wikipedia doesn't have?
VisualEditor is flexible enough to be adapted to all Wikimedia sites. However, Wiktionary's heavy reliance on templates will require significant work by community members to provide TemplateData to their users, and Wikisource's ProofreadPage tool will require some additional work to integrate VisualEditor smoothly.
Does VisualEditor make automatic fixes to pages?
In most cases, VisualEditor will not make changes to formatting on lines that are not being directly edited. In cases where markup already on the page is handled incorrectly (for example, with tables that are not closed), it may attempt to correct these.
Will the visual editor be enabled on talk pages?
​No. This question comes up quite often.
  • The visual editor is designed to edit content, plain pages of text[1].
    • Talk pages aren't content. Many of the tools and design patterns that make VE nice to use to edit content make it poor to use for discussions.
    • To make it usable for discussions, we would have to remove or break many of those patterns in VE. We have spent a lot of time researching with users what works best there.
  • VE can't deal with structured discussions and plain-text discussions are not structured discussions.
    • Discussions like they are on traditional talk pages are not structured discussions from a technical perspective, despite the fact there is a certain number of colons or bullet points added to each answer to provide a pseudo-structure. With the current design of classical discussions, a piece of software can't know who has replied to whom – only humans can. There is no real connection between posts (which post is the parent/child of which), which is the definition of a structured discussion.
    • At the moment Flow deals with structured discussions. In Flow, each post is independent with a unique ID, linked to other posts and to a Topic (also with a unique ID), with a specific history, and all posts can be targeted precisely. It would be possible in the future to have conversations at multiple places, to move topics or replies, and to create sub-discussions with Flow. Classical talk pages, using VE or not, do not allow that.


Where can I read more about what communities can do to adapt the visual editor to their sites?
Where can I find people experienced in this kind of effort?
There is a list of names at Community Taskforce.


  1. Based on James Forrester's message on wikimedia-l mailing-list, June 2016