Wrong. All you've actually done is follow some unmixed change - change which is deliberately segregated so as not to impact the privacy of the coinjoin. You haven't deanonymized a single Whirlpool output.

Since this post is currently being used on Twitter as some kind of "gotcha" moment, it's probably worth repeating that it is no such thing. All it shows is unmixed change being spent - the same change Whirpool deliberately segregates so as not to impact the privacy of its coinjoins. It does not show a Whirlpool coinjoin being deanonymized in any way.

The Wasabi shills repeating this example only show their own ignorance.