Page semi-protected

Wikipedia:Requested moves

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to 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 moves 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 consensus is reached at or after this time, a reviewer will enact the request. If not, the request may be re-listed to allow more time for consensus to develop, or the discussion closed as "no consensus". See Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions for more details on the process.

Wikipedia:Move review can be used to contest the outcome of a move request as long as all steps are followed. If a discussion on the closer's talk page does not resolve an issue, then a move review will evaluate the close of the move discussion to determine whether or not the contested close was reasonable and consistent with the spirit and intent of common practice, policies, and guidelines.

When not to use this page

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

Undiscussed moves

Autoconfirmed editors may move a page without discussion if all of the following apply:

  • No article exists at the new target title;
  • There has been no discussion (especially no recent discussion) about the title of the page that expressed any objection to a new title; and
  • It seems unlikely that 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

If you are unable to complete a technical move, request it below. If this is your first article and you want your draft article published, please submit it for review at Articles for Creation, by adding the code {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft or user sandbox page instead of listing it here.

  • 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

Uncontroversial technical requests

Contested technical requests

Requests to revert undiscussed moves

Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves

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 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

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.}}

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 23 February 2019" and sign the post for you.

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

There is no need to edit the article in question. Once the above code is added to the Talk page, a bot will automatically add the following notification at the top of the article:

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

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.}}

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.

Occasionally the discussions for significant multi-move requests may be hosted on WikiProject talk pages or other pages in Project namespace. For multi-move discussions hosted on a page which is not itself proposed to be moved, specify |current1=Current title of page 1 for the first page to move.

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 23 February 2019

Wikipedia:Requested movesNew – why Example (talk) 00:20, 23 February 2019 (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 23 February 2019

Wikipedia:Requested moves → ? – why Example (talk) 00:20, 23 February 2019 (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 23 February 2019

Wikipedia:Requested movesNew – why Example (talk) 00:20, 23 February 2019‎ (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 23 February 2019

– why Example (talk) 00:20, 23 February 2019 (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 23 February 2019

– why Example (talk) 00:20, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Commenting in a requested move

All editors are welcome to contribute to the discussion regarding a requested page move. There are a number of standards that Wikipedians should practice in such discussions:

  • When editors recommend a course of action, they write Support or Oppose in bold text, which is done by surrounding the word with three single quotes on each side, e.g. '''Support'''.
  • Comments or recommendations are added on a new bulleted line (that is, starting with *) and signed by adding ~~~~ to the end. Responses to another editor are threaded and indented using multiple bullets.
  • The article itself should be reviewed before any recommendation is made; do not base recommendations solely on the information supplied by other editors. It may also help to look at the article's edit history. However, please read the earlier comments and recommendations, as well as prior move requests. They may contain relevant arguments and useful information.
  • Vested interests in the article should be disclosed per Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI.

When participating, please consider the following:

  • Editors should make themselves familiar with the article titling policy at Wikipedia:Article titles.
  • Other important guidelines that set forth community norms for article titles include Wikipedia:Disambiguation, specific naming conventions, and the manual of style.
  • The debate is not a vote; please do not make recommendations that are not sustained by arguments.
  • Explain how the proposed article title meets or contravenes 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.[a]
  • Do not make conflicting recommendations. If you change your mind, use strike-through to retract your previous statement by enclosing it between <s> and </s> after the bullets, and de-bold the struck words, as in "• Support Oppose".

Please remember that reasonable editors will sometimes disagree, but that arguments based in policy, guidelines, and evidence have more weight than unsupported statements. When an editor offers an argument that does not explain how the move request is consistent with policies and guidelines, a reminder to engage in constructive, on-topic discussion may be useful. On the other hand, a pattern of responding to requests with 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 using a dispute resolution process.

Closing instructions

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.[b] 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 by notifying WikiProjects of the discussion using the template {{RM notification}} or {{Mdn}}. Banners placed at the top of the talk page hosting the move request can often be used to identify WikiProjects suitable for notification.


  1. ^ A nominator making a procedural nomination with which they may not agree is free to add a bulleted line explaining their actual position. Additional detail, such as sources, may also be provided in an additional bullet point if its inclusion in the nomination statement would make the statement unwieldy. Please remember that the entire nomination statement is transcluded into the list on this page.
  2. ^ Despite this, discussions are occasionally relisted up to three times.

Current discussions

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. 26 discussions have been relisted, indicated by (Discuss)

February 23, 2019

February 22, 2019

  • (Discuss)Dreamland (upcoming film) → ? – I'm unsure the best method to disambiguate these sufficiently. I just reviewed WP:NCFILM, and complications arise with these titles since they are both planned to be part of the "thriller" genre, both have some sort of association to the United States with their production (in other words, the use of the word "American" in any applicable disambiguators), and both do not seem to have a planned or projected release date. So ... I'm stumped, and both of the current titles are ambiguous. Steel1943 (talk) 16:11, 15 February 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. В²C 20:27, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Ode of RemembranceFor the Fallen – The article is about the whole poem, not just the (more famous) fourth stanza. I do feel that Ode of Remembrance should redirect to For the Fallen, but the scope of this page is wider than simply the ode. See WP:PRECISE: titles should unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but should be no more precise than that. For instance, Saint Teresa of Calcutta is too precise, as Mother Teresa is precise enough to indicate exactly the same topic. In this case, 'Ode of Remembrance' is too precise and 'For the Fallen' is precise enough to indicate the whole topic. Eddie891 Talk Work 16:43, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Charlevoix tourist trainTrain de Charlevoix – "Charlevoix tourist train" is a description of the service and not its actual name. All current branding uses the name "Train de Charlevoix" in English and French. Looking at old records, the service is sometimes described in passing as "the Charlevoix tourist train" but that doesn't equate to the name of the service. It's also described as either a tourist or ski train, with the location given as either Charlevoix or Le Massif, in various permutations of English and French. Seems obvious to give the article the actual name of the service. Madg2011 (talk) 00:31, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

February 21, 2019

  • (Discuss)Harrison F.C.Harrison S.C. – I updated the current page with the more accurate club names and included citations. Harrison S.C. is the best page for this club but that is currently a redirect to Harrison F.C. DC (talk) 13:17, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Dusky flying foxPteropus brunneus – The accepted and most common name for this skull and skin, currently residing in a drawer at BMNH. The coded designation in their catalogue is too technical, the variety of common names incidentally applied to the name are ambiguous, misleading, or outright wrong. All article criteria and deference to policy suggests this the only title, as with other possibly or actually extinct taxa. Also not a dusky fruit bat (Penthetor lucasi), fruit bat and flying fox being somewhat synonymous. cygnis insignis 12:24, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Six Flags AstroWorldAstroWorld – This move will place the article at the WP:COMMONNAME name by which the park was known over its entire operational time, both before and during the ownership by Six Flags, as well as currently. During its time under Six Flags, per the article, "It was marketed as 'AstroWorld: A Member of the Six Flags Family' so as to not confuse patrons with Six Flags Over Texas". In the Google Ngram comparison (configured to remove any overlap), its apparent that "AstroWorld" is used far more than Six Flags AstroWorld. This also satisfies WP:CONCISE by making the title no longer than necessary. -- Netoholic @ 10:33, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)ColumbineColumbine (disambiguation) – I have reverted a previously paste and move here, and have started this proper discussion, based on the original rationale posted on Talk:Columbine High School massacre I have copied below.[3] The short version from the request is that Columbine should be a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT to Columbine High School massacre: :I was wondering about the plausibility of having a search for the word “Columbine” redirect to this page, and then having the current “Columbine” page (which says “Columbine may refer to”) move to a new “Columbine disambiguation” page that would be linked at the top of this page. I looked at the other results on “Columbine may refer to” after searching the word “Columbine” and they all seem very obscure and unnotable compared to the Columbine Massacre. I would venture to estimate that over 90% of searches with just the word “Columbine” on Wikipedia and the Internet at large are with the intent of finding sources related to the Columbine Massacre. :To me, it’s like how if you type “LeBron” or “Lebron”, Wikipedia automatically redirects you to the LeBron James Wikipedia page. Certainly, there are and have been other people with the name LeBron who have a Wikipedia page (even before LeBron James was well-known). But at some point in LeBron James’ basketball career, the Wikipedia community got discussed and decided that the name “LeBron” or “Lebron” is so uniquely tied to the identity of “LeBron James”, that the redirect was necessary. I feel the same way about the word “Columbine”. :(For those who aren’t familiar with LeBron James, he’s an American professional basketball player, considered to be one of the greatest basketball players of all-time, and arguably the best basketball player of all-time) :I feel very strongly that “Columbine” should redirect to “Columbine Massacre”. But I’d love to hear other opinions and thoughts regarding this, and especially your reasons too. I am neutral in this issue. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:40, 14 February 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. SITH (talk) 04:50, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

February 20, 2019

  • (Discuss)Spygate (conspiracy theory)Spygate (Donald Trump conspiracy theory) – Reduce confusion with Spygate (NFL). When many people hear "Spygate," they think of the 2007 controversy involving the New England Patriots. (When you search online for "spygate", the NFL controversy comes up far more often then the Trump wiretapping claims.) That controversy involved various conspiracy theories, both that the Patriots coaches and front office conspired among themselves and also that they conspired with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell to destroy embarrassing videotapes. Therefore, we need a way to make clear which "Spygate" conspiracy theory this article is about. R2 (bleep) 22:25, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)List of films featuring insectsList of films featuring anthropomorphic insects – The current title is misleading. The proposed title reflects the actual topic as stated in the lead of the article. Also per the previous nomination above - however my main point is that the current title is misleading, regardless of what anyone thinks the article should or shouldn't contain, the current title should reflect the current content. The current content specifically excludes films featuring actual real insects. Pontificalibus 12:08, 11 February 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. Steel1943 (talk) 21:25, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Úmaro EmbalóUmaro Embaló – Most reliable sources (Benfica, FPF, Liga Portugal, Soccerway, ForaDeJogo – TheFinalBall isn't reliable) show that his first name doesn't have an accent. SLBedit (talk) 17:29, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)H2 (TV network)History2 – A&E began rolling out the "History2" rebrand, but is it too early to change this article's title? Also, is it "History2" (without a space) or "History 2" (with a space)? JSH-alive/talk/cont/mail 11:09, 13 February 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. IffyChat -- 15:28, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Alcatraz CitadelFort Alcatraz – This article is about the whole of Fort Alcatraz, yet it is named for a single structure, more or less like naming an article on Washington, DC The White House. Moving will reqire deletion of a redirect. Qwirkle (talk) 08:36, 12 February 2019 (UTC)--Relisting. Dekimasuよ! 10:20, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)MMR vaccine and autism → ? – This is a procedural listing. Since 20 January there has been a huge discussion about renaming the article without a formal RM, and we need an uninvolved administrator to close the discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:04, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

February 19, 2019

  • (Discuss)The Jurist (painting)The Lawyer (painting) – The title "Il Avvocato" means "The Lawyer", in the sense of "legal practitioner"(cp. "advocate"). If he had wanted to say "jurist" ("legal scholar"), he could have said "giurista". The lead should then give "The Jurist" as an AKA and the image title will have to change. Wikiain (talk) 22:32, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)MitochondrionMitochondria – Per WP:PLURAL: "With irregular plurals whose usage far exceeds the usage of the singular, we prefer the common and unastonishing title: bacteria, algae, and data, rather than bacterium, etc." This case clearly fits that exception. Rreagan007 (talk) 21:54, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Steven Weber (actor)Steven Weber – A reason this would be a good move is because 99 percentage interest in this page. Steven Weber (professor) you would only know if you were very familiar with Berkeley, and even then he would not be much known, so this page is more familiar and you can remove his job. --Quiz shows 06:57, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

February 18, 2019

  • (Discuss)Alexey Kim (chess player)Alexey Kim – Although the main title header of the disambiguation page could be placed at a neutral transliteration that is used by neither of the two entries, such as Aleksey Kim or Alexei Kim (both of which currently redirect to the footballer, Aleksei Kim), the Alexey Kim dab page is not really necessary. "Alexey" and "Aleksei" are two transliteration variations of the same Russian given name and can be handled by hatnotes atop the footballer's and the chess player's entries.     Roman Spinner (talkcontribs) 19:15, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Marsupial moleNotoryctes – "Two species are currently recognised, Notoryctes typhlops or Southern Marsupial Mole from central Australia, and Notoryctes caurinus or Northern Marsupial Mole from north western Australia. Given these unimaginative common names for these extraordinary species, Maxwell et al. (1996) proposed the adoption of Aboriginal names: Itjaritjari for N. typhlops, and Kakarratul for N. caurinus. These names have been widely accepted." Benshemesh, J. (2004). Recovery Plan for Marsupial Moles Notoryctes typhlops and N. caurinus. 2005-2010. Northern Territory Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Environment, Alice Springs cygnis insignis 14:40, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)TV5 Network5 Network – Guys, due to the rebranded of TV5 to simply The 5 Network or 5, this article needs to changed the name and turn into 5 Network as it said on the website just removed the TV on this article. I'm not gonna moved/changed it because of the alerts on my user talk page. Any comments guys, will renamed it to 5 Network or not. It's your decisions/comments/suggestions. My decision is 50/50. Thanks. P.S. This is a temporary... Movies Time (talk) 11:23, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

February 17, 2019

  • (Discuss)Edita PiekhaEdyta Piecha – The sources cited either are Russian, or refer to her as Edyta Piecha. She has a Polish name and the article should be named accordingly. The address of her official site is Lastly, the correct transcription of her Russian name would be Edita Pyekha. WikiArticleEditor (talk) 20:11, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)BaʽadanJabal Baʽdan – This article is mainly about a mountain called Baʽdan mountain I tried moving it but it says the name is in the blacklist? Could you please rename this article? thanks SharabSalam (talk) 13:58, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Western United FC (A-League)Western United FC – Simply put, this is a new professional football team, starting in the 2019-20 A-League season, which shares the name of a semi-pro team from the Solomon Islands. This article (going by the standards set from other A-League articles will be significantly higher traffic than the Solomon Islands article. - J man708 (talk) 05:56, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Noddy (TV interview technique)Nod shot – First, the term "noddy" is an informal way of describing this shot, more like filmmaker's WP:JARGON. This is also opportunity for WP:COMMONALITY as the term "noddy" varies slightly by region. Secondly, the current disambiguation for this term is cumbersome and somewhat inaccurate (its an editing technique, not part of the interview itself), and I can't think of an alternative that can be concise. On the other hand, rephrasing as "nod shot" (or perhaps "nodding shot") is simple, straightforward WP:NATURALDISAMBIG and commonly-used. Compare within the technical dictionaries and media studies books found in these Google Books results: nod shot, nodding shot, noddy shot. -- Netoholic @ 04:56, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

February 16, 2019

  • (Discuss)BlackBerry MessengerBBM (software) – It seems like the full name is no longer used at all. If you go to the website there is only "BBM" and no mention of "BlackBerry Messenger". Also on the App Store and Google Play Store it is called "BBM". So, it is now just called "BBM". I'm sure this has been the case for quite a while now but the page hasn't been updated (most likely because it's not a popular topic anymore). ממשמזמן (talk) 18:17, 16 February 2019 (UTC)


See also