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:..."
 | If you are here because you want an admin to approve of your new article or your proposed page move, you are in the wrong place.
|
- To list a technical request: the Uncontroversial technical requests subsection and insert the following code at the bottom of the list, filling in pages and reason:
This will automatically insert a bullet and include your signature. Please do not edit the article's talk page.{{subst:RMassist|current page title|new title|reason=edit summary for the move}} - 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.
Technical requests
Edit this section if you want to move a request from Uncontroversial to Contested.
Uncontroversial technical requests
Administrator needed
- Edit this section if a request requires an administrator (see this guide to which moves need administrators). Place the request in another section if it only requires a page mover's permissions.
Contested technical requests
- Afghan National Army (currently a redirect to History of the Afghan Armed Forces (2002–2021)) → Afghan army (currently a redirect instead to Afghan Army) (move · discuss) – The Afghan National Army title was the title for the American-backed army of 2002-2021, which no longer exists. This article should have its title moved because the ANA title is not representative of the content: article covers 1700s Afghan Army, Royal Afghan Army, and the Army of the communist Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (1970s-1991) in addition. 'Afghan Army,' rather than ANA, covers, acknowledges, these other periods in addition. Buckshot06 (talk) 07:57, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Buckshot06: I do agree with this move, although it probably shouldn't be styled as a capitalised proper name, "Afghan Army", something like Afghan army or Army of Afghanistan would be better. The article should also be expanded to include details of the present-day armed forces, whatever they are. It's a bit off to have it dating all the way back to 1700s, but then abruptly stop in 2021. It's either specifically about the American-backed forces or it's about the whole deal. — Amakuru (talk) 11:18, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- Why shouldn't it be styled as a proper capitalised name? We don't uncapitalize other countries' armies; the question is not the formal title of the force (whatever that might be), but WP:COMMONNAME - it would be called usually in ordinary English discourse simply the 'Afghan Army.' On your second point, while there is vastly less information about the army after the American evacuation, some things been added to the article, including some Taliban announcements. Buckshot06 (talk) 11:35, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Buckshot06: the entire premise of your move request is that this is not an article about the Afghan army at a specific point in time, but about the general topic of the country's army, which has had several different proper names over the years, including the up-to-2021 official name of "Afghan National Army". I don't know if it was ever called simply "Afghan Army" as a proper name, but even if it was, that would suffer from the same issue as the current title of being specific only to a particular period. The name should be a descriptive title, which appears in sentence case per MOS:CAPS. CHeers — Amakuru (talk) 18:03, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- In that case, yes, the most correct title would be Afghan army. Please consider that my request. Buckshot06 (talk) 18:41, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Buckshot06: the entire premise of your move request is that this is not an article about the Afghan army at a specific point in time, but about the general topic of the country's army, which has had several different proper names over the years, including the up-to-2021 official name of "Afghan National Army". I don't know if it was ever called simply "Afghan Army" as a proper name, but even if it was, that would suffer from the same issue as the current title of being specific only to a particular period. The name should be a descriptive title, which appears in sentence case per MOS:CAPS. CHeers — Amakuru (talk) 18:03, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- Why shouldn't it be styled as a proper capitalised name? We don't uncapitalize other countries' armies; the question is not the formal title of the force (whatever that might be), but WP:COMMONNAME - it would be called usually in ordinary English discourse simply the 'Afghan Army.' On your second point, while there is vastly less information about the army after the American evacuation, some things been added to the article, including some Taliban announcements. Buckshot06 (talk) 11:35, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Buckshot06: I do agree with this move, although it probably shouldn't be styled as a capitalised proper name, "Afghan Army", something like Afghan army or Army of Afghanistan would be better. The article should also be expanded to include details of the present-day armed forces, whatever they are. It's a bit off to have it dating all the way back to 1700s, but then abruptly stop in 2021. It's either specifically about the American-backed forces or it's about the whole deal. — Amakuru (talk) 11:18, 12 February 2022 (UTC)