On 05/03/2014 07:57, dan entous wrote:
hi james,
glad to hear that you're getting ready to upload with gwtoolset. sorry that
you're running into an issue. at the moment the following characters are
replaced with a '-' in a title without a method to override any of them:
'#','<','>','[',']','|','{','}',':','¬','`','!','"','£','$','^','&','*','(',')','+','=','~','?',',',';',"'",'@'
this list was comprised based on several wiki articles:
* https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:File_naming
*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(technical_restrictions)
* http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Bad_title
* http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Titleblacklist
i'm not sure who would or what process would “approve” the issue of relaxing
that restriction to also allow the characters: '(',')',','. maybe someone else
on this list would know. my guess is that if the commons admins and community
are okay with it, then we can go ahead and allow those characters, but i don't
know how that's done. maybe via an rfc or village pump article with votes ...
In respect of the list above, the links actually indicate a lot of
flexiblity.
From http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Bad_title it's clear that
there is no technical problem with most of the characters -- it gives
the example of
Some¬`!"£$^&*()_+-=~?/.,;:'@
as something the software could handle, if necessary.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Titleblacklist highlight
some characters that would be a problem, but they are a lot more
esoteric than anything I want (so long as none of my filenames contain
rude parts of the body).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_%28technical_restrictions%29
contains a much shorter list of restricted characters - just
# < > [ ] | { }
which leaves
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:File_naming
with its rather vague statement to
"Avoid "funny" symbols (control characters, unneeded punctuation, etc.)
that might be significant in future wiki markup."
(Vagueness in the draft seems to be one reason why it has never been
adopted, but is still only a working proposal).
For me, the apostrophe in
St John's Gospel
or
Cicero's Aratus
or
Breviari d'Amour
*is* essential punctuation, and the strange and unreadable
Breviari d--39-Amour
is not an acceptable substitute.
Similarly parentheses and commas are used in the names of so many
images, that it would break far too much now for them ever to become
"significant in future wiki markup".
I can request confirmation at Commons:Village Pump if it is really
necessary; but just doing what the other bots do, per Jean-Frédéric's
suggestion, seems a good way to go.
Sorry to keep harping on this, but as I said in my other post, it's
really blocking me, because a full reupload of the files is going to be
the only sane way to sort these issues out; and until that's happened I
can't do anything to integrate these files into the wiki, because it
will all just get wiped out (as will the work of anybody else who tries
to work on or with them).
So if this isn't too big a fix to ask, I would be very very grateful.
All best,
James.
_______________________________________________
Glamtools mailing list
Glamtools@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools
