Could you link to these TOSECISO names and explain what is wrong with them?

But then I'm trying to figure out the logic of a project that goes back like 15 years which is kind of silly, no offense to anyone. It starts out one way and then people don't want to have to change x amount of years of naming conventions, and also opinions, etc. But I think leaving out the version numbers was always a huge mistake. I personally add them to every file I get when it makes it to my hard drive.

EDIT: Re-worded the first sentence and to explain it... a version number is identifying information about what you're playing, and to assume that something doesn't have a different version is very foolish. I came around and dumped a 1.10 of TimeSplitters 6 years after the 2.00 had been dumped, and to my knowledge it wasn't "obvious" or "known" that there was a 1.10; both are black label and plenty of games exist with versions higher than 1.xx without a 1.xx—THAT WE KNOW OF. That's the whole point. Then you just have to go back changing all the games that we find new versions for. It's a bit of a silly method and to... what, save like 5 characters off the filename?

Didnt read all the posts, but when there's multiple versions released of a game, and one of them is undumped, the version can be added to the filename for the one that is dumped. Is that what you mean with New Super Mario Bros. Wii?

When the only currently known release is internally marked as a revised version (so, an earlier one is highly likely to exist, just hasn't been found yet).

For PC: NO NO NO NO NO NO!

Version info is FAR too messy on PC for this to be in the filename. It doesn't belong there.

If you disagree, look at these and consider what the revised filename would be:
http://redump.org/disc/21147/
http://redump.org/disc/45369/
http://redump.org/disc/49850/

And I believe putting the version information for http://redump.org/disc/11223/ in the filename will break stuff since slashes aren't allowed on Windows files.  Yes, that game has two versions. Running sshock.exe gives a version of F1.6S, and running cdshock.exe gives a version of F1.6C.

Besides, I doubt Jackal will ever agree to this change.

No-Intro mostly covers systems that use revisions, so most of the "versions" do start at "v1.00".

However, even that has caveats. For example there may be 1.01 without a 1.00 ever existing.

Still, nothing bad in calling it (v1.01) to motivate people to look/check for (v1.00). Again, as far as I understand, No-Intro names their roms according to the version/revision, if known, even if the existence of the earlier ones is only suggested, not proven.