On the contrary, it has EVERYTHING to do with it.
When a translator opts for an explanatory translation, as you do, he will add extra words with the aim of making the meaning clearer than it would be if he were opting for a form-equivalent (or "word-for-word") translation. His choice of extra words will be determined by what he understands the meaning to be. His understanding of the meaning will depend on which interpretation of dependent arising he is committed to.
For example, A.P. de Zoysa, the Sinhalese translator at Sutta Central, has opted for an explanatory translation just like you. But de Zoysa's understanding is the opposite of yours: he thinks that it's විඥාන විපාක (vipāka viññāna) that ceases and so translates accordingly. The Burmese translator opts for ပဋိသန္ဓေဝိညာဏ် (rebirth-linking consciousness).
By contrast, the Thais and the European language translators have all opted for the form-equivalent rendering that you so vehemently object to: simply "consciousness".
Thai: วิญญาณ
Both English translators: consciousness
Both Dutch translators bewustzijn
German: Bewußtsein
Norwegian: bevisstheten
Italian: coscienza
Spanish: conciencia
Portuguese: consciência
Both Russian translators: сознание
In short, Sutta Central offers two translations that are informed by the Mahāvihāra commentarial interpretation, a dozen or so that are compatible with just about any interpretation, but none at all that comport with or are supportive of the Waharakaist eccentricity. In your anti-Sutta Central crusade it seems you've really got your work cut out for you.