@Aklapper : I ended up discovering what caused the problem said in the argument, when I saw "Salved", I had the impression
that the translation made afterwards had already been saved. Therefore, I will not prepare the video, because the video would not help, than write as the cause of the error.

@Aklapper: I will take a screenshot in .mp4 to describe the bug. So that it becomes easier to understand.

In T261133#6419171 @Darwinius wrote:

First, there is no pillar being "violated". We are challenging not a pillar, but a "foundational" principle born and implemented at wiki.en in 2005, 4 years after wiki.pt was running as a community. Nobody there was consulted, as far as I know, before alien entities decided that the bizarrery that "anyone can edit" forcibly included IPs - which are not persons, and are not equivalent to them - was something "foundational". Not unsurprisingly, that topic has been controversial since ever at wiki.pt, with a lot of community members wanting to get rid of it, but with fear of challenging a status quo where they had no word, to start with. To me, this was clearly a colonial/imperial-like interference of the wiki.en community into other local communities, which unfortunately continues to be perpetuated.

Finally, about the mentioned "foundational principle", let's not forget the huge fallacy of talking about "freedom" when referring to using IPs to edit. IPs are a liability, both for then persons behind them, for the project and ultimately for WMF, which has the obligation/ideal of ensuring a safe environment for editing the projects. IPs can reveal who and where you are, up to the desk the computer is installed at. Just to mention a well known case from wiki.pt, less than 2 years ago a military police worker from São Paulo, Brasil, which politically edited Wikipedia using and IP from the Military Police network, was easily detected, publicly denounced and subject to disciplinary process and other charges at their workplace, for using an IP he most probably believed was "anonymous", as Wikipedia policies very wrongly call them. This liability and source of danger for Wikipedia users should have been more than enough reason to have thrown that "foundational" principle down the toilet long ago. Yet, inexplicably, there are still people defending it (never caring to explain why, but just parroting "it's the status quo", as you just did). In any case, calling this "anonymity" and "freedom to edit" is nothing but a sad joke.

In the discussion of the Lusophone community, I was in favor of banning IPs, as they are the main vandalists of Wikipedia Lusophone; but the foundation principle says that

Thank you!

@Aklapper: Well could you do this task above (the one in the order)?

@Aklapper: Sorry, I was inspired by this request [[T29728]], which contained Bawolff and Shell. More if you can do the task I asked for above. Appreciate!