Commons talk:MediaMoveBot/CheckPage

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Not to be confused with Template:User reviewer.

Note BetacommandBot is NOT active - renames are handled by admins.

This page is for adding requests for approved user status.

Discussions and proposals regarding the renaming process should be held at Commons talk:MediaMoveBot.

Request for approved user[edit]

Please request access here. An admin shall process this request when they can. Use the template {{User6}}, eg #{{user6|Example}} which will produce Example (talk · contributions · Move log · Number of edits · logs · block log). Do not request approved user status if you are not planning on regularly contributing in this field. Currently MediaMoveBot is deprecated since administrators process file renaming. Further requests will not be accepted.


Are there any controls what those users which were approved are really doing? Until now I thought that those are trused users and thus I don't need to check their work as rigorous as the rest. I always still checked real duplicate, no typos, not scaled down, and so on, but I never checked the logic of the names they approved. Until now: first I got that note by Rcbutcher telling me that a few images now are worse named than before. All those renaming requests were confirmed by Luigi Chiesa. Then I myself noticed a stupid renaming confirmed once again by Luigi Chiesa concerning Image:FranzIvonFrankreich01.jpg, which currently shows the name of the depicted person, while he approved a renaming to the name of the painter who is not shown on that image. Since I am one of the administrators who delete duplicates on a rather regular case, I have to say that I don't trust that user with what he is doing and therefor request that he will be removed from this list. -- Cecil (talk) 14:50, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I have removed Luigi Chiesa from the list per this comment. —Giggy 23:11, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Dear Giggy, whilst agreeing that user:Luigi Chiesa's proposal "Image:Joos van Cleve 004.jpg" was by far less than perfect, I think you might be overdoing by removing him from the list "at once".
I'd rather propose to work towards a comprehensive "How-To" for naming images, before: I'd not at all be sure that a somehow misspelled name of some ...emperor would be more significant for a c.500 years old painting than the name of the artist who definitely did it. I'd therefore propose for same pic, according to enWP naming, either "Image:Joos van Cleve, portrait of Francis I of France (c. 1520).jpg" or rather, the other way round, "Image:Francis I of France, portrait by Joos van Cleve (c. 1520).jpg" -- but I won't do such myself in such case unless a minimum of COM-accepted "benchmarks" would ever be published on an appropriate place.
Besides, I mention that I recently (well, more than 10 days ago) proposed to have talk on such+similar stuff on Commons talk:MediaMoveBot, in order to keep this page free for requests. What do you think about? Best, --WeHaWoe (talk) 14:26, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
No, no, no. Renaming images should not be like renaming pages. There are no naming conventions. And there never should be. They're just file names. I think we should remove users for trivial changes like that. Use this service to rename the ones that really need it like Image:!cid EA85F6991420471B8D1B4577E2C2A5F8@STXlixiaode.jpg or Image:Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.PNG or Image:''--;.pg--=====-=.jpg (gotta encode it just to link to it: Image:''--;.pg--=====-=.jpg). And now I'm italicised. Rocket000(talk) 18:31, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Maybe something should be written about that in the Guide on the checkpage? /Ö 11:17, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm actually planning to write a little guide to accompany this page. People need understand renaming files can cause a lot of work for already overworked admins. When there hear "bot" they think it's completely automatic. The thing is, these are good users doing these renames. They just need to see the impact that renaming widely used images have. Rocket000(talk) 11:39, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Good idea. COM:FAQ#How can I rename/move an image or other media file? doesn't even mention this page. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:01, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Necessarity of renaming[edit]

I really don't have a problem, when somebody renames totally cryptic names directly created from the camera. I also don't have a problem if somebody renames a real error in a filename. But I have a problem if you people rename a correct name just for the fun to another maybe or maybe not correct name just because somebody didn't like that it contained a date or had no empty spaces or had a lower case letter instead of upper case. Each time you rename something you create a duplicate on the server (even if it is not visible anymore) and then you cause sometimes only a few edits or up to some hundreds depending on the usage of that file. Every few days there are all those flags, COAs, maps and so on listed as duplicates. All those images have on thing in common, they are heavily used. And still every few days they get renamed because of such things as 'Coat of arms' instead of 'Coat of Arms' or the other way round, depending on the flag and the person.

The goal of renaming is to find a file and not to create the perfect file name, because that will never happen. Instead of renaming those files every few days, a better description is the only solution to tell an user what the image is showing. And only a good categorizing will help find those files because then they are all at one place. -- Cecil (talk) 14:56, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

  1. Sorry to repeat myself (see above): Let us please work towards a comprehensive "How-To" generate filenames, instead of getting enerverd about so-called "de-facto" outcomings of the up-to-now unsatisfying "frame".
  2. I totally agree that files which are heavily used should not be renamed unless for M.O.S.T urgent reason, [and, besides, I think they sould be renamed before being used that much] and [do not know whether such would be manageable] but by very-very-trusted users. Unfortunately, there are hardly any instructions on such (I remember to have read that "much-used media" should not be renamed, if ever avoidable, though) --WeHaWoe (talk) 14:42, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  3. Forgot to mention that of course, proper (rather: acceptable) categorization should be considered to be part of the "renaming" pürocess by so-called "trusted users". --WeHaWoe (talk) 14:47, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  4. @Cecil (or any in-this-case-comptent developer) -- One more question: Would it be technicallyANDpractically manageable to tag some file name as "NoRename"? Such might help in cases as you noted above. --WeHaWoe (talk) 14:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Don't know if it would be practical, if first would have to be respected. There actually is a feature called 'redirect': the image stays at the same place but the name in the projects can be changed to a better one if the projects want to use it.
I'm just so pissed each time when I see somebody renames images that are used hundreds of times from 'XXX flag' to 'Flag of XXX' or 'xx Of yy' to 'xx of yy'. Renaming should be done for cryptic (e.g. just numbers) or misleading (e.g. shows a person but is named after another person) names, and in cases when the image is used just a few times I also see no problem with correcting typos. But there are a few people that rename just for the fun of renaming perfectly proper names of the most heavily used images (maps, flags, COAs, ...) and not just once, because after some time the next person comes and also does not like the name. Each time a real person (because the bots have problems with reading the infoboxes) has to replace the images in all the projects, sometimes that results in over 100 edits just for one image. That means: time, server space, a huge strain for the toolserver ... Oh, and not to forget that it ridicules the uploader who have choosen a good name and than has to find the 'Badname'-template there. -- Cecil (talk) 21:45, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Cecil that many renames are completely unneeded. Another reason to not make unnecessary renames is that it break links from reusers of Commons images outside Wikimedia.
A "how to name files" is a very good idea to help users choose good names. But I think that should only be recommendations and not requirements. And when files really need to be renamed, of course it should be done as soon as possible. /Ö 23:36, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

not trusted status?[edit]

Although Image:Ferdinand2.jpg was requestd for a rename by me, the bot told me later it didn't work because I am not a "trusted user"? Can someone check on this please or do I have to request that status? Gryffindor (talk) 17:47, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

No, admins don't need to. I don't know why it didn't work. Let's see if it was just a temporary glitch. Rocket000(talk) 19:18, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Oh, I see. User:Cropbot edited the image last. Rocket000(talk) 19:19, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
I am not sure that image should be renamed. You see it as a painting by Joseph Heintz d. Ä. But for the user who uploaded it, it is a painting of Ferdinand II, so he named it like that. Neither name is more correct. And by Cecil's reasoning higher up on this page, it is better to not rename in such cases. /Ö 08:29, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Ah, so if Cropbot edited it last, then it won't work do I see this correct? I'd have to be the last editor? Gryffindor (talk) 09:06, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes, a "trusted" user has to be the last editor, otherwise the bot says "rename failed". Stupid, but (regrettably) well known. --Túrelio (talk) 08:43, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Please adapt renamed[edit]

User:WeHaWoe has recently been renamed to user:W. As "WeHaWoe" had globally been misused by a vandal, please correct the list of trusted users ASAP -- I do not want to read that acronym any more. Thanks, Wolfgang (talk) 09:34, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Kanonkas(talk) 13:51, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Help with a Trusted User task[edit]

I'm listed as a trusted user, yet attempting to do a file rename here File:Caracara cheriway-20081221.jpg, via "Click here to perform the move." results in an error: "You do not have permission to do that, for the following reasons:

  • You do not have permission to move files.
  • Cannot move pages in namespace "File""

Any help would be appreciated. -Dougjj (talk) 13:15, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

The template was wrong it should be done via bot no via a link. Betacommand 00:37, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


Is it possible to have the statut to autorise the renaming of file ? — Riba (talk) 20:24, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Come again what are you attempting to say? Betacommand 00:38, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
He wants to be a trusted user. Stifle (talk) 14:06, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Apparent typo[edit]

✓ Done The project page says "As a rule of thumb, users with fewer than 200 edits in will not be added to the list." It seems to be missing some words. Maybe "As a rule of thumb, users with fewer than 200 edits in the File namespace will not be added to the list."; or drop the word "in" altogether if there's no intended qualification. TJRC (talk) 01:02, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see it has been corrected. TJRC (talk) 00:34, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Renaming procedure[edit]

About that procedure, first I tagged several files (e.g. File:BSicon xBS2+lc.svg with {{rename|BSicon eBS2+lc.svg|should be ''e'' instead of ''x'' according to [[Commons:Icons for railway descriptions/Policies]] ~~~~}} on 26. Jun. 2009). Three days later BetacommandBot changed the tempate to "rename needs confirmation" commenting "Rename failed. needs confirmation". On 2. Jul. 2009 I was listed as trusted user and changed the template back to "rename".

Do I have to do something more to make it work? When will BetacommandBot start again? axpdeHello! 16:05, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

This happened because there is an edit between yours and the one from BetacommandBot. The bot requires that your edit be the last one to be considered valid. Best regards, Alpertron (talk) 14:27, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
But my (last) edit is the last one (at all)! And at the time of my first try to rename the files I haven't been a "trusted user". The question is: What do I have to do to make BetacommandBot proceed again? axpdeHello! 14:57, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Based from past experience I think that the bot runs 2 times a month, so you will need to wait until BetacommandBot catches that file again. In the meantime you can find more files to rename. Best regards, Alpertron (talk) 16:17, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I run it when ever I get a chance if it ever starts to get backlogged either leave a note on my talkpage or email me. Betacommand 16:20, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

To much renameing[edit]

Sometimes it seems to me that there is to much renameing. Renameing should be limited to a minumum and not be somthing you do because the new name looks nicer.

I do not belive that all users check Commons:File renaming before they move (I think that there should be a link to that page on the projectpage and on the templates requesting a move telling the trusted user to check before approving the move). --MGA73 (talk) 11:31, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Request to be added to the list[edit]

In general, I don't think images should be renamed, but I suppose it would have been simpler if I could have requested renaming files like File:Locarno.JPG or File:Suisse.jpg directly. -- User:Docu at 12:59, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

see #Request for trusted userBetacommand 13:01, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
I thought I had to write a note here rather than just add my name. In the meantime, I changed my mind. I wouldn't want to authorize accidentally a renaming request just because I categorized an image to which someone else happened to add the template. -- User:Docu at 13:12, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Request to be added to the list[edit]

I'm uploading a lot of maps with kazakh toponyms, since unfortunately the risk of misspelling is pretty high I often need to rename them; being on the list would make my work easier. Thanks in advance. --Vipera (talk) 12:48, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

✓ Done good user, don't expect any misuse. --The Evil IP address (talk) 19:01, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

How to decide if a user should be "trusted"?[edit]

How should we judge if users that request to be approved have a good judgment? Takeing good images or having a nose for copyvios does not mean that you should be trusted to rename images. If we asked the users to add 20 images they suggest renamed then we could see if they know and understand the Commons:File renaming? --MGA73 (talk) 16:36, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

At least I would like to see a 5-line comment about why the requester needs this feature. Best regards, Alpertron (talk) 17:05, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
I think that trusted users should be able to move files that they have uploaded for at least one hour after upload. Snowmanradio (talk) 09:13, 5 July 2010 (UTC)