In T191156#9009990, @Ladsgroup wrote:

And I wouldn't call FlaggedRevs particularly a winning game TBH

In sports we have an old wisdom: never change a winning game. So was there a real reason to begin meddling with that? I mean a true real reason?

As I had proposed somewhere at the community wishes survey each reference Wikimedia projects are using should be referenced to Wikidata. That would make users capable to use the references metadata input users in an other language version or project in any other Wikimedia project. That would reduce work to maintain references. The information might be entered into Wikidata once and not entered and/or maintained in each and every language version or sister project on its own. Each language version would use the references metadata by something like cite q (in engl. WP) or maybe something smarter in future.

I urge to investigate wether the Russian issue can be minimized if DPL is not used on category pages, but on index pages only (most likely PORTAL pages, like in [[:n:de:Portal:Berlin]] what (as I am understanding it) would render the DPL only when a specific portal page would be accessed (purged) and not every time an article is added to a category.

As German Wikinews editor (+admin) I consider removing DPL as a ba solution.. In most perhaps all of the language versions I know we use them to generate different newsfeeds used in what we call news portals which are using the portal namespace. Some languages use or used DPL on the homepage but those are all wikis with a couple of articles a day.

<s>Sorry, no. It is correct that people are notified if their contribution was reverted.

In T148274#2788217, @PerfektesChaos wrote:

German Wikipedia:

• TL;DR Use template for ISBN, use interwiki format for both RFC and PMID by default.

I tried to investigate further. Translation drafts recently created are reloaded properly but the issue occurs for all my drafts created more than about three months ago.

This might be the same issue reported in T184042.

In T145604#3376698, @JEumerus wrote:

The explanation is needed because otherwise the feature is unused or people make bad markup for things that don't have the feature.

In T145604#3290707, @MZMcBride wrote:

I think between all bad ideas which were discussed the MediaWiki development, removing magic links and especially ISBN is one of the worst. I do not consent with MZMcBride when he talks about confusion under editors because of the ISBN is suddenly linked. Editors and especially new editors are happy that this happens.

But save could also be something in the bank, or a thing that must do after earthquake/flood/tsunami...

As a user and sysop on Wikinews I am protesting against this change as in most if not all that language versions the term "publish" (or its equivalents in other languages) is used for the one special edit when an article is considered ready, well after it was proofread, doublechecked and reviewed, when it usually get halfprotected and is added to the main page and declared to never again modified anymore. The change would add confusion to the redaction processes in Wikinews.

As a user and sysop on Wikinews I am protesting against this change as in most if not all that language versions the term "publish" (or its equivalents in other languages) is used for the one special edit when an article is considered ready, well after it was proofread, doublechecked and reviewed, when it usually get halfprotected and is added to the main page and declared to never again modified anymore. The change would add confusion to the redaction processes in Wikinews.

In T94906#2026284, @Tbayer wrote:

That's nonsense. Speaking as one of the authors of the page that you quote, it does not apply to this situation at all.

Please read :w:de:Wikipedia:Themenring. This extension must be deactivated for DE:WP ASAP.

This has to be deactivated for the German Wikipedia ASAP (and never should have been activated) since the German WP does have editoral rules with which this tool does not comply, namely w:de:Wikipedia:Themenring. Why you never ask before you invent such a tool (which in measures of sense does not deliver any useful content as well)

Deprecating this won't do good. Such templates are state of the art in list article editing, are used in most English Wikipedia articles in the references in which <references/> or <references>... </references> is replaced by templates for a couple of years.