Wiki143:Requested moves

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

Template:Short description

  1. REDIRECT Template:Protection padlock

Template:Rcat shell Script error: No such module "Protection banner".

Script error: No such module "For". Script error: No such module "redirect hatnote". Script error: No such module "For".

Script error: No such module "Purge".

Script error: No such module "Template wrapper".

Script error: No such module "Shortcut". Requested moves is a process for requesting the retitling (moving) of an article, template, or project page on Wikipedia. For information on retitling files, categories, and other items, see § When not to use this page.

Script error: No such module "anchor". Before moving a page or requesting a move, please review the article titling policy and the guidelines on primary topics.

Any autoconfirmed user can move a page using the "Move" option in the editing toolbar; see how to move a page for more information. If you have no reason to expect a dispute concerning a move, be bold and move the page. However, it may not always be possible or desirable to do this:

  • Technical reasons may prevent a move; for example, a page may already exist at the target title and require deletion, or the page may be protected from moves. In such cases, see [[../#TR|§ 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 [[../#CM|§ Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves]]. The requested moves process is not mandatory, and sometimes an informal discussion at the article's talk page can help reach consensus.
  • A page should not be moved and a new move discussion should not be opened when there is already an open move request on a talk page. Instead, please participate in the open discussion.
  • Unregistered and new (not yet autoconfirmed) users are unable to move pages.

Requests are typically processed after seven days. If consensus supports the move at or after this time, a reviewer will perform it. If there is a consensus not to move the page, the request will be closed as "not moved". When consensus remains unclear, the request may be relisted to allow more time, or closed as "no consensus". See Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions for more details on the process.

Wikipedia:Move review can be used to contest the outcome of a move request as long as all steps are followed. If a discussion on the closer's talk page does not resolve an issue, then a move review will evaluate the close of the move discussion to determine whether or not the contested close was reasonable and consistent with the spirit and intent of common practice, policies, and guidelines.

When not to use this page

Script error: No such module "Shortcut". Separate processes exist for moving certain types of pages, and for changes other than page moves:

Undiscussed moves

Script error: No such module "Shortcut". Autoconfirmed editors may move a page without discussion if all of the following apply:

  • No article exists at the new target title;
  • There has been no previous discussion about the title of the page that expressed any objection to a new title; and
  • It seems unlikely that anyone would reasonably disagree with the move.

If you disagree with a prior bold move, and the new title has not been in place for a long time, you may revert the move yourself. If you cannot revert the move for technical reasons, then you may [[../#Requesting technical moves|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 [[../#CM|§ Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves]].

Requesting technical moves

Wiki143:Requested moves/Technical requests/InstructionsWiki143:Requested moves/Technical requests

Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves

Wiki143:Requested moves/Controversial

Commenting on a requested move

Script error: No such module "Shortcut". 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 Template:Section link.

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.
  • Script error: No such module "anchor".Nomination already implies that the nominator supports the name change, and nominators should refrain from repeating this recommendation on a separate bulleted line.Template:Efn
  • 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

Script error: No such module "anchor". Script error: No such module "Shortcut". 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.Template:Efn 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 Template:Tlxs, 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 Template:Tl. Banners placed at the top of the talk page hosting the move request can often be used to identify WikiProjects suitable for notification.

Notes

Template:Notelist

Current discussions

Script error: No such module "Shortcut".

This section lists all requests filed or identified as potentially controversial which are currently under discussion.

Script error: No such module "Message box".

This list is also available in a page-link-first format and in table format. 152 discussions have been relisted.

July 1, 2025

  • (Discuss) – Mario → Mario (character)Mario (character) – Per the recent move from Luigi to Luigi (character), I am now suggesting the same be done to Mario. As with Luigi, in spite of easily being the most well-known Mario, the name is very common in real life (in fact the character Mario was named after a real person), to the point that the real life given name should take precedence. Specific disambiguation of (character), (Nintendo), etc. could be done later, but at the moment we should make Mario's page name consistent with Luigi's. Unnamed anon (talk) 20:23, 1 July 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Luton Airport Parkway station → Luton Airport Parkway railway stationLuton Airport Parkway railway station – Since the move is being contested, it's time for a full move discussion in the interest of getting consensus from the community :-) "[place] railway station" has become the standard naming convention for rail stations in the UK, with the obvious exception of London Underground stops. The only other article I'm aware of which goes against this convention is East Croydon station (there may be others that I don't know about, happy to be corrected), which makes sense as it is an interchange with bus transportation. However, Luton Airport Parkway is exclusively rail, even if DART is light rail. I'm proposing either of the following for the purposes of both naming conventions, and reader clarity: * Rename Luton Airport Parkway station to Luton Airport Parkway railway station, in accordance with convention due to it being a purely rail station or * Rename Luton Airport Parkway station to Luton Airport Parkway Interchange (open to suggestions on other/better options) along with other similar interchanges, like East Croydon - distinctly marking such articles as transport interchanges and not just "station". Danners430 (talk) 09:39, 24 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. CoconutOctopus talk 16:52, 1 July 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Meghna Division → Cumilla DivisionCumilla Division –
    I propose that the page Meghna Division be moved to Cumilla Division. On 17 December 2024, the Public Administration Reform Commission of the interim government officially recommended naming the new administrative division “Cumilla Division” page 191 and this has become the de facto designation. Sheikh Hasina’s original proposal to name the division “Meghna Division” is no longer under consideration following her ouster. Since “Meghna Division” no longer reflects the current official nomenclature, retitling the article will ensure accuracy and consistency with government usage. Tausheef Hassan (talk) 05:43, 10 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Jeffrey34555 (talk) 14:37, 17 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. CoconutOctopus talk 16:11, 24 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. CoconutOctopus talk 16:41, 1 July 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Trainwreck: Woodstock '99 → Trainwreck (TV series) – As the article itself says, it's become a series, now covering the likes of Astroworld, American Apparel, Project X, the Poop Cruise, and Rob Ford. I believe this article should be expanded to include all entries to date, with the next one coming July 8. (I'm unsure whether "film series" or "TV series" is more appropriate, since at least one is movie-length.) MannysMyName (talk) 15:21, 1 July 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Kirisuto no Haka → Tomb of Christ (Japan) – This article's current title uses the monument's Japanese name (romanised) instead of an English translation. I can't easily find an English source which refers to it as Kirisuto no Haka, rather, most tend to use translations such as "Christ's Grave," "the Grave of Jesus Christ," or "the Tomb of Christ." Similar translations are also reflected on the area's local signage. To best honour the spirit of WP:UE, I believe that the article should be renamed and moved to a space such as "Tomb of Christ (Japan)" — with the inclusion of "(Japan)" to remove ambiguity from other, similar monuments. ItsSwimm (talk) 10:45, 1 July 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Mossad infiltration of Iranian nuclear archive → Israeli infiltration of an Iranian nuclear archive – 1. Attributing the operation to Israel in the title is clearer for readers, specially for those not familiarised with the subject, and makes the article easier to find. In Wikipedia we most commonly use country demonyms rather than specific national organs for titling articles. See the articles at Category:Mossad, all articles but two including this one do not mention Mossad in the title. 2. "of Iranian nuclear archive" is not proper English. I propose using "an" but I am not opposed to other proposals. We could also use "the" or even flip the title somehow to avoid this awkward wording (from the top of my head, as an idea, "Iranian nuclear archive infiltration by Israel", though that's also weird). Noting that I started this RM over the second issue and only thought of the first as I was writing the RM. I don't have a particular preference so long as the next title employs proper grammar. Super Ψ Dro 21:21, 23 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Jeffrey34555 (talk) 03:16, 1 July 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Korea Train Express → KTXKTX – Seldomly would anyone in the world call these two services by their full name. Thus the article titles being KTX and SRT instead would be more appropriate, in my opinion.
    In previous discussion, there are people who said "There is another KTX that does not have its own article but appears notable", which I am not able to locate from internet search, but even if that is the case those can be resolved using disambiguation. C933103 (talk) 02:50, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

June 30, 2025

  • (Discuss) – Heart of Moldova Republican Party → Heart of Moldova PartyHeart of Moldova Party – WP:COMMONNAME and shorter. Party is not discussed in Google Scholar or Google Books. In regular Google results, -wikipedia "heart of moldova republican party" gives me 12 results (including 2 Wikipedia mirrors) while -wikipedia "heart of moldova party" gives me 9. But the party has barely ever been discussed in English. In Romanian, -wikipedia "Partidul Republican Inima Moldovei" gives me 71,300 results, while -wikipedia "Partidul Inima Moldovei" gives me 121,000. In Russian, -wikipedia "Республиканская Партия Сердце Молдовы" gives me 1,030 results while -wikipedia -"Республиканская Партия" "Партия Сердце Молдовы" (if I did that search right) gives me 3,820 results. It is not ideal to employ regular Google searches to determine the common name of a subject as results can vary depending on the location of the user. But it is not surprising if it is argued that sources most of the time do not employ the long formal name. I prefer having a shorter title and I believe it is backed by Wikipedia policy. I invite other users to give their opinion and do their own research. Super Ψ Dro 17:52, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Gaik Vartanyan → Gaik VartaneanGaik Vartanean – WP:COMMONNAME. Figure is not discussed in Google Scholar or Google Books. In a regular Google search, -wikipedia "Gaik Vartanyan" gives me 212 results, -wikipedia "Gaik Vartanian" gives me 3,240 and -wikipedia "Gaik Vartanean" gives me 22,000. While regular Google results can be unreliable as they can very depending on the location of the person, this is such a vast difference that I'm pretty sure the latter is the clear common name. All of these yield English-language results ([2] [3], [4] [5], [6] [7]), so while most results in Google are in Romanian, it doesn't seem like English-language sources follow a different spelling from them. This is also how this person presents himself in social media [8] [9] [10] and in his own party [11]. "Vartanyan" is closer to the native ethnic Armenian spelling, but it is clear this person is discussed more often in sources dealing with Moldova rather than Armenia. Super Ψ Dro 17:15, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

June 29, 2025

  • (Discuss) – Shaun Shui (disambiguation) → ? – Likely misplaced or malformed disambiguation page, given the number of redirects and small details capitalization present in the lead. However, this did raise my interest when it caught my attention and these three titles will likely need to be assessed for WP:SMALLDETAILS. I think a PTOPIC will need to be determined and then a disambiguator created for the remaining title. Chasing down the three of these with the respective redirects at different capitalization was a little confusing intially as I was browsing from WP:NPP. Bobby Cohn 🍁 (talk) 22:07, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – USNS Harvey Milk → ? – There's controversy over what the ship ought to be named on Wikipedia. It was recently renamed and there's a lively discussion on the talk page. What name and what guideline to follow? Killuminator (talk) 21:20, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Guantanamo military commission → Guantanamo Bay military commissions – A minor vocabulary change (also pluralizes the title) I wondered if moving it myself would be a good idea, but figured that since I haven't moved anything before, I might as well ask what the community thinks. I think "Guantanamo Bay" is slightly more descriptive than "Guantanamo", but if people want it to stay, I'm happy to let it stay. ItsABlackHole (talk) 02:51, 20 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPathtalk 12:21, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Capsule toy → Capsule toy vending machineCapsule toy vending machine – The current name of this article is very misleading, suggesting it is about the toys sold by this type of the vending machine. Instead, the article is clearly about the vending machines themselves. The article should be renamed accordingly. I am unsure if capsule toy should have its own article one day. For now it can safely redirect to the "capsule toy vending machine" article (note: it did not exist, I just created it now as a temporary redirect here). Side note: there is also confusion about how this topic is different from Gashapon, which on en and ja has a stand-alone article. But most interwikis here - i.e. to capsule toy (vending machine) article are known as gashapons in other languages. Compare: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q11294641 vs https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1204526 . From what I can tell, Gashapon is a specific brand name of a capsule vending machine. I am unsure if any merge is needed (leaning no), but I wanted to mention this before someone suggests renaming this article here to Gashapon. Interwikis at wikidata might merit some cleanup too, sigh;in fact the Wikidata article is about the capsule toy (not capsule toy vending machine), although most of the interwiki'd articles, like ours, are about the vending machine. A mess. PS. What needs to be done: Wikidata needs a page about capsule toy vending machines, pretty much all interwikis from Q11294641 need to be switched to that page (it can be an intentional sitelink to redirect to our capsule toy redirect). I'll do it later this year if nobody jumps on this first. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:23, 20 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPathtalk 12:20, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Na Woon-gyu → Na Un'gyuNa Un'gyu – Defaulting to MR per WP:KOREANNAME. Seems like there isn't a single dominant spelling. No results for any spelling of his name in ngrams. He clearly appears in English-language scholarly literature though, but haven't checked what they use. Note that "Woon-gyu" is ad-hoc and doesn't even fit the modern Revised Romanization system that South Korea uses. RR would recommend "Ungyu", and if you use the common modification of RR with a hyphen in the name, it'd be "Un-gyu". grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 21:25, 20 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPathtalk 12:10, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Kwiat jewelry → Kwiat (jeweler)Kwiat (jeweler) – This updates a prior request. The article is about the American jewelry company, not the physicist Paul G. Kwiat or other uses of the surname. "Kwiat" currently redirects to the physicist, so this move will avoid ambiguity and follow Wikipedia naming conventions for companies. A disambiguation page (Kwiat (disambiguation)) will also be created to clarify multiple uses of the name. Hhaber (talk) 18:28, 19 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPathtalk 11:56, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

<templatestyles src="Reflist-talk/styles.css"/>

References

<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />
  1. ↑ Even if the dictionary definition did take priority, wikt:taskmaster is the only definition I can find that includes "supervises workers"; Oxford Dictionary of English, New Oxford American Dictionary and Merriam-Webster all define it as Template:Tq (or words to that effect). Despite the fact that TaskmastershipTaskmastership redirects to Supervisor, I can find no evidence that modern usage of the word "taskmaster" indicates a synonymous meaning with "supervisor", so there's no reason why Supervisor would be the primary topic here.
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".
Pineapple Storage (talk) 21:05, 13 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPathtalk 05:53, 21 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPathtalk 11:43, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

June 28, 2025

  • (Discuss) – MV Astoria → ? – The naming convention on ships states, among other things, that An article about a ship that changed name or nationality should be placed at the best-known name, with a redirect from the other name. This ship has had multiple names and is now being sent to the scrapyard. I believe we should select a permanent name now and my personal candidate is Stockholm because it's associated with the well known maritime disaster. Killuminator (talk) 22:26, 28 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Kamurú language → Pedra Branca languagePedra Branca language – My suggestion is to rename Kamurú to Pedra Branca. Let me explain: according to Azevedo (1965), there are records of four Kariri dialects (or languages?), namely: (1) Kipeá (well-documented by Mamiani), (2) Dzubukuá (documented by Nantes), (3) Sabujá, and (4) Pedra Branca. According to the same author, only vocabularies of 100 to 150 words survive for the last two dialects (or languages?), found in von Martius. Rodrigues (1948) notes that Kiriri is an alternative name for Kipeá, Kariri for Dzubukuá, and suggests that Kamurú may be an alternative name for Pedra Branca: “Pedra-Branca (Kamurú?)”. Pedra Branca was the name of a village visited by von Martius. From the Pedra Branca vocabulary, according to Rodrigues—and merely as a point of interest—there are a large number of Kipeá words as documented in Mamiani’s grammar. Also according to Rodrigues, “Curt Nimuendajú encountered a few Kamurú individuals” (although by that time, no Kariri language was still spoken…). Queiroz (2012) is more categorical in affirming that Kipeá, Dzubukuá, Sabujá, and Pedra Branca (which he also refers to as Kamurú) all belong to the same Kariri language family. The same is true of the only source cited in this article: “Kamurú* (Camurú, Pedra Branca)”. Apparently, the confusion stems from Ethnologue, which suggests that Pedra Branca is synonymous with Sabujá. In fact, I also cite: “Eduardo Ribeiro points out that the languages spoken by the ‘Cariri’ tribes of Ceará are essentially unknown. The only Karirian languages for which there is any documentation were those spoken in Bahia and Sergipe (Kipeá, Dzubukuá, Sabuyá, Pedra Branca).” My suggestion to rename Kamurú to Pedra Branca stems from the fact that the latter is the name used by von Martius, the only primary source we have for this language. Why rely on a name coined by Nimuendajú—one that has also caused confusion elsewhere—when documentation is so scarce and there appears to be no more established term? In such cases, I believe it is best to adhere to the primary source, which will always be revisited whenever the topic is researched. RodRabelo7 (talk) 08:54, 14 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. CoconutOctopus talk 09:58, 21 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. CoconutOctopus talk 19:06, 28 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Fall of Maximilien Robespierre → Coup of 9–10 Thermidor – The current title centers on the personal downfall of Maximilien Robespierre, whereas the article addresses a broader political event: the orchestrated overthrow of Robespierre and his Montagnard allies on 9 Thermidor Year II. "Coup of 9 Thermidor" is a more historically accurate and neutral title. It is consistent with the naming conventions of similar events (e.g., the "Coup of 18 Brumaire") and better reflects the article’s focus on the political context of the Thermidorian Reaction, rather than solely Robespierre’s fate. Marissa TRS (talk) 04:20, 12 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Alpha3031 (t • c) 07:39, 28 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Mohammedan SC (Kolkata) → Mohammedan SCMohammedan SC – The Kolkatabbased football club is the primary topic commonly referred to as Mohammedan SC in reliable sources. Other uses are either less notable or geographically disambiguated (e.g. Dhaka, Rangpur). Per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and common usage in Indian football media. BurningB (talk) 04:17, 28 June 2025 (UTC)

June 27, 2025

  • (Discuss) – Kernicterus → Bilirubin Encephalopathy – kernicterus is the Chronic form of Bilirubin Encephalopathy. There is also an Acute Bilirubin Encephalopathy (ABE) which takes place before the chronic phase and it is not Kernicterus. We can not have the acute phase on an article purly based on its chronic phase, but with a title change there wont be any confusions. This way the article can be written for both phases with a lot more information, but if we keep it as Kernicterus then there needs to be another article for its Acute phase which does not make sense. This short article explains my reasoning. Also as per WP:COMMONNAME, results on National Library of Medicine shows Bilirubin Encephalopathy close to 30,000, and Kernicterus shows 5500. That is widely because Kernicterus is the specific type of Bilirubin Encephalopathy. DrTheHistorian✎ 23:00, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Rockstar (drink) → Rockstar EnergyRockstar Energy – The current name of "Rockstar (drink)" gives the impression that this article is about the beverage and not the brand. "Rockstar Energy" is the name of the brand specifically and what most people would recognize, as that is its common name. Reliable news sites like CNBC and the Hill also refer to the brand as Rockstar Energy.[1][2]

<templatestyles src="Reflist-talk/styles.css"/>

References

<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />
  1. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  2. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".
EC for Golin (talk) 19:44, 11 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. CNC (talk) 14:05, 20 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. CoconutOctopus talk 18:19, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Al Hilal SFC → Al-Hilal SFCAl-Hilal SFC – The usage of a hyphen throughout the article is inconsistent, as some have hyphens (as in Al-Hilal), while some do not (as in Al Hilal). So, should the article's title include a hyphen or not? GTrang (talk) 17:48, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – FEAR (terrorist group) → FEAR (militia group) – When I look at the cited sources, practically all of them refer to this as a militia group, and none of them explicitly refer to it as a terrorist group (although some might say the group's activities were terroristic). Per MOS:TERRORIST, Wikipedia does not generally use the label "terrorist" in article titles – the word is somewhat vague, POV, tabloidish and inflammatory. For example, of the 16 sources cited in the article, 9 of them have "militia" in their headlines, and none of them have "terrorist" (or any similar word). —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 06:29, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

<templatestyles src="Reflist-talk/styles.css"/>

References

<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />
  1. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  2. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".
Aoeuidhtns (talk) 02:32, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

June 26, 2025

  • (Discuss) – 2017 Hamas charter → Hamas Document of General Principles and Policies – The current title does not reflect how this document is most commonly and neutrally described in reliable sources, contrary to WP:COMMONNAME and WP:NPOV. An analysis of sources shows that sources more frequently use "document" or similar terms than "charter", even when generously counting sources that use "charter" only with qualifications like "could be considered." Among sources that consider whether this constitutes a charter, there is no consensus, with some explicitly noting the document "does not replace the charter." The proposed title uses the official name given by Hamas, reflects the predominant terminology in sources, and maintains neutrality on the contested question of whether this document constitutes a new charter. If you're concerned about the length of the proposed title, please indicate whether an alternative 2017 Hamas policy document would be preferable. The current name is the result of a move that was done without a RM despite being clearly controversial and was challenged almost immediately here, so it doesn't constitute a stable consensus version. Alaexis¿question? 21:02, 18 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. CoconutOctopus talk 17:50, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Cancún → CancunCancun – In 2021 there was an attempt to do this. At the time, people argued that since Zürich wasn't changed to Zurich, Cancún shouldn't be changed either. Now, Zürich is listed under its common English name, Zurich. At the time people were cherrypicking the subsection of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English-language sources), "WP:DIACRITICS", selectively using the phrases "The use of modified letters in article titles is neither encouraged nor discouraged" and "The policy on using common names and on foreign names does not prohibit the use of modified letters" as a reason not to move the page, yet ommiting the accompanying phrases, "when deciding between versions of a word that differ in the use or non-use of modified letters, follow the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language" and "if they are used in the common name as verified by reliable sources", respectively. Google Ngrams shows that "Cancun" has always been the common name in English. As stated above, the city's tourism agency ommits the accent in the English version of the website (in the same way Celine Dion's website does it in English vs. French). Spanish is not an official language in Mexico, and insisting that the accent is required merely for "respect for other languages" would support the argument for changing "Mexico" to "México", since that is the country's de facto colloquial name in Spanish. (CC) Tbhotch™ 17:41, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Synthesis anarchism → Anarchist synthesis – When I hastily rewrote this article a couple years ago to deal with the previous version's bad sourcing (see talk page discussion with Graywalls), I didn't think to check at the time if the article's title had basis in reliable sources. I just now checked for it in the cited sources in this article, but none of them use the term "synthesis anarchism". Skirda 2002 talks about the "Anarchist Synthesis" (also shortened to simply "the Synthesis"), which was the title of Faure's original article on the matter. He also uses the term "synthesist" to refer to proponents of it. van der Walt and Schmidt also mention "the Synthesis" and use the term "synthesist". Avrich and Malet make no reference to any "synthesis", although their description of a "united anarchism" is connected to the anarchist synthesis by Skirda (and later by Zoe Baker). None of the primary sources listed in the further reading use "synthesis anarchism" either; all of them refer to the "anarchist synthesis" (or simply "the synthesis"). I searched for the term on Google Scholar, but the only cases of "synthesis anarchism" I could find from before this article was created in August 2010 were false positives (i.e. one sentence ending with "synthesis" and another beginning with "anarchism"). It seems that, a few years after this article was first created, authors started picking up the term. In contrast, I found 36 results for the use of "synthesist" in conjunction with anarchism, and 10 results for "Anarchist Synthesis", although this included a couple false positives. I was also able to find only one reference to "synthesism" in a 2008 article by David Berry. Jeff Shantz used the term "synthesist anarchism" in his April 2010 entry on the "Anarchist Synthesis" in the International Encyclopedia of Revolution and Protest, but it appears that he originated this variant, as I can find no earlier references to "synthesist anarchism". It also seems that this did not catch on widely after that, with only 3 references to "synthesist anarchism" since 2010 (one of which is another work by Shantz). When coming across cases of suspected citogenesis, I've started checking Zoe Baker's book Means and Ends, as I know Baker has a rigorous approach to examining primary sources rather than just assuming Wikipedia terminology is correct. Sure enough, she uses the term "anarchist synthesis" and refers to its proponents as "synthesists" but never once uses the term "synthesis anarchism". As it appears that the terminology "synthesis anarchism" originated on Wikipedia in 2010, and as it seems clear to me that the common name for this tendency since the very beginning was the "anarchist synthesis", I'm requesting we move the article to reflect that. Grnrchst (talk) 11:53, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Sure Shot (rapper) → Blak ProphetzBlak Prophetz – Request for move over redirect. The page should be named Blak Prophetz as this is the name Mark Duffus is most known by and it is used everywhere online and on physical / digital music releases, not Sure Shot which was a one-off alias long ago and no longer used. Hiddenstranger (talk) 09:19, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Richard Butler (white supremacist) → Richard Girnt ButlerRichard Girnt Butler – Using his full name forms a WP:NCDAB which is preferred over parenthetical disambs, and I think the name with the middle name is the WP:COMMONNAME for him anyway. His full name is used in most sources that refer to him, including encyclopedias (e.g. Kaplan's encyclopedia) and most obituaries. We could also do "G." because that's common, but full name seems to be more common. Was moved without discussion because it was "better" (I do not think it is, as he is very often referred to with his middle name). PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:09, 18 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Jeffrey34555 (talk) 01:19, 26 June 2025 (UTC)

June 25, 2025

  • (Discuss) – Be Honest (song) → Be Honest – Very substantial article on a song, versus a two sentence stub on an EP tagged for notability. I think the song is the most notable work called "Be Honest", and the song of the same name by Thrasher Shiver is already hatnoted sufficiently. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:46, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Delaware Valley → Greater PhiladelphiaGreater Philadelphia – "Greater Philadelphia" is the more common and less confusing term for the Philadelphia metro area. "Delaware Valley" is mostly used only be media sources, and can be confusing to outsiders, as it could also refer to the area surrounding the Delaware River along the PA/NJ border. Additionally, "Delaware Valley" can cause confusion that it refers to an area solely within the state of Delaware. Red0ctober22 (talk) 21:21, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – AZF (terrorist group) → 2004 French train bomb extortion scheme – There was apparently never a real AZF group; there was just a bomb threat extortion scheme (that involved constructing two workable bombs) that was attempted in February and March 2004 and was then abandoned. The scheme was primarily the effort of one man and was really too small to characterise as an organized group. There was no enduring organisation. The main perpetrator himself said AZF "n'était même pas un groupuscule" (was not even a small group). —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 10:47, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Army of the Czech Republic → Czech Armed ForcesCzech Armed Forces – The Army of the Czech Republic is a literal translation of the Czech name of the military (Czech: Armáda České republiky) not supported by relevant official sources. Recent documents issued by the Czech Ministry of Defence in English (and cited in sources, namely The Czech Armed Forces Development Concept 2035 and Czech Armed Forces in 2022) use the term Czech Armed Forces. Similar example of such naming convention policy may be the Swiss Armed Forces (German: Schweizer Armee; French: Armée suisse; Italian: Esercito svizzero; Romansh: Armada svizra; lit. 'Swiss Army'). Mossback (talk) 20:55, 15 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPathtalk 10:09, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – "Yo mama" joke → Maternal insultMaternal insult – I know this discussion has been done before but I genuinely believe this should be moved to Maternal insult. Disparaging one's mother isn't exclusively considered a joke. Even the examples given in the article are mostly non-humourous. In fact, I think, in the majority of non-English languages such as most other European languages, Arabic, Hindustani, Persian, etc., insulting one's mother is usually taken as a serious insult. As a native Hindustani speaker, I can confirm that even simply "teri maa" ("your mum") is considered offensive, and "teri maa ki chut / ka bhosda" ("your mum's cunt/pussy") or anything like that is considered equivalent to "fuck you" with no humourous connotations. It's only recently, especially in English, that insults towards one's mother are taken jokingly. Even then, they're still considered insults—non-serious ones, but insults nevertheless. The article is quite clearly about both genuinely derogatory and humourous uses. So, some usages can be considered "humourous insults," as in they're just as a joke among friends etc. and not seriously offensive/abusive, but all usages including humourous ones are insults nonetheless, therefore, Maternal insult is the appropriate title. Also, another reason I don't think "Yo mama" joke is the right title is because the article isn't just about the "yo mama" trend (sort of a meme) but about maternal disparagement in general; I personally don't think stuff like the Rabbi Eliezer example would or could be considered a yo mama joke. — Ö S M A N  (talk · contribs) 09:45, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

June 24, 2025

Elapsed listings

Script error: No such module "Shortcut". Script error: No such module "Hatnote".

  • (Discuss) – Sergey Nechayev → Sergei NechaevSergei Nechaev – I noticed that the current title doesn't quite line up with standard transliterations of his Russian name, so I dug around for different transliterations. I found that Sergei Nechaev is the most commonly used English transliteration by far, with 1,010 results on Google Scholar. In contrast, the current title "Sergey Nechayev" received 281 results; "Sergei Nechayev" received 212 results; and "Sergey Nechaev" received 171 results. According to Google Ngrams results, "Sergei Nechaev" has been the most commonly used transliteration since 1974 and has been the most used by far for a couple decades (it also disconcertingly shows that "Sergey Nechayev" has spiked in usage since this Wikipedia article was created in 2004). A Google Search also gives 132,000 results for "Sergei Nechaev", 86,500 results for "Sergey Nechaev", 24,900 results for "Sergey Nechayev" and 12,600 results for "Sergei Nechayev". As "Sergei Nechaev" appears to be, by far, the most commonly-used transliteration of his name, I'm proposing this article be moved to reflect that. Grnrchst (talk) 12:19, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Backlog

Script error: No such module "Shortcut". Script error: No such module "Hatnote".

  • (Discuss) – Morning dew (disambiguation) → morning dewmorning dew – Unnecessary " (disambiguation)". The base topic is "dew" AKA "morning dew" (lowercase), the first list entry on the DAB page. The capitalized items (the lead entry, which is the primary topic for Morning Dew but not morning dew, and other list entries) are songs and a ship, and maybe more will turn up later. Given the mixed-case entries, morning dew is the appropriate title for the DAB page, we just don't need the parenthetical tacked onto it. Everyone looking for a song or ship knows that's capitalized (if they're competent to be using an English-language encyclopedia), and if they bork it up anyway, the entries at the DAB page will get them where they're intending to go.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  12:02, 1 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Ivey (talk - contribs) 13:26, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Gingalain → Fair UnknownFair Unknown – It is a general trope (aka tradition,[1] story type,[2] pattern,[3] or theme[4]) for a number of different characters, including the eponymous Tale of the Fair Unknown.[5] (The sample links above in particular classify Lancelot as a Fair Unknown type, and here for example is a discussion of Lancelot in relation to some other early instances of the "Fair Unknown romances":[6]) Gingalain is NOT the only other representative of such trope (etc.) and his excess material should be moved to Knights of the Round Table at the same time when the articles is being correctly retitled and quickly rewritten (it is important to also rewrite it while moving). Fair Unknown is right now just redirect but is actually the subject if this article, while Gingalain on his own is barely even covered as a character, thus should be moved to the the list of Knights as a new section. Actually I may handle it all myself, just notify me on my talk page after you change the title of this article here.

<templatestyles src="Reflist-talk/styles.css"/>

References

<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />
  1. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  2. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  3. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  4. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  5. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  6. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".
94.246.147.217 (talk) 08:19, 16 June 2025 (UTC)94.246.147.217 (talk) 09:11, 16 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. CoconutOctopus talk 12:39, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Nuseirat rescue and massacre → Nuseirat raidNuseirat raid – The term massacre is absent from neutral and pro-Israel sources and thus violates NCENPOV. Two reasons, the RfC on EuroMed as yellow and always attribute and WP:TITLEWARRIOR, which called out opinion pieces and failing to recognize authorial voice (newspaper quotes X who says massacre, therefore newspaper says massacre which is false). This is similar to Entebbe raid, and the AP (premier neutral source) has also clarified less than a month ago that the Paletinian deaths ocurred during a gun battle during the raid (see [39]) Closetside (talk) 23:31, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Andrew Boden → Andrew Boden (politician) – Now that we have an article about Canadian writer Andrew Boden, it's no longer clear that the American politician, who served 200 years ago, would be highly meganotable enough to keep WP:PRIMARYTOPIC rights anymore, as his daily average over the past month is just two page views per day (with no page views at all on some days) according to the pageviews analysis tool. There's a good chance, further, that even his peak viewing day across all of 2025 combined, nine pageviews on May 29, might even have been attributable to people looking for the writer rather than a sudden spike of interest in the politician.
    I'm proposing a disambiguation page at the base title for the time being, as the Canadian writer just got his article today and thus can't be feasibly measured for meaningful pageview comparisons yet — however, considering that he's just coming off a significant literary award nomination for his debut novel, there's a good chance that we'll have to revisit it in the future, with far more chance of a living contemporary writer overtaking a fairly obscure 19th-century politician as primary topic than there ever will be of the obverse. Bearcat (talk) 02:38, 11 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Garsh (talk) 05:04, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Scotch Mist (drama) → Scotch MistScotch Mist – My move here was previously reverted despite the page being primary for the capitalized form of the phrase (see WP:DIFFCAPS). No other page is competing for that name and as can be seen on the talk page, the play is notable and it would be WP:RECENTISM to say it isn't. Even if it is not, it should have been discussed or put on WP:RM rather than being moved to a new incorrect disambiguation, accompanied by a completely false WP:PERSONALATTACK. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:51, 4 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 13:42, 11 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Frost 15:49, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Kissufim massacre → Kissufim attackKissufim attack – WP:NCENPOV states that massacre should be used in titles if it is the "generally accepted word" used to refer to an event in scholarly sources, or if it's part of the WP:COMMONNAME. This is due to the POV connotations. It doesn't appear as that standard is satisfied right now nor was it satisfied at the last requested move. Specifically, since the last requested move, WP:ARBPIA5 happened and inconsistencies in article titles relating to the word "massacre" were a major part of that case. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 00:35, 24 April 2025 (UTC)— Relisting. >>> Extorc.talk 10:25, 2 May 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Alpha3031 (t • c) 15:40, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

<templatestyles src="Reflist-talk/styles.css"/>

References

<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />
  1. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  2. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  3. ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".
Pineapple Storage (talk) 01:04, 10 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Bensci54 (talk) 16:05, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – TVA (disambiguation) → TVATVA – The previous move discussion personally feels as though it was opened too soon and as though there was a deadline. There wasn't yet time to see the long term effects of Loki yet. The previous discussion closed narrowly, and Time Variance Authority still has 9k views in April (compared to Tennessee Valley Authority's 16k), despite the fact that Loki ended over a year and a half ago, and the Time Variance Authority hasn't made an appearance in the MCU since Deadpool & Wolverine, nearly a year ago now. I don't see any harm in TVA being a disambiguation page with two primary topics. I will admit, I do likely have a potential bias on this issue, as I was a fan of the Marvel Cinematic Universe until 2024. But I don't see an unambiguous primary topic for the term "TVA". FireDragons52 (talk • contributions) 01:47, 31 May 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPathtalk 04:40, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – List of entertainment affected by the September 11 attacks → Impact of the September 11 attacks on the entertainment industry – This is a weird (and potentially improper, inappropriate or non-standard) way to use the noun entertainment. This is like having an article be titled List of water affected by development firms instead of List of bodies of water affected by development firms. However, on account of the content in the body, it doesn't seem like any title beginning with "List of" would work well for this article unless it was significantly longer or more of a handful than the current title. (e.g. List of productions, venues, events, publications and brands affected by the September 11 attacks) Just a moment ago, I boldly moved this article to a similar alternative title and was quickly reverted, hence this discussion. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 17:50, 23 May 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPathtalk 12:15, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Transnistria War → War in TransnistriaWar in Transnistria – I thought the use of the proper noun Transnistria but not its adjective form was a bit peculiar, so I did a cursory search on Google to see if it is the common name. Google Ngrams returns no results for Transnistria War and plausible variants with the use of "war", including War in Transnistria, Transnistrian War, and War of Transnistria. Transnistrian conflict and Transnistria conflict return some results (conflict in / of Transnistria returning none), with the former adjective form seeing much more usage. However, Transnistria conflict is a separate article from Transnistria War with a wider scope, time-wise. "War in Transnistria" and "Transnistrian conflict" are the most used names by a significant margin in Google Search, Google Books, and Google Scholar. I'd rather not waste time copying-and-pasting all the links, but anyone can make the searches themselves and correct me if I'm mistaken. For consistency's sake, it may be preferential to move Transnistria War to Transnistrian war in conjunction with a move to Transnistrian conflict. A final note is that the Romanian and Russian translations provided in the lead also translate literally to "War in Transnistria". Yue🌙 16:21, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Negative responsiveness → Mono-raise criterionMono-raise criterion – Last year these three pages were moved from their earlier names of "Monotonicity criterion", "Consistency criterion", and "Reversal symmetry" (as was "Participation criterion"). Two of the stated justifications for these moves were that the terms "monotonicity" and "consistency" are vague and can mean multiple things and that the pages should be named consistently. But these changes created an inconsistency between these pages and the other pages on voting system criteria (which are named after the criteria themselves and not the paradoxes that occur when they are violated). And the vagueness of the terms "monotonicity" and "consistency" could be addressed by simply making the titles more specific. "Monotonicity criterion" could have been renamed "Mono-raise criterion" or "Monotonicity criterion (electoral systems)" and "Consistency criterion" could have been renamed "Join-consistency criterion" or "Consistency criterion (electoral systems)". As shown in the pages' histories, I tried to fix this. I moved "Best-is-worst paradox" back to "Reversal symmetry". I requested that "No-show paradox" be moved back to "Participation criterion", which later happened. I moved "Negative responsiveness" to "Mono-raise criterion" (which required editing to restore the page's earlier language). And I moved "Multiple districts paradox" to "Join-consistency criterion". However, the user who made the initial changes (Closed Limelike Curves) reversed most of what I did. They moved three of the pages back (but couldn't move back "Participation criterion") and reverted the aforementioned edits to the one page. I apologize if my actions have come across as aggressive, but in my opinion the pages "Participation criterion" and "Reversal symmetry" were fine under those names and the other two pages should have names that, while precise, are consistent with those of the other pages on voting system criteria. Discussion is welcome. But I do want to note that as it stands the page "Negative responsiveness" has the same paragraph (about monotonicity violations in proportional representation systems) appear twice in different sections. One of my reverted edits fixed this by removing one of the duplicates, and it would need to be fixed again in a future edit. I would do it myself, but I might as well let people first discuss which location is more appropriate for the paragraph. Thank you for your input. Man of Steel 85 (talk) 03:25, 16 April 2025 (UTC) — Relisting.  — Amakuru (talk) 05:36, 27 April 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPathtalk 12:51, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Malformed requests

Script error: No such module "Hatnote".

Possibly incomplete requests

Script error: No such module "Hatnote".

References

Script error: No such module "Hatnote". Template:Notelist


See also

The current Wikipedia time is:
15:04, Tuesday, 15 September 2026 (UTC)
To update time purge the cache!

Script error: No such module "navbox".Template:Skip to bottom

Retrieved from "http://debianws.lexgopc.com/wiki143/index.php?title=Wiki143:Requested_moves&oldid=5442943"