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: edit 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

Uncontroversial technical requests

Glu (Usher song) (currently a redirect to Glu (song)) → Glu (song) (move · discuss) – Additional specification unnecessary, no other notable song with that title/spelling. Lk95 (talk) 16:24, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Electron-Reservoir Complexes (currently a redirect to Electron-reservoir complex) → Electron-reservoir complex (move · discuss) – WP:NCCAPS and WP:SINGULAR. 2A01:4C8:49:B2A2:243F:CCFF:FEB7:7D26 (talk) 16:06, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Independent Children's Homes Association (currently a redirect to Children's Homes Association) → The Children's Homes Association (move · discuss) – Organisation's name was changed in 2022 so this title was inaccurate Lateraleditor (talk) 16:06, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requests to revert undiscussed moves

Contested technical requests

Massasauga (currently a redirect to Eastern massasauga) → Eastern massasauga (move · discuss) – The taxonomy of this species has changed, with the subspecies all becoming species; the title of this page should reflect this. Chumzwumz68 (talk) 00:47, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't seem uncontroversial. The current title is the result of an RM (which I had initiated). The nominator made a substantial change to the relevant aspects of the article (and another article) today, and has recent warnings on their user talk page, and part of today's edit was already reverted by 7&6=thirteen. I don't know how well accepted this alleged taxonomic change is. I think it needs discussion. Not all taxonomic change proposals get widespread acceptance. The nominator doesn't mention any authority declaring the validity of this change. Even if the taxonomic change is valid, perhaps the title should use the scientific name instead of a vernacular name. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 01:08, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sources: [1][2] Both of those have more than enough modern ::papers that use both taxonomic names. It's time to drop the old taxonomy. Chumzwumz68 (talk) 16:13, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fall River, Massachusetts → Fall River (move · discuss) – Fall River already redirects to Fall River, Massachusetts. There is no need for the disambiguator. Notsammyray (talk) 18:42, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, would you please be able to give some evidence that this particular place should take the base title, over and above any of the nearly 30 places listed at Fall River (disambiguation)? It may perhaps make more sense to move that dabpage to the base title. Dr. Vogel (talk) 18:50, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The problem here is that Fall River should redirect to Fall River (disambiguation) rather than the Massachusetts city. That does not require a page move. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 21:09, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

but then wouldn't it be better to move the dabpage to the base title? (that's what I was trying to ask above) Dr. Vogel (talk) 21:34, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The suggestion seems controversial. Regardless of whether it's a primary topic for the name or not, I believe this suggestion runs afoul of WP:USPLACE. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 22:45, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the request is controversial. What about the alternative of moving the dabpage to the base name instead? Dr. Vogel (talk) 22:47, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Massachusetts town has been positioned as the primary topic for a very long time and the redirect has more than 150 incoming links. I suggest not jumping to the conclusion that's improper. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 22:51, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The current situation seems optimal (the Massachusetts city of 100,000 being the primary topic, named after USPLACE), and anyone disputing it should seek a formal RM or RFD. Suggest closing this one. No such user (talk) 11:21, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. @Notsammyray: Perhaps you aren't familiar with WP:USPLACE. American cities (with a few select, well-defined exceptions) are always titled as Cityname, Statename, regardless of primary topic status. 162 etc. (talk) 15:48, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cristidiscoidea → Nucleariid (currently a redirect instead to Nucleariida) (move · discuss) – The group of organisms known as "nucleariids" (singular "nucleariid") has received many formal names: first Rotosphaerida, then Nucleariidae/Nucleariida/Nucleariae, then Cristidiscoidea. However, they're all the same, and I believe giving priority to the informal name Nucleariid would relieve us from having to choose one formal taxon name over the other. (Also, I noticed that Nucleariida is also a separate page, and the information there will need to be transferred into Nucleariid just like what happened between Stramenopiles and Heterokont) ☽ Snoteleks ☾ 13:47, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From both articles, it looks like Nucleariida is one of two orders in the class Cristidicoidea. Merging the two would mean that the other order does not exist. This doesn't seem right to me. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:49, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@UtherSRG I hear you, and it makes sense to think that, so I'll explain. The Cristidiscoidea(Nucleariida+Fonticulida) classification isn't very widely recognized, there are two other classification schemes: 1) the original first, which groups all nucleariid amoebae as one single order Rotosphaerida (with Holomycota as the direct parent taxon), and 2) one by Tendersoo et al. 2018, which groups them as Kingdom Nucleariae. The first is the one supported by the protistologist society and the most widely used system (see Adl et al. 2018 or Gabaldón et al. 2022). For this reason I think it much more convenient to just use one page for the whole group, 'Nucleariid', to avoid controversy between all the different names. If it still doesn't sit right with you, if you prefer I will consult it with the rest of WikiProject Tree of Life. ☽ Snoteleks ☾ 10:36, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That does make sense, but yeah, I think it's better to seek consensus from ToL. Thanks! - UtherSRG (talk) 11:03, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Meridian Hill/Malcolm X Park (currently a redirect to Meridian Hill Park) → Meridian Hill Park (move · discuss) – WP:Commonname is by far Meridian Hill Park. It's the name used by the National Park Service, used by local news agencies, and even used by local travel magazines. The precedence is overwhelming. Cristiano Tomás (talk) 22:26, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article's been moved a couple of times, not uncontroversial. There is certainly a case to be made for Malcolm X Park, or the current dual title; this WaPo article is a good illustration of how both names can be seen as correct. 162 etc. (talk) 01:12, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator needed