Talk:VisualEditor/2024
| This page used the Structured Discussions extension to give structured discussions. It has since been converted to wikitext, so the content and history here are only an approximation of what was actually displayed at the time these comments were made. |
 | This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current talk page. |
Cite, requirement of sources?
I am no programmer or website creator, so please pardon my very layman language.
When using the automatic cite-tool in VisualEditor the result from the source vary. I had the following result using just the url to a random article for New York Times and a random article from Swedish source Sveriges Radio:
- Trebay, Guy (22 maj 2013). ”The Architecture of Seduction” (på amerikansk engelska). The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Läst 23 februari 2024.
- Radio, Sveriges (23 augusti 2022). ”Operationsresorna – Rumpförstoring i Turkiet | Del 1/2 - P1 Dokumentär”. sverigesradio.se. Läst 23 februari 2024.
The New York Times article is perfect. The Sveriges Radio have at least the following problems: "Sveriges Radio" is interpreted as the author (first and last name). sverigesradio.se should be written as Sveriges Radio". This error from Sveriges Radio is very consequent.
Many other Swedish sources works as badly, but others dont. Among the once working fine are many small local papers. That has led me to believe there is some standard or harmonised guideline for how to fill in a header for web pages, that is not very work intensive. And that Visual Editor uses this standardized way.
What should I tell the webmaster at Sveriges Radio, so they can standardise and harmonice its headers in the same way? LittleGun (talk) 11:29, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- Maybe there is no use to try to discuss with webasters?
- What, and how, can a user do to improve the VisualEditor source tool to interpret information from sources? LittleGun (talk) 12:54, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm. Not a word. Have I posted this in the wrong place? LittleGun (talk) 08:10, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- User:LittleGun, the citation generation backend for VisualEditor is Citoid. The output of this library is deeply unreliable for many webpages for a number of reasons. There's some history of discussion at Talk:Citoid from around a year ago, but it doesn't seem like much has changed in the interim. Folly Mox (talk) 11:28, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
VisualEditor's "convert" button uses Citoid to damage citations
This thread on en.wp is the story of a 70k+ editcount editor hitting "convert" over and over in VisualEditor and causing the loss of information from existing citations. Plenty of diffs in the thread. I don't know whether this problem comes from Citoid's output or from VisualEditor not checking existing template parameters to ensure it's not deleting anything, so crossposting to both talkpages. Folly Mox (talk) 11:25, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- This flaw is heartbreaking.
- An article I created was impacted by this: a user used the "Convert" button in visual editor, and they thought they were "improving" the article ... and the edit convinced them it was better (citation in footnote looked cleaner). The user did not realize that the Citoid script was deleting some information from the citation!!!! (usually author name, publication date, publisher name, ... but also other data).
- My article lost data from about five citations (about 1/3 of those that Convert script was applied to). But the user that used Convert script has done over 50,000 edits with that tool (I think that # is correct, I have not confirmed it). Does that mean that perhaps 10,000 citations have had data deleted?
- This needs to be addressed ASAP !! [Signed user Noleander, cannot get signature to work here] Noleander (talk) 14:20, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Compatibility with draft category container
See w:Template_talk:Draft_categories#Functionality_with_VisualEditor. Sdkb talk 05:17, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Jdforrester (WMF), regarding your summary "Please don't forum-shop. One cross-post is enough," both of these are invites to the English Wikipedia post where discussion was intended to be centralized. Invites are by definition not forum shopping; please familiarize yourself with the talk fork guidance and be sure to respond at the centralized location next time rather than at the other invite, where you created a fork. Sdkb talk 16:05, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Sdkb: Please have care to respond appropriately. If you want conversations to happen elsewhere, especially on a different wiki, you need to specify as such. And no, your local policies don't apply here, in the same way that ours don't apply there.
- Wherever you want the conversation to happen, edit-warring here is not appropriate. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 16:08, 26 June 2024 (UTC)