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. See also Category:Requests to move a userspace draft.
Click here to purge this page
This page has a backlog that requires the attention of one or more administrators.
This notice is automatically updated by RM bot (talk) and will no longer be displayed when the backlog is cleared.

Contents
Shortcuts:

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

Any autoconfirmed user can use the [move] tab located at the top of any page to perform most moves (see Wikipedia:Moving 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:

  • Sometimes, technical reasons prevent a move from succeeding (for instance, if a page already exists with the desired name). In these circumstances, administrator help is required to move a page. You can request such help through this process: please see the section Requesting technical moves.
  • In some situations, the appropriateness of a move may be under dispute, and discussion is necessary in order to reach a consensus. It is not always necessary to formally request a move in these circumstances: you can start an informal discussion at the article's talk page instead. If you do choose to place a formal request for a potentially controversial page move, please see the section Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves.
  • Thirdly, unregistered users and new (non-confirmed) 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.[1] Two pages often cited during move discussions, which you might want to familiarize yourself with before making your request, are our naming convention regarding primary topics and our guideline on using common English names. See also the How to Determine Wikipedia Article Titles and Title discussions essays for additional guidance.

Requests are generally processed after seven days, although backlogs often develop. If there is a clear consensus after this time, the request will be closed and acted upon. If not, the closer may choose to re-list the request to allow time for consensus to develop, or close it as "no consensus". (For uncontroversial technical moves, the page will often be moved after seven days, even without any discussion.) The processes involved in closing requests, performing moves, and cleaning up after moves can be viewed at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions.

  1. ^ Note to closers: according to an ArbCom ruling of June 2009, confirmed in September 2011, discussions relating to the naming of Ireland articles (Ireland, Republic of Ireland, Ireland (disambiguation)) must occur at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland Collaboration, unless it is agreed there to hold the discussion elsewhere. Any requested move affecting these articles that is opened on the article talk pages or any other venue should be speedily closed, with a pointer to the ArbCom ruling.

[edit] When not to use this page

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

[edit] Requesting technical moves

Consider the following points before listing pages here:

  • If the move you are suggesting is uncontroversial or technical in nature (e.g. spelling and capitalization), please feel free to move the page yourself. If you cannot move the page yourself, then request it below.
  • If any of the following situations applies to the requested move, it should be treated as controversial:
    • There is an existing article 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 the page has recently been moved without discussion, then you may revert the move (although this is not required, and may not always be possible) and initiate a discussion of the move on the talk page of the article. (See also: Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle.)
  • If the only obstacle to a technical move is a navigation aid (e.g., a redirect or an unnecessary disambiguation page with a minor edit history), you may 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 page for deletion under criterion for speedy deletion G6. If the page is a redirect, place the code above the redirection.

Otherwise, list new technical requests at the bottom of the sub-section "Technical requests" immediately below, using the following code:

{{subst:RMassist|old page name|requested name|reason for move}}

This will automatically insert a bullet and include your signature. No edits to the article's talk page are required.

If you object to a proposal listed in Technical requests, please move it to the Contested technical requests section below.

If your technical request is contested by another editor, remove the request from the "Contested technical requests" section and follow the instructions at Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves, below.

[edit] Technical requests

[edit] Contested technical requests

[edit] Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves

Do not put more than one move request on the same article talk page, as this is not supported by the bot that handles updates to this page. (For requesting multiple moves, see below.)

This process is only necessary if there is any reason to believe a requested move would be contested. For technical move requests (e.g. spelling and capitalization fixes), see Technical requests above.

[edit] Requesting a single page move

(If your proposal involves moving more than one page—for example, if you will need to move one page, such as a disambiguation page, to move another page to that title—please use the process for "Requesting multiple page moves" below.)

To request a single page move, create a new section at the bottom of the Talk page of the article you want moved. Format it like this:

== Requested move ==
{{subst:requested move|NewName}} 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. ~~~~

The name of the section does not necessarily need to be "Requested move", though it is suggested. "NewName" is what you want the new name of the page to be. If there was a previous discussion use == Requested move xxxx == where xxxx can be the year if that is appropriate, or "2" for a second discussion.

As an alternative, you can click the "New Section" tab on the talk page and insert {{subst:RMtalk|Proposed new name|Reason for move.}} Leave the Subject/headline blank, as the template automatically creates the heading "Requested move", along with a location for survey and discussion. Also note that the template must be substituted. The template will automatically include your signature.

Note: Nominators should not add a separate support !vote, as the nomination itself qualifies as a !vote. Nominators may, of course, make comments and otherwise participate in the discussion.

[edit] Requesting multiple page 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:

==Requested move==
{{subst:move-multi
| current1 = Current title of page 1, with the talk page hosting this discussion
| new1 = New title for page 1
| current2 = Current title of page 2
| new2 = New title for page 2
| current3 = Current title for 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. Do not sign this.

}}

For example, if you were proposing a move for the article Wikipedia and other articles, put this template on Talk:Wikipedia and current1 would be Wikipedia. Note that the discussion for all the affected articles is held on the talk page of the first article - current1. It is not necessary to sign a request using this template with ~~~~ as the template does this automatically. Do not skip pairs of numbers. The template currently supports up to 30 listings.

After you make your move request on the talk page of one of the articles, per above, RM bot will automatically place a notice 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.

The template {{movenotice}} can be used on the current page (not the talk page) to draw attention to the proposed move and the discussion on the appropriate talk page.

Note: Nominators should not add a separate support !vote, as the nomination itself qualifies as a !vote. Nominators may, of course, make comments and otherwise participate in the discussion.

[edit] Current discussions

This section lists all requests filed or identified as potentially controversial which are currently under discussion.
Do not attempt to edit this list manually; a bot will automatically update the page soon after the {{subst:Requested move}} template is added to the discussion on the relevant talk page. The entry is removed automatically when the discussion is closed.
To make a change to an entry, make the change on the linked talk page.

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

[edit] February 12, 2012

[edit] February 11, 2012

  • (Discuss) – Martin Crane (disambiguation) → Martin Crane – The Roman Catholic bishop is a real person and deserves to be a primary topic. The fictional character of Frasier... I don't know, but there should be more 'Martin Crane's out there. Also, article of fictional character is a mere violation of WP:PLOT, as there is no or insufficient real-world coverage. George Ho (talk) 22:03, 11 February 2012 (UTC) Now that I created a disambiguation page, maybe there is no need to make a bishop a primary topic? --George Ho (talk) 22:45, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] February 10, 2012

  • (Discuss) – General Nutrition Centers
 → GNC
 – Relisted. Favonian (talk) 21:25, 10 February 2012 (UTC) Per WP:COMMONNAME, "GNC" is the most commonly used name in reference to the store — even the logo says just GNC, the website is gnc.com, and a search for "General nutrition center[s]" gets far fewer hits. The retail chain seems to be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for this abbreviation, as it gets more hits than the other elements abbreviated GNC. However, two of the other things currently listed on the GNC page are at PROD, so whether or not we need a GNC (disambiguation) page for them will depend on how the prod turns out. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 19:38, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Hope Adams Newman → Hope Adams – I am requested that this page be moved back immediately!! It had no reason to be moved as Hope only used Newman as her married name. It was only moved yesterday, so can it just be moved back? There was absolutely no reason to move it and the person who did move it does not understand WP:COMMONNAME. MusicFreak7676 TALK! 17:45, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Zürich Hauptbahnhof → Zurich Central Station – The other train stations in Category:Hauptbahnhof are titled as "Central Station." The word "hauptbahnhof" is not found in the major English-language dictionaries.[1], [2], [3],[4]. According to WP:UE: “If there is no established English-language treatment for a name, translate it if this can be done without loss of accuracy and with greater understanding for the English-speaking reader.” Removing the diacritic here allows this title to correspond to the city article, which is at Zurich. The Google book hits for "Zurich Hauptbahnhof" are almost exclusively in travel literature. "When a guidebook or roadmap written in English shows an autobahn between München and Nürnberg, it is attesting to local usage, because that is what the signs on the autobahn will say; Munich and Nuremberg are still the English names." (WP:NCGN) Kauffner (talk) 07:16, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] February 9, 2012

  • (Discuss) – Mona Simpson (novelist) → Mona Simpson – The author is the clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC of the name "Mona Simpson". Mona Simpson (novelist) was viewed 36966 times in January 2012, compared to only 6286 for Mona Simpson (The Simpsons), the only other article of the title. The novelist has gotten many more page views than the Simpsons character (who is named for her) as far back as I checked. In addition, "Mona Simpson"+writer gets me 3,640 hits on Google Books and over 400 on Google News archives, compared to only 47 and 30, respectively, for "Mona Simpson"+"The Simpsons"; many of those are actually sources on the writer, mentioning that the Simpsons character is named for her. Also, for what it's worth, almost every incoming link to the Mona Simpson disambig page intends the writer.[5] The article on the Simpsons character can easily be disambiguated with a hat note.Cúchullain t/c 21:21, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Guyver (OVA) → The Guyver: Bio-Booster Armor – I'm suggesting we title the page after what is actually used in the images (VHS/DVD). This title shares a similarity yet a distinction to the subsequent anime series (Guyver: The Bioboosted Armor). There have been multiple OVAs of Guyver. Guyver: Out of Control was the first one and should be disambiguated. Using 'OVA' in singular most likely refers to OoC. The topic of this article is actually a 12-episode SERIES of OVAs. If not moving it to the title, I think we should at least retitle this Guyver (OVA series) to disambiguate it from the previous OVA, which was a 1-shot and not a series. Y12J (talk) 18:22, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Florida vs. Georgia Football Classic → Florida–Georgia football rivalry – This article's current title (decided here) was selected as the "official" name, but there's a major problem: it's almost never used. There are only around 8 total hits in the Google News archives for "Florida vs. Georgia Football Classic"[6] The City of Jacksonville itself doesn't always use it, and it's not really even treated as official.[7] The former title of "World's Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party" isn't usable either, for the reasons stated in the last request. By far the most common way of referring to the game in sources is "Florida-Georgia" or a related variant such as "Georgia-Florida", "Florida vs. Georgia", "Florida-Georgia rivaly", "Florida-Georgia game", etc. "Florida-Georgia"+football returns over 5,000 hits on Google Books, and over 11,000 in the Google News archives.[8], with many more for the individual variants. As such I propose that a descriptive title like "Florida–Georgia football rivalry" is more in line with how the game is referred to in the sources, recognizable to readers, precise, and consistent with the general practice for similar articles in Category:College football rivalries in the United States, in accordance with WP:NAMINGCRITERIA.Cúchullain t/c 16:30, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Sunlight → Solar radiation – Move Sunlight to solar radiation (which currently redirects back to Sunlight because as the dictionary says, the term sunlight refers specifically to the electromagnetic radiation (ER) which is visible to the human eye. We also speak of "invisible" sunlight such as the warming rays of infrared and the tanning rays of ultraviolet (UV). But wavelengths of solar radiation longer than infrared (or shorter than UV) aren't usually called "sunlight", even by scientists, are they? Sunlight should be about solar radiation which we can see by, which warms us, or which tans us (yes, and gives us skin cancer). Solar radiation should be the general article on all wavelengths of ER the sun emits. Very likely the best arrangement would be to have a section on "Sunlight" in the Solar radiation article. We can use WP:Summary style and link this small section to the larger Sunlight article. Uncle Ed (talk) 16:09, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Department of Intelligence and Security → Département du Renseignement et de la Sécurité – The French name appears to be about four times more common (in English-language references) than its English translation, based on Google Books searches linked to in the section "French name" above. (The word "Algeria" was included in the search query to ensure that unrelated instances of "Department of Intelligence and Security" were excluded from the results.) In case the move does not go forward, please also comment on whether the French name of the organization should be mentioned in the article.96.46.204.126 (talk) 03:07, 9 February 2012 (UTC) [Edit: Here are the searches again: [9], [10] 96.46.204.126 (talk) 04:07, 9 February 2012 (UTC)]

[edit] February 8, 2012

  • (Discuss) – Production of Watchmen (film) → Production of Watchmen – This article was moved to the current title (with the "(film)" disambiguator) in a previous discussion. I am suggesting that this article be moved back to the original title for two reasons. Firstly, Wikipedia's guidelines regarding the decision to disambiguate state that article titles should only be provided with disambiguators when "there is more than one existing Wikipedia article to which that word or phrase might be expected to lead" (italics mine). There are no other existing Wikipedia articles that could be referred to by the title "Production of Watchmen," therefore the guidelines are against disambiguation. Secondly, the current title (with the disambiguator) is more misleading than the original title, because it suggests that there is a film called Production of Watchmen. The disambiguator does not apply to the entire title, and it does not serve the purpose of disambiguating. The original title should be restored. Neelix (talk) 21:56, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Racko! → Rack-O – The name of the game is either referred to as Racko or Rack-o depending on when you looked at it. 50+ years ago, it was Racko See PDF more recently its been Rack-OSee PDF. Also see this picture of the cards File:Racko-game.jpg where there is a dash before the 'O'. Any assistance with this would be great. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 14:38, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Richard Voß → Richard Voss – The German double-'s', special character 'ß', is not used in Enlish. (It isn't even used in German-speaking Switzerland.) It is always transliterated to 'ss'. I tried to move the article to Richard Voss but it redirects here and so I was not allowed to move it. The two pages should be reversed. The article should be moved to Richard Voss and Richard Voß should redirect to Richard Voss. Mike Hayes (talk) 00:30, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] February 7, 2012

  • (Discuss) – BOMB (magazine) → Bomb (magazine) – Upper- and lowercase per official site's own copyright indicia. Consistent with Time (magazine), Cosmopolitan (magazine), etc., which also do all caps on their covers. This magazine's owners I'm sure want their name in all-caps, but half the magazines in the world are all caps on the cover and we don't do all caps in article names. No reason this should be any different than Time, Cosmopolitan, etc. Tenebrae (talk) 17:22, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Nadal (surname) → Nadal – Unnecessarily piped, only use is surname. (Someone has reverted the edit to the surname page at this time from "Nadal", with no discussion. John Cengiz talk 16:24, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Philippine Dynasty → Portuguese House of Habsburg – Relisted for additional input. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:04, 7 February 2012 (UTC) All the other houses of Portuguese royalty are categorized under their house name and not their dynasty (House of Braganza and not Brigantine Dynasty, House of Aviz and not Joanine Dynasty, Portuguese House of Burgundy and not Afonsin Dynasty). It would be constistant. Thank you :)relisted--Mike Cline (talk) 15:57, 31 January 2012 (UTC) Cristiano Tomás (talk) 23:39, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Linear → Linearity – This article addresses the property of linearity and its effects on objects that instantiate that property. Thus, I think the article should be moved to "linearity", with "linear" redirecting there. (Currently, the situation is the reverse.) Augurar (talk) 06:46, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] February 6, 2012

  • (Discuss) – MLA → MLA (disambiguation) – I often think about Modern Language Association (MLA) as more of a primary topic than any other because MLA citations are helpful especially for print materials. In fact, "MLA" should be a redirect to Modern Language Association, regardless of popularity. --George Ho (talk) 22:39, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Vesākha → Vesak – The page was previously moved from Vesak to Vesākha based on the argument that there is no widely-accepted English spelling for the name. However, the online Macmillan Dictionary does has an entry for Vesak,[12] and the United Nations resolution on the international recognition of the day of Vesak also uses that spelling.[13] Google book search returns over 8,000 hits for Vesak, versus one for Vesākha. I suggest that the article be renamed back to Vesak, since it is the overwhelmingly predominant spelling of the term in English texts. Paul_012 (talk) 18:30, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – D. J. Campbell → DJ Campbell – This article was originally created at Dudley Campbell, the subject's given name and surname, then, in 2007, was moved to DJ Campbell, the name by which he is generally known. In 2009, it was moved to its current name, spelt with dotted spaced initials, the mover citing "Correct formatting per Wikipedia's manual of style" in their edit summary. A recent move to D.J. Campbell, with no space between the dotted initials, was reverted.A Google search for "D. J. Campbell" produces minimal hits for that orthography, the vast majority being for the form DJ with neither dot nor space. Likewise for Google news. The name is written DJ at his current football club profile, and the subject himself writes it that way at his Twitter account. By WP:Naming conventions (people), we "use the most common format of a name used in reliable sources". Of particular relevance is the clarification that where the subject's name is abbreviated, "There is no consensus for always using spaces between initials, neither for never using them." cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:34, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit] February 5, 2012

  • (Discuss) – Orientale (province) → Orientale – Relisted. Given the hat note, it appears that the other use needs to be considered in this discussion. The point has been raised in the discussion that the other use could be the primary topic. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:42, 5 February 2012 (UTC) No need for disambiguation in the title. Mightymights (talk) 13:00, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Tequila (song) → Tequila (instrumental) – This is a contested move. According to WP:Naming conventions (music), musical works with no lyrics should be disambiguated with "instrumental" and not "song". The question in this case is whether this specific musical work has lyrics or not. Does the shouted word "tequila" (repeated three times in the work) qualify as a lyric or not? Blueboar (talk) 17:28, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Westfalenstadion → Signal Iduna Park – How do you know its common name is still Westfalenstadion to make it the official page name? The German version of this Wikipedia page is called Signal Iduna Park. Every stadium as far as I can remember that I have seen in all of sports has the Wikipedia name of whatever that stadiums name change is. Some examples in Germany are the Veltins-Arena which was first known as Arena AufSchalke and the AWD-Arena which was first known as the Niedersachsenstadion. Here is a list of stadiums worldwide with naming rights List of sports venues with sole naming rights. It is the case with every stadium that I know of that has naming rights. Whenever the stadiums name changes, the name of its Wikipedia article changes.relisting for defintive discussion--Mike Cline (talk) 16:25, 5 February 2012 (UTC), relisted -Mike Cline (talk) 17:45, 23 January 2012 (UTC) Hornymanatee (talk) 02:37, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Sydney City Soccer Club → Hakoah Syndey – Being that this club has existed before the NSL as Hakoah Sydney and continues to operate as Hakoah Sydney, it doesn't make sense for it to be called Sydney City SC when most of its history and it is better known nationally and internationally as Hakoah Sydney. NYC2TLV (talk) 16:10, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Native Police Corps → Native Police Force – The largest and longest lasting and most significant Native Police in Australian history was the one attached to Queensland (not the one in Victoria or New South Wales), and the official name - reflected in all parliamentary documents of note (see below) was the 'Native Police Force' - it was not named "Corps", nor was it named "Native Mounted Police Force" (as some seems to think)- it was simply the - "Native Police Force" -Helsned 13:06, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Frederick Walker (explorer) → Frederick Walker (Commandant of Native Police) – Frederick Walker is an important historical person in Queensland, he was also a station manager and an explorer, but that is all secondary. He is predominantly known to history as the first Commandant of the Native Police Force, it is important that this is also visible here as it is elsewhere -- Helsned 12:46, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Convert → point after touchdown – "Convert" is neither widely understood nor the term that appears in the rule books (I am given to understand the rulebooks call it a "try"). This title is at least widely used. --Trovatore (talk) 10:04, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Flying (The Beatles song) → Flying (instrumental) – This page move was reverted because it hasn't been properly discussed. While this is actually true and I can understand it, the article should however have been left at its title. This is simply an instrumental, as stated in the article and elsewhere, and should thus use a simpler disambiguation. --The Evil IP address (talk) 09:58, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Chunkath Joseph Varkey → C. J. Varkey, Chunkath – Common name of the subject. All sources referred also use the same form (except one which has chosen to expand the initials to the full name, which is not likely to match most searches for the subject.) Karnan (talk) 04:57, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Conquering Lion → Rebel MC – Relisted. Vegaswikian (talk) 03:05, 5 February 2012 (UTC) Considering all of his mainstream fame was under as "Rebel MC", I am willing to go with "Michael West" if anybody could persuade me that "Conquering Lion" had the same mainstream level of fame, not forgetting if he wasn't Rebel MC, then he would not had been eligible for notability here.relisted -Mike Cline (talk) 18:14, 23 January 2012 (UTC) Donnie Park (talk) 16:51, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Backlog

  • (Discuss) – Romance (genre) → Chivalric Romance – The common use of Romance (genre) would be the modern romance movie and novel, not the historic medieval genre. Considering how radically different these two are, this should be renamed to make clear it's about the medieval style (as well as the occasional modern imitator). I am open to other name ideas. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 04:26, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Average Directional Movement Index → Average directional movement index – Nomination to rename the article title to lowercase consistent with MOS:CAPS. This is one article among many in Category:Technical indicators that were recently moved to lowercase. These moved have generated controversy (see Talk:Relative Strength Index#Requested move, Talk:True strength index#Requested move, as well as a pending ArbCom case Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Article titles and capitalisation), and therefore should not have been made without prior discussion. In that spirit, I have restored this article to its original uppercase version, protected it to prevent further move-warring, and initiated this proposal to rename it to lowercase.Here is my attempt at summarizing the arguments that have transpired on the other talk pages mentioned above.Basic arguments in favor of uppercase:*Experts in the field assert that the invention of a technical indicator is a creative work that would fall under MOS:CT, and therefore its name would be a proper noun.*The field of technical analysis pre-dates the internet, and the majority of sources are not online.*The majority of reliable sources on technical analysis indicators use the names as proper nouns.Basic arguments in favor of lowercase:*A technical indicator is not a creative work, therefore MOS:CT does not apply.*Reliable sources that can be found online don't use uppercase consistently.*Lowercase is consistent with MOS:CAPS.Participants may feel free to adjust my summary of the arguments above if I missed anything. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:39, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Meßkirch → Messkirch – This article was originally titled “Messkirch”. It was moved without explanation or discussion a while ago to the current title. As the original title was in standard English spelling, and conformed to guidelines on title and using English, while the current one does not, I am seeking to have this moved back to its original title.
    I am doing this via WP:RM as it cannot be carried out conventionally, and requires admin assistance to do so. Moonraker12 (talk) 13:21, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Manchu people → Manchus – REASONS: *First, this article is different from British people, Japanese people and Chinese people. We cannot add "s" after the word British, Japanese and Chinese as plurals. It's pretty much the reason we have to put "people" after that to clarify what the articles are talking about. But the word "Manchu" CAN absolutely be added "s" as its plural just like the article Germans and Mongols.*Otherwise, the academic monographs which introduce "Manchu people" are actually a lot more often to use the word "Manchus". For example, the Manchus by Pamela Kyle Crossley,Manchus and Han by Edward J. M. Rhoads, China and the Manchus by Herbert Allen Giles etc. So why not use the name which is more formal, brief and commonly used? *Last but not least, let's check out the Wikipedia pages of other Indo-European languages please (Manchuer in Danish Wikipedia, Mandchous in Spanish Wikipedia, Manchú in French Wikipedia, Manciù in Italian Wikipedia, Mantsjoes in Dutch Wikipedia, Manchu in Portuguese Wikipedia and so on). None of them put "people" in their own languages. Then why English Wikipedia HAS TO make the exception??? *So, no doubt, "Manchus" is obviously a better title of the article.--Šolon (talk) 01:15, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Conditional statement (logic) → conditional statements in logic – During the fabulous Afd discussion for this page Arthur Rubin made a comment that was both logical and informed. The new page name is based on that suggestion. To be upfront, the problems I see here are many fold, and the page rename is the first step in fixing the problems, so it will not be the total embarrassment that it is now. This is not an unduly complicated topic. However, it is an utter embarrassment for Wikipedia that may need to get listed on David Letterman's "top 10 Wikipedia embarrassment", if he does such a segment.My suggestion would be that if/when a rename takes place, Machine Elf 1735 and Hanlon1755 voluntarily step back and let Arthur Rubin and/or CBM rewrite the new page from scratch - should take no more than a few hours. Believe me Machine Elf 1735 and Hanlon1755, it will help both of your blood pressures to step back here. Neither of you will have to have a win/loss emotion and there will be three winners, the two of you and the hapless Wiki-reader who may stumble on this hapless page. History2007 (talk) 22:01, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Democratic Republic of Afghanistan → Communist Afghanistan – Per WP:COMMONNAME, the official name of communist Afghanistan was first the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, but in 1987, in the National Reconciliation effort, the name of communis Afghanistan was changed to the Republic of Afghanistan. Since there were two official names for the period, the wikipedia community should move the article from Democratic Republic of Afghanistan to Communist Afghanistan or Communist-ruled Afghanistan.*Support, as the proposer. --TIAYN (talk) 14:14, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Chevron Phillips → Chevron Phillips Chemical – Relisted. The discussion seems to be avoiding what the common name may be which is an important factor here. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC) Chevron Phillips is incorrect name. The full name of the company is Chevron Phillips Chemical Company LLC and the short(common) form of it is Chevron Phillips Chemical. Beagel (talk) 05:26, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Time could not be ascertained

The current Wikipedia time is:
05:21, Sunday, February 12, 2012 (UTC)
To update time purge page cache!
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requested_moves&oldid=476388727"
Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Navigation
Interaction
Toolbox
Print/export
Languages