Wikipedia:Requested moves

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Timeineurope (talk | contribs) at 01:19, 20 November 2007 (Uncontroversial proposals). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Purge the cache to refresh this page Requested moves is a process for requesting the retitling (moving) of an article, template, or project page on Wikipedia. For information on retitling files, categories, and other items, see § When not to use this page.

Before moving a page or requesting a move, please review the article titling policy and the guidelines on primary topics.

Any autoconfirmed user can move a page using the "Move" option in the editing toolbar; see how to move a page for more information. 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; for example, a page may already exist at the _target title and require deletion, or the page may be protected from moves. In such cases, 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.
  • A page should not be moved and a new move discussion should not be opened when there is already an open move request on a talk page. Instead, please participate in the open discussion.
  • Unregistered and new (not yet autoconfirmed) users are unable to move pages.

Requests are typically processed after seven days. If consensus supports the move at or after this time, a reviewer will perform it. If there is a consensus not to move the page, the request will be closed as "not moved." When consensus remains unclear, the request may be relisted to allow more time, or 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 previous 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 a prior bold move, and the new title has not been in place for a long time, you may revert the move yourself. 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.

Uncontroversial proposals

Only list proposals here that are clearly uncontroversial but require administrator help to complete (for example, spelling and capitalization fixes). Do not list a proposed page move in this section if there is any possibility that it could be opposed by anyone. Please list new requests at the bottom of the list in this section and use {{subst:WP:RM2|Old page name|Requested name|Reason for move}} rather than copying previous entries. The template will automatically include your signature. No edits to the article's talk page are required.

If you object to a proposal listed here, please relist it in the #Incomplete and contested proposals section below.

Incomplete and contested proposals

  • Like I said, I've done that already. Literally asked at 3 policy talkpages, 1 rfc (posted for double-length), the pump (policy), the mailing list wikien-l, and individually asked a few admins. Like dab says, TT is a hard-sell ("filibustering") on whether we have consensus already (I believe that there is: 11 editors (5 of them admins) vs 2 (TT and Phoebe), if counting). Regarding this move, he even posted on ANI (plus 4 other places). If you want to remove this request from this page, that's fine by me (I didn't due to involvement, and instead just added context). If you'd like to help with the discussion too, that'd be even better :) -- Quiddity (talk) 18:52, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I apologize for my lack of reading comprehension. I think what happened is that I noticed the move request from mainspace to portal space for the mathematics topics in the backlog below, and I believed that discussion there should be superceded by the outcome of this one... but looking through the linked talk pages, it didn't appear that discussion was ongoing, or that a conclusion was reached, so I typed a generic suggestion without examining things further. Dekimasuよ! 04:43, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other proposals

  • Haggerston, Greater LondonHaggerston —(Discuss)— This now links to a disambiguation page that contains this article and a red link. Somebody moved the items, and there are now 50 odd articles pointing to a disambiguation page (undone pending outcome of this request). I feel insufficient care was taken in moving this page to its current name and insufficient discussion considering the consequences. —Kbthompson (talk) 11:32, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Jallianwala Bagh massacreAmritsar Massacre —(Discuss)— Page was originally moved against policy to its current location, where a poll was undertaken to move it back to its common english name rather than its name in India. After the poll ended in a dead heat, no action was taken. The main argument being put forward against the move was a wikipolicy (that was not written down anywhere) that meant local form was preferred over common English useage and that Amritsar Massacre was only prefered in western text books. Amritsar Massacre is clearly the common English name (as net searches and checking of history books will reveal) and the incorrect move to Jallianwala Bagh should finally be fixed. —-- Narson (talk) 17:08, 16 November 2007 (UTC) -- Narson (talk) 17:08, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • ÅlandÅland Islands —(Discuss)— General and traditional usage in English, United Nations recognises the autonomous province as "Åland Islands" [1], Finnish state (in English texts) [2]. Anyway, I sort of have already thought it's obvious that it is Åland Islands in English, since Åland doesn't really tell anything to an English-speaker.--Pudeo 13:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC) —Pudeo 13:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sun ConureSun Parakeet —(Discuss)— All major authorities use the name Sun Parakeet (not Sun Conure), e.g. the South American Classification Committee, Clements check-list of Birds of the World, Sibley & Monroe check-list of Birds of the World, Howard & Moore check-list of Birds of the World, Handbook of Birds of the World, BirdLife International, etc. Additionally, all recently published field guides to the region where this species occurs also use Sun Parakeet, these being Birds of Northern South America (Restall et al, 2006), Birds of Venezuela (Hilty, 2003), Aves do Brazil (Sigrist, 2006) and Birds of South America - Non-Passerines (Mata et al, 2006). Hence the recommendation of a move of this article —Rabo3 21:17, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Backlog

Move dated sections here after five days have passed.

  • RJ 100DZRJ-FM —(Discuss)— I'm in a way, making this for ALL Piony radio stations which have articles which use their brand names as the article name. To have consistancy with all other radio station articles that have call letters, I think they should ALL be moved to their respective call letters as their article name. —ViperSnake151 14:44, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Spice World (film)Spice World —(Discuss)— Spice World currently redirects to Spiceworld (the album) with a hat to Spice World. This seems backwards to me. The movie is definitely better known, and the space/capital configuration is the proper spelling for the movie but improper for the album. A move to Spice World for the movie with a hat disambig at the top would suffice. — Revolving Bugbear (formerly Che Nuevara) 22:10, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • MilitsiyaMilitia (Police) —(Discuss)— The term Militia was used in many former communist states in their respective official languages. Currently it is not clear what perspective the article deals with: Only the ex-Soviet and/or the modern Russian one? Or it includes the Eastern Bloc countries such as Poland which had the Milicja Obywatelska and the Non-Aligned SFR Yugoslavia which had its own Milicija? All of these countries regardless of their differences adopted the term "militia" for their police forces following the same Bolshevik Leninist example: The usage of the term "militia" for "police", despite its original military conotation, originates from early Soviet history, when the Bolsheviks intended to associate their new law enforcement authority with the self-organization of the people and to distinguish it from the "bourgeois class protecting" police. A decision should be made: either the article will deal with the Russian police only OR it will deal with all the (former) communist police forces named Militia regardless of the country. Moreover the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs (Ministry of Police) has its own article with a detailed overview of the history of law enforcement in Russia. —Dzole 02:19, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  NODES
admin 7
INTERN 2
Note 3
Project 6
USERS 4