Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requested moves: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 10: Line 10:


*'''[[:Biological devolution]] → [[:Devolution (fallacy)]]''' — Revert, but the user modified the old redirect so I couldn't move it back myself. There is a similar naming discussion happening over at [[Talk:Evolution]] that the moving user has participated in, thus would have know that this would have been a controversial move. Thanks. —[[User:Darkliight|darkliight]]<sup>[[User_talk:Darkliight|[&pi;alk]]]</sup> 20:16, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
*'''[[:Biological devolution]] → [[:Devolution (fallacy)]]''' — Revert, but the user modified the old redirect so I couldn't move it back myself. There is a similar naming discussion happening over at [[Talk:Evolution]] that the moving user has participated in, thus would have know that this would have been a controversial move. Thanks. —[[User:Darkliight|darkliight]]<sup>[[User_talk:Darkliight|[&pi;alk]]]</sup> 20:16, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

*'''[[:Gekisou Sentai CarRanger]] → [[:Gekisou Sentai Carranger]]''' — All the articles for the other series' in the franchise use lowercase -ranger, not uppercase -Ranger (and since the series' are Japanese, there's no official English spelling, so consistency is better here). Can't move it myself because there's already a redirect in place. —[[User:Jgp|jgp]] <sup>[[User_talk:Jgp|T]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Jgp|C]]</sub> 21:24, 7 January 2007 (UTC)


*'''[[:Parterre (horticulture)]] → [[:Parterre]]''' — Returning to the only encyclopedic subject. Theatrical parterre, not encyclopedic in itself, becomes a dab to [[Theater (structure)]] at head of [[Parterre]] page. Many double redirects avoided. —[[User:Wetman|Wetman]] 09:27, 8 January 2007 (UTC) -[[User:Wetman|Wetman]] 09:27, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
*'''[[:Parterre (horticulture)]] → [[:Parterre]]''' — Returning to the only encyclopedic subject. Theatrical parterre, not encyclopedic in itself, becomes a dab to [[Theater (structure)]] at head of [[Parterre]] page. Many double redirects avoided. —[[User:Wetman|Wetman]] 09:27, 8 January 2007 (UTC) -[[User:Wetman|Wetman]] 09:27, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:01, 8 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

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

Undiscussed moves

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

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

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

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

Uncontroversial proposals

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

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

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


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.

Assume this is allowed to be relisted. Simply south 16:15, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Prypiat, UkrainePripyat, 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]
  • List of gay porn starsList of male performers in gay porn films —(Discuss)— While these things are mentioned in the description of the list, they are often missed and cause confusion and the addition of names that shouldn't be on the list: 1. The performers aren't gay, the films are; 2. It's a list of performers ("stars") in films, not webcam models, etc.; 3. The list is of males. While there may be females in gay porn films, this list doesn't include them, and should say so; and 4. Ultimately, this is about "scope creep", the list needs to be more readily defined than it is currently. —20:12, 6 January 2007 (UTC)Chidom talk 
  • Sexual_intercourseVaginal_intercourse —(Discuss)— The current article indicates that "sexual intercourse" only refers to penile-vaginal intercourse. This exclusive usage is in violation of NPOV, as it has heteronormative bias. This usage also defies Merriam-Webster's dictionary definition of sexual intercourse; which lists several acts as forms of sexual intercourse [2]. The proposal is to rename the article "Vaginal intercourse", because that is the specific act to which the article exclusively refers. The move would allow for a disambiguation page at Sexual intercourse, which would list each of the acts which can be described by the term. —Joie de Vivre 15:04, 6 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]

  • Giorgio OrsiniGiorgio 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]
  • 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]

Backlog

Move dated sections here after five days have passed.