Problem: The normal diff displays article text and wiki markup. For readers only interested in changes to the article text, it's overly complicated and it's sometimes difficult to even find the article text changes among all the templates and other markup.
Who would benefit: I have a use in mind for this that is aimed at academic reviewers and the general reader. It’s not just patrollers, editors and authors who will benefit from this feature
Proposed solution: Offer both options: the normal diff containing article text and wiki markup, and a simple diff showing just the changes to article text.
I recommend flipping a few times between these two images in a media viewer. Compare the experiences. Anthonyhcole (talk) 14:37, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
What about changes in files, references, tables and templates? --Vachovec1 (talk) 19:13, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Vachovec1: Sure. If it’s technically possible to display the original and replacement citation, image, category, table, etc., I’m all for it. (To be clear, I’m talking about a diff where the original image, citation, etc. itself, not its code, appears in the left column and the replacement image, citation, etc., not its code, appears in the right column.) The more that can be included in the simple diff, the better, provided it”s all simple and not code, but if the best that can be achieved initially is just a diff showing how the text of the article has changed, that’s OK, too. This isn’t going to replace the standard diff, and a diff showing just article word changes would be of benefit to editors. That said, maybe there should be a warning at the top pointing out the kinds of changes that the diff doesn’t highlight. —Anthonyhcole (talk) 06:47, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
I really would like to see an API for this, but it might not for performance reasons. MER-C (talk) 04:16, 13 November 2017 (UTC)