Forums: Index War Room FANDOM is researching how fans edit on your community
Forum logo
Replacement filing cabinet This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page, other than for maintenance. If you wish to revisit this topic, please bring it up again in a new topic.

Hey there, CoD Wiki!

FANDOM is conducting a small test that will compare usage of the Visual Editor with the usage of the classic editor. The purpose of the test is to determine which editor brings more success to newer users. As part of that test, we will be disabling the Visual Editor as the default editor on this community for several months. Users who have the Visual Editor selected in their user preferences will get the classic editor when clicking the main "Edit" button during the test period. However, VisualEditor will remain available as the secondary editing option on the Edit drop-down menu.

I am posting this here since some users may be surprised by the altered experience. Giving them a different experience is the point of the test, of course.

However, we would request that you refrain from making any community-wide announcement about the test; to get the most accurate results, it's better for users to have no expectation of a change before they encounter it. Obviously this post is public, and it would be fine to point individual users here if they inquire about the change.

Please let us know if you have any questions! Thank you. Kirkburn (talk) @fandom 19:49, September 12, 2017 (UTC)


Once again it seems Fandom has done something to this wiki without contacting anyone if it's alright to do first. I mean, after the Discussions fiasco I was hoping you'd consider asking us first. And does this mean in a few months we're going to be forced to have Visual editor as our primary editing tool? I'm not happy at this decision at all. 20:07, September 12, 2017 (UTC)

So we are being used as an experiment against our will? Faaaaaantastic. Twig (Talk) GLnUhiE.png 21:00, September 12, 2017 (UTC)

Just what kind of test is this? It's ridiculous is what it is. Not being given a choice on what features are utilized on a Wiki is a fantastic way of making a community shatter. How does disabling one editor in favor of another help with anything? Both have their advantages and disadvantages, and actually giving new users a choice is what would lead to results. GhKJh.pngP90DeathmanuceaHlB.png21:07, September 12, 2017 (UTC)

Hooray, another think Wikia Fandom just springs without any notice. Although to be fair the visual editor is fucking horrible IMO and I only use the classic editor anyway. I guess here's to hoping we won't all be forced into using the visual editor once this this done. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 21:15, September 12, 2017 (UTC)

Hey there - we don't want to cause your wiki problems as a result of this, but we do want to find out whether the VisualEditor is helping or hindering editing. To do this, we need comparable data sets - i.e. edits on a set of wikis with and without the VisualEditor as the primary editor.
Right now, the VisualEditor is set as the primary editor for this wiki - you can see that by clicking the Edit button on an article while anonymous.
During the test, the VisualEditor simply won't be the primary editor here - it'll only come up as the secondary one (meaning it's still accessible from the Edit button dropdown menu). This effect is already active on a couple of wikis, by their request over the past few years.
If your preference is set to 'Classic rich-text editor' or 'Source editor', you won't notice a difference.
Once the test is ended, we plan to simply set CoD Wiki back to the current state. This certainly does not mean you'll end up being forced to use the VisualEditor - if anything, this test may show us that the VisualEditor has been having a negative effect (so editing rates may improve during the test).
Of course, we are happy to discuss this further, if you feel it is going to cause your wiki significant issues. Kirkburn (talk) @fandom 21:44, September 12, 2017 (UTC)
Alright, that's definitely good to hear. I'm clearly not a fan of the VisualEditor (and I do have the ClassicEditor set as my preference) and I was worried that, following the end of this test, we'd be subjected to another one to see how things change when only the VisualEditor is able for use. I'm glad that will not be the case. And, although it won't affect me, it still would've been nice if we had been asked if we wanted to participate in this test rather than just springing it on us (even with a warning beforehand). Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 23:43, September 12, 2017 (UTC)

In spite of the bafflingly negative attention this has drawn, I am completely okay with this case study. Fandom is trying to improve their product, and a study of this nature is a perfectly acceptable way of procuring data with which they can do so. Joe 23:27, September 12, 2017 (UTC)

I have to agree with you. I find it strange how certain wiki members flat out refuse to participate in things that the parent company wants to do. Considering this has pretty much no long term side effects (I assume this study will run for about a month at most, but realistically closer to a week or two), it's even more peculiarly that members are vehemently against something that likely won't even affect them. I'm all for this, especially if it means it will enlighten other users to the splendor that is the source editor. Sigmund Fraud Talk Contributions 00:09, September 13, 2017 (UTC)
The main thing is that it was shoved onto us without any sort of prior knowledge, Not even a little heads up to anyone about it. Which is becoming a trend with Fandom. Also believe that most people who've posted here edit using the classic style. Twig (Talk) GLnUhiE.png 02:31, September 13, 2017 (UTC)
As per with CoaZ.I'm happy that it's the classic editor they're using to test because I hate the visual editor myself. And in some ways have no qualms in them running this test. What I don't like is that they just enabled all the changes without asking anyone first. In fact, if they'd done it on one of our talk pages we could of discussed it in Discord in our staff room and then allowed this test they'd prefer us not to to tell everyone even more hidden away. I just don't like how as of recently Fandom is taking a "shoot first and ask questions later" attitude to the things they want to test. I mean as tests go, I'm more than happy to run it, I just wish we'd been given the chance to say "yes, we want to help you run this test". 10:05, September 13, 2017 (UTC)
Exactly. In response to Joe's and Sigmund's comments, it's not about "flat out refusing to participate in things that the parent company wants to do", it's about the principle of seeing Fandom make changes out of nowhere without notifying us first. In my case though, I personally don't have any issue with this test, especially that it's just temporary and that the VisualEditor completely sucks. I sort of agree that some members of our community may have overreacted a bit at the start of this thread, but at the same time you can't blame them for being annoyed at Fandom's trend of enabling/disabling things without asking our opinion first. This is mainly linked to some issues that happen prior to this, the main one being the blatant power abuse and policy breaches displayed by the staff member who enabled Discussions without asking our permission, only setting up a forum after (!) doing so and refusing to remove them despite us having made it clear that such things should go with community votes first. HBRa3 menu icon AW Ultimate94ninja talk · contribs 10:56, September 13, 2017 (UTC)
Apologies for the abruptness of the announcement - the switch hasn't actually been made yet, but we're hoping to move fairly quickly on this test (likely starting it later today) so that we can get useful data sooner rather than later. From our perspective, making the tweak is basically as simple as flipping a switch - so if it does cause problems, we can easily halt it (though obviously, we'd like to avoid that).
To shamelessly steal a relevant comment from one of my colleagues (Bert): "Our data analyst who designed this test had some very specific criteria around the volume and consistency of edits from users deemed to be "newer" editors. We needed to be reasonably confident that roughly the same number of new people would be editing during this upcoming test period as had done so in the past. There were additional considerations as well, and not that many communities met all of the criteria." As a result, we have only a limited pool of wikis that we can use for the test, and we don't want to do big announcements about it. (A/B tests generally don't really work very well if everyone affected is super-aware there's an A/B test happening.)
If you have any more questions about this, please feel free to ask. In general, we don't expect this to be very disruptive to the core editors, since I wouldn't be surprised if most of you use the basic source editor all the time (which is fine!). Kirkburn (talk) @fandom 14:25, September 13, 2017 (UTC)
I think most of us are happy to partake in this test. Many of us, myself included, are still sore from the last time Fandom enabled something on our Wiki without asking if they could. Being aware that you've not yet done it, and that you can disable it should the need arise honestly puts my own, and likely others, mind at rest. 21:17, September 13, 2017 (UTC)
Lol. This is Wikia, is it heck being removed if it fails. Look at Discussions, it completely failed and Wikia refuse to take it down. If this fails, you're still stuck with it. And yes, they should have asked first. But they won't. And we all know it. Disclaimer: I do like the idea of changing the editor though, it's awful as it stands. YELLOWLUCARIO TALK  17:24, September 17, 2017 (UTC)
De-emphasis or retirement of the VisualEditor are a potential future outcomes of this experiment, particularly if we find that it's likely been having a significant detrimental effect. Of course, that's not solely dependent on this test, but it is a possibility we take seriously. Kirkburn (talk) @fandom 13:55, September 18, 2017 (UTC)

Closed - This test is purported to take several months. Please create a new thread at the conclusion of this period. Joe 04:27, December 13, 2017 (UTC)