Wikipedia:Requested moves

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

Closing instructions

"Wikipedia:RM" redirects here. For requested mergers, see Wikipedia:Proposed mergers. For removals, see Wikipedia:Guide to deletion. For page history mergers, see Wikipedia:Requests for history merge.
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 our article titling policy and our 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, such as when a page may already exist at the target title and require deletion, or if the page to be moved is protected from moves. In these circumstances, administrator help is required to move a page, see below: § Requesting technical moves.
  • A title may be subject to dispute, and discussion may be necessary in order to reach consensus, see below: § Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves. It is not always necessary to use the requested move process in these circumstances: one option is to start an informal discussion at the article's talk page instead.
  • Unregistered users and new (not yet autoconfirmed) users do not have the capability to move pages. They must request moves using this process.

Most move requests are processed by a group of regular contributors who are familiar with Wikipedia naming conventions, non-binding precedents, and page moving procedures. Requests are generally processed after seven days, although backlogs often develop. If there is a clear consensus after this time, or if the requested move is uncontroversial or technical, the request will be closed and acted upon. If not, the closer may choose to re-list the request to allow more time for consensus to develop, or close it as "no consensus". For the processes involved in closing requests, performing moves, and cleaning up after moves, see Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions. For a list of all processed moves, see Special:Log/move.

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

When not to use this page[edit]

Shortcuts:

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

Undiscussed moves[edit]

Shortcut:

Anyone can be bold and move a page without discussing it first and gaining an explicit consensus on the talk page. If you consider such a move to be controversial, and the new title has not been in place for a long time, you may revert the move. If you cannot revert the move for technical reasons then you may request a technical move.

Move wars are disruptive, so if you make a bold move and it is reverted, do not make the move again. Instead, follow the procedures laid out in § Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves.

Requesting technical moves[edit]

Shortcut:

The discussion process is used for potentially controversial moves. If any of the following apply to a desired move, treat it as potentially controversial:

  • 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.

If a desired move is uncontroversial and technical in nature (e.g. spelling), please feel free to move the page yourself. If the page has recently been moved without discussion, you may revert the move and initiate a discussion on its talk page. In either case, if you are unable to complete the move, request it below.

  • To list a technical request, go to the bottom of this section that you are reading right now; edit the subsection Uncontroversial technical requests; insert the following code at the top:
{{subst:RMassist|<!--old page name, without brackets-->|<!--requested name, without brackets-->|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 it to the Contested technical requests section.

  • Alternatively, if the only obstacle to an uncontroversial move is another page in the way, you can ask for the deletion of the other page. This may apply, for example, if the other page is currently a redirect to the article to be moved, a redirect with no incoming links, or an unnecessary disambiguation page with a minor edit history. To request the other page be deleted, add the following code to the top of the page that is in the way:
{{db-move|<!--page to be moved here-->|<!--reason for move-->}}
This will list the undesired page for deletion under criterion for speedy deletion G6. If the page is a redirect, place the code above the redirection. For a list of articles being considered for uncontroversial speedy deletion, see Category:Candidates for uncontroversial speedy deletion.

Uncontroversial technical requests[edit]

Contested technical requests[edit]

Requests to revert undiscussed moves[edit]

Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves[edit]

Shortcut:

Use this process if there is any reason to believe a move would be contested. For technical move requests (e.g. spelling and capitalization fixes), see Requesting technical moves.

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

Requesting a single page move[edit]

(To propose moving more than one page—for example, moving a disambiguation page in order to move another page to that title—see "Requesting multiple page moves" below.)

To request a single page move, edit at the bottom of the talk page of the article you want moved, using this format:

{{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 present Google Books or Google News Archive results before providing 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). Leave the Subject/headline blank, as the template automatically creates the heading "Requested move 24 November 2015". Do not sign a request with ~~~~ as the template does this automatically. The template must be substituted.

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

Note: Unlike certain other request processes on Wikipedia, nominations need not be neutral. Strive to make your point as best you can; use evidence (such as Ngrams and pageview statistics) and make reference to applicable policies and guidelines, especially our article titling policy and the guideline on disambiguation and primary topic. After the nomination has been made, nominators may nevertheless add a separate bullet point to support their nomination, but should add "as nominator" (for example,  * '''Rename, as nominator''': ...). Most nominators, however, simply allow the nomination itself to indicate what their opinion is. Nominators may also participate in the discussion along with everyone else, and often should.

RMCD bot notifies any Wikiproject listed on the talk page of the article to be moved to invite project members to participate in the RM discussion. Requesters should feel free to notify any other Wikiproject or Noticeboard that might be interested in the move request.

Requesting multiple page moves[edit]

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

{{subst:requested move
| new1 = New title for page 1 with the talk page hosting this discussion
| current2 = Current title of page 2
| new2 = New title for page 2
| current3 = Current title of page 3
| new3 = New title for page 3
| reason = Place here your rationale for the proposed page name change, ideally referring to applicable naming convention policies and guidelines, and providing evidence in support where appropriate. If your reasoning includes search engine results, please default to Google Books or Google News Archive before providing any web results. Do not sign this.}}

See also: Wikipedia:Request multiple page moves, 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.

Closing instructions[edit]

Any uninvolved editor in good standing may close a move request, and more closers of move requests are needed, but there are certain procedures that need to be followed. Please read our closing instructions for information on how to close a move request.

Relisting[edit]

See also: Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions § Relisting

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. Preferably, a reason for the relist will be given. When a relisted discussion reaches a resolution, it may be closed at any time according to the closing instructions.

To relist a move request discussion, simply type <small>'''Relisted'''. ~~~~</small> after the initial request. This can also be done by using {{subst:Relisting}}, which signs the relisting automatically. The RMCD bot uses the new timestamp to relist the entry on this page.

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. One option is to notify relevant WikiProjects of the discussion using the template {{RM notification}}. Applicable WikiProjects can often be determined by means of the banners placed at the top of the talk page hosting the move request.

Current discussions[edit]

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.

November 24, 2015[edit]

  • (Discuss) – Haredi Judaism → Ultra-Orthodox Judaism – We need the assistance of an Administrator in order to move this page's history. Talk page was already successfully moved. The explicit reason: Haredi Judaism sounds like a 4th Judaism stream along with Orthodox+Conservative+Reform, which it isn't. Bostonnine (talk) 02:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Al-Hilal (disambiguation) → Al-Hilal – Now "Al-Hilal" football club is not only a club in Saudi Arabia in all over the world. The club which in Saudi Arabia is very famous. However, Only known by the people whom lived in Asia. Have you got any permission for that club is very famous in the world? It just not all the people known that football club whom lived in Africa. WKDx417 (talk) 00:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

November 23, 2015[edit]

  • (Discuss) – Tim Metcalfe (Coronation Street) → Tim Metcalfe – This page was created to be an article page for a current section on a different page. The section is linked as Tim Metcalfe, so the new page featuring the information should be placed at Tim Metcalfe rather than the current Tim Metcalfe (Coronation Street). Soaper1234 (talk) 20:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Occupation of Mecca → Conquest of Mecca – Approve as nominator WP:COMMONNAME There are six accessible sources in the article, five of them describe the event as "Conquest of Mecca" and one describes it as "Fall of Mecca", none describes it as an "Occupation", the article's current name. Sources in support of "Conquest of Mecca": Bernard Lewis, Lt. Gen. A.I.Akram, Abu Dawood, Ibn Hisham, Abu Dawood Sources in support of "Fall of Mecca": Francis Peters Sheriff (report) 18:14, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – English languages → Anglic languages – "English languages" is an unclear and confusing title. "Anglic languages" is the only halfway decent alternative. Counter to previously aired claims, two cites in the article now prove the currency of the term, even though it is rarely used – but so is the concept. (I don't think any of the terms is anywhere close to ideal, but elimination leaves only "Anglic", as "Insular Germanic" is even rarer and hardly clearer. It's essentially a choice between bad, poor, and meh.) Note that Glottolog uses the minimal variant "Anglian". Also, other articles linking here from infoboxes keep "Anglic" for clarity. Florian Blaschke (talk) 17:24, 15 November 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 12:09, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Research Lodge → Research lodge – Recently moved without discussion and a request to revert was made at RM/TR which I actioned as a purely procedural decision. On reading the article, I do not think the title is a proper noun which, if others agree, means it should be decapitalised per WP:NCCAPS. Pinging potentially interested editors, MSJapan, Philg88, Chicbyaccident. Jenks24 (talk) 10:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Devonshire → Devonshire (disambiguation) – Devon is the primary topic for Devonshire, so this page should redirect to Devon. Most of the articles listed on the dab page do not use the term Devonshire alone e.g. Duke of Devonshire. Some other places which use the term are very minor in comparison to Devon (approx. 1.1 million people). Jolly Ω Janner 07:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Playland Park (Texas) → Playland Park (San Antonio, Texas) – There were two(2) Playland Parks in Texas. There are two articles (Playland Park (Texas) and Playland Park (Houston, Texas). The former is actually more specifically located in San Antonio, Texas. Therefore to be consistent with the two independent locations (and articles) this article should be renamed to add the specific location of the park - not just the state. A redirect page exists which should be removed or sent to a disambiguation page between the two Texas parks Trhao (talk) 06:02, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

November 22, 2015[edit]

  • (Discuss) – Peoples' Democratic Party (Turkey) → Peoples' Democratic Party – The HDP is the only party with this name which can be alternatively translated as Democratic Party of the Peoples. Though there are several other, mostly minor parties with singular "people" in the name, the difference is genuine and not an artefact caused by translation. It is absolutely enough to add a hatnote referring to the People's Democratic Party disambiguation page for parties with similar names. PanchoS (talk) 14:06, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Revolutionary People's Liberation Party–Front → Revolutionary People's Liberation Party/Front – This article was renamed in 2010 by @Koavf, introducing the en-dash. While in most other cases, this was a correct decision, here it wasn't, as in this case the hyphen doesn't represent a range, ratio nor otherwise a relation between "party" and "front" as two separate entities.
    You can see it in two different ways: One perspective is that the organization indivisibly and indistinguishably is party and front at the same time, just as a singer-songwriter indivisibly and indistinguishably is singer and songwriter at the same time. The other perspective is that the organization is supposed to have two faces, so we're speaking of either the "Revolutionary People's Liberation Party" or the "Revolutionary People's Liberation Front", with "party" resp. "front" being interchangeable.
    Either way, only a hyphen or a slash is correct here, but not an en-dash. Same holds for the other nominated article, both originating from the "People's Liberation Party/Front of Turkey" (THKP/C). See also MOS:ENDASH.
    Amongst the two valid options of using either a hyphen or a slash, I tend to prefer the slash because it is so much easier to read, especially for the various THKP/C successor groups with further annexes in the name. Also, the original THKP/C had two distinct logos, supporting the "two faces of the same organization" perspective, see THKP-C_logo.jpg.
    --PanchoS (talk) 23:57, 14 November 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 11:29, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Agnieszka Radwańska → Agnieszka Radwanska – Many tennis players only have spelling sources in English newspapers, tv news, and magazines. There has been concern in the past about using sources that don't really use a lot of diacritics or foreign letters. Ana Ivanovic and Novak Djokovic are exceptions in that they also have additional sources which conclusively show that they themselves do not use those letters in English usage. And we use sourcing here at wikipedia. Agnieszka_Radwanska can be additionally sourced to use the spelling Radwanska on her personal twitter account, her personal official facebook account, her own website, her signature, etc. These sources have no problem with diacritics and non-English letters yet she chose to spell her name Agnieszka Radwanska. Since it can be conclusively shown that this is how she spells her own name in English usage, the article should be titled as such (just as we do for Novak Djokovic instead of Novak Đoković). Fyunck(click) (talk) 04:44, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Marin Čilić → Marin Cilic – Many tennis players only have spelling sources in English newspapers, tv news, and magazines. There has been concern in the past about using sources that don't really use a lot of diacritics or foreign letters. Ana Ivanovic and Novak Djokovic are exceptions in that they also have additional sources which conclusively show that they themselves do not use those letters in English usage. And we use sourcing here at wikipedia. Marin Cilic can be additionally sourced to use the spelling Cilic on his personal twitter account, his personal official facebook account, and his own website, etc. These sources have no problem with diacritics and non-English letters yet he chose to spell his name Marin Cilic. Since it can be conclusively shown that this is how he spells his own name in English usage, the article should be titled as such (just as we do for Novak Djokovic instead of Novak Đoković). Fyunck(click) (talk) 04:44, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Mohan Baidya → Mohan Vaidya (Tamil singer) – The talk page for the Carnatic singer redirects to the Nepalese politician because the names can be transliterated the same. I think the article for the singer should be renamed to Mohan Vaidya (Tamil singer) and a new talk page for the singer should be created and the redirect to the Nepalese politician should be deleted FeanorStar7 02:10, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Vanathirayampattinam → Vanathirayanpattinam – A couple recent IP edits seem to be asking for a move. Vanathirayampattinam has 4130 Google results. Vanathirayanpattinam has 1400 Google results. Attempting to refine the search a bit more... Vanathirayampattinam, Ariyalur, Tamil Nadu gives 26,900 hits. Vanathirayanpattinam, Ariyalur, Tamil Nadu gives 1150 hits. I seem to find from those searches that the village itself is often spelled with an 'n' and the area of the village with an 'm' but I'd like more eyes on this. The original source is archived at [9], but that page doesn't have either name. (I believe the controls at the top gave that information, but they don't seem to work in the archive.) —PC-XT+ 01:58, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

November 21, 2015[edit]

  • (Discuss) – Fillet (redaction) → Filleting (obfuscation) – Not a single source in the article proves that this technique has been observed or actually is called "fillet". I don't have authoritative literature by the hand to prove it either, but it seems to exist. However, WP:COMMONTITLE should be the verb's gerund here: "filleting" rather than "fillet". Found a single source that supports my expectation: [10]. Finally, the disambiguator "obfuscation" is closer to descibing what filleting actually represents. I'm fine with any reasonable outcome, though, if others have access to more relevant literature. PanchoS (talk) 23:27, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Robert Wiren → Robert Viren – This Russian admiral's name is Robert Viren, in Russian Роберт Николаевич Вирен, and on the Russian wikipedia [11]. The Russian В is transliterated exclusively as 'V' (see Romanization of Russian). The W does not exist in the Russian alphabet, nor does the sound in the Russian language. Scholarly sources use Viren almost exclusively. Google books returns 19,400 results for Robert Viren. For 'Robert Wiren' it produces 9,120 results almost all of which refer to other people. At the very best 'Robert Wiren' is perhaps an archaic form, or comes from the transliteration of the name into languages with different phonetic forms (eg. Finnish). 'Robert Viren' should be the main title as being clearly the WP:COMMONNAME as used in English, both in scholarly and popular sources, and 'Robert Wiren' used as a redirect. 129.67.116.126 (talk) 22:12, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Roman Catholic theology → Catholic theology – The contents of Catholic theology also had discussed a few critical difference between eastern and western theology that were not covered in this article. The Catholic theology page has several problematic phrasing, such as not distinguishing Roman Catholic from Latin Catholic. Seeing that neither page has grown significantly since the above discussions, I merged the shorter article into this larger one (currently named "Roman Catholic theology") to cover this gap. I would further propose this page be renamed "Catholic theology", if simply to match the Catholic Church article. --Zfish118 (talk) 18:30, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Ana Ivanovic → Ana Ivanović – It's been two years since last tried to restore this bio title from ASCII to Unicode full fonts the same as every other straightforward -ć bio or geo article on en.wp, let's have another try. Rationale as User:Mareklug above: When they USE DIACRITICS AT ALL, they spell competently. When they produce copy WITHOUT ANY FUCKING DIACRITICS, they don't. Why are you twisting reality into a pretzel? ... please excuse the French, but could not myself say it more eloquently. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:43, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Rhine Valley → Alpine Rhine – The title is confusing and could apply to any part of the Rhine valley from source to sea. This article is specifically about that section of the River Rhine between its headstreams and Lake Constance, usually known in the sources as the Alpine Rhine e.g. The Rhine by Knepper and Bik or Rivers of Europe by Tockner, Uehlinger and Robinson. Alpine Rhine redirects here already. I would have moved it over the redirect, but don't have the permissions. Bermicourt (talk) 11:33, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Kručić (family) → Croce (family) – This Ragusan family, the Croce, was never known as "Kručić". The latter is a Croatian neologism which is scarcely used. Common names are Croce and Crosio. A bold move to Croce was reverted with the comment "known-to-be-opposed, unilateral, non-consensus move". Article titles guidelines support Croce. Zoupan 20:18, 13 November 2015 (UTC) --Relisted. Natg 19 (talk) 05:12, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

November 20, 2015[edit]

  • (Discuss) – Infant vision → Development of the visual system – I propose we move this article to a more comprehensive 'development of - ' style article that includes development in infants and adults as it is expanded. I think this article is too large to be merged into Visual system but that it's unnecessary to have a split all the way to "Infant vision" at this stage. A 'Development of-' article can act as a central focus for this information as the article is developed. Tom (LT) (talk) 23:12, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Four Past Midnight → Four past Midnight – The previous RM was closed as "moved" without consensus. Somehow, the action was reverted due to official use of the uppercasing. Now I must re-propose again; this time I hope involved parties do not do this again. Again, "past" is used as a preposition with just four letters. Per MOS:CT (and WP:NCCAPS), the word should be lowercased. George Ho (talk) 21:35, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Anglo-Wabanaki War → Father Rale's War – Was moved to Anglo-Wabanaki War to correct fallacies of that period...this is not our job....we are here to regurgitate what the sources say...not to fix history. There are many conflicts called " Anglo-Wabanaki war" so this title is misleading. A Google search for "Anglo-Wabanaki War " leads to nothing/...that said "Drummer's War" would be ok with me as per the sources. Moxy (talk) 17:49, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Premiership of Stephen Harper → Harper Government – I see this has been discussed before but I want to formally nominate this move. I think Harper Government makes sense for a number of reasons (although if editors prefer, Government of Stephen Harper would work too, however I think this one is more commonly used). First, Harper Government is actually used by the public. I've never seen "Premiership" used in Canada. A search of the name on Google News (without quotes) turns up around 4,000 results. Harper government, on the other hand, turns up almost 4 million. Even a search of "Trudeau government" already turns up 20,500 results on Google News, far more than "Premiership." Next, the term is much more natural and more likely to be searched for, since premiership is rarely used in Canada. As for precision, I think both of these titles are equally precise. FuriouslySerene (talk) 14:58, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Queen Elizabeth University Hospital Campus → Queen Elizabeth University Hospital – The addition of 'Campus' to the title is not required, the pre-existing name covers the entire site, including landscaping and retained clinical units. The name 'Queen Elizabeth University Hospital refers to the entire site in much the same way a university does not feature 'XYU Campus' in its title. The name Queen Elizabeth University Hospital is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the facility based on various sources from news reports, official sites and in-facility documentation. GRA (talk) 14:41, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Marian and Holy Trinity columns → Plague column – Several reasons: #The proposed name is shorter and simpler #Whatlinkshere includes a lot of inlinks of the form [[Marian and Holy Trinity columns|plague column]] #according to the article itself, columns were dedicated to various saints, not just Mary and/or the Trinity. #Most Google Scholar links for Holy Trinity Column and Marian Column refer specifically to Holy Trinity Column in Olomouc and the Marian Column in Prague Old Town Square, whereas "Plague column" is about as common as those two put together and has a wider variety of referends jnestorius(talk) 14:19, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Muhammad Iqbal → Allama Iqbal – Approve as nominator: The reason is WP:COMMONNAME. Careful analysis of references present in the article reveals that subject's common name is "Allama Iqbal". There are eleven mentions of "Allama Iqbal", ten mentions of just "Iqbal" and six mentions of "Muhammad Iqbal" thus as per WP:COMMONNAME, article title does not have to be the person's given name, it can be anything what most reliable sources use the title for the subject, thus please move the page to "Allama Iqbal", Iqbal's most commonly used name. Sheriff (report) 05:57, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

November 19, 2015[edit]

  • (Discuss) – SAP S/4HANA → SAP S/4HANA – article about SAP S/4HANA recently went live but with an incorrect title of "4HANA". So the “S/” is missing from the title, the "S/" is important because it signifies that it is a “suite” of software. Somewhere along the editing, someone removed the "S/". The page should be called "SAP S/4HANA" (you will see the rest of the article refers to it as SAP S/4HANA too), I would like to request a page move in order to correct this title. Thanks! Olivia0452 (talk) 17:50, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Bantayan Island → Bantayan – The island is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the term Bantayan based on google books results and actual wikiarticle page views, where the municipality Bantayan, Cebu just covers one third of the island. No disambiguation page needed either as the two articles are related. RioHondo (talk) 14:23, 11 November 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 12:16, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Javier Muñoz → Javier Muñoz Jiménez – We presently have articles on Javier Muñoz who plays for Real Madrid Castilla and gets 20-30 Wikipedia hits daily on his page, and we have Javier Muñoz (actor) whose page gets 200-300 hits daily, and who plays the lead in the Broadway hit musical Hamilton on certain nights. Both Javiers Muñoz are early career. I have no crystal ball, one may someday be a major star, the other, a footnote to history. At present, however, moving the footballer to his full name would be similar to the other footballer, Javier Muñoz Mustafá (who gets 2-3 hits a day on his WP page). Alternatively, we could direct all searches for Javier Muñoz to a disambigulation page, and sort them out there. My news and other searches are not dispositive. The actor is hot right now on English languages searches, but his notability is very new, the futbol player comes up better when I search in Spanish, but news and other searches are also full of other Javiers Muñoz, quite a popular name. E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:17, 11 November 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 12:14, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Advanced-fee scam → Advance-fee scam – Correct spelling, grammar or idiomatic usage, whichever you prefer! "Advanced" is a common misspelling or misunderstanding of "advance". This article refers to fees paid in advance, not to advanced (sophisticated?) fees. It has had this title before, in early 2014. This move would be uncontroversial and automatic, except there has been substantial discussion about the title, and it has had this name before. However, neither the opposition to nor the support of this name was based on its being ungrammatical. As far as I could see, discussions centered on semantic factors like referring to Nigeria or not.
    —Leif Arne Storset 21:16, 11 November 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 12:11, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Dozhinki → Dożynki – It seems the current name is the least popular in English usage. Per WP:UE we should use the term that predominates in English-language reliable sources. A quick search on Google Books (with lang=en parameter) shows: * 225+144 for Dożynki/Dozynki (Polish name) * 1 false positive for Dozhinki * 10+1+2 for Obzhynky, Obzhinky or Obzhinki Google Scholar doesn't cope well with searches in a particular language only, but still there seems to be a 50:1 consensus in favour of the Polish term (cf. Dozhinki (10) vs. Obzhinki (3) vs. Dożynki (527) vs. Obzhynky (11)). //Halibutt 10:17, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Painted Desert (Arizona) → Painted Desert – This is the primary topic. It was viewed 1866 times in November, compared to 214 for its Australian rival. The 1931 film gets a surprising 877 visits, but those are mostly clumped around Clark Gable's birthday, so atypical. The 1938 remake only gets 58 looks (and many of those are people looking for the Gable version apparently, because most are on his birthday). There are no other articles with this name. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:07, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Roller skates → Roller skate – The naming convention is clear on this subject (WP:SINGULAR), plurals should only be used when the singular is never used (e.g. scissors, trousers or handcuffs); where it is essentially impossible to talk about a scissor or a trouser or a single handcuff. Yes, roller skates are usually referred to in the plural, however, it is perfectly fine to talk about a single skate (i.e. "My roller skate lost a wheel.") and often appropriate from an encyclopaedic POV (i.e. "The first roller skate was effectively an ice skate with wheels replacing the blade."<--an actual sentence from the lede of Roller skates). as for Inline skate, in the lede of that article, the first sentence is "Inline skates are a type of roller skate used for inline skating." I think it is clear that "roller skate" (singular) is often used to refer to this device (the lede of both articles prove this), and therefore as per WP:SINGULAR the correct form is the singular. the move of "Inline skates" to "Inline skate" follows logically from this.  InsertCleverPhraseHere InsertTalkHere  00:49, 10 November 2015 (UTC) --Relisted. Natg 19 (talk) 01:07, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

November 18, 2015[edit]

  • (Discuss) – Davit Gogibedashvili → David Dephy – He is best known in English sources by his English pen name David Dephy. His real name Davit Gogibedashvili should be the first bold link in the lead section followed by "known by his pen name David Dephy". This is per MOS guidelines on article naming and lead section follows normal convention in thousands of articles. GreenC 15:24, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

November 17, 2015[edit]

  • (Discuss) – United Kingdom European Union membership referendum → United Kingdom and Gibraltar European Union membership referendum – The name of the present title erroneously suggests that Gibraltar were somehow otherwise a full and integral part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland but outside of England and Wales, and Scotland, and Northern Ireland, whereas it is not and has never been so. Gibraltar is treated as (as if it were) a full part of the United Kingdom, for (but only for) the purpose in terms of the membership of the United Kingdom in the European Union and in the European Economic Area. As far as the United Nations and the rest of the World are concerned, the United Kingdom (sovereign) and Gibraltar (non-sovereign) are effectively two separate Countries, but they are not independent from one another either! -- Urquhartnite (talk) 13:02, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Sean Martin (filmmaker) → Sean Martin (writer and director) – Move back to original disambiguator. Martin doesn't just write poems. For people who are less into films, he is often known as the author of several bestselling history books, including "The Gnostics" which was a bestseller in Turkey (partly because the Turkish translation's book title explicitly referred to the ALevi connection). PanchoS (talk) 12:34, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Osaka Restoration Association (1st) → Osaka Restoration Association – The Osaka Restoration Association (大阪維新の会) is a regional party based in Osaka that is contesting the upcoming mayoral and gubernatorial elections. It has continued to exist at the regional level despite coming under the "umbrella" of the national level party named the Japan Restoration Party in 2012. The national party split last month and a new national party Osaka Ishin no Kai (おおさか維新の会) was formed. The Japanese name of the new party is pronounced the same as the regional party, but is written slightly differently. The English-language press does not use an "English sounding" name for the new party, see specifically the news of the party forming and more recently this article.
    Despite Tenaqzn'f Fbvyrq Gubat's rationale for moving this page to its current location and creating a disambiguation page at Osaka Restoration Association, the new national party is not a "new iteration" of the regional party. The regional party has continued to exist all this time despite the article not being updated. A disambiguation page for Osaka Restoration Association (regional) and Osaka Ishin no Kai (national) is not required because their English names are not the same. A hatnote differentiating them is sufficient. Therefore this page should be moved back to its original location, Osaka Restoration Association. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 02:01, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Hualien City → Hualien – it redirect to article there is no ambiguity as the county is always known as Hualien County not Hualien alone. – — ASDFGH =] talk? 00:47, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Miaoli City → Miaoli – it redirect to article there is no ambiguity as the county is always known as Miaoli County not Miaoli alone. – — ASDFGH =] talk? 00:47, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Pingtung City → Pingtung – it redirect to article there is no ambiguity as the county is always known as Pingtung County not Pingtung alone. – — ASDFGH =] talk? 00:47, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Taitung City → Taitung – it redirect to article there is no ambiguity as the county is always known as Taitung County not Taitung alone. – — ASDFGH =] talk? 00:47, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Backlog[edit]

Shortcut:
  • (Discuss) – Reading (process) → Reading – One of the two ways to determine a primary topic is long-term significance, for topics with "substantially greater enduring notability and educational value", even if another topic by that name gets viewed more often. That's why, to give just a few examples, Apple is a fruit and not a tech company, Pink is a color and not a singer, and Avatar is a religious concept and not a movie. For this reason, I propose that the topic with the greatest long-term significance when it comes to Reading is, well, reading. It is such a fundamental aspect of not just nearly every culture and civilization in the world today, but so many previous cultures and civilizations, going back thousands of years, even ones where only a small percentage of the population could actually do it. It is the thing that you are doing right now that is the reason we are even able to communicate our opinions to each other and have a discussion about this. I see that the last time this came up two and a half years ago, there were some who objected based on the existence of a couple of places - one in England and the other in Pennsylvania. These places are not insignificant, it is true. However, I would argue that the concept of reading is so utterly fundamental in its importance, so worldwide in its interest, that it would overwhelm even Athens and Rome in how significant it is, and Reading, Berkshire and Reading, Pennsylvania are nowhere near as important as Athens and Rome. Not even close. Egsan Bacon (talk) 21:46, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Pembroke, Pembrokeshire → Pembroke, Wales – This is analogous to Lincoln, as described in WP:UKPLACE, even though it is not explicitly spelled out for Wales. Same logic applies - "Pembrokeshire" is not that useful as a disambiguator, "Wales" is much more helpful. And Pembroke is unique within Wales. Nilfanion (talk) 11:48, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Enchanted (2007 film) → Enchanted (film) – This was the title until recently when the article was moved, presumably to accomodate the creation of Enchanted (1942 film). However, I found few if any sources indicating that the 1942 Czech picture was ever called "Enchanted", so I moved it to its original title, Okouzlená. That makes the date unnecessary here, as there are no other articles for films titled "Enchanted". It seems vanishingly unlikely that this would cause any confusion, so policy would recommend we go with the more WP:CONCISE title for this much more prominent film. Cúchullain t/c 15:35, 6 November 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 08:37, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Turks in Bulgaria → Bulgarian Turks – This article covers Bulgarian Turks living in a range of countries (Turkey, the Netherlands, Belgium, Northern Cyprus, Austria, Sweden, the UK), not just Bulgaria, so use of "in Bulgaria" in the article name is misleading. The alternative term "Bulgarian Turks" has relatively widespread usage in scholarly sources, as demonstrated by Google Scholar. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:09, 7 November 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 06:41, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Zoog → Zoogs – I need to create a disambiguation page for Zoog Disney so relocating this to where it was prior to 5 January 2005 would allow the page history to be kept intact. "Zoogs" can redirect to Dream Cycle as it currently does and be linked from the disambig. Ranze (talk) 17:04, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – PhoneGap → Apache Cordova – PhoneGap is the proprietary version of open source Apache Cordova. PhoneGap, and many other tools and frameworks are based on Apache Cordova, not vice versa. Currently, "Apache Cordova" redirects to this PhoneGap page, but it should be the other way around. There are several requests for the rename in the "Rename" section of this Talk page, so it isn't very controversial. Jonasmkr (talk) 20:12, 2 November 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 04:54, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – JIRA → Jira (software) – Per MOS:TM / MOS:ALLCAPS ("avoid: TIME, KISS, ASUS"): Lots of organizations and brand names like to use all-caps name styling to try to make themselves stand out from the crowd and appear more important. It's an annoying practice that Wikipedia should generally not follow. Please see prior comments on Talk page. This is not an acronym – just purely promotional styling. —BarrelProof (talk) 14:41, 30 October 2015 (UTC) --Relisted. Andrewa (talk) 16:02, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Case Closed (manga) → Case Closed – The main manga article should still be named Case Closed as that is the predominant search result. The other uses should be renamed back to the Case Closed (disambiguation) article. This was moved recently without proper discussion and requires a technical move to restore it. – AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:55, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

References[edit]

References generally should not appear here. Use {{reflist-talk}} in the talk page section with the requested move to show references there.
The current Wikipedia time is:
03:30, Tuesday, November 24, 2015 (UTC)
To update time purge the cache!
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requested_moves&oldid=689410694"