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.
• 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 proposals here that are clearly uncontroversial but require administrator help to complete (for example, spelling and capitalization fixes). Do not list a proposed page move in this section if there is any possibility that it could be opposed by anyone. Please list new requests at the bottom of the list in this section and use {{subst:RMassist|Old page name|Requested name|Reason for move}} rather than copying previous entries. The template will automatically include your signature. No edits to the article's talk page are required. If you object to a proposal listed here, please re-list it in the #Incomplete and contested proposals section below.

• The Roof is on Fire → The Roof Is on Fire — Verbs should not be lowercased in song titles. — Funk Junkie (talk) 22:43, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
• Battle of Timor (1942–43) → Battle of Timor — Unnecessary dab; latter redirects to former. — -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 00:30, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Incomplete and contested proposals

With the exception of a brief description of the problem or objection to the move request, please do not discuss move requests here. If you support an incomplete or contested move request, please consider following the instructions above to create a full move request, and move the discussion to the "Other Proposals" section below.

• Villarreal/Vila-real → Vila-real —(Discuss)— Someone not discuss nothing and not fix after his move, use native name is better —Matthew_hk tc 23:36, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
• Prudential (Guaranty) Building (Buffalo, New York) → Prudential Building — No other Prudential Buildings, so no need for disambiguation. — robwingfield ^«T•C» 15:21, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Google search shows Prudential Buildings in several cities in UK and USA. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 19:00, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Prudential Building===Newark, New Jersey. So this needs to be a dab. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:38, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

• Székely Land→ Székely Region - there is no gov. of Szekely it's simply a region from Romania. MNsRATEw (talk) 06:32, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Székely Land is a simple translation of the Hungarian Székelyföld. These people speak Hungarian, so I don't understand what this is all about. Squash Racket (talk) 06:40, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

• Tom-Yum-Goong → The Protector (2005 film) — Requested move from Thai to English-language title, as per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films)#Foreign-language films. The Protector (2005 film) already exists as a redirect page. — Gram123 (talk) 18:59, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
  • I disagree that this is uncontroversial. The film is also titled Warrior King in the UK. Why settle on the US title? The proposed move to The Protector (2005 film) is also inaccurate, as it wasn't released as The Protector until 2006. — WiseKwai 19:58, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
  • It's still a 2005 film regardless. The guideline clearly calls for using an English-language title, but a case would have to be made for using one of these over the other. PC78 (talk) 08:00, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
    • The film was produced in 2005, and this is what is noted in the article, so I think that's safe. As for the English title, I am in the UK myself, and considered proposing the move to Warrior King. However, I went with The Protector as this title is used in USA, Canada and Australia, whereas the English title of Warrior King is solely used in the UK and Ireland. As such, I think Warrior King should be the redirect. Gram123 (talk) 12:10, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
  • How about the fact that its English title was Tom-Yum-Goongin the film festivals long before it was released in the US. or the fact that majority of the world never heard of it being titled The Protector or Warrior King. It's actually a different movie also after all the editing by Weinstein, hence 'US release as the Protector' section. Case in point Laputa: Castle in the Sky which still refer to its Japanese original. Suredeath (talk) 12:53, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
    • We're supposed to be using the most widely known English-language titles for films, not trying to find the title that will be recognisable to the most people in the world. "Tom-Yum-Goong" may have been used at festivals, but it is not English, and it is not the title the majority of people from English-speaking countries will know, so when they search the English-language Wikipedia, they're less likely to find what they want. If you're going to use "Tom-Yum-Goong", it's little more useful to non-Thai speaking people than "ต้มยำกุ้ง". Yes, we can have a redirect from "Tom-Yum-Goong", yes we can detail the Thai title and it's phonetic approximation, and yes we can talk about the US version being a different cut to the original. However, the article title should still be in English. Gram123 (talk) 17:30, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
    • My own preference would be for Warrior King, since it was released under this title first and is apparently less heavily cut than the US version. Personally, though, I'd be happy to keep this one where it is; I'm not sure when or why the guideline changed, but I always thought using the native title was a good compromise over US vs UK naming conflicts. PC78 (talk) 17:46, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Ok, agreed. As it isn't really clear which English-language title is "most commonly known", going with the one that was released first seems the best option. When I proposed The Protector, it was simply guesswork based on potential market size, and besides, if we move it to Warrior King, it will reduce potential confusion with the Jackie Chan film The Protector (1985 film). However, I don't think "least vs most cut" should really come into it, cos people could end up arguing about a minute of film. I definitley don't think we should leave it as Tom-Yum-Goong, as this is clearly the least well known of the 3 options to people from English-speaking countries. Gram123 (talk) 20:10, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
  • I still disagree. The International English title is still "Tom-Yum-Goong", whereas the Warrior King and the Protector are use in exactly two countries. Heck, in Thailand we HAVE an English-language title provided by the film maker. You know... like the English promotional material used in Thailand [[1]].Suredeath (talk) 06:56, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

• Hedvig Malina → Hedviga Malinová —(Discuss)— Hedviga Malinová is her legal name and the name she uses. It's also the name the media use except for the Hungarian media, because Hedvig Malina is the Hungarian version of the name. —Svetovid (talk) 13:03, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
  • I ask administrators to not make this move. She is ethnic Hungarian and if you read the article, you will see that using her Slovakized name would be more than controversial. Discussion to support or oppose the move should be on this talk page, usually under the heading "Requested move". If, after a few days, a clear consensus for the page move is reached, please move the article and remove this notice, or request further assistance.
    
    • There is absolutely no concensus about this move. She has a Hungarian name, she uses her Slovak name for Slovak documents. English language sources that we have tend to use the name "Hedvig Malina". Squash Racket (talk) 13:23, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
      • English sources don't use it. Only Hungarian sources writing in English use it, which is a huge difference.
        Also, don't forget that Wikipedia is not a democracy. We can't just make consensus about things opposing facts.
        "She has a Hungarian name." So do many other things, places and people. This is an English encyclopaedia however.
        There is no such a thing as a "Slovakized," which isn't even a word, name. It's her legal name, the name given by her parents and the name she uses. Also, saying you don't want it to be changed because you don't like it does not sound like a proper reason.--Svetovid (talk) 14:10, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

• Nuevitas → Nuevitas, Cuba — Nuevitas means "nines" in spanish, as in many 9, title misleading, standard comma dab, over redirect — Qyd (talk) 15:30, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Huh??? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:38, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
    • This is not even ambiguous in Spanish. — AjaxSmack 21:13, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
      • Nueve means nine in Spanish, and we don't even have a page for that. I guess nuevita might be a diminutive - little nine ? -- Beardo (talk) 23:38, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
        • 'Nuevo' is Spanish for "new", so "small things which in Spanish are grammatically feminine"? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:31, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

• Shantaram (novel) → Shantaram — The only other item is a director's nickname, V. Shantaram, which is not a central topic for the word "Shantaram". When the novel article is moved, a dab link can be placed at the top of it to point to the director. — Erik (talk • contrib) - 20:11, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Is a novel (probably run-of-the-mill) much more important than the film director? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:38, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Of course not, but "Shantaram" isn't the director's identity -- the difference is the "V." Anyone looking for him would likely enter the V, and if not, the dab link at the novel article would send them the right way. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 03:49, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

• Eastwood Mall (Niles) → Eastwood Mall — Eastwood Mall in Niles has been determined to be primary topic for disambiguation; however, Eastwood Mall previously was disambig page. -- JeffBillman (talk) 17:14, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
  • As Eastwood Mall (disambiguation)says, "Eastwood Mall" is the name of several shopping centers in the United States. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 07:07, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

• Cassadaga (album) → Cassadaga — Undisambiguated pages shouldn't redirect to disambiguated ones. — Will ^(talk) 16:19, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
  • I moved Cassadaga (disambiguation) to Cassadaga. Cassadaga (album)'s fame will likely fade within a few years: there are so many pop music albums. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 20:58, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

• DVB-H and DVB-SH → DVB-H — There is a discussion on the talk page to determine how the title should be best written. Indeed, a single purpose account has switched some days ago to the longer title, without discussion. I ask to move it back to the original, short version. --Cantalamessa (talk) 11:16, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

• PointCast (dotcom) should move to PointCast; and PointCast Media should be deleted, there is no such company and it confuses people as per comments
  • I restored PointCast to a disambig page and tidied it. I better leave the rest to someone who knows more about these companies. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 17:04, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

• Ahmed Orabi → Ahmed Urabi — Both are the only two correct transliterations in English, but need to be consistent with other pages on WP. Urabi also seems to be more common in academic literature. — Zerida 00:11, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Consistency with other articles isn't a requirement, and WP:NC specifically provides "In particular, the current title of a page does not imply either a preference for that name, or that any alternative name is discouraged in the text of articles." In this case the incoming links are also split. There is no reason for a move, not even if the claim about academic literature were proved which it is not. Gene Nygaard (talk) 10:51, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

• White privilege (sociology) --> White privilege - It looks like this was the subject of a dispute more than 2 years ago. That doesn't strike me as recent, but I put it under "controversial" anyway. It looks like this was just a translation problem that has since been fixed. Profepstein (talk) 23:02, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • To clarify... "white privilege" used to be ambiguous. Now it isn't, and hasn't been for a while. White privilege (sociology) is the only article on white privilege. To quote another similar proposal above, "undisambiguated pages shouldn't redirect to disambiguated ones." I think the same reasoning applies in this case. Profepstein (talk) 02:11, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
  • But thereby it is still ambiguous when reading older written matter. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:45, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
    • But the older stuff was badly named. It's been fixed now, to reflect its commonly used name. It's no longer ambiguous, and hasn't been ambiguous for a long time. Right now there's just a redirect from white privilege to white privilege (sociology). I'd say that's an unnecessary redirect. Profepstein (talk) 20:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

• Futurism (art) → Futurism. Futurism already redirects there, so no dab necessary. The Transhumanist 23:40, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
  • How much dominant is this art meaning? Page Futurism (disambiguation) has 15 alternatives. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
    • Almost all of those alternatives are either aspects of the artistic movement, like Futurist architecture, or references to it, like Neo-Futurism. The exceptions are aspects of futurology, but only one of them, I think, uses futurist/ism. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 15:16, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
      • Most of the meanings in Futurism (disambiguation) seem distinct enough to me. Move Futurism (disambiguation) to Futurism? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 07:04, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

• William T.G. Morton → William T. G. Morton — (Discuss) — Naming conventions — -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 07:59, 25 January 2008 (UTC) :: I moved the discussion to Talk:William T.G. Morton#Move to William T. G. Morton ?. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 11:27, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

• Harry Robertson (composer) → Harry Robertson — Harry Robertson currently redirects to Harry Robertson (composer). There is no need for the qualifier "(composer)" in the title of the article. The composer is already recognized as the main use of the word as shown by the fact that Harry Robertson redirects to Harry Robertson (composer) and not to any other article that could be known as "Harry Robertson". Neelix (talk) 02:25, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I have changed page Harry Robertson from a redirect to a disambig. How specially notable was he? I had never heard of him. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
    • The composer probably still deserves primary disambiguation over a total unknown who maybe made ten bucks in his "professional" football career, playing in one game in 1922 in an NFL much different from today's. Gene Nygaard (talk) 14:58, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions#RfC: Should titles of article on units of the form "X per Y" be singular or plural? - applies to several articles who cannot be moved without admin assistance.
  • Kilometres per hour → Kilometre per hour
  • Miles per hour → Mile per hour
  • Pounds per square inch → Pound per square inch
  • Kilobytes per second → Kilobyte per second

  Note: Moved due to lack of clearly illustrated consensus at [Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions#RfC: Should titles of article on units of the form "X per Y" be singular or plural?]--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 21:50, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

  Hmm, 4 independent editors vs. 1 (I know it's not a vote) indicated consensus to me. Ditto to the similar items below...Oli Filth^(talk) 21:54, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

  Combined into a multi-page move request. Oli Filth^(talk) 22:15, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

  Object in particular to Pounds per square inch which should be moved back to its earlier Pound-force per square inch version to distinguish these lbf/in² from the lb/in², also pounds per square inch but a different unit entirely, used in other contexts such as in ballistic coefficient with the normal pounds as units of mass. Gene Nygaard (talk) 22:15, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

  Object plural is the correct form for the general version --Nate1481( ^t/_c) 15:41, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

  Object, this is clearly a case of misusing a guideline. The only time you would ever use a singular form is when the ratio is exactly 1, and only when in prose. The name of the general unit should still be in plural form. Ham Pastrami (talk) 11:57, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

  Wrong. The singular is proper in any case where the absolute value of the measurement is greater than zero and less than or equal to one. In other words, anything from -1 to 1 inclusive, except exactly zero. Furthermore, the same is true of horse which is properly in the singular form on Wikipedia, evenb though the singular is normally used only when you are talking about exactly one horse in that case (using counting numbers, not the real numbers used for most measurements, in that case), at least unless you are talking about a quarter after it is butchered or something like that. Gene Nygaard (talk) 15:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

  Object Plural is the standard here in technical usage. DGG (talk) 09:07, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

• Sudden Ionospheric Disturbance to Sudden ionospheric disturbance, to reflect capitalisation in the article text itself. I am fairly certain that I am responsible for it being at the wrong title, but I am not sure how, and I know I can't do anything about it. Jdcooper (talk) 22:09, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
  • If this page is about a particular type of event in the ionosphere, rather than all sorts of sudden ionospheric disturbance, leave the name as capitals? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:24, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
    • The beginning uses "a sudden ionospheric disturbance" and shows why this should not be capitalised. It never is in carefully edited texts. --Espoo (talk) 09:26, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

• Republic of Lakotah → Lakotah —(Discuss)— Supporters of the state have split into two factions; "Republic of Lakotah" refers to only one faction. The other calls itself "Lakotah Oyate". "Lakotah" is currently a redirect to "Lakota", which is a DAB. —Stlemur (talk) 14:36, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Lakotah Oyate was a redirect to Lakota: I have redirected it to Republic of Lakotah. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 19:14, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
    • Comment': I created Lakotah Oyate in anticipation of the move being approved

Other proposals

February 10, 2008

• Sunrise (film) → Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans —(Discuss)— This is the film's onscreen title and was incorporated on the recent DVD release. —Parable1991 (talk) 04:34, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
• Statler & Waldorf → Statler and Waldorf —(Discuss)— More naming convention for article covering two people/characters. —Newbie27 (talk) 01:27, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

• ''Liu's family tree of the Han Dynasty''→ Liu's family tree of the Han Dynasty -Move article with quotes (it has non trivial edit history) to the other title (history has only moves) and then delete file with the quotes. -- Magioladitis (talk) 01:13, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

• Epistle of Jeremy → Letter of Jeremiah —(Discuss)— More common title. —SigPig |^{SEND - OVER} 21:52, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
• Ben Sira → Sirach —(Discuss)— More common name; or possibly Ecclesiasticus. —SigPig |^{SEND - OVER} 21:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
• E*TRADE → E-Trade —(Discuss)— Trademark style guidelines. Complications involving the disambiguation page at Etrade are mentioned in the discussion area. —Tigeron (talk) 17:19, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

• Superman film series → Superman (film series)
• Spider-Man film series → Spider-Man (film series)
• Batman film series → Batman (film series)
• Austin Powers series → Austin Powers (film series)
• The Matrix (series) → The Matrix (film series)
• Harry Potter film series → Harry Potter (film series)
• X-Men film series → X-Men (film series)

(Discuss) — Move per WP:NCF. --MrStalker ^(talk) 10:27, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

• Erich Kästner (author) → Erich Kästner —(Discuss)— The author Erich Kästner is by far the most common target of all existing links; currently, after an ill-advised move by OOODDD (talk · contribs) these links lead to the disambiguation page. —Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:25, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

February 9, 2008

• Hamburg Harbour → Port of Hamburg —(Discuss)— The article is about the port and not the harbour. "Port of hamburg" is the ports' official name, the one used in media coverage of the port, and a standard nomenclature for Wikipedia ports articles. The article was originally at "Port of Hamburg" but was moved in 2007 without discussion. Consensus then and now supports moving it back —Euryalus (talk) 02:35, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
• Kiev → Kyiv —(Discuss)— Correct name —Ostap 01:01, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

• Mina' Rashid → Port Rashid —(Discuss)— The name "Port Rashid" is the most common name used for this port. It is used by the operator of the port, and the local media. "Mina Rashid" is not used as widely as "Port Rashid." —Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 22:48, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

• Hors d'œuvre → Hors d'oeuvre —(Discuss)— While Hors d'œuvre is the correct spelling in French, this is the English wiki. Any reliable dictionary gives the primary (or only) spelling as Hors d'oeuvre —The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 21:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

• Fürstenwalde (Spree) → Fürstenwalde —(Discuss)— we should use a headword without specifier, as described in Wikipedia:WikiProject Germany/Conventions --androl (talk) 19:40, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

• X-Men: The Twelve → Apocalypse: The Twelve —(Discuss)— Proper name of the content of the article. —Rau J16 17:39, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

• John Camaterus → Patriarch John X of Constantinople - Per naming conventions in clergy. All of the others are formatted like the way I want this to be [2] and there is no other widely accepted name. [3] Grk1011 (talk) 16:38, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

• Cyril Lucaris → Patriarch Cyril I of Constantinople - Per naming conventions in clergy. All of the others are formatted like the way I want this to be [4]and there is no other widely accepted name. [5] Grk1011 (talk) 16:38, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

• Gennadius II Scholarius → Patriarch Gennadius II of Constantinople - Per naming conventions in clergy. All of the others are formatted like the way I want this to be [6]and there is no other widely accepted name. [7] Grk1011 (talk) 16:38, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  • All three of these nominations are incomplete. In case I do not get back to them when completed, there is at least one glaring exception to these generalizations; we use, and I support, John Chrysostom, not Patriarch John I of Constantinople. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 01:00, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

• Ace Ventura Jr. → Ace Ventura 3 —(Discuss - The official name of the movie appears to be Ace Ventura 3. All references in the article points to Ace Ventura 3, not Jr.--EclipseSSD (talk) 14:24, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

• Order of Dobrzyń → Order of Dobrin —(Discuss)— More common. There had already been a move war over it a year ago. —Sciurinæ (talk) 12:16, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

• Half-Life → Half-Life (video game) —(Discuss)— WP:NC(P) recommends "adding a parenthetical (bracketed) disambiguator to the page name: for instance when both spellings are often or easily confused." In this case, only capitalization separates Half-life and Half-Life. —Mika1h (talk) 10:49, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

• WWE Friday Night SmackDown! → WWE SmackDown —(Discuss)— WWE have finally dropped the exclamation mark last night on the logo featured on the TV show's on-screen graphics and apron. (Some of it can be seen in the new set's photos) There's now officially no reason to keep the exclamation mark. — Oakster  Talk  10:02, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

• Wet Willie (band) → Wet Willie — Wet Willie is only a redirect to Wet Willie (band) — Church of emacs (Talk | Stalk) 22:08, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

February 8, 2008

• Football in the Republic of Ireland → Association football in the Republic of Ireland —(Discuss)— I am proposing this move, as during the previous requested move, some other users supported the idea of moving this page to Association football in the Republic of Ireland. This move would remove the ambiguity of the term 'football' which is also commonly used in Ireland to refer to Gaelic football and sometimes rugby football. As it appears the term 'soccer' is quite unpopular, perhaps this move would be more appropriate - association football being the least worst title. As shown here and at many articles concerning soccer in different countries, an ongoing consensus has been to move to 'Association football in...', even in countries where there are no other forms of football popular on a large scale; this is more important in RoI, where there are competing sports which style themselves as 'football'. This move would also help bring continuity throughout the encyclopedia. —EJF (talk) 20:34, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

• Royal Chitwan National Park → Chitwan National Park Park name has changed, discussed in article. Move over redirect. I've made a mess of it, see also Temp Chitwan National Park and TemporaryChitwan National Park. The instructions for non-admin move over redirect need clarification. LeadSongDog (talk) 18:30, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

• Dalmatian (disambiguation) → Dalmatian —(Discuss)— "Dalmatian" refers to anything from Dalmatia. The dog just happens to be one of them. Let us not put it higher in importance than the rest. —Parable1991 (talk) 03:13, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

• The Swan Princess III: The Mystery of the Enchanted Kingdom → The Swan Princess: The Mystery of the Enchanted Kingdom —(Discuss)— This is the name of the movie according to the distribution studio, the official DVD cover and IMDB. —Annie D (talk) 01:18, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

• White privilege (sociology) → White privilege —(Discuss)— Page was initially moved because a misnamed page created an ambiguity. The other page has been apparently corrected. The ambiguity is gone and probably shouldn't have been there in the first place. No need for disambiguation naming, and White privilege (sociology) should be moved back to plain old White privilege. (Note, I originally listed this as a controversial rename. But only because I thought it warranted discussion. This is an effort to get that discussion. I do not know whether someone will actually contest this rename and make it controversial, but no one has contested it yet.) —Profepstein (talk) 17:56, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

February 7, 2008

• Qipao → Cheongsam — (Discuss) — per Wikipedia guidelines ("Use common name" and "Use English") — AjaxSmack 21:06, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

• Virtual human → Virtual actor —(Discuss)— Clearly what the article describes are virtual actors, all of the examples given in Virtual human#Early history have little resemblance to a human and could never be confused with a real human. The term "virtual human" simply doesn't hold up. —ASU (talk) 20:32, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

• Mr. Beast → Mr Beast —(Discuss)— There is no full stop on the album, or on any primary source that I have seen. —U-Mos (talk) 17:30, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

• Superdelegate → Unpledged delegates —(Discuss)— Superdelegate is a media term that has become associated with Unpledged delegates of the Democratic party. As a result, abosuletly no information has been written about Unpledged Republican delegates, the best way to alleviate this is to cover both topics on an Unpledged delegates page. Otherwise, information about the Republican unpledged delegate process is ignored.--Dr who1975 (talk) 16:40, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Incomplete; this is controversial, since the present name is common usage. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 00:04, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

• Milwaukee Electric Tool Company → Milwaukee Electric Tool Corporation —(Discuss)— The company name is "Milwaukee Electric Tool Corporation" (not Milwaukee Electric Tool Company) according to the company's web site. See Talk:Milwaukee Electric Tool Company#Company_name —Ohedland (talk) 13:17, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

• WCWA Texas Tag Team Championship → NWA Texas Tag Team Championship: Various professional wrestling championships are renamed and this particular championship, while originally renamed the NWA Texas Tag Team Championship, was renamed to WCWA Texas Tag Team Championship in the mid 1980s. However, in the late 1990s, the championship reverted to its original name. Articles for various wrestling championships should use the official and most recent names used. Odin's Beard (talk) 01:52, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

February 6, 2008

• 2-G → 2G —(Discuss)— The 2-G wireless technology is properly titled 2G. The page 2G previously existed as a disambiguation page (new link for that page), but there is little it's doing. I don't see how a viewer can confused an album title 2G+2 or Yellow 2G or Red 2G with 2G. —Gh5046 (talk) 22:09, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

• EHEIM GmbH & Co. KG → Eheim —(Discuss)— Wikipedia:Name#Companies ("The legal status of the company... is not normally included [except] when disambiguation is needed") and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (trademarks) ("Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules, regardless of the preference of the trademark owner.") —Fatsamsgrandslam (talk) 19:27, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

• Pine mushroom → Tricholoma magnivelare —(Discuss)— I think Pine mushroom should be moved to Tricholoma magnivelare to be consistent with Amanita smithiana, Chlorophyllum molybdites etc. —96.229.184.69 (talk) 19:00, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

• Television Personalities (band)→ Television Personalities : no other similarly named articlesCosprings (talk) 18:31, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
• Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden → Gustavus Adolphus —(Discuss)— The current title already avoids using his regnal ordinal and his Swedish name (Gustav Adolf), so there is hardly a reason to enforce consistency with other Swedish monarchs by the redundant "of Sweden". —Srnec (talk) 18:02, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

• Jim Gianopulos → James N. Gianopulos — I'd like the article to be moven to its complete and proper name — Zisimos (talk) 15:05, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Relisting to get more input. -GTBacchus^(talk) 05:03, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

• National Bloc (disambiguation) → National Bloc —(Discuss)— The page currently at National Bloc (Palestine) was originally at National Bloc; I moved it, as I do not feel that any of the groups listed on this disambiguation page is so notable that they can be called the primary use of the term. Therefore, according to WP:MOSDAB, the disambiguation page should be simply located under National Bloc. —Terraxos (talk) 03:31, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Backlog

Move dated sections here after five days have passed (July 29 or older).

• Heather Graham (actress) → Heather Graham —(Discuss)— Heather Graham is currently an unnecessary disambiguation page. It's unnecessary because a) there are only two things being disambiguated, and b) one of the articles is only a partial match with the title anyway. Originally brought up at Talk:Heather Graham. —Powers ^T 15:12, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

• Gateway timeout → HTTP 504 —(Discuss)— Fit in with naming convention, unable to because of dumb redirect to HTTP status codes —TheJosh (talk) 12:39, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

• The "Scramble & Gamble" → Super Bowl XLII Manning to Tyree pass —(Discuss)— The current name may not (and likely will not) take hold in mainstream parlance; however, the event itself is independently notable and should have a separate article. The current name is causing confusion at the AfD for this article. It should be renamed as soon as possible. —Torc2 (talk) 02:23, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

• Pennsylvania German language → Pennsylvania Dutch language —(Discuss)— Majority consensus, WP:COMMONNAME, WP:BOLD —PierceG (talk) 02:01, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Incomplete request: No discussion section has been set up on the talk page. —Angr ^{If you've written a quality article...} 06:23, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
    • There has been a lot of discussion on the talk page about naming. There is a section called ""Pennsylvania Dutch," rather than "Pennsylvania German"?". The discussion has mostly fizzled out but it seems that the majority of users think "Pennsylvania Dutch" would be a more appropriate title. PierceG (talk) 20:05, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
      • Yes, but it should still be discussed, and the discuss link above should not point to the conversation of 2006. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 04:26, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
        • That siad, if anyone actually manages to get a discussion section up, put me in for strong support a move to Pennsylvania Dutch (language). This is the name of the language and what it is called. Whether it's "wrong" or not is irrelevant - we're here to report on stuff, not change it (see the misguided discussion on moving homophobia to misohomo). The Evil Spartan (talk) 09:39, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
          • Discussion section now produced. Knepflerle (talk) 13:46, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
• template:History of Manchuria → template:History of Manchuria(Northeast China) and Russian Far East —(Discuss)— First, I make my position clear that I myself is against this move. I am making this request for move because some people have been persistently changing the title within the template that is different from the title of the template itself. Many steps were taken to help establish consensus, such as 3rd opinion and RfC[8][9][10][11][12], but these editors still persist on the name "Northeast China". I have repeatedly asked them to request a move if they wish to change the title, but they just kept changing the title within the template without changing the template title itself, which lead to continued edit warring. So I make this request for move in hope to estalish consensus on the title of this template and put an end to the edit warring. —Cydevil38 (talk) 00:51, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

• The Book of the Law → Liber AL vel Legis —(Discuss)— "The Book of the Law" is a general term used in more than one religion. In Judaism it refers to the Torah; in Mormonism it refers to "The Book of the Law of the Lord". Suggest we move this article to its actual distinguishable title —83.171.165.105 (talk) 19:56, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

• 9/11 conspiracy theories → 9/11 alternative theories —(Discuss)— unless you think random events caused 9/11, you think a conspiracy caused it. Whether it was an Al Qaeda, CIA or Martian conspiracy would determine which page, the mainstream, September 11, 2001 attacks page, or the 9/11 alternative theories page, that your data should appear on. Any theory except a theory attributing the cause to random causation is a conspiracy of some sort. —S. McIntire Allen (talk) 06:01, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

• Little Caesar (film) → Little Caesar —(Discuss)— All other uses of "Little Caesar" don't actually use this text. They are either plural, nicknames, collective, or in eye dialect. This is the only usage that uses "Little Caesar" as a whole in the title. —Parable1991 (talk) 00:41, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

• Darius the Great of Persia → Darius the Great —(Discuss)— "of Persia" is redundant and the whole title isn't even consistent with other Perisan monarchs, since that would be Darius I of Persia. —Srnec (talk) 23:54, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

• Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colors).svg → Image:Union flag 1606 (Kings Colours).svg - The flag relates to the British kings and Colour should be splet with a U accordingly as the spelling of color is only used in the USA --Lucy-marie (talk) 12:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Incomplete; No place for discussion. I don't see that there is much point to this; this is entirely internal to WP, and moving will make no visible difference to any article; it won't even change the edit screen. It anyone feels otherwise, it can just be moved. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:11, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

• Chinese wén → Chinese cash —(Discuss)— per WP:UE (use English for article titles), WP:UCN (use the most common name for article titles), and WP:OR (no original research). A proposal to modify Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics/Style guidelines that currently call for using non-English names for currencies is also underway at its talkpage. — AjaxSmack 22:53, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Numismatics Style guidelines have subsequently been changed to call for using English and using the common name of a currency. — AjaxSmack 04:51, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

• Spiritualism (religious movement) → Spiritualism —(Discuss)— This is part of a multiple page move, related to the request below. The article Spiritualism was moved to Spiritualism (religious movement) without discussion on January 15. We would like to move it back for two principal reasons: 1) the most common use of the word "spiritualism" is the religious movement that began with the Fox sisters, which is the topic of the now Spiritualism (religious movement) article; 2) the current use of the Spiritualism page is an attempt by one editor to discuss the ways in which animism can be observed in every religion, a project unlikely to lead to an encyclopedic outcome. The current content of the Spiritualism page can be moved to Spiritualism (beliefs) where its author can have leisure to develop it further. —Anthon.Eff (talk) 15:49, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

• Spiritualism → Spiritualism (beliefs) —(Discuss)— By far the most common meaning of Spiritualism is the religious movement that began with the Fox sisters. Prior to January 15 the Spiritualism article discussed that religious movement. On January 15 the article was moved without notice to Spiritualism (religious movement). The current Spiritualism page then became dedicated to a one-editor project to present elements of all religions that resemble animism. Let's follow the suggestion of User:Nealparr and move the current article to Spiritualism (beliefs), and then move Spiritualism (religious movement) back to its rightful place. —Anthon.Eff (talk) 15:35, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

  OK, there are some background issue here that we have to document and address.

  Firstly, I invite editors to look over the references and citations [13] and identify;

  • where they are not using the word spiritualism in a broader context or where they do not relate the phenomena being described to Modern Spiritualism.

  I have made my position clear on more than one occasion that I have never confused animism with Modern Spiritualism and have worked to document spiritualism globally as per the academic references given.

  I need to request our American editors to take off their cultural blinders for a minute. I am very sorry but the rest of the academic world DOES use that word, far more broadly and for other reasons. I have been VERY careful in my extensive use references and citations to underline any edits made. Many made verbatim.

  What is the issue? Anthon lays ownership to Spiritualism for Modern American Spiritualism. No, I am sorry. The references and the rest of the world ... bare me out.

  Please note that in retribution for the page being originally moved (I voted but did not do so), the editor not only proposed a template I made to interconnect those related topics OUTSIDE of Modern Spiritualism, which failed TfD (Template for deletion), but has now 'twice engaged in repetitively delete from every related articles [14].

  I cant see the issue unless it is just one of his faith ... but it lies outside of academic reason. --Lucyintheskywithdada (talk) 16:15, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

  Please direct discussion to the relevant talk page, not here. Thanks. -GTBacchus^(talk) 23:05, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

• Cláudio Ibrahim Vaz Leal → Branco (footballer) —(Discuss)— He is far more widely known by this name; renaming the article would make it far easier to find and identify in categories. —ArtVandelay13 (talk) 13:27, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

• Staplehurst, Kent → Staplehurst —(Discuss)— see talk page —Parable1991 (talk) 05:06, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

• Reflections Interactive → Ubisoft Reflections —(Discuss)— The company was renamed when Ubisoft bought it's staff and all other assets in the company —EclipseSSD (talk) 20:06, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

• Tykocin pogrom → Tykocin massacre —(Discuss)— The main subject is the execution of the Jews by the Germans —Xx236 (talk) 10:52, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Incomplete; no place for discussion provided. And I would appreciate a discussion of why pogrom does not imply slaughter. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 14:37, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
  • The discussion is where the Discuss field leads.Xx236 (talk) 14:55, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

• THEMIS (satellite) → THEMIS —(Discuss)— Title is somewhat misleading, as it implies singularity, when THEMIS actually consists of five satellites. Seeing as THEMIS redirects here, it is probably best to use that as the title. —GW_Simulations^{User Page | Talk} 08:03, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

• Buses used by New Jersey Transit → Buses owned by New Jersey Transit —(Discuss)— Many of the full-sized buses purchased and leased by New Jersey Transit to other operators are not in state bus branding, as shown by many of the buses operated by Academy and Coach USA, to name two, that are owned by NJT from a big order, but are not otherwise affiliated with the agency. —AEMoreira042281 (talk) 03:37, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

• Template:Sony DSLR cameras → Template:Konica Minolta/Sony DSLR cameras —(Discuss)— article refers to both Sony and Konica Minolta cameras —Tejastheory (talk) 20:30, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• Brunei ringgit → Brunei dollar —(Discuss)— moving to English name, also name is in common use within the country and is used officially by the government —Novelty (talk) 01:14, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• Lake Point Tower (Chicago) → Lake Point Tower —(Discuss)— This page was recently moved from Lake Point Tower to Lake Point Tower (Chicago) because a new stub article, Lake Point Tower (Dubai), was created. However, the Chicago building is much more notable and much more well known than the one in Dubai, so it should be located at "Lake Point Tower", with a dab link to the Dubai building. —Rai-me 05:44, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

• Pocket Fighter → Super Gem Fighter: Mini Mix —(Discuss)— Every other capcom related article uses american names where the game's name was changed for its release here in the states (examples include stuff from M. Bison, to Darkstalkers). —Kung Fu Man (talk) 22:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

• Scene (software) → The Scene —(Discuss)— I am proposing that this article be moved back to its original name for two reasons. First, the current disambiguation tag is incorrect, as The Scene is not specific to software. Second, the move was predicated on the idea that "The Scene" should be used as disambiguation -- however, no disambiguation page was ever created, as no other subject using that name is of encyclopedic interest. Since the move, the original article name has remained a pointless redirect. —Ham Pastrami (talk) 11:43, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

• Ahmed Arabi → ? —(Discuss)— As discussed above; this may well be controversial, but I have no opinion between this and Arabi Pasha, there being a balance between simplicity and commonness. There are also other possibilities. Please discuss. —Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:50, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

  Relisting to generate discusison. Anyone have an opinion about this? -GTBacchus^(talk) 03:46, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

• I would like the Creoles of color page moved because it need to be merged with Louisiana Creole people. --Margrave1206 (talk) 02:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

• Kim Ki-duk (director) → ? —(Discuss)— Given that both this and the other Kim Ki-duk are film directors, the disambiguating term "director" would seem less than ideal. I'm not sure what to suggest as an alternative, though. —PC78 (talk) 00:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

• Taxing and Spending Clause → General Welfare Clause —(Discuss)— The article has been moved back-and-forth four times now, with both regular and cut-and-paste moves. "General Welfare Clause" is by far the more common name per Google hits, as well as the source cited in the first paragraph of this article. —MilesAgain (talk) 14:31, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

  Make your case on the talk:Taxing and Spending Clause discussion page and not here. Foofighter20x (talk) 09:50, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• English English → English in England —(Discuss)— quite non-controversial as moves go. Already mentioned in lead as an alternative term. It is a better use of English- stylistically, grammatically, and for ease of understanding. —Merkinsmum 20:25, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

• Predatory dinoflagellate → Carnivorous alga —(Discuss)— Moving back to original page title since it was a requested article and the new title is basically missing the point. —tameeria (talk) 05:28, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

• Battery electric vehicle → Electric car —(Discuss)— Battery electric vehicle is an obscure industry name, everyone else knows these as the electric car. —199.125.109.29 (talk) 04:15, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

• GOS Rocket (Linux distribution) → gOS (Linux distribution) —(Discuss)— About all gOS versions —Chealer (talk) 05:15, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

• Early Modern Irish → Classical Gaelic —(Discuss)— Both names seem to be frequently used in literature and by major relevant institutions. However only one of them is appropriate for the subject matter and is not crippled by an inappropriate nationalistic/ethnic association. Early Modern Irish is not an appropriate name for a form of language which was used extensively by non-Irish Gaels. Gaelic is the correct English rendering of the native name used by both Scots(Gàidhlig) and Irish(Gaeilge) to refer to their languages and is the correct English rendering of "Gaoidhealg" the contemporary, native, term used within Classical Gaelic/Early Modern Irish to refer to itself. Classical Gaelic is, unlike Early Modern Irish, unambiguous and ethnically, geographically and politically neutral and covers both Scottish and Irish languages. ——Angr ^{If you've written a quality article...} 13:17, 19 January 2008 (UTC) (Actually requested by —siarach (talk) 12:52, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

• School Bullying → School prank —(Discuss)— move (and creation of new article at source) made without consensus. Should be moved back until consensus is obtained. —— Arthur Rubin | (talk) 20:33, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
  • No visible discussion set up, the link here goes to a redirect. For what it is worth, the present situation looks to me like separate articles on separate, if related, topics. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:25, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
    • Looks like some over-zealous page moving has been going on. A discussion area does exist, but is now at Talk:School Bullying: List of Actions. Subsequent redirecting of moved pages has left everything requiring admin intervention to mop up. --DeLarge (talk) 21:35, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
      • Discussion pointer moved. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 21:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

`

• Girl Guides → Girl Guiding and Girl Scouting —(Discuss)— The new title would more accurately reflect the article's subject. The current title, Girl Guides, is too similar to the article Girl Guide and is confusing. I additionally propose that the page Girl Guides redirects to Girl Guide and Girl Scout and that pages are created called Girl Guiding and Girl Scouting respectively, that redirect to this article. —Kingbird (talk) 05:58, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

• Levon V Lusignan of Armenia → Leo V of Armenia —(Discuss)— "Levon" is not typical English. "Lusignan" is not typical form for monarchs at Wikipedia. —Srnec (talk) 04:38, 18 January 2008 (UTC)