Forum:Image names: Difference between revisions
Mini-mitch (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Forumheader|Panopticon}} <!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ --> Do we have a policy on the names of images? If we ...") |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
All images should so what is included (in this case, Autons), then what is the main aspect of the picture (if needed (picture 2 is a prime example of this (handgun))) and lastly the number of the file uploaded. I.e if this was the first Auton image upload it would be Auton1, then Auton 2 ot Autonhandgun1. etc. | All images should so what is included (in this case, Autons), then what is the main aspect of the picture (if needed (picture 2 is a prime example of this (handgun))) and lastly the number of the file uploaded. I.e if this was the first Auton image upload it would be Auton1, then Auton 2 ot Autonhandgun1. etc. | ||
Lastly, there should be no files upload just plainly as ''Auton'' or ''Dalek'' - file names like this should be locked or just plainly used as the main article image. This is stop Users uploading and replacing images which take up valuable file names, when the file names can be put onto a much better image, such as one for the infobox. | Lastly, there should be no files upload just plainly as ''Auton'' or ''Dalek'' - file names like this should be locked or just plainly used as the main article image. This is stop Users uploading and replacing images which take up valuable file names, when the file names can be put onto a much better image, such as one for the infobox. [[User:Mini-mitch|MM]]/<small>[[User talk:Mini-mitch|Want to talk?]]</small> 16:23, February 12, 2012 (UTC) | ||
: We have [[T:IUP NAMES]], so yes, strings of gibberish are already disallowed. No idea about generic naming of things like Dalek.jpg though. -- [[User:Tybort|Tybort]] ([[User talk:Tybort|talk page]]) 16:30, February 12, 2012 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 16:30, 12 February 2012
If this thread's title doesn't specify it's spoilery, don't bring any up.
Do we have a policy on the names of images? If we don't I think we seriously need one, especially now all our images are being put into categories. It will seriously help with image searching and when someone wants to add an image to an article.
Take File:Autons2.jpg - that comes up very easily in any search for an Auton image. However File:St--3a61autonhandweapon.jpg can be more difficult to took up and what can be even more difficult is when an image file's name is just complete gibberish - file:FE8T74GN349.jpg.
We should have a policy that states the file name should be what the image shows. Looking back to my earlier examples, File:Autons2.jpg, is fine. However, on the other hand File:St--3a61autonhandweapon.jpg needs to be renamed something along the lines of Autonhandgun - the name clearly shows what the image is about. file:FE8T74GN349.jpg should be simply renamed Auton3, so it comes up much easier in searches.
All images should so what is included (in this case, Autons), then what is the main aspect of the picture (if needed (picture 2 is a prime example of this (handgun))) and lastly the number of the file uploaded. I.e if this was the first Auton image upload it would be Auton1, then Auton 2 ot Autonhandgun1. etc.
Lastly, there should be no files upload just plainly as Auton or Dalek - file names like this should be locked or just plainly used as the main article image. This is stop Users uploading and replacing images which take up valuable file names, when the file names can be put onto a much better image, such as one for the infobox. MM/Want to talk? 16:23, February 12, 2012 (UTC)
- We have T:IUP NAMES, so yes, strings of gibberish are already disallowed. No idea about generic naming of things like Dalek.jpg though. -- Tybort (talk page) 16:30, February 12, 2012 (UTC)
