In T370598#10698080, @whym wrote:

(Whether they are confirmed on Commons itself seems irrelevant, as most users only have a Commons account due to Central Auth.)

So the idea is that people who are not confirmed on a sister wiki but confirmed on Commons are a small minority of power users, and that although they don't have to be stopped from using UD, it's not a big deal because they would know how to work around the restriction?

I’m not sure if this is the right place to bring this up, but I believe this issue is important, and currently discussions are happening in multiple places, which may not be helping to move things forward. From my understanding, no action will be taken unless there is both a technical solution and consensus to implement it.

Thank you! And sorry about the ticket format etc.

@Aklapper Do you mean the ticket format or something else?

@Tacsipacsi Thanks for the detailed explanation, I get it now. :)

In T330453#8645695, @Pols12 wrote:

In T330453#8645441, @Kyykaarme wrote:

This might be another issue, but the translation extension doesn't detect these "corrupted" paragraphs.

This is not a bug: since the content has not changed (some parts have been wrapped in tvar, but final content remains), the translation administrator has chosen not to invalidate translations.

Some things that I left out from my post on Meta, 'cause I thought it was confusing enough already:

I noticed this in the Finnish WP where I'm an admin and I edit via a VPN which is often blocked. I think I currently see the incorrect links for all other users except administrators.

Thank you, everyone who worked on this.

I did mention new users in my opening message, but I feel that it was the language team who fixated on newcomers and the deletion ratios etc. I contemplated if it might be possible to limit the CT tool to the autoreviewed user group (which is manually assigned by admins), but because I didn't know if that would be feasible, I ended up suggesting that the new article invitation be removed completely. I felt that it was a softer method and much easier to implement than trying to limit the use of the tool to certain user groups. Maybe it doesn't seem like a soft option to "hide" the tool from everyone, but something had to be done to stop the disruption caused by the tool. I actually care about new users and their wiki experience, and I have saved many new articles from the trash bin, but fixing translated articles is too time consuming and often practically impossible.

Did you mean to write "new article" instead of "new translation"?

In the Finnish Wikipedia a user who is in the reviewer user group with "stablesettings" right reported last night that they lost the ability to change the FlaggedRevs settings in articles. No admin has reported the same problem, but I don't know how many have tried it. The user said that they don't see the option anymore in the drop-down menu at the top of the article.