Page semi-protected

Wikipedia:Requested moves

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

Closing instructions

Click here to purge this page

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 the article titling policy and the 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: a page may already exist at the target title and require deletion, or the page may be protected from moves. 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.
  • Unregistered users and new (not yet autoconfirmed) users are unable to move pages.

Requests are generally processed after seven days. If consensus is reached at or after this time, a reviewer will enact the request. If not, the request may be re-listed to allow more time for consensus to develop, or the discussion 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 discussion (especially no recent 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 such a move, 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

Technical requests

Uncontroversial technical requests

Administrator needed

Contested technical requests

Requests to revert undiscussed moves

Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves

The discussion process is used for potentially controversial moves. A move is potentially controversial if either of the following applies:

  • there has been any past debate about the best title for the page;
  • someone could reasonably disagree with the move.

Use this process if there is any reason to believe a move would be contested. For technical move requests, such as to correct obvious typographical errors, see Requesting technical moves. The technical moves procedure can also be used for uncontroversial moves when the requested title is occupied by an existing article.

Do not create a new move request when one is already open on the same talk page. Instead, consider contributing to the open discussion if you would like to propose another alternative. Multiple closed move requests may be on the same page, but each should have a unique section heading.

Do not create a move request to rename one or more redirects. Redirects cannot be used as current titles in requested moves.

Requesting a single page move

To request a single page move, click on the "New section" tab of the talk page of the article you want moved, without adding a new subject/header, inserting this code:

{{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 prioritize searches limited to reliable sources (e.g. books, news, scholarly papers) over other web results. You don't need to add your signature at the end, as this template will do so automatically.}}

Replace NewName with the requested new name of the page (or with a simple question mark, if you want more than one possible new name to be considered). The template will automatically create the heading "Requested move 14 September 2022" and sign the post for you.

There is no need to edit the article in question. Once the above code is added to the Talk page, a bot will automatically add the following notification at the top of the affected page:

Unlike other request processes on Wikipedia, such as Requests for comment, nominations need not be neutral. Make your point as best you can; use evidence (such as Google Ngrams and pageview statistics) and refer to applicable policies and guidelines, especially our article titling policy and the guideline on disambiguation and primary topics.

WikiProjects may subscribe to Article alerts to receive RM notifications. For example, Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Article alerts/Requested moves is transcluded to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography. RMCD bot notifies many of the other Wikiprojects 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, as long as this notification is neutral.

Single page move on a different talk page

Occasionally, a move request must be made on a talk page other than the talk page of the page to be moved. For example, a request to rename Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Resources to Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewing and templates would need to take place at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation because the talk page of the project page to be moved, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/Resources, is a redirect to that centralized discussion page. In this type of case, the requested move should be made using the following code:

{{subst:requested move|reason=(the reason for the page move goes here).|current1=(present title of page to be renamed)|new1=(proposed title of page)}}

The |1= unnamed parameter is not used. The |current1= and |new1= parameters are used similar to multiple page moves described below.

Requesting multiple page moves

A single template may be used to request multiple related moves. On one of the talk pages of the affected pages, 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).

To request a multiple page move, edit at the bottom of the talk page of the article you chose for your request, without adding a new header, inserting this code:

{{subst:requested move
| current1 = Current title of page 1
| 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 prioritize searches limited to reliable sources (e.g. books, news, scholarly papers) over other web results. You don't need to add your signature at the end, as this template will do so automatically.
}}

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.

Occasionally the discussions for significant multi-move requests may be hosted on WikiProject talk pages or other pages in Project namespace. For multi-move discussions hosted on a page which is not itself proposed to be moved, specify |current1=Current title of page 1 for the first page to move.

Request all associated moves explicitly

Please list every move that you wish to have made in your request. For example, if you wish to move Cricket (disambiguation) to Cricket because you do not believe the sport is the primary topic for the search term "Cricket", then you actually want to move two pages, both Cricket (disambiguation) and Cricket. Thus you must list proposed titles for each page affected by your request. For example, you might propose:

If a new title is not proposed for the sport, it is more difficult to achieve consensus for a new title for that article. A move request that does not show what to do with the material at its proposed target, such as:

is incomplete. Such requests may be completed as a request to decide the best new title by discussion.

Template usage examples and notes
Talk page tag Text that will be shown (and usage notes)
{{subst:Requested move|new|reason=why}}
links talk edit
Requested move 14 September 2022

Wikipedia:Requested movesNew – why Example (talk) 12:50, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Use when the proposed new title is given.
Do not sign this template—this tag is auto-signed when substituted. Be sure to use the subst:.
This tag should be placed at the beginning of the section containing the relevant discussion.Reply[reply]

{{subst:Requested move|?|reason=why}}
Requested move 14 September 2022

Wikipedia:Requested moves → ? – why Example (talk) 12:50, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Use when the proposed new title is not known.
Do not sign this template—this tag is auto-signed when substituted. Be sure to use the subst:.
This tag should be placed at the beginning of the section containing the relevant discussion.Reply[reply]

{{subst:Requested move|new|reason=why|talk=yes}}
Requested move 14 September 2022

Wikipedia:Requested movesNew – why Example (talk) 12:50, 14 September 2022‎ (UTC)Reply[reply]

Survey
Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this subsection with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
Discussion
Any additional comments:



This template adds subsections for survey and discussion.
Do not sign this template—this tag is auto-signed when substituted. Be sure to use the subst:
Click the "New Section" tab on the talk page and leave the Subject/headline blank, as the template by default automatically creates the heading.

{{subst:Requested move|new1=x|current2=y|new2=z|reason=why}}
Requested move 14 September 2022

– why Example (talk) 12:50, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Do not sign this template—this tag is auto-signed when substituted.
Be sure to use the subst: and place this tag at the beginning of the section containing the relevant discussion.
Add additional related move requests in pairs (|current3= and |new3=, |current4= and |new4=, etc.).Reply[reply]

{{subst:Requested move|new1=?|current2=y|new2=?|reason=why}}
Requested move 14 September 2022

– why Example (talk) 12:50, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Commenting on a requested move

All editors are welcome to contribute to the discussion regarding a requested page move. There are a number of standards that Wikipedians should practice in such discussions:

  • When editors recommend a course of action, they write Support or Oppose in bold text, which is done by surrounding the word with three single quotes on each side, e.g. '''Support'''.
  • Comments or recommendations are added on a new bulleted line (that is, starting with *) and signed by adding ~~~~ to the end. Responses to another editor are threaded and indented using multiple bullets.
  • The article itself should be reviewed before any recommendation is made; do not base recommendations solely on the information supplied by other editors. It may also help to look at the article's edit history. However, please read the earlier comments and recommendations, as well as prior move requests. They may contain relevant arguments and useful information.
  • Vested interests in the article should be disclosed per Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI.

When participating, please consider the following:

  • Editors should make themselves familiar with the article titling policy at Wikipedia:Article titles.
  • Other important guidelines that set forth community norms for article titles include Wikipedia:Disambiguation, specific naming conventions, and the manual of style.
  • The debate is not a vote; please do not make recommendations that are not sustained by arguments.
  • Explain how the proposed article title meets or contravenes policy and guidelines rather than merely stating that it does so.
  • Nomination already implies that the nominator supports the name change, and nominators should refrain from repeating this recommendation on a separate bulleted line.[a]
  • Do not make conflicting recommendations. If you change your mind, use strike-through to retract your previous statement by enclosing it between <s> and </s> after the bullets, and de-bold the struck words, as in "• Support Oppose".

Please remember that reasonable editors will sometimes disagree, but that arguments based in policy, guidelines, and evidence have more weight than unsupported statements. When an editor offers an argument that does not explain how the move request is consistent with policies and guidelines, a reminder to engage in constructive, on-topic discussion may be useful. On the other hand, a pattern of responding to requests with groundless opinion, proof by assertion, and ignoring content guidelines may become disruptive. If a pattern of disruptive behavior persists after efforts are made to correct the situation through dialogue, please consider using a dispute resolution process.

Closing a requested move

Any uninvolved editor in good standing may close a move request. Please read the closing instructions for information on how to close a move request. The Simple guide to closing RM discussions details how to actually close a requested move discussion.

Relisting a requested move

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. In general, discussions should not be relisted more than once before properly closing.[b] Users relisting a debate which has already been relisted, or relisting a debate with a substantial discussion, should write a short explanation on why they did not consider the debate sufficient to close. While there is no consensus forbidding participation in a requested move discussion after relisting it, many editors consider it an inadvisable form of supervote. If you want to relist a discussion and then participate in it, be prepared to explain why you think it was appropriate.

Relisting should be done using {{subst:relisting}}, which automatically includes the relister's signature, and which must be placed at the very end of the initial request after the move requester's signature (and subsequent relisters' signatures).

When a relisted discussion reaches a resolution, it may be closed at any time according to the closing instructions; there is no required length of time to wait before closing a relisted discussion.

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, such as by notifying WikiProjects of the discussion using the template {{RM notification}}. Banners placed at the top of the talk page hosting the move request can often be used to identify WikiProjects suitable for notification.

Notes

  1. ^ A nominator making a procedural nomination with which they may not agree is free to add a bulleted line explaining their actual position. Additional detail, such as sources, may also be provided in an additional bullet point if its inclusion in the nomination statement would make the statement unwieldy. Please remember that the entire nomination statement is transcluded into the list on this page.
  2. ^ Despite this, discussions are occasionally relisted more than once.

Current discussions

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 and in table format. 80 discussions have been relisted.

September 14, 2022

  • (Discuss)Chinese languageChinese languages – Chinese is not a language, it's a language family. The varieties/dialects are not mutually intelligible. It would make more sense to call this Chinese languages, similar to Romance languages or Dravidian languages. It is also called "Chinese languages" in German. Leiho7 (talk) 20:14, 6 September 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 03:33, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 13, 2022

  • (Discuss)TheoconservatismReligious right in the United States – Procedural nomination. In June another user tried to nominate this for merging into the proposed title, but the proposed title is currently a redirect (to Christian right) rather than an article — so what they were really trying to propose was that this page be moved to the proposed title rather than "merged" into it. Accordingly, I've removed the merger templates from the affected pages and am submitting this through the RM process where it's supposed to be. Their original "merger" rationale at Talk:Religious right in the United States was "It seems like these are two words for the same thing. Since Wikipedia is based on topics not terms it is correct to treat them in the same article."; there was one oppose on the grounds that "theoconservatism is a term for a much more specific viewpoint than the more general term 'religious right'", but no other participation at all until I caught the problem just now. I have no opinion of my own on the merits or demerits of the proposed move; this is strictly a procedural nomination because I had to close down an unresolved discussion that was taking place in the wrong venue for what was being requested. Bearcat (talk) 23:23, 5 September 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 06:33, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)Julio Iglesias Sr.Julio Iglesias Puga – Recommend moving this to either "Julio Iglesias Puga" or "Julio Iglesias (gynecologist)" as the title is a WP:NEOLOGISM. The senior, junior, III model is not used in Spanish, where this man spent his whole life. The English source from UPI introduces him as "Dr. Julio Iglesias Puga" and later calls him "Iglesias Sr.", a common journalistic way of disambiguating people, whether or not they share the same first name. The current title also runs into confusion as the son of Julio Iglesias is Julio Iglesias Jr., and is professionally known as that due to living in the US. The average person who sees the Jr. article and will expect the Sr. article to be Jr's father. Google Books search is mainly cheap biographies of his star offspring, but they too call him "Julio Iglesias Puga". It's up to you whether it's clearer to include his second surname, or his profession. Unknown Temptation (talk) 19:35, 5 September 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Shadow007 (talk) 03:13, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)2023 Nigerian general election2023 Nigerian elections – I requested this move as the current title indicates that there is one central election on one day (like 2018 Pakistani and 2019 British election pages); however, there are dozens of different elections in Nigeria throughout 2023 (from February to at least November) making this page more comparable to the 2020 United States elections (especially as they are both presidential systems with a large number of disparate elections throughout the year). Also, as the component elections in this page already have unique pages, it is no longer like the 2019 page where there was no separate election page. In accordance with other like pages, such as the 2022 Nigerian elections, 2023 Nigerian elections is more accurate. When a user first moved the page to its current name, it was clear that the user was not at all familiar with the content; when I requested it be moved back to its stable "2023 Nigerian elections", a different opponent pivoted to a content discussion before refusing to engage so the discussion was closed. This cycle of ghosting discussion continued nine more times over months to avoid justifying the move. After a RFC, it was suggested to open a new move request. Watercheetah99 (talk) 00:38, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 12, 2022

  • (Discuss)KamenáčAschberg – The article was recently moved, in good faith, from Aschberg to Kamenáč on the basis that the summit lies within the Czech Republic. However, it is clear that a) the mountain as a whole is very much on the Czech-German border and b) that, looking at ngram viewer, it has always been called the Aschberg in English sources whereas Kamenáč does not register at all in English sources. The location of the summit is less relevant than the English WP:COMMONNAME used in WP:RS. Bermicourt (talk) 11:24, 28 August 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 05:48, 5 September 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 09:10, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)Kangaroo Point BridgeKangaroo Point Green Bridge – It is the official name of the bridge. I searched both terms on Google: the former (current name) registered 5.58m results, and the latter (official name) registered 4.85m results. While the former reported more results on Google, the word "bridge" is mainly used as a common noun, and the "bridge" in the latter is mainly used as a proper noun referring to this specific bridge. RPC7778 (talk) 03:51, 5 September 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 09:03, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)Tom Butters (baseball)Tom Butters (sports) – Tom Butters had a career that is hard to summarize in a one-word parenthetical, as he is notable for both his Major League Baseball pitching career and his career as a prominent collegiate athletic administrator. The current title only focuses on his baseball career, which I found very confusing when I first stumbled upon this article – I was looking for the athletic administrator who hired famous basketball coach Mike Kryzewski, and had no clue he'd ever played baseball. Using "sports" as the parenthetical is a bit vague, but it does encompass both of the things he's famous for; whether you're looking for a baseball pitcher or a college sports administrator, "Tom Butters (sports)" sounds like it could be the right article. IagoQnsi (talk) 07:37, 5 September 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 08:04, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)Kōji FukadaKoji Fukada – According to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Japan-related articles#Modern names, articles about post-Meiji-Restoration Japanese people should, if no commonly used name in reliable sources can be clearly identified, be titled after "the form [of their name] personally or professionally used by the person, if available in the English/Latin alphabet (this can include the spelling appearing on their official website or official social media profile, but do not rely on a URL when the actual text is all Japanese)"; modified Hepburn romanization should only be used for article titles when no official nor commonly used romanization can be identified. The modified Hepburn romanization should always be included in parentheses in the opening of the article, and it will still be there if the title of the article uses a different spelling. In this case, the website of the person's agency uses the spelling Koji Fukada. This is supported by this spelling also being used by recent articles on Deadline and Variety, on the industry databases JFBD and Japan Program Catalog, by the sales agencies Nikkatsu, mk2, and ColorBird (including on trailers and posters on their sites), and on the US and UK disc packaging for Hospitalité, Harmonium, The Real Thing, and A Girl Missing. The spelling Kôji Fukada is used very commonly in French-language information, but for English Wikipedia the policy is to prioritize what's used in English-language information. If you don't like the Koji spelling and want the article to be titled after the modified Hepburn organization, Kōji, then you need to get the policy on this at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Japan-related articles#Modern names changed because prioritizing the modified Hepburn romanization is not currently what the Manual of Style tells us to do. If you think a different spelling is currently more commonly used officially or in English-language reliable sources generally, and can provide evidence, then that would be a valid reason for opposing the move and will help us to decide what the article title should be. Tempjrds (talk) 05:12, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)Tesshō GendaTessyo Genda – I previously requested a move to this spelling which ended with no consensus, perhaps because I didn't explain myself enough or provide enough evidence. According to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Japan-related articles#Modern names, articles about post-Meiji-Restoration Japanese people should be titled after "the form [of their name] personally or professionally used by the person, if available in the English/Latin alphabet (this can include the spelling appearing on their official website or official social media profile, but do not rely on a URL when the actual text is all Japanese)"; modified Hepburn romanization should only be used for article titles when no official nor commonly used romanization can be identified. The modified Hepburn romanization should always be included in parentheses in the opening of the article, and it will still be there if the title of the article uses a different spelling. In this case, the website of the person's agency uses the spelling Tessyo Genda. This is supported by this spelling also being used on the industry database Japan Creator Bank and on the US/CA poster for his recent movie The Deer King, which can be downloaded in high enough resolution to read the text in this ZIP file. Some much earlier Roman-character posters use another spelling, but Tessyo Genda appears from this evidence to be the current official one. JFDB, another industry database, uses Tessho, but I would not consider that as authoritative a source as his agency's site. If you don't like the Tessyo spelling and want the article to be titled after the modified Hepburn organization, Tesshō, then you need to get the policy on this at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Japan-related articles#Modern names changed because prioritizing the modified Hepburn romanization is not currently what the Manual of Style tells us to do. Opposing this move will not change the policy. If you think a different spelling is currently more commonly used officially and can provide evidence, then that would be a valid reason for opposing the move and will help us to decide what the article title should be. Tempjrds (talk) 04:22, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)CrossarchusCusimanse – This alongside the "kusimanse" spelling seems to be by far the common name, the other common names listed on this page have other common meanings with dwarf mongoose most times meaning an entirely different species and "mangue" having many references. Cusimanse with a C seems to be the more common spelling as per Google Ngrams. Maykii (talk) 02:08, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 11, 2022

  • (Discuss)HM Prison Wormwood ScrubsHMP Wormwood Scrubs – "HMP" is extremely common British parlance and much more commonly used than "HM Prison". For example, a Google search for "HMP Wormwood Scrubs" reveals 165,000 results, whereas "HM Prison Wormwood Scrubs" reveals 26,000. Official sources also use HMP, see here for example. If there is consensus for this move then it would be applied to all prisons in the UK (would take too long to list them all in this request). I note that in many of the infoboxes of these articles "HMP" is already the form used, suggesting that there is a recognition that this is the form that should be used, but due to spurious moves several years ago, moves are not possible without discussion due to existing re-directs. Elshad (talk) 17:29, 4 September 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 20:38, 11 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)MaizeCorn – The WP:COMMONNAME of this plant is "corn". It has been this way throughout the entire NGRAMS corpus, including when limited only to British English and separately when limited only to American English. (The article, according to the talk page, is written in American English). Previous arguments have incorrectly assumed that British publications do not frequently use "corn" to refer to the plant (or alternatively, the plant when in a field), but mainstream publications in the United Kingdom like The Guardian regularly refer to the plant as "corn" without any reference to "maize" ([1] [2] [3] [4]) and the BBC refers to fields of this crop as "corn fields". The proposed title currently redirects here and the plant referred to herein is the WP:PTOPIC for the term "Corn", so usurping the redirect poses no challenge. For these reasons, the title of this article should be moved to "Corn", which is this crop's WP:COMMONNAME. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 15:46, 11 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)Io ShiraiIyo Sky – It could be a bit too soon but her new ring name has been established; e.g. her WWE profile, participating in WWE Women's Tag Team Championship Tournament (2022) and advancing to the finals, having a PPV match at Clash at the Castle, being a member of Damage Control (a main roster stable), appearing on Raw and having matches under her new ring name. Plus reliable PW sources has started using her new ring name. While she wrestled as Io Shirai for many years and she is well-known for her accomplishments under her old/original ring name, it is her WWE main roster career that has become a trend. Mann Mann (talk) 08:40, 4 September 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 15:23, 11 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)Campaign to change the WRU logo → ? – Wouldn't it be much better to change the name of the page to Logo of the Welsh Rugby Union? There is evidently enough attention been paid to the symbolism of the logo, to warrant an article. The news articles cited also describe the long history of the logo. But the only notable 'campaign' or oppposition has been a petition in 2020 (the other petition, cited only to the Twitter feed of the person who set it up, is clearly not of any note as far as Wikipedia is concerned). Otherwise this article is quite a biased and selective synthesis of what has been said by the press. Sionk (talk) 09:44, 11 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)Iberia, Byzantine Empire → ? – Again, per WP:CONCISE and WP:CONSIST, I still believe Theme of Iberia would be perfectly suiting name as "X of Iberia" is better description for the polity, but as it was rejected by the colleagues in previous move-request I am suggesting we offer better fitting name as the current name reads like a name of a little town in the middle of nowhere. Regards, An emperor /// Ave 01:52, 11 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 10, 2022

  • (Discuss)L'Étape du TourL'Étape du Tour de France – As per the move request dated 21 July 2022, the organizer changed the official naming a while ago. Additionally, the official naming has since been adopted in the majority of articles on the subject. There are 388.000 google hits for the new name 'L'Étape du Tour de France', whereas there are 567.000 google hits for 'L'Étape du Tour' which *include* the 388.000 google hits for the longer name - thus giving a total of 179.000 google hits for the old name alone. Notwithstanding the many errors in this calculation (which would only distort results in favor of the shorter name), this goes to show, that the new naming has indeed been adopted widely. Browsing through the google search results of https://www.google.com/search?q=%22L%27%C3%88tape+du+Tour+de+France%22 provides plenty of further evidence. 87.153.128.144 (talk) 22:12, 3 September 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 22:02, 10 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)ArmatoloiArmatoles – Widely used English name. Armatoloi and Armatolos, the Greek names, give me 288 results in Google Scholar [20], while the English Armatoles and Armatole give me 291 results [21]. As both versions are practically equally common, one would need other arguments to base the election of one version or another. I've just added information on the article about the Aromanian armatoles that existed, and I also get a big amount of papers in Google Scholar when searching Albanian armatoles [22], so it was not a Greek-only thing. Based on this, I believe the English names are more neutral and preferable. Super Ψ Dro 12:51, 10 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)Bulldog StadiumValley Children's Stadium – In July 2022, the stadium was officially renamed under a 10 year agreement. I have not performed a move like this and I know the old name shows up in many places. Any help with making sure this move is done successfully is requested. Also if anyone has input on the move itself please add. Nweil (talk) 18:59, 2 September 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 03:31, 10 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)Civis romanus sumCivis Romanus sum – The consensus above is that the adjective Romanus ("Roman") should be capitalised yet this seems to have been overlooked when the page was moved, or else the existence of the redirect page prevented this. Capitalisation is the universal practice in the Anglosphere and consistent with dictionary spelling and practice on the rest of Wikipedia (e.g. Pax Romana) . Lo2u (TC) 01:52, 10 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 9, 2022

  • (Discuss)London, Ontario truck attack2021 London, Ontario truck attack – The naming convention for events WP:NCEVENTS states that a majority of events should display the when, where and what of events. Right now, this is one of the few articles from this list of vehicle-ramming attacks without the year in the date. I therefore think it would to add the 2021 to make it WP:CONSISTENT with other titles in this category, and no obvious reason to diverge from the naming convention comes to mind. Pilaz (talk) 15:46, 9 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)UST Golden Tigresses volleyball teamUST Golden Tigresses volleyball – Philippine varsity teams are not included in WP:CBBALL and WP:CFB, but there's no reason we can't follow their naming conventions here, as the idea came from the U.S. In the Philippines, most women's teams (except the Ateneo Blue Eagles which are called the "Blue Eagles" in every sport, gender and level of competition) use the "female" version of the men's team. In these cases, the "UST Growling Tigers" become the "UST Golden Tigresses". However, still others use a sports-centric nickname (volleyball teams become "Spikers", soccer teams become "Booters", etc.), still some others are unique: the men's volleyball teams of the De La Salle Green Archers are the "De La Salle Green Spikers" (usual naming convention) but the women's teams are simply the "De La Salle Lady Spikers". Using the U.S. naming convention of "<team name> <sport>" (notably without the word "team"); this RM should be a simple move to what is the standard elsewhere, and the standard being discussed in other WP:RMs about this. Howard the Duck (talk) 00:03, 2 September 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 08:01, 9 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 8, 2022

  • (Discuss)His Majesty's ShipHMS (ship prefix) – I can't find any Wikipedia policy to support this, but it just feels wrong that an article's title changes depending on who holds an office. (Maybe someone can find some other examples and set me straight.) As for the proposed title, HMS (ship prefix) still unambiguously identifies the subject, and the first sentence of the lede would give the initialism's meaning. And there's no problems with leaving an intialism/acronym unexplained in an article's title, see FAQ, FYI, and BYOB. Brightgalrs (/braɪtˈɡæl.ərˌɛs/)[ᴛ] 20:50, 8 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)Oru Kadhai SollatumaThe Sound Story – A CBFC search yields nothing for the Tamil dubbed version while the original Malayalam version give two tables: one says THE SOUND STORY (HDD) and THE SOUND STORY. The first one is from 2018 and the second one is from 2019, both certified in Thiruvananthapuram. The Times of India reviews clearly list the original versions and the review only lists Malayalam. There is also this review (which is under the title Sound Story. The review also lists Malayalam first. With a predominant Malayalam/Mollywood cast and crew, a perfect lipsync trailer, it is best to move the page back to its primary title vs a dubbed one. Also note the poster of the film on this page uses the new title only. DareshMohan (talk) 05:54, 1 September 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 09:51, 8 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)RendagamOttu (film) – Primary version name that receives more information online. A Google search of Ottu brings information from more recent information while Rendagam brings more older information (two weeks ago). Take the most recent source, Ottu is mentioned a couple times while Rendagam is put of as the "Tamil version" for which Boban did not dub for. Other recent sources here and here. Trailer views vs trailer views (the fact that one of the actors (Boban) did not dub for Tamil version/he is a Malayali actor may have caused this views difference). DareshMohan (talk) 06:52, 1 September 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 09:51, 8 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

September 7, 2022

  • (Discuss)FCSBFC FCSB – The name of this page is not consistent with the naming conventions for articles on sports teams. In cases where there is no ambiguity as to the official spelling of a club's name in English, the official name should be used. There are numerous examples to be found, such as Manchester_City_F.C.. Please support consistency accross Wikipedia by renaming and moving this article to FC FCSB. For avoidance of doubt, this information can be found on the official website of the team - English language version: This is the only official website (...) and it is a registered trademark ©FC FCSB SA. Gunnlaugson (talk) 22:06, 31 August 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 23:18, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)Jack and CokeBourbon and Coke – "Jack" is just one brand that can be used in this common U.S. southern drink. Other brands are often used as well, such as Jim Beam or Evan Williams, and Bourbon and Coke already redirects here. There isn't really a sufficient amount of distinct subject matter to support two separate articles about a cocktail in which the only difference is the brand of whiskey, so using the more general one seems more appropriate. When the title of this article was discussed three years ago, we may have gotten hung up on whether "Coke" should be changed to "cola" or not. In the southern U.S., "Coke" is frequently used to refer to any cola. Considering the effect of the combination of ingredients, it doesn't really make a big difference which brand of either ingredient is used. While the term "Coke" is often used generically, the term "Jack" is not. "Jack" only refers to the Jack Daniel's brand. Most bourbon drinkers would give you a very confused (and possibly insulted) reaction if you referred to their bourbon as "Jack". Per previously-cited Ngram evidence, "Bourbon and Coke" is a term that has been more historically dominant than "Jack and Coke" and remains in frequent use. Although Jack and Coke is currently popular, this is partly a scope question. As I mentioned, Bourbon and Coke redirects here, so the scope should include both topics, but the title doesn't currently fit the scope. Although the Jack Daniel's brand is not marketed as "bourbon", it fulfills the definition of what bourbon is (and is required to, under terms of the North American Free Trade Agreement and the laws governing production of Tennessee whiskey). See also Rum and Coke. Please also see the previous RM discussion commentary. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:32, 30 August 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. ModernDayTrilobite (talkcontribs) 20:38, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)Lamar JohnsonLamar Johnson (baseball) – No clear primary topic for the name Lamar Johnson. Thus, I propose moving this article and create a disambiguation page. The monthly page views data between the three articles named Lamar Johnson, the actor has gotten 545,321 page views, while the baseball player and footballer had the respective page views of 34,870 and 3,730; the spike in June 2021 comes from the first page of articles, mainly about the prisoner who killed someone in 1994. The second spike in March 2022 shows results of the actor on the first page. If googling "Lamar Johnson", there is a mixture of the actor and the wrongful convict from the first two result pages. 2600:6C40:5400:55A6:FDFE:1C1D:7184:7279 (talk) 19:32, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)PAX (event)Pax (event) – Move per WP:ALLCAPS. Since the convention has separated from Penny Arcade, the name is no longer officially an acronym, and the capitalization is simply a stylization - the convention is always referred to as "Pax". If people think it should still be capitalized, then I think it has a strong claim to being primary topic for "PAX" based on pageviews, being one of the few things called that as an acronym for something else. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 19:09, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Elapsed listings

  • (Discuss)InjuryHuman injury – This article is exclusively about human injury, and on 25 August 2022, it was proposed below that it be moved to Human injury. A new article about the broader concept of injury could then be created in its place. The article Human injury would remain under the scope of WikiProject Medicine while the new Injury article would be overseen by WikiProject Biology and WikiProject Vital Articles. I personally have no opinion on the question and am just converting the ongoing discussion to proper WP:RM format. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 21:03, 6 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Backlog

  • (Discuss)List of pitch-class setsList of set classes – The anonymous editor from last year was correct, even if putting their comment in the body of the article was an odd way to voice their opinion. A pitch-class set is a group of specific pitch classes which does not necessarily include pitch-class zero. By contrast, a set class (which is shorthand for "pitch-class set class") is the most compact way of enumerating the intervallic relationships in a pitch-class set, regardless of transposition or inversion. For example, [1,3,5] and [2,4,6] are DIFFERENT pitch-class sets. They contain different pitch-classes. But both correspond to set class [0,2,4]. This article is a list of those set classes. A list of all possible pitch-class sets would be substantially longer, including as it would every possible transposition and inversion for each set class. This is the standard usage of the terms. One of the standard textbooks on the topic, Straus's "Introduction to Post-Tonal Theory" goes into a lot more detail.[4] For an online reference, you can consult Moseley and Lavengood's chapter in Open Music Theory.[5] For the time being, I'm proposing moving this page to "List of set classes", and adding a redirect from "List of pitch-class sets" to that page. If someone were feeling ambitious, an ACTUAL list of pitch-class sets could be created, but I'm sure not volunteering. :) PianoDan (talk) 02:47, 6 September 2022 (UTC) PianoDan (talk) 02:54, 6 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)Philippine drug war → ? – "Philippine drug war" is not the WP:COMMONNAME. Sources either describes this campaign as a "war on drugs" or a "drug war" (without the adjective "Philippine", and if they do add a modifier it is "Philippines' "drug war"). Its also occasionally called as "Duterte's Drug War". Also there is uncertainty on how current President Bongbong Marcos would approach this campaign so its difficult to determine the end of the "Philippine drug war" since the country has always been launching campaigns against illegal drugs even before Duterte. Though admittedly minus the notoriety of Oplan Tokhang. Marcos is unlikely to explicitly state to end the drug war and announced a policy shift (PNA) I suggest renaming this article to (but not limited to): *Philippine war on drugs (2016–2022) *War on drugs of Rodrigo Duterte (2016–2022) Hariboneagle927 (talk) 09:48, 14 August 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 12:39, 21 August 2022 (UTC)— Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 17:06, 28 August 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 22:50, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)Ivanenko–Landau–Kähler equationDirac–Kähler equation – Me and Sunlitsky were debating what the name of this article should be. I would argue for "Dirac–Kähler equation" on the basis that it seems to be the more widely used term (it was the original name for this article when I wrote it), while Sunlitsky makes a good point for "Ivanenko–Landau–Kähler equation" on the basis that that gives the correct attribution. Some community input here would be useful: what is the general Wikipedia convention on the title name concerning attribution vs most common name. My reasoning for saying that "Dirac–Kähler equation" is the more common name since when I was researching for this article, I saw it much more (although this is a slightly subjective argument); more importantly an arXiv search for it returns 13 hits, while for "Ivanenko–Landau–Kähler equation" only 2, so it seems, on first glace, to be more common in academic research as well. OpenScience709 (talk) 20:08, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)Reese's 150Kansas Lottery 150 – This ARCA Menards Series race is this weekend. It used to have the Kansas Lottery as its title sponsor and they are coming back this year as the race's title sponsor. Because the article used to have the title of "Kansas Lottery 150", that title is redirected to the article's current title (Reese's 150) and the article title now needs to be switched back to Kansas Lottery 150 over the redirect. Articles about NASCAR and ARCA races are usually named according to the race's title sponsor. I previously put in a request for this on August 19 and it hasn't been moved yet. Cavanaughs (talk) 16:59, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)BDI BridgeElm Park Bridge – It looks like the official name is "Elm Park Bridge" while the alternate name is "BDI Bridge" - it even says as much in the introduction of the article. I'm wondering if the official name should be used as the article title (Elm Park Bridge) with a redirect from the unofficial name, as opposed to the other way around? MuzikMachine (talk) 14:29, 29 August 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Favonian (talk) 14:59, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (Discuss)The Troubadour, London → ? – The name of the club is "Troubadour" and not "The Troubadour". I'm not sure why the original article was titled using The as "The" has nothing to do with the name of the historic music club and coffee house in London established in 1954. It is also very low in search engine results, well below Troubadour in LA even though they were were establised in 1957, 3 years later than Troubadour in London and their wiki page says that they copied the historic club in London even down to the typestyle in their building sign. 2601:188:CA80:E410:3199:B8BF:725:984A (talk) 15:00, 25 August 2022 (UTC) Nomination updated, originally requested a change to Troubadour but this is clearly not the primary topic. Other options discussed below. Primefac (talk) 08:16, 29 August 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 08:52, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Possibly incomplete requests

References

  1. ^ "Official site of Gmina Biała".
  2. ^ "Bulletin of Public Information of Biała City Council".
  3. ^ At https://bdl.stat.gov.pl/ (Statistics Poland database), teritorrial unit 1610014 representing the town is called Biała.
  4. ^ Straus, Joseph Nathan (2016). Introduction to post-tonal theory (4th ed.). New York. ISBN 0393938832.
  5. ^ Moseley, Brian; Lavengood, Megan (1 July 2021). "Set Class and Prime Form". Online Music Theory. Retrieved 6 September 2022.

See also