Wikipedia:Requested moves

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia:RM)
Jump to: navigation, search

Closing instructions

Click here to purge 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: 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 move process is not mandatory, and sometimes, an informal discussion at the article's talk page can help reach consensus.
  • Unregistered users and new (not yet autoconfirmed) users are unable to move pages.

Requests are generally processed after seven days. If a consensus is reached after this time, a mover will enact the request. If not, the request may be re-listed to allow more time for consensus to develop, or be as "no consensus". See Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions for more details on the process.

The Move review process can be used to contest a move. It is designed to evaluate a contested close of a move discussion to determine if the close was reasonable, or whether it was inconsistent with the spirit and intent of Wikipedia common practice, policies, or guidelines.

When not to use this page[edit]

Separate processes exist for moving certain types of pages, and for changes other than page moves:

Undiscussed moves[edit]

Anyone may move a page without discussion if:

  • No article exists at the new target title;
  • There has not been any discussion (especially recent discussion) about the title for the page that expresses disagreement with the new target title;
  • And it seems unlikely anyone would reasonably disagree with the move.

If you disagree with such a move, and the new title has not been in place for a long time, you may revert the move. 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.

Requesting technical moves[edit]

If you are unable to complete a technical move, request it below. If this is your first article then please request at Wikipedia:Articles for creation.

  • To list a technical request: edit the Uncontroversial technical requests subsection and insert the following code filling in pages and reason:
    {{subst:RMassist|current page title|new page title|reason = reason for move}}
    This will automatically insert a bullet and include your signature. Please do not edit the article's talk page.
  • 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 ~~~~.
  • 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]

Edit this section if you want to move a request from Uncontroversial to Contested.

Uncontroversial technical requests[edit]

Contested technical requests[edit]

Requests to revert undiscussed moves[edit]

Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves[edit]

The discussion process is used for potentially controversial moves. The move is potentially controversial if any of the following apply:

  • There is an existing article (not just a redirect) at the target title;
  • There has been any past debate about the best title for the page;
  • Someone could reasonably disagree with the move.

Use this process if there is any reason to believe a move would be contested. In particular, use this process before moving any existing page with incoming links to create a disambiguation page at that title. For technical move requests (e.g. spelling and capitalization fixes), see Requesting technical moves.

Do not put more than one open move request on the same article talk page, because this is not supported by the bot that handles updates to this page. Multiple closed move requests may be on the same page, but each should have a unique section heading.

Requesting a single page move[edit]

To request a single page move, edit at the bottom of the talk page of the article you want moved, without adding a new header, inserting this code:

{{subst:requested move|NewName|reason=Place here your rationale for the proposed page name change, ideally referring to applicable naming convention policies and guidelines, and providing evidence in support where appropriate. If your reasoning includes search engine results, please prioritize searches limited to reliable sources (e.g. books, news, scholarly papers) over other web results. Do not sign this. {{subst:DNAU|14}}}}

Replace NewName with the requested new name of the page (or with a question mark, if you want more than one possible new name to be considered). The template will automatically create the heading "Requested move 17 March 2018" and sign for you. The {{subst:DNAU}} template ensures that your thread doesn't get archived before elapsing. You can remove this template once the move request is closed.

Use the code |talk=yes to add separate locations for survey and discussion.

Note: Unlike other request processes on Wikipedia, such as RfC, nominations need not be neutral. Make your point as best you can; use evidence (such as Ngrams and pageview statistics) and refer to applicable policies and guidelines, especially our article titling policy and the guideline on disambiguation and primary topic.

WikiProjects may subscribe to Article alerts to receive RM notifications, e.g. this page is transcluded to here. RMCD bot notifies many of the other Wikiprojects listed on the talk page of the article to be moved to invite project members to participate in the RM discussion. Requesters should feel free to notify any other Wikiproject or Noticeboard that might be interested in the move request.

Requesting multiple page moves[edit]

A single template may be used to request multiple related moves. On one of the talk pages of the affected articles, create a request and format it as below. A sample request for three page moves is shown here (for two page moves, omit the lines for current3 and new3). For four page moves, add lines for current4 and new4, and so on. There is no technical limit on the number of multiple move requests, but before requesting very large multi-moves, consider whether a naming convention should be changed first. Discuss that change on the talk page for the naming convention, e.g., Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (sportspeople).

{{subst:requested move
| new1 = New title for page 1 with the talk page hosting this discussion
| current2 = Current title of page 2
| new2 = New title for page 2
| current3 = Current title of page 3
| new3 = New title for page 3
| reason = Place here your rationale for the proposed page name change, ideally referring to applicable naming convention policies and guidelines, and providing evidence in support where appropriate. If your reasoning includes search engine results, please prioritize searches limited to reliable sources (e.g. books, news, scholarly papers) over other web results. Do not sign this. {{subst:DNAU|14}} }}

For example, to propose moving the articles Wikipedia and Wiki, put this template on Talk:Wikipedia, and replace current2 with Wiki. The discussion for all affected articles is held on the talk page of the article at page 1 (Talk:Wikipedia). Do not sign a request with ~~~~ as the template does this automatically. Do not skip pairs of numbers.

RMCD bot automatically places a notice section on the talk page of the additional pages that are included in your request, advising that the move discussion is in progress, where it is, and that all discussion for all pages included in the request should take place at that one location.

Template usage examples and notes
Talk page tag Text that will be shown (and usage notes)
{{subst:Requested move |new|reason=why}}
links talk edit
Requested move 17 March 2018

Wikipedia:Requested movesNew – why Example (talk) 00:33, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Use when the proposed new title is given.
Do not sign this template—this tag is auto-signed when substituted. Be sure to use the subst:.
This tag should be placed at the beginning of the section containing the relevant discussion.

{{subst:Requested move|?|reason=why}}
Requested move 17 March 2018

Wikipedia:Requested moves → ? – why Example (talk) 00:33, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Use when the proposed new title is not known.
Do not sign this template—this tag is auto-signed when substituted. Be sure to use the subst:.
This tag should be placed at the beginning of the section containing the relevant discussion.

{{subst:Requested move |new|reason=why|talk=yes}}
Requested move 17 March 2018

Wikipedia:Requested movesNew – why Example (talk) 00:33, 17 March 2018‎ (UTC)

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
Any additional comments:

This template adds subsections for survey and discussion.
Do not sign this template—this tag is auto-signed when substituted. Be sure to use the subst:
Click the "New Section" tab on the talk page and leave the Subject/headline blank, as the template by default automatically creates the heading.

{{subst:Requested move |new1=x|current2=y|new2=z|reason=why}}
Requested move 17 March 2018

– why Example (talk) 00:33, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Do not sign this template—this tag is auto-signed when substituted.
Be sure to use the subst: and place this tag at the beginning of the section containing the relevant discussion.
Add additional related move requests in pairs (|current3= and |new3=, |current4= and |new4=, etc.).

{{subst:Requested move |new1=?|current2=y|new2=?|reason=why}}
Requested move 17 March 2018

– why Example (talk) 00:33, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Commenting in a requested move[edit]

All editors are welcome to contribute to the discussion regarding a requested page move. It is a place for rational discussion of whether an article should be renamed.

There are a number of practices that most Wikipedians use in such discussions:

  • When editors recommend a course of action, they usually do so in bold text, e. g., Support or Oppose, which is done by surrounding the word with three single quotes on each side, e.g. '''Support'''.
  • Start comments or recommendations on a new bulleted line (that is, starting with *), and sign them by adding ~~~~ to the end. If you are responding to another editor, put your comment directly below theirs, making sure it is indented (using multiple *s).
  • Please disclose whether you have a vested interest in the article, per WP:AVOIDCOI.
  • Please have a look at the article before making a recommendation. Do not base your recommendation solely on the information supplied by the nominator or other editors. To understand the situation, it may also help to look at the history of the article. However, please read the earlier comments and recommendations, as well as prior Requested Moves. They may contain relevant arguments and further useful information.

When participating, please consider the following:

  • Ideally editors should be familiar with WP:Article titles, WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, and WP:MOS (among others) which sets forth community norms for article titles.
  • The debate is not a vote; please do not make recommendations on the course of action to be taken that are not sustained by arguments.
  • When making your case or responding to others, explain how the proposed article title meets/violates policy and guidelines rather than merely stating that it does so.
  • Nomination already implies that the nominator supports the name change, and nominators should refrain from repeating this recommendation on a separate bulleted line.
  • Do not make conflicting recommendations; if you change your mind, modify your original recommendation rather than adding a new one. The recommended way of doing this is to use strike-through by enclosing a retracted statement between <s> and </s> after the *, as in "• Support Oppose".

Also, just a reminder that reasonable editors will sometimes disagree, but valid arguments will be given more weight than unsupported statements. When an editor offers arguments or evidence that do not explain how the proposed article title meets/violates policy, they may only need a reminder to engage in constructive, on-topic discussion. But a pattern of groundless opinion, proof by assertion, and ignoring content guidelines may become disruptive. If a pattern of disruptive behavior persists after efforts are made to correct the situation through dialogue, please consider a dispute resolution process outside the current Requested Move process.

Closing instructions[edit]

Any uninvolved editor in good standing may close a move request. Please read the closing instructions for information on how to close a move request. The Simple guide to closing RM discussions details how to actually close a requested move discussion.


Relisting a discussion moves the request out of the backlog up to the current day in order to encourage further input. The decision to relist a discussion is best left to uninvolved experienced editors upon considering, but declining, to close the discussion. In general, discussions should not be relisted more than once before properly closing. Users relisting a debate which has already been relisted, or relisting a debate with a substantial discussion, should write a short explanation on why they did not consider the debate sufficient to close. While there is no consensus forbidding participation in a requested move discussion after relisting it, many editors consider it an inadvisable form of supervote. If you want to relist a discussion and then participate in it, be prepared to explain why you think it was appropriate.

Relisting can be done using {{subst:relisting}}, which also signs it automatically, and is placed at the very end of the initial request (after their signature, and subsequent re-listers signatures). When a discussion has been relisted a bot partially underlines the "Discuss" link in the lists of debates: (Discuss).

When a relisted discussion reaches a resolution, it may be closed at any time according to the closing instructions; there is no required length of time to wait before closing a relisted discussion.

If discussion has become stale, or it seems that discussion would benefit from more input of editors versed in the subject area, consider more widely publicizing the discussion, such as to notify relevant WikiProjects of the discussion using the template {{RM notification}}. Applicable WikiProjects can often be determined by means of the banners placed at the top of the talk page hosting the move request.

Current discussions[edit]

This section 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 and in table format. 16 discussions have been relisted, indicated by (Discuss)

March 17, 2018[edit]

March 16, 2018[edit]

  • (Discuss)American Horror Story: Murder HouseAmerican Horror Story (season 1) – Fan dubbed name, name not given on any promotional material or boxset etc. "Murder House" is used widely, I accept, but Netflix is not what decides the name of the season, and no source is given stating the season is officially renamed Murder House, previous Washington Post source explicitly say that Murder House is the official name, only it sports that name (by whom, fans or FX, it doesn't state). TedEdwards 22:35, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)LavasoftAdaware – Company has changes its name, using the name of its flagship software. I merged the notable information from Ad-Aware, in which a header was place to inform about notability issues. I believe merging the articles and moving to the company's name as title, is appropriate. ~~ uℂρЭ 0υĜe 20:21, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

March 15, 2018[edit]

  • (Discuss)TheotokosMother of God – Many inlinks to this article are named "Mother of God". That is also a perfectly prevalent expression in English language. Although indeed existing in theological circles, no reason to keep a Greek term here like this as default title. See also discussion on this issue above. Chicbyaccident (talk) 16:40, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)GalvanizationGalvanizing – The lead says "galvanizing" is the more commonly-used term. The article uses it more often than the rather obscure "galvanization". Please don't let this be a grammatically correct but factually wrong thing? Lithopsian (talk) 16:33, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Kentucky colonelKentucky Colonel – Changing the second word to uppercase per MOS:JOBTITLES – KC is a formal title and is addressed as a title in and of itself. Confirmed after checking cited sources and some discussion. —BarrelProof (talk) 02:26, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

March 14, 2018[edit]

  • (Discuss)100 prisoners problemLocker Puzzle – There are a lot of problems about 100 prisoners, there is no evidence that "100_prisoners_problem" would be recognized as this problem. "Locker Puzzle" is more recognized name. It looks like in all references where this problem is referred by a name it referred by "Locker Puzzle" starting from Curtin and Warshauer's paper Alexei Kopylov (talk) 23:37, 7 March 2018 (UTC)--Relisting.usernamekiran(talk) 19:06, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)2018 anti-Muslim riots in Sri Lanka2018 Buddhist–Muslim riots in Sri Lanka – I propose this as this violence was caused against both Muslims and Buddhists in the country. Muslims destroyed Pansalas while Buddhists attacked the mosques. It was my fault to have created the article with the heading stating that the violence was conducted only by the Buddhists against Muslims (I mainly focused on the Ampara incident during the attempt to create this article) Abishe (talk) 14:44, 7 March 2018 (UTC)--Relisting.usernamekiran(talk) 18:58, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Audubon Park, New OrleansAudubon Park (New Orleans) – WP:NAMINGCRITERIA. It was switched to the current page over a decade ago in 2006, but the format for parks has switched from Park Name, City to Park Name (City). I was unable to move it due to requested format already being created. Thanks. Spatms (talk) 08:06, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)MetahumanMetahuman (DC Comics) – "Metahuman" appears to be a relatively common alternative fictional term for "mutant". Its structure of "meta" and "human" is simple enough that I'm not sure its DC Comics incarnation can lay claim to it in its entirety. In fact, the article itself states that the term was used prior to DC Comics using it. It should be the WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT to Mutants in fiction. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 02:31, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

March 13, 2018[edit]

  • (Discuss)Pop 2 (mixtape)Pop 2 – The mixtape (Pop 2) and the programming language (POP-2) are the only two articles on the disambiguation page that have similar names, and a hatnote for each article should suffice in directing readers to their intended article. WikiRedactor (talk) 23:03, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Yellow Dog Updater, ModifiedYellowdog Updater, Modified – The existing page title does not match the acronym if "yellow" and "dog" are two separate words. The body of the article, as well as the graphic, follows this usage with "yellowdog" as a single word. When I try to move this page the filter says it already exists and suggests I try making the request here. Apparently the filter sees the two titles as equivalent (yellow dog = yellowdog). So I'm requesting technical assistance on this page move, thanks. Full disclosure: I'm requesting this title change on behalf of the original YDL developer (Kai Staats) for whom I'm writing a bio page. We need consistent terminology for internal links. Heimhenge (talk) 19:13, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Instant messagingMessaging – WP:COMMON (the article covers old-school instant messaging but also what is far more common today, messaging apps. The new title covers the topic better and is more in line with current usage) Keizers (talk) 17:42, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Bassem al-TamimiBassem Tamimi – A significant majority of English news coverage uses Tamimi without the al-(the) prefix which is used in Arabic. I believe the subject himself also uses this in English. Also note the subject's daughter is at Ahed Tamimi, without the al- Icewhiz (talk) 15:13, 5 March 2018 (UTC)--Relisting. Shadow007 (talk) 05:15, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

March 12, 2018[edit]

  • (Discuss)TuxTux (mascot) – Was brought up in the requested move of Tuxedo. Tux is a commonly used abbreviation, and in fact is the reason the penguin is named as such (since penguins are colored the same as tuxedos). So, it is the obvious WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT for Tux. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 18:50, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)TuxedoDinner suit – This clothing tradition originated with the then Prince, King Edward VII in England. While the colloquial American English name "tuxedo" (after Tuxedo Park where the Prince's style was first imitated in the United States) may be indicated in the article, the dinner suit is since a long time established as a global tradition. It should thus be referred to with the global perspective in mind. This aspect, as well as its English origin, disfavours preference for the American English term. Often referred to as "dinner jacket" in English-speaking contexts outside of the United States, "dinner jacket" would be preferred over "tuxedo". However, as this article is not limited to the jacket part but covers all of the suit, "dinner suit" seems more correct. Chicbyaccident (talk) 16:26, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

March 11, 2018[edit]

  • (Discuss)Deadline – Revisiting the issue to more widely publicize it, given that the website is cited on thousands of pages. The article was created in September 2009 as It remained so until last month, on a second attempt at a change to Deadline Hollywood that garnered few responses. Per research (above) by two editors, the names and Deadline Hollywood are used roughly equally, so both satisfy WP:COMMONNAME; therefore, concrete reasons should be given to choose one common name over the other. The advantages to are 1) that it is shorter and less wordy, and 2) that it avoids the italicization disagreements that accompany Deadline Hollywood. Tenebrae (talk) 19:01, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)ZIP Codezip code – Lower case it per MOS:CAPS - that previous RM had mainly dubious rationales, per MOS:CAPS, capitilization should only be used when the terms are consistently capitilized, ngrams reveal a very mixed usage with "zip code" not only being the most common, but also preferred by MOS as least amount of capitilization. Or at the very least it should go to "ZIP code" and not "ZIP Code". Galobtter (pingó mió) 13:15, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)College rugby union in the United StatesCollege rugby – Most of the college specific sports pages do not have their own pages dedicated to specific countries (i.e. College basketball in the United States, College football in the United States) and most of the college rugby links on Canadian pages like U Sports link back to here and there doesn't seem to be one made for Canada. Rather then have a page for each country, I think it's best to just have one page for this since there isn't that much information for the rest. AquilaXIII (talk) 08:00, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

March 10, 2018[edit]

  • (Discuss)East Bengali refugeesBengali Hindu refugeesEast Bengal, as an entity existed as a province in the Dominion of Pakistan only between 1947 and 1956. In 1956, when Pakistan became an Islamic Republic, the East Bengal was renamed to East Pakistan. But the flow of refugees continued from the territory of erstwhile East Bengal, even after 1956, notably in 1964 and 1971 and it continues till date. But we can't call refugees between 1956 and 1971 as East Pakistani refugees or post-1971 as Bangladeshi refugees. Refugees not only arrive from East Bengal/East Pakistan/Bangladesh. Refugees also came to West Bengal from Burma in 1950s and 1960s, from Assam in 1960s and from Meghalaya in 1970s and 1980s. Considering that, the article should be moved to Bengali Hindu refugees BengaliHindu (talk) 23:07, 10 March 2018 (UTC)


See also[edit]