Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requested moves/Current discussions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Requested moves

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 162.211.126.244 (talk) at 03:40, 20 February 2017 (→February 20, 2017). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Shortcuts
This page lists all requests filed or identified as potentially controversial which are currently under discussion.

This list is also available in a page-link-first format.

February 20, 2017

February 19, 2017

  • (Discuss) – Achille Émile Meeussen → A. E. Meeussen – Moving was blocked because there is a redirect from that page, it seems. The spelling of A. E. Meeussen's forenames seems to be unknown for certain, but Professor Swiggers believes the second name was probably Emile rather than Émile and suggests that I remove the accent. Meeussen himself always signed his articles A. E. Meeussen, so following the suggestion of another Belgian researcher it seems best to use this as the title of the article. Kanjuzi (talk) 19:53, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Synthpop → Synth-pop – The Google test lists "about 5,570,000 results" for synth-pop and "about 5,890,000" results for synthpop. However, it's very likely that synthpop only gets more web results than synth-pop because of this article. If we limit the search to news pieces, we get: * Synth-pop: About 37,200 results * Synthpop: About 19,400 results And when limited to books: * Synth-pop: About 7,050 results * Synthpop: About 4,170 results Historically, synth-pop (or synth pop) appears to be the more common spelling. This is also true for technopop and techno pop: * Techno pop: About 7,520 results (books) / 3,450 (news) * Technopop: About 2,780 results (books) / 791 (news) --Ilovetopaint (talk) 19:14, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – John Blair (disambiguation) → John Blair – The base name is a redirect to a page with a "Jr." yet there are 20 people on the disambiguation page. The person at the base url may be well-known with the US though outside of that supreme court is not one of the renowned jurists of the world. The disambiguation page should reside at the base url as there are so many John Blairs, and clean-up of links to the US justice from base url can be achieved easily, and there is no page move required beyond the disambig page. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:33, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Empress Shōshi → Fujiwara no Shōshi – The main title, "Empress Shoshi", is technically incorrect and cannot be considered accurate from a historical point of view. Wikipedia should not perpetuate incorrect forms. According to WP:MOS-JP (which is a guideline for Japan-related articles) for the Japanese emperors and empresses we should use the form [[Emperor/Empress {name}]], which is a partial translation of their posthumous names. On posthumous names not all the empresses have them, as some of those names have been either lost or changed throughout the history. If any of the 諡号 shigō (posthumous name) or 追号 tsuigō (another form of posthumous name) names of an empress is known then it can be used, for example Tachibana no Kachiko who can also be called by her posthumous name "Empress Danrin". Otherwise, like many other ancient empresses, Shoshi should be styled as Fujiwara no Shoshi, as I can't find a posthumous name for her except "Jōtōmon-in" but she's never been commonly known as "Empress Jōtōmon-in" in sources, which can be realized by a single Google search [1] & [2]. She was first Empress, then Grand Empress, then Senior Grand Empress, and then an Imperial Lady — but she was Fujiwara no Shōshi all along. I had discussed it with Japanese Wikipedians a long time ago and they said "Posthumous names for Empresses were disappeared in late Asuka-Nara period (上代, 6-8 century), and Nyoin name (女院) started to be used instead". Furthermore they noted that Nyoin names aren't in use today anymore. It can obviously be seen on Wikipedia that almost all the articles about ancient Japanese empresses are titled "Clan name" 'no' "name". This page shouldn't be an exception. (it also makes it a WP:CONSISTENT move). Keivan.fTalk 04:59, 11 February 2017 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 07:31, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Ahmad Shamloo → Ahmad Shamlou – Various spellings are used for the last name all over the internet. Even in the article, there's been various spellings, which I just fixed to be consistent. There's one spelling that's preferred his estate, and used by his official website (http://shamlou.org/), that's Shamlou, and we better use that spelling here, too. I cannot Move manually, because there's a redirect set on the target to the current title. Behnam (talk) 23:19, 11 February 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. SkyWarrior 03:27, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 18, 2017

  • (Discuss) – Pride Week (Toronto) → Pride Toronto – While this move was rejected in an RM discussion in 2010, and then suggested again in 2012 without being addressed either way (see unheadlined comment by Smckinnon at the bottom of the QUAIA section above), there's been a significant change as of 2016 that warrants revisiting the proposal: in 2016, although the primary community festival still took place in the final week leading up to the parade itself, Pride as a whole was not declared as just that week, but for the entirety of June. The final week was still the biggest locus of activity, but the flag-raising kickoff at Nathan Phillips Square was held on May 31 and declared Pride Month rather than Pride Week ([3]), and a program of Pride-related events was scheduled throughout the entire month of June rather than being confined solely to the week of the main community festival alone ([4]). And while certainly stuff could change between now and June, that is currently what's expected to happen again this year. So, rather than quibbling over whether the event is "Pride Week" or "Pride Month", I believe the best course of action here is now to move the article to the title Pride Toronto. ("Pride Week" and "Pride Month" can still be retained as redirects, so that a person who's expecting one of those titles will still get here.) I would also note that the idea that this article is about the event rather than the organization, which is what was proffered in the original RM discussion as a reason not to move the article, isn't all that convincing an argument — the article, as written, is somewhat of a hybrid of "the event" and "the organization", as evidenced by the content about QUAIA and financial difficulties and the stuff that should be here but isn't yet about the current BLM/police fracas. There wouldn't be much basis for us to maintain two separate articles about the event and the organization that runs it, but the idea that this article isn't at least partially about the organization isn't really an accurate reflection of what's actually in this article. Bearcat (talk) 14:46, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 17, 2017

  • (Discuss) – Peafowl → Peacock – By far the more common name. This move has been suggested a few times in the past, and at least executed once (but reverted on procedural grounds), but no formal move request and discussion seems to be had until now. The reason is WP:COMMONNAME. While Peafowl isn't wrong per se, it is by far the less common name (Google hits excluding Wikipedia gives 560 thousand hits for peafowl[12], and 65 million for peacock![13]. GNews gives a similar 13,000 vs. 390,000, and even at Gbooks, where it is less outspoken, we get 80,000 vs. 560,000.) Fram (talk) 14:58, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Class-T amplifier → Class T – The article is about a trademarked product. There is no such thing as a "Class-T amplifier", Class T is simply a trademark for this company's design of a class D amplifier. This is clear and there is no dispute. Because of this, we should be referring to "Class T" as a trademark, and class D as the design, both in the article and in the title. Also, I believe it should be "was a trademark" as I don't see a live trademark, and the parent company seems out of business. Best I can tell, the dash wasn't used either. Second choice is move to company name. Current name is misleading. 71.76.228.224 (talk) 02:58, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – American Media (publisher) → American Media, Inc. – PThe company seems to consistently use ", Inc." in it's company name, this article uses that structure throughout, and the articles on the tabloid magazines they own seem to consistently use "American Media, Inc." While the Inc in most common names is often only on official stationary, this seems to be a more natural non-parenthetical way of being clear. On the other hand, this article was created by Jimbo and the current name is hardly terrible. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:23, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 16, 2017

  • (Discuss) – Meadowhall Centre → Meadowhall – The shopping centre is commonly known simply as "Meadowhall", as per its own website and logo, and indeed the lead sentence of the article. It is clearly the primary topic for the name. The existing dab page does not need to be retained as - other than the shopping centre - it mentions only the surrounding area of Sheffield (which has no article of its own) and various transport connections, which are covered on the separately existing Meadowhall station dab page anyway. Jellyman (talk) 21:40, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Elm Guest House child abuse scandal → Elm Guest House claims and controversy – What scandal?! This is a controversy at best, a hoax and a case of mass hysteria at worst! Even the title in its present form is itself arguably libellous towards Field Marshal Lord Bramall and Harvey Proctor, and quite possibly actually actionable! We have to take by inference Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe's apology [16] as Commissioner of the Met Police as an admission and acceptance of the whole story being false by the Commissioner and the Met Police; and honestly, who are we, us eminent experts here to say that the Met are wrong on this?! As things currently stand (now), there were no child abuse in Elm Guest House by this alleged, supposed or fictitious "Tory Thatcherite Freemason (insert Jewish or Zionist or Jewish Zionist) Westminster VIP Paedophile wing" headed by Sir Edward Heath as "Grand Master", end of story, period, or full stop! (and can we possibly have some mass WP:RevDel page purge as well please I would perhaps suggest, thank you!) -- 87.102.116.36 (talk) 14:32, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Ederny → Ederney – The correct and official name for this village is Ederney, which is confirmed by this. It clearly states: The townland name from which the village derives is Ederny but the official spelling of the village has been Ederney since 1992.. A redirect already exists at Ederney pointing to Ederny so I can not simply move the page. Whilst it would seem an uncontroversial move, the article originally stood at Ederney since its creation back in January 2006 until it was moved undiscussed back in February 2013 by @Asarlaí: who cited: this is the official and most popular spelling, without providing any evidence and which going by the above source is incorrect. This move was reverted by @Ukireland: before Asarlaí reinstated their undiscussed and contested move [17], to which the article has remained ever since. Mabuska (talk) 12:25, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 15, 2017

  • (Discuss) – Pilgrim Fathers → Pilgrim (Plymouth Colony) – See above reasons posted a week ago with no comments or objections. This page used to be called Pilgrim (Plymouth Colony). Pilgrim is the Common Name, not Pilgrim Fathers. "Plymouth Colony" distinguishes the page from the more general page for religious pilgrims. "Pilgrim Fathers" may be used in the U.K. but this article certainly bears greater significance in the U.S. as the Pilgrim story is one of the core stories of the founding of the American colonies and by extension, the U.S. Also, Pilgrim Fathers is archaic and factually incorrect--the settlers included women and children. Historical Perspective 2 (talk) 12:43, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Seludong → Kingdom of Maynila – The article was mistakenly moved to its alternative, albeit much older name, following natural disambiguation which ignored its WP:COMMONNAME as reflected in the article's references. The article had been created under Kingdom of Maynila by Alternativity and remained there for the longest time until changes to its disambiguation were introduced. However, the vast majority of academic sources continue to refer to it as "Kingdom of Maynila" and only few mentions of "Seludong." Kindly refer also to the above discussion and Google Books statistics. RioHondo (talk) 09:51, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 14, 2017

  • (Discuss) – Sigla F.C. → Team Socceroo F.C. – WP:NOTINHERITED, the club never played in the UFL as "Sigla FC" as originally planned. The club as "Sigla FC" fails to meet WP:GNG. I know that WP:NOTTEMPORARY, once a certain organization became notable, they are "forever notable". But there is a precedent (the historic Mabuhay Satellite Corporation which operated the Philippines' first satellite, now known as the Mabuhay Investment Corporation which is your ordinary holdings firm). The situation here is a top league football club in a country suddenly renamed themselves with a complete brand overhull but then fails to participate and settle in youth development, joining open/weekend tournaments. It would be better if this article is renamed back to Team Soccerroo and just take note that the club rebranded and changed their name. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 08:33, 5 February 2017 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 19:43, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 13, 2017

  • (Discuss) – Red Cross with Triptych egg → ? – This page was moved from Red Cross with Triptych (Fabergé egg) to Red Cross with Triptych by MaybeMaybeMaybe in 2012. I subsequently moved it to Red Cross with Triptych egg, since the article was not about a triptych but about an egg and(that was careless) unaware that it had already existed once under Red Cross with Triptych (Fabergé egg). It appears that a large proportion of the Faberge egg articles exist with either the parenthetical Faberge egg at the end or simply the word "egg". I attempted to move this article back into Red Cross with Triptych (Fabergé egg) but was prevented from doing so by its edit history. There is no explanation as to why the article was moved away from this namespace in the first place, and no discussion anywhere about the move. I see no reason not to move it back (unless there really is a good reason somewhere). KDS4444 (talk) 00:07, 3 February 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. Andrewa (talk) 19:35, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Elapsed listings

Shortcut
The 7-day listing period has elapsed. Items below may be closed if there's a consensus, or if discussion has run its course and consensus could not be achieved.
  • (Discuss) – Neden (album) → Neden – Neden currently redirects to Vagina, for which it is a slang term, but it is not common enough to be mentioned on its target page. “Neden” is the name of this album and should therefore target this article, taking precedence over uncommon slang. Redirecting it here would create an unnecessary disambiguation, so I propose moving this article to Neden. Gorobay (talk) 17:34, 5 February 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. Andrewa (talk) 20:51, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Backlog

Shortcut
Elapsed listings fall into the backlog after 24 hours. Consider relisting 8-day-old discussions with minimal participation.
  • (Discuss) – Im Yoon-ah → Lim Yoon-ah – As per a section above, Yoona's surname is Lim, not Im. The incorrect surname here on Wikipedia has lead sites such as Google to display her name likewise erroneously. Not only is Lim her actual surname, but also by convention surnames are romanized traditionally. The same way Kim Tae-yeon is not Gim Tae-yeon, Lim Yoon-ah should not be Im Yoon-ah. To sum up, two reasons: 1. Lim is Yoona's actual surname instead of Im; 2. Lim is the conventional way to romanize the surname. GeT RiGhT (talk) 22:46, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

References generally should not appear here. Use {{reflist-talk}} in the talk page section with the requested move to show references there.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requested_moves/Current_discussions&oldid=766424960"