@Vexations Unless I'm missing something, those files only cover the names and descriptions of tags (hence the name). I don't see any of the message texts there.

@Catrope In that case it's inconsistent with the other three filters in the same UI (unreviewed, reviewed, redirects), which at the moment function correctly.

@Mattflaschen-WMF I'm sorry, it seems either you've misunderstood the suggestion or I've misunderstood what PageTriageExternalTagsOptions.js does. We have the option on enwiki of tagging an article as a stub (i.e. adding the {{stub}} template) using the Page Curation Tool. However, the New Pages Feed also has a functionality where it automatically detects "possible issues" such as orphaned or uncategorised articles – these issues are then displayed in bold red text next to the article in the feed. We would like very short articles to trigger one of these automatic issues.

Steps to reproduce (courtesy of Jbhunley in the linked enwiki discussion above):

@Addshore Erm, manually checking 155,000 records does not sound like "a bit of extra legwork" to me... I understand that it's hard to think of every edge case, but the lower bound issue was specifically brought up above. What is the point of using a bot if you are going to knowingly introduce a such large number of errors that all of its work needs to be checked by humans?

I see a lower bound was discussed here, but was it implemented? AddBot has been tagging prehistoric dates, which are likely to be estimates based on radiocarbon or other absolute dating methods with error margins of decades or centuries, so the Gregorian/Julian distinction is irrelevant.