See T253985: Turn talk pages on for all users on Swedish wikipedia for how to go around this. Community consensus will be needed.

More general task is at T54165: Links to talk pages in mobile view for all anonymous users

In T289409#7299606, @stjn wrote:

See T253985: Turn talk pages on for all users on Swedish wikipedia for how to go around this. Community consensus will be needed.

More general task is at T54165: Links to talk pages in mobile view for all anonymous users

If you were to navigate to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mona_Lisa while logged out the only link to the article is all the way at the bottom, "Return to "Mona Lisa" page."

Seriously, this should be treated as a bug. Consensus should have been required to remove talk page links for anons. Obviously if whoever implemented this had asked, they would have been told to get lost because it's a terrible idea to hide talk pages from anyone who can edit. (I could see a case if the edit link was also removed, but they didn't do that!)

In T289409#7299710, @AlexisJazz wrote:

If you were to navigate to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mona_Lisa while logged out the only link to the article is all the way at the bottom, "Return to "Mona Lisa" page."

Seriously, this should be treated as a bug. Consensus should have been required to remove talk page links for anons. Obviously if whoever implemented this had asked, they would have been told to get lost because it's a terrible idea to hide talk pages from anyone who can edit. (I could see a case if the edit link was also removed, but they didn't do that!)

Again, you can read the arguments on this in T54165: Links to talk pages in mobile view for all anonymous users. tl;dr is that there was some expectation from mobile developers that these links would mostly result in negative experience for established editors (= spam, nonsense messages etc.). If enWP community intends to show them for everyone, they can do it with a configuration change. I also think your point (?) that the page tabs should be shown on talk page itself is valid, so the task here is probably valid as well.

In T289409#7299796, @stjn wrote:

In T289409#7299710, @AlexisJazz wrote:

If you were to navigate to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mona_Lisa while logged out the only link to the article is all the way at the bottom, "Return to "Mona Lisa" page."

Seriously, this should be treated as a bug. Consensus should have been required to remove talk page links for anons. Obviously if whoever implemented this had asked, they would have been told to get lost because it's a terrible idea to hide talk pages from anyone who can edit. (I could see a case if the edit link was also removed, but they didn't do that!)

Again, you can read the arguments on this in T54165: Links to talk pages in mobile view for all anonymous users. tl;dr is that there was some expectation from mobile developers that these links would mostly result in negative experience for established editors (= spam, nonsense messages etc.). If enWP community intends to show them for everyone, they can do it with a configuration change. I also think your point (?) that the page tabs should be shown on talk page itself is valid, so the task here is probably valid as well.

I forgot to actually state that point, but yeah, that's what I meant.

The arguments are potentially valid if the edit button had been removed as well. The spam argument is very strange. Desktop users don't spam? Or they're just more mature? If mobile anons lack the responsibility for a talk page link, they definitely lack the responsibility for an edit button. It's not a good idea to disable the handbrake before you give someone the car keys.

In T289409#7299916, @AlexisJazz wrote:

The arguments are potentially valid if the edit button had been removed as well. The spam argument is very strange. Desktop users don't spam? Or they're just more mature? If mobile anons lack the responsibility for a talk page link, they definitely lack the responsibility for an edit button. It's not a good idea to disable the handbrake before you give someone the car keys.

Removing talk page link but not edit link is perfectly reasonable: this way editors who actually want to edit talk page still can, and editors that are less interested in that need to take additional action, which is generally a deterrent on the web. So, yeah.

I am now wondering whether ‘page tabs should just be displayed on talk page as they are’ needs to be a separate task, since this one seems to be about (future possible) configuration change for enWP.

This is a duplicate of T54165. Minerva has talk page links (try https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mona_Lisa?useskin=minerva incognito)

They are just disabled via configuration per @stjn for the mobile site. The relevant configuration flag is `$wgMinervaTalkAtTop

In T289409#7299968, @stjn wrote:

In T289409#7299916, @AlexisJazz wrote:

The arguments are potentially valid if the edit button had been removed as well. The spam argument is very strange. Desktop users don't spam? Or they're just more mature? If mobile anons lack the responsibility for a talk page link, they definitely lack the responsibility for an edit button. It's not a good idea to disable the handbrake before you give someone the car keys.

Removing talk page link but not edit link is perfectly reasonable: this way editors who actually want to edit talk page still can, and editors that are less interested in that need to take additional action, which is generally a deterrent on the web. So, yeah.

I am now wondering whether ‘page tabs should just be displayed on talk page as they are’ needs to be a separate task, since this one seems to be about (future possible) configuration change for enWP.

Talk pages don't exist for people who are interested in them. They are not a convenience fun fan forum. If you're unwilling to discuss anything on a talk page that's fine, but it means you must automatically yield to any concerns raised on the talk page. But this won't work if an editor can't reach talk pages. An editor may also be wondering "Why hasn't anyone added to the article that Goofy is a cow?" and before they ruin the article, they might want to try and see if anyone has already suggested this or suggest it themselves. At which point they'd stumble onto this.

If you're not interested enough to have talk page links, you're not interested enough to have edit buttons. Without talk pages, the only tool that can stop an edit war is a block.