Hi,
on wikisource, in Page edition mode (page image with text box on the side), this gadget totally breaks edition, with the total disparition of the image...
Not good at all !
Help talk:Two Column Edit Conflict View
I second Hsarrazin feedback. It also breaks the Index namespace interface.
@DePiep I want to come back to your feedback in the village pump discussion now archived.
The two column edit conflict handling is currently in beta and regarding your post: Clearly, in comparison to the 'old' edit conflict handling it uses more elements, colors and dialogue boxes. To help new users there we show a small walk-through tutorial on first sight.
With all that we try to solve the problem, that users in the past a) had no idea what happened or whether something has happened at all and b) found it annoyingly complicated to resolve conflicts with the 'old' interface. We gathered feedback around that from many editors and as a result came up with the current version.
However, this is a beta feature test with the goal to find out, if the workflow of the new interface works well under live conditions. For this, any feedback is welcome and valuable to improve the current version of the feature. So far the reception was quite good, but also some users pointed out that the interface could be more intuitive. So we are open for suggestions and ideas.
Thanks,
Christoph
p.s.: As edit conflicts do not appear quite often we are currently working on a simple way to simulate them with the new interface so users can test it more easy without having to wait for a conflict to appear. If you're interested I will get back to that in this thread as soon as it's deployed.
You may want to look at this feedback: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Edit_conflict_options_spoiling_my_edit
Hi, I'm using this feature on English Wiktionary. It works great, except the dialog is way too wide. I mean the dialog that says "What should initially be in the editor and serve as a basis for combining the conflict versions?", and is over the right text box. It extends way to the right of the page content, so I have to scroll to the right in order to find and press the "OK" button. Could you make the dialog be the same width as the right text box?
Hi @Erutuon,
I assume you use the feature on a relatively narrow screen. I tried it myself and could reproduce the issue. Here is the task on Phabricator I created: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T166232
Thanks for your feedback we appreciate it :-), best
Christoph
Well, I have a medium-sized laptop, perhaps 15 inches diagonally. Another factor is that I typically have my zoom size set to 150% while viewing English Wiktionary. Anyway, I reopened this because the problem still exists: see File:Two column edit conflict bug.png.
Hey @Erutuon,
the issue should be fixed by now. I tested it with zoom and narrow screens. You should now always be able to reach the OK, button. It would be great if you could confirm though.
Thanks and best,
Christoph
Sorry for the slow response. I had to wait for an edit conflict before I could respond. I just had an edit conflict and the dialog box looks fine now. Thank you so much!
I am not able to solve edit conflict, second column is missing or placed over the first.
Using Vivaldi
also translation would be very useful.
Hey @JAn Dudík,
thanks for the feedback. I will post an answer and some questions in the ticket, the dev audience on Phabricator is a bit bigger :-).
Best,
Christoph
P.S.: regarding translations, this is done by the community on Translatewiki. If you like to help there please see https://translatewiki.net/wiki/Special:Translate/ext-twocolconflict every bit is appreciated :-).
Hey @JAn Dudík,
as stated in the Phabricator ticket, we assume the issue was solely related to the wikEd gadget. We temporarily deactivated that for the two column view. It would be great if you could confirm, when the conflict screen is now working for you or if you got any more issues.
Thanks and best,
Christoph
Please remove this feature, it only shows the most recent version. Though there are some buttons that should allow you to retrieve you own edits, but the buttons are behind the box with the most recent version. On my notebook, all the buttons and boxes are all superimposing each other, creating a chaos. i am using Chrome and am not zooming my screen in.
Please remove this feature so my edits do not get lost every time.
Hello Farang,
Thanks for letting us know that the function causes problems. Did you make, by any chance, a screenshot of how it looked like on your screen? By that we could possibly track what caused the problem.
As a quick fix, you can disable the function in the settings for beta features – but our aim would be that the feature works for all users.
(@Christoph Jauera (WMDE) – do you have an idea what caused the problem?)
Yes, i did. How do I send it to you?
It could be that there is a conflict with other functions I have enabled, of which you can see a list here. It may also be my fault that I have too much enabled.
> Yes, i did. How do I send it to you?
Easiest would be a local upload here or upload at imgur and paste the link here.
> conflict with other functions I have enabled,
Thanks! This can be very helpful to know
Okay, Jan Dittrich, this is the screenshot: File:Schermafdruk 2017-06-20 15.22.10.png
Thanks for the screenshot! I created an ticket on phabricator for this problem and put the screenshot there, too. (Phabricator is the platform the developers use to keep track of such issues)
Okay, thanks. :-)
Hey @Farang Rak Tham,
also thank from my side for the feedback and the screenshot. That really looks nasty. To reproduce and fix the issue it would be really great if you could provide us with some additional input:
- What browser in what version do you use? ( it looks like Firefox from the screenshot but you can never be sure enough ;-) )
- Do you have any Gadgets or special user scripts activated and which ones?
Thanks and best,
Christoph
Ah sorry I failed to notice the list of gadgets in the ticket. So please ignore my last point :-).
Hello @Christoph Jauera (WMDE), I use Chrome 58.0.3029.110 (64-bit). Thanks for the follow-up.
I also have a list of Chrome apps installed, but is that relevant?
Hey, thanks. I think the issue is more related to gadgets and scripts so the Chrome apps are probably irrelevant. But if you don't mind sharing them, it could be important still.
Hey @Farang Rak Tham I tested the scripts in your common.js and they seem fine.
I then took a look at the wikEd gadget in the user preferences and it seems to be the reason for the broken edit conflict page. I assume you have the gadget enabled in your settings.
It would be great if you could disable the gadget and try to test the new edit conflict screen without it. Just so I can confirm the reason for the broken page.
Since wikEd is used a lot we will definitely think of a solution for the wikEd users, so they can use our new feature. I will keep you updated.
Thanks again and best,
Christoph
It is rather difficult to simulate an edit conflict, because of the timing. Perhaps you can let me know when you are editing some article, and I will then edit that article as well to trigger a conflict. Thank you.
Hehe, there is a way to create a conflict with yourself. This is how you do it:
1) Create a test page in your user namespace, e.g.: User:Farang Rak Tham/Test
2) Add some lines of text to that page and save it.
3) Now open the page again to edit it. But for now just leave it open and don't do anything.
4) Now open another browser window in private browsing mode where you edit the page. ( you will act as an anonymous user there )
5) Change the text you added originally and save.
6) Now go back to your browser window where you are logged in as regular user ( with the still open editor ) and change the same part of the text ( but change it to something else )
7) When you now save you should get an edit conflict ( with yourself as anonymous user )
Done. ( thats also how I do it when I need to test the whole thing ;-) )
Dear all,
I have tried editing on another language Wikipedia, and the problem no longer occurs. On that language, WikEd is not operating. So it may well be WikEd that is causing the problems described. I found the edit conflict editor easy to use. Nice work!
Thanks for the feedback. Will close the issue for now.
Most of the times, the edit conflicts are going away by themselves (as in the auto-resolve edit conflict feature is working), on the few times the Two Column showed up for me it was a much better experience than the old one. I've used basing on my version or on the current version and both worked beautifully. Thanks for this feature.
@Chicocvenancio, thank you so much for the great feedback! We're really happy that the feature works well for you :-) If you see any issues or have suggestions for further improvements in the future, please let us know, too! Have a nice day --Birgit
There is a more recent situation that led to a lot of edit conflicts, so I've had more opportunities to test the feature. The only thing I found that could improve it is a better direction on what to do to "change" the version you want to work with. I mean, once I started working with the published version, but latter decided it'd be easier to work with my version and then re-apply the changes made by other users. It took me some 3 seconds to realize copy and paste would solve the problem (copy from one column to the other and then re-apply the changes). Maybe another method could be provided (as in keep the radio buttons on top and have them change the text) or the copy and paste method be hinted at in the interface. It is a really small detail though.
The feature has already helped me a lot, edit conflicts are no longer really frustrating, which makes me less frustrated with the users who make three or four edits after posting a response on a talkpage. I haven't experienced edit conflicts in articles with this feature yet, but I imagine it is a lot more rewarding to not have to deal with edit conflicts (as in the magical solution that works most times) or to have an interface that makes it easy to deal with in the main namespace.
Please give some way of ignoring the conflict, i.e. replacing the article with my version anyway. (Also without JS please :-) ) This is useful for example in the case of me having already noticed and merged the conflict before saving, or having done a typo fix in a slightly different way as part of more changes. I had both of those cases just yesterday, and the prototype and screenshots suggest resolving this would be significantly harder with the new UI.
Hi @Nenntmichruhigip,
thanks for the suggestion. I created a ticket on Phabricator https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T158083 and we will consider it when looking into next features and improvements for the beta version. I also added you as a subscriber there. :-)
Is there a way to get it to post under the conflicted post with an ''edit conflict'' symbol? I'm using Safari, and the last time the edit conflict message appeared, I said to save to my comment, which it did, but it deleted the other comment, so that editor had to post it again. Can it just save both? Atsme (talk) 14:46, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
Hey @Atsme,
the reason for getting an edit conflict page in the first place is, that the program ( in your case ) does not know what post belongs where and it cannot just solve the issue itself. So when you say "Can it just save both?" - it does not know how to do that.
But you might be right, that for specific cases the situation could be improved. That's a general issue with the auto conflict solving algorithm. A link to the diffs of the two edits would be helpful to better understand the issue.
Thanks for your feedback and best,
Christoph
My experiences have been User TP conflicts rather than articles. Not sure if it's possible to isolate a "keep both" command only to TP? ~~~~
Thanks :-)
According to the phabricator ticket, checking the box to use your version as the base version and saving should work, but when I just tried it on en-wikipedia it did not save my version.
Hi @ONUnicorn, thanks for your feedback!
I tried to reproduce the issue, and since I failed I just want to make sure I understood everything correctly. Is this what happened:
1) You had an edit conflict
2) You saw the two coloumn edit view, and a dialogue box on top of the text editor
3) You changed the default selection, so that it said "use my version"
4) The text editor showed your version
5) You clicked on save, and nothing was saved (or a revision with no contents was saved?)
?
Best,
Lea
Hi @Lea Voget (WMDE); that's exactly what happened. I pushed the button that said "use my version" and clicked save and nothing was saved. I don't know if the text editor showed my version or not; I just assumed "use my version" would cause it to use my version.
@ONUnicorn two more questions :) When you clicked save, what did you see? Did you see the edit conflict window again, or go back to the editing page or did you see the article, just all of your changes lost, and the conflicting version being the last entry in version history? If that is not too much, could you maybe point us to the revision that you clashed with?
Thanks again for helping us detect the problem!
Best,
Lea
If I remember correctly I just saw the article, all changes lost, and the conflicting version being the last entry in version history. This is the revision I clashed with: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Polyoxyfen&oldid=780034379].
@ONUnicorn so, do I understand it correctly, the version you had a conflict with was the creation of a redirect? If that's the case, it might be the reason why it did not work properly as I don't know exactly how conflict resolution behaves in case of a redirect. Will investigate a bit more.
@Tobias Gritschacher (WMDE), yes. It was a new article and I was attempting to clean it up and wikify it, then do additional research to see if it was an appropriate article. While I was working on it another new page patroller came along and redirected it, leading to the edit conflict.
After an edit conflict I copied the text I wrote from left of the "two column view" and pasted to the right column: All line feeds disappeared and ruined the table I added: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spezial:Diff/165283575?title=Wikipedia:Redaktion_Chemie Please check.--Mabschaaf (talk) 12:01, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Hey @Mabschaaf,
thanks for the feedback. I could reproduce your issue and that really seems to be a problem we did not notice until now. I created a Phabricator ticket right away so we can keep track of it an fix it. https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T164716
Again thank you very much and best,
Christoph
Thx
Thank you.
Hi @IKhitron, could you elaborate a bit more? What should the tool not do for "new topic" edits and what do you mean by "new topic" edits? Thank you!
Hi Lea Voget (WMDE). Here you are. I open a talk page. I click on wiki code edit of the last section. I work on it 5 minutes. Meanwhile, somebody else clicks add section, writes something and saves. Somebody third answer him in this section and saves. Then I save and get into the tool. It shouldn't be like that, because the mechanism recognizes work on different sections.
Thanks for the specification! Unfortunately this is nothing our tool can improve. The new page appears whenever the old conflict resolution page would appear as well - only with a new layout. So since we did not change the conflict detection behavior, we cannot improve the situation here :(
Pity and thank you.
