Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requested moves

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 86.44.6.14 (talk) at 02:10, 14 March 2008 (→‎Uncontroversial proposals). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Purge the cache to refresh this page 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 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.

  • RZA (rapper)RZA (hip hop artist) — Recently renamed from RZA to distinguish it from Religious Zionists of America—although he does indeed rap, RZA has a near-legendary status in the hip hop world as a producer. The effect is not quite analogous to an article entitled Elvis Presley (guitarist), but does hit rather a clanging wrong note (unlike the subject's productions). — 86.44.6.14 (talk) 02:10, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cage KennylzCage (hip hop artist) — Cage Kennylz is the long form of a pseudonym. it is referenced in song and in such things as his myspace URL, but is not the name he performs under, doesn't appear on his record covers, concert bills, etc. The long form is easily obscure enough not to be useful on the disamb page for Cage. See talk for URL to covers etc., and damn these move templates. Cage raps and produces, hence (hip hop artist) rather than (rapper) is preferred, but no biggie in this case. — 86.44.6.14 (talk) 02:10, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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. Requests that remain incomplete after five days will be removed.

Other proposals

Purge the cache to refresh this page

Backlog

Move dated sections here after five days have passed (July 5 or older).

Show me one that is not a stub. The longest one, Battery (crime) is only 5kb. Battery cage is only 8 kb, barely above stub size. 199.125.109.76 (talk) 16:51, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I believe you're a bit misguided as to what constitutes a stub. Generally, articles that have only a few paragraphs are considered stubs. Much more than that, and articles are then rated as "Start class". Both of the examples you give are definitely Start class, as are several of the geographic locations mentioned on the disambig page. Parsecboy (talk) 17:00, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For example Artillery battery is not a stub. - 83.254.215.235 (talk) 20:50, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Shadow (fictional character)Shadow (fictional character) —(Discuss)— Despite the article having been titled "Shadow (fictional character)" in accordance with WP:NCD, some fans of the character changed it to the non-policy form "The Shadow (fictional character)" — offering no justification for why The Shadow deserves special treatment as opposed to The Joker, The Hulk, The Spirit, The Flash, The Phantom, The Phantom Lady, The Heap, The Black Widow, The Green Hornet, The Lone Ranger, etc., etc., (other than one fan's solipsistic "Because I said so". There had been no RfC or other formal procedure to justify this — basically just some talk-page discussion with a handful of fans for the change and a handful of editors against, and this non-policy change made without clear consensus. —Tenebrae (talk) 22:03, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is a request for further assistance. Whatever the outcome of the move proposal, it needs to be combined with a resolution of the fork problem: an article List of books featuring pedophilia is a fork from the article here under discussion.
As defined in the Wikipedia article Pedophilia, "pedophilia" does not uncontroversially apply to many works currently on these and related lists. Discussion of this mismatch between title and contents has been extensive for several years, and continues on the article's Talk page. The principal editor of this and related pages concedes that what he has meant all along by "pedophilia" is "sexual attraction to children", a plain English description of the topic of the lists that comes much closer than "pedophilia" to describing what is actually to be found on them. He has also agreed that "child sexual abuse" is unneeded in the title (many of the works do not focus on abuse). SocJan (talk) 17:11, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sailor Moon SuperSSailor Moon Supers —(Discuss)— Since this title obviously violates WP:MOS-TM and WP:MOSCAPS, I originally listed it in the uncontroversial moves section of WP:RM where it was moved to the non-emphatic title; but, soon was moved back. The article, and the section immediately above this notice on the talk page, both state that the capital S is only for emphasis, and is not pronounced separately. The Manual of Style trumps common usage, per many examples cited in those manuals, as well as overwhelming prior consensus. As far as I'm concerned, this discussion is a formality, and a waste of time; but, the article title will probably get changed back and forth again without the discussion. Neier (talk) 05:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC) —Neier (talk) 05:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • International style (architecture)International Style —(Discuss)— The term is a proper noun, coined in 1932 by Phillip Johnston and Henry-Russel Hitchcock for their exhibition and book, and it is clear that it was intended as a title for a particular bounded body of architecture rather than as a mere descriptive. Moreover, is invariably rendered as "International Style" in architectural literature. If the new capitalisation is agreed upon, the "(architecture)" suffix becomes redundant and can also be removed. —FrFintonStack (talk) 23:02, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]