If someone sees an image of themself which they want removed, they can
1. email OTRS.
whether the request is received by a volunteer and/or anonymous person shouldn't matter. The OTRS policies do matter, esp. the privacy policy.
For added privacy, they should email oversight-en-wp or the commons oversight email address (?).
If the complaint includes unresolved legalities, the OTRS ticket (i.e. email thread) will be sent to the legal team, who are not (afaik) anonymous.
2. create a wiki account and nominate the image for deletion.
3. use the laws available to them.
Are they expected to give their real name,
It depends on the option they take
and how do they prove the image is of them?
If their complaint reaches someone sane, it is unlikely they will be asked to prove anything. A simple assertion should be sufficient to cause the OTRS volunteer to investigate the upload. Often the photo was uploaded by an account with very few edits, and the image would be deleted without much fuss.
I would like to throw this back in a positive direction. The task of deleting poor quality photographs (and metadata/provenance/paperwork is part of quality) is made much easier if we have good quality photographs of the same topic. Nobody cares about deletions of bad photographs when those photographs are no longer used. They do care when it is the only photo of its kind, because it is a precious resource.
As Sarah Stierch points out, our images of sexuality and reproduction are crap, broadly speaking, and our paperwork/processes are self-evidently not good for attracting high quality photographs. What processes should we put in place to encourage good quality photographs of this kind. e.g. should we set up a separate OTRS queue to process the paperwork for these photographs? Should it be managed by verified non-anonymous women only?
-- John Vandenberg