Wikipedia talk:Moving a page

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
the Wikipedia Help Project (Rated High-importance)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of the Wikipedia Help Project, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's help documentation for readers and contributors. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. To browse help related resources see the Help Menu or Help Directory. Or ask for help on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you there.
 ???  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 High  This page has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Move over redirect with single line of history[edit]

I'm trying to move Thomas Crowley Weston to Tom Weston over a redirect with a single line of history, but it won't let me. As far as I know, this should work without trouble. Can somebody please explain what's going wrong? Schwede66 19:12, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Just letting you know that it's been resolved. Schwede66 19:57, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
@Schwede66: It's not as simple as having a single line of history. That single line of history must be the creation of a redirect from a page move; and the page that it was moved to must also be the page that you're trying to move back. So, if Tom Weston had been moved to Thomas Crowley Weston, you would be able to move Thomas Crowley Weston back to Tom Weston. However, the redirect that you wanted to overwrite consisted of
#REDIRECT [[Tom Weston (disambiguation)]]
{{R from move}}
so at some point, Tom Weston was moved to Tom Weston (disambiguation) - which is why Thomas Crowley Weston couldn't be moved over the top (except by an admin). --Redrose64 (talk) 21:45, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
@Redrose64: The original redirecting-page does not have to be created as a result of a page-move. If I create User:Davidwr/Testing123 as a redirect to Wikipedia talk:Moving a page "by hand," I could still move Wikipedia talk:Moving a page to User:Davidwr/Testing123 davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 19:24, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Deleting redirect after rename[edit]

Hi, all. Is there any rule, when to leave the redirect after the move, or when to set it for deletion? Do the redirects from rename have any harm? Thanks. --Okino (talk) 19:45, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

It mainly depends upon how long the page was at the previous name. If it's been at the old name for some time - weeks or more - there may be established incoming links which will be broken by deleting the redir. But if it's just a few hours, and especially if an error was made in moving a page, resulting in the page being moved again, it's probably OK to del the redir. Remember that redirects are cheap, and the rules given at WP:CSD#Redirects should be considered; also those at WP:RFD. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:59, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Incorrect information in information section[edit]

The information section that displays on the Special:Move page seems to have incorrect information. It says that talk pages will not be moved if the page is being moved to a different namespace. I just copied a page along with its talk page from my userspace draft to the mainspace just fine. Should this be changed? -24Talk 21:31, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

You are referring to the text in the interface page MediaWiki:Movepagetalktext. Request changes to this by placing the {{editrequest}} template on MediaWiki talk:Movepagetalktext, where I see someone else made a similar point, several years ago. Wbm1058 (talk) 22:22, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I have submitted a request. Cheers, -24Talk 01:59, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and actioned it. Graham87 06:10, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Category moves[edit]

Categories can now be moved by any autoconfirmed user. Presumably this page should be updated as such. RGloucester 03:01, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

@RGloucester: Working I'll be happy to help. Can you point me at any documentation or changelogs that can help show this change in the MediaWiki software. I want to see if more documentation (like the MediaWiki interfaces) need to be changed as well. Thanks, -24Talk 13:44, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
There isn't any documentation that I'm aware of. All I know is that there was a large discussion at WP:AN about it. RGloucester 20:08, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Besides AN, there have been discussions (of varying length and participation) at WP:VPT, WT:CAT, WT:CATP and elsewhere. One thing that certainly needs to be explained/described is that simply moving the category page will not be enough - every page that is a member of that category will also need to be amended because unless that is done, they will still be members of the old category. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:10, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
@RGloucester and Redrose64: So what exactly happens when a category is moved? I'm guessing that only its description is moved and then an empty category is left but is a redirect made from the old category to the new one and do the pages get updated with the new category because of the redirect? Kind of hard to explain. I'll be doing some research and testing in the meantime. -24Talk 04:08, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
A soft redirect is created (unless you're an admin and deselect "Leave a redirect behind"), which uses this message, see for example Category:Actors from Punjab. This page continues to list the pages categorised in the old category: the cat box at the bottom of the member pages is not updated. Clicking the cat link on one of the member pages takes you to the old cat page, where the page that you clicked from will still be listed; if you follow the link in the purple box to the new cat page, you may be puzzled to find that the page that you first clicked from is not listed. A manual cleanup is necessary: for example, some cat moves were recently performed by Graeme Bartlett (talk · contribs), see these twelve contribs, of which the first two were actual moves of two different categories, and nine of the other ten (that of 08:22, 3 June 2014 to Category:Geological tools excepted) were post-move cleanup. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:16, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
For these two moves I could have just as easily deleted and recreated the categories, but since I saw there was a move tab on the categories I though I would try it out. I still have one more category to change after the discussion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:15, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
@Graeme Bartlett: I was using you as an example of the Right Thing - using the move tab and cleaning up afterward. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:27, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Redrose64. Examples of other recent redirected categories are Category:Novels by Joaquim Maria Machado de Assis Category:Actors from Punjab, Category:City treasurers in the United States, Category:City attorneys, Category:Burials in Perth and Category:Pasiphaë group. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:29, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
So when using the move tab in a category is used the software takes these steps:
  1. Moves the old category's description to the new category
  2. Creates a soft redirect at the old category
At this point in time there is a soft redirect on the old category with the pages still in that old category (which makes the statement on the template false), the user then should make the category empty by changing all the categories to the new one. The new one then has the old category's description and the new pages. To summarize: the move tab only moves the description and places a redirect notice. Sorry to bother you all with this, it's necessary to get everything right before documentation is create. Thanks, -24Talk 14:49, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Generally speaking, that's correct. It gets more complicated when moving a cat that is produced by a template, for example, one of the many stub templates.
Consider Category:Mountain Lakes geography stubs - this is currently under discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 June 2#Category:Mountain Lakes geography stubs. If you are the closing admin, and close it as "move to Category:Mountain Lakes, West Virginia geography stubs" (as suggested by the nom), you would use the "Move" tab on the cat page, and then you would look at the members of what has become the "old" category: there are about 250 articles, seven templates, plus a subcategory (Category:Upshur County, West Virginia geography stubs). Fixing the subcat is easy: you just edit it and change [[Category:Mountain Lakes geography stubs]] to [[Category:Mountain Lakes, West Virginia geography stubs]]. Then you might want to move the articles that are still in Category:Mountain Lakes geography stubs - but that cat doesn't appear in the wikitext for the pages, because it's built into each of the seven templates. You would edit those, changing |category=Mountain Lakes geography stubs to |category=Mountain Lakes, West Virginia geography stubs in each case, and in theory that would be all that is required. The template edits would put all their transcluding pages into the job queue, and within a few hours, all the categories would be sorted out.
Unfortunately, there was a change to the job queue software about a year ago, and although the transcluding pages will correctly show the "new" category at the bottom, they will not be listed on the "new" cat page but on the "old". A WP:NULLEDIT to each and every article in the cat will fix it, but that is not ideal. It might be necessary to rope in Joe's Null Bot (talk · contribs). --Redrose64 (talk) 15:25, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for clearing that up. I think we can start writing documentation starting with the categories section on this page and then going to some other Wikipedia pages (any ideas?) I'm going to go check the MediaWiki wiki and see if there is any other concerns or 'gotchas' that need to be addressed and any outdated documentation that needs to be corrected because the documentation should start as 'upstream' as possible. Thanks for your work Red. -24Talk 17:19, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
I have updated the page with the new info. The category lead is updated and I moved the section about categories and updated it. Has any information been left out or is this page updated (and can I remove the tag at the top)? -24Talk 18:58, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── @Makyen: I like your changes that you made with the lead section. To answer your question, does this belong in the lead, I think it doesn't. It was in the lead before I made my edits so I just updated the content but I did also ask the same question. To be honest, the lead is merely just a repeat of what is said in the individual sections. I think that it should be taken out. Any other thoughts? -24Talk 19:48, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I had assumed that you left it in the lead because it was already there. The question becomes how much detail should be dealt with in the lead. The lead currently gives some details for normal page-moves, moving files, and moving categories. It is not clear to me how much detail we actually want in the lead for each, or even if it should break the different types out beyond a sentence. Usually, the lead is a brief summary of article content. As it currently stands, it provides more detail than is minimally needed in the lead for each type, but most of the information is useful.
I have expanded the WP:MOVE#How to move a category section a bit. As a result, I have trimmed the category move information in the lead. All portions in the lead could still be trimmed further. — Makyen (talk) 21:31, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Newly enabled special page to automate history merges[edit]

Special:MergeHistory, a special page that can automate history merges, has recently been enabled on the English Wikipedia. It's currently being discussed on the admin's noticeboard. Graham87 02:48, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Is it still necessary to re-categorize all pages manually?[edit]

See the discussion here: Wikipedia:Bot requests#Automated recategorization. Jarble (talk) 19:54, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Breaking incoming links[edit]

In a recent RM discussion, Gerda Arendt argued that moving the page would cause problems for external websites that link to it. With no hard redirect in place (the proposal is to have a disambiguation page there instead), this could be perceived as an error. My view is that this is just WP:LINKROT but the other way round from normal, and is simply part of the usual dynamics of the ever-changing Internet. I can see Gerda's point, but I don't think that we can really take this into account or else nothing would ever get moved. I don't think it should be our responsibility to manage non-Wikimedia websites. However, I can't find any Wikipedia policy or similar that even mentions this situation. Should something be written? What should our policy be? Bazonka (talk) 08:24, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

I am not against page moves at all, I move a lot and even initiated some requests. I try to be very careful when there will not be a redirect, and don't see any advantage for the readers by going through the effort of renaming and fixing, to end up disambiguating two (!) people - which could be done in a hatnote. All this effort (move discussion, now coming here): for whom? I mean people, not some rules such as (debatable and debated) Primary topic. "Primary" will depend on what time and who's looking. One user told me not to have heard the name of the composer before. Wikipedia is there to change that ;) - I made three more comments in the matter than I usually do (two that is). Stop. Let me edit articles. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:36, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
A dab page is a redirect though, albeit a soft one. Anyway, this is not the place to discuss the specifics of the Humperdinck case. I do partly sympathise with your general point but I don't think it's a big problem. What I want to discuss here is whether we should mention it in any Wikipedia policies. Bazonka (talk) 08:56, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
I've been bold and added a new section to Wikipedia:Link rot#Link rot on non-Wikimedia sites. I think any further discussion should take place on the corresponding talk page, not here. Bazonka (talk) 21:50, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, like it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:56, 16 December 2014 (UTC)


I confess that before having been called here I didn't look at the page. Now I did and have a few questions to the Technical restrictions:

  • I don't understand what "which may be used as workarounds" is supposed to mean, perhaps "which show the title differently from the stored title"?
  • Why is there so much bolding?
  • Why is an example pictured for {{DISPLAYTITLE}} which would be the same for {{italic title}}, while the other could be used to achieve Ave Maria, WAB 6.

Learning, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:41, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Automatic movement of pages[edit]

I want to move ro:Cladova (dezambiguizare) over ro:Cladova for example. Is it possible to generate a single link and to make the move just by clicking that link? Something like for example

Is it possible to automatically make such moves using AWB or some other tool? —  Ark25  (talk) 12:30, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Nope, it is not possible to move a page using just a URL. It is however possible using the API, but you'd have to write your own program to do that. I'm not aware of a tool for speeding up page moves. Graham87 15:04, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Change in Editing User.[edit]


Please change the Wikipedia heading from Chetansynergos/sandbox to Borderless Access as it was wrong entered and the whole page belongs to Borderless Access. Please do the needful ASAP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Borderless Access (talkcontribs) 09:31, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Done. Graham87 14:46, 12 May 2015 (UTC)


If a woman gets married and has a page on Wikipedia, her page should be moved to the title containing her maiden name. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 16:25, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

@GeoffreyT2000: Not necessarily. WP:COMMONNAME applies. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:03, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Differences in naming convention[edit]

Hi, back in November 2013, I moved a number of Russian submarine articles with the summary "Name comes before hull or pennant number or disambiguation. As per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ships)#Naming articles about military ships." It appears that such a convention applies chiefly to American and British ships, as those that serve in the Russian and Soviet Navies follow a different naming convention, with the name following the pennant number eg "K-141 Kursk". This convetion appears to have been adopted by other navies as well. Should the moves the kept as they are, or should they be reverted? Regards, --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 00:20, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I think that this is something that WT:MILHIST and WT:SHIPS would both have agreed on some years ago. Have you asked them? --Redrose64 (talk) 07:10, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Redirecting a page[edit]

Hello I started a page Ancient river and released I did not put a capital. I could not work out how to change it through all the guides, so I requested a deletion and then started a new page Ancient River. Is there a way to redirect this? As the new page is not showing up just the deleted page. Learning sorry. July 22 SeniahCSeniahC (talk) 08:16, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

The redirect is there. I see you created a few minutes after you posted this. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:22, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Copy a page including its history[edit]

It happens enough: a Help page is at an introductory level and a Wikipedia page with the same pagename is an advanced version. (We have two of these situations right now: Help:Searching and Help:Template need advanced versions WP:Searching and WP:Template. Compare Help:Pagename and WP:Pagename, amongst others.)

It's like moving a page, but it copies instead. (This might be called cloning a page?)
It's like forking/mirroring, but only for one page.

Export it, then import it back in?
Cut and paste with edit summary telling the source page?
Requests for moves seems like the wrong place to argue the merits of such requests. — CpiralCpiral 23:59, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

If you need to split a page's history, see WP:HISTSPLIT. But this is not often done, you would need a pretty good reason to request it. --Redrose64 (talk) 07:28, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
That's a move, but I need a copy of the history, so that one and the same history is in two pages at once. Is that just wrong? If so the other option seems just as lame: cut and paste, but mention "forked from Help:X" in the initial edit summary. But if that's OK with you, it's OK with me. Thanks. — CpiralCpiral 22:07, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Not possible. Page history is a series of revisions; each revision happens to exactly one page and no more. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:58, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
That sounds like simultaneous revisions. I want what you say is possible, which is for "each revision to happen on exactly one page" at a time. So let me rephrase please: Is duplicating a history impossible? (And from there it would be separate.) Thanks. — CpiralCpiral 01:32, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Duplicating a history is *possible* through exporting and importing, but I can't think of any situation where it would be a good idea. It would cause people's edit counts to be inflated, for a start. Cutting and pasting is fine in this situation. Graham87 01:58, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Moving over redirect[edit]

An error is displayed when viewing a diff for a revision that has been deleted, or was the creation of a redirect that has been overridden by a page move, or has the id for a future revision that is yet to be made. The error no longer appears when the revision has been restored, or when a revision having the id has finally been made. When moving over a redirect, the overridden redirect is permanently removed from the database and cannot be restored. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 22:34, 5 September 2015 (UTC)


When moving a page, the four edits (old page, new page, old talk page, and new talk page) can appear in any order in the user contributions. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 14:26, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

It's not specific to page moves. Edits and moves are listed in chronological order, except that with page moves, their timestamps are often the same to the resolution that MediaWiki uses (I don't know if it's the nearest second, the nearest tenth, or the nearest hundredth). When two edits (not just page moves) have identical timestamps (to that resolution), they are listed in random order on all lists - contribs, watchlist, page history, etc. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:06, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
MediaWiki stores timestamps to the nearest second. Graham87 03:38, 10 September 2015 (UTC)


There is an issue with Special:WhatLinksHere. When moving an article, only the moved article appears as a redirect in WhatLinksHere under the new article name and the talk page redirect does not appear in WhatLinksHere. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 03:56, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

@GeoffreyT2000: I strongly suspect that this is closely related to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 141#Category membership issues, in that the links tables (which is what is used to generate both WhatLinksHere and the lists on cat pages) are lagging behind reality. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:53, 17 November 2015 (UTC)