You might guess I'm a bit underwhelmed by the results, both at national and international level. It is an awful lot of work which I see partly undermined at the final jury stage, but also limited by the quality of material we attract. To attract great contributors, we need to publish amazing winning images on the photography forums and magazines, along with the call for entries. But some of our "winning" material isn't sufficiently good, technically, to publish, never mind outstanding enough to inspire. I'm not sure of my position for 2015. Seems that FP is good at selecting great images and the Photo Contest is achieving some success at recruiting new users. -- Colin (talk) 13:27, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi Colin. I'll email you about this as soon as I have a moment. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 04:00, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Wikibooks will get access to language links via Wikidata on February 24th. Coordination is happening at d:Wikidata:Wikibooks.
Roughly 17000 of the candidate articles that Google identified as potentially being about the same topic but lacking a language link have been merged. About 17500 are remaining and waiting for you to go through them via https://tools.wmflabs.org/yichengtry/
Thanks for sorting out one of the images I uploaded. I don't know what to do about this one. George Chakravarthi is the subject and photographer of the image, so what do you need?Emerald (talk) 12:24, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Nothing you need to do. Mr Chakravarthi has just this minute confirmed by email, and I have updated the file with the approved ticket tag.--MichaelMaggs (talk) 12:28, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
This image is of a photograph, but you have moved it from a photograph category to a painting one, why? It definitely isn't a painting. Thanks for sorting out the other image!Emerald (talk) 12:31, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
OK, I see now. I have changed it back. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 12:44, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Great, thanks. All done now. Have a great day.Emerald (talk) 12:45, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for robbing us of plenty of content that has not been proven false. Copyright is not a concern because the images were DWs of our Commons files of the seal and COA of Pennsylvania, you should have only deleted those proven not to be true. Fry1989eh? 15:57, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
I am sorry you disagree, but "not proven false" is not a criterion for hosting content here. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 17:19, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
I don't believe you are sorry one bit, I believe you are being overly broad in your reasoning to delete. Considering copyright is not of concern for these files, and only 2 out of over 50 images have been proven untrue, there was no valid reason to delete them all. And I find it ironic for you to state that you don't wish to "impugn the good faith of the uploader" when that is exactly what you have done by deleting all of them based on only 2 images that are false. They should be evaluated individually. Fry1989eh? 19:07, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
The templates for adding badges (good article, featured article, etc) to articles on Wikipedia in the sidebar are getting removed from articles rapidly in favor of getting that information from Wikidata \o/ German Wikipedia even deleted those templates already. English Wikipedia seems to be getting close.
This was originally 11 DRs, one for each image. I combined them for our convenience in making comments -- I thought I had captured all of the original comments, but I might have missed yours -- sorry. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:29, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
No problem. I was a little confused, but didn't think it was worth following though what had happened. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:31, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Lots of improvements around MixNMatch. It has a new catalog overview page. ~340K IDs have been matched so far with it and it now has an FAQ for institutions wanting to get their identifiers linked in Wikidata