VE should offer to edit a transcluded page and handle the case better that entering {{ isn't necessarily a template.
If the target of a {{ isn't a template (if it doesn't have field names), VE should not use the word "template" in the dialog and instead make it clear that a transclusion will happen.
On a page with transcluded content, VE should offer to edit the transcluded page.
Is this a duplicate of T87130: VisualEditor incorrectly says that I am adding a template to the page when editing an existing template transclusion (or the underlying problem being similar enough)?
This is talking about two issues; dealing with them distinctly here:
If the target of a {{ isn't a template (if it doesn't have field names), VE should not use the word "template" in the dialog and instead make it clear that a transclusion will happen.
"Not a template" and "doesn't have field names" aren't the same thing. :-) For example, Template:Current G20 Leaders has no fields but is still the transclusion of a template.
We've intentionally used the term "template" in all single-item transclusions, even in cases where you're transcluding a non-template because people were very upset and confused by the term (see endless debate in 2013). We still use the term in the (rare) case that you're making a multi-template transclusion. Reversing this decision would need some considerable work to establish and run a community discussion and conclude it.
On a page with transcluded content, VE should offer to edit the transcluded page.
No. This would be insanely complicated and a bad user experience. Would each item get its own save button, or would the ben pooled? How would you deal with edit conflicts on parts of the page but not others? What if the changes I make locally alter the way that my transclusion works?
Transcluded content (be it a template, an image or something less common) is edited at that content's location, not in situ, by design.
Overall, I'm going to Decline this.