Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requested moves

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Anthony Appleyard (talk | contribs) at 22:21, 8 July 2007 (→Uncontroversial proposals: done Clark Steel to Clark Still). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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

Shortcuts

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

Undiscussed moves

Shortcuts

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 here proposals 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 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

Contested --Stemonitis 09:29, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Incomplete. --Stemonitis 08:24, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rekha Ganesan → Rekha — This article has been known as Rekha and everybody knows this actress as Rekha. Someone decided to use her full name, while she is known as Rekha everywhere; Her stage name is only Rekha; She is credited as Rekha in every single film without exceptions; IMDb.com names her as Rekha, as well as every other reliable and unreliable site does. Even here on wikipedia, all the other articles related to her somehow, name her as Rekha. Please redirect her name. Her full name can be used in the introduction. Let's take Shakira for example. We can't move her page to Shakira Isabel Mebarak Ripoll just because it's her real name. Her stage name is Shakira, and that's how it should be here. No-one prefers Rekha Ganesan over Rekha. It wasn't an established editor who moved the page earlier. It was a new editor, who is absent from Wikipedia now. Thanks, best regards, --Shahid • Talk2me 16:08, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Incomplete. --Stemonitis 16:15, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other proposals

July 8, 2007

  • NR0B1 → DAX1 —(Discuss)— The Nuclear Receptor Nomenclature Committee system for naming receptors (e.g., NR0B1 for DAX1) is very useful, but is not normally used as the primary name for the receptor in the scientific literature. For consistency with the names of other Wikipedia nuclear receptor articles, IMHO it would be better to name this article DAX1 with a redirect from NR0B1 to DAX1. Alternatively the title could be "dosage-sensitive sex reversal, adrenal hypoplasia critical region, on chromosome X, gene 1", but that is way too wordy. —Boghog2 11:42, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Voluntary_caregiver → Carers —(Discuss)— nobody appears to know what a voluntary caregiver is and nobody wants to be called one to their face, and anyway the internationally accepted terminology used by various organisations is Carers, plural, not singular because an individual carer is a simple dictionary definition whilst carers are a massive social movement —Excalibur 00:17, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

July 7, 2007

July 6, 2007

  • Xiangxue Sun Hei → Sun Hei FC —(Discuss)— Due to change in sopnsorship, the team has already been renamed Convoy Sun Hei. (Official Blog) I'd suggest renaming this article to simply Sun Hei FC, rather than "Convoy Sun Hei". The name "Sun Hei" is the best known and the most commonly called name, and it is not sensible to rename the article frequently due to change in sponsorship. We can introduce the official name "Convoy Sun Hei" inside the article. —supernorton 17:54, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

July 5, 2007

  • Greater Fatra → Veľká Fatra —(Discuss)— All the evidence for using the native name as the widely accepted English name is shown on the talk page. Also remember that the fact that an English name exists and is used is not enough to consider it a widely accepted name in English (there are too many examples to count; e.g. Côte d'Ivoire). Actually, the fact that various English translations exist (Greater, Great, Big) is another reason to use the native name to stop confusion. If you have any doubts or questions, please discuss them before voting. —Svetovid 14:00, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Deutsches Reich → German Reich —(Discuss)— This is an English wiki, so the common English name should be used to describe the German state 1871-1943/5. The half-translated term "German Reich" is the correct English name. At the moment, "German Reich" redirects to "Deutsches Reich", so I need an administrator to reverse the direction of the redirect —52 Pickup 07:30, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neighbourhood → Neighborhood —(Discuss)— Because the article lacks sufficient content related to any nations that would use the British spelling, it would most certainly make the most sense, common-sense-wise and policy-wise, to move this page to the title which is most fitting to the article, which is the American spelling. While I understand that the article was created with the British spelling, the article has evolved such that it takes on a more American tone. As well, neighborhoods are predominantly an American entity and have closer ties to the American (rather than the British) sense of the word. —└Jared┘┌t┐  01:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

July 4, 2007

July 3, 2007

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requested_moves&oldid=143375356"