Template:File renaming reasons/render

Whether a filename is perceived to be suitable often depends on the familiarity of the individual with the subject, which is often the place depicted. It also occurs that items are known under different terms to different contributors or they believe entities are primarily well-known under the term they are used with to describe this entity, neglecting cultural differences, even within countries.

Not of less importance is the purpose the filename is believed to have; contributors frequently categorizing files have different demands from those who create, process, manage and upload them. Uploaders often have schemas naming their files; moving files might break them. If possible, language and schema should be preserved, as well as the camera or catalogue number.

Commons:File naming describes how files should be named. In general, Commons aims to provide stable filenames as there might be external file clients and file moving involves significant human and computing resources. Thus renaming should be used with caution. Currently there are six widely undisputed uses for rename requests:

#	Aim	Examples (old name)	Examples (new name)
1.	At the original uploader’s request.^[1]
2.	To change from a meaningless or ambiguous name to a name that describes what the image particularly displays.^[2]	File:DSC 1342.jpg (no information at all)	File:Pretoria Venningpark DSC 1342.jpg
		File:20110428 OH K1023900 0014.JPG - Flickr - NZ Defence Force.jpg (only photographer or rights holder)	File:Helicopter A109LUH(NZ) by NZ Defence Force.jpg
		File:20120519 3349.CR2.png (only date)	File:Sebkha-Chott 3349.png
		File:Paris 319.jpg (only broad location)	File:Paris 75018 Rue Norvins no 018 Le Consulat z.jpg
		File:Smartphone.jpg (generic category)	File:Samsung Galaxy Note series (Original, II, and 3).jpg
		File:RAS.jpg (acronym or initials)	File:Rodrigo Arias Sánchez.jpg
		File:Flickr - law keven - Anybody know a Good Dentist^......Happy Furry Friday Everybody...-O))).jpg (no relation to file content)	File:Lion-tailed Macaque, Colchester Zoo, England.jpg
		File:Louvre 12.jpg (inappropriate for specific content)	File:Mona Lisa by Leonardo da Vinci.jpg
3.	To correct obvious errors in filenames, including misspelled proper nouns, incorrect dates, and misidentified objects or organisms.^[3]	File:Ayres Rock 3.png File:Van Gogh portrait 1787.jpg File:Unknown insect 02.jpg	File:Ayers Rock 3.png File:Van Gogh portrait 1887.jpg File:Hogna radiata 02.jpg
4.	To harmonize the names of a set of images so that only one part of all names differs.^[4]	File:Bhf-BS-Icon.svg File:Icon HST bs 1.svg File:Dst symbol.svg	File:BSicon BHF.svg File:BSicon HST.svg File:BSicon DST.svg
5.	To change a filename that would be a violation of Commons’ policies and guidelines if it appeared elsewhere on the project as text. This includes gratuitous vulgarity, personal attacks/harassment, blatant advertising, and cases where revision deletion would be authorized.^[5]	File:Stupid fat idiot.jpg File:Buy now NEW PAINT! 555-6200.png	File:<Name of the person>.jpg File:2007 pink Honda Accord.png
6.	Non-controversial maintenance and bug fixes, including fixing double extensions, invalid or incorrect extensions, character handling problems, and other similar technical issues.^[6]	File:Map of Asia.svg.png File:Computer mouse.jpe File:Mooncake.jpg, File:Mooncake.JPG	File:Map of Asia.png File:Computer mouse.jpg File:Mooncake.jpg, File:Square Mooncake.jpg

Additional information: Please consider creating file redirects instead, where applicable and possible. They are cheap, usually do not break anything and are easily edited or deleted, if required.

↑ Unless there is a compelling reason not to, uploader requests should be honored. This is a courtesy, not an absolute right, however. If a file mover feels that a proposed new name is disruptive or inappropriate, they can suggest a different name or decline the request.
↑
Including:
1. Absolutely no information at all
  Composed entirely of random letters, numbers, and words like “Flickr”, “original”, and “crop”, which do not describe the subject of the image, but may indicate its upload history.
2. Only information is the photographer or rights holder
  The only piece of meaningful information is the name of the photographer or the holder of the copyright.
3. Only information is the date
  Only piece of meaningful information is the date that the photograph was taken on.
4. Only information is the location (broad)
  The only piece of meaningful information is a broad location, such as a city, province, or country. In this case, the location is so large that an average person would not be able to figure out where the image was taken or what the image depicted, without assistance from someone that knows the area.
5. Generic category rather than specific item
  The only piece of meaningful information is a word, such as “smartphone” or “screenshot”, which broadly describes the subject of the file, but does not impart any information that would help someone identify the specific object depicted. This is not just restricted to inanimate objects, it also applies to broad titles or groupings, such as “queen” or “bird”.
6. Acronyms and initials
  The only piece of meaningful information is an acronym or a person’s initials. This differs from “Absolutely no information at all” in that the acronym or initials are related to the subject of the file, even if it takes a second to figure out how.
7. Names that are not meaningless, but do not describe the file
  Contains a coherent description or message that do not describe the subject of the file. Does not apply in cases where the name of the file is the title given to a work of art by the artist that created it, even if the name has nothing to do with what is depicted (for example, many works of Dadaism).
8. Images where the information in the filename, while normally acceptable, is inappropriate for the specific content.
Not including: Specific locations, such as a park, an individual building, or an event.
↑ If an object or organism was incorrectly identified in the filename (such as calling a Sylvilagus floridanus by the name “File:Sylvilagus audubonii.jpg”), this criterion covers renaming the image. If the filename includes words like “unidentified” or “unknown” when describing an object or organism, and that object or organism has been identified, this criterion also covers the change. This criterion does not, however, cover moving a file from its common usage name to its scientific or technical name.
↑ Just because images share a category does not mean that they are part of a set. There are two scenarios that this criterion is designed for. First, certain complex templates (such as those that use BSicons or that display football kits) assume that the images used in them will follow a specific naming convention. Wikisource also uses a specific naming convention for the source files they transcribe. Second, files that form parts of a whole (such as scans from the same book or large images that are divided into smaller portions due to Commons’ upload size restriction) should follow the same naming convention so that they appear together, in order, in categories and lists.
↑ Note that Commons’ neutral point of view differs significantly from that of English Wikipedia. A file like “File:Taiwanese Tiaoyutai islands map.png” would be acceptable on Commons, even though it is not neutrally titled (see here). This does not mean that all non-neutrally worded titles are acceptable, however. An image of a person with the name “File:1BIGGest_nOSE_everS33n.JPG” would not enjoy the same protection.
↑ This is not a catch-all for anything that doesn't fit one of the above. This is for specific technical problems, generally which have a Phabricator task and have been the subject of community discussion.

View →the discussion that led to the selection of these criteria.

[1] Unless there is a compelling reason not to, uploader requests should be honored. This is a courtesy, not an absolute right, however. If a file mover feels that a proposed new name is disruptive or inappropriate, they can suggest a different name or decline the request.

[2] Including:

Absolutely no information at all
Composed entirely of random letters, numbers, and words like “Flickr”, “original”, and “crop”, which do not describe the subject of the image, but may indicate its upload history.

Only information is the photographer or rights holder
The only piece of meaningful information is the name of the photographer or the holder of the copyright.

Only information is the date
Only piece of meaningful information is the date that the photograph was taken on.

Only information is the location (broad)
The only piece of meaningful information is a broad location, such as a city, province, or country. In this case, the location is so large that an average person would not be able to figure out where the image was taken or what the image depicted, without assistance from someone that knows the area.

Generic category rather than specific item
The only piece of meaningful information is a word, such as “smartphone” or “screenshot”, which broadly describes the subject of the file, but does not impart any information that would help someone identify the specific object depicted. This is not just restricted to inanimate objects, it also applies to broad titles or groupings, such as “queen” or “bird”.

Acronyms and initials
The only piece of meaningful information is an acronym or a person’s initials. This differs from “Absolutely no information at all” in that the acronym or initials are related to the subject of the file, even if it takes a second to figure out how.

Names that are not meaningless, but do not describe the file
Contains a coherent description or message that do not describe the subject of the file. Does not apply in cases where the name of the file is the title given to a work of art by the artist that created it, even if the name has nothing to do with what is depicted (for example, many works of Dadaism).

Images where the information in the filename, while normally acceptable, is inappropriate for the specific content.

Not including: Specific locations, such as a park, an individual building, or an event.

[3] Absolutely no information at all
Composed entirely of random letters, numbers, and words like “Flickr”, “original”, and “crop”, which do not describe the subject of the image, but may indicate its upload history.

[4] Only information is the photographer or rights holder
The only piece of meaningful information is the name of the photographer or the holder of the copyright.

[5] Only information is the date
Only piece of meaningful information is the date that the photograph was taken on.

[6] Only information is the location (broad)
The only piece of meaningful information is a broad location, such as a city, province, or country. In this case, the location is so large that an average person would not be able to figure out where the image was taken or what the image depicted, without assistance from someone that knows the area.

[7] Generic category rather than specific item
The only piece of meaningful information is a word, such as “smartphone” or “screenshot”, which broadly describes the subject of the file, but does not impart any information that would help someone identify the specific object depicted. This is not just restricted to inanimate objects, it also applies to broad titles or groupings, such as “queen” or “bird”.

[8] Acronyms and initials
The only piece of meaningful information is an acronym or a person’s initials. This differs from “Absolutely no information at all” in that the acronym or initials are related to the subject of the file, even if it takes a second to figure out how.

[9] Names that are not meaningless, but do not describe the file
Contains a coherent description or message that do not describe the subject of the file. Does not apply in cases where the name of the file is the title given to a work of art by the artist that created it, even if the name has nothing to do with what is depicted (for example, many works of Dadaism).

[10] Images where the information in the filename, while normally acceptable, is inappropriate for the specific content.

[3] If an object or organism was incorrectly identified in the filename (such as calling a Sylvilagus floridanus by the name “File:Sylvilagus audubonii.jpg”), this criterion covers renaming the image. If the filename includes words like “unidentified” or “unknown” when describing an object or organism, and that object or organism has been identified, this criterion also covers the change. This criterion does not, however, cover moving a file from its common usage name to its scientific or technical name.

[4] Just because images share a category does not mean that they are part of a set. There are two scenarios that this criterion is designed for. First, certain complex templates (such as those that use BSicons or that display football kits) assume that the images used in them will follow a specific naming convention. Wikisource also uses a specific naming convention for the source files they transcribe. Second, files that form parts of a whole (such as scans from the same book or large images that are divided into smaller portions due to Commons’ upload size restriction) should follow the same naming convention so that they appear together, in order, in categories and lists.

[5] Note that Commons’ neutral point of view differs significantly from that of English Wikipedia. A file like “File:Taiwanese Tiaoyutai islands map.png” would be acceptable on Commons, even though it is not neutrally titled (see here). This does not mean that all non-neutrally worded titles are acceptable, however. An image of a person with the name “File:1BIGGest_nOSE_everS33n.JPG” would not enjoy the same protection.

[6] This is not a catch-all for anything that doesn't fit one of the above. This is for specific technical problems, generally which have a Phabricator task and have been the subject of community discussion.

[15] Absolutely no information at all
Composed entirely of random letters, numbers, and words like “Flickr”, “original”, and “crop”, which do not describe the subject of the image, but may indicate its upload history.

[16] Only information is the photographer or rights holder
The only piece of meaningful information is the name of the photographer or the holder of the copyright.

[17] Only information is the date
Only piece of meaningful information is the date that the photograph was taken on.

[18] Only information is the location (broad)
The only piece of meaningful information is a broad location, such as a city, province, or country. In this case, the location is so large that an average person would not be able to figure out where the image was taken or what the image depicted, without assistance from someone that knows the area.

[19] Generic category rather than specific item
The only piece of meaningful information is a word, such as “smartphone” or “screenshot”, which broadly describes the subject of the file, but does not impart any information that would help someone identify the specific object depicted. This is not just restricted to inanimate objects, it also applies to broad titles or groupings, such as “queen” or “bird”.

[20] Acronyms and initials
The only piece of meaningful information is an acronym or a person’s initials. This differs from “Absolutely no information at all” in that the acronym or initials are related to the subject of the file, even if it takes a second to figure out how.

[21] Names that are not meaningless, but do not describe the file
Contains a coherent description or message that do not describe the subject of the file. Does not apply in cases where the name of the file is the title given to a work of art by the artist that created it, even if the name has nothing to do with what is depicted (for example, many works of Dadaism).

[22] Images where the information in the filename, while normally acceptable, is inappropriate for the specific content.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

Template:File renaming reasons/render

Navigation menu

Search