Jump to: navigation, search

About this board

Edit description

Post your feedback about using the visual editor. Please report bugs involving Parsoid at Talk:Parsoid instead.

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 feedback tool within the visual editor will include your user agent details instead.

Use this page to tell the Wikimedia developers your ideas and issues about using the visual editor. 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.

Please note that the Wikimedia Foundation does not provide support for installing VisualEditor on third-party wikis.

You may also want to read a guide to optimize the visual editor's experience on your site, which details work necessary on the community side (such as translating or setting up citation systems).

View open developer tasks Report a new bug in Phabricator Join the IRC channel Test the visual editor! (no account required)

By clicking "Add topic", you agree to our Terms of Use and agree to irrevocably release your text under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and GFDL

Are there any usage statistics available?

Halibutt (talkcontribs)

Since the ee dashboard is off, I'm wondering if there is a way to check exactly what percentage of wikipedians uses VE as compared to wikitext editor.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Overall, about 30% of registered editors use the visual editor at least once each month. That statistic is not calculated automatically, but you could get a query to make it specific to any individual wiki. See–_Quarterly_Review_slide_deck%2C_2016–17_Q3.pdf&page=24 for some numbers.

For the metric that you didn't ask for, about a million edits were saved in the visual editor last month. This represents about 8% of all non-bot, non-Wikidata edits. The other 92% includes Undo, AWB, Twinkle, HotCat, mobile, mobile app, WikEd, etc. as well as the "manual" edits in the older wikitext editors.

Is popularity really the metric that you want? says that editors who have made less than 1,000 edits are more likely to complete an edit when using VisualEditor at enwiki and plwiki, except that logged-out editors at plwiki (but not enwiki) are more successful in the wikitext editor. (I'm looking at the last six months; that dataset got changed at some point, so the earliest days aren't comparable.)

Halibutt (talkcontribs)

Well, popularity is certainly one of the factors to consider. There is a huge debate on Polish Wikipedia whether implementing solutions that make editing in code easier, but that make editing in Visual Editor much less fun, is acceptable. Namely, VE doesn't work well with references disguised as templates (say, {{R}} templates, ref grouping and such), yet some wikipedians apparently love it and since there is a script that automatically converts all references to this format, they use it. Anyway, I was wondering how many Wikipedians would actually be affected if we followed the logic that convenience of those who use code editor is more important than convenience of those who use VE.

Halibutt (talkcontribs)

Also, is there an example query somewhere to customise?

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)

The story seems to be that if you want this data, then you probably need to file a Phab task to request that someone pull it for you. Also, they apologize, because apparently someone was supposed to re-create the old dashboards on the new data system, and it hasn't happened yet.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)

I thought that plwiki had decided to stop using those templates in 2013, when VisualEditor was first introduced. (It'd also make Content Translation harder.) Perhaps I'm mis-remembering this; User:Tar Lócesilion could probably correct me.

I'm not aware of any query, and both of the people that I'd normally ask are out of the office today. But I'll ask around, and I'll let you know if I get something useful.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)

A different question: How do editors at the Polish Wikipedia usually add references? Are citation templates common? Is the citoid service working out? I know that the services that citoid relies upon have a bias towards English-speaking sources.

Halibutt (talkcontribs)

Citoid works great, together with the pretty universal {{Cytuj}} template wrapped in standard <ref> tags. Sure, there aren't that many Zotero plugins for Polish sources, but the service itself works great and I love it (which is why I implemented it :) , with a lot of help from you guys that is).

The standard way is wrapping reference templates in ref tags, much like on other wikis. Cytuj template for all sources works great, but there's also earlier templates still in use, that is Cytuj książkę (our version of Cite book), Cytuj pismo (Cite journal), Cytuj stronę (Cite web), and so on.

However, there's also a sizeable group of Wikipedians (a minority, but a visible one) who prefer to use {{r}} templates together with this script. The group is particularly strong in biological topics, where such nested refs paired with a template are pretty much common. To make things even more complicated, there is a script to convert existing ref tag refs to {{r}} templates, but not the other way around. Which means you can make VE's citation engine useless with one click, but it's considerably harder to undo the damage.

Finally, in FA and GA class articles the {{odn}} templates (our version of sfn from English Wikipedia) are common. VE doesn't work to well with them either (the engine is useless, plus when adding the template to articles, VE adds empty lines before and after; there is a workaround though, you have to type the code of the template, say, {{odn|Kowalski|2017|s=12}} somewhere else, for instance in the search box of your browser, and then Ctrl+V it in place.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)

It is unlikely that the visual editor will ever support {{sfn}} fully. (There are technical reasons for this situation, but I don't understand them, so I can't explain them to you.) If the {{r}} template is similar, then I think we could reasonably predict limited support (at best) for that template, too.

@Matma Rex, have you ever considered writing an "undo the {{r}} templates" script? Would it be significantly more complex than the existing one?

As a volunteer, I'm a little worried about using this template in biological topics, at least to the extent that biological topics include medical topics. Medical articles often get translated, and the more templates that get used, the worse the result is.

Matma Rex (talkcontribs)

The script lives in my user namespace, but I don't maintain it anymore. The part that does the actual conversion has been since rewritten by Peter Bowman and lives on tool labs (

Note that the script really does two separate things:

  1. Move references contents out of the <ref>…</ref> tags in the main body text to <ref>…</ref> inside the <references/> tag at the end. This should not be a problem for VisualEditor, and it would still be an improvement for people editing in wikitext.
  2. Change the resulting <ref name="…" /> tags to {{r|…}}, and the <references>…</references> to {{Przypisy-lista|…}}. This is the part that VisualEditor doesn't like. (In general, VisualEditor doesn't like things that are simultaneously templates and something else, e.g. template-generated table cells or template-generated references).

Changing the script to only do 1 without doing 2 should not be very difficult, it would just be a matter of adjusting the script's output. But I don't maintain this code anymore and I'm not familiar with the current Java version of it – please ask @Peter Bowman about making and deploying any changes to the labs tool.

But anyway, in my opinion it should be entirely possible to make VisualEditor handle template-generated references better, and I'm sad we're not putting more effort into it. :(

Halibutt (talkcontribs)

Oh, and there's another local bit: Polish Wikipedia absolutely hates the </references> tag, it's being replaced with {{Przypisy}} on sight by basically everyone, and their mother too. Which often leads to weird results if they forget to add an empty line before the template and it breaks. But this one is not a huge problem. Nested refs are.

Tar Lócesilion (talkcontribs)

It was announced that any further use of those templates is discouraged, but not everyone knew it, not everyone agreed, and now, still doesn't agree.

As for the refs, the standard are citation templates and a template (References) at the bottom. In fact, Citoid works well. However, it's considered OK as long as it produces templates that look like they were added manually in wikicode. Our community loves sticking to the only standard.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)

It doesn't look like  {{Przypisy}} has been updated to use the new responsive layout feature. People might be happy with the result. It's possible that the easiest thing to do is to request a config change. (File a subtask at .)

Reply to "Are there any usage statistics available?"
Ortisa (talkcontribs)
Agente de usuario: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux i686; rv:53.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/53.0

In wikibooks there is a tab with a danger icon in which a warning appears in a format difficult to read because it is very long and narrow

Elitre (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Please provide direct links where we can see what you are referring to. Thanks.

Reply to "Eyelash notice in Wikibooks" (talkcontribs)
Agent utilisateur : Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Trident/7.0; SLCC2; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729; .NET4.0C; .NET4.0E; rv:11.0) like Gecko


Reply to "SCELLES"
Mara Salmar (talkcontribs)
Agente de usuario: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/58.0.3029.81 Safari/537.36

URL: (talkcontribs)

جيد 😃

Reply to "Mara Salmar"
Summary by Elitre (WMF)

Unlikely VE-related. (talkcontribs)
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/58.0.3029.81 Safari/537.36


Tines dels Tres Salts

Summary by Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)
Agent d'usuari: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:53.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/53.0

només diros que la foto que hi ha en aquesta pàgina no és de la tina dels tres salts sinó de la Casa de les tines URL:

Reply to "Tines dels Tres Salts"

Issues: Multiple usability issues with the media settings dialog

2 (talkcontribs)

Steps to reproduce

  1. Go to Project:Sandbox
  2. Click edit (make sure this leads to visualeditor)
  3. Click insert in toolbar
  4. Click the Media button
  5. Enter a file name that isn't an image such as audio, video (e.g. "Mozart Symphony 36 KV 425 Linz 4.oga")
  6. Click the audio or media item in the list
  7. Click advanced


  • "Change media" button
  • "Media type" heading
  • "Media dimensions /size" heading

Custom image size input boxes

  • Ability to input audio dimensions

Make full size button working

  • Actually make the audio the default size


  • Choosing this option and applying the changes sets a border


  • "change image" button
  • "image type" heading
  • "image size" heading

Custom image size input boxes

  • Can't actually set audio dimensions, as each time the text is entered it is removed by the input box (this is possible to set using wikitext)

Make full size button

  • Button doesn't seem to do anything


  • Issues
    • This changes the location of the image to the left hand side
    • Hides the border
    • Hides the caption
    • Makes it hard to actually spot where the audio is
    • Seems to change the "audio" dimensions to 0x0 px

Proposed solutions

  • Review the whole interface, and make changes to emphasize that this tool supports media, and not only images.
  • Basic Image type - this doesn't seem like it would work with audio, and it isn't entirely clear what it does when confronted with other media
  • Custom image type input boxes - enable the inputboxes and allow entry
  • "Full size" - seems to have been designed entirely for images, although it could be reset the audio dimensions to default
  • "Border" - this seems to quite simply be a very strange bug. It should just set the border if possible with audio
  • Change labels to reflect that it works with media not only images.

Notes: It seems more like it was initially designed just for images and later changed to also work for other media, yet those changes didn't take into account the different media types. It is actually pretty confusing, and a usability issue, when one is inserting non-images and the dialog keeps making notes about image type, image size, and so forth.

Elitre (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Thanks for these notes. Is there a particular reason why you won't also post them on Phabricator, where devs can see them?

Reply to "Issues: Multiple usability issues with the media settings dialog"

"次へ" is not displayed.

Summary by Elitre (WMF)

Fix now in production, apologies.

アルトクール (talkcontribs)

"次へ" is not displayed on the mobile view editing screen and it is grayed out as "visualeditor-savediaialogiabe-publibrs". It always occurs in Article of jawiki.


Summary by Elitre (WMF)

No followup from user

渴望自由的人 (talkcontribs)
用户代理: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/58.0.3029.81 Safari/537.36


Elitre (WMF) (talkcontribs)

@渴望自由的人, hi. Does the procedure explained here help?

Summary by Elitre (WMF)

Not a technical remark.

2A02:1205:503B:A630:B9F0:125A:A08D:EE17 (talkcontribs)
Agent utilisateur : Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; Trident/7.0; SLCC2; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729; Media Center PC 6.0; .NET4.0C; .NET4.0E; OfficeLiveConnector.1.5; OfficeLivePatch.1.3; rv:11.0) like Gecko

URL : Sulpicius I. von Bourges

celui qui purifie (c'est le soufre qui purifie! de lat. sulphur, sulpur)