Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requested moves

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RainbowSprinkles (talk | contribs) at 19:29, 28 June 2006 (→[[June 28]], [[2006]]). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Shortcut

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: ===[[20 October]] [[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]] → '''[[NewName]]''' — reason for move — [[Talk:PageName]] — ~~~~
----

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 (October 20) in the format described above. Actual discussions should take place on the listed talk page, not here.

June 28, 2006

27 June 2006

  • 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

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

  • 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]

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

As Template:Prime Minister has been deleted I suggest moving this template there as it is a more appropriate title. Are there any objections?

I Support this. --GW_Simulations|User Page | Talk | Contribs | E-mail 07:56, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


  • Summit School

16 June 2006

  • Pinolio → Pinolillo … Rationale: "Pinolillo" currently redirects to "Pinolio", and it should be the other way around. Pinolillo is the correct spelling, and Pinolio may be a secondary Englishized form, but I've never encountered it before now. … Please share your opinion at Talk:Pinolio. --ryos 22:11, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aloïs Hudal to Alois Hudal, given the trema is not correct and not German. Smith2006 20:22, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Girolamo Savonarola 15:24, 16 June 2006 (UTC) [reply]

  • Captain Barbie → Captain Barbell - Rationale: Wrong title. Someone moved it just to bash the character created by GMA Network. Please return it to its original location.


15 June 2006

Ordinal United States Congresses

All of the others (1st United States Congress through 113th United States Congress) have long since been renamed with the consensus of the Wikipedia community. I suspect that the renamers found these articles hard to move and gave up.—Markles 10:37, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where was this "consensus" discussed? It seems rather odd for articles to begin with a numeral. I had thought that an exception was made for the congresses over one hundred. older ≠ wiser 01:43, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No no… you're right. I implied consensus, and I think perhaps I was too hasty. I don't particularly care for the numerals for the earlier congresses– at least not in the single digits. but for the 10th+ congresses, it doesn't seem too bad. In any event, however, I think we should either rename these 14 outliers above even if we later revert all the changed names to the old system.—Markles 03:29, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There's a precedent for using article names that begin with a numeral, see: 55th Annual Primetime Emmy Awards, 1st millenium, 1st century, 1st Canadian Parliament, 23rd Ohio Infantry, etc.. --MZMcBride 07:07, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Issue seems to be that many of the spelt-out articles seem to have started with a cut and paste move from the numerical articles. Compare [2] with [3] or [4] with [5] --Henrygb 00:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regular requests


14 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=61067291"