Thanks for telling me the problem URL.

I have had a similar problem on en.WP with about 19K items on my watchlist. Neither Edit or Edit raw would work - always timed out. And once that happens there is no way to prune your watchlist apart from article by article unwatching, which is what I did probably thousands (literally) of times until I finally got it to the point where in a lucky moment it finally opened with Edit raw and I zapped a lot of them. I understand why we need to have timeouts as a server may genuinely be malfunctioning but I think the time-outs should be relative to the size of the watchlist, or retrieve the watchlist in chunks, each of which should be possible within the current time-out.

Currently on en.WP each contributor using "cite web" etc use it more-or-less as they choose. Which piece of text from the web page do I regard as the title? Do I put the organisation name as the website or as the publisher? Etc. So it is not unusual that many citations to the same website will look quite different in the hands of different editors. I am not aware of any WikiProjects that I am involved with seeking to standardise these things. And if someone proposed trying to mandate a standard, I would probably say "it's just going to create arguments among the active contributors and everyone else won't even be aware of it and won't follow it anyway". Our biggest problem on en.WP is not people producing variant styles of citation to the same resource but people not citing at all. Or just adding a URL as an external link.

That's interesting. My impression was that Cite Reuse seemed to be working ok. But I had not noticed that "Only references inserted in the same edit trigger the issue", so it may be that I was only observing Cite Reuse in the context of reusing a reference being created in a previous edit.

If you are looking at the current version of my sandbox5, then it's been fixed manually (or so I thought, I obviously missed the 2nd theodore reference). I had to as this is actual content I am working on so I had to fix it; it wasn't just some kind of test. If you look at [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Kerry_Raymond/sandbox5&oldid=1066408215 this version], you will see dozens of repeated citations instead of extensive re-use of a number of them

Yes. You were asked to add a "depicts". Once you had chosen one, it showed it with "Mark as prominent". You could either mark it as prominent at the point, or you could add further depicts and then mark the prominent ones later, prior to the final Publish. Since the problem that triggered this bug report, I do not see any "Mark as prominent" appearing any more. See this screen shot for the uploading I just did https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kuranda_Fig_Tree_Avenue,_Species_Map,_2018.jpg

Not sure if this is part of this task, but the Add Meta-Data Step is in the UploadWizard is still not working as it was. Previously it asked which features were prominent in the image. It no longer appears to do that.

Editing *is* complex, that's why the tools have to be capable of handling it.

VE does not display that note when you are copying. At least if it did that, it warns the user that there is some problem.

Looks good. I must admit I am only seeing one globe this time but it seems it can be scrolled left and right forever (well, I did about 5-10 of scrolls in before I got bored and clicked on Brisbane). Each time I got coords that looked plausible.

Agreed. I don't think anyone will be saying "no no, my event's being held in the other australia". :-)

Actually I didn't pan. Rather the map that opened for me was quite wide and had the globe repeating 2 or 3 times. That is, there were multiple Australia's on screen. I clicked on a random Australia and then zoomed in. So the problem may be seen as either there should not be more than one globe shown or the longitude should be calculated down to the range -180 to 180.

Thanks all, Kerry

The template does indeed seem to be the trouble maker. I just had the same problem on [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kia_Ora,_Queensland&oldid=922291754 Kia Ora, Queensland] when I tried to cut-and-paste "It is located at 2754 Anderleigh Rd (26.02817°S 152.77676°E).[5]" where the coords are produced by a template. Another test case for you.

I probably should add that I was reporting relative to [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Woodgate,_Queensland&oldid=922128021 this version of the articles]. I have subsequently edited it (but it doesn't seem to have altered the problem).

Thank you!

That isn't any help to the VEFriendly template which is specifically there to assist VE-only people edit pages on which the VE is not routinely available but that they need to edit. For example, the State Library of Queensland are very involved with 1Lib1Ref contributing over 1000 edits in the past couple of years (world leaders in both years). They are gearing up for their 2019 1Lib1Ref (which starts 15 May ) and discovered to their horror that they could no long edit their [[WP:SLQ]] pages (which have the VEFriendly template). Nor does it help them talk to me on-wiki as their support person as my User Talk page also uses VEFriendly template.

Eureka moment. I have experimented with my preferences. The problem seems to be

I tried using French Wikipedia and everything was fine.

Yes, it still occurs with safe mode.

The Auto Capitaliation setting make makes no difference to the behaviour.
It occurs either way.

How do you duplicate an event but with a different date? I have a number of monthly events to set up. It doesn't seem possible to use the same name (QWiki Club), despite being on different dates because of the way the event page is named. If I just copy and edit the copied event page, then there appears to be no way to set the display name to be different to the new event page name. It's OK if they are differently named event pages, but the display name on Future/Past events should be the same.

There will seems to be issues with the timezone and UTC fields. Surely UTC is determined by timezone, state and date and is not independent. At the moment, there is no error message in relation to UTC but the event does not display and gives error messages when trying to display the time (which don't explain what the problem is).

It seems to be part of a broader problem with clicking to the left of the article "rectangle". Yesterday I was trying to paste text at the start of a paragraph and the the paste kept getting added to the start of the article. The extent of the area you can click to place your cursor at the start of a line requires the user to be super-precise. If you miss the area (which of course is not displayed online so pretty easy to get it wrong!), the focus goes north (start of article, start of section?).

I thought it was fixed as I was having no problems for a while, but it struck again on [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Queensland_Police_Service&type=revision&diff=871249590&oldid=871248597].

And I probably should add that having one tab where I do nothing but repeated edits to the articles I am currently working on is my normal way of working. Because I start a lot of new articles, I get lots of problems with new page patrollers (or those with nothing better to do) causing edit conflicts so I tend to do lots of small edits to minimise the risk. As my way of working hasn't changed recently, this bug (irrespective of the cause) has been introduced due to some change in the past week or so. I could not have failed to notice it before. So look to changes in the past 1-2 weeks.

Yes, it could be the same. I use multiple tabs on my browser, one tab will always be the article I am working on, the others will be sources etc. So yes after each Publish Changes in VE, the next action I am very likely to make in that tab is to launch the VE on that same article. If this is correct, the problem would occur on every 2nd edit. I don't think it is that frequent. But I realise that lately I have mostly been creating new articles on Australian places which means construction a large infobox (Template:Infobox Australian place). As doing lots of template work isn't a particular strength in the VE, I often do those edits in source editor from the outset or switch mid-edit from VE to source. So that probably means I am not doing two successive VE-only edits as frequently as usual, so that might reduce the frequency of the bug to what I am experience (frequent but not 1 in 2).

The problem persists. And I still cannot see any pattern to what is causing it. It does not appear to be a reaction to any specific editor action.

I am editing Cornubia, Queensland on English Wikipedia. This is the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cornubia,_Queensland&oldid=870451850 current version]. I added 3 templates at the top of the file (Use Australian English, Use DMY dates, more citations needed). Then I noticed that the Publish Changes was grey. Here is a screenshot. This article has not previously contained those templates. Yet look at my screenshot, you can see the 3 templates I have added. You can see the Publish Changes is greyed. However, I can undo the work I have done and redo it. I can do more edits. However, whatever I do, Publish Changes remains grey throughout all of this and clicking it does nothing.

The problem persists. I have learned that once it reaches the greyed state, it is not possible to undo (consistent I guess with thinking no changes have been made, despite changes being visible).

Hurray, it is working again!

I note that we have 1Lib1Ref South starting May 15 so it's important that Visual Editor's citations are working OK with Trove citations since citation is the key element of the campaign.

Chrome 64.0.3282.186

I think the "unsaved changes hav been automatically recovered" feature makes it more important to have an obvious way to safely abort/cancel an edit. Previously there was no consequence to how you aborted/cancelled (and there are many ways to do it) but now there is. If you "exit" the wrong way, you created "unsaved changes" that will reappear later and cause unintended problems.

When I train with the VE, it is a common question "how do I get out of this edit and start over".

And I think the logs need to be examined to see if any other articles have been affected by the publishing of an aborted VE edits after other edits, as they will need to have the edits manually merged.

It's funny that you should mention

Having finally found out how to get back here - the notification I received did not provide any link back here.

I see someone else reporting similar problems here:

How about a button on the VE that takes a screenshot (or better still a Start/Stop recording) so you can see exactly what I can see. There are a lot of problems in the VE in execution (like the constant problem of how it repositions the text you are working on off screen) which cannot be demonstrated by a diff as it affects the user experience but cannot be captured either with a screen shot because the act of starting my tool to take a screenshot generally loses the popup on my VE screen. It also affects me in making training materials as there are some pop-ups/drop-downs that I just cannot screen capture.

On no occasion did I see a Javascript error display, I saw nothing happen at all.

Yes. People are always telling me to do things in phabricator but I haven't been able to login to it. See this most [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiLove#Strange_behaviour_by_WikiLove.3F recent example]. Everyone *says* it is automatic with my Wikipedia login and never listens to me when I say that it does not work for me because it works fine for them. But when you are sitting in front of the login screen and it takes you round in circles with different error messages at different times, there is NO help from that screen to troubleshoot it and no link to where you can ask for help. I have even been told to report the login problem on phabricator which is really useless advice when I can't login to it. Quiditty is the first person to take the trouble to find out why I can't login. So now I can, I'd like to report that there are lots of people like me who probably can't login and there is no way to get help to do so.

At the very least, when you get the error message about the user name, tell the user that what they have to do is replace all the illegal characters with underscore to make it work (or at least that is what I was told and that worked for me).

Because WikiLove does not include any comment that it is a tool creates the problem that even not-so-users copy one manually and then break the syntax when they edit it to suit their purpose. So a comment would be a helpful way to get them to use the tool instead of trying to do it manually. It should include a pointer to the instructions to enable WikiLove (as it is a preference so it may not be enabled for all users).