File talk:Een lid van de Binnenlandse Strijdkrachten (BS) presenteert geweer (een stengun…), Bestanddeelnr 900-2542.jpg

Rename request

@Bicycle Tourer: has requested a rename to:

File:Een lid van de Binnenlandse Strijdkrachten (BS) presenteert geweer (een stengun…), Bestanddeelnr 900-2542.jpg

as a "Bracket error" under Commons:File renaming#FR5.

I'm not in favour of any rename here, although would not oppose one. However this is not the name I'd choose.

• Why rename at all? The name is a mechanical truncation of a longer title used by the archive. It is not incorrect or misleading in any significant way.
• We don't recognise "bracket error" as a reason to rename. There is no reason why such brackets should be paired. For any sort of 'bot script etc. to assume that such brackets will be paired would be an error, and will be unreliable in use.
• This is not an FR5 situation, 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.
• Filenames are not titles or descriptions. We have metadata with greater bandwidth than that, we store the title there. It's entirely proper for the filename to only be a shortened form of this.
• This is one of tens of thousands of images from the same archive. Many will have the same truncation. Are we to start remedying all of them?
• As a general rule, I avoid renaming files here which have come from outside sources, unless there is a significant benefit to doing so. Otherwise, the ability to cross-reference the files is generally more useful. That's not applicable here, as their archive identifiers are opaque, not any sort of title.
• If we're trying to restore the title, then it should be

File:Een lid van de Binnenlandse Strijdkrachten (BS) presenteert geweer (een stengun) in Enschede, Bestanddeelnr 900-2542.jpg

and at least restore the full title.

Andy Dingley (talk) 10:26, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

@Andy Dingley: I can live with any name, as long as there is for each opening bracket a closing one (paired). Reason for this is quality assurance: de:WP has tools to parse all articles on a regular base to identify non paired use of brackets. This is of high value for readers, because a missing opening or closing bracket can turn a beautifully named link into a nasty cryptic URL. I also involve user aka (@Aka: ) into this discussion because he is the author of the parsing tools and has given guidance to use reason 5 with comment "bracket error" in case there is a file name with unpaired brackets. I hope this explains enough, otherwise we should get user:aka involved. Many thanks --Bicycle Tourer (talk) 10:48, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

I think you need to fix your tools. Because any tool that makes assumptions about bracket pairing in user-supplied content is going to be mostly unreliable.

Given how this name came to have unpaired brackets, that's presumably a common source for them? Have you counted how many others there are? Andy Dingley (talk) 10:52, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

@Andy Dingley: Well, it's not unusual that unpaired brackets are the result of truncated file names. But I've also seen simple typing errors. Nevertheless probably one out of 100 bracket errors is due to a filename problem. 99 are for other reasons. And we fix about 300-500 bracket errors a week in de:WP. So it makes a lot of sense to fix these few ones this way, because it's seldom, and by fixing it it avoids further false positives. And in fact I already got a "thanks" from original authors for fixing it.

Nevertheless I will ask to get the tools changed, but I have to say, that I'm not in the position to change them by myself. Would be great if the renaming can be done until the issue is solved in another way. Many thanks --Bicycle Tourer (talk) 16:45, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

As noted, I'm not against such a rename (although I see it as unnecessary). But if we're going to do it at all, at least restore the whole title. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:55, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

@Andy Dingley: I agree, restoring the whole title makes sense. Is there a new request for renaming it needed by me? As far as I can see the rename originally requested by me has already been done. BR --Bicycle Tourer (talk) 17:43, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

No, it's done now. Discussion is supposed to be respected on Commons, but of course there's always someone who just has to do it their way despite. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:48, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

@Andy Dingley: Nevertheless many thanks for your help and advise. It looks like that the parsing-tool can be changed too. Let's see how it works ... BR --Bicycle Tourer (talk) 19:56, 19 March 2019 (UTC)