This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Edinburgh, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Edinburgh on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EdinburghWikipedia:WikiProject EdinburghTemplate:WikiProject EdinburghEdinburgh articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Can anyone explain, in simple terms, WTF is going on with this page, and why there appears to be a series of move-wars going on? Can you lot start a discussion to sort things out to decide where it should sit without any more moves or silliness? - SchroCat (talk) 12:23, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. I count six moves, including one performed by Anthony Appleyard even after the page was protected by Alex Shih, as it was requested at WP:RM/TR by Pigsonthewing. (RM/TR is how I came to be on this page.) A discussion should have been started anytime between the first move and now; given the number of long-time editors involved, this should have been a given. -- AlexTW13:24, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
