User blog comment:BertH/Wikia's evolution continues with VisualEditor/@comment-3441771-20131015093552/@comment-3441771-20131016065234

(@BertH:)

&ldquo;[...] I don't think it's fair to assume that someone who's not using wikitext can't possibly add good content to an article or to a wiki.&rdquo; That was implied by what/how I said (it). And is an erroneous assumption about a great many things above, regardless. I know it ain't that PC, but it's rather simple: If you make something really easy, you won't get only dedicated enthusiasts, you'll get those that know best and those that no nothing too. I did not know a lot of detail about my home wiki's topic when I first joined. So I'm a hypocrite, I realize that. However, I was also really, really keen to learn more and I had the references at home already to start looking deeper. Plus, on the tools side of things, it didn't take me long to work out that the visual editor was rubbish and I swapped to "source only" soon thereafter. I'm also hopelessly addicted to wiki'ing, so that helped. There's a lot of variables there, that's all I'm really saying. What's not a variable is that a text editor shows you your errors straight up, vs. a rich text editor that tends to be airy-fairy, especially if inconsistent, about them.

Re Wikitext editing in VisualEditor: I didn't know that forum thread existed (I didn't realize the link in the blog was direct having not hovered over it). So I've made a few preliminary notes there too. But thanks for clearing that up. :)

Thanks you've answered my question how I was hoping you would. :D It's good to know I'll eventually (at release?) be able to just click the big "Edit", and not have to click "Classic editor". Ah, yes, another label that looked innocent in production, but to type it is like picking roaches off your food: Why didn't you see the implication that Wikitext editors, as in Wikitext-users, are out-of-date (who in reality are more advanced)?