Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requested moves: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
m rm requests which have been completed
→‎[[27 December]] [[2006]]: rm Basel earthquake -- malformed; rm Chinese written language -- accepted
Line 233: Line 233:
==[[28 December]] [[2006]]==
==[[28 December]] [[2006]]==
*'''[[Ethnic Japanese]] → [[Nikkei people]]''' —(''[[{{{4|Talk}}}:Ethnic Japanese|Discuss]]'')— Current title is confusing because it has the same meaning as [[Japanese people]] - that is, people with Japanese ethnicity. The contents indicate that this article concerns only people with Japanese ethnicity living outside of Japan; the specific term for this is ''Nikkei''. —[[User:Dekimasu|Dekimasu]] 06:57, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
*'''[[Ethnic Japanese]] → [[Nikkei people]]''' —(''[[{{{4|Talk}}}:Ethnic Japanese|Discuss]]'')— Current title is confusing because it has the same meaning as [[Japanese people]] - that is, people with Japanese ethnicity. The contents indicate that this article concerns only people with Japanese ethnicity living outside of Japan; the specific term for this is ''Nikkei''. —[[User:Dekimasu|Dekimasu]] 06:57, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

==[[27 December]] [[2006]]==
*'''[[Basel earthquake]] → [[1356 Basel earthquake]]''' —(''[[{{{4|Talk}}}:Basel earthquake|Discuss]]'')— more common name used in earthquake literature - see also talk page discussion. —[[User:Carcharoth|Carcharoth]] 23:18, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

*'''[[Chinese_written_language]] → [[Written_Chinese]]''' —(''[[{{{4|Talk}}}:Chinese_written_language|Discuss]]'')— — The new title is shorter, just as unambiguous as the current one and would be analogous to [[spoken Chinese]]. See [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions (languages)]] for guidelines on usage of "language" in titles. —[[User:Peter Isotalo|Peter]] <sup>[[User talk:Peter Isotalo|Isotalo]]</sup> 15:54, 27 December 2006 (UTC) <small>Moved to Controversial.</small> —[[User:Pmanderson|Septentrionalis]] <small>[[User talk:Pmanderson|PMAnderson]]</small> 18:49, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:06, 7 January 2007

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

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

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

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

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

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

When not to use this page

Shortcuts

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

Undiscussed moves

Shortcuts

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

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

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

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

Uncontroversial proposals

Only list 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.

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.

7 January 2007

  • Prypiat, Ukraine → Pripyat, Ukraine —(Discuss)— Pripyat appears to be by far the most common spelling. It gets 302,000 Google results vs. 25,600 for Prypiat, and it gets 6 vs. 1 for Google News (the single result is a video game site reporting on a video game and the two other sites reporting on the game use the other spelling). The BBC, Der Spiegel and a Ukraine TV website in the Google News results all use the Pripyat spelling. I did not include links because the urls are so big that they mess up the editing box. The searches can easily be repeated. The BBC usually uses the Pripyat spelling. A search of its site gives 107 vs. 5 unique results. Finally, the website for the town is http://pripyat.com, although I do not know if it is official. —Kjkolb 11:55, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

6 January 2007

  • Sexual_intercourse → Vaginal_intercourse —(Discuss)— The current article indicates that "sexual intercourse" only refers to penile-vaginal intercourse. This is exclusive of the act of anal intercourse, which can readily be described as a form of sexual intercourse. There is a sentence in at the top of the page that states "To engage in sexual intercourse, the erect penis is inserted into the vagina..." This is not accurate; the dictionary states that several acts are described as sexual intercourse [1]. The proposal is to rename the article "Vaginal intercourse", because that is the specific act to which the article exclusively refers. —Joie de Vivre 15:04, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

5 January 2007

  • KISS (band) → Kiss (band) —(Discuss)— The full capitalization of band names is at odds with WP:NC and WP:MOS-TM. I have refrained from requesting the moves of related articles for now, given the vast number of them. These moves should become uncontroversial, if this one finds approval. —Cyrus XIII 21:22, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

4 January 2007

  • Michael Leeroyall Evans → Mike Evans (basketball) —(Discuss)— Mike Evans has never gone by the full name "Michael Leeroyall Evans", and there is apparently no other basketball-related individual named Mike Evans. Why was this moved? FYI: The same editor who moved this also moved a whole lot of other "Mike Evans". --Downwards 01:05, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Relisting with proper talk header. Patstuarttalk|edits 01:31, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We should move Lieutenant-Governors of Ontario to List of Lieutenant-Governors of Ontario, as that article is clearly a list. I would also like to do this move because Monarchy in Ontario is more appropriately named Lieutenant-Governor of Ontario, which also redirects to Lieutenant-Governors of Ontario. "Monarchy of Ontario" is pretty much an article about the "Lieutenant Governor of Ontario". I have not listed this as an "uncontroversial" move because the edit summaries for these articles seem to indicate a number of disputed manual moves. In fact, once "Monarchy of Ontario" is moved to "Lieutenant-Governor of Ontario" and "Lieutenant-Governors of Ontario" becomes "List of Lieutenant-Governors of Ontario", the other articles only need their re-directs changed. —Agent 86 00:53, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • INSEE → National Institute for Statistics and Economic Studies —(Discuss)— Two reasons. The first is that it is an initialism and we generally don't use those for naming articles per WP:NCA. The second is that articles about French stuff on the English wikipedia should be in English, title included, unless the French name is of common use in English. --Bob 23:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC) —Bob 23:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Giorgio Orsini → Giorgio da Sebenico —(Discuss)— The last move request (Dec 26,2006) was from Juraj Dalmatinac → Giorgio Orsini, which has now suceeded, after 4:0 votes cast in the survey. During the discussion above, I gave reasons why I thought Giorgio da Sebenico the better choice, which are further confirmed by the fuller research by User:Evv above. Neither of us voted in the last survey. Opinions expressed passim on this further move by the 4 who did vote are: one for, one against.
    Giorgio da Sebenico is the mostly commonly used name in English, and is used by the preponderance of high-quality reference works. See the full discussion above (on talk page) —Johnbod 22:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • SysOp → sysop —(Discuss)— Regular capitalization seems to be more common both on Wikipedia and in the world at large. —-- nae'blis 16:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Hitchers (band from Limerick) → The Hitchers —(Discuss)— The The Hitchers page originally contained the article now at The Hitchers (band from Limerick). Another article was created, "The Hitchers (band from Teeside)", and "The Hitchers" changed to a disambig between the two. The Teeside band article was successfully prodded, and the Limerick band article survived an AfD. The information on the Teeside band has been merged with the Limerick band article. I think that it would be more sensible to rename the only current article ("band from Limerick") back to "The Hitchers", but we need to retain the edit history, and we can't do a move while the redirect exists. As I see it, the ideal state of things will be to have the article text at The Hitchers with the edit history that's now at "band from Limerick", with "band from Limerick" and perhaps "band from Teeside" as redirects. —Tevildo 03:25, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Golden Road Box Set → ? —(Discuss)— I don't know what names to up with, but I think it needs a better title than this. It is difficult for average person to type it in, and it is not well-named. —Gh87 02:20, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment this is the name of the album, as listed at All Music Guide, Amazon.com, ect. However, at the store at dead.net, it is simply The Golden Road Box Set. A WP:REDIRECT from that to this one, or a move to The Golden Road Box Set are two options. Update I have moved it to The Golden Road Box Set as per the official store page with a redirect from the old article. -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 02:26, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Comment: Right now, we're discussing its new name as it moved already —Gh87 02:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • As I stated on the article talk page, because it is "difficult to find" is not a valid reason to request a move since this is the official name of the album/box set and conforms to WP:NAME and WP:MOS. -- moe.RON Let's talk | done 02:59, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3 January 2007

  • Liturgy of the hours → Liturgy of the Hours —(Discuss)— There may be liturgies of the hours that have been composed on private initiative; but this article is not about them: it is about the official liturgical rite of the Latin Catholic Church; such liturgical rites are usually capitalized, e.g. Anointing of the Sick —Lima 20:07, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Relisting. Patstuarttalk|edits 19:53, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Satana (Marvel Comics) → Satana —(Discuss)— The only other article to use this name is Satana (India). Though I don't know a great deal about this Indian village, it's notability would seem to be questionable. I believe the Marvel Comics character should have priority. —PC78 17:36, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • French Parliament → Parliament of France —(Discuss)— Continuing with the housekeeping project of renaming French articles in English accoring to a single style by Wiki conventions of X of Y/X in Y etc. --Bob 03:49, 3 January 2007 (UTC) —Bob 03:49, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2 January 2007

  • Heroes of Might and Magic III → Heroes of Might and Magic III: The Restoration of Erathia —(Discuss)— The history of this is a bit complicated, but a general overview is available on the relevant talk page. In brief, User:Frecklefoot moved it from the longer title (the official release name of the title) to the shorter title. Certainly, Frecklefoot didn't do anything inappropriate, but looking over the history, it's not at all clear that there was real consensus: the previous RM attracted little attention, so the page was not moved back, but the preponderance of comments on the talk page seem to support the original, longer title, with Frecklefoot's being the only consistent voice to the contrary. The game is part of a series, and the other titles in the series are not abbreviated in the same way. – Sean Daugherty (talk) 19:02, 24 December 2006 (UTC) —– Sean Daugherty (talk) 19:02, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1 January 2007

  • Shtime → Štimlje —(Discuss)— Move from the Albanian name to the Serbian one, to reflect common English usage, as illustrated in the "Sources" sub-section of the discussion. —Evv 21:25, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bulletproof vest → Body armor —(Discuss)— The term "bulletproof vest" is a misnomer. The article name should reflect the correct name of the item. To give a related example of how bad this is, calling body armor a "bulletproof vest" is like calling a magazine a "clip". —207.67.146.243 00:41, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Backlog

Move dated sections here after five days have passed.

31 December 2006

29 December 2006

28 December 2006

  • Ethnic Japanese → Nikkei people —(Discuss)— Current title is confusing because it has the same meaning as Japanese people - that is, people with Japanese ethnicity. The contents indicate that this article concerns only people with Japanese ethnicity living outside of Japan; the specific term for this is Nikkei. —Dekimasu 06:57, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requested_moves&oldid=99100702"