Page semi-protected

Wikipedia:Requested moves

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Closing instructions

For the current list of potentially controversial requested moves, see § Current discussions.
"Wikipedia:RM" and "Wikipedia:RFPM" redirect here. For requested mergers, see Wikipedia:Proposed article mergers. For removals, see Wikipedia:Guide to deletion. For page history mergers, see Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. For requesting the page mover user right, see Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Page mover.
For detailed guidance on how and when to move a page, see Wikipedia:Moving a page.
Click here to purge this page
Shortcuts

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

Shortcuts

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

Undiscussed moves

Shortcut

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

Shortcut

If you are unable to complete a move for technical reasons, you can request technical help below. This is the correct page 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: ..."

  • To list a technical request: edit the Uncontroversial technical requests subsection and insert the following code at the top of the list, 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 ~~~~. 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

Uncontroversial technical requests

Administrator needed

Contested technical requests

Per MOS:HYPHENCAPS, Wikipedia does not ordinarily capitalize a word that follows a hyphen, so this appears to need discussion. Also, the article Rear admiral (Royal Navy) does not use a hyphen between "Rear" and "admiral", as well as not capitalizing "admiral". —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 09:00, 20 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Per MOS:HYPHENCAPS, Wikipedia does not ordinarily capitalize a word that follows a hyphen, so this appears to need discussion. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 09:00, 20 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

References

  1. ^ "System Map" (PDF). Washington Metro. Retrieved 19 October 2022.
@UnkreativeFrog: Per the article's content, the subject still seems untitled. Claiming that the film will be called "The Exorcist" currently seems to be WP:CRYSTAL. Steel1943 (talk) 06:39, 20 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, do the sources say that that will definitely be the official name? If no, it's WP:CRYSTAL as Steel pointed out, and if yes, then it probably makes sense to update the article first. Dr. Vogel (talk) 22:27, 20 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Requests to revert undiscussed moves

Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves

Shortcuts

The discussion process is used for potentially controversial moves. A move is potentially controversial if either of the following applies:

  • 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. For technical move requests, such as to correct obvious typographical errors, see Requesting technical moves. The technical moves procedure can also be used for uncontroversial moves when the requested title is occupied by an existing article.

Do not create a new move request when one is already open on the same talk page. Instead, consider contributing to the open discussion if you would like to propose another alternative. Multiple closed move requests may be on the same page, but each should have a unique section heading.

Do not create a move request to rename one or more redirects. Redirects cannot be used as current titles in requested moves.

Requesting a single page move

Shortcut

To request a single page move, click on the "New section" (or "Add topic") tab of the talk page of the article you want moved, without adding a new subject/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. You don't need to add your signature at the end, as this template will do so automatically.}}

Replace NewName with the requested new name of the page (or with a simple question mark, if you want more than one possible new name to be considered). The template will automatically create the heading "Requested move 20 October 2022" and sign the post for you.

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 affected page:

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

WikiProjects may subscribe to Article alerts to receive RM notifications. For example, Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Article alerts/Requested moves is transcluded to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography. 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, as long as this notification is neutral.

Single page move on a different talk page

Occasionally, a move request must be made on a talk page other than the talk page of the page to be moved. For example, a request to rename Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Resources to Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewing and templates would need to take place at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation because the talk page of the project page to be moved, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/Resources, is a redirect to that centralized discussion page. In this type of case, the requested move should be made using the following code: 

{{subst:requested move|reason=(the reason for the page move goes here).|current1=(present title of page to be renamed)|new1=(proposed title of page)}}

The |1= unnamed parameter is not used. The |current1= and |new1= parameters are used similar to multiple page moves described below.

Requesting multiple page moves

Shortcut

A single template may be used to request multiple related moves. On one of the talk pages of the affected pages, 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).

To request a multiple page move, edit at the bottom of the talk page of the article you chose for your request, without adding a new header, inserting this code: 

{{subst:requested move
| current1 = Current title of page 1
| 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. You don't need to add your signature at the end, as this template will do so automatically.
}}
See also: Template:Requested move/extended blank

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.

Request all associated moves explicitly

Please list every move that you wish to have made in your request. For example, if you wish to move Cricket (disambiguation) to Cricket because you do not believe the sport is the primary topic for the search term "Cricket", then you actually want to move two pages, both Cricket (disambiguation) and Cricket. Thus you must list proposed titles for each page affected by your request. For example, you might propose:

If a new title is not proposed for the sport, it is more difficult to achieve consensus for a new title for that article. A move request that does not show what to do with the material at its proposed target, such as:

is incomplete. Such requests may be completed as a request to decide the best new title by discussion.

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 20 October 2022

Wikipedia:Requested moves → New – why Example (talk) 23:13, 20 October 2022 (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.Reply[reply]

{{subst:Requested move|?|reason=why}}
Requested move 20 October 2022

Wikipedia:Requested moves → ? – why Example (talk) 23:13, 20 October 2022 (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.Reply[reply]

{{subst:Requested move|new|reason=why|talk=yes}}
Requested move 20 October 2022

Wikipedia:Requested moves → New – why Example (talk) 23:13, 20 October 2022‎ (UTC)Reply[reply]

Survey
Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this subsection 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.
Discussion
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 20 October 2022

– why Example (talk) 23:13, 20 October 2022 (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.).Reply[reply]

{{subst:Requested move|new1=?|current2=y|new2=?|reason=why}}
Requested move 20 October 2022

– why Example (talk) 23:13, 20 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Commenting on a requested move

Shortcut

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 a requested move

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 requested move

Shortcut

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 should be done using {{subst:relisting}}, which automatically includes the relister's signature, and which must be placed at the very end of the initial request after the move requester's signature (and subsequent relisters' signatures).

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}}. Banners placed at the top of the talk page hosting the move request can often be used to identify WikiProjects suitable for notification.

Notes

  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 more than once.

Current discussions

Shortcut
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. 39 discussions have been relisted.

October 20, 2022

  • (Discuss) – Nawabs of Bengal and Murshidabad → Nawabs of Bengal – This has been discussed for a long time, but no action has been made. The Nawabs of Bengal were the powerful independent rulers of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. The Nawabs of Murshidabad were their descendants who were not rulers, but simply a wealthy aristocratic family. The article at present makes it seem like both are the same thing, when in fact they are two different entities which do not overlap. UserNumber (talk) 19:58, 20 October 2022 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). Dr. Vogel (talk) 22:23, 20 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Tag Team (group) → ? – The last RM fizzled out due to no one agreeing on anything, so let's try this again. I am proposing either of the two options: #Move to Tag Team (duo) per the precedent of using "(duo)" in disambiguations (e.g. Trout Fishing in America (duo), Love and Theft (duo)). They are not a "group" as they consist of only two people. @162 etc.: failed to address this in the last RM when questioned. Despite another comment, the term "duo" is far from exclusive to wrestling, and I doubt anyone will be confused. #Move to Tag Team as per WP:DIFFCAPS and the page view stats in the last RM, which suggest that most people looking for "Tag Team" with both T's capitalized are indeed looking for the musical duo. (hat tip to @Station1:) Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 22:32, 10 October 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 20:54, 20 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Abu Hurairah → Abu Hurayra – Abu Hurayra is the common Arabic transliteration per WP:MOSAR. Abu Hurayrah is also a correct transliteration of the Arabic word per the guidelines here though it is more common on Wikipedia to drop the 'h' in similar cases, e.g., Mu'awiya I instead of Mu'awiyah I. Abu Hurayra also seems to be a more common transliteration in reliable sources, e.g., the works of Madelung. TatesTopG (talk) 8:25, 7 October 2022 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). – Ammarpad (talk) 10:00, 13 October 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 20:45, 20 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Pakistani Taliban → Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan – All five criteria under WP:TITLE should be referred to when choosing to name articles appropriately. WP:COMMONNAME notes that Ambiguous or inaccurate names for the article subject, as determined in reliable sources, are often avoided even though they may be more frequently used by reliable sources. "Pakistani Taliban" isn't really the name of any organisation, but is rather just informal shorthand for the group known as Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan. More significantly, the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan themselves don't refer to themselves as such, and neither do the vast majority of Pakistani sources including the Urdu press. If we look at the previous move request then you can see that the user used WP:GOOGLEHITS as an argument to change the name which is not good enough to warrant the name change, because going by the same argument, a search for "Pakistani Taliban" in Urdu (پاکستانی طالبان) returns 14,600 results whereas the name "Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan" (تحریک طالبان پاکستان) returns a staggering 547,000 results in comparison. To imply that it is way off the mark would be an understatement! 103.244.173.68 (talk) 19:17, 11 October 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 16:33, 20 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Nicolás Jaar → Nicolas Jaar – Most secondary sources don't use diacritics. He uses diacritics on his website but not on other social media so I am not sure if it's proof enough. Also, he was born in New York and I'm not sure how likely it is the use of them. 7szz (talk) 06:08, 20 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

October 19, 2022

  • (Discuss) – Sino-Soviet relations → China–Soviet Union relations – The names of the countries are China and Soviet Union. Not Sino or Soviet. Demonyms should not be used to title the article about the relationship between the governments that conduct the affairs of foreign relations. Any search results that use the current title in regard to articles on the web or scholarly sources don't factor in the name of the article because we use common names of countries. The common name of both countries is China and Soviet Union, respectively. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:09, 19 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

October 18, 2022

  • (Discuss) – Sooes River → Tsoo-Yess River – U.S Board of Geographic Names approved official name of river as Tsoo-Yess on March 18, 2014 meeting. This extends to Tsoo-Yess Beach, Tsoo-Yess Peak, and Tsoo-Yess (populated area). Kype killa (talk) 20:18, 18 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Community of Halifax, Nova Scotia → History of Halifax, Nova Scotia – Per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:PRECISION. To my knowledge, there is no formally defined entity named the "Community of Halifax, Nova Scotia", and almost the entire page concerns the history of the former city and the present Halifax Regional Municipality (HRM). It makes little sense to name this page after an undefined "community" when it is in fact a history article about two clearly identifiable municipalities. I know there is a political and semantic dispute over historical outlying communities within the HRM getting short shrift (both on Wikipedia and in real life), but Wikipedia is meant to make sense to the general (uninformed) public, not just to make the locals happy. Carguychris (talk) 16:54, 18 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

October 17, 2022

October 16, 2022

  • (Discuss) – Twin Cities Zephyr → Twin Zephyr – I think this is an example of a confusing WP:Official names vs. descriptive WP:COMMONNAME, with single/plural on the side. The Chicago, Burlington and Quincy Railroad (Burlington) ran high-speed inter-city passenger "Zephyrs" from 1934 to 1971. One route was from Chicago to the "Twin Cities" of Minneapolis–Saint Paul Minnesota. This route was scheduled as "Morning (or Afternoon) Zephyr". "Twin" was never in the name of the route. The Burlington did say to/for/between the Twin Cities. Amtrak ended the service in 1971. In early advertisements the name of the equipment was "Twin Zephyr". There were two (twin) train-sets, both making a daily round trip in opposite directions. Generation #1 (9901 and 9902) was directly replaced by Generation #2 (9904 and 9905) in 1936. In 1947 the Generation #2 trainsets were replaced by dedicated conventional cars with replacement and extra cars from a pool fleet. The Burlington continued to pair the train-sets but they were only called "Twin" on this service. Zimmermann, Karl (2004). Burlington's Zephyrs. Andover Junction. pp. 6–7, 12, 45–55, 96–113. ISBN 0-7603-1856-5. (sort of a fan book but probably definitive). The name "Twin Zephyr" was official in advertisements from 1935 to at least 1947 (edit add: 1951 on ebay) and either official or commonname after that. "Twin Cities Zephyr" is descriptive, was a commonname in the Chicago area, and will show up in newspapers and local history. This was started on the talk page above (involved have been notified) but I did it wrong. I have some COI and won't be editing around here. Thank you. Sammy D III (talk) 20:15, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss) – John Balcerzak → Killing of Konerak Sinthasomphone – As the article mostly focuses on the killing of the victim and how both of the police officers handled the situation, i suggest changing the title to "Killing Murder of Konerak Sinthasomphone", and moving down "John A. Balcerzak (born April 13, 1957) is an American former police officer from Milwaukee, Wisconsin" and the "Service as union official" to his own section, maybe titled "John Balcerzak" or similar. If these changes were to happen, i also suggest adding more information about the murder in the lead, in addition to the current lead that mainly focuses on the attention the police officers received. 𝙨𝙥𝙞𝙙𝙚𝙧-𝙬𝙞𝙣𝙚-𝙗𝙤𝙩𝙩𝙡𝙚(🕷) - (✉) 17:00, 8 October 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 17:55, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Salaam → Salaam (disambiguation) – This seems like a pretty clear case of WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT. Keeping in mind that The fact that an article has a different title is not a factor in determining whether a topic is primary, "Salaam" primarily refers to the greeting used by Muslims and others, which we discuss at the article As-salamu alaykum. WikiNav shows that page as 3:1 ahead of the next-most-clicked entry, despite the fact that it was not linked as prominently as it should have been until a few days ago. We should move to Salaam (disambiguation) and retarget the redirect to As-salamu alaykum. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 05:42, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss) – The Mink Case → ? – I think the name of this article should be reconsidered. First, should The be in the title? WP:THE seems to say no, but I think it gets tricky with translations. Mink Commission does not use The, even though the Danish word is definite. Second, should we consider the title a proper noun? I mostly see it uncapitalised in Danish publications,[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8], but some do capitalise it,[9][10] including the Danish Wikipedia article. English publications vary widely. Some translate it as "mink case",[11][12] others use the term "minkgate",[13] "Minkgate",[14] "mink gate"[15] or "Mink gate".[16] I can't access it, but this journal article has "Minkgate" and "minksagen" (lit. the mink case) as keywords.[17] Some Danish publications also use the term mink gate, but this appears to be limited.[18][19] I see these possibilities: 1. Mink case. This is the name I lean the most towards; it is arguably the best translation considering proper nouns and is in line with WP:THE and Mink Commission when it comes to the definite article. 2. Some variation of mink gate. Seems to be a pretty widely used term in non-Danish media. 3. Minksagen. No translation at all is not unprecedented, e.g. Folketing (here the definite article is excluded), but per WP:TRANSLITERATE should only be done with terms that are consistently used non-translated in English sources, which does not seem to be the case here. 4. Mink Case would be following the Danish article with regards to capitalization while continuing the precedent with regards to definite articles set by Mink Commission and WP:THE (arguably also Folketing).

References

  1. ^ https://denstoredanske.lex.dk/minksagen
  2. ^ https://www.bt.dk/samfund/advokatundersoegelse-modsiger-mette-frederiksens-forsvar-i-minksagen
  3. ^ https://www.berlingske.dk/kronikker/juraprofessor-har-vendt-hver-en-sten-kan-statsministeren-straffes-for
  4. ^ https://nyheder.tv2.dk/samfund/2022-06-16-dokumentar-kan-faa-betydning-naar-ansvaret-for-minksagen-skal-placeres
  5. ^ https://www.altinget.dk/artikel/mette-frederiksen-forsvarer-embedsmaend-i-minksagen-lev-med-det
  6. ^ https://jyllands-posten.dk/politik/ECE14202336/kommission-statsministeriets-departementschef-kan-drages-til-ansvar-i-minksagen/
  7. ^ https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/politik/mette-frederiksen-faar-en-naese-sin-rolle-i-minksagen
  8. ^ https://nyheder.tv2.dk/politik/2022-09-22-yderligere-tre-embedsmaend-faar-advarsel-i-minksagen
  9. ^ https://www.information.dk/indland/2022/09/professorer-nye-borgerliges-retlige-vurdering-minksagen-baade-juridisk-forkert-problematisk
  10. ^ https://nyheder.tv2.dk/politik/2022-09-20-to-embedsmaend-slipper-med-advarsel-i-minksagen
  11. ^ https://cphpost.dk/?p=120516
  12. ^ https://www.politico.eu/article/danish-pm-frederiksen-under-pressure-over-mink-cull/
  13. ^ https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/09/world/europe/denmark-mink.html
  14. ^ https://cphpost.dk/?p=129957
  15. ^ https://www.forbes.com/sites/danieladelorenzo/2022/04/30/what-is-going-on-with-the-danish-mink-gate/?sh=21134fab158b
  16. ^ https://www.9news.com.au/world/coronavirus-updates-denmark-pm-defends-mink-cull-during-pandemic/7d023341-3532-44bd-82af-d6a1c55c759f
  17. ^ https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4137749
  18. ^ https://politiken.dk/debat/debatindlaeg/art8007070/M%C3%A5ske-var-den-ulovlige-ordre-lovlig
  19. ^ https://ugebrev.dk/finans/finans-markedsovervaagning/mink-gate-medierne-skal-holde-sig-parat-til-kaempe-skandale/
Stowgull (talk) 20:20, 5 October 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 05:01, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Insurgency in Cabo Delgado → Islamist insurgency in Mozambique – If Google Scholar is anything to go by, the latter falls much more in line with WP:COMMONNAME. To illustrate: Insurgency in Cabo Delgado – 2,280 results Islamist insurgency in Mozambique – 14,800 results Plus, for what it's worth, the Portuguese version of this page calls this Insurreição islâmica em Moçambique, or "Islamic insurrection in Mozambique," which is a lot closer to the second title than the current one. DJ (talk) 03:33, 16 October 2022 (UTC) DJ (talk) 03:24, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

October 15, 2022

  • (Discuss) – Skillet Street Food → Skillet (restaurant) – This article is outdated. The business has evolved and now operates as multiple brick and mortar restaurants in the U.S. state of Washington The company's website says, "We are cooking more Skillet deliciousness every day at our four restaurants: Skillet Capitol Hill located at 14th Avenue and E Union Street; the Skillet Counter located in the Armory at the Seattle Center; Skillet Regrade located at 6th & Lenora; and Skillet SeaTac located in the North Satellite of SeaTac Airport." More info at Eater Seattle. --Another Believer (Talk) 15:08, 15 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Hackerspace → Makerspace – Per the above discussion "A Hackerspace is not a Makerspace", a hackerspace can be regarded as a subset of makerspace" Makerspace is broader, since it both refers to physical and digital fabrication, while hacking seems more focused on programming (whether focused on digital fabrication or programming workarounds). Hacking can also be more ambiguous, since its etymology can have various meanings, for example: *Hack (computer science), an inelegant but effective solution to a computing problem *Hack (computer security), to break into computers and computer networks *Hacker, a computer expert with advanced technical knowledge *Hacker culture, activity within the computer programmer subculture *Cybercrime, which involves security hacking And many more. As seen, in the contect of hackerspaces, however, I believe the term "hacking" is often meant in the positive meanings "to be creative", or "to be good at something", or "to make something work", rather than the malicious, secretive or mystical meanings sometimes associatied with the word hacking. Therefore, due to Makerspace being a broader and clearer term, I think it would be more fitting to have Makerspace as the main title of this page discussing these two closely related topics, since digital facbrication is a subset of what can be done at a makerspace. A makerspace can be suited for creative building or construction of anything (digital, physical, et cetera). Sauer202 (talk) 09:03, 15 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

October 14, 2022

  • (Discuss) – List of dialects of English → Dialects of English – This is an important encyclopedic topic, and although a lot of the page is currently structured in the form of a list, this is really a topic which deserves to be treated as a standalone article rather than just a list. And the "overview" section provides an introduction to that. And even if it is just a list, WP:NCLIST doesn't mandate the use of "List of...", it merely describes it as "A common practice". Finally, there's a strong WP:CONSISTENCY argument. I've had a look through similar pages relating to other major languages, and I so far haven't found any that title the page on dialects as "List of ...". See for example German dialects, Spanish dialects and varieties, Dialects of Polish, Varieties of French etc. Note that I boldly moved this yesterday, following a request by Treetoes023 at WP:RM/TR,[8] but the move was reverted by BilCat so here we are. I also prefer "Dialects of English" over "English dialects", so it's clear that we're referring to the language, not the country of England, a point raised by DrVogel at the RM/TR discussion.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:34, 14 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss) – 142,857 → 142857 – Despite the previous RMs, the fact still stands that the topic is not (or should not be) about the integer one hundred and forty two thousand eight hundred and fifty seven but about the repeating number sequence, which may appear as 0.142857142857..., 71.4285714285..., 857.142857142..., etc. The 2018 RM saw IMO some confused !votes which misunderstood the issue. Certes said, "If we feel that the page is mainly about a sequence of digits, rather than an integer, then let's remove the comma", which I read as partial/conditional support, while noting that comparison with dates should be irrelevant (which I agree with). But Paintspot then !voted oppose, citing agreement with Certes, when Certes had not voiced any direct opposition. The only other oppose, by 力, cited MOS:DIGITS without addressing the main concern, why and whether the subject should be treated as an integer. Also pinging previous participants Galobtter and Feminist, and I'll also post to the Numbers and Mathematics WikiProjects in hope of gaining more input this time. Paul_012 (talk) 10:52, 14 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Fixed point (mathematics) → Fixed point – After my edits this article is about the usage of fixed points in a range of areas, such as math, computer science, and logic, with a brief mention of the physics definition, so it is not just about mathematics anymore and is more suited to be at Fixed point. Looking at the dab stats it seems that it is 50-50 fixed point (mathematics) and fixed-point arithmetic, so no help there in determining a primary topic. As argued in the previous RM though, the primary topic of the term "fixed point" is the sense described on this page. "Fixed-point" uses a dash, for one thing - looking at a dictionary they are clearly separate. Also, in terms of long-term significance, the usage in computers is relatively recent and niche, and the usage as a point that is fixed has been around for centuries and is still going strong in every high school math classroom. Also the close last time as no consensus seems pretty suspicious by my count - the only actual oppositions were No such user and BarrelProof who preferred moving to invariant point, and they were rebutted by eviolite and also opposed by Felix QW. So if this page doesn't become the primary topic then Wikipedia's RM process is just broken. Mathnerd314159 (talk) 04:09, 4 October 2022 (UTC) — Relisted. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'r there 10:32, 14 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

October 13, 2022

  • (Discuss) – Eastern Ukraine offensive → Eastern Ukraine campaign – As opposed to a singular offensive, this article now describes multiple offensive and defensive operations by both sides. The Southern and Northeastern offensives have been similarly renamed to campaigns to give proper weight and a more relevant title to their respective theatres of operations. In light of the Ukrainian Balaklia-Kupiansk-Izium-Lyman offensive, to refer to this theatre as a singular is now even more inappropriate FiveStars1234 (talk) 23:23, 13 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[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) – Italia Conti Academy of Theatre Arts → Italia Conti – I am the great niece of Italia Emily Stella Conti. As an actress she went by her full name and lent simply her name and surname to the school she started - this eventually became Italia Conti Academy of Theatre Arts, and a number of other Italia Conti companies were also formed. Whilst the school eventually changed ownership (and has been inherited by a different family) over the years, I have been notified by the current board that it has merged multiple companies together and changed its trading name to Italia Conti. It would be appropriate that the actress Italia Conti be known by her full actress name Italia Emily Stella Conti, as she would have wanted. It would be more factually correct and in the public interest for Italia Conti Academy of Theatre Arts to be retitled to its trading name Italia Conti - this is how it has informally been known since 1911, and has now been formalised. EveShew (talk) 12:48, 13 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Backlog

Shortcut
Elapsed listings fall into the backlog after 24 hours. Consider relisting 8-day-old discussions with minimal participation.
  • (Discuss) – Iberian federalism → Iberism – The concept is the unification of the Iberian peninsula, it doesn't necessarily has to be restricted to a federation. The term "Iberism" remains advocating for the unification of the peninsula [12], however if this is too vague for some users, "Pan-Iberism" or "Iberian unionism" should do the work. Super Ψ Dro 20:57, 4 October 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 17:41, 12 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Somalia War (2006–2009) → ? – The current title is very ambiguous, and very easy to confuse with "Somali Civil War." It also doesn't make Ethiopia's role in this war very clear - even though it's covered explicitly by English-language news outlets & human rights organizations that have talked about this, who, as far as I'm aware, don't simply call it "the Somalia War." Going by WP:CRITERIA, I believe it should be changed to something more specific. For example: 1. Ethiopian invasion of Somalia (2006–2009) 2. Ethiopian intervention in the Somali Civil War (2006–2009) 3. Ethiopian occupation of Somalia (2006–2009) 4. Ethiopian war in Somalia (2006–2009) Or maybe something else. Alternatively, if none of these are satisfactory, we can keep the title as is. DJ (talk) 00:49, 2 October 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 15:08, 10 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Camilla, Queen Consort → Queen Camilla – There seems to be movement on that secondary sources are accepting Camilla as Her Majesty The Queen and dropping the “Consort” bit to reflect the convention for British Queen consorts. I open a move discussion to reflect the dropping of “Consort” in Her Majesty’s title. Also may discuss a move to “Queen Camilla of the United Kingdom” or the like. I do wish to also note that “Queen Camilla” is a more familiar name. Even if “Consort” wasn’t officially dropped, it wouldn’t be wrong for the article to be moved to “Queen Camilla,” since it’s still a personal style for a Queen consort. AKTC3 (talk) 03:13, 9 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Possibly incomplete requests

See "Request all associated moves explicitly"

References

References generally should not appear here. Use {{reflist-talk}} in the talk page section with the requested move to show references there.


See also

The current Wikipedia time is:
23:13, Thursday, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
To update time purge the cache!
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requested_moves&oldid=1112405976"