--
Wikimedia Commons Welcome
(
talk
)
22:54, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
[
reply
]
Dear GVarnum-WMF,
A lot off your recent renames seems to be unnecessary and against
policy
. “ more accurate name” and “more complete name” aren’t valid reasons to rename a file. Our policy clearly states that ‘’ Files should NOT be renamed only because the new name looks a bit better‘’ and a large part of your recent renames seem to fall in this category. After al: ‘’In general, Commons aims to provide stable file names as there might be external file clients and file moving involves significant human and computing resources.’’
I trust that you will take more care when doing renames in the future. We are talking about file which are heavily used which means that one has to take even more care when renaming a file.
Kind regards,
Natuur12
(
talk
)
15:09, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- @
Natuur12
:
Thank you for the note - perhaps my edit summaries did not convey very well - but I think they were indeed within policy as they were changes to harmonize the files names of a set of images (Wikimedia Foundation logos), essentially at uploader's request as all but one (WM logo blue - which was both out of harmony with other "Wikimedia logo color" files and very ambiguous) were uploaded on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation, and many of the names were ambiguous - things like "Foundation" instead of "Wikimedia Foundation" whereas Foundation could basically apply to any Foundation - and "Wmf" or "WM" being rather ambiguous as well. Specifically the ambiguous issue is what I was trying to address with "more accurate name" and "more complete name". I apologize if you felt they were out of policy, but I do not agree they were simply to look a
bit
better. The desire to change them stemmed from the old names being confusing to people at times (exampled by people using the wrong logo and complaining later the names were too ambiguous) and had very poor harmony. We are very aware of their heavy use, which is why we felt less ambiguous and more harmonized names would serve everyone better. I will try to more specifically state which policy the rename relates to, I hope that helps address any concerns about any future renames made. --
Gregory Varnum (Wikimedia Foundation)
(
talk
)
01:21, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Since you did another rename (on which causes mass notification spam) I asked for the
removal
off your file mover flag.
Natuur12
(
talk
)
17:30, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- @
Natuur12
:
I am sorry you felt the need to escalade things without giving me the benefit of a response first. Would you be willing to respond to what I posted in reply to your post on this page and clarify what concerns you still have? Do you not believe these provide more harmony, are less ambiguous, and that uploader request applies to staff uploads as well? Thank you. --
Gregory Varnum (Wikimedia Foundation)
(
talk
)
17:51, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- See my
responce.
Natuur12
(
talk
)
18:06, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- You clearly don't follow
Commons:File renaming
. Right removed.
Multichill
(
talk
)
19:06, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- @
Multichill
:
May I ask for clarity on how that policy was not followed, for my own benefit if nothing else? Is it that is that
Image:Wikimedia_Foundation_logo_-_vertical_(2012-2016).svg
is not less ambiguous and more harmonious than
Image:Wmf_logo_vert_pms.svg
and author request did not apply - or that I was not aware of how to disable the Spam aspect in advance? Thank you. --
Gregory Varnum (Wikimedia Foundation)
(
talk
)
19:17, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
[
reply
]
Patrick Rogel
(
talk
)
09:57, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
[
reply
]
Patrick Rogel
(
talk
)
09:58, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- @
Patrick Rogel
:
Thank you for your diligence. I have forwarded permission from Lucidworks to OTRS, ticket# 2019092710006535. They provided permission before the photo was utilized under CC license on Foundation website. --
Gregory Varnum (Wikimedia Foundation)
(
talk
)
17:08, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
[
reply
]
ALL: in
2001:9E8:4420:D100:D1A3:F205:2B58:3838
05:43, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
[
reply
]