Re. 2. (@SToyofuku-WMF @Etonkovidova): correct, the specification doc was just noting that a sidebar Contacts link was an existing feature on those wikis, but we are not affecting those with this project. The local community is free to keep a link like that (or even better, they could update the community page it points to, so that it mentions our new link).

We (WMF Legal) are grateful for the follow-up discussions we had with @kostajh , @Dreamy_Jazz, @Niharika , @Urbanecm_WMF and others. As per the fuller rationale we’ve written up off-Phab, we’re unconvinced that the benefits of logging account ancestry(1), as proposed here, would outweigh the privacy implications, so we’re advising against doing that for now.

Ditto

Confirming that Legal has seen this and is preparing a response. Current status is blocked pending confirmation of what happens when various groups here have the global permission flag set (automatically or by opt in), but local projects have set enhanced local requirements.

I'm OK with the wording/design from a legal point of view. As to Niharika's question to me above about URL destination: it's fine to link to the whole Policy.

I'm wondering about the Links report - does it tell us which third party sites might be linking to the cookies article? https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/9049606 ("Top linking sites for a given page")

Is Google Search Console able to provide any insights here? @mpopov