Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests

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: 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.

Add a new request

Remove all requests

Technical requests

Edit this section if you want to move a request between sections.

Uncontroversial technical requests

Most requests should be placed below this heading.

• NewspaperArchive.com (currently a redirect to NewspaperArchive) → NewspaperArchive (move · discuss) – Official name no longer has the ".com" suffix. DigitalIceAge (talk) 00:39, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

  Has the common name used in independent reliable sources changed? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 02:22, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

  When used in running text, yes (example 1, 2, 3). Problem is, the site is used so heavily as a source that it's hard to separate the mentions from citation URLs. DigitalIceAge (talk) 02:30, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

• Fear Files: Darr Ki Sacchi Tasvirein (currently a redirect to Fear Files) → Fear Files (move · discuss) – Move page as per WP: COMMON NAME 2409:40E0:2C:24C:5039:B9FF:FE72:AA05 (talk) 00:48, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Requests to revert undiscussed moves

If your request involves reverting a move, place it here.

Contested technical requests

Do not insert new requests in this section. Only move requests here if the requested move has been contested.

• ABC News (disambiguation) (currently a redirect to ABC News) → ABC News (move · discuss) – WP:MALPLACED. Can't move because "ABC News already exists. DaCrashy (T.C.) 20:57, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

  We should probably hold off on taking action here until the ongoing MRV on ABC News has been resolved. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 21:20, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

  MRV is still going. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 00:05, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

• Gotjawal Forest (currently a redirect to Gotjawal) → Gotjawal (move · discuss) – "Gotjawal" is a generic Jeju language word for the wild forest, kinda like how "the bush" is used for Australia. It shouldn't be a proper noun like the current title. This is backed up by the content of the article. There are grammar mistakes here and there in the article; I suspect the titling is a similar misunderstanding. 211.43.120.242 (talk) 07:57, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

  Not necessarily the case. In English, a lot of place names are tautological, adding a descriptor like "forest", "mountain", "desert", "river", etc. to a name already including this meaning in the native language. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:55, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

  I don't think that's what this is; I'm not worried about tautologies here. The places on the list you link are single geographical features, e.g. a lake or a river, that happen to have a tautological name.

  Gotjawal is not one specific feature, it's a category: multiple different places that are disconnected. There are several different gotjawal forests that each have their own individual names.

  I'm proposing that this page be treated more like Tundra or Rainforest; it's the forest biome on Jeju Island as a whole. 211.43.120.242 (talk) 14:12, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

  If that is the case, the article would need to be updated (with sources) to reflect that, as it currently describes it as a single forest. --Ahecht (TALK
  PAGE) 15:49, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

  I think it already does describe it as multiple forests, but it's just unclear because of grammar and the telephone game played over 10+ years of people trying to fix the grammar over time and misunderstanding it.

  [1] this academic source describes it as a category, not as a single forest. [2] This source does too: Four gotjawal regions have been singled out for their well-preserved conditions -- Hankyung-Andeok Gotjawal and Aewol Gotjawal in the west, Jocheon- Hamdeok Gotjawal and Gujawa-Seongsan Gotjawal in the east.

  If the page communicates an impression of it being a single forest, it's incorrect. I was going to get around to rewriting the page anyway. Do I need to do that first before the rename? 211.43.120.242 (talk) 16:37, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

• Kanjurmarg (currently a redirect to Kanjur Marg) → Kanjur Marg (move · discuss) – two different words 49.32.182.115 (talk) 15:10, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

I cannot see evidence of it being two words. Do you have a source for this? C F A 💬 17:19, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

'Kanjur' is the Area name and 'Marg' means Road in local language, so these two are separate words. Here are some news references 1, 2, 3 49.32.231.23 (talk) 05:48, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Those references use both names so this is not uncontoversial. I suggest you start a RM discussion. C F A 💬 18:56, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

• Vasai Virar Municipal Corporation Marathon (currently a redirect to Vasai-Virar Municipal Corporation Marathon) → Vasai-Virar Municipal Corporation Marathon (move · discuss) – needed 49.32.182.115 (talk) 16:53, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

The official website and every other source I can find does not use a hyphen. Do you have a source for this? C F A 💬 17:19, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Here are some news references 1, 2 and also you can clearly see the logo on this website where Hyphen is present 3. 49.32.247.21 (talk) 04:05, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

• Kanjurmarg railway station (currently a redirect to Kanjur Marg railway station) → Kanjur Marg railway station (move · discuss) – Kanjur and Marg both are different words 49.32.231.23 (talk) 05:55, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

  Not uncontroversial; proof of WP:COMMONNAME needs to be given. The pictures in the article seem to suggest no space in the name; you'd need to prove that most reliable sources spell it with a space in order for this move to pass 211.43.120.242 (talk) 08:44, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

• Moon Ga-young → Mun Ka-young (currently a redirect back to Moon Ga-young) (move · discuss) – List of reliable sources (per WP:RSPSOURCES and WP:KO/RS#R) using the name "Mun Ka-young": 1.(www.chosun.com) 2.(www.koreatimes.co.kr) 3.(www.voguehk.com) 4.(www.koreaherald.com) 5.(en.yna.co.kr) 27.125.245.54 (talk) 09:16, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

  I'm seeing several sources in the article which seem to support the name Moon Ga-young. I'd recommend opening a full requested move discussion for this. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:33, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

  All the sources above used the name Mun Ka-young, what is "support the name Moon Ga-young" mean? 27.125.245.189 (talk) 16:51, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

  I was simply looking through the references in the article and checking which name pops up more in sources at a glance. I'm not making a statement about which title would be more appropriate, just that a full discussion may be beneficial to establish a consensus on the topic. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:55, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

• Canada Permanent Trust Building → Canada Permanent Building (currently a redirect back to Canada Permanent Trust Building) (move · discuss) – This is not the correct name of the building. The name is visible on the front entrance. Tsc9i8 (talk) 18:18, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@Tsc9i8 Sources use both names so this is not necessarily uncontroversial. There is also a semi-notable "Canada Permanent Building" in Edmonton which complicates things. C F A 💬 18:51, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

• Raazz Mahal → Raaz Mahal – Dakini Ka Rahasya (move · discuss) – Moving page per WP:COMMON NAME 2409:40E0:102C:F100:7C13:6AFF:FEB5:72AB (talk) 23:48, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Per the sources in the article, "Raazz Mahal" IS the common name. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 23:51, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Then move the page to Raazz Mahal – Dakini Ka Rahasya as per WP:HYPHEN. 2409:40E0:1046:8941:9024:FFFF:FE30:219D (talk) 00:14, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Administrator needed

Edit this section only if your request requires an administrator. Usually, do so if the page has been fully protected or move protected (see this guide to which moves need administrators). Place your request in another section if it only requires a page mover.

• Ivory Coast → Côte d'Ivoire (currently a redirect back to Ivory Coast) (move · discuss) – Talk:Ivory Coast - requested move has now been closed, and we just need someone to move the move-locked page. Thank you! Red Slash 06:36, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

  @Red Slash: are you sure you wish to go ahead with this? I personally don't think your close is a good one, there are good points made by both supporters and opposers regarding common usage, and it should have been closed as no consensus. Or if you feel strongly about it then you should have cast a "support" !vote. But I suppose if you don't reconsider, pending a move review, we will go ahead and make the move as proposed.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:31, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Not involved, and no disrespect to User:Red Slash, but such an important article probably shouldn't be a non-admin close. 162 etc. (talk) 16:50, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Moving to contested due to discussion here and elsewhere; an MRV is likely to be opened though. @Red Slash:, next time you should request pages that are move-protected to "Administrator needed". Toadette^Edit! 18:45, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

A move review is definitely needed. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 22:15, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm sure I want to go through with this. It's a cut-and-dried move, with nothing but a technical limitation standing in the way. This is not a difficult case--100% of the evidence lies in favor of the move request. I do not support the move, per se, but the consensus is very clear.

If someone wants to take me to WP:MRV, they're more than welcome to, but until then, yeah, I'm standing by this close. Red Slash 06:09, 11 July 2024 (UTC)