Forum:VisualEditor discussion

The Sims Wiki's Site Feature Policy requires that all new non-MediaWiki updates to Wikia be disabled by default on The Sims Wiki. Wikia Staff have been developing a new "VisualEditor" that will (eventually) replace the RTE/"WYSIWYG" editor. This change will directly affect all unregistered users, and any user that uses the default editor settings in their user preferences, and may have an indirect effect on articles, as the new VE does function differently in some ways from the RTE.

The Site Feature Policy requires that this feature be disabled automatically here as soon as it goes live to all of Wikia. This discussion is intended to allow users to comment locally on the new feature, and to indicate whether they support its adoption or not. If the local community does not indicate support for the new feature, myself and other members of The Sims Wiki's admin team will contact Staff and attempt to get the feature disabled, in line with the SFP. So, if you want the new feature to be rolled-out here, be sure to mention so below.

What does everyone think about this? -  LostInRiverview talk ~ blog 00:53, October 12, 2014 (UTC)

Neutral (leaning towards slight support) - The principle of the new VE is that it's supposed to correct a lot of the nagging issues in the RTE. Preliminary information suggests that the VE is marginally better than the RTE and marginally less likely to cause problems on the pages it's used on. But ultimately, I'm not going to use the new VE anyways, so I'm not personally directly affected by Wikia's plans to change it. --  LostInRiverview talk ~ blog 00:53, October 12, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose - The VisualEditor has been nothing but trouble so far. It has been notoriously breaking articles, such as removing links, text bold/italics, wreaking havoc on tables, randomly removing templates (especially maintenance or cleanup tags), and often leaving tons of useless HTML code or orphaned tags (e.g.  ). It also doesn't work with The Sims Wiki:Battles; instead of four tildes transforming into a signature, four tildes is wrapped with  tags, becoming completely useless. I've been told VisualEditor was enabled for anonymous users by default so "More user feedback could be collected", but it leaves more experienced users out in the cold, or just leaving them to spend more time cleaning up after the mess VE makes. Completely unacceptable. --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  02:33, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
 * I recently had to advise Joey.eyeball not to use VisualEditor, and he says that VisualEditor actually made him edit less due to its issues, instead of "allow[ing] users to edit an article quickly and easily". If such a tool is actually driving away editors, especially existing editors and leaving new editors to unknowingly break pages, then such a tool should not be allowed on the wiki. At least until it's fully baked. --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  18:34, October 26, 2014 (UTC)

Neutral ~ I have to agree with k6ka on the fact that VE has messed up a lot of articles, and it has caused quite a hassle. What with all of the cleaning up we've had to undergo recently. However, I am open to hearing other's opinions on the matter and there is, most likely, someone who is a fan of the new editor. There is a small chance I might change my mind, but for now, I'm neutral towards the editor. Beds (talk - blog ) 21:36, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose ~ I'm willing to be open about many of the wikia beta features. However, when I enabled VisualEditor, I was completely unable to edit pages at all. Woe is me. Ѧüя◎ґ (talk) 18:24, October 26, 2014 (UTC)

Neutral - While the VisualEditor does have issues it is still in beta and it is intended to replace the current rte at some point (I think). I don't feel as if the decision here is that important since we'll probably be stuck with it at some point anyway, and non-source editors are notorious for being garbage regardless of the version.

Oppose - Well from what I've heard, visual editor has been known to cause quite a problem with inexperienced users, possibly resulting in less active community members. I don't think I'd be much affected by this either way, but for now I'm opposed to this new "VisualEditor". --  C.Syde  ( talk &#124;  contribs ) 05:23, November 4, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose - it does more trouble than it's worth. Source editor is the best editor. --- ☣   ʀodrigo  x  (talk)(contribs) 10:52, November 8, 2014 (UTC)