stringtranslate.com

Wikipedia:Requested moves

Click here to purge this page
Shortcuts
  • WP:RM
  • WP:REQMOVE

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:

Requests are generally processed after seven days. If consensus to move the page is reached at or after this time, a reviewer will carry out the request. 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 for consensus to develop, or the discussion may be 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
  • WP:NOTRM
  • WP:RMNOT

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

Undiscussed moves

Shortcuts
  • WP:RMUM
  • WP:BOLDMOVE

Autoconfirmed editors may move a page without discussion if all of the following apply:

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 mayrequest 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

Shortcuts
  • WP:RM#T
  • WP:RM#TR
  • WP:RM#TM
  • WP:RM#SPEEDY
Shortcuts
  • WP:RM/TR
  • WP:RMTR

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:..."

Technical requests

Uncontroversial technical requests

Requests to revert undiscussed moves

Contested technical requests

@Gayviewmahat moved to contested for now until we can determine the actual common name ASUKITE 15:18, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, we follow the common name for titles, not necessarily the official name, per WP:NAMECHANGES, we can accept modern reliable, independent sources documenting the name change, but we will need to see such sources first. That said, "Atolls" is plural for Atoll, which is the primary topic in this case, so any move to "Atolls" would need to be disambiguated to something such as Atolls (marketing company). ASUKITE 13:53, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ben01807 moved to contested until we can find sources for name change & choose a disambiguated title ASUKITE 13:54, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's also no chance that Atoll isn't the primary topic here. 162 etc. (talk) 15:51, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mb2437 See MOS:ACROTITLE and WP:NATDIS. C F A 💬 16:56, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder if Ranger tab should be moved instead so both words are capitalized in that title, because both of these military awards appear to be proper terms in which title case should be used. Also, both articles are currently written as if that is the case, with the title at the top of the Ranger tab article being the only exception. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 20:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for looking at this, Doomsdayer. When I first stumbled across this, I was irritiated by the "Tab" on these things, as it seemed another case of overcapitalization, but I looked around to see if it wasn't exactly that: a special, proper noun. Tabs of the United States Army used (already, before I started standardising the texts) a mixture. There was some inconclusive mention on the Talk of that article, but otherwise, I haven't found any discussion, just a bit of sloppiness.
For me, the deciding factor (apart from my understanding of English rules) was the use by the Army itself in the Wear and Appearance of Army Uniforms and Insignia document I linked to. I figure, if anybody can be expected to inappropriately overcapitalize words, it'd be the US military, but they consistently downcase not just "the tab" but "the airborne tab", e.g., at p.2 (even "airborne" is lowercase there). Also I find at [1] ("...awarded the Governor's Dozen tab...") and [2] (PDF's p.11, 4th-last paragraph "arctic tab").
Unfortunately, I've already gone ahead and made changes to article text as well as redirects (where I could) so as to unify the mix of usages contrary to Army/military usage. I didn't mean to throw a WP:FAIT situation at you, so I've stopped to see what you decide. If you think these changes might, in fact, be controversial, I can open up discussions on the (I think) four pages I've tweaked. If folks don't like what I've done, I'll go around with my reverting hat on (I mean my Reverting Hat). — JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 21:06, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If various articles in this area are sloppy and inconsistent in capitalization, then we absolutely need you to clean everything up. Your efforts are appreciated. If anyone familiar with these precise military terms pops up here, we may be able to nail down whether these terms should all be in Title Case or Sentence case. Whatever the ultimate verdict, reverting some of your recent edits and moving some remaining page titles shouldn't be too difficult. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 12:49, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JohnFromPinckney Sounds like more expert input is needed here. Perhaps a post on WT:MILHIST would help. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 23:48, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@LesVisages The proper names of multi-word writing systems are typically capitalized (see Chữ Hán, Ol Onal, Pahawh Hmong, Ersu Shaba script, etc.) --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 23:48, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator needed

Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves

Shortcuts
  • WP:RM#CM
  • WP:PCM

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

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

Shortcut
  • WP:RSPM

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

{{subst:requested move|New name|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 New name 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 22 September 2024" 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

Shortcut
  • WP:RMPM

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 with current1 set to Wikipedia and current2 set to Wiki. The discussion for all affected articles is held on the talk page of the article where the template is placed (Talk:Wikipedia). Do not sign the request with ~~~~, since the template does this automatically (so if you sign it yourself there will be two copies of your signature at the end of the request). Do not skip pairs of numbers.

RMCD bot automatically places a notice section on the talk page of all pages that are included in your request except the one hosting the discussion, to call attention to the move discussion that is in progress and to suggest that all discussion for all of the pages included in the request should take place at that one hosting location.

For multi-move discussions hosted on a page which is itself proposed to be moved, it is not necessary to include the |current1=Current title of page 1 for the page hosting the discussion, as its current title can be inferred automatically. Occasionally the discussions for significant multi-move requests may be hosted on WikiProject talk pages or other pages in Project namespace, in which case it is necessary to include |current1= to indicate the first article to be moved.

Request all associated moves explicitly

Shortcut
  • WP:EXPLICIT

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.

If a disambiguation page is in the way of a move, the request may be completed as proposing to add (disambiguation).

Template usage examples and notes


Commenting on a requested move

Shortcut
  • WP:RMCOMMENT

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 participating, please consider the following:

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

Shortcut
  • WP:RMRELIST

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:RM relist}}, 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 appears on the list on this page.
  2. ^ Despite this, discussions are occasionally relisted more than once.

Current discussions

Shortcut
  • WP:RM#C
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. 73 discussions have been relisted.

September 22, 2024

References

  1. ^
    • Twitchett, Denis Crispin; Fairbank, John King, eds. (1983) [1978]. Republican China, 1912–1949 (Part 1). Vol. 12. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-23541-9.
    • Fairbank, John King; Feuerwerker, Albert, eds. (1986) [1978]. Republican China, 1912–1949 (Part 2). The Cambridge History of China. Vol. 13. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-24338-4.
    • Gao, James Zheng (2009). Historical Dictionary of Modern China (1800-1949). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow. ISBN 0-8108-4930-5.
Remsense ‥ 论 00:47, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 21, 2024

September 20, 2024

September 19, 2024

September 18, 2024

September 17, 2024

September 16, 2024

September 15, 2024

Elapsed listings

Shortcut
  • WP:RME

Backlog

Shortcut
  • WP:RMB

From meta:Research:Wikipedia clickstream: :clickstream-enwiki-2024-05.tsv:  :* Sloboda Sloboda_Ukraine link 28  :* Sloboda Sloboda_(disambiguation) link 12  :* Sloboda Boyar link 12  :* total: 52 to 3 identified destinations :clickstream-enwiki-2024-06.tsv:  :* Sloboda Sloboda_Ukraine link 32  :* Sloboda Sloboda_(disambiguation) link 12  :* Sloboda Boyar link 12  :* total: 56 to 3 identified destinations :clickstream-enwiki-2024-07.tsv:  :* Sloboda Sloboda_(disambiguation) link 17  :* Sloboda Sloboda_Ukraine link 16  :* Sloboda Boyar link 13  :* total: 46 to 3 identified destinations Even if we're unsure, I say we should move it and then do the same measurements again later, and see if reader behavior indicates we need to keep or revert. -- Joy (talk) 08:14, 24 August 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 07:10, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Malformed requests

Possibly incomplete requests

References

  1. ^ "Eryholme–Richmond branch line". TriplyDB: The Network Effect for Your Data. Retrieved 13 September 2024.
  2. ^ "A Walk to Easby Abbey » Two Dogs and an Awning". Two Dogs and an Awning. 2 October 2015. Retrieved 13 September 2024.
  3. ^ Hoole, Kenneth (1985). Railway stations of the North East. Newton Abbot: David and Charles. p. 65. ISBN 0-7153-8527-5.
  4. ^ Body, Geoffrey (1989). Railways of the Eastern Region volume 2. Wellingborough: Patrick Stephens. p. 68. ISBN 1-85260-072-1.
  5. ^ Haigh, A. (1979). Yorkshire railways: including Cleveland and Humberside. Clapham: Dalesman Books. p. 24. ISBN 0-85206-553-1.
  6. ^ Young, Alan (2015). Lost stations of Yorkshire; the North and East Ridings. Kettering: Silver Link. p. 33. ISBN 978-1-85794-453-2.
  7. ^ Hoole, Kenneth (1985). Railway stations of the North East. Newton Abbot: David and Charles. p. 48. ISBN 0-7153-8527-5.
  8. ^ Suggitt, Gordon (2007). Lost railways of North and East Yorkshire. Newbury: Countryside Books. p. 46. ISBN 978-1-85306-918-5.
  9. ^ Burgess, Neil (2011). The Lost Railway's of Yorkshire's North Riding. Catrine: Stenlake. p. 13. ISBN 9781840335552.
  10. ^ Blakemore, Michael (2005). Railways of the Yorkshire Dales. Ilkley: Great Northern. p. 54. ISBN 1-905080-03-4.
  11. ^ "RID mileages". railwaycodes.org.uk. Retrieved 13 September 2024.
  12. ^ a b Lloyd, Chris (1 July 2017). "90 years ago three million people headed north by rail to witness one of the biggest events of the year - a total eclipse of the sun". The Northern Echo. Retrieved 13 September 2024.
  13. ^ Shannon, Paul (2023). Branch Line Britain. Barnsley: Pen & Sword. p. 127. ISBN 978-1-39908-990-6.
  14. ^ "North Eastern Railway Civil Engineering Drawings List" (PDF). railwaymuseum.org.uk. Retrieved 13 September 2024. Various pages - use the search function for Richmond
  15. ^ "List of North Yorkshire & North Riding plans of railway lines..." (PDF). archivesunlocked.northyorks.gov.uk. p. 5. Retrieved 13 September 2024.
  16. ^ "Darlington-Richmond Line (Closure) Volume 774: debated on Wednesday 4 December 1968". hansard.parliament.uk. Retrieved 13 September 2024.

See also

The current Wikipedia time is:
05:52, Sunday, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
To update time purge the cache!