Wikipedia:Requested moves

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by JPG-GR (talk | contribs) at 19:35, 13 August 2008 (→‎8 August 2008: one completed). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Administrator instructions

For requested mergers, see Wikipedia:Proposed mergers. For removals, see Wikipedia:Guide to deletion.

Requested moves is a process for requesting the retitling (moving) of an article, template, or project page on Wikipedia. For retitling files, categories and other items, see When not to use this page.

Please read the article titling policy and the guideline regarding primary topics before moving a page or requesting a page move.

Any autoconfirmed user can use the Move function to perform most moves (see Help:How to move a page). If you have no reason to expect a dispute concerning a move, be bold and move the page. However, it may not always be possible or desirable to do this:

  • Technical reasons may prevent a move; for example, a page may already exist at the target title and require deletion, or the page may be protected from moves. See: § Requesting technical moves.
  • Requests to revert recent, undiscussed, controversial moves may be made at WP:RM/TR. If the new name has not become the stable title, the undiscussed move will be reverted. If the new name has become the stable title, a requested move will be needed to determine the article's proper location.
  • A title may be disputed, and discussion may be necessary to reach consensus: see § Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves. The requested moves process is not mandatory, and sometimes an informal discussion at the article's talk page can help reach consensus.
  • Unregistered and new (not yet autoconfirmed) users are unable to move pages.

Requests are generally processed after seven days. If consensus to move the page is reached at or after this time, a reviewer will carry out the request. If there is a consensus not to move the page, the request will be closed as "not moved". When consensus remains unclear, the request may be relisted to allow more time for consensus to develop, or the discussion may be closed as "no consensus". See Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions for more details on the process.

Wikipedia:Move review can be used to contest the outcome of a move request as long as all steps are followed. If a discussion on the closer's talk page does not resolve an issue, then a move review will evaluate the close of the move discussion to determine whether or not the contested close was reasonable and consistent with the spirit and intent of common practice, policies, and guidelines.

When not to use this page

Shortcuts

Separate processes exist for moving certain types of pages, and for changes other than page moves:

Undiscussed moves

Shortcuts

Autoconfirmed editors may move a page without discussion if all of the following apply:

  • No article exists at the new target title;
  • There has been no previous discussion about the title of the page that expressed any objection to a new title; and
  • It seems unlikely that anyone would reasonably disagree with the move.

If you disagree with a prior bold move, and the new title has not been in place for a long time, you may revert the move yourself. If you cannot revert the move for technical reasons, then you may request a technical move.

Move wars are disruptive, so if you make a bold move and it is reverted, do not make the move again. Instead, follow the procedures laid out in § Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves.

Uncontroversial proposals

Only list proposals here that are clearly uncontroversial but require administrator help to complete (for example, spelling and capitalization fixes). Do not list a proposed page move in this section if there is any possibility that it could be opposed by anyone. Please list new requests at the bottom of the list in this section and use {{subst:RMassist|Old page name|Requested name|Reason for move}} rather than copying previous entries. The template will automatically include your signature. No edits to the article's talk page are required.

If you object to a proposal listed here, please re-list it in the #Incomplete and contested proposals section below.

Incomplete and contested proposals

With the exception of a brief description of the problem or objection to the move request, please do not discuss move requests here. If you support an incomplete or contested move request, please consider following the instructions above to create a full move request, and move the discussion to the "Other Proposals" section below. Requests that remain incomplete after five days will be removed.

  • Meaningless (album) → Meaningless — Unnecessary dab, latter redirects to former. — —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:45, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Contested -- Meaningless was a disambiguation page that is useful as a soft redirect for Wiktionary, as well as the two music related uses of the term. I undid the redirection of the dab page, and suggest we keep things as they are currently. Parsecboy (talk) 00:49, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Template:Infobox Chinese, Taiwanese, Singaporean, Malaysian actor and singer → Template:Infobox Chinese actor and singer —([[Talk:Template:Infobox Chinese, Taiwanese, Singaporean, Malaysian actor and singer#Requested move|Discuss]])— The page was moved by User:Certified.Gangsta with no consensus. Previously it was under Template:Infobox Chinese and used by hundreds of page. He attempted to start a discussion but there was no concensus. The move was then made by himself. Now the template cannot be moved back to its original page without an administrator. --Benjwong (talk) 22:40, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • This is not an "uncontroversial proposals." If you haven't noticed, the current infobox was a compromise hammered out by me and User:Pandacomics in User_talk:Certified.Gangsta#infobox (full length discussion). There are so far no consensus to move it back. I urge admins not to comply with this POV pushing campaign.--Certified.Gangsta (talk) 23:05, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Please note the above user recently tried to delete the whole wikiproject china because of POV reasons. Also, a consensus is not reached by 2 individuals and User:Pandacomics has said here if you would kindly not put random words into his mouth about agreeing into the matter. Dengero (talk) 00:55, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I am beginning to see user Certifiedgangsta has a serious identity problem in a number of articles. The original template was fine. This user is purposely stalling the discussion and moving the template to to affect some thousands of articles. This revert needs to be done asap. Benjwong (talk) 02:02, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Benjwong has been on a crusade to impede my edits and further his POV-pushing agenda.--Certified.Gangsta (talk) 02:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • This is not a suitable forum for discussion of any move. Please restrict your comments to the designated talk page. Thank you. Parsecboy (talk) 03:09, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bundeswehr → Military of Germany — WP:UE — 69.234.124.47 (talk) 21:05, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Contested; the German military is commonly referred to as the Bundeswehr in English-language sources. WP:UE stipulates that we follow English usage, not necessarily use English-language words 100% of the time. Parsecboy (talk) 02:00, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other proposals

Purge the cache to refresh this page

13 August 2008

12 August 2008

  • Equestrian (Roman) → Equestrian Order —(Discuss)— Correct term. The term Equestrian Order is used by historians and appears as such in several books about ancient Rome, it also is mentioned as such in TV documentaries. Basicly it was a social class (below the Senatorial Order) from which the Roman government choose its military and civil officials. One can find 'Equestrian Order' already in several articles. As far as I have been able to determine it is impossible to create an article with this name. The reasons are unknown. --Flamarande (talk) 12:36, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hypertext Transfer Protocol over Secure Socket Layer → https —(Discuss)— I'm requesting to rename this article back to "https", like it used to be until May 2008, when User:Ziggymarley01 moved it to its current name. This move was done without sufficient prior discussion and contrary to WP:COMMONNAME; people rarely write out "Hypertext Transfer Protocol", much less when referring to the secured variant. Furthermore, Secure Sockets Layer has been deprecated, and RFC 2818 actually calls this protocol "HTTP over TLS". Alternatives also include "HTTP/TLS" or "HTTP over TLS", although I am leaning towards https. ---- intgr [talk] 11:52, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

11 August 2008

--Kotniski (talk) 18:06, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Rajah → Rajah (dog) —(Discuss)— On the 10th August there was a move by administrator Zzuuzz who moved Rajah (dog) to Rajah, but I'm not sure of the reasoning. The reason in the history is "unnecessary disambiguation, requested by AmeIiorate". I don't agree - Rajah in it's original language would be far more widely known than that of a NZ sheepdog. Rajah is actually a Sanskrit word for "Prince". Could we please have this move decision reconsidered? - Tbsdy lives (talk) 11:02, 11 August 2008 (UTC) --Tbsdy lives (talk) 11:02, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • MADtv → Mad TV —(Discuss)— MADtv appears to be violating WP:MOSTM to me. "Mad" shouldn't be capitalized since it's not an acronym (like Mad magazine). "Mad TV" appears to be the most common way to spell this television show (it's how the Internet Movie Database [1] and Jump the Shark [2] refers to it) without blatantly trying to imitate the Mad TV logo. --Xnux the Echidna 00:56, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

10 August 2008

  • Merrell boots → Merrell —(Discuss)— Move to simplify and correct name of company. Page is apparently currently protected against creation, yet oddly I was able to edit it manually. Anyway, unable to move by normal means. --DWaterson (talk) 22:39, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • In-Fisherman Bass Hunter 64 → Bass Hunter 64 —(Discuss)— In-Fisherman is not part of the main title, but a sponsored magazine authority on fishing, on the boxes edges and cartridge it is titled only as "Bass Hunter 64" and even on the front and title screen the In-Fisherman logo is separate then the title as the Take-Two and other logos are. I believe that they are separate one the title and the other a logo like the others, some sources have it as part of the title but think it should be listed this way because that is the main title. --Floppydog66 (talk) 21:31, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Josei → Josei manga —(Discuss)— "Josei" means woman in Japanese and women's comics when used in English. As this covers the English meaning of the word, it should be clearer as to what it is. See also shoujo manga. --Malkinann (talk) 20:36, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rania, Queen of Jordan → Queen Rania of Jordan —(Discuss)— This page was moved to a form that does not conform to the existing convention on the naming of queen consorts, and with no clear consensus for the move. It sets a precedent (as the original proposer correctly pointed out) which in my opinion will result in the creation of several unhelpful article names in place of the sensible ones that are currently in use. --Deb (talk) 19:27, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mildred Loving → Mildred and Richard Loving —(Discuss)— This article is really about both of them. Their notability in wikipedia is directly and solely tied to their being a married couple in a significant and historic US Supreme Court ruling reguarding marriage rights. Loving v. Virginia There is no significant chance of either Mildred or Richard ever having their own articles separate from their joint article. As near as I can tell, no editing (or very minor copy editing) of the actual article would be required for the title change, as the article in reality is already about both of them. --Ramsey2006 (talk) 02:14, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

9 August 2008

  • Kingdom of Chile → Captaincy General of Chile —(Discuss)— This is the more common denomination for this territory of the Spanish Empire, and matches the one used for other analagous divisions, like the Captaincy General of Venezuela, Captaincy General of Guatemala, etc. There is a page for "Captaincy General of Chile," but it is just a redirect to "Kingdom of Chile." --TriniMuñoz (talk) 04:24, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Canute the Great → Cnut —(Discuss)— Essentially, "Canute" is a character of legend, who tried to stop the incoming tide; "Knud den Store" is how the historical figure is known in Danish - i.e., he's not generally known as "Canute/Cnut the Great" in English; "Cnut" was a king of England. Though there is already a page "Cnut", it is only a re-direct. --Nortonius (talk) 00:49, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

8 August 2008

Backlog

Move dated sections here after five days have passed (May 15 or older).

I've requested further input on this request from WT:WikiProject Guitarists. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 00:39, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requested_moves&oldid=231743353"