THIS WAS ON MY GEORGE KERASOTES WIKI PAGE TODAY UNDER VISUAL EDITOR. I RE-SAVED IT FOR YOU ALL. MIKE :)

THIS WAS ON MY GEORGE KERASOTES WIKI PAGE TODAY UNDER VISUAL EDITOR. I RE-SAVED IT FOR YOU ALL. MIKE 🙂

Why are we still using this?[edit source]

A couple months have gone by since the release of Visual editor and eventhough a large number of problems have been fixed, there are still hundreds of bugs nad enhancements needed. With all the problems that have been identified, and as fast as that list is growing, along with all the limitations and exceptions to using this app, why are still forcing it to be used? We need to stop forcing this out. This application needs to be opt in only for now. Once the major bugs are worked out and we can trust the application to make an edit without screwing it up, then we can make it opt out. The RFC to make this opt in has overwhelming support so its time for the WMF to do the right thing. We need to take a step back, make the app opt in only and not encourage new editors to try and use it yet. We need to fix the bugs and increase the functionality. We need to do these things because its the right thing to do. Hate me if you want for continuing to call attention to this but the bottom line is this application is largely a failure and it needs to be fixed. Kumioko (talk) 14:38, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

  • Agree if this was an AFD, the whole thing would have been closed DELETE a long time ago. Time to Wikipedia:Drop the stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass.–Paul McDonald (talk) 14:42, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
    • Definitely not a fan of “hating” people. As I did before, I’d just remark this is not the right place for similar discussions. For example I can see a similar one ongoing here, which you edited as well, and this specific page has a very different purpose. This said I’d be really glad to help you with specific issues, if you have any. —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 15:10, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
      • Yeah it seems like there is no good place for this type of discussion. Thanks for the offer but I stopped using the application or submitting feedback about problems after the problems we were identifying and the feedback we were providing were being ignored. But it still annoys me how many problems are allowed to litter the articles without being fixed. VE continues to have problems with adding templates and I have a list of more than a dozen articles that have yet to be fixed. I have 5 that have a broken table, several more that have image problems, etc. I fixed a lot of others but I am sort of using these as a control group to see if the WMF is going to fix the mess they created or rely on the community to do it. I also stopped fixing the problems since the WMF seems intent on using Wikipedia as a petri dish to test and doesn’t seem to mind that the application is breaking articles. When the WMF starts to act like they care more about the project than about testing broken software, then I will fix the problems and continue to support the process. I think a lot of others would too. We realize that creating this software is not a trivial thing and problems are going to occur, but we shouldn’t be moving full speed ahead knowing that we are leaving a wake of destruction in our rear view mirror.Kumioko (talk) 16:17, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
        • 100% agreed. And on frwiki, it’s even worse: even difficult to have an answer on the feedback page, and when you report having to fix problems like that you get an answer saying that nothing proves it was VE’s fault. —NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 18:18, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
          • I think in the case of the French wiki the problems go beyond VE. IMO, that shows that not only is Visual editor problematic but the underlying Parsoid and Universal translator apps need serious refinements as well. All three of these work closely (but apparently not closely enough) but they all tie to VE. Again and as I inferred above. Its perfectly fine if we want to keep testing and developing this and we should. But this should absolutely not be available to IP’s and new users yet and it should only apply to users who want to opt in to using it. Kumioko (talk) 18:26, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
In some defense, work is in progress to fix the bugs, but it is unreasonable to expect a bug to be fixed immediately. To give an indication of the scale of the task the developers have for Visual Editor there are 319 new bugs, 411 bugs which have been assigned to someone, 9 with a patch to be implemented so should soon be fixed, and 721 have been fixed. Its going to take a lot of time to fix all those, even going through the new bug to work out if they are real bugs or duplicates of others takes a significant amount of time.–Salix (talk): 21:46, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Kumioko, what is this “Universal translator app”? If you mean the Universal Language Selector, it has nothing at all to do with VisualEditor. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 22:08, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

@Whatamidoing, Yeah that’s it sorry and I was under the impression that was what helped translate from one language to another for things like Visual Editor so that the WMF wouldn’t have to make a separate VE app for every single language. Maybe I am wrong. That is very possible.
@Salix, your right and no one, not even me is saying that we expect these bugs to be fixed immediately and no one is saying there shouldn’t be any bugs, because that is inevitable with any software application no matter how mature it is. There have been a lot of improvements but the volume o bugs identified in the last couple months alone show it wasn’t ready for release. Let alone to new users and IP’s. What I am saying is that it should not be pushed to the new users and IP when it has a lot of major problems. Like deleting content, adding things it shouldn’t add, breaking tables, etc. These are the kinds of problems that should have caused the WMF to unrelease it and keep it in a beta, opt in status until they were fixed. What’s worse, the WMF has absolutely no plan to clean up the hundreds of articles broken by the app. They expect the community of volunteers to do it while disregarding any of our comments other than pats on the back telling them what a wonderful job they are doing and identifying problems with the application that anyone can see was not even close to being release worthy. That isn’t even taking into account that several of the most widely used internet browsers isn’t even supported. They can’t even get it to work. Kumioko (talk) 23:10, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

They don’t make separate software for each language. They just make a separate file for each label. If the label is “vector-view-view”, then whatever you put in the file “vector-view-view” will show up in that spot. (Have a look at the label names: [1].) It’s the same system that allowed us to switch between “Talk” and “Discussion” tabs a few years ago, and to change “Edit” to “Edit beta” three weeks ago. What the ULS does is—if you’ve set some other language—show you the labels from the same kinds of files, but using a different group of files. ULS needs some performance work, but the actual process of showing “Página” instead of “Article” requires no extra work. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 02:37, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
@Salix: I do understand that it will take time to fix the bugs, and I also find that normal and expected. The only thing I don’t understand is why VE hasn’t been rolled back to opt-in by WMF when it’s obvious that it will take time to fix the bugs and have an editor that is not damaging hundreds of articles every day. Especially since WMF has decided that it’s not their task to fix the articles damaged by VE, but volunteers who are repeatedly asking to go back to opt-in mode… —NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 05:13, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

@User:NicoV, not sure you saw that Ssastry took care of the problem you linked here, it’s here now, and it’s a Parsoid bug – it appeared on it.wp as well, and it’s useful for others to know it is duplicating parts of the article. —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 17:20, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, but not sure this bug has anything to do with the problem I linked, and the problem I linked was in fact 3 problems: nowiki at the beginning of a line, nowiki inside internal links with no text ([[Alésia|<nowiki/>]][[Alésia|<nowiki/>]][[Siège d'Alesia |<nowiki/>]][[Siège d'Alésia|Alésia]]), strange internal links ([[Commentaires sur la Guerre des Gaules|Commentaires]] [[de]] [[César]] [[sur]] [[la]] [[guerre]] [[des]] [[gaules]]). And the only answer I got on frwiki is still that “nothing proves it has anything to do with VE”. —NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 18:47, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

  • The nowiki tags at the start of the line (<nowiki> </nowiki>Il prit la voie directe allant de Langres à Lausanne…) are a known bug that was fixed in the most recent release (reached frwiki late on Tuesday).
  • The Alésia mess (…une citadelle religieuse celtique, [[Alésia|<nowiki/>]][[Alésia|<nowiki/>]][[Siège d’Alesia |<nowiki/>]][[Siège d’Alésia|Alésia]]. is bug 37835.
  • The multiple link mess ([[Commentaires sur la Guerre des Gaules|Commentaires]] [[de]] [[César]] [[sur]] [[la]] [[guerre]] [[des]] [[gaules]] is probably a consequence of fixing the bug that made anything you typed after a link become part of the link. I’m not sure what do with it. It would be very helpful to know exactly how this series of links was created. Whatamidoing (WMF)(talk) 19:28, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
Well, to know exactly how the problem was created would require to ask the user and that he knows how he did it, but he probably won’t because I don’t think he ever signed up to be a beta tester. But you can ask him.
Can I also ask why no WMF liaison is answering on the frwiki feedback page now that VE has been forced on every user ? Users are reporting problems there, but their reports seem to be simply ignored. —NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 10:59, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
NicoV, sorry for the confusion about the bug 🙂 I just assumed Ssastry and I were talking about the same thing. For the user thing, that’s exactly the way to tell it was really VE to cause the mess – and is what I often do, even with experienced users (your user joined just recently). As for the liaisons, both here and on it.wp i.e. you can see that now mostly users help each other because this is how it should work in the long term. It should be also worth noticing that here and elsewhere it’s writtenAll comments are read, but personal replies are not guaranteed. As most of the liaisons are increasingly working now on preparing new wikis for deployment, please feel free to ping any of us in case of bugs which are not already known and reported on Bugzilla. Thanks! —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 11:30, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Elitre. Your answer worries me… In the long term users will help each other, yes sure, but VE has been deployed recently and it’s still full of bugs, some of them still damaging articles. So, honestly, when I read that liaisons are preparing new wikis for deployment, instead of managing the feedback on the already deployed wiki, when everything clearly shows that VE is still not ready: I can only think that VE team is still not listening to users and still doesn’t care about damages made by VE on wikipedia. What is the point in deploying more when you know that many damaging bugs are still present, and that you don’t even manage to handle the current flow of feedback ? —NicoV (Talk on frwiki)13:33, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

NicoV, there is no need to worry. We can definitely keep supporting and keep deploying. If both staffers and volunteers did not care, bugs would not be reported to Bugzilla anymore, which is definitely not the case… No need to overreact, especially since the flow of feedback is actually quite low now when compared to the first deployment days (and I can see some volunteers at work on fr.wp as well, as a matter of fact), and no direct answers, wherever they happen, should definitely not imply “the flow” isn’t being handled. —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 14:14, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Nico and there is absolutely a need to worry. The RFC shows almost 500 editors are worried. The ongoing cavalier attitude from the WMF and its staff about the damage done to the project are worrisome and irritating to those of us that volunteer our time to help build it. VE still causes too many problems, there are still problems lying around that haven’t been fixed and it doesn’t work with IE which is one of the most widely used browsers. Once they do get it to work with IE I think we can all assume there will be more errors with it that will need to be addressed. At this point, not pulling the software back and stopping deployment is just negligent and shows the WMF doesn’t care about the community or the project. We are just number to the WMF. Kumioko(talk) 14:19, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

By not handling the flow, I meant not handling fixing the flow of feedback: there are currently 777 open bugsfor VE in bugzilla (for 735 fixed from the beginning of VE), this number is still increasing. Yes, the flow of feedback is quite low: still people on holidays, and many people are still waiting to see bugs reported a month or two fixed. —NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 14:34, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

I would also add that the flow of feedback has also decreased because most of us know that the WMF isn’t listening, so why bother. The flow of discussion has decreased because people aren’t even trying to use the application and have given up on it, because its crap. Kumioko (talk) 15:55, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

It doesn’t appear to be the case that people have given up on using the application; the hourly editstracking shows that levels of usage have not changed much over the last month. Mike Christie (talk –contribs – library) 16:06, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

The people who are using it are not the ones who are leaving comments. These are new and casual users who are editing with the assumption that the application works and are generally unaware that the application causes errors. They assume, and rightly so that the application should work. And the number of usage are down from when it was first released. Kumioko (talk) 16:17, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

I believe the drop in usage about a month ago coincides with a change in labelling the link for VE, from “Edit” to “Edit beta”; perhaps someone else can confirm that. Other than that I don’t see a significant change in usage. Mike Christie (talk – contribs – library) 16:26, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it does. Rearranging the tabs (“Edit source” is first and therefore most convenient) probably had a bigger effect on reducing use. I believe that the changes resulted in an immediate drop of something like 25%. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 22:07, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
I agree that was probably part of it but I believe that a significant reason is because we let them know it was a beta release of the app and not ready for prime time. In my experience a lot of people won’t use something that says beta. Kumioko (talk) 23:46, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
Nico, you do have a WMF staffer at the frwiki feedback page. He’s just one of the many staffers who prefers to use an account name without “(WMF)” at the end. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 22:07, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Well, check the history of the page, you will see that he’s not participating much. —NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 05:47, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Check better? 😉 —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 16:14, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

What’s the point in the stats ? I don’t deny that there was many posts from WMF on the entire lifetime of the feedback, I was just saying that we had almost no more answers now that VE has been turned to opt-out on frwiki. If you look at the history, you will see that, except for the batch of answers that happened today (only after I have reported here several times), there was no real answer in the last 3 weeks… That’s what I was reporting: the official reason for deploying on more wikis was to get more feedback, but on frwiki I felt that our feedback was simply ignored. —NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 16:52, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Be assured, it wasn’t. As a matter of fact, since our dear Guillaume is not “technically” a liaison for VE, I’ll guess that I will be soon helping him actively there. There, this is what you get when you complain too much! 😉 —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 17:17, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

VE + ULS unicode Devnagari Script input issues[edit source]

Hi,

With reference to bug no 49569. From my todays test edits at mr wiki, it seems some efforts have taken place to initiate/enable ULS unicode Devnagari Script input in VE edits.But for practical usage,even for primary begining, it seems to have too many issues yet.Before informing the issues do we wait untill we are officially informed from your side or do we start reporting issues ?

I suppose till now there is no separate bug to track “VE+ULS unicode Marathi language Devnagari script issues”. Would you prefer to start a separate bug for tracking or you expect us to join with some existing bug reports for related issues.

Thanks and regards

Mahitgar (talk) 05:31, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Pinging @User:PEarley (WMF) about the best way to handle this, which I suspect should be splitting the two kind of issues since different teams would take care of them. Regards, —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 09:20, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Hey Mahitgar, Elitre. As VE will not be usable on wikis where ULS isn’t integrating properly, I’d be filing this as a VE bug, and as a “blocker” to Marathi deployment depending on severity. It is fine to file as a separate bug – if the devs discover it is linked to another reported issue already assigned, they can merge the reports. Mahitgar, can you give us a more detailed report about the specific issues you are noticing on mr.wiki, as well as the browser and operating system of your computer? With that, we can submit a actionable bug report, and work to get this fixed before any rollout to Marathi. Can’t offer much insight to this particular script – I haven’t been working with the Indic languages – Jan and his team are working on this.User:JEissfeldt (WMF) – tag, you’re it! PEarley (WMF) (talk) 16:33, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Mahitgar, you might also want to know that the bug related to vowels for that language has been fixed in the meantime. —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 18:13, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I have the CIS in Bangalore putting together a file on critical bugs for Indian language versions for this product since yesterday and will expand it as necessary. This looks like a solid candidate to me, regards —Jan (WMF) (talk) 18:00, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Eating references[edit source]

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 52228

I did not see this mentioned elsewhere, but I have encountered a bug where, if I add multiple citations to back a statement, the Visual Editor only saves the first citation I added. This happened once when I added three citations to back a claim and had to add each one individually over the course of three edits and again just now when I had to add a second citation after it didn’t get saved. Multiple citations can be added if they are separate as I had added a citation for another statement in the same edit and it was saved. Seems VE has a problem specifically with citations being added next to each other.–The Devil’s Advocate tlk. cntrb. 00:39, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Sounds similar to what the Executive Director of the Wikimedia Foundation reported recently:Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback/Archive_2013_4#Problem adding multiple references. That’s for a bug that’s supposed to have been resolved. — John Broughton (♫♫) 03:13, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

That does describe what has been happening to me so it does not seem to have been fixed.–The Devil’s Advocate tlk. cntrb.05:29, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

I’ve reopened bug 52228 and copied yours and Sue’s comments there. Thryduulf (talk) 09:55, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Can’t access the album review section[edit source]

In album articles (like Def Leppard’s X) I can’t edit the reviews section because the track listing is next to it. Please fix this. Mab987(talk) 05:50, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

I forget which Bugzilla number this is, but the problem with editing X (Def Leppard album) is that the article is formatted with multiple columns, another basic fundamental feature of Wikipedia editing that was neglected in the rush to release VE.—Kww(talk) 06:24, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

See [2]. I am actually able to edit the reviews, but this will need to get fixed anyway. —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 14:04, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

ref name[edit source]

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 50568

I tried to edit refs with VisualEditor, but it seems to lack the <ref name=”Example”> feature.-Seonookim (What I’ve done so far) (I’m busy here) (Tell me your requests) 06:20, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi there! If you want to reuse a reference, make sure you follow these steps (just remember that, right now, you need to save first before being able to use a new reference). Does this help? Thanks, —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 10:01, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
VisualEditor does not currently support adding reference names, but this is requested at bug 50568. Unfortunately that bug has remained unprioritised since it was reported in early July so I can’t say when the feature is likely to be added. Thryduulf (talk) 10:19, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

VE breaks table/references?[edit source]

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 53402

The article The Legend of Korra (Book 2) gets constantly disrupted when somebody edits (any part of) it using VE. The following two lines of text are inserted into a table:

<ref name="Futon">{{ns. -->
|''''=|ok Tw=| Spir=ts''''' is the second season of the animated TV|ser=es ''[[The Legend of Korra]]'' by [[Michael Dante DiMartino]] an| [[B=|an Konietz=}}</ref><ref name="Futon">{{ episode| ("c=|pters=|. Ord=red in early 2011, ''Book Two: Spirits'' will a|r o= [[Nickelodeon]] in the U.S. beginning on September 13, 2013.<re| nam=|"Yahoo 15 =}}</ref><ref name="Futon" /><ref name="Futon" /><ref name="Futon" /><ref name="Futon" /><ref name="Futon" /><ref name="Futon" /><ref name="Futon" /><ref name="Futon" />

Please check the recent article history. Although at first I though this was some persistent vandalism, I seriously doubt this now. If possible, please edit the article in such a way that the bug does not show up any more. YLSS (talk) 06:59, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

This is usually caused by some minor error in the table markup such as a missing quote, but I’ve not been able to find anything. There are other people far better at spotting those things than I am though, so hopefully someone will notice something I haven’t. If this is the cause then it is bug 49839Thryduulf (talk) 10:44, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Did some testing in a sandbox out of curiosity. The error is caused by the named ref “Futon” in the table, and only when it is formatted as a named ref:

  • Moved the ref as named ref outside of the table structure and deleted all iterations – OK, VE works.
  • Used exactly the same cite within the table, but only as unnamed, single “ref” – OK, VE works.
  • Removed all references from table and added a new named ref “TEST” within the table – VE-edits get corrupted with “TEST”-text. GermanJoe (talk) 11:57, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
Hmm, it’s more than just named references in a table [3][4][5]Thryduulf (talk) 12:30, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

This one [[6]] is an article version, that is OK for VE. I have reverted back to the original situation: [[7]] (VE error). Something in the difference is the cause :). GermanJoe (talk) 12:44, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, but I haven’t yet figured out what that something is! I can’t reproduce it in a simple table with that reference in my sandbox [8], so it seems likely to be the interaction between named references and something else. I haven’t got time at the moment to investigate further. I’ve reported it as bug 53402, but it can be refined if we can narrow it down. Thryduulf (talk) 14:15, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

VE doesn’t accept ref names with leading and ending quotations marks in this specific situation. Changed the OPs article to fix that for now, but it’s definately a bug. GermanJoe 😦talk) 14:22, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
GermanJoeThryduulf: see Template:Episode_list and how the ProdCode parameter is used there:

<td id="pc{{{ProdCode}}}">{{{ProdCode}}}</td>

So, if you pass in

| ProdCode = 113<ref name="xyz" />

you can see that the td-cell produced by the template will break. So, the template is not designed to take anything but numbers/strings for the ProdCode parameter. The same is true for the EpisodeNumber parameter. All uses of this template in WP pages where these parameters are not strings are errors in source wikitext on those pages. Hope this clarifies the matter. Ssastry (talk) 16:01, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

I’ve been trying to figure out how this was done. You can’t add a named ref at the moment, so it must have begin by re-using (and modifying) an existing one. But then why did it add a second/different instance with the same name, rather than changing the original? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 15:19, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

This bug affects all edits in VE, whether you touch the table or references or not, so the inability to name references in VE is not relevant here. As for adding references with the same name, do you mean something like bug 52755?
Anyway Ssastry has commented on the bug, saying that it’s some sort of interaction problem with something the episode list template does. I don’t understand it, but those who understand template coding are encouraged to read bug 53402 (comment #1) and see if they can fix the problem. Thryduulf (talk) 16:02, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

I also pasted the explanation above. Ssastry (talk) 17:50, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes thanks. Our posts were almost simultaneous, but I didn’t get an edit conflict so I hadn’t spotted it until I saw my notification flag. Thryduulf (talk) 18:14, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

mistranslation[edit source]

The following discussion is marked as answered. If you have a new comment, place it just below the box.


there is a mistranslation in the Etymology section of this article. Nishikigoi translates literally as Western (Nishi-Ki) Carp (Goi/Koi). 98.65.239.24 (talk) 15:51, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

This page is for feedback about the visual editor. to give feedback about a specific article you should post on that article’s talk page. Thryduulf (talk) 16:04, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

 

Mysterious attempt to use anchor element[edit source]

I’ve just found this edit; see the first two changes where the <a>...</a> element has been used. this element is not permitted in wikitext – was it added by the user, or by VE? —Redrose64 (talk) 16:14, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi there 🙂 You’ll find this reported above – it happens when editing with iPads, AFAIK. Thanks for any help in undoing these diffs 🙂 —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 16:17, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, this seems to be a bug in Safari on the iPad where it “helpfully” converts numbers in certain editing areas that it thinks are phone numbers into external links that phone applications understand. The VisualEditor editing surface is one such text area but it is not limited to VE (and there are similar problems with some other browser plugins). The devs though are trying to work out a way to detect these injections and stop them getting into the saved revision. Thryduulf (talk) 16:45, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Visual Editor[edit source]

STRONG SUPPORT. This new tool makes me excited to start new pages again! Mashford (talk) 18:30, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the support, the VE team will be grateful for the kind words too. If you don’t already know about it, there is an ongoing RFC about VisualEditor at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Default State RFC where you may wish to share your views.Thryduulf (talk) 18:54, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Confirming some positive feedback from time to time is definitely welcome, thanks. —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 08:37, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Unable to make additional changes after previewing[edit source]

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 52462

I can not figure out how to return to editing the article when using the “Edit” (rather than “Edit Source”) option. In order to preview changes, it appears that I need to click on Save page. From there I can preview the changes, cancel, or accept–but I cannot figure out how to return to the edit form and change my changes rather than discarding all of them (or accepting all of them). Am I missing something, or does the “Edit” functionality not include that feature yet? Grim0098 (talk) 02:30, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Press the Esc key or click the up-arrow in the upper right corner of the Save/Review box. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:04, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
I’ve added comments about this to related bug 52462Thryduulf (talk) 09:57, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Problems at 2013 US Open (tennis)[edit source]

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 53468

I’m not sure why this is happening, but whenever someone uses the visual editor in the 2013 US Open (tennis), the tables in the “Point and prize money distribution” section get all screwed up. Tad Lincoln(talk) 04:04, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

You might want to check Template:Disable_VE_top out which might be a useful workaround if applied to those sections – we can then remove it once the bug is fixed, as in the case of some airport tables. Looking into the bug now. —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 07:06, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Here you can see that a random edit when the tables are “shielded” with those template does not cause any harm. Anyway, it’s weird because here you can see that a similar edit did not cause any trouble either when the page was basically featuring almost only the very same tables. It does take a while to load and edit the article with VE, though. —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 08:32, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
I have reported this as bug 53468. I can see no logical reason why the first edit to the table worked and then the next edit caused a monumental cockup. Thryduulf (talk) 11:23, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

In {{For}} the fourth parameter can’t be added without the third[edit source]

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 50407
Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 53469

And this edit is mute. I would expect a warning or something. — Magioladitis (talk) 07:25, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, this will need an extension to TemplateData so that parameters can be defined as requiring another parameter. bug 50407 is a request to be able to define exactly this sort of dependency relationship, although there appears to have been no full understanding of the need for it by the dev who commented and there has been no activity since July. Unfortunately I don’t expect that VE will be able to do anything about this until it can be expressed in TemplateData as that is the only way that VE knows anything about parameters. I’ve filed the VE request as bug 53469 though so it can be worked out when TemplateData is extended. Thryduulf (talk) 11:47, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

e.c. I am not sure this is a bug. The template is probably meant to work like this, i.e., if you don’t provide the third, you shouldn’t add the fourth 😉 I think you can already make this clear in the description/label fields of the related TemplateData: this would prevent people to do the same and hence avoid the problem. —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 11:53, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

I believe you are mistaken; the documentation gives many examples of correct usage that skips parameters; search for || on that page and you will see them. 28bytes (talk) 11:57, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Of course: and you can “skip” parameters with VE as well, but I guess only in positions where you are allowed to do so, not where the template expects to find a sequence. And you can definitely warn against this with TemplateData already. (I haven’t experimented with other templates though). —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 12:27, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Deleting a row from table has disastrous results[edit source]

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 53464

Check this one. The > was removed from all tr tags. — Magioladitis (talk) 07:41, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

There is a list of all pages using HTML table elements at Wikipedia:CHECKWIKI/031 dump. I asked for help converting them. — Magioladitis (talk) 07:45, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

The problem seems to stem from the fact that that table is poorly formed, it has </tr> tags, but no corresponding <tr> tags. It still shouldn’t mangle the table, but at least it should be a rare thing to encounter. My sandbox testing shows that there appears to be no issues with HTML tables more generally.
I’ll fix the table in the article with my next edit. Thryduulf (talk) 10:46, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Feature request[edit source]

Nice work. At some point you may want to add LaTeX editing (probably best to do raw, not WYSIWYG LaTeX!). Also, when I clicked the Edit button it added a new line between the title and the first paragraph that I couldn’t remove. 86.184.25.131 (talk) 11:16, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

I may be missing something, but what would be the benefit to adding code editing to the VisualEditor? Thryduulf (talk) 11:56, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

I think this is refereing to the <math> tag which is in the pipeline see bug 43058 and demo at mw:VisualEditor:TestMath.–Salix (talk): 12:03, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

(I’d also add [9]). —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 12:29, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

If you have suggestions for it, then mw:User:Jiabao wu/GSoC 2013 Project Work/Math Node User Interface is a good place to find the person working on it. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:12, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

VE not respecting link color preferences[edit source]

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 37901

When reading an article or editing it using the standard editor, redirects appear as green links instead of blue since I configured it that way. VE does not seem to use these values, and shows all internal links (including red links) as blue. 28bytes (talk) 11:37, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, this is an often requested feature tracked as bug 37901. It doesn’t presently have a target for when they expect to fix it though, sorry. Thryduulf (talk) 12:00, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. 28bytes (talk) 12:37, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Request for easier editing of infoboxes[edit source]

Editing infoboxes using VE (as I did here) is somewhat difficult and unintuitive. I just wanted to change an uppercase “T” to a lowercase “t”, but instead of just clicking and editing the desired infobox text, you must click on the infobox, then click the “transclusion” puzzle piece, then find the parameter that contains the text you wish to edit, and then edit the wikitext (not WYSIWYG text) as desired. While there are a wide variety of infobox types, some sort of WYSIWIG editor for them would be extremely helpful. 28bytes (talk) 11:48, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Something like this? —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 12:32, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes. That would be great. 28bytes (talk) 12:36, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Issues when creating an article[edit source]

I tried to create my first VE article today (I’ve created 100 or so the “old fashioned” way.) Here are some observations.

  1. How does one create a redirect in VE? There does not seem to be an obvious way to do that.
  2. When adding references, a plain box is presented. It’s not obvious that to use one of the common {{Cite}} templates, you have to click the “add transclusion” button, and then manually type in the citation template you want. There should be some sort of menu to let you pick from the most frequently used citation templates.
  3. When adding “The New York Times” as the “newspaper” parameter, I wanted to link to The New York Times but it was not obvious how to do so. Ctrl-K does not work in that box.
  4. When adding the first reference to an article, VE should add a == References == section with {{Reflist}}. Or at the very least, just {{Reflist}}. As it is, the reference is just “hidden” when you enter it, and it’s unreasonable to assume a new user will know they have to click the “transclusion” button and manually type in “Reflist” to get the references they entered to appear. There is no warning that the {{Reflist}} is missing until you actually save the article, when you get a scary red message at the bottom.
    Adding: this seems to be a common problem among the other VE article creations today: [10] [11] [12]
  5. Clicking on a link during preview mode doesn’t work right: I used the hyperlink button to create a link to Salvation Army, but when I right-clicked on it and chose “Open Link in New Tab” (I’m using Firefox 23), I got this page.
  6. How does one add categories? There does not seem to be an obvious way to do that.
  7. Why does the “style” box contain a “Page Title” option? It is my understanding that level 1 headers are not supposed to be used in articles.
  8. There seems to be an odd caching issue: whenever I try to link to the newly created article from another article, it does not auto-fill and says “new article” with a red link when I type it manually.

— 28bytes (talk) 13:00, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

This looks the typical case where I prepare a very long answer, only to find out User:Thryduulf already got it – and better than me. So, pinging him to find out whether this is what would happen. In the meantime, thanks for your report. Almost everything looks already known to me, luckily 🙂 and some answers can already be found in the user guide or in the known problems page. —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 14:08, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

  1. Redirects are not possible (yet). It’s bug 47328.
  2. That dialog needs, and is getting, a lot of work. I’m not sure when we’ll actually see the improvements, though.
  3. Actually, see #2: I want to be able to give it a link to a story at nytimes.com, and have it create the ref automagically.
  4. Clicking on the VisualEditor - Icon - References.svg references icon will add the <references /> block.
  5. I haven’t seen this click-to-invalid-page bug before. If it hasn’t been discovered, then this needs to be filed.
  6. It sounds like you found the hidden cat feature.
  7. Some pages need this heading level, though (just not articles).
  8. It sometimes takes a bit for Wikipedia to notice that a recently created page has been created. Did this persist for more than a few minutes? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:23, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 53546
Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 49502
Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 53547
Yes, it’s still doing it, for me at least: I created the redirect home for unwed mothers this morning, and every time I try to link a page to that, VE says it’s a red link. Perhaps you can try one of the articles that has it unlinked (Wickliffe, Ohio is the next one on my list) and see if you get the same results, or if it’s just me? Incidentally, trying to link it on Reunited (TV series) generates some odd behavior: if you use Firefox, press Ctrl-F and then type in the text “home for unwed mothers” (without the quotes), that text will be highlighted, but if you then press Ctrl-K, the == References == heading is what gets blue-linked. (I suspect this is due to the way it handles templates, since the found text appears to be embedded in one.) 28bytes (talk) 18:48, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Whatamidoing, did you get a chance to see if you get the same result I do when trying to linkhome for unwed mothers in an article? I am still seeing it red-linked in VE this morning. 28bytes(talk) 15:09, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi 28bytes, I tried it just now, and it’s still not working for me like it ought to. It makes the link, but the link inspector does not believe that the page exists. I also found this on a page (Odd) that is clearly not new, although most of the older pages work correctly for me. It doesn’t matter if the capitalization is upper or lower for the leading character, and it also doesn’t matter whether I type the word first or enter the link inspector first.
I also found a new problem, which is that if you select a word, enter the link inspector, and then cancel (escape key or “<” button), it links the word to the first thing in the search list anyway. Is anyone else getting this? I’m using Safari 6.0.5 on Mac OS X 10.7.5. What are you using? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:14, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Firefox 23.0.1 on Windows 7. (Happens on Vista and Windows 8 too, FWIW.) Yes, I have noticed that when you cancel from the link dialog it will create a link anyway, and you have to Ctrl-Z to undo it. 28bytes (talk) 17:33, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

That’s enough of a mismatch that it’s probably all browsers and all OSes. I’ve added bug 53546 for the ‘since when did Escape mean Okay?’ problem.
The problem with the redirects appears to be bug 49502: they’re deliberately filtering them out. (I supposed that if you’re trying to link to Cancer, that you don’t really want to see a list of the dozens of pages that redirect there.) But Odd isn’t a redirect, and other disambiguation pages work correcltly. So the new not-a-red-link bug is bug 53547Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:23, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Also[edit source]

Thanks. The user guide answered my question about categories, but raised a few more:

  1. What is the “reference list” button supposed to do? I clicked on it while editing maternity home and a blank dialog came up; I was expecting a list of references (just one reference at the moment.)
  2. In that same article, is there a reason VE will not let me use the uncapitalized link “pregnancy” but forces it to uppercase?
  3. Similar to the request to make infoboxes directly editable, it would be nice to make references directly editable as well. For example, I tried clicking on the “The New York Times” in the reference so that I could link it, but could not do so; I had to click the [1] in the section above, then the reference icon, then the cite template, then the transclusion icon, then the “newspaper” parameter, then I manually added brackets and clicked “apply changes” first at the transclusion level, and again at the reference level. And at that point, the changes did not appear to be applied; “The New York Times” still appeared unlinked. I had to save the page and then reload it to make sure the linking worked. That’s a lot of clicks just to link something! Using the wikitext editor that would be two clicks; highlight “The New York Times” then click the “[[]]” toolbar button; so this could definitely be streamlined in VE, I think, to make life easier on newer editors. (And older ones too, I suppose.)

28bytes (talk) 15:04, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

  1. It adds <references />, and nothing else. Just choose “apply changes” and it works. (Some instructions on that nearly blank box would be helpful.)
  2. bug 50452. The workaround is to first type pregnancy, then select it, and press Control+k to enter the link inspector. If you press Control+k first, and then type pregnancy, the autocomplete “feature” gives you leading caps.
  3. I agree that we need improvements to this process. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:32, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
I couldn’t find anything about the wrong URL on right-clicking, so I added bug 53491. I didn’t have any success in reproducing it in the mainspace, but I got two different wrong URLs from my sandbox. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:43, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I am able to reproduce bug 53491 consistently; I just start a new article, and any links I create and right-click on generate the 404 error. 28bytes (talk) 18:53, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
What about a dialog after inserting the first reference ? “There is no VisualEditor - Icon - References.svg references list in this page yet. Do you want to add one now ?” —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 18:55, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry I wasn’t around earlier, I was showing my face at the WMUK office! I’ve marked bug 53491 (wrong link target) as a duplicate of bug 48915 although as that bug’s title “VisualEditor: Respect Parsoid’s <base>” describes the solution not the effect so I’m not surprised you didn’t find it (I only found it when a bug I reported was marked as a duplicate of it).
There are several issues with links, and the workaround for all of them is to write the text of the link first, select it and then link it. I’ve reported this specific issue as bug 54395 recommending that the first character of the string input should be preserved, i.e. if you enter “Green” you get Green, if you enter “green” you get greenbug 48789 should make all this easier, as that asks for a way to explicitly set the display text from with the dialog.
bug 51864 relates to the paragraph styles drop-down, asking for individual options to be enabled/disabled on a per wiki per namespace basis. This is a low priority request though as its a nice to have rather than something essential.
Automatically adding a references section is discussed at bug 45132 and Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback/Archive 2013 4#as a newbie using freindly interface, I would prefer this to be automatic. To summarise, it is possible but there are internationalisation issues round the section title (easy to solve) and section placement as different wikis have different preferences relating to the order of references, external links, further reading, navboxes, etc. (this is not so easy).Thryduulf (talk) 20:24, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

references[edit source]

when i try to add a reference it just adds an existing -= false one. 78.8.195.23 (talk) 13:25, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi, can you please give details about this, such as, in which article did this happen? Did you follow the related steps as seen in the user guide? Thanks, —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 13:31, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Can a VE user see comments in the wikisource?[edit source]

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 49603

A point was raised yesterday about an editor who was continually making changes to articles contrary to comments in the wikisource (two examples of such comments being “<!– DO NOT CHANGE THIS NATIONALITY WITHOUT DISCUSSION ON TALK PAGE –>” and “<!– This is, as Wikipedia guidelines suggest, as he self-identifies and by long-term consensus –>” ). A suggestion was made that as the editor concerned was using the Visual Editor he would not have seen these comments in the source. Is this true? (I don’t use VE, and I’m an IE user so couldn’t use it if I wanted to, so can’t check). – David Biddulph (talk) 18:27, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that is true. The FAQ, on this page, uses this problem as an example (search for “hidden comments”, on this page, above). You might think that being in the FAQ, as an example of a common problem, would make fixing this a high priority for the developers. If so, you’d be wrong.
As an aside, “fixing this” is as simple as making text within hidden comments visible but non-editable (and in a different font – for example, white on a black background). That’s not perfect (it would be good to be able to edit such comments), but that would be good enough for the moment – and, quite frankly, it seems not-all-that-difficult, programming-wise. — John Broughton(♫♫) 20:32, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

My programming is limited to a very small amount of python as well as some HTML and wikimarkup, so I could be wrong but.. Is it really that hard to program in “look for <!– and then display what’s in between as something –>? Potentially, it could be displayed as an inline box or something. That cannot be that hard to code from my limited knowledge. ~Charmlet -talk- 22:34, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

My programming knowledge is less than yours, but my guess is that the difficult bit is making sure that by showing this it doesn’t break something else. You also have to decide how to show something that wont be seen when you save the page, given that the point of VE is to be basically WYSIWYG (although it can’t be completely). Neither of these things should have held it up as long as it has been though, so there may be something that you and I aren’t seeing. I’ve done what I can to bring it to the dev’s attention on bugzilla today, but @jdforrester (WMF): may have more information about its prioritisation past and present. For now though we all just need to be patient. Thryduulf(talk) 23:47, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) The suggestion was correct, VE users cannot see hidden comments. High priority bug 49603 is about addressing this issue, and I’ve copied your comments there to try give it another push. Thryduulf (talk) 20:35, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

I’ve commented further at bugzilla about programming and user interface issues. Responses/rebuttals are welcome, of course.
I originally was inclined to suggest displaying the hidden text in full, but with a different font/background color. I’m now more inclined to have the person doing the edit see a yellow warning icon (see examples here), and by hovering, to then see the full hidden text. That, to me, seems both less disruptive (the hidden comment is reduced to an icon, so it hardly disturbs the flow of the text, and maintains, roughly, the WYSIWYG concept of VE) and simultaneously harder to ignore – it waves, figuratively, a big flag in front of the person doing the edit, saying “LOOK HERE”. — John Broughton (♫♫) 00:26, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

As PamD notes at Bugzilla, the point of these notices is that they need to be front and centre so there is no question that you have seen it. I also understand that hovering is not easy/not possible on touch screen devices. So I don’t think that hiding them behind an icon is the best way to do things, unless they are expanded by default and you can click on an icon to get a more WYSIWYG view. Thryduulf (talk) 10:34, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I like this idea: show the comment with a foreground/background different to the editable text, and allow it to be collapsed to confirm a WYSIWYG view.
I’d also like bugs that have not been resolved NOT get archived here 🙂 Mark Hurd (talk) 13:48, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, AFAIK the page is archived by a bot. We couldn’t really edit here anymore if bugs which are not solved on Bugzilla are not archived. We use sometimes the “answered” template, but any section featuring this template can still be edited, of course. If you’d like to get updates on specific bugs, please add yourself to the CC list for that bug on Bugzilla, so that you get email notifications when the bug is changed: also, if you think that some discussion which is now archived deserves some more attention, just ping people to notify them about updates or new comments, like this: Mark Hurd 🙂 —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 14:12, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Yeah that was rhetorical, hence the smiley 🙂 I have added myself to the CC for this bug, which I commented on a week or two ago, and I actually reported the list continuation bug bug 52399. Thanks for showing me how easy pinging is now though. Mark Hurd (talk) 14:40, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

VisualEditor stopped working completely like a month ago[edit source]

My VisualEditor stopped working completely like a month ago. When I try to edit, the article’s text goes gray, and the “loading bar” appears and shows does the loading animation. But that’s it. It never loads. I am using Fireox 22.0 (technically Iceweasel). I have deleted my browser cache completely. I even tried resetting my Wikipedia preferences but it still happens. Any ideas? Cookies and Javascript are enabled too. Jason Quinn (talk) 01:42, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

PS This only happens if I am logged in. It appears to be something wrong with my account. Jason Quinn (talk) 01:46, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Did your resetted preferences include gadgets? Can you list them? Also, can you try to remove User:Jason_Quinn/jqcite.jsfrom your .js pages to make sure it is not conflicting? Thanks, —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 11:05, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Another Nowiki-adding VE edit[edit source]

…that breaks a link, and only adds a closing nowiki tag: [13]. – The Bushranger One ping only 06:05, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, that’s not a closing nowiki tag: see Wikipedia:NOWIKI#WP:NOWIKI. On why this happens, see my answer #3 in the next thread, which partially applies. Bye! —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 09:12, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

nowiki tags[edit source]

From up above in “Why are we still using this?”, the following are responses given to NicoV‘s questions.

  • The nowiki tags at the start of the line (<nowiki> </nowiki>Il prit la voie directe allant de Langres à Lausanne…) are a known bug that was fixed in the most recent release (reached frwiki late on Tuesday).
  • The Alésia mess (…une citadelle religieuse celtique, [[Alésia|<nowiki/>]][[Alésia|<nowiki/>]][[Siège d’Alesia |<nowiki/>]][[Siège d’Alésia|Alésia]]. is bug 37835.

–Whatamidoing (WMF)

  1. Concerning the supposedly fixed bug. It is still happening. (<nowiki> </nowiki>Local humane societies,…) diff
  2. I was going to give examples of what turns out to be bug 37835. As the bug is a year old, looks like this won’t be fixed and therefore no use in giving the examples.
  3. Why are these happening? (in the [[American Le Mans Series|American Le Mans Serie]]<nowiki/>s and Park Place Motorsport..) diff (is an [[American football]] [[wide receiver|wide receive]]<nowiki/>r who is currently a free agent.) diff (*[[Goat|Goa]]<nowiki/>ts) diff

I’m fixing 15-20 articles a day with broken nowiki tags. Bgwhite (talk) 06:23, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

  1. That should be 51462. I’ll reopen it since I can find it on it.wp as well, but it is, IMHO, one of those cases in which the nowikis actually make much sense, since they are invisible and they prevent text to become preformatted.
  2. Thanks for your opinion. I don’t think we should actually stop commenting just because something is either too hard to fix or something else has the priority. Providing more comments and examples – instead than just reporting something won’t work – is the only way we have to underline how much an apparently trivial thing means to our editing experience.
  3. I am afraid that might depend on what users select to be linked, or sometimes on them still using the old markup way to create links – ignoring the warning popup. Also see [14]. There are many requests related to wikilinking, if you believe that some intended behaviours should be, well, different, please read the developers comments to the bugs and feel free to weigh in. —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 09:10, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
How about we just use an edit filter to block edits with <nowiki/>, these are always an error unlike legitimate uses of matched pairs. —Salix (talk): 11:54, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, there are legitimate situations where you can use <nowiki/>: apostrophe before/after bold or italic formatting for example. Of course, other ways exist like {{}}. —NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 12:35, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Entering Visual Editor renumbers references[edit source]

Entering Visual Editor mode renumbered the references on page Python_(programming_language), so they don’t match the references listed at the end of the article. Davipo (talk) 08:36, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

You are right that the numbers won’t match, but the references still work in that they can be correctly edited – you wouldn’t be able to preview them by hovering on the number anyway. Adding to [15] though, thanks 🙂 —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 09:53, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

From the bug comments, this was allegedly fixed two releases ago, but I’m seeing the same problem that Davipo reports. VisualEditor finds ten refs in the inforbox, but still starts over with ref #1 in the body of the article. Whatamidoing (WMF)(talk) 17:26, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

This isn’t the same as bug 51289, when that was happening the references for the infobox would not have appeared in the reference list at all, this is just problem with numbering. Thryduulf (talk) 18:45, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

It might be related to Bugzilla52300 , an orphan bug that no one is paying any attention to that I can detect.—Kww(talk) 21:50, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Possibly. I’ve crosslinked them and given bug 52300 a more descriptive title (making it easier to find). If I get time tomorrow I’ll go through some more of the unconfirmed VE bugs and see if they’re still occurring, but it would be really useful if James or someone else on the VE team could reduce the backlog of unassigned bugs and prioritise them. Thryduulf (talk) 22:27, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Feel free to look at Bugzilla52478  while you are at it. It truly annoys me to see the VE team brag about responsiveness when they can’t even take the time to confirm and prioritise the bugs coming in, especially when I take the time to distill a test case for them to look at.—Kww(talk) 22:42, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

I’m not awake enough to understand that bug report atm so I’ll look at it tomorrow. Thryduulf (talk) 23:29, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Perhaps you can persuade James that deciding that deciding that the {{#tag:ref}} feature never should have been supported in the first place falls outside of his scope.—Kww(talk) 23:53, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Hey Kww, you might want to decide whether you want to ping Oliver or James F., it’s not clear. —Elitre (WMF) (talk) 11:19, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s