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
Conscious (talk | contribs)
33,989 edits
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Shortcut|[[WP:RM]]<br>[[WP:RFPM]]}}
{{adminbacklog}}
'''Requested moves''' is the place to request and vote on article moves that are not straightforward, or that require the assistance of Wikipedia administrators. Normally, logged in users can do uncontroversial moves themselves using the '''[move]''' tab found at the top of every page (see [[Help:Moving a page]] for more information). However, sometimes this does not work because the target is already occupied (usually in the form of a redirect with a page history). In other situations a move may be controversial and will require discussion to reach a consensus.
'''Requested moves''' is the place to request and vote on article moves that are not straightforward, or that require the assistance of Wikipedia administrators. Normally, logged in users can do uncontroversial moves themselves using the '''[move]''' tab found at the top of every page (see [[Help:Moving a page]] for more information). However, sometimes this does not work because the target is already occupied (usually in the form of a redirect with a page history). In other situations a move may be controversial and will require discussion to reach a consensus.


Revision as of 21:37, 30 June 2006

Requested moves is the place to request and vote on article moves that are not straightforward, or that require the assistance of Wikipedia administrators. Normally, logged in users can do uncontroversial moves themselves using the [move] tab found at the top of every page (see Help:Moving a page for more information). However, sometimes this does not work because the target is already occupied (usually in the form of a redirect with a page history). In other situations a move may be controversial and will require discussion to reach a consensus.

Approval voting is encouraged for page moves requested on this page. Requested moves may be implemented if there is a Wikipedia community consensus (generally 60% or more) supporting the moving of an article after five (5) days under discussion on the talk page of the article to be moved, or earlier at the discretion of an administrator. The time for discussion may be extended if a consensus has not emerged.

What requested moves are not for:

Before you begin, please note that requested moves are only for moving articles, and sometimes templates. It is not the place for the following:

Unobstructed, uncontroversial moves
Moves of this nature can be accomplished by any logged-in user whose registration was more than 4 days ago. Use the [move] tab located at the top of every page. See Help:Moving a page.
Category move requests
To rename a category, list it on categories for deletion (yes, deletion).
Image move requests
To rename an image, re-upload the image with the name you want, and then change the relevant links to reflect the new name, and then list the old image on images and media for deletion.
Merge requests
To merge two articles, make a request at proposed mergers or be bold and do it yourself.
Cut and paste move fix requests
To request page histories to be merged, list them at cut and paste move repairs.

Steps for requesting a page move

In the following, replace PageName with the name of the page to be moved; NewName with your proposed name; and reason for move with some text explaining your proposal.

Step 1:  Add the request to the list on this page

a.  To aid the administrators, add a line with the day's date on it directly under the heading of the Current proposals subsection, if it has not already been added for this day.

The line should look like:
===[[Day# Month]] [[Year]]===

Using today's date as an example: ===[[13 November]] [[2024]]===

b.  To enter a request for a single page to be moved to a new name, add the following two lines at the top of the section under the date line (the second line consists of four hyphens) :

* [[PageName]] &rarr; '''[[NewName]]''' &mdash; reason for move &mdash; [[Talk:PageName]] &mdash; ~~~~
----

A handy way to do this is to write the following on an empty line:
{{subst:WP:RM|PageName|NewName|reason for move}}
which will include all the necessary formatting, including your signature. Don't forget the "subst:" at the beginning!

c.  Include the page's name in your edit summary. Save this page.
Step 2:  Add the move template to talk page

Enter the following text at the top of the talk page of the page you want moved:

{{move|NewName}}

If you think a page should be moved, but don't yet know what name it should be given, you can use {{moveoptions}} instead to indicate that there are several options to discuss.

Step 3:  Create a place for discussion

If one does not already exist, create a section on the talk page of the page you want moved for discussion. This can take any form that is reasonable for administrators to follow, but copying the following is suggested. The reason for move should be copied from the entry on the WP:RM page:


==Requested move==
PageName → NewName – {reason for move with signature} copied from the entry on the [[WP:RM]] page
===Survey===
:''Add *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''' followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ''<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>''

===Discussion===
:''Add any additional comments''


If you are proposing that multiple closely related pages should all be moved for the same reason (see #Multiple page moves), it may be advisable to create this discussion on only a single talk page and provide links from the other talk pages to this centralized discussion.

Please include "move proposal" or similar in the edit summary and don't mark it as minor. Consider checking the "Watch this page" box to follow the page in your watchlist. Save the page.

What to do on the article page

If the move you are suggesting is uncontroversial – for example, it is correcting spelling or capitalisation – then update the article's text to reflect the article's new title. For example, if the article were at Blah Blah, but should be at Blah blah, then if the opening sentence began "Blah Blah is a...", you would update it to "Blah blah is a...".

Current proposals

Please list new proposals at the top of today's section (November 13) in the format described above. Actual discussions should take place on the listed talk page, not here.

30 June 2006

Done in another way. Duja 20:11, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Already done !

29 June 2006

  1. Not all the games described are German - they just led the field during the 1990s.
  2. Not all the games described are board games
  3. The only thing the games have in common is that they credit the designer

It's also worth noting that at least two other wikipedias, including , use a name meaning "Designer game". … Please share your opinion at Talk:German-style board game. —Percy Snoodle 13:38, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

* Gulf War syndrome → Gulf War illness … Rationale: all the current sources say "syndrome" is a misnomer and that "illness" is the correct term. I believe this is uncontroversial, but it is complicated because: (1) the existing Gulf War illness redirect has a nontrivial history, so my non-admin move attempt failed, and (2) there is also a Category:Gulf War syndrome which I have no idea how to go about moving. … Please share your opinion at Talk:Gulf War syndrome#Requested move to "Gulf War illness". —Rtt71 07:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC) I retracted this proposal. Rtt71 19:41, 29 June 2006 (UTC) [reply]

  • Symbology → Symbology in Fiction ... Rationale: The discussion is largely related to how this word is used in the Da Vinci Code and other fictional contexts. There is actually a word "Symbology". Please read the changes I made to this article. Perhaps adding a discussion section at the top, above the Da Vinci Code section would help. I consider this to be a disputed or controversial article the way it is currently written. It makes it sound like there is no such academic theory/model of "symbology" which there clearly is. Also, I'd like to make changes to the definition, but I can't. 29 June 2006
  • S.P.E.W → S.P.E.W. … Rationale: The page was just moved from SPEW to S.P.E.W, as it is now, for the rationale that that spelling is how it is presented in the British editions of the book. It makes no sense, even if you don't know the books, that the acronym, which stands for the Society for the Promotion of Elfish Welfare, should be lacking in a period at the end of the W. However, the page S.P.E.W. is currently a redirect to S.P.E.W (with no period at the end). … Please share your opinion at Talk:S.P.E.W. —Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 02:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

28 June 2006

  • Kaechŏn → Kaechon … Rationale: This is a North Korean city. The name under which the article is currently at is neither the English common spelling (which has no diacritics) nor the correct transliteration under the McCune-Reischauer system (which has an apostrophe), so in essence it's an incorrect name. Since the articles for other North Korean cities like Chongjin, Hamhung, etc. use the common English spellings, this should be done for Kaechon also. … Please share your opinion at Talk:Kaechŏn. —KittySaturn 21:18, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

27 June 2006

  • Astrogeology → Planetary geology: The term "astrogeology" is an outdated term that hasn't been in common use since the Apollo lunar exploration era. Those of us in the field refer to ourselves as planetary geologists, not astrogeologists, probably because we study planets and not stars, as "astrogeology" implies. Request administrator assistance to effect this change, due to pre-existing redirect from desired target name. IntrplnetSarah 19:02, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The articles had not previously been listed here, thus hardly anyone participated in the discussion. Please, discussion at the discussion pages. Añoranza 14:39, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Disputed moves are allowed to be contested. There is no policy saying no discussion is allowed on this page. NSLE 14:44, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please take a look at the top: "discussion on the talk page of the article to be moved". Añoranza 15:15, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but it does not prohibit discussion on this page. NSLE 15:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
These are not an ongoing operations and these were not WWII type military operations, and are historically noted more for what they were than the title of the respective US military operation itself; i.e. a US intervention in Honduras in 1988, codenamed Operation Golden Pheasant by the US military. Move misleading, pro-US nationalist propaganda titles in favour of descriptive npov ones as per Añoranza. El_C 11:47, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The names do not even make sense, NATO is still in Bosnia, yet its not called Joint Endeavor anymore, There was no intervention in Dominican Republic or Honduras, to assume a training exercise in one case is an intervention is to insert POV into the article. As for UNOSOM II, I say once again that only the US operation is being covered in the existing article and a seperate UNOSOM II article focusing on the events of the UN as a whole should be created, not moved to a less descriptive name. This naming convention does not even make sense, are you going to call Operation Restore Hope US Intervention in Somalia ... Considering there were other operations in Somalia the same year this would not even be descriptive. I find it disturbnig that noone seems to want to consider that Operation XYZ is used to differentiate between different actions taken by a military force. There are over 50 operations alone tied to Operation Iraqi Freedom, renaming them will make them and the articles that mention them less descriptive. --zero faults |sockpuppets| 14:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bombtrack (Type of song) → Bombtrack … Rationale: A "bombtrack" is an actual object, and therefore the title of Bombtrack should belong to this object. I've been having trouble moving it on my own. I successfully moved the original "Bombtrack" article to "Bombtrack (song)" and fixed all the corresponding links, but I'm having trouble moving "Bombtrack_(Type of song)" to "Bombtrack" on account of Bombtrack's persistant existance. (I removed the redirect tag, so now "Bombtrack" is just a blank article.) I don't know how to do this, but it looks like it would be as simple as deleting the Bombtrack article then moving Bombtrack_(Type of song) to Bombtrack, which will be nonexistant. … Please share your opinion at Talk:Bombtrack (Type of song). —Torvik 02:02, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

* Sting (wrestler) → Steve Borden — "(wrestler) looks really ugly and his real name is fairly well known. Move would follow the examples of Terry Brunk, Nelson Erazo, Amy Dumas and Glen Jacobs, all of whom would also require "(wrestler)" if titled under their ring names; move proposed on talk page already and there are no objections, but a redirect is blocking the move. Talk:Sting (wrestler) — Tromboneguy0186 01:59, 27 June 2006 (UTC) Proposal withdrawn. Tromboneguy0186 23:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Withdraw request The problem has become much deeper than previously thought, with redirect to the four corners of the Earth and three versions of the same article. I am making a private request with an admin, so I can detail the entirety of the problem in one place. Thanks anyway. --Larry V (talk | contribs) 18:58, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

26 June 2006

I botched the request, didn't follow procedure, and didn't put the requisite Talk notice. However, I just fixed the oversight. Sorry about that. -- Gogo Dodo 04:53, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chronology of Jesus' Last Days -> Historical Jesus rightrx806 makes article more relevant

Biletnikoff Award -> Fred Biletnikoff Award ... just need to auto link to the other page and remove the stub

Comment: Erroneous. Both the article Rusalkas, and the redirect Rusalka should be redirected and merged into Slavic fairies. — Lemegeton 16:07, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lusanaherandraton 07:38, 26 June 2006 (UTC) [reply]

  • VC-10 → VC10. Rationale: "VC10" is the manufacturer's type designation as evident from sources quoted at the foot of the article, contemporary advertising (follow VC10derness link at foot of article), and standard references such as Jane's All the World's Aircraft and Flight Internationals of the period. "VC-10" is the aircraft's adopted designation by the RAF which is internal to that armed service. "VC-10" is also a very common and excusable solecism. This is therefore a plea for the current article (VC-10) to be transferred to the current redirect (VC10), leaving it as a redirect page. Livedvalid 18:53, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose:
  1. The source page is only a redirect.
  2. There is no notification on the talk page.
  3. All sources that I have use VC-10 rather than VC10 anyway.
GW_Simulations|User Page | Talk | Contribs | E-mail 18:06, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

25 June 2006

I feel we have reached a consensus: 4 support, one "strong" oppose. The current Bear Lake should be moved back to Bear Lake (disambiguation), and the Bear Lake (Idaho-Utah) article moved into its spot. --Lethargy 22:16, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Proposal not currently completed (no talk-page setup). "Abbey Road" used to refer to the studios (along Abbey Road, London) where the Beatles recorded, so suggest status quo remains. David Kernow 12:38, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Phil Brooks → CM Punk … Rationale: Has gone by the name CM Punk since at least the age of 17, and even in shoot interviews refers to himself as Punk. Punk also views negatively people who refer to wrestlers by their real name rather than ring name, though doesn't mind if you know the real name. Also seems to be supported by WP:NAME. … Please share your opinion at Talk:Phil Brooks. —Lid 04:00, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Scientific mythology → Scientific folklore … Rationale: Same as for the now-renamed Tornado myths, as laid out on Talk:Tornado myths, this isn't mythology at all, far from it. It is more a series of legends and urban legends, not myths, a myth being "a cultural or religious narrative with deep symbological meaning". Furthermore, the title "Scientific mythology" implies that there exist a collection of such stories under a common category, and that it is studied by mythologists, which doesn't and it isn't. The pagename is erroneous, and as such contradicts the Wikipedia article on Mythology; and as a core topic, that won't do at all. Please share your opinion at Talk:Scientific mythology — Lemegeton 11:05, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

24 June 2006

Cúchullain t/c 19:27, 24 June 2006 (UTC) [reply]

  • The move recently was carried out, but shortly after was reverted by another user. The preferred title is now a redirect to the unpreferred title. Some please see to it that the namechange is successfully carried out, as reasoned on Talk:Tornado myths. - Lemegeton 21:10, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • As only one of the users who frequent the article have shown any interest at all, I would hope the move is carried out as quickly as possible, as no one seems to show any interest at all, and so probably isn't really so important for them at all. - Lemegeton 10:05, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

23 June 2006

--Claude 09:00, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

22 June 2006

  • Plzeň → Pilsen … Rationale: Plzeň is the Czech name for the city and Pilsen is the English name. the MoS states that the most common English name be used. Plzeň is definately not the most common English name for that city. … Please share your opinion at Talk:Plzeň. —Masterhatch 02:28, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Kate Shelly" to "Kate Shelley", My husband is the son of Kate Shelley's only nephew, Jack Shelley. The family spells her name with the second "e", Shelley, not Shelly. She should be listed under her correct name.
  • "Lamont reese" to "Lamont Reese", to correct a capitalization error which prevents clicking his name on the recent deaths page from linking directly to the page.
  • September 11, 2001 attacks → September 11, 2001, attacks. Commas in dates, geographical locations, &c., function as marks of parenthesis. The parenthesis has be closed by a second mark. Think of it like "September 11 (2001) attacks" and the "Arlington (Virginia) Pentagon". We don't leave off ")"—so we don't leave off the comma. Just as we write "Arlington, Virginia, U.S.A., is the location of the Pentagon" and "Tuesday, September 11, 2001, was an important day", we also do this when the multi-word term functions attributively. Associated Press example from late March 2005: "Four suspected Islamist radicals went on trial in Paris on charges that they provided false documents to two Tunisians who posed as journalists and killed the celebrated Afghan resistance hero Ahmed Shah Massoud two days before the September 11, 2001, attacks in the United States." — President Lethe 21:46, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


21 June 2006

  • William Henry Keeler → William Cardinal Keeler — Wiki style appears to accept this as the correct title on articles about Cardinals of the Catholic Church, See Cardinal (Catholicism) "Since 1630, cardinals have taken the style Eminence, and upon elevation the word "Cardinal" becomes part of the prelate's name, traditionally coming immediately before the surname." --Jdurbach 19:57, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

20 June 2006

Oops, Dusty Rhodes is a disambiguation page. Maybe move to Dusty Rhodes (wrestler) then. --JFred 18:35, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

19 June 2006

Consensus was to add a dablink at the start of the article, so that anyone searching for an accelerated math curriculum (instead of Accelerated Math the software) can continue their search. --JohnDBuell 20:39, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

18 June 2006

  • Torrigan → Touchstone — Touchstone's true name isn't even revealed to the reader until the end of the final book, so the article should definitely not be called by that name. The character is known as Touchstone throught the trilogy. — Talk:Torrigan. —

U-Mos 15:34, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

17 June 2006

Old discussions

none currently

Procedure for admins

See Wikipedia:Moving guidelines for administrators.

Additional notes

Multiple page moves

For single page moves with more than one option for the destination name:

For block moves:

An example of how to request to move a block of pages:

Another example of how to request to move a block of pages:

Relevant policies and guidelines

In discussing a page move, or making a move request, please consider following Wikipedia policies and guidelines:

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requested_moves&oldid=61443527"