This HTML5 document contains 6 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Subject Item

n2:

rdfs:label

Avatar Wiki:War Room/New visual editor

rdfs:comment

__NOWYSIWYG__ On Avatar Wiki, we have a nice little tradition where we try out as many of Wikia's new features as possible, providing that we believe that they will be useful to us in future. For a little while now, Wikia has been testing out a new version of the editor that promises to be much better than the one we're currently stuck with. While it's true that most regulars use the old editor (which won't be going away), I think it would be helpful to those who don't to be using a slightly better WYSIWYG. Thoughts? The 888th Avatar (talk) 12:14, July 2, 2014 (UTC)

n3:wikiPageUsesTemplate

n4: n5: n7:

n8:abstract

__NOWYSIWYG__ On Avatar Wiki, we have a nice little tradition where we try out as many of Wikia's new features as possible, providing that we believe that they will be useful to us in future. For a little while now, Wikia has been testing out a new version of the editor that promises to be much better than the one we're currently stuck with. While it's true that most regulars use the old editor (which won't be going away), I think it would be helpful to those who don't to be using a slightly better WYSIWYG. Thoughts? The 888th Avatar (talk) 12:14, July 2, 2014 (UTC) Isn't the VE already enabled on the site? There have been plenty of edits made with it. Or am I thinking of a different version? 13:04, July 2, 2014 (UTC) There are two visual editors now, a new one and the much-criticised old one. The new one actually closely resembles the one on Wikipedia in functionality. It's currently enabled for anonymous editors and users who signed up in the past few months. What I'm suggesting is that we make it the default for everyone who hasn't already opted into the source editor. The 888th Avatar (talk) 13:14, July 2, 2014 (UTC) Well, if it could help in at least not having visual edits result in quote marks going around the reference tags, I'd definitely be for it - that's been the biggest problem I've seen with visual mode. 13:21, July 2, 2014 (UTC) so nonies can edit again with this new tool? if i understand correctly, then i think i'm against this proposal - the new visual editor (the one in the drop down menu with page history and stuff, yes?) is not a favorite of mine, and is the one causing quotes to be put around the refs. (right?) making this the default would just make that problem worse. Intelligence4 (wall • contribs) 20:38, July 2, 2014 (UTC) I just tried it out, and it does add those unwanted quotes. The old one functions fine as it is (over the new one, at any rate) and I actually would prefer it not to be used in its current state. I also see no need to force people to use it, regardless of whether it works or not. 12:35, July 3, 2014 (UTC) Unfortunately, the problem there is that this isn't a bug of the new visual editor. It's because our practice of not putting quotation marks in references is non-standard. Because the visual editor isn't going away (if we don't implement it now, it'll come eventually anyway) and they won't be making a change like this to it, the only course is to change those references anyway. The 888th Avatar (talk) 04:53, July 4, 2014 (UTC) Really, the quotation marks are there to stay? Boo... oh well, nothing some bot-runs can't fix. Since the only downside of the visual editor was the addition of those quote marks, which is apparently standard and we will have to adapt to that anyway, I don't see a reason why not to make the transition to the visual editor already. From general feedback I've read about the feature, it is superior to the traditional RTE and those who use source mode as their standard won't be affected by it anyway, so I don't really see a reason why not. 11:16, July 4, 2014 (UTC)