Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 31: Line 31:
:::::In light of Srnec's contesting of the non-admin closure, we will need an admin to come close the discussion. (Even without Srnec's objection, we need an admin to effect a move). [[User:Feoffer|Feoffer]] ([[User talk:Feoffer|talk]]) 00:54, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
:::::In light of Srnec's contesting of the non-admin closure, we will need an admin to come close the discussion. (Even without Srnec's objection, we need an admin to effect a move). [[User:Feoffer|Feoffer]] ([[User talk:Feoffer|talk]]) 00:54, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
::::::{{ping|Feoffer|162 etc.}} Is admin closure required if one or two people object to the close? There were many participants in the discussion, so it's inevitable that one or two people may object. I'm willing to request the technical move myself. [[User:Onetwothreeip|Onetwothreeip]] ([[User talk:Onetwothreeip|talk]]) 02:21, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
::::::{{ping|Feoffer|162 etc.}} Is admin closure required if one or two people object to the close? There were many participants in the discussion, so it's inevitable that one or two people may object. I'm willing to request the technical move myself. [[User:Onetwothreeip|Onetwothreeip]] ([[User talk:Onetwothreeip|talk]]) 02:21, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
:::::::[[WP:MR]] has the procedure to follow. [[User:Feoffer]] seems to have reverted your close; that should not have happened. However, if I was in your shoes, I might step aside for this one as it's a pretty volatile discussion and might be more of a headache than it's worth. [[User:162 etc.|162 etc.]] ([[User talk:162 etc.|talk]]) 02:31, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
* {{RMassist/core | 1 = Tagsatzung | 2 = Swiss Federal Diet | discuss = yes | reason = Per [[WP:ENG]] | sig = [[User:Excommunicato|Excommunicato]] ([[User talk:Excommunicato|talk]]) 23:55, 30 May 2021 (UTC) | requester = Excommunicato}}
* {{RMassist/core | 1 = Tagsatzung | 2 = Swiss Federal Diet | discuss = yes | reason = Per [[WP:ENG]] | sig = [[User:Excommunicato|Excommunicato]] ([[User talk:Excommunicato|talk]]) 23:55, 30 May 2021 (UTC) | requester = Excommunicato}}
**'''Oppose''' From Google Scholar results I have discovered that searching English-only, Tagsatzung is about 10x as common as the proposed name [https://scholar.google.com/scholar?lr=lang_en&q=%22Tagsatzung%22&hl=en&as_sdt=0,48][https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C48&q=%22Swiss+Federal+Diet%22&btnG=] ([[User talk:Buidhe|t]] &#183; [[Special:Contributions/Buidhe|c]]) '''[[User:buidhe|<span style="color: black">buidhe</span>]]''' 10:11, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
**'''Oppose''' From Google Scholar results I have discovered that searching English-only, Tagsatzung is about 10x as common as the proposed name [https://scholar.google.com/scholar?lr=lang_en&q=%22Tagsatzung%22&hl=en&as_sdt=0,48][https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C48&q=%22Swiss+Federal+Diet%22&btnG=] ([[User talk:Buidhe|t]] &#183; [[Special:Contributions/Buidhe|c]]) '''[[User:buidhe|<span style="color: black">buidhe</span>]]''' 10:11, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:31, 1 June 2021

If you are unable to complete a move for technical reasons, you can request technical help below. This is the correct method if you tried to move a page, but you got an error message saying something like "You do not have permission to move this page, for the following reasons:..." or "The/This page could not be moved, for the following reason:..."

  • To list a technical request: edit the Uncontroversial technical requests subsection and insert the following code at the bottom of the list, filling in pages and reason:

    {{subst:RMassist|current page title|new title|reason=edit summary for the move}}

    This will automatically insert a bullet and include your signature. Please do not edit the article's talk page.
  • If you object to a proposal listed in the uncontroversial technical requests section, please move the request to the Contested technical requests section, append a note on the request elaborating on why, and sign with ~~~~. Consider pinging the requester to let them know about the objection.
  • If your technical request is contested, or if a contested request is left untouched without reply, create a requested move on the article talk and remove the request from the section here. The fastest and easiest way is to click the "discuss" button at the request, save the talk page, and remove the entry on this page.

Technical requests

Edit this section if you want to move a request from Uncontroversial to Contested.

Uncontroversial technical requests

Contested technical requests

Ping @Onetwothreeip: as the RM closer should be the one doing the moving. Is this in fact the consensus title? 162 etc. (talk) 22:52, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@162 etc.: I have changed the disambiguation page into a redirect back to the primary topic, and have left a link at the top of the subject article to the second disambiguation entry. All that is required now is to swap the two articles. Onetwothreeip (talk) 23:09, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
2021 United States Capitol attack is the consensus title as of the recent discussion. I have tried to move this as requested of me, but I am unable to do so due to the redirect (formerly disambiguation) article taking the place of the consensus name. Onetwothreeip (talk) 23:20, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm contesting this close. I have left a note on the closer's talk page. Srnec (talk) 00:01, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In light of Srnec's contesting of the non-admin closure, we will need an admin to come close the discussion. (Even without Srnec's objection, we need an admin to effect a move). Feoffer (talk) 00:54, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Feoffer and 162 etc.: Is admin closure required if one or two people object to the close? There were many participants in the discussion, so it's inevitable that one or two people may object. I'm willing to request the technical move myself. Onetwothreeip (talk) 02:21, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
WP:MR has the procedure to follow. User:Feoffer seems to have reverted your close; that should not have happened. However, if I was in your shoes, I might step aside for this one as it's a pretty volatile discussion and might be more of a headache than it's worth. 162 etc. (talk) 02:31, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Requests to revert undiscussed moves