I hadn't realised that. If it can only edit articles, then the percentage of article edits using it must be quite a bit higher than the proportion of all edits, which is what is usually quoted on here.
The Visual Editor is a huge failure
- Poetlister
- Genius
- Posts: 25599
- kołdry
- Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
- Nom de plume: Poetlister
- Location: London, living in a similar way
- Contact:
Re: The Visual Editor is a huge failure
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche
- Vigilant
- Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
- Posts: 31485
- Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
- Wikipedia User: Vigilant
- Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant
Re: The Visual Editor is a huge failure
4.2% of non-bot(human) article space edits on en.wp used Visual Edsel by my last count a week or so ago.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.
- Moral Hazard
- Super Genius
- Posts: 3401
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2015 4:46 pm
- Wikipedia User: Kiefer.Wolfowitz
- Nom de plume: Kiefer Wolfowitz
- Contact:
Re: The Visual Editor is a huge failure
Now I understand the backstory of Seth Rogen (T-H-L)'s This is the End (T-H-L) character having been victimized.
Kiefer.Wolfowitz (T-C-L)
“Arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet is a sucker's game because they almost always turn out to be—or to be indistinguishable from—self-righteous sixteen-year-olds possessing infinite amounts of free time.”
Neal Stephenson (T-H-L) Cryptonomicon
“Arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet is a sucker's game because they almost always turn out to be—or to be indistinguishable from—self-righteous sixteen-year-olds possessing infinite amounts of free time.”
Neal Stephenson (T-H-L) Cryptonomicon
- Vigilant
- Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
- Posts: 31485
- Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
- Wikipedia User: Vigilant
- Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant
Re: The Visual Editor is a huge failure
Checking back in, Recent Changes shows that 7.2% of edits to article space on en.wp are Visual Editor.
Most are smaller edits.
Most are smaller edits.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.
Re: The Visual Editor is a huge failure
Ming came across this today: Category:Wikipedians who have turned off VisualEditor (T-H-L).
- Vigilant
- Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
- Posts: 31485
- Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
- Wikipedia User: Vigilant
- Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant
Re: The Visual Editor is a huge failure
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.
- Poetlister
- Genius
- Posts: 25599
- Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
- Nom de plume: Poetlister
- Location: London, living in a similar way
- Contact:
Re: The Visual Editor is a huge failure
This is probably very incomplete. I doubt that most editors who do it bother to announce the fact publicly. I certainly don't.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche
- Vigilant
- Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
- Posts: 31485
- Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
- Wikipedia User: Vigilant
- Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant
Re: The Visual Editor is a huge failure
ARISE!
In 'Recent Changes', it's being used on about 12% of total article changes.
These changes tend to be very small.
How much money has been spent on this boondoggle?
How much more will be spent?
How much longer for the Mo:leMan's fever dream of the Visual Cowpat being the only editor allowed on en.wp?
Why would anyone expect ANY engineering effort at the WeMakeFailures plant to be any better?
When will Teh Communitah notice that the WMF is no longer an engineering shop but an advocacy firm?
Visual Edsel has been underdevelopment for about a decade now.The Visual Editor is a huge failure
Post by Vigilant » Wed Jul 10, 2013 3:44 pm
In 'Recent Changes', it's being used on about 12% of total article changes.
These changes tend to be very small.
How much money has been spent on this boondoggle?
How much more will be spent?
How much longer for the Mo:leMan's fever dream of the Visual Cowpat being the only editor allowed on en.wp?
Why would anyone expect ANY engineering effort at the WeMakeFailures plant to be any better?
When will Teh Communitah notice that the WMF is no longer an engineering shop but an advocacy firm?
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.
- Vigilant
- Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
- Posts: 31485
- Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
- Wikipedia User: Vigilant
- Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant
Re: The Visual Editor is a huge failure
The Swami Vigilant will do a reading now.Vigilant wrote: ↑Thu Jul 11, 2013 5:57 pmAnd here we are again in the morning with 30 more reported problems.
It's somewhat staggering that for such a smallish, straight forward project like VE that their bugzilla database has passed 50K reported issues.
They were issuing bugzilla entries at around 30K during the December pre-pre-alpha shitfest.
It would be interesting to see how many projects are included in that database, how many bugs are for VE and when they were reported.
I'd bet that the "dev team" and "test team" found and fixed almost no bugs outside of these editor based gulag tests in December and July.
Everything I see points to no formal test and/or regression infrastructure.
I'd go look, but I'm a lazy bastard.
Absolutely the case.The WMF seems to be an organization that is immune to learning.This might sound a bit snarky (and isn't meant as criticism of the devs who worked on this), but careful testing is only necessary when one actually expects to have a decision to make. As best I can tell, all the major decisions have already been made (VE is the way of the future!). I don't think there is any scenario that would lead to disabling this, hence deciding whether it is a success isn't actually very important. That said, I'm sure the WMF would like to be able to tell donors that they have accomplished X, Y, and Z during 2013. Those accomplishments could be phrased in terms of performance benchmarks (especially if they do get good numbers), but they could just as well be explained in terms of products created. Personally, I do hope that the WMF follows-up and studies the impact of this change, but I doubt there are any specific goals that they feel must be met. Dragons flight (talk) 05:16, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
It's not that they couldn't; it's that they prefer to be ignorant so as to avoid offending the people who are fucking up the hardest.
At some point, they're going to alienate enough of the more productive editors that this abortion of an editor will never, ever get full acceptance even if it eventually gets to be workable.
Given their disdain for automated regression testing, I'll bet VE is a thorn in the side of the WMF for many, many years to come as new features are coded in by even newer programmers which break other features.
Editors on wikipedia, get ready to become permanent, unwilling regression testers every time you log in.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.
Re: The Visual Editor is a huge failure
Someone needs to have a chat with the WMF about effective change management and benefits realisation.