Commons talk:File renaming

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to Commons:File renaming.
This talk page is automatically archived by ArchiveBot. Any sections older than 180 days are automatically archived. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Archive of file renaming proposal and activation: Here

faulty renames[edit]

File:Volkseinkommen Deutschland vor 1991.pdf has recently been renamed to an obviously wrong name. (The statistic is current and not until 1990). How do I go about to fix this? Agathoclea (talk) 10:23, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

@PerfektesChaos: Why did you ask again for this rename, given the previous denial? @Draceane: Why did you approve it, given the previous denial?   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 19:40, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
@Jeff G., Agathoclea: Sorry, I've seen the description there and thought that it is correct to rename it. (The problem was I didn't read the description in German correctly.) Draceane talkcontrib. 20:14, 3 March 2019 (UTC) (edited — Draceane talkcontrib. 20:16, 3 March 2019 (UTC))
Sorry, I have taken the description from w:de:Volkseinkommen#Entstehungsrechnung which seems to be originated by uploader. I did not decipher the figures below the chart since they are too small and not rendered in my presentation.
However, it is not a good idea to use as name an unspecified range from −∞ until +∞ and it would be to use the same unspecified file name for any purpose and any time range, even in 19th century.
Therefore the new renaming request would be: from 1970 until 2012 using this particular chart in appropriate context only, and national income of 19th century with another chart.
The amendment before 1991 meant: “data before 1991 for Western Germany only” which is not detailed in file information page, a very slipshod attitude as well.
The original name Volkseinkommen.pdf does not tell any range nor any country (Austria??) and was a bad idea anyway. That is the reason why I asked for a more precise name.
Greetings --PerfektesChaos (talk) 11:45, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Move war: 大诺史 and CAPTAIN_RAJU vs Impru20[edit]

A volunteer to stop the crapfest producing collateral damage (such as deletion of redirects)? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 19:53, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Redirects were removed to make way for move (they had no other use other than being the leftovers from a previous move). The initial move was requested by user 大诺史 without consensus nor any significant reasoning behind it (CAPTAIN_RAJU merely conducted such request), breaking consistency with other already uploaded files named following a similar pattern, thus I've requested a re-move to the initial location (which has been in use for years without any trouble). Impru20 (talk) 20:05, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
My apologies about this. Should’ve paid more attention when requesting. 大诺史 (talk) 01:43, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment In this situation these are graphs generated by the user for use in templates at esWP. Whilst I would normally encourage spacing, I am comfortable letting the contributor make that assessment on their needs.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:37, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

File movers - problem moving files?[edit]

Sorry, I don't know where else to post this. Are any other file movers having issues not having a 'move file' button under the "More" tab? It's not showing up for some reason and I am trying to move a file... Corky 19:51, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

@Corkythehornetfan: Please see phab:T226672. 4nn1l2 (talk) 19:55, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Review rights please[edit]

Please review the mover rights of someone who would do a move like this one! Total chaos will result if things like this go on. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:19, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

@SergeWoodzing: That was not a file moving/renaming. Pinging @DenghiùComm.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 16:58, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
Is there anything wrong with creating consistency between category names and leaving a redirect? Pinging @Jeff G.--DenghiùComm (talk) 17:21, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
P.S.: look now the name Charles here after his rollback. --DenghiùComm (talk) 17:24, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
Same thing you see at en:Category:Swedish monarchs. I don't see the problem with it -- if the most-used term for someone is different than predecessors with a similar name, well then it's different. On the other hand, this has nothing to do with file-moving, so probably doesn't belong on this page (and there are no special rights involved). Carl Lindberg (talk) 04:22, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
The main discussion of these category moves is at COM:ANU#DenghiùComm.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 05:14, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Six uses for rename requests[edit]

It is rather seldom, a few times a year, that I rename a file. But when doing I would like to give the short coded reason, e.g. "r#4" or what is well understood. For that, I would like to have in the move box a link where I can look for the six reasons – I am not fit enough to remember that stuff, from one rename to the next one. Of course, it can as well be a drop-down just to tick the reason, with the advantage to have it normalized. May be that some others would like that too. -- sarang사랑 13:51, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Not sure[edit]

I am not sure, whether my recent move was right (this one). I clicked to fast. I often work with location maps and the old name is the more obvious scheme for these kind of files. Is it better to move it back, or use the more often used kind of names like "map of foo, bla highlighted". Sorry, I looked at the reason but forgot to think. -- DerFussi 08:59, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Ratelimit exceeded[edit]

Hey guys, since I got filemover rights I tried to rename some files; often I got this message:

Some edits exceeded your rate limit of 900 edits per 180 seconds. Please let this tab open until this dialog disappeared or you got a positive response from the tool you are using. It will take approx. 168 seconds to complete this task.

It's a bit annoying to wait 3 mins until I can continue, anyone knows how to fix that issue? Greets, Arjoopy (talk) 16:02, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

@BWolff (WMF): I thought the ratelimit was increased to 10500 per 3 minutes for autopatrol? I ran into ratelimits some time ago as well, so something seems to be up.. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 17:13, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
But unlike me, you don't seem to have performed anywhere near 900 edits.. So this may be a bug that needs to be reported on m:Phabricator. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 17:16, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Looks like after moving 16 pages in one minute you got stuck. Seems like there is a ratelimit for page moves. The MediaWiki default for that is 8 moves per minute. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 17:22, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi Alexis, I really appreciate the quick support. You're absolutely right, I never came close to 900 edits in 3 mins, that's why I wondered whether this is a bug ;) Following the thread at Phabricator, I assume you'll need a few more days? Greets, Arjoopy (talk) 19:29, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
There does, however, appear to be a bug - the message for ratelimited moves should not be the message for ratelimited edits, or at least should pass the action as a parameter to allow customization. --DannyS712 (talk) 20:05, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
@DannyS712: In addition, Arjoopy's limit is not 900 edits per 180 seconds. It's 10500, he's autopatrolled. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 17:00, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
Setting aside the move rate limit being too low, it sounds like part of the confusion is that the error message uses the edit rate limit instead of the move rate limit. This appears to be a bug in MediaWiki:Gadget-libAPI.js. Bawolff (talk) 06:46, 22 July 2019 (UTC)