Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk | contribs) at 20:10, 7 September 2024 (Done 2. I have not done the Doink one as I am not sure that it is uncontroversial). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

If you are unable to complete a move for technical reasons, you can request technical help below. This is the correct method 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:..." or "The/This page could not be moved, for the following reason:..."

  • To list a technical request: edit the Uncontroversial technical requests subsection and insert the following code at the bottom of the list, filling in pages and reason:
    {{subst:RMassist|current page title|new title|reason=edit summary for the 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

  • Doink (currently a redirect to Doink the Clown)  Doink (disambiguation) (move · discuss) – move for primary redirect 162 etc. (talk) 18:38, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Requests to revert undiscussed moves

I'm not seeing the move in the page history. It appears that "Porto Metro" is the stable title. 162 etc. (talk) 16:18, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I thought it was this edit, but apparently it wasn't. KatVanHuis (talk) 18:38, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Contested technical requests

No apparent discussion of this, not uncontroversial. 162 etc. (talk) 18:46, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ACTfootyhistory: Seems like the content in it makes this title stable. Unless you start an RM by clicking/tapping on the "discuss" link, this request stays here. Intrisit (talk) 11:46, 4 September 2024‎ (UTC)[reply]
@Officialworks "Braathens Regional Aviation" appears to be the common name. C F A 💬 23:40, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No clear common name. You can start a requested move discussion by clicking the "discuss" link above. C F A 💬 13:55, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Commonname. @Fgnievinski: I'm also pretty reluctant to use abbreviations as article titles when they're both obscure and there's a better choice so closely available. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:22, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
XSD is XML Schema Definition, and the formal title seems to be "W3C XML Schema Definition Language (XSD)". One of those might be a better title. Getting rid of the "(W3C)" in parentheses seems desirable. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:53, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it at the current location, with the necessary (W3C) disambiguator. We already have XML schema as a separate article on the generic topic of schemas for XML, thus this article does need to keep the W3C disambiguator on it. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:56, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nordfold (municipality) (currently a redirect to Nordfold Municipality)  Nordfold Municipality (move · discuss) – use standardized naming for municipalities in Norway Jay1279 (talk) 23:18, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jay1279: A glance at Category:Former municipalities of Norway shows there are more articles that disambiguates with () rather than "Municipality" though? I don't get a sensing that there is a standardised diambiguation? Is there a conversation somewhere that had arrived at one? – robertsky (talk) 04:21, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Robertsky Hi. I know this topic of naming municipalities has come up at Wikiproject Norway a little over the years. There was a post about Gulen municipality on Wikiproject Norway the other day. Since there is no consistency, I have been trying to move in the direction of standardizing the names of the articles that I have been working on for consistency. There are many former and current municipalities in Norway were there is a town or village within the municipality with the same name (Nordfold and Nordfold (municipality)) so disambiguation seems to happen a lot. In Norwegian, the official name of this municipality was "Nordfold herred" which translates to "Nordfold Municipality" so I think a direct translation would be best for the name. The Norwegian Nynorsk wikipedia, nn:Kommunar_i_Noreg, names all their current municipalities using the format of "____ kommune" which directly translates to something like "Nordfold Municipality". Also all of the articles for municipalities in Sweden and Denmark are also formatted this way. When I originally wrote many of these articles about former municipalities in Norway, I didn't really put much thought into the name formatting and now I was hoping to update them in a more standardized way. Jay1279 (talk) 20:07, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator needed