Closing instructions  | This page has a backlog that requires the attention of one or more administrators.
This notice is automatically updated by RFC bot (talk) and will no longer be displayed when the backlog is cleared | Requested moves is a place for requesting the retitling of an article, a template, or a page in the Wikipedia namespace. Any logged-in user who has been registered for more than four days and has made at least ten edits can use the [move] tab located at the top of each page to perform simple moves (see Help:Moving a page). Unregistered users and users not yet confirmed may request moves here. Administrator help is required in some situations, such moves can also be listed here. In some situations the appropriateness of a move may be under dispute, and discussion is necessary in order to reach a consensus. There is no obligation to list such move requests here; discussions of page moves can always be carried out at the article's talk page without adding an entry. This page may be seen as a place to advertise move debates that would benefit from wider community input, or for users to request assistance from administrators in moving pages. Most move requests are processed by a handful of regular contributors who are familiar with naming conventions, nonbinding precedents, and page moving procedures. Two pages often cited during move discussions, which you might want to familiarize yourself with before making your request, are our naming convention regarding primary topics and our guideline on using common English names. Requests are generally processed after seven days, although backlogs of a few days develop occasionally. If there is a clear consensus after this time, the request will be closed and acted upon. If not, the closer may choose to re-list the request to allow time for consensus to develop, or close it as "no consensus". The processes involved in closing requests, performing moves and necessary tidying tasks when a move is performed can be viewed at closing instructions. [edit] Processes beyond the scope of this page Separate processes exist for moving certain types of pages, and for changes other than page moves: [edit] Requesting uncontroversial moves If the move you are suggesting is uncontroversial and technically possible, please feel free to move the page yourself. If you cannot move the page yourself, then request it below. Moves are possible (for registered users with accounts over four days old and ten edits) when the desired name is a red link, or in cases where the target is a simple redirect—a redirect to the current title, with no prior versions in its edit history, and the page not move-protected. After moving a page, update its text to reflect the new title. If the only obstacle to an uncontroversial move is a navigation aid (e.g., a redirect or an unnecessary disambiguation page with a minor edit history), the template {{db-move}} can be used instead to have that page deleted under criterion for speedy deletion G6. Note that this template requires two parameters: {{db-move|page to be moved here|reason for move}}. If there has been any past debate about the best title for the page, or if anyone could reasonably disagree with the move, then treat it as controversial. Otherwise, post your request in the uncontroversial requests section of this page. If the page has recently been moved without discussion, then you may revert the move and initiate a discussion of the move on the talk page of the article. (See also: Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle.) If this reversion requires administrator assistance, it is also eligible to be listed here. When listing this kind of request, please include a link showing that you have attempted to discuss the page move first. [edit] Requesting potentially controversial moves [edit] Requesting a single page move Create a section at the bottom of the talk page of the page you have requested to be moved. It should be formatted like this: == Requested move == {{subst:move|NewName}} A short reason for page name change. --~~~~ The name of the section does not necessarily need to be "Requested move", though it is suggested. "NewName" is what you want the new name of the page to be. This can also be done by clicking the "new section" tab on the talk page and inserting {{subst:RMtalk|Proposed new name|Reason for move.}} Note that the Subject/headline should be left blank, as the heading, Requested move, is created along with a location for survey and discussion by this template, and that the template must be substituted. The template will also automatically include your signature. [edit] Requesting multiple page moves On one of the talk pages of the affected articles, create a request and format it as below. The following is an example for three pages: == Requested move == {{movereq
| multiple = yes
| current1 = Current title of page 1
| new1 = New title for page 1
| current2 = Current title of page 2
| new2 = New title for page 2
| current3 = New title for page 3
| new3 = New title for page 3
}} [[FirstPage]] → [[NewFirstPage]] — A short reason for page name changes. --~~~~ * [[SecondPage]] → [[NewSecondPage]] * [[ThirdPage]] → [[NewThirdPage]] [edit] Uncontroversial requests Only list proposals here that are clearly uncontroversial but require assistance from an administrator or confirmed user (for example, spelling and capitalization fixes). Do not list a proposed page move in this section if there is any reasonable possibility that it could be opposed by anyone. Please list new requests at the bottom of the list in this section and use {{subst:RMassist|Old page name|Requested name|Reason for move}} rather than copying previous entries. The template will automatically insert a bullet and 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 Contested requests section below. [edit] Contested requests With the exception of a brief description of the problem or objection to the move proposal, please do not discuss move proposals here. If you support a contested move proposal, please consider following the instructions above to add the proposed page move to the "Other proposals" section below by substituting the {{move}} template on the article's talk page. Proposals that remain here after seven days will be removed. [edit] Current discussions  | There is no need to edit this list manually; a bot will automatically update the page soon after the {{subst:move}} template is added to the discussion on the relevant talk page. The entry is removed automatically when the discussion is closed.
To make a change to an entry, make the change on the linked talk page. | This list is also available in a page-link-first format. [edit] November 09, 2009 [edit] November 08, 2009 [edit] November 07, 2009 - (Discuss) — Chilean Climbing Mouse → Irenomys — - As explained at length here, "common names" for animals such as this are not really in common use, and the articles should therefore be located at the scientific names. Usage of the genus name as the article title for a genus with a single species follows established practice in articles like Andrewsarchus, Lundomys, and Pseudoryzomys. Ucucha 02:34, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Formation (stratigraphy) → Geological formation — - I think that this article should be moved back to its previous name, "geological formation". It cannot simply be called "formation" because of all the other definitions of the word ("formation" is a disambiguation page). I think that it is usually preferable to have a two word article title than a one word title with a disambiguation word in parentheses. Also, I think that "geological formation" should be used instead of "geologic formation" because it is the more common form of the term. It is not my first choice, or even my second, but even "stratigraphic formation" would be a preferable name for the article. -- Kjkolb (talk) 07:19, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Cornerstone (band) → Cornerstone (Danish band) — [There are two bands using the name "Cornerstone", this danish band, and an austrian band as well (who has protected the name as trademark), so people shouldn't get confused, so I'd suggest to change the name of this band to Cornerstone (Danish band)] --Morrissey1976 (talk) 09:18, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Muzachia → Myzeqeja — - [Myzeqeja is Albanian and English most common usage, vs. the obscure and misleading Musachia, a noble Albanian family in the XV-XVI centuries.] --Guildenrich (talk) 15:23, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Kingdom Hearts → Kingdom Hearts (video game) — Since the launch of the first game Kingdom Hearts has developed into a wide series consisting of numerous games, novels as well as mangas. Thus Kingdom Hearts is now more commonly referred to as a series rather than as simply the first game. The move is also supported by the disambiguation section of the naming conventions for the series. Hence the first game should be moved to Kingdom Hearts (video game) and the series page should be moved to Kingdom Hearts. An example of how this has been done before is that Final Fantasy directs to the series page while the first game, Final Fantasy is under Final Fantasy (video game) --KiasuKiasiMan (talk) 16:28, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] November 06, 2009 - (Discuss) — Spam (food) → SPAM (food) — SPAM is the proper name (registered trademark) of the Hormel meat product. The references on the page (and disambiguation page) have been updated to reflect this. — BrianMakesEdits (talk) 07:07, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Gay community → LGBT community — - The name "gay community" is ambiguous, as it can mean any one of "LGBT community", "gay men and lesbians community", or "gay men community". This article is about the LGBT community, so it should be under that title for clarity. --Alynna (talk) 13:55, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Template:User py → Template:User pyt — I want to create a template page for the userbox below, and since PY is the abreviation for Paraguay I'd like to request to move this template to another name as to leave "User PY" for the Paraguayan userbox. Veritiel (talk) 19:04, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Yiddish language → Yiddish — - As with several other languages like Hindi and Latin, the term "Yiddish" is ubiquitous in the English-speaking world with the language. The term literally just means "Jewish" in German, and the people who speak the language are commonly known as Ashkenazi Jews or the "Ashkenazim" in English. They are never referred to as Yiddish. This distinguishes the language from others like "German", whose name can pertain to a people and country as well as the language. A google search for "Yiddish" returns hits related solely related to the language. --84.92.117.93 (talk) 22:12, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] November 05, 2009 - (Discuss) — Jalón → Xaló — * It's the official, local and historically correct name. The use in local English media, such as radio, seems to use both names equally. Out of respect for the people of the town, we should use the proper name. — Espencat (talk) 08:51, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Tajiks of Xinjiang → Tajiks in China — I propose moving the article Tajiks in Xinjiang to Tajiks in China. This is the only article about minority groups in China that uses the name of the province rather than the country in the article title. For other examples see Mongols_in_China, Koreans_in_China, Vietnamese_people_in_China, and Russians_in_China. Very few other articles about minority groups would use a province or state versus a country in the name. Moreover, this page’s original title was Tajiks in China and was changed to Pamiris in China by a user who eventually had their account permanently blocked (see:User_talk:Banigul). The move was in violation of Wikipedia move protocol in that there was neither a discussion on the talk page nor was there a request to move the page. This page was then moved again without a request or discussion from Plateau Tajiks to Pamiri people in China, then to Mountain Tajik people, and finally Tajiks in Xinjiang. Within the article the term Tajik has been replaced by Pamiri by a single editor and there is currently an open dispute discussion the talk page. In my opinion, the term Tajik is more appropriate than Pamiri because the official name of the minority group in China is Tajik, virtually all of the literature with a very small number of exceptions refers to this group as Tajik, and the Ethnic groups in China page refers to the group as Tajiks, as does the map of ethnolinguistic groups in China. David Straub (talk) 14:17, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Mexican lottery → Lotería — - Restore article to original, more accurate and more familiar name. The move made to Mexican Lottery was made without discussion and is incorrect. --Knulclunk (talk) 15:42, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Wallingford → Wallingford, Oxfordshire — The small town in England is not the primary topic for the term "Wallingford". A general web search shows a mix of hits from various topics including the town in Connecticut, the town in Vermont, a neighborhood in Seattle, and a bicycle company. Google News and Google Books shows a mix between various people's names and the town in Connecticut. Google Scholar shows mainly people's names. The unqualified Wallingford should be a disambiguation page since the English town is not the primary topic and so should not be at the base name when there are other topics known as Wallingford that are at least as significant as the English town. --Polaron | Talk 16:09, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] November 04, 2009 [edit] November 03, 2009 - (Discuss) — European Hippopotamus → Hippopotamus antiquus — Looking at the usage of the "common name" vrs the binomial shows that Hippopotamus antiquus is the much preferred name to refer to this species. "European hippopotamus" returns ~2,300 google hits and only returns three hits on goggle scholar. Hippopotamus antiquus returns over 90 google scholar hits and over 3,690 google hits. --Kevmin (talk) 03:57, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — User:BirchRiver → Aquarian Calendar — - [I would like this to be moved to be a live article. I asked if my references on it were good enough and no one answered so I might as well try to make it live and see if it gets deleted. Thanks.] --BirchRiver (talk) 04:56, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Critic → Criticism — - [The Critic article covers criticism in general which has a much broader meaning than critic. There is also much more that can be said about the psychology of criticism and nitpicking.]--Penbat (talk) 09:45, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — User:Nikiandi/Fotonovela → Fotonovela — - [This page should be listed as Fotonovela because the redirect for "Fotonovela" takes you to Fumetti, the Italian word for comics, which is not an accurate description of the Hispanic/Latino term, fotonovela, but rather a broad definition that covers several formats of the comics media from the Italian perspective. A fotonovela is a comic-type format that uses photographs of people to tell a story. This page explains just the fotonovela format.] --Nikiandi (talk) 19:12, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] November 02, 2009 - (Discuss) — Phil&teds (strollers) → Phil&teds — - There is no reason to have the disambiguation "(stroller)" in the page name, except to circumvent the previous protection of the old name, which has had pages deleted twice per WP:CSD#G11 (blatant advertising). I cannot see the former versions, but it seems to me that this page is not blatant advertising, as it is not particularly effusive and does cite reliable sources. But in either case, this page needs attention. If this page is just like those that have been deleted, then it should be deleted. If it isn't, then it should be moved to the proper name. --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 15:55, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Backlog - (Discuss) — To Aru Majutsu no Index → Toaru Majutsu no Index — - On the debate of whether とある in the title should be "Toaru" or "To Aru," the article has settled on "To Aru" on the assumption that they are two separate words. Indeed, one notices a similarity in the definition of "とある" and "ある" (aru), however, there are two issues with "to aru." (A) both Daijisen [9] and Daijirin [10] give a single entry for "とある", and (B) what would "To" mean if the pronunciation was a separate word? It wouldn't be "and," or any other definition listed at wiktionary. "Toaru" spelling is not uncommon, however one reason I am putting this up for discussion is because the article title has been "To Aru" for a long time now. --Tokek (talk) 16:21, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — WWE One Night Stand → WWE Extreme Rules — - The 2010 Extreme Rules event has just been announced by WWE, more or less confirming that the "One Night Stand" name has been phased out that "Extreme Rules" name is here to stay. The page has been move protected due to move wars a few months ago, but this should finally put this situation to rest. -- Θakster 20:55, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Carlos Zambrano (baseball) → Carlos Zambrano — - There was no reason for this page to be moved from its original location. Carlos Zambrano, the pitcher, is by far the most well-known of the two Carlos Zambranos that have articles on en.wiki. This is further evidenced by the fact that Carlos Zambrano redirects to this page, proving that the disambiguator is totally unnecessary. The hatnote at the top of the article page is fully enough to point people in the right direction if they arrive here accidentally. --KV5 (Talk • Phils) 12:02, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — New Order (France) → Ordre Nouveau — - All political organisations of this name are best known in the English-speaking world as Ordre Nouveau, not by the English translation. Ordre Nouveau already redirects here, and has the benefit that it doesn't need to be disambiguated. --84.92.117.93 (talk) 22:32, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Whiz Kids (disambiguation) → Whiz Kids — I don't believe that the Ford executives are so much more notable than the other items listed on this page to qualify outright as the most common article at this title per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:NAME. The 1950 Philadelphia Phillies, subject of the current redlink Whiz Kids (baseball), which is an article that's about to be created, get more Google hits under "Whiz Kids" than the auto executives, who I'd never heard of until looking for Whiz Kids. Thus, I believe that the "Whiz Kids" article should be the disambiguation page branching out to other locations and that the current Whiz Kids article be moved to a parenthetical disambiguator like (executives) or (Ford). -KV5 (Talk • Phils) 19:12, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — This Place is Death → This Place Is Death — - I wish I had noticed this discussion when it was happening last time. Capitalizing "is" IS standard. "Is" is a verb and verbs are capitalized in titles. The shortness of it is completely irrelevent. There are plenty of two letter words that get capitalized. As can be seen in that last link though, there are some styles that choose to capitalize all verbs EXCEPT forms of "to be" (i.e. "be", "am", "is", "are", "was", "were", "been"). I don't understand this at all personally, the lower case looks really wrong to my eyes, but both happen. However Wikipedia's manual of style tells us to use the first one where forms of "to be" ARE capitalized. Even if we wanted to go with the style ABC uses instead (which we're not supposed to), they aren't even consistent on the issue. The press releases for "Dead Is Dead" and "This Place Is Death" both have a lower case "is", however the release for "Tricia Tanaka Is Dead" has a capital "is", and on ABC's own episode guide they use a capital "is" for all three. --DocNox (talk) 23:52, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Thraco-Roman → Daco-Roman — "Articles are normally titled using the most common English-language name of the person or thing that is the subject of the article. In determining what this name is, we follow the usage of reliable sources, such as those used as references for the article." The article describes the early stage of the history of the Romanian people and uses the "Thraco-Roman" expression. However, the article itself refers to the fact that it was only Ovid Densusianu who used this name for the ancestors of the Romanians around 1900. In modern works, one can only find one which uses this expression, but not in connection with the early Romanians, but in connection with a Roman village in Bulgaria (the other search results do not contain the expression "Thraco-Roman", but only the separate words "Thraco" and "Roman") [[11]]. In the context of the arcticle, modern works exclusively use the "Daco-Roman" expression [[12]], for example:*Grumeza, Ion: Dacia: Land of Transylvania, Cornerstone of Ancient Eastern Europe (Hamilton Books, 2009, ISBN 978-0-7618-4465-5)*Oltean, Ioana A.: Dacia: Landscape, Colonisation, Romanisation (Routledge, 2007,ISBN 978-0-415-41252-0)*Parry, Ken – Melling, David J. – Brady, Dimitry – Healey, John F. (Editors): The Blackwell Dictionary of Eastern Christianity (Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2001, ISBN 0-631-18966-1)*Bradshaw, Michael J. – White, George W.: Contemporary World Regional Geography: Global Connections, Local Voices (The McGraw Hill Companies, 2004, ISBN 0-07-254975-0)*Pop, Ioan Aurel: Romanians and Romania: A Brief History (Columbia University Press, 1999, ISBN 0-88033-440-1)Borsoka (talk) 04:52, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Carabins → Montreal Carabins — *Under WP:COMMONNAME University sports teams are listed as the University's short name (Montreal) and their nickname (Carabins). Therefore, this page should move to Montreal Carabins and the redirect should be Carabins, not the other way around --Shootmaster 44 (talk) 05:23, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Geestland → Geest — - Part of a double move. Geest is the correct English geographical term. The current Geest page will be moved to Geest (disambiguation) --Bermicourt (talk) 08:26, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Cambyses of Anshan → Cambyses I — - The name "Cambyses of Anshan" is not used anywhere. And since "Cambyses I" is not ambiguous, and the only one with this name I propose this move. Also using google books test makes sure that Cambyses I is the correct name. --Xashaiar (talk) 12:59, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Cambyses of Persia → Cambyses II — - The name "Cambyses of Persia" is not used anywhere. Making such title would be justified if "Cambyses II" was ambiguous and used by another person with the same notability. This is not the case and he is the only one with this name and notability. I propose this move. Also using google books test makes sure that Cambyses II is the correct name and some Encyclopaedias like Britannica ([13]) or Dictionaries, or more specialised works like The Cambridge History series, show that "Cambyses II" is unambiguous, unique among notable people, and correct and widely use. --Xashaiar (talk) 12:59, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Cyrus of Anshan → Cyrus I — - The name "Cyrus of Anshan" is not used anywhere. And since "Cyrus I" is not ambiguous, and the only one with this name I propose this move. Also using google books test makes sure that Cyrus I is the correct name. Moreover using the usual Encyclopaedias like Britannica (Cyrus I as title and "king of Persia" as subtitle) and Iranica, and the Cambridge History series makes sure the name "Cyrus I" is correct and unambiguous. Xashaiar (talk) 13:25, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Psychro → Psychro Cave — Psychro is a village near the cave, so a page with this name alone should be about the village. I think that the cave is better known as Dhiktean, Diktaean or Dictean cave, but I admit that that title could have been confused with the mythological Dictean cave.] --Stegop (talk) 20:05, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Bohm interpretation → de Broglie-Bohm theory — After reading this discussion, it looks like the name "de Broglie-Bohm theory" is most accepted among the discussion participants. But because this was such an utterly nuanced debate, I want to make sure that this is the title you want. @harej 04:34, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
- (Discuss) — Persecution of Falun Gong → Supression of Falun Gong — Three reasons. Firstly, it is evident that the subject covered in the article deal with both the media campaign and the alleged torture, mistreatment etc. Much of this article does not describe "persecution" in and of itself, but rather what the Chinese regime did to suppress the movement; the 'persecution' of the practitioners was one of the means. Secondly, the title is not grammatically sound. Falun Gong practitioners are the subjects of persecution, not Falun Gong; people get persecuted, not movements. Movements are suppressed. Concerns for neutrality of the title is also worth note. --Colipon+(Talk) 22:20, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
|
