User blog comment:MisterWoodhouse/Social Activity, the 2010 Editor, and Unpausing Migrations/@comment-44762573-20201021115311

Inconsistent naming isn't helping any of this.

If "2010 Editor", "WikiEditor", and "Source Editor" all refer to the "Source editor" option in Preferences, then pick a single name and stick with it - both in Preferences and as it's referred to publicly.

Preferably, if this is (allegedly) the out-of-the-box and un-Fandom-ized editor supplied by MediaWiki, it should be named "Source editor (MediaWiki)" - and should be a PERMANENT option. Anyone with MediaWiki experience on any site should be able to have the same basic out-of-the-box experience as any other site (e.g. Wikipedia).

If you want to play with the appearance/UI of a visual editor, fine - but name it "Visual editor (UCP)" and leave the source editor alone.

In general terms, the appearance/behavior provided by MediaWiki should ALWAYS be the default, with any Fandom add-ons being options chosen under Preferences. By taking any other approach, you're basically telling editors (and readers): "This is the way Fandom does things. If you don't like it, leave."