Wikipedia:Requested moves

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

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

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

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

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

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

When not to use this page

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

• Making an uncontroversial move – if you can, be bold and do it yourself! If you can't, see § Requesting technical moves.
• Renaming a category – propose the move at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion.
• Renaming a stub template – propose the move at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion.
• Renaming an image or other file – see Wikipedia:Moving a page § Moving a file page.
• Moves from draft namespace or user space to article space – Unconfirmed users: add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the article. See Wikipedia:Articles for creation. Confirmed users: Move the page yourself.
• Merging two articles – make a request at Wikipedia:Proposed mergers, or be bold and do it yourself.
• Splitting an article – make a request at Wikipedia:Proposed article splits, or be bold and do it yourself.
• Requesting that page histories be merged – list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge.
• Contesting a move request close – use the Wikipedia:Move review process.

Undiscussed moves

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

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

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

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

Uncontroversial proposals

Only list here proposals that are clearly uncontroversial but require administrator help to complete. Things like capitalization and spelling mistakes would be appropriate here. If there is any prior discussion as to the name of the article please link to it. If there is any possibility that the proposed page move could be opposed by anyone, do not list it in this section. If the move location appears as a red link you should be able to move the article using the move button of the top of the article's page and don't need to use this page

Please use {{subst:WP:RM2|Old page name|Requested name|Reason for move}} for uncontroversial moves only; do not copy, paste, and edit previous entries. No dated sections are necessary, and no templates on the article's talk page are necessary.

If your request was not fulfilled, and was removed from this section, please relist it in the other proposals section below.

---

• Piano Collections: Final Fantasy VI → Final Fantasy VI Piano Collections — The offcial name for this album is "Final Fantasy VI Piano Collections", a fact which can be backed up by numerous review and shopping websites. Whoever named this article clearly only named it based on how the title appears on the CD's cover, and nothing more. —Nahald 01:58, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

• High Council of Sweden → Privy Council of Sweden — This article was moved to "High Council of Sweden" by User:Suedois, who marked the move as "minor", without providing any explanation and without any previous discussion. If the page should be moved to the new name then consensus need to be reached first. —Slarre 21:57, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Slarre's proposal is not uncontroversial. I hereby oppose it. Suedois 00:11, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Your original move wasn't uncontroversial either. This move merely seeks to move things back to the original status quo. After that, you can make your case for change. -- Exitmoose 07:08, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

• Berlin Center, Ohio → Berlin Township, Mahoning County, Ohio - Page speaks of the township, and map on county page knows nothing of Berlin Center. Berlin Township is currently a redirect with a small edit history. Nyttend 20:50, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

• Russia Township, Lorain County, Ohio → New Russia Township, Lorain County, Ohio — Map on county article (generated by Census Bureau) shows township as "New Russia". I created an article for "New Russia", since a link to such an article was a redlink. —Nyttend 22:06, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
• Critiscism of capitalism → Criticisms of capitalism Ultramarine 07:38, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

• Townhome → Terraced housing — "Terraced housing" 'owns' this article. Of the incoming links, 17 wikilink directly to 'Townhome' or 'Town homes', 14 link to a variation of 'Row home', while 170 articles link to variations of 'Terrace(d) house(s)(housing etc). The term 'townhome' is not mentioned in the introductory paragraph, and is only mentioned at all in two photograph captions later in the article. —Mal 09:13, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Other proposals

All of the proposals listed below need to have a discussion set up on talk page of the article to be moved. Please use the template {{subst:WP:RM|Old Page Name|Requested name|Reason for move}} and, if necessary, create a new dated section.

8 February 2007

• Children's Machine → One Laptop Per Child —(Discuss)— Damn! I lost all I wrote when my browser crashed! Sigh...there's no way I'll convince you all to vote with me on this one now. :( Anyway, I was proposing that Children's Machine be moved to One Laptop Per Child with a section on the laptop, and a section on the project. I attended linux.conf.au and went to a few talks about OLPC (done by Chris Blizzard and Jim Gettys) and not once did I hear the phrase "Children's Machine". Don't take my word for it. Watch the videos. I'm sick of rewriting this, it was about 4 times as long before it crashed. /quit —— JeremyTalk 09:10, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• FN Five-seven → FN Five-seveN —(Discuss)— Correct capitalization. —216.32.80.74 23:01, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

  Not according to WP:MOSCL and WP:MOSTM, it isn't. Chris cheese whine 01:05, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

  "Five-seveN" is the official title of the weapon as set by the company. If this does not matter, we might as well move iPod to Ipod and DragonForce to Dragonforce. They are incorrect, but that is what you are suggesting we should do. 216.32.80.74 05:40, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

  Have you actually read WP:MOSTM? It specifically addresses both CamelCase (as in DragonForce) and initial capital letters (as in iPod). -GTBacchus^(talk) 06:37, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

  Surely neither of those cases are relevant? Or am I missing something? Driller thriller 00:00, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

This is evidently not "uncontroversial", moving it out. Chris cheese whine 02:30, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

• Sidewalk → Footway —(Discuss)— Neutral engineering term for a construction that has a number of regionalisms and colloquialisms —EdC 01:34, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Gin Fizz → Fizz (cocktail) —(Discuss)— This move is being requested by participants of the Mixed Drinks WikiProject involved in the cleanup and assessment of mixed drinks/cocktails articles.
  • This article has been flagged for merge or delete for 1-2 months.
  • In its current form, it is essentially a recipe (which is not desirable at Wikipedia).
  • A new article (Fizz (cocktail)) was written by a project participant that covers the "fizz" family of cocktails.
  • Some information from Gin Fizz is incorporated into the new article, and the edit history must be kept for GFDL license reasons.
  • Normally, I would just blank the article and create a redirect noting the reason with an appropriate R template.
  • This time, there are more than one articles being merged together, and I wanted to be sure that we were doing everything properly.
  • There will be a few other similar "family" mergings coming up, so this is our litmus test to see how to best accomplish this (maybe there is a better way that an admin can do it that we can't?).
  • This move is probably entirely uncontroversial. The Ramos gin fizz (the next article discussed below) might not be. —Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 07:30, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
• Ramos gin fizz → Fizz (cocktail) —(Discuss)— This move is being requested by participants of the Mixed Drinks WikiProject involved in the cleanup and assessment of mixed drinks/cocktails articles.
  • Unlike Gin Fizz (see the next article discussed above) this article was not flagged for merging or deletion, but it has been flagged with non-notable, unreferenced, and stub tags for quite a while.
  • Like the Gin Fizz, in its current form, it is largely a recipe (which is not desirable at Wikipedia), but there is additional good information that has been kept and merged into the new Fizz (cocktail) article.
  • This cocktail is shared with WikiProject New Orleans. I will be mentioning this merge to that project as well as adding their banner to the new article. I am a little concerned that they might feel that we are diluting their article's importance. Hopefully they will agree that a healthy article is better than a sickly one. —Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 07:30, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

7 February 2007

• Dutch (ethnic group) → Dutch people —(Discuss)— Restore earlier name, the Dutch are both a nation and an ethnic group. Article was renamed to limit its content to the ethnic aspects, this is neither accurate nor neutral. NPOV policy requires that titles use the most general and objective terms. —Paul111 20:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

• Tricosagon -> Tricontagon -(Discuss) -- Proper name. Georgia guy 19:54, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

• Rugby football → Rugby —(Discuss)— Primary usage. Target should be moved to Rugby (disambiguation), currently a redirect.
  • Rugby → Rugby (disambiguation)—SigPig |^{SEND - OVER} 08:22, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

• Regions (Niterói) --> somewhere else. --Montchav 09:53, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

• Dr. Kawashima's Brain Training: How Old is Your Brain? → Brain Age: Train Your Brain in Minutes a Day! —(Discuss)— I explained at WP:CVG, but briefly: the article was moved unilaterally by a user who seems to love WP:IAR too much (and edited several redirects, preventing non-admins from moving it back). Brain Age gets over 10x as many Google hits (463,000 vs. 38,300), has been a big hit in North Amerca (one of the top 10 games of 2006) and is the more common name based on how it is referred to in the media. —TJ Spyke 04:10, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
  • That would be a good argument if Brain Training in Europe wasn't the second best-selling DS game ever. You also failed to mention that Sega Genesis was successfully moved to Sega Mega Drive under the logic that SMD is the original name. And that the video game media is stronger in North America than it is in Europe as well. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:58, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

6 February 2007

• Mika (singer) → MIKA —(Discuss)— This seems to be how all his official websites, album art and more importantly liner notes are crediting him. —Driller thriller 23:52, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

• Adam Copeland → Edge (wrestler) —(Discuss)— Adam Copeland (a.k.a. Edge) is a professional wrestler who is best known as Edge. He has been known under this name for almost 9 years. He has made multiple appearances elsewhere besides wrestling, and is known as Edge in those places too. This is his best known name, and this should be the name of the article too. —mikedk9109^SIGN 21:14, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

• X2 (film) → X2: X-Men United —(Discuss) "X2" is not the full name of the movie, and leaving the page there would be the same as listing the second Terminator movie as simply 'T2'.

—Master Deusoma 20:52, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

• Magnus_Blaze → User:Magnus Blaze (rock band) —(Discuss)— Due to potential conflicts of interest, userfy the material would be okay, should it fail to gather enough information to be kept as an encyclopedia article —- Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 12:24, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

• Hillary Rodham Clinton → Hillary Clinton —(Discuss)— This is how she is best known and is even the name her campaign website HillaryClinton.com uses. Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names) points to using the most common name. We don't have, say, Anthony Charles Lynton Blair (even though that's what appears on the ballot paper) or his wife at Cherie Booth even though she uses it professionally. —Timrollpickering 11:57, 6 February 2007 (UTC) Timrollpickering 11:57, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

• AMD K8L → AMD K10 —(Discuss)— Interview from AMD officials confirmed that, see reference link —202.71.240.18 10:42, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
  reference link: The Inquirer report

• May First Labour Movement Centre → Kilusang Mayo Uno —(Discuss)— The English translation is not used, even in English-language media. --Soman 07:28, 6 February 2007 (UTC) —Soman 07:28, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

• Silchester Roman Town → Calleva Atrebatum —(Discuss)— Currently all articles listed under Category:Roman towns and cities in England, except this one, have their name as used in Roman times if known. Calleva Atrebatum is a redirect at present. —Walgamanus 07:08, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

• The Wire (TV series) → The Wire —(Discuss)— The page The Wire currently redirects to the TV series page making the redirect redundant as well as article name consistency meaning the page should be at The Wire. —–– Lid^(Talk) 06:38, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

• Christian extremist terrorism → Christian Terrorism —(Discuss)— Consistency with Islamist terrorism —Sefringle 06:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

5 February 2007

• J. E. Clark → Bud Clark —(Discuss)— Bud is his common name[1][2] —Jason McHuff 21:20, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

• Metropolitan Area Express (Portland) → MAX Light Rail —(Discuss)— "Metropolitan Area Express" is rarely used; "MAX Light Rail" is the common name —Jason McHuff 19:50, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

• Plain-carbon steel → Carbon steel —(Discuss)— As indicated in the article history, "plain carbon steel" is the industry term for the material. It is Wikipedia's convention to use the most common name, which is "carbon steel" in this case. Carbon steel is the name given in Encyclopedia Britannica, and Encarta refers to the material as "carbon steel" in articles such as "Carbon" and "Iron and Steel Manufacture". Also, "carbon steel" gets 1.3 million Google results whereas "plain carbon steel" gets 69,900, over 17 times less (the number of "plain carbon steel" results were subtracted, since those pages show up in a "carbon steel" search). —Kjkolb 17:34, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

• Jayhawks (band) → The Jayhawks —(Discuss)— "The Jayhawks" is the name of the band, as noted in the article and pretty much everywhere else —Korny O'Near 14:51, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

• Reggaetón → Reggaeton —(Discuss)— The word Reggaeton is a hybrid word used by Spanish and English speakers, because it is not purely a Spanish word (borrowing the non Spanish word reggae), it does not adhere to the same rules of spelling and grammar as other Spanish words. Throughout the history of this genre, less than one percent of Reggaeton music CDs use an accent on this word, subsequently this wiki article's title had not been changed in years. One particular user erroneously moved the page, the consensus on the discussion pages for both The Spanish Wiki (where the contributor has had his edite reversed multiple times by a number of established contributors) and The English Wiki is to retain the original title of the page, which is free of an accent mark. Only one user in wikipedia's history has attempted to retitle this page, and the majority of contributors to the discussion have provided facts of why it shouldn't have been renamed. I can't move it myself on en.wikipedia because I need an admin to first remove the old "reggaeton" page so that Reggaetón can be moved. But the fact that the page had been unchanged for years and that most agree it shouldn't be changed is support enough, I can't call this an unctroversial move only because one sole contributor continues to erroneously argue for its renaming —TacoPimp 13:42, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

• Old Trafford (cricket ground) → County Ground, Old Trafford —(Discuss)— adopt official name of ground per LCCC website —DJR (T) 11:48, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:List of media personalities who have vandalised Wikipedia → Wikipedia:Editing of Wikipedia by the media —(Discuss)— More neutral name - allows this 'Wikipedia' article to expand outside just vandalism to cover other aspects of editing by the media. See the talk page for more details. —Carcharoth 10:34, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

• Guidon (U.S. Army) → Guidon —(Discuss)— no need to disambig —Pmsyyz 01:07, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Not uncontroversial. Guidons refer to more than just what the US Army uses. --SigPig |^{SEND - OVER} 09:46, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

• Honour killing → Honor killing —(Discuss)— The article uses American spelling, and the Wikipedia Manual of Style states "Articles should use the same spelling system and grammatical conventions throughout." Discussion on the talk page for the article showed unanimous agreement for a regularization of spelling. I was unable to move the page myself. —Tabun1015 19:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Moves from AmE to BrE and vice versa are especially contentious. Moved from uncontroversial. --SigPig |^{SEND - OVER} 05:42, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

• LEXX → Lexx —(Discuss)— Prior decision to render the title in all-caps was based solely on the appearance of a logotype. In commercial and general use outside Wikipedia, the title is usually written with standard capitalization. —RVJ 04:28, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

• Talk:10c coin (Australian) -- A couple of days ago, Extra3 moved all the Australian banknotes and coins to alternative names. Personally I think the new new names are not as clear. Unfortunately, Wikipedia:Naming conventions (numbers and dates) have little on this topic, so there isn't one clear way to go. However, I should note that other currencies (eg. [3] [4]) use the "spelled out" method of page naming.

  I asked Extra3 for his reasons on the page moves to which he replied on my talk page. His main reason seemed to be that people new to Wikipedia may type "$5" into the search box looking for the $5 note. Which I suppose is possible, but I think it would be better in this example to create a redirect $5 note (Australian) → Five dollar note (Australian). This way the article remains clear whilst at the same time making sure people typing in "$5" into the search box gets what they are looking for.

  So, in conclusion - I would suggest these articles be moved back to their previous name, then redirects created on the "new" names. --DWZ (talk • email • contribs) 03:53, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

  • 10c coin (Australian) → Ten cent coin (Australian)
  • 20c coin (Australian) → Twenty cent coin (Australian)
  • 50c (round) coin (Australian) → Round fifty cent coin (Australian)
  • 50c coin (Australian) → Fifty cent coin (Australian)
  • $1 coin (Australian) → One dollar coin (Australian)
  • $2 coin (Australian) → Two dollar coin (Australian)
  • $1 note (Australian) → One dollar note (Australian)
  • $2 note (Australian) → Two dollar note (Australian)
  • $5 note (Australian) → Five dollar note (Australian)
  • $10 note (Australian) → Ten dollar note (Australian)
  • $20 note (Australian) → Twenty dollar note (Australian)
  • $50 note (Australian) → Fifty dollar note (Australian)
  • $100 note (Australian) → One hundred dollar note (Australian)
    • I agree with this move, the old names are more intuitive. - Ta bu shi da yu 08:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

• African American Vernacular English → Ebonics —(Discuss)— Adhering to the naming conventions this page should be named to a title that most English speakers are familiar with. —Wikidudeman ^(talk) 03:28, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Please see Talk:African_American_Vernacular_English#Article_Title:_Ebonics_vs._AAVE for arguments against (and for) this suggestion. -- Hoary 09:35, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

• Islamic Christianity studies → Islam and Christianity comparative studies —(Discuss)— more neutral title —Sefringle 01:54, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

4 February 2007

• Diatomic → Diatomic molecule — Based on the contents of the article, this is a more suitable title. —ffm ^yes? 18:12, 4 February 2007 (UTC) ffm ^yes? 18:12, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

• City of Tshwane → City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality —(Discuss)— Correct name of municipality, will bring it into line with other first sentence of article, and other municipalities (eg. City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality, Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality), as per talk page, official name is City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality —Park3r 16:50, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

• Dominator UAV → Aeronautics Dominator

Hello, would people with experience in naming conventions for articles please chime in at the Discussion page here: Talk:Dominator UAV. I am flexible on the article name, but I want to ensure people using search engines like "Google" and "Wikipedia" will find it quickly and easily. Thank you Headphonos 16:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

• Who the Fuck Are Arctic Monkeys? → Who the Fuck Are Arctic Monkeys —(Discuss)— correct erroneous titling —DJR (T) 15:50, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

• Agnolo di Cosimo → Bronzino —(Discuss)— B is currently a redirect to Agnolo di Cosimo. See article and talk page; Bronzino is much the most commonly used name Johnbod 12:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

• Talk:Blend -- Blend currently redirects to Blend (linguistics), so the unnecessary disambiguation could be removed – Blend (linguistics) being a primary meaning. However, the initial disambiguation page[5] should be kept, so Blend could be moved to Blend (disambiguation). --Korg (talk) 05:39, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Blend → Blend (disambiguation)
  • Blend (linguistics) → Blend

• Till Eulenspiegels lustige Streiche → Till Eulenspiegel's Merry Pranks —(Discuss)— Per WP:UE: changing to a commonly-used English name rather than one in a foreign language. —Heimstern Läufer 04:00, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

3 February 2007

• Sky Digital (UK & Ireland) EPG → List of channels in Sky Digital in the UK and Ireland —(Discuss)— This article lists channels in the Sky Digital package. Why don't we define what it is? —JSH-alive^{talk to me}_{see my works}^{mail to me} 15:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

• Tod und Verklärung → Death and Transfiguration —(Discuss)— Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) suggests using English titles where one exists, and the name Death and Transfiguration is a commonly-used translation. Until recently, the guidelines for Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical music said never to translate titles, but this restriction has been removed. I believe it would be more consistent with Wikipedia policy to use the English name. —Heimstern Läufer 07:51, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

• Malaysian American → Immigration from Malaysia to the United States —(Discuss)— Existing title is a neologism lacking reliable sources; immigrants from Malaysia to the United States don't actually identify this way —cab 05:31, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

• Singaporean American → Immigration from Singapore to the United States —(Discuss)— Existing title is a neologism lacking reliable sources; immigrants from Singapore to the United States don't actually identify this way —cab 05:01, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

• Pom-pon → Pompon —(Discuss)— The spelling, according to Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language is "pompon" and is a borrowing of a French word of the same spelling, which in turn derives from a Latin root for "pomp." I've fixed the disambiguation page and its uncited assertion that the word is "often misspelled as 'ponpon.'" The article was originally entitled "Pompon" so there is a redirect now from what the article ought to be called to what it is currently being called. I don't know how to unredirect something. P0M 04:22, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Created discussion section on relevant page. --SigPig |^{SEND - OVER} 06:49, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

• C. Jack Ellis → Hakim Mansour Ellis —(Discuss)— Attested namechange. —68.39.174.238 03:28, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Backlog

Move dated sections here after five days have passed.

2 February 2007

• Futari wa Pretty Cure → Pretty Cure —(Discuss)— It airs as Pretty Cure in serveral European coutries. And, In Singapore, where English is one of the Four official languages, MediaCorp aired it as Pretty Cure. —JSH-alive^{talk to me}_{see my works}^{mail to me} 06:51, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

• Railroad car → rolling stock —(Discuss)— Title, Railroad car makes little sense outside the USA, In Britain a car would mean a passenger carrying vehicle, a freight vehicle would be called a wagon. I recognize the term does not cover railcars or multiple units but feel that these are well catered for in their existing separate articles. —Oxyman 05:51, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

• King Bowser → Bowser (Nintendo) —(Discuss)— Use most common name. My move was reverted because of the existence of a short and ridiculous "discussion" to have it at "King Bowser" out of irrational dislike of parenthesis in names. The article doesn't even use the name. —' ^{(Feeling chatty? ) (Edits!)} 01:36, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

• High Council of Sweden → Privy Council of Sweden —(Discuss)— This article was renamed to "High Council of Sweden" by User:Suedois with any previous discussion. I don't see why this article should have any other name than other privy councils that exist (e.g. Privy Council of the United Kingdom, Privy Council of Ireland etc.). —Slarre 01:11, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

• Gauloise → Gauloises —(Discuss)— Actual trademark. As seen on the logo pic, website, etc. —Tokek 00:01, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

1 February 2007

• Magnetica -> Shunkan Puzzloop- This link to a past character sneaked it in as uncontroversial. This is a fairly standard compromise in computer game articles where all three major regions have different names. Magneta is one of the English names, it is also Actionloop in English--Josquius 23:27, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
  • How is this an appropriate move in any definition of the word? So instead of using EITHER of the English names, you use the least commonly known name to English-speaking people available? - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:15, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Instead of using either of the English names which mean nothing to people who use the other one we use the original name which means something to both.--Josquius 13:02, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
    • It means nothing for both! There is no policy or guideline that says "if you can't come to a decision that satisfies at least one party, come up with one that satisfies neither party". - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:15, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

• beautifulgarbage → Beautiful Garbage —(Discuss)— More appropriate typesetting according to Wikipedia's policy on album titles. This has however been disputed, which is why I am proposing the move rather than performing it immediately. —Hymyly^T@C 20:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• Talk:David Miller → NewName -- Move somewhere else. Undo a bad move by User:Rosameliamartinez. This should not be the primary disambiguation. If there were only two of them, maybe he would deserve primary head-to-head against any of the others, but he does not deserve the primary spot versus at least 13 other David Millers with Wikipedia articles, plus others mentioned which do not yet have articles. Any of the former names of this article which are now redirects would be better: David Miller (mayor of Toronto) or David Miller (Canadian politician)) [was badly capitalized with lc "c"] or David R. Miller. Also, many of the current links to the David Miller article should be linked either to someone else or the disambiguation page. --Gene Nygaard 17:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
  • David Miller (disambiguation) → David Miller

31 January 2007

• Jogaila → Jogaila (Władysław II Jagiełło) —(Discuss)— The editors are divided around Jogaila and Władysław II Jagiełło. In the past, some controversial moves have led to heated debates. Using both names seems like the reasonable compromise. —_{<span style="border:1px solid}

• Northeastern University, Boston → Northeastern University —(Discuss)— Many articles link to Northeastern University which now redirects to Northeastern University (disambiguation). Northeastern University should be the title of the university's article as opposed to Northeastern University, Boston because there is only one Northeastern University. The disambiguation page leads to articles for other universities with "Northeastern" in the title. —Crashintome4196 12:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

30 January 2007

• John_Watts_Young → John_Young —(Discuss)— Article title should simply be his first name, last name to be consistent with similarly named astronaut articles (see Eugene Cernan request below}. —Bart 22:30, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• Charles_Moss_Duke,_Jr. → Charles_Duke —(Discuss)— Article title should simply be his first name, last name to be consistent with similarly named astronaut articles (see Eugene Cernan request below}. —Bart 22:30, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• Coritani → Corieltauvi —(Discuss)— Inscription evidence discovered about twenty years ago (as mentioned in the article), suggests the correct form of this tribal name is Corieltauvi (currently a redirect). This is now generally accepted and Coritani is only used in older works. The key articles on the subject are Tomlin's 'Roman Leicester, a Corrigendum: For Coritani should we read Corieltauvi?' in Transactions of the Leicester Archaeological & Historical Society 48 and 'Non Coritani sed Corieltauvi' in the Antiquaries' Journal 63 (both 1983) —Walgamanus 22:23, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• Crusaders → Crusaders (Super rugby franchise) —(Discuss)— Name should redirect to Crusades as primary reference; team article will then follow the format of other Super rugby franchises (Blues, Hurricanes) etc —SigPig |^{SEND - OVER} 17:13, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• St Johnstone F.C. → St. Johnstone F.C. —(Discuss)— Move revert request. Full stop/period should be included per the club's official website. The previous attempt to move it seems to have been done erroneously. —Dudesleeper · Talk 16:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

29 January 2007

• Polish Expedition to Kiev → Kiev Expedition (1018) —(Discuss)— Concise title with a date to disambig between other expeditions to that city (including more than one by the Poles). —Appleseed (Talk) 18:09, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

• Level of support for evolution → Endorsement and rejection of evolution —(Discuss) - According to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (precision), this article has a very poor title. Note that both "level" and "support" are quite ambiguous. Would you know from the current title that this article would be about polls and open letters regarding both the endorsement and rejection of evolution in the context of the creation-evolution controversy? A number of the other editors have proposed equally ambiguous titles, the alternative is the only one that has seemed to have had at least a moderate (if somewhat guarded) support. Another idea floated was Popularity of evolution or Popular support for evolution, but I believe those two titles to be more ambiguous than the proposed one here. Note that there are a lot of ways to write an imprecise title to this article, but precision is absolutely necessary because we need to make sure that people are not misled in, for example, a POV-pushing fashion. For example, the simple title "support for evolution" rightly redirects to evidence for evolution because evolution's support isn't verifiably tied to opinion polls and open letters but rather to the scientific evidence. --ScienceApologist 05:45, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

28 January 2007

• Soft Light (The X-Files) → Soft Light — TV naming conventions - move and add a dab notice, but there is no need for Soft Light to redirect to Soft light and force dab in the episode article title. —WikidSmaht (talk) 05:41, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

  Oppose speedy rename for soft light. I think this should be debated, as I think people would expect the soft light article and not an episode article. 70.55.84.145 05:38, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

  While opposed as well, I won;t discuss it here [this comment was made when the listing was under Uncontroversial proposals] as per policy. However, to explain the above comment, it should be noted that there is no notice of the proposed move at either of the affected pages, nor any sign of a discussion section. I have since started one at Talk:Soft Light (The X-Files). --Ckatz^chat_spy 07:15, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

  Moved from #Uncontroversial proposals, because it's clearly not uncontroversial. -GTBacchus^(talk) 23:22, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

  Hmm, so it would seem. --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

  To be fair, a speedy, by definition, does not require discussion, since it is uncontroversial. That is why I didn’t start one. --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

  I could swear I saw a precedent and maybe even something in naming conventions where when the difference between a film, episode, book, etc. and another topic is a capital letter, they are each placed at a non-disambiguated name with a dab notice at the top of one or both articles.( Not discussing, adding to request reason since it has been moved down here.) --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

• Reggaetón → Reggaeton — The word Reggaeton is a merging of non Spanish words as used by Hispanics, and thus does not require an accent mark - some journalists accidentally use the accent mark, but the artists themselves do not and an accented version does not appear on reggaeton album covers. Attempted a move to a title without the accent, but that title exists as a redirect back to the page with an accent. —TacoPimp 22:23, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

  Moved from #Uncontroversial proposals. Looking at both page histories, I see that this is clearly not uncontroversial. -GTBacchus^(talk) 22:34, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

• Super Mario Bros.: The Lost Levels → Super Mario Bros. 2 (Japan) -(Discuss)- See discussion. Georgia guy 22:31, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

• Nicene Christianity → Late Antique Christianity —(Discuss)— lostcaesar (talk · contribs) attempted to do a cut-and-paste move, stating the new title was more academically correct. I'm bringing it here for wider input. —-- nae'blis 18:11, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

• Sheffield Midland station → Sheffield railway station Sheffield station —(Discuss)— The current name of the station is just Sheffield so the article should be of that name. Sheffield Midland should be mentioned as part of the Sheffield railway station article. Needs admin assistance as Sheffield railway station is currently a redirect to Sheffield Midland station. I suggest that Sheffield Midland station should be a redirect to the main article which should be name Sheffield railway station. —Adambro 16:29, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Having discussed this with other Wikipedians, I now propose a move to Sheffield Station to reflect the fact that there is also a stop on the Sheffield Supertram. Adambro 19:50, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Sheffield station seems to be a better title as per WP:MOSCL Adambro 18:07, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

• Al-Kindi → Talk:Al-Kindī —(Discuss)— There is a discussion on the Talk page, but it's stalled. The main argument against sdepends upon a claim that "al-Kindi" is the more common form, but appeals to Googled evidence by an editor who now admits that he can't actually look at the relevant evidence. Since then, no-one has contributed. More eyes and discussion would be welcome. —Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 12:45, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

25 January 2007

• Administrative Review Board (military) → Administrative Review Board —(Discuss)— Another wikipedian moved Administrative Review Board to Administrative Review Board (military) and created a stub article Administrative Review Board (Labor). There are two articles that had linked to Administrative Review Board that should have referenced the Department of Labor's Administrative Review Board. And there are almost 400 articles that link to Administrative Review Board that should reference the Office for the Administrative Review of Detained Enemy Combatants's Administrative Review Board. I believe the convention is that the person who moved ARB to ARB (military) should have gone and edited the ~400 articles so they didn't point to the new disambiguation page they left at Administrative Review Board. If the person doing that editing doesn't use automated tools that would be almost two days work. Unnecessary work IMO. As a stopgap I created Administrative Review Board (disambiguation) and changed Administrative Review Board to be a redirection to Administrative Review Board (military). Cheers! —Geo Swan 21:22, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

• Asif Iqbal (detainee) → Asif Iqbal (Guantanamo detainee 87) —(Discuss)— This article was previously named Asif Iqbal (Guantanamo detainee 87). This is consistent with several dozen other Guantanamo captives. Many of those Guantanamo captive's names collided with the names of other Guantanamo captives. I gave the rest of them similar names, for consistency and predictability. Another wikipedian thought Asif Iqbal (Guantanamo detainee 87) was too verbose. I felt this name failed to provide enough details to distinguish this individual from other Asif Iqbals who were also prisoners. The other wikipedian disputed that this was likely to ever be a problem. But it turned out that there was another Asif Iqbal imprisoned because he was suspected of terrorism. So, I believe the article should be restored to the previous name. — Geo Swan 21:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

20 January 2007

• Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid/draft version → Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid —(Discuss)— current article is too long and needs splitting; cross-linkage already incorporated. Considerable discussion about consensus is on the current article talk page Talk:Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid#Consensus_reached?; have copied and posted it on Talk:Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid/draft version#Requested_move, where it can continue (as per request format). This article is currently tagged "controversial." It is not entirely clear whether or not consensus has been reached yet. --NYScholar 10:45, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

18 January 2007

• List of wizards in fantasy → Wizard (fantasy) —(Discuss)— "List of wizards in fantasy" originally was "Wizard (fantasy)"; a Wikipedian nominated it for deletion, the decision was "keep" to maintain the edit history, and the Wikipedian then did an end run about the deletion process by moving it and then creating a new "Wizard (fantasy)" without its edit history —Goldfritha 02:53, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

• Could someone else please review this? I honestly can't make heads or tails of where about three different articles belong in the course of redirects, moves, and an AfD. I need a more experienced eye; I've been trying to figure this out for a couple days. Teke ^(talk) 06:45, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

• As yet, no consensus has been reached about what to do, and it doesn't look like the discussions have yet finished. There is some complex history merging and tidying up to do once a decision is attained about where the page ought to be. Proto::► 12:30, 8 February 2007 (UTC)