Why shouldn't it be visible in MMV? It's an image on the page?

... but it is inconsistent with the behaviour when you load the page
I suspect there's some kind of race condition going on here.

I can see the tick fine in scenario 1.

Yes, the tick shows once you're at the last delicious image of Plov.

In T125817#2000712, @bmansurov wrote:

Yes, the tick shows once you're at the last delicious image of Plov.

But isn't the second scenario linking to the second to last image on the page?

It is.

Thanks @bmansurov, I guess that answers @Jdlrobson's question.
@Florian's question still stands though.

In T125817#1998759, @Florian wrote:

Why shouldn't it be visible in MMV? It's an image on the page?

Is the image really inserted as [[File]] on the page? I couldn't tell because it uses https://uz.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andoza:Reflist in which I didn't see any [[File]].

Also shouldn't media viewer show images from the body of the article and not from the footer, etc?

In T125817#2122367, @bmansurov wrote:

In T125817#1998759, @Florian wrote:

Why shouldn't it be visible in MMV? It's an image on the page?

Is the image really inserted as [[File]] on the page? I couldn't tell because it uses https://uz.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andoza:Reflist in which I didn't see any [[File]].

Also shouldn't media viewer show images from the body of the article and not from the footer, etc?

The tick is generated by the ref itself, not the reflist:
https://uz.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Andoza:V&action=edit (which is used at https://uz.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Palov&action=submit in the end of the first section).

In my opinion, all images should be visible in the media viewer, which belongs to the content (and the reflist belongs to the content, in my opinion) :)

This is a bug about consistency. I've added a video to demonstrate how the experience changes depending on how you load the page (with fragment or without)

The tick should not be visible in media viewer - media viewer should not load icons, only thumbnail images so the behaviour without the tick is the correct behaviour.

I still don't understand what inconsistency is being referred here. Also, MediaWiki does not make any difference between icons and thumbnails, nor does it have a concept of an article footer. References could be special-cased, but I would rather leave that decision to the editors. They can easily add the noviewer class to the ref template, or, if they want to be even more generic, replace class="references" with class="references noviewer" in uz:MediaWiki:cite_references_prefix.

Bump. Is this task able to be marked Resolved?

I see there is a difference of opinion on what to display in MediaViewer. I personally believe that thumbanils only should be viewable in it. Others disagree. In my opinion the task is not resolved and I'd leave it open until we see stronger arguments for either opinion. My argument is that, as a user I'm not interested in seeing icons, as they are meant to be viewed inline (usually, or is it always?). As for thumbnails, they exist because larger images would not make it easy to read articles and if I wanted to I could click on a thumbnail and see the full image which usually has more details than the thumbnail.

Well, in a narrow technical sense the tick is a thumbnail (the original image is an SVG). The less narrow sense is hard to capture. For example the image at the top of the infobox is included with the same syntax as the tick ([[File: with no |thumb).

Again, template editors can fix this if they care. A generic solution would require T90914: Provide semantic wiki-configurable styles for media display or something similar.

There seems to be confusion here. Whether to show the tick or not is a template issue and not a bug. The issue is a race condition that is not fixed.

Please carefully watch the video I took the time to make:
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/F3645771

You'll see that the 2nd image is a tick in the second workflow but is not in the first workflow. This is the inconsistency about which I am talking.

It's obvious MultimediaViewer under certain conditions loads that tick and sometimes doesn't. Given the tick is hidden I imagine it is doing some check to see if visible before it is styled.

@Jdlrobson I think you are mistaking two identical images on the page for each other, as Prtksxna suggested earlier. The task for improving handling of those in MV is T64039.

In T125817#2529529, @Jdlrobson wrote:

You'll see that the 2nd image is a tick in the second workflow but is not in the first workflow. This is the inconsistency about which I am talking.

But the workflow starts with different images. In one you are directly opening the last image (before the tick), and so see the tick next, and in the second workflow you open the first image, the one in the navbox, and thus see the second image on the page.

In T125817#2529596, @Tgr wrote:

@Jdlrobson I think you are mistaking two identical images on the page for each other, as Prtksxna suggested earlier. The task for improving handling of those in MV is T64039.

The images aren't identical. The one in the navbox is An'anaviy palov and the one towards the end is Sarimsoqli palov. (they might be equal in taste :P)