Wikipedia:Requested moves

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Closing instructions

"WP:RM" redirects here. For requested mergers, see Wikipedia:Proposed mergers. For removals, see Wikipedia:Guide to deletion. For page history mergers, see Wikipedia:Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen.
Click here to purge this page
Shortcuts:

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 our article titling policy and our 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, such as when a page may already exist at the target title and require deletion, or if the page to be moved is protected from moves. In these circumstances, administrator help is required to move a page, see below: § Requesting technical moves.
  • A title may be subject to dispute, and discussion may be necessary in order to reach consensus, see below: § Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves. It is not always necessary to use the requested move process in these circumstances: one option is to start an informal discussion at the article's talk page instead.
  • Unregistered users and new (not yet autoconfirmed) users do not have the capability to move pages. They must request moves using this process.

Most move requests are processed by a group of regular contributors who are familiar with Wikipedia naming conventions, non-binding precedents, and page moving procedures. Requests are generally processed after seven days, although backlogs often develop. If there is a clear consensus after this time, or if the requested move is uncontroversial or technical, the request will be closed and acted upon. If not, the closer may choose to re-list the request to allow more time for consensus to develop, or close it as "no consensus". For the processes involved in closing requests, performing moves, and cleaning up after moves, see Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions. For a list of all processed moves, see Special:Log/move.

To contest a close, the Move review process is designed to evaluate a contested close of a move discussion to determine if the close was reasonable, or whether it was inconsistent with the spirit and intent of Wikipedia common practice, policies, or guidelines.

When not to use this page[edit]

Shortcuts:

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

Undiscussed moves[edit]

Anyone can be bold and move a page without discussing it first and gaining an explicit consensus on the talk page. In line with the bold, revert, discuss cycle, if you consider such a move to be controversial, and the new title has not been in place for a long time, you may revert the move. If you can not 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 potentially controversial moves.

Requesting technical moves[edit]

Shortcut:

The discussion process is used for potentially controversial moves. If any of the following apply to a desired move, treat it as potentially controversial:

  • There is an existing article (not just a redirect) at the target title;
  • There has been any past debate about the best title for the page;
  • Someone could reasonably disagree with the move.

If a desired move is uncontroversial and technical in nature (e.g. spelling), please feel free to move the page yourself. If the page has recently been moved without discussion, you may revert the move and initiate a discussion on its talk page. In either case, if you are unable to complete the move, request it below.

{{subst:RMassist|<!--old page name, without brackets-->|<!--requested name, without brackets-->|reason= <!--reason for move-->}}
This will automatically insert a bullet and include your signature. Do not edit the article's talk page.
  • If you object to a proposal listed in the uncontroversial technical requests section, please move it to the Contested technical requests section.
  • Alternatively, if the only obstacle to an uncontroversial move is another page in the way, you can ask for the deletion of the other page. This may apply, for example, if the other page is currently a redirect to the article to be moved, a redirect with no incoming links, or an unnecessary disambiguation page with a minor edit history. To request the other page be deleted, add the following code to the top of the page that is in the way:
{{db-move|<!--page to be moved here-->|<!--reason for move-->}}
This will list the undesired page for deletion under criterion for speedy deletion G6. If the page is a redirect, place the code above the redirection. For a list of articles being considered for uncontroversial speedy deletion, see Category:Candidates for uncontroversial speedy deletion.

Uncontroversial technical requests[edit]

Contested technical requests[edit]

Requests to revert undiscussed moves[edit]

Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves[edit]

Shortcut:

Use this process if there is any reason to believe a move would be contested. For technical move requests (e.g. spelling and capitalization fixes), see Requesting technical moves.

Do not put more than one open move request on the same article talk page, as this is not supported by the bot that handles updates to this page. Multiple closed move requests may be on the same page, but each should have a unique section heading.

Requesting a single page move[edit]

(To propose moving more than one page—for example, moving a disambiguation page in order to move another page to that title—see "Requesting multiple page moves" below.)

To request a single page move, edit at the bottom of the talk page of the article you want moved, using this format:

{{subst:Requested move|NewName|reason=Place here your rationale for the proposed page name change, ideally referring to applicable naming convention policies and guidelines, and providing evidence in support where appropriate. If your reasoning includes search engine results, please present Google Books or Google News Archive results before providing other web results. Do not sign this.}}

Replace NewName with the requested new name of the page (or with a question mark, if you want more than one possible new name to be considered). Leave the Subject/headline blank, as the template automatically creates the heading "Requested move 26 January 2015". Do not sign a request with ~~~~ as the template does this automatically. The template must be substituted.

Use the code |talk=yes to add separate locations for survey and discussion.

Note: Unlike certain other request processes on Wikipedia, nominations should not be neutral. Strive to make your point as best you can; use evidence (such as Ngrams and pageview statistics) and make reference to applicable policies and guidelines, especially our article titling policy and the guideline on disambiguation and primary topic. After the nomination has been made, nominators may nevertheless add a separate bullet point to support their nomination, but should add "as nominator" (for example,  * '''Rename, as nominator''': ...). Most nominators, however, simply allow the nomination itself to indicate what their opinion is. Nominators may also participate in the discussion along with everyone else, and often should.

Requesting multiple page moves[edit]

A single template may be used to request multiple related moves. On one of the talk pages of the affected articles, create a request and format it as below. A sample request for three page moves is shown here (for two page moves, omit the lines for current3 and new3). For four page moves, add lines for current4 and new4, and so on. There is no technical limit on the number of multiple move requests, but before requesting very large multi-moves, consider whether a naming convention should be changed first. Discuss that change on the talk page for the naming convention, e.g., Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (sportspeople).

{{subst:requested move
| new1 = New title for page 1 with the talk page hosting this discussion
| current2 = Current title of page 2
| new2 = New title for page 2
| current3 = Current title of page 3
| new3 = New title for page 3
| reason = Place here your rationale for the proposed page name change, ideally referring to applicable naming convention policies and guidelines, and providing evidence in support where appropriate. If your reasoning includes search engine results, please default to Google Books or Google News Archive before providing any web results. Do not sign this.}}

For example, to propose moving the articles Wikipedia and Wiki, put this template on Talk:Wikipedia, and replace current2 with Wiki. The discussion for all affected articles is held on the talk page of the article at page 1 (Talk:Wikipedia). Do not sign a request with ~~~~ as the template does this automatically. Do not skip pairs of numbers.

RMCD bot automatically places a notice section on the talk page of the additional pages that are included in your request, advising that the move discussion is in progress, where it is, and that all discussion for all pages included in the request should take place at that one location.

Relisting[edit]

Relisting a discussion moves the request out of the backlog up to the current day in order to encourage further input. The decision to relist a discussion is best left to uninvolved experienced editors upon considering, but declining, to close the discussion. Preferably, a reason for the relist will be given. When a relisted discussion reaches a resolution, it may be closed at any time according to the closing instructions.

To relist a move request discussion, simply type <small>'''Relisted'''. ~~~~</small> before the initial requester's first timestamp (see this diff for an example). This can also be done by using {{subst:Relisting}}, which signs the relisting automatically. The RMCD bot uses the new timestamp to relist the entry on this page.

If discussion has become stale, or it seems that discussion would benefit from more input of editors versed in the subject area, consider more widely publicizing the discussion. One option is to notify relevant WikiProjects of the discussion using the template {{RM notification}}. Applicable WikiProjects can often be determined by means of the banners placed at the top of the talk page hosting the move request.

Current discussions[edit]

Shortcut:
This section lists all requests filed or identified as potentially controversial which are currently under discussion.

This list is also available in a page-link-first format.

January 26, 2015[edit]

  • (Discuss)Railroad Man's MagazineRailroad MagazineRailroad Magazine appears to be both the longest-used and the latest name of this magazine. According to the article's text, this magazine was called Railroad Magazine (with "Magazine" in small letters to the right on at least the last issue) from 1937 to 1979 merger (42 years), and is still part of the successor's name as Railfan & Railroad (35 years); by contrast, The Railroad Man's Magazine was only in use from 1909 to 1919 and 1929 to 1932 (13 years). --Relisted.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:57, 26 January 2015 (UTC) Closeapple (talk) 18:44, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Islamic State of Iraq and the LevantIslamic State of Iraq and Syria – or to ISIS (Islamist rebel group). ISIS is the most common English language reference to the group in reference to the Arabic title "ad-Dawlah al-Islāmīyah fī al-‘Irāq wash-Shām". This title is also rendered into English as "Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant", "Islamic State of Iraq and Syria", "Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham" or "ISIL" and is also represented as "Da‘ish" or "DAESH", the acronym of the Arabic title but ISIS remains in common usage. *A major advantage of Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant is that it uses natural disambiguation and refers to a more accurate translation of "al-Sham". *A major advantage of Islamic State of Iraq and Syria is that it uses natural disambiguation and links smoothly with the commonly used acronym ISIS. *A major advantage of ISIS (Islamist rebel group) is that it uses the commonly used ISIS format. [This suggestion comes in the context of a recent RM to Islamic State (islamist rebel group)]. Context A wide range of scholars and groups reject the use of the title "Islamic State" on the basis of the religious and political implications of the title. Reference can be made to other groups with Mohammedan based faiths ranging from nations to other rebel groups in conflict with ISIS, and a wide range or representatives in the international community. The group describes itself as "Islamic State". Ban-Ki Moon stated, "As Muslim leaders around the world have said, groups like ISIL – or Da’ish -- have nothing to do with Islam, and they certainly do not represent a state. They should more fittingly be called the "Un-Islamic Non-State" and Muslim leaders sticking to religious angles have described it as the un-Islamic State. With these two extremes of presentations I think that NPOV demands that we don't become a soapbox for either side and that a relevant rendering of "ad-Dawlah al-Islāmīyah fī al-‘Irāq wash-Shām" be used. At one extreme I personally think that, in this context, questionable unqualified use of the title "Islamic State" has been made by news groups such as agency Reuters from early times. At the other extreme, notable Arabic news groups make sole use of terms such as ISIL, ISIS and Daesh. Another issue is that we already have an article on Islamic state. GregKaye 11:38, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

January 25, 2015[edit]

  • (Discuss)Canada Gate and Canada MemorialCanada Memorial – The Canada Gate (designed in 1905) and the Canada Memorial (designed in 1992), although located quite close to one another, are separate subjects and should not have the same Wikidata items. I have moved the content on the gate to Canada Gate, formerly a redirect, leaving the remaining text to cover the memorial as the article links with fr:Mémorial du Canada on Wikidata. Ham II (talk) 21:48, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)ImbrosGökçeada – Previous discussion ended with no consensus. "Imbros" is the island's previous name which is much less commonly used today. As User:Aditdigo said, why should we use a Greek name for a Turkish island when we don't do it vice versa? --Relisted. EdJohnston (talk) 02:41, 25 January 2015 (UTC) Liongrande (talk) 22:29, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Electron magnetic dipole momentElectron magnetic moment – (1) The term "electron magnetic moment" is the more common term compared to "electron magnetic dipole moment" even for when the dipole moment is meant (per both a Google search and a Google books search); (2) This article is the natural place to include magnetic moments of all orders, even though the dipole moment is the only one usually considered (one would not create separate articles for the other electron magnetic moments). —Quondum 02:22, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Pink (singer)P!nk – This is a unique situation. The subject of this article has consistently used only the coined stage name, P!nk, a term that resembles a word with a clear primary topic (the color, pink). Although the "singer" has therefore been disambiguated, the current disambiguator is insufficient because the fictional protagonist of the Pink Floyd album and film, The Wall is also a singer whose name is given only as "Pink". See the IMDB description of "The Wall" ("Storyline" section), stating: "The movie tells the story of rock singer "Pink" who is sitting in his hotel room in Los Angeles, burnt out from the music business and only able to perform on stage with the help of drugs"; John Kenneth Muir, Singing a New Tune: The Rebirth of the Modern Film Musical (2005), p. 71: "Pink Floyd: The Wall... starred Bob Geldof as a strange cat named Pink, and his odd, psychologically fragile existence was punctuated by a terrific, pounding sound track from Pink Floyd's Roger Waters"; Will Romano, Mountains Come Out of the Sky: The Illustrated History of Prog Rock (2010): "The Wall, centered on an aging, emotionally and detached rocker named Pink, who's fallen prey to his fears, perhaps much like Waters". (An added irony is that Pink Floyd is itself named in part after a blues singer named Pink Anderson). In order to avoid confusion with the fictional singer, "Pink", this title requires either further disambiguation (making it even more unnatural relative to its origins), or disambiguation by using the subject's actual real-world stage name, which is not "Pink" but "P!nk". The relevant portion of the disambiguation guideline (WP:NCDAB) specifically states that "[n]atural disambiguation is generally preferable to parenthetical disambiguation", and that "[i]f natural disambiguation is not available, a parenthetical is used". Here, natural disambiguation is available, and the parenthetical can be avoided altogether. Like Deadmau5 and Tech N9ne, this subject has been completely consistent in using only "P!nk" (see album covers in Can't Take Me Home, Missundaztood, Try This, The Truth About Love (Pink album), Funhouse Tour: Live in Australia, and so on). This form notably has been used by major media outlets like the BBC, the Chicago Tribune, CNN, Fox News, and the Washington Post: * Luis Gomez, "Sighting: P!nk dines at Frasca Pizzeria, Crosby's Kitchen", Chicago Tribune (January 10, 2014). * Hollie McKay, "P!nk's main goal with new record: 'Just don't suck'", Fox News (September 25, 2012). * Jaime Gill, "P!nk Greatest Hits…So Far!!! Review" BBC (2010) * "Grammys 2014: Winners list" CNN (January 27, 2014), noting "Just Give Me a Reason -- P!nk featuring Nate Ruess". * Emily Yahr, "People’s Choice Awards: Jennifer Hudson and other standout moments" (January 9, 2014), listing "P!nk" for several categories. * Allmusic.com also denotes this subject as P!nk. This is not to suggest that there are not also many sources that use "Pink", but that an equivalent quality of sources use the subject's own consistently used version. WP:NCDAB states that natural disambiguation is preferable to a parenthetical "even without being the most common term". Furthermore, there is no source which uses our exact title, "Pink (singer)", making this a good candidate for natural disambiguation. The naturalness of this title is exemplified by the fact that in the last 90 days, the existing redirect P!nk has received over 15,000 pageviews, indicating that a large number of readers are expecting the article to be titled "P!nk". Note that this subject is not comparable to Ke$ha because in that case, the singer's given name is "Kesha" (of which Ke$ha is a variation), while in this case the singer's given name is Alicia, and her stage name is not a variation of any existing thing; and because there is no other use of "Kesha" requiring disambiguation (natural or otherwise); and because Kesha has been inconsistent in the use of that stylization, and has since officially dropped it altogether, while P!nk has been entirely consistent throughout her career. I have not designated this as a multimove, but I think it goes without saying that per WP:CONSUB, this would apply to all subtopics, category names, and so forth. bd2412 T 00:40, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

January 24, 2015[edit]

  • (Discuss)Raymond Wong (film presenter)Raymond Wong Bak-ming – Or Raymond Wong Pak-ming. Because he is not a primary topic, he is deservingly disambiguated. However, the parenthetical disambiguation looks awkward at best. There is nobody disambiguated as "film presenter". This guy has been an actor, a director, a producer, a screenwriter, and a presenter. Sources like Xiamen and The Star use "Bak"; other sources use "Pak", like SCMP and Hollywood Reporter. Per WP:NATURALDIS, parenthetical disambiguation would have been suitable solution if natural disambiguation is not possible. However, these sources make these proposed names possible. By the way, he can't be confused with the other guy, Raymond Wong (actor), also called Raymond Wong Ho-yin. George Ho (talk) 21:32, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)ErbilArbil – See "The Concise Dictionary of World Place-Names" (3.Ed),Oxford University, 2014, ISBN 9780191751394. Quote: Arbīl, (Iraq) Urbillum, Arba Elu/Arba llha, Arbelles; Evolved from the Babylonian name '(The City of) Four Gods' from arba 'four' and ilan 'gods'. The Greeks called it Arbelles. It is also spelt Irbīl. The de facto Kurdish capital, it is largely populated by Kurds and they call it Halwer. DerHandelsreisende (talk) 21:07, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)German Army (1935–46)German Army (Wehrmacht) – The article title makes a controversial statement as to the exact date of the dissolution of the German Army. No reliable sources have been produced to support the claim. The new name has been suggested on the WikiProject Military History talk page, where the matter has been discussed in the past days. ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 06:19, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Away team (disambiguation)Away team – Away team (without "disambiguation") is the correct target. For some strange reason that I cannot figure out, an editor had redirected the title to Star Trek: Away Team. That is most certainly not the primary target for the term. This problem had been raised on the talk page in the past with no response. There is no primary topic, as away mission is another synonym that was mistakenly redirected. What links here is pretty clear on this ( [2], [3], [4]) so this is really routine housekeeping that somebody screwed up. Viriditas (talk) 02:12, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

January 23, 2015[edit]

  • (Discuss)Richard de Beaumis (died 1162)Richard de Belmeis II – There seems no obvious reason for using the present article name. It is likely to confuse readers, who are extremely unlikely to find it elsewhere: I haven't. Belmeis is the form of the name generally used in literature on the subject. The modernised form Beaumais is occasionally found, although it is generally given as an alternative to Belmeis. (Oddly, older sources are more likely to use the modernised form.) Both represent the name given to a number of French villages: the Belmeis form is simply the most common 11th-12th century spelling. (See the French wikipedia article on Beaumais in Calvados). The Roman number is generally used to differentiate the two Bishops of London of the same name, e.g. in Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicana and in Eyton's Antiquities of Shropshire. "Richard Belmeis II" has been used before but that article contains only a redirect and the Talk page seems empty, so not entirely sure why the move won't go ahead. Have canvassed opinion and the move seems uncontroversial. The subject is unlikely to complain, as died in 1162. Have moved his uncle to Richard de Belmeis I. Sjwells53 (talk) 21:53, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

The problem is there isn't ONE Mormon Church. While the LDS Church claims to be the only one, there are hundreds of sects claiming to be the true "Mormon church". Additionally, even the LDS Church doesn't use "Mormon Church", despite the fact the some people choose to call it that. --- ARTEST4ECHO (talk) 17:35, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

  • (Discuss)'Art'Art (play) – Echoing the question raised above, while the original does have quotation marks in the title, this play has been translated and shown around the world, and in the English-speaking world is not always written with the quotation marks, see e.g. this article from last year. Therefore I don't believe this "minor detail" enough to disambiguate this play. Timmyshin (talk) 07:20, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

January 22, 2015[edit]

  • (Discuss)Product lifecycle managementProduct lifecycle – The article at that place I converted to an R to this one, today (see WP:RFD). I think this should go to "Product Lifecycle" as the shorter name. The article that was there before I made the redirect had multiple issues including OR and no sources, whereas this article has lots of sources and no OR. It's kinda OK that it sits where it stands, but I think better if it were at the primary Product lifecycle, with of course this becoming an {{R from move}} to preserve history etc. I think it would just be easier for people to search it that way. PLM is a DAB page, so that's easily fixed up depending on the result of this request. Si Trew (talk) 22:28, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)MookgophongNaboomspruit – Eight years after it was officially renamed, Naboomspruit remains the most common name for the town. As far as I can tell, this is the only South African town for which the article's title is not also the common name. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 21:23, 22 January 2015 (UTC) (talk) 06:50, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Las PalmasLas Palmas de Gran Canaria – Original page was named Las Palmas de Gran Canaria as per its official name, but was surprisingly and swiftly renamed to Las Palmas in January 2012 on the contention that it is its "common name in English". However, this is open to a number of controversies: # It contradicts the city's actual name; # It leads to confusion between the names of the city, the island it is located in, and the province to which both belong (Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Gran Canaria, and Las Palmas, respectively); # It is a cause for common misconceptions, at a geographic (similar-sounding island of La Palma, also in the Canary Islands, and the city of Palma de Mallorca, colloquially shortened to "Palma", in the distant but still Spanish Balearic islands), political (name of island deliberately being confused with short-form name of the city, see below), and cultural level; # It is the cause of nationalist tension, with politically-biased proponents from other islands lobbying for a name change of the full island to "Las Palmas" on unsubstantiated claims that nobody uses the full name ("de Gran Canaria") anyway, and that the whole island should change its name to keep up with popular use vs. official naming; # Applying a simple benchmarking analysis, other cities around the globe also have "commonly used names" (in English and in other languages) that differ from the official name in that same language, which has not been used as a reason to change the page name. For example, in U.S., the most common way to refer to Washington, D.C. is simply "DC", despite which the city's article hasn't been renamed to DC, which is a disambiguation page. In Mexico, the most common way to refer to Mexico City is simply "el DF", but the page name remains unchanged, also in Spanish (see México, D.F.). As for the translated English version, "Mexico City" is the proper (official, if you will) name in English of Mexico's capital city, the same way that Venice is the proper English name for "Venezia". There is a proper translated name, which Wikipedia seems to regularly accept, and then there are popular misuses and misconceptions when translating a city's name, which Wikipedia seems to be condoning in this instance alone. Applying the same logic as in the Washington, D.C and Mexico, D.F. cases, the article's name should remain as "Las Palmas de Gran Canaria", with "Las Palmas" holding the current disambiguation page; and # Finally, there's Wikipedia's own rules and guidelines. Apart from WP:ON, there is also WP:WIAN (particularly the section dealing with Multiple Local Names) that should be taken into account. The city of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria has only one official local name, and one proper translation. Also, under WP:ON there is a lengthy explanation about when it is okay to use common names in lieu of official names, citing obscurity, competing authorities and frequent name changes as a reason to use common instead of official geographic names. None of these are at issue with the city of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, despite which its original article was renamed, it must be concluded, without proper justification. For completeness, note also that Wikipedia's manual of style recommending common vs. official names hasn't prevented the article about Madras being named Chennai (i.e. using the official name since 1996 to the detriment of its former and far more commonly used name in English outside of India). As a result, given the absence of any reasoning or discussion when the decision was taken to move Las Palmas de Gran Canaria → Las Palmas, the arguments above speak to the need to revert the page name back to Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, keeping "Las Palmas" as a disambiguation page. As long as Wikipedia wishes to still be factually correct, that is. – 2620:0:1050:9:6119:9380:88BE:4BF0 (talk) 19:19, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Nineveh ProvinceNineveh Governorate – Common format per Template:Governorates of Iraq. Wikipedia uses "governorate" to describe the primary administrative divisions in Iraq, not "province". These were all in the format "Place Governorate" until a series of undiscussed moves by User:EStudent 82 on 14 February 2012 (the user is no longer active on Wikipedia). The user was contacted at the time as he/she had made the move at Baghdad Governorate by cut and paste, and undertook to use the Requested move process in future. He/She subsequently made a further undiscussed move at Baghdad Governorate two days later. All the other governorates have subsequently been reverted. Skinsmoke (talk) 19:12, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)MGM - AEG ArenaLas Vegas Arena – This under-construction arena seems to now have an official name, so there is no reason to continue using a descriptive title (I believe the current name was invented by Wikipedia). The name Las Vegas Arena is used on the official site: [5] [6], in recent news sources: [7] [8] [9] [10] [11], and in official MGM documents: [12]. If there is any confusion about other arenas in Las Vegas, that can be handled with a hatnote. --Relisted.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:58, 22 January 2015 (UTC) Toohool (talk) 07:47, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)MHz WorldViewMHz Worldview – The article was moved from the latter title (with a lower-case V) to the current one (with a capital V) about four and a half years ago. This is a proposal to revert the article to its original title. MHz Networks spells the name with a lower-case V,[1] as do the great majority of web pages found by a Google search.[2] Although MOS:TMRULES states that “CamelCase may be used where it reflects general usage and makes the trademark more readable”,[3] neither of these criteria seems to apply here (worldview is as valid as world view[4]). The editor who moved the page did not give a reason for doing so in the edit summary,[5] and has not responded to a request for an explanation.[6]
    References
  1. ^ "ABOUT THE CHANNEL". MHz Networks. Retrieved 22 January 2015. 
  2. ^ "MHZ WORLDVIEW". Google. Retrieved 22 January 2015. 
  3. ^ "MOS:TMRULES". Retrieved 22 January 2015.
  4. ^ "worldview: definition of worldview in Oxford dictionary (American English) (US)". Oxford Dictionaries. Oxford University Press. Retrieved 22 January 2015. 
  5. ^ "MHz WorldView, 20:08, 21 May 2010". Wikipedia. Retrieved 22 January 2015. 
  6. ^ "User talk:Shortride". Retrieved 22 January 2015.

 :—Quick and Dirty User Account (talk) 12:00, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

  • (Discuss)Pirkka (magazine)PirkkaPirkka is currently a redirect to Birkarls with no incoming links to the redirect. The corresponding Finnish article is named fi:Pirkkalaiset and not "Pirkka" or "Pirkat". The article about Birkarls does not even mention "Pirkka" or "Pirkat" but just "Pirkkalaiset" and "Pirkkamiehet". Also Pirkka is a Finnish male first name. Therefore I would suggest a topic with an actual article would be the primary topic instead of a redirect. JIP | Talk 07:39, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)PEGIDAPegida – The article was moved back to "PEGIDA" because I requested it. I have no regrets on doing so. In fact, making "Pegida" a part of the sentence is hard to detect. "PEGIDA" is easier to recognize in body content. That aside, I want a proper discussion on the proposed title. By the way, I neither support nor oppose this, so I'm abstaining myself from voting for either title. Which is more commonly used, "PEGIDA" or "Pegida"? George Ho (talk) 02:38, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

January 21, 2015[edit]

  • (Discuss)Dušan Tadić (footballer)Dušan Tadić – The rationale for currently titling him "Dušan Tadić (footballer)" is that a Serbian war criminal also used that name, despite his page being titled "Duško Tadić". The footballer's page views, even with the spike from scoring against Manchester United, absolutely dwarf those of the war criminal, whose name in reliable sources is Dusko not Dusan anyway. I propose to delete the disambiguation page, and put a hatnote on the footballer's article saying "For the Bosnian Serb war criminal also known as Dušan Tadić, see Duško Tadić" --Relisted.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:05, 21 January 2015 (UTC) '''tAD''' (talk) 01:18, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Pottawatomie MassacrePottawatomie massacre – Since guidelines, sources, and two-thirds of responding editors favor lowercase, it hard to see why the article was not moved after the previous RM discussion. Can we try again? See detailed data and analysis in the previous discussion. Dicklyon (talk) 04:46, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

January 20, 2015[edit]

  • (Discuss)HyperchromicityHypochromicity – There is actually no such thing as hyperchromicity. The interaction of the the electron dipole moments of the bases in DNA and RNA results in a decrease in absorbance, which is referred to as hypochromicity. For reference, see the classic text: BIOPHYSICAL CHEMISTRY, Part II: Techniques for the study of biological structure and function, Cantor, C.R. and Schimmel, P. R., 1980, W.H. Freeman, chapter 7 . Spincole (talk) 18:45, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Hakari (river)Hakari – To remove unnecessary disambiguator "(river)". Currently Hakari is just a redirect to a disambiguation page. This could be covered by a simple hatnote on this article. --Relisted.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:21, 20 January 2015 (UTC) Bermicourt (talk) 11:19, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Karkar RiverKarkar – 1. The normal convention for European rivers is "Foo". 2. "Karkar" is 10 times more common than "Karkar River" on google books. 3. "Foo River" implies "River" is part of the proper name and 4. Karkar is currently just a redirect to this page. For all these reasons and for simplicity this should be moved to "Karkar" --Relisted.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:20, 20 January 2015 (UTC) Bermicourt (talk) 12:05, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Kura RiverKura – 1. The normal convention for European rivers is "Foo". 2. "Kura" appears to be several times more common than "Kura River" on google books. 3. "Foo River" implies "River" is part of the proper name which IMHO it isn't and 4. looking at the disambiguation page for Kura this is a huge river that appears to be the primary topic amongst those just named "Kura". For all these reasons and for simplicity I suggest we move this to "Kura" and move "Kura" to "Kura (disambiguation)". --Relisted.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:20, 20 January 2015 (UTC) Bermicourt (talk) 14:11, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Smilga RiverSmilga – 1. The usual river naming convention in Europe, including Lithuania, is "Foo" - see Category:Rivers of Lithuania; this is an odd man out. 2. Smilga already redirects here so we are only moving the article over a redirect, but for some reason this needs admin intervention. --Relisted.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:19, 20 January 2015 (UTC) Bermicourt (talk) 15:10, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Vilnia RiverVilnia – 1. The usual river naming convention in Europe, including Lithuania, is "Foo" - see Category:Rivers of Lithuania; this is an odd man out. 3. Vilnia already redirects here so we are only moving the article over a redirect, but this one needs admin intervention. The above vote was 9 years ago by a - now banned - editor. --Relisted.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:19, 20 January 2015 (UTC) Bermicourt (talk) 15:15, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Alfred Ingvald NæssAlfred Næss – Not sure why this page was moved in the other direction back in 2007. In the article, in the sources, in Google hits, the subject of the article is mostly referenced as "Alfred", not "Alfred Ingvald" (Google: 182,000 vs 28,800). The article even says – albeit unreferenced – that he called himself "Alfred". Additionally, "Alfred Ingvald" is only two of his three given names. HandsomeFella (talk) 06:39, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

January 19, 2015[edit]

  • (Discuss)Twenty-four kohanic giftsTwenty-four priestly giftsWikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) and the policy to use the most common terminology. After checking with Google Scholar, it is clear that Twenty-four priestly gifts is by far the best title pursuant to Wikipedia policy. Kohanic only had one hit. The term "priestly gifts" is used by numerous academic reliable sources (and Jewish POV sources, too). Search here twenty-four "priestly gifts"[13] includes Flatto, Fox, Zahavy, Chernick, Mortensen, Neusner, Ostrer, Labovitz, Schiffman, Visotzky, Schwartz. See also books and G-books search cited above by another editor [14]. Thanks! ProfGray (talk) 20:58, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)LBC London News 1152LBC London News – Although the station's schedule page on LBC's website refers to its name as "LBC London News 1152"; on the radio, the station is now, as far as I am aware, only referred to as "LBC London News", without the 1152 suffix. On London DAB, the station is also labelled simply as "LBC London News". The station's new logo (viewable on Radio Player) is also devoid of any reference to 1152. I would have conducted the move by myself had it not been for the anomaly on the schedule page. --Relisted.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:00, 19 January 2015 (UTC) Khairul Islam 02:48, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Weihsien CompoundWeihsien Internment Camp – Common name as indicated by discussion on this page and Google Books search: "Weihsien Internment Camp" 294, "Weihsien Compound" 53, "Weixian Internment Camp" 34, and "Weixian Compound" 1. --Relisted.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:04, 19 January 2015 (UTC) BabelStone (talk) 09:56, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Quartier des SpectaclesQuartier des spectacles – This is a French name, in which the "s" is lowercase. The Quartier des spectacles official website uses a lowercase "s" in both languages, while English-language reliables sources such as the Montreal Gazette capitalize it both ways. So we should default to the correct French capitalization. --Relisted.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:09, 19 January 2015 (UTC) Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:46, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)LannaLan Na – "Lan Na" is the correct transcription according to the Royal Thai General System of Transcription (RTGS) rules, the most established transcription rule for Thai. Lan="one million" and Na="rice field" are two separate words in Thai and are therefore to be spelled separately per RTGS rules. This spelling is also used by many reliable sources, authored by experts on Thai, and especially Northern Thai (i.e. Lan Na), history and/or culture, e.g.: * Fredrick W. Bunce (2004). Buddhist Textiles of Laos, Lan Na, and the Isan. D.K.  * Susan Conway (2002). Silken Threads Lacquer Thrones: Lan Na Court Textiles. River Books.  * Volker Grabowsky, ed. (1995). Regions and National Integration in Thailand, 1892-1992. Harrassowitz Verlag.  * Foon Ming Liew-Herres; Volker Grabowsky (2008). Lan Na in Chinese historiography. Institute of Asian Studies, Chulalongkorn University.  * Patit Paban Mishra (2010). The History of Thailand. Greenwood.  * Mayoury & Pheuiphanh Ngaosyvathn (1998). Paths to Conflagration. Cornell Southeast Asia Program.  * Sarassawadee Ongsakul (2005). History of Lan Na. Silkworm Books.  * Carol Stratton (2004). Buddhist Sculpture of Northern Thailand. Silkworm Books.  * David K. Wyatt (2003). Thailand: A Short History. Yale University Press.  "Lan Na" is also (in my opinion) a better rendering of the actual pronunciation as both "a"s are long (while "Lanna" wrongly implies a short "a") and the two "n"s are pronounced separately. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 01:42, 19 January 2015 (UTC) RJFF (talk) 15:33, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Buddha Yodfa ChulalokeRama I – A new attempt (earlier discussion ended with no consensus for either title) to move the articles about the three first Siamese kings of the Chakri dynasty to their most common names in English-language reliable sources. In all standard works about Thai history (including Wyatt, Thailand: A Short History; Baker/Pasuk, A History of Thailand; Mishra, The History of Thailand) the first three Chakri kings are always refered to as Rama+ordinal number and not by the names they have in Thai chronicles and history books. Moreover "Rama x" was officially sanctioned by Rama VI. (Vajiravudh) for use by foreigners. The conventions of Thai chronicles and history books are not relevant for English-language Wikipedia. Wikipedia should follow the usage in the most relevant works of English-language expert literature and not try to establish a different usage. This is also the essence of the applicable naming convention guidelines: use common names and use English. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 01:41, 19 January 2015 (UTC) --RJFF (talk) 16:02, 11 January 2015 (UTC) RJFF (talk) 16:02, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Cryolipolysis → ? – According to The Daily Mail, Cryolipolysis is a trademark of Zeltiq Aesthetics, who use it in the CoolSculpting device. The technique was developed at the Massachusetts General Hospital and licensed to Zeltiq in exchange for royalties.[1] If Zeltiq does in fact own the trademark, that would seem to make it technically impossible for there to be other "Cryolipolysis" devices, besides counterfeits[2] and DIY[20]. The wording in medical journals did not make it entirely clear to me whether Cryolipolysis and CoolSculpting were virtually synonymous or whether Cryolipolysis was a much broader technique used in other applications, as different sources had slightly different wordings. Should we have: *3 articles on Zeltiq (company), CoolSculpting (product) and Cryolipolysis (technique) *2 articles one on the medical technique (Cryolipolysis) and one on the commercial aspects (CoolSculpting with a section on Zeltiq) *1 article on either Cryolipolysis or CoolSculpting, with sections devoted to the company and product and details about
References
  1. ^ Lee, Jenny (August 23, 2010). "Lose those love handles". The Vancouver Sun. Retrieved September 28, 2014. 
  2. ^ Stevens, W. G.; Spring, M. A.; Macias, L. H. (2014). "Counterfeit Medical Devices: The Money You Save Up Front Will Cost You Big in the End". Aesthetic Surgery Journal 34 (5): 786–788. doi:10.1177/1090820X14529960. ISSN 1090-820X. 
Disclosure: I have a conflict of interest. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 01:40, 19 January 2015 (UTC) CorporateM (Talk) 20:22, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Shaan (actor)Shaan Shahid – Whether the surname Shahid is "fairly often used" per WP:NCP#Single name, which normally discourages single names, is your decision. Searching for the Pakistani actor online wasn't easy. Without inserting narrow terms, the results would include Shaan (singer), an Indian. However, WP:NATURAL discourages obscure and made-up names. If adding "Shahid" improves the article, yet the surname may be obscure and rarely used and may not meet also WP:CRITERIA, perhaps before ignoring these applicable rules that prevent us from improving the article's name, there should be other applicable existing rules, which I might overlook. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 01:39, 19 January 2015 (UTC) George Ho (talk) 18:32, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Backlog[edit]

Shortcut:
  • (Discuss)Moby Dick (Moby-Dick)Moby Dick – * By the same reasoning as for the move from Captain Ahab (Moby-Dick) to Captain Ahab at Talk Page Captain Ahab, this article should be moved to Moby Dick. * The present title "Moby Dick (Moby-Dick)" is confusing. * Moby Dick is clearly Primary topic. * WP:TITLE calls for Recognizability, Naturalness, Precision, Conciseness, Consistency. "MD (M-D)" is not more recognizable, only more confusing; "MD" is more natural, because the whale is not named "MD (M-D)"; MD is more precise, again because it is what he is called in the novel; more concise; and, perhaps most important, more consistent, since Ishmael is the only other character in the MD Template: Moby-Dick to have (Moby-Dick) because he is not the Primary Topic. * There are, to be sure, many hits for “Moby Dick” and “Moby-Dick,” but there are so many spellings referring to so many different MDs that after fighting with Google Search for far too long I decided that there was no way to get useful results. * Moby Dick (disambiguation) lists the other Wikipedia articles with MD in the title, none of which could be confused with the whale. * Confusion with the novel is possible even though Melville spelled the novel with the hyphen and the whale without. But “Moby Dick (Moby-Dick)” doesn’t help with this either. So a second possibility would be to move to Moby Dick (whale), but that still looks silly. ch (talk) 19:03, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Syrian KurdistanRojava – This article is about a region governed by the PYD, which calls the area Rojava. Foreign press also uses this term, for example [21] (BBC) [22] (Guardian) [23] (Independent) [24] (VICE). Other examples on Wikipedia such as Kosovo (not South Serbia), Catalonia (not Catalonian Spain) or Scotland (not Scottish United Kingdom) indicate this article should be called Rojava as per convention. Genjix (talk) 18:43, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Rizwan Ahmed (cricketer)Rizwan Ahmed – Currently, Rizwan Ahmed redirects to the article for actor Riz Ahmed. While Rizwan is his full first name, there's no reason anyone would search him under his full name when he is credited as simply "Riz". In the off chance that they are, a hatnote on this article would suffice to direct them to the right place. Sock (tock talk) 15:12, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Level Mountain RangeLevel MountainWP:COMMONNAME. From years of research (e.g. reading papers, books, etc) on volcanoes in British Columbia, it is safe for me to say that this feature is more commonly referred to as "Level Mountain". The actual "Level Mountain Range" is a mountain range on the summit of Level Mountain and does not include the shield volcano. This article is about the shield volcano, which makes up the bulk of Level Mountain. If anything, the Level Mountain Range is a subtopic of Level Mountain. Separate pages would be unnecessary since the Level Mountain Range is a significant topic (the upper half) of Level Mountain and the current article has lots of room for expansion. Actually I am in the process of gathering information to rewrite, expand and reorganize this article. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 05:50, 17 January 2015 (UTC) Volcanoguy 08:40, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Real-time polymerase chain reactionQuantitative PCR – This discussion has happened once before, but I really think it's worth having again. Colloquially, in the field, no one refers to it as Real-Time PCR. See here and here. Plus, under Wikipedia's article title conventions, the name should describe current usage. Also in those guidelines is a small bit about using titles to help distinguish similar concepts. RT-PCR in the field means Reverse transcriptase-PCR. Real-Time PCR is NEVER used in journals or in conversation as a result. It's all qPCR. It's all Quantitative PCR. Plus this article is entirely ABOUT qPCR. New students learning about these concepts are only confused by the current title. --Relisted.  — Amakuru (talk) 21:27, 15 January 2015 (UTC) Shibbolethink (talk) 16:15, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Mustang (disambiguation)Mustang – The primary topic grab for the horse article at Talk:Mustang#Alternative_proposal was ill-advised and ill-formed, especially coming as it did as a late alternative proposal within a losing RM discussion. The data presented there make it clear that the horse topic gets about an order of magnitude less traffic than the car. Given those stats and the huge number of topics on this disambig page, the right thing to do is not claim any primary topic. The previous horse title, Mustang horse, was objected to by some as redundant and unnatural; the parenthetical disambiguator is more standard, and has no reason to provoke any objections. Dicklyon (talk) 04:37, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Landmark WorldwideLandmark Forum – The current official product name and the most recognized COMMONNAME for this topic. Ties into previous incarnations of the seminar product as well. This article was subject to an ArbComm case and suffers from COI POV pushing issues. Legacypac (talk) 19:06, 10 January 2015 (UTC) Legacypac (talk) 19:06, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Five solaeThree solae – The article text (other than the recently edited opening sentence) is written first as a description of the original three solas, with the other (2 or 4) solas described as additions. The bulk of references that refer to any number, refer to three, not five. Overall, the title most appropriate to the current text, should mention "three", not "five". The only sensible alternative to a rename is to rewrite the article (including removing a large proportion of the citations) to suit the current title. Google Ngram gives no hits for "five solas", but gives several for "three solas", dating back to 1865. --Relisted. Andrewa (talk) 16:36, 10 January 2015 (UTC) Thomask0 (talk) 20:42, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Elizabeth PickettElizabeth Ann Pickett – or perhaps Elizabeth Pickett (judge) to make way for disambiguation or redirection, because there is no clear indication that this current appeal court judge in Louisiana (with 118 views in 2014-12 and no reliable secondary sources establishing WP:GNG) is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "Elizabeth Pickett" when considering Elizabeth Pickett Chevalier (177 views in 2014-12), who was credited as "Elizabeth Pickett" in her early career, especially when considering the relatively WP:RECENT nature of the judge's career and the pioneering work of the other Pickett in the early days of film entertainment. The article about the judge seems to only discuss her political campaigns (sourced to government records) and her parentage – establishing various facts but with no clear indication of notability. Her political campaigns have seemed rather sleepy on the whole, as her first opponent declined to pursue a runoff election, and no one bothered to oppose her in the subsequent ones. —BarrelProof (talk) 02:06, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Penner RiverPenna RiverA recent edit changed the main name in the article to Penna, and the previous section seems to agree with this. I thought about moving it myself, but do not think this would work, due to the target redirect having been edited. I have listed it here for discussion, instead of as a technical move, because I am unsure if this may be controversial. (The linked edit and the next also changed the order of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka.) —PC-XT+ 06:00, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Dishwashing liquidDishwashing detergent – "Liquid" is not the best name because there are non-liquid dishwashing substances, and this article should cover them. "Dishwashing soap" may be an option, but it seems that the industry producing these products calls them "detergents" A change to either "soap" or "detergent" would be an improvement but I am not sure which is best. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:57, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Baron MünchhausenBaron Munchausen – This article is about two people: a fictional character called Baron Munchausen, and a real-life nobleman named Hieronymus Karl Friedrich, Freiherr von Münchhausen. I think it's appropriate to handle both figures on one page (take a look at the Fictionalization and Fictional character sections to see how the two are connected/different), but it inevitably raises the question of what to call the article. It's beyond reasonable doubt that the fictional Baron is notable by Wikipedia standards: plenty of significant coverage in subject-independent reliable sources. The real Baron is probably notable as well, but he's predominantly known for being the inspiration for his fictional counterpart. And, of the two, the fictional one has pretty clearly gotten more attention: Special:WhatLinksHere/Baron_Münchhausen suggests that most references in the English Wikipedia are specifically to the fictional Baron. Given those circumstances, to name the article after the real Baron would make it something resembling a WP:Coatrack: the article would seem to be about a real person, but most of the focus would inevitably fall on his more famous fictional counterpart. So, in accordance with the WP:UCRN policy, and following the precedent set by most paper encyclopedias (including the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica and the Columbia Encyclopedia), I strongly recommend that we name this page after the fictional character, using the standard and recognizable English-language spelling: Baron Munchausen. The historical figure's name can still be a redirect, of course (and will be very useful as such, since his biography will remain on the page). Lemuellio (talk) 22:12, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Main-group elementMain group – By analogy with carbon group and boron group, other groups of elements with descriptive names. Google search results for "main group" primarily contain references to the chemistry concept, but not always in the context of the phrase "main group element": "main group chemistry" and "main group compounds" are also typical uses of the phrase. Thus the more concise title is preferable. Also satisfies WP:PRIMARYTOPIC – this is the most common use of the phrase, and I cannot find any other uses with potential long-term significance. Cobblet (talk) 10:17, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Adam BirchJoey Mercury – As noted in previous discussions, Birch's performances as "Joey Mercury" in the mid-2000s had considerably higher exposure than his 2000-2001 appearances as "Joey Matthews" with ECW. He is now once again performing regularly on WWE television as "Joey Mercury", increasing his exposure under this name. A Google News Archive search returns 93 hits for "Joey Matthews" wrestling and 626 hits for "Joey Mercury" wrestling. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 20:14, 30 December 2014 (UTC) McPhail (talk) 20:23, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Thriller (Michael Jackson album)Thriller (album) – Makes absolutely no sense for "Thriller (album)" to redirect here, indicating that Michael Jackson's album is the primary topic for albums named Thriller (which it is, seeing as it's the best-selling album in history and all), only for the actual article title to be disambiguated further. WP:PDAB was a guideline when the move to "(Michael Jackson album)" was made; it has since been downgraded to an essay due to lack of consensus. All of the previous RMs took place last year, and seeing as it's been over a year since the last one, I think now is a good time to reevaluate. –Chase (talk / contribs) 19:28, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Stephen Ponsonby PeacockePonsonby Peacocke – I have just merged the stub Ponsonby Peacocke with this well-developed article. He was, however, known as Ponsonby Peacocke as mentioned in the article. Two standard New Zealand sources, Wilson (1985) and Jackson (1972), do not even record his first name in their listings, although they generally list people by their full names. Schwede66 18:46, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Next Qatari general electionCancelled Qatari general election, 2013 – the article content is about the cancelled election, and the article name implies there will be a "next" election, the article content is about the cancelled election only, there is no plans and sources of doing this so called "next" elections and its not certain if ever due to the fact that the elections was indefinitely postponed. Dannis243 (talk) 16:32, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Coalition of the Radical LeftSYRIZA – As @Picapica: already stated two years ago, the party is now referred to as "SYRIZA" by media nearly worldwide. Noone talks or writes about the "Coalition of the Radical Left". Plus: now that SYRIZA has become a (more or less) unitary party, it isn't even a coalition anymore, so the full name isn't descriptive anymore either. --Relisted. --Mdann52talk to me! 21:20, 28 December 2014 (UTC) PanchoS (talk) 12:07, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Stellar classificationSpectral type – Stellar classification itself is a very broad topic that also includes classification such as variable star classification, binary star classification, and many other types of classification. This article only focuses (as it should, we have other articles for the others) on the Morgan–Keenan classification by temperature and luminosity (spectrum), and thus the title "stellar classification" is inappropriate, and should be made into a disambiguation page. StringTheory11 (t • c) 18:39, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Lap-chee TsuiLap-Chee Tsui – Tsui is Canadian, so we should not follow Chinese name order. And he spell his name as "Lap-Chee Tsui". The "C" should be capital. Huang (talk) 11:03, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Nara, NaraNara – As the various comments above attest, this title is a reducio ad adsurdum of a poorly thought out guideline. If you think that anyone in the real world calls this city "Nara, Nara", check out the first page of hits on Google Books: [45] Not one is a bona fide double named English-language reference to the city. The WP:MOS-JA creates an exception for designated cities. Nara's population is not quite large enough to be a designated city. But as a major tourist destination, it is better known than most of the designated cities. Cf. WP:UKPLACE, which recommends "Lincoln, England, not Lincoln, Lincolnshire." NotUnusual (talk) 03:15, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Richard Yates, Jr. → ? – "Jr." in name appears to be contrived/not in historical use; removed in 2011, but moved back with no explanation other than "better title", so treating as controversial Closeapple (talk) 19:11, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Russians in Canada → ? – Russians in Canada" implies that these are Russian citizens living in Canada, which in many instances is simply not the case. Many have never lived in Russia nor hold Russian citizenship, it also implies that these are in some way "foreigners" in Canada, as they are not classified as Canadians. Instead, these are more appropriately referred to Canadians of Russian descent (or Russian Canadians) per WP: PRECISION. I eat BC Fish (talk)18:44, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Kid vs. KatKid vs Kat – As can be seen in the logo, "versus" is abbreviated as "vs" not "vs." there is no dot after the lowercase S. Ranze (talk) 00:44, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Ford ClassicFord Consul Classic – The Ford Classic nameplate is ambiguous; right now, an Indian saloon version of the Fiesta is sold under this nameplate (which is currently mentioned in this article, but is a totally unrelated car and thus would not be a disaster to remove any text about). This car is also actually known as the Consul Classic, with "Classic" simply being shorthand. This can be shown best by looking at the owner's club, where they describe the cars as "Ford Consul Classic & Consul Capri", whilst their name is "Ford Classic & Capri Owners Club". Searching on Google for "Ford Classic" produces very few immediate results for this car, whilst Consul Classic immediately gives you a whole bunch. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 17:40, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)DWRT-FM99.5 Play FM – Per WP:NC, one of the characteristics of a good article title is recognizability. So to comply with the policy mentioned, we should use the station name—which is more recognizable than its call sign—to name this article. —theenjay36 (talk) 09:45, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

References[edit]

References generally should not appear here. Use {{reflist-talk}} in the talk page section with the requested move to show references there.