Wikipedia:Requested moves

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Closing instructions

Click here to purge this page

Requested moves is a process for requesting the retitling (moving) of an article, template, or project page on Wikipedia. (For retitling files, categories and other items, see When not to use this page.) Please read the article titling policy and the guideline regarding primary topics before moving a page or requesting a page move.

Any autoconfirmed user can use the Move function to perform most moves (see Help:How to move a page). If you have no reason to expect a dispute concerning a move, be bold and move the page. However, it may not always be possible or desirable to do this:

  • Technical reasons may prevent a move: a page may already exist at the target title and require deletion, or the page may be protected from moves. See: § Requesting technical moves.
  • Requests to revert recent undiscussed controversial moves may be made at WP:RM/TR. If the new name has not become the stable title, the undiscussed move will be reverted. If the new name has become the stable title, a requested move will be needed to determine the article's proper location.
  • A title may be disputed, and discussion may be necessary to reach consensus: see § Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves. The requested move process is not mandatory, and sometimes, an informal discussion at the article's talk page can help reach consensus.
  • Unregistered users and new (not yet autoconfirmed) users are unable to move pages.

Requests are generally processed after seven days. If a consensus is reached after this time, a mover will enact the request. If not, the request may be re-listed to allow more time for consensus to develop, or be as "no consensus". See Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions for more details on the process.

The Move review process can be used to contest a move. It is designed to evaluate a contested close of a move discussion to determine if the close was reasonable, or whether it was inconsistent with the spirit and intent of Wikipedia common practice, policies, or guidelines.

When not to use this page

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

Undiscussed moves

Anyone may move a page without discussion if:

  • No article exists at the new target title;
  • There has not been any discussion (especially recent discussion) about the title for the page that expresses disagreement with the new target title;
  • And it seems unlikely anyone would reasonably disagree with the move.

If you disagree with such a move, and the new title has not been in place for a long time, you may revert the move. If you cannot revert the move for technical reasons then you may request a technical move.

Move wars are disruptive, so if you make a bold move and it is reverted, do not make the move again. Instead, follow the procedures laid out in § Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves.

Requesting technical moves

If you are unable to complete a technical move, request it below. If this is your first article then please request at Wikipedia:Articles for creation.

  • To list a technical request: edit the Uncontroversial technical requests subsection and insert the following code filling in pages and reason:
    {{subst:RMassist|current page title|new page title|reason = reason for move}}
    This will automatically insert a bullet and include your signature. Please do not edit the article's talk page.
  • If you object to a proposal listed in the uncontroversial technical requests section, please move the request to the Contested technical requests section, append a note on the request elaborating on why, and sign with ~~~~.
  • If your technical request is contested, or if a contested request is left untouched without reply, create a requested move on the article talk and remove the request from the section here. The fastest and easiest way is to click the "discuss" button at the request, save the talk page, and remove the entry on this page.

Technical requests

Edit this section if you want to move a request from Uncontroversial to Contested.

Uncontroversial technical requests

Contested technical requests

Requests to revert undiscussed moves

Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves

The discussion process is used for potentially controversial moves. The move is potentially controversial if any of the following apply:

  • There is an existing article (not just a redirect) at the target title;
  • There has been any past debate about the best title for the page;
  • Someone could reasonably disagree with the move.

Use this process if there is any reason to believe a move would be contested. In particular, use this process before moving any existing page with incoming links to create a disambiguation page at that title. For technical move requests (e.g. spelling and capitalization fixes), see Requesting technical moves.

Do not put more than one open move request on the same article talk page, because this is not supported by the bot that handles updates to this page. Multiple closed move requests may be on the same page, but each should have a unique section heading.

Requesting a single page move

To request a single page move, edit at the bottom of the talk page of the article you want moved, without adding a new header, inserting this code:

{{subst:requested move|NewName|reason=Place here your rationale for the proposed page name change, ideally referring to applicable naming convention policies and guidelines, and providing evidence in support where appropriate. If your reasoning includes search engine results, please prioritize searches limited to reliable sources (e.g. books, news, scholarly papers) over other web results. Do not sign this.}}

Replace NewName with the requested new name of the page (or with a question mark, if you want more than one possible new name to be considered). The template will automatically create the heading "Requested move 14 December 2017" and sign for you.

Use the code |talk=yes to add separate locations for survey and discussion.

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

WikiProjects may subscribe to Article alerts to receive RM notifications, e.g. this page is transcluded to here. 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.

Requesting multiple page moves

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

{{subst:requested move
| 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. Do not sign this.}}

For example, to propose moving the articles Wikipedia and Wiki, put this template on Talk:Wikipedia, and replace current2 with Wiki. The discussion for all affected articles is held on the talk page of the article at page 1 (Talk:Wikipedia). Do not sign a request with ~~~~ as the template does this automatically. Do not skip pairs of numbers.

RMCD bot automatically places a notice section on the talk page of the additional pages that are included in your request, advising that the move discussion is in progress, where it is, and that all discussion for all pages included in the request should take place at that one location.

Commenting in a requested move

All editors are welcome to contribute to the discussion regarding a requested page move. It is a place for rational discussion of whether an article should be renamed.

There are a number of practices that most Wikipedians use in such discussions:

  • When editors recommend a course of action, they usually do so in bold text, e. g., Support or Oppose, which is done by surrounding the word with three single quotes on each side, e.g. '''Support'''.
  • Start comments or recommendations on a new bulleted line (that is, starting with *), and sign them by adding ~~~~ to the end. If you are responding to another editor, put your comment directly below theirs, making sure it is indented (using multiple *s).
  • Please disclose whether you have a vested interest in the article, per WP:AVOIDCOI.
  • Please have a look at the article before making a recommendation. Do not base your recommendation solely on the information supplied by the nominator or other editors. To understand the situation, it may also help to look at the history of the article. However, please read the earlier comments and recommendations, as well as prior Requested Moves. They may contain relevant arguments and further useful information.

When participating, please consider the following:

  • Ideally editors should be familiar with WP:Article titles, WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, and WP:MOS (among others) which sets forth community norms for article titles.
  • The debate is not a vote; please do not make recommendations on the course of action to be taken that are not sustained by arguments.
  • When making your case or responding to others, explain how the proposed article title meets/violates policy and guidelines rather than merely stating that it does so.
  • Nomination already implies that the nominator supports the name change, and nominators should refrain from repeating this recommendation on a separate bulleted line.
  • Do not make conflicting recommendations; if you change your mind, modify your original recommendation rather than adding a new one. The recommended way of doing this is to use strike-through by enclosing a retracted statement between <s> and </s> after the *, as in "• Support Oppose".

Also, just a reminder that reasonable editors will sometimes disagree, but valid arguments will be given more weight than unsupported statements. When an editor offers arguments or evidence that do not explain how the proposed article title meets/violates policy, they may only need a reminder to engage in constructive, on-topic discussion. But a pattern of 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 a dispute resolution process outside the current Requested Move process.

Closing instructions

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 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. 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 can be done using {{subst:relisting}}, which also signs it automatically, and is placed at the very end of the initial request (after their signature, and subsequent re-listers 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 to notify relevant WikiProjects of the discussion using the template {{RM notification}}. Applicable WikiProjects can often be determined by means of the banners placed at the top of the talk page hosting the move request.

Current discussions

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

This list is also available in a page-link-first format and in table format. 34 (Discuss)ions have been relisted.

December 14, 2017

  • (Discuss)Staubbach FallStaubbach Falls – The spelling "Staubbach Falls" appears to be over three times more common in English sources (2860 hits to 868 hits on Google Books) and was the original name of this article. It may have been moved because its German name is singular but, in English, we commonly use "Falls" or "Waterfall", rarely "Fall". An acceptable alternative would be "Staubbach Waterfall", but this only has 887 hits on Google books, about the same as "Fall". Bermicourt (talk) 08:23, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Step Up: Revolution – Music from the Motion PictureStep Up Revolution: Music from the Motion Picture – This is a reversal of a previous RM, in which I was the sole commenter. In that RM, I stated "...there is no reason not to move the page, provided that the target is indeed the proper name of the album." However, the page for the associated film was later moved to Step Up Revolution, negating the purpose of the original RM. In addition, the original RM was made under a flawed premise. It was one of a spate of film-related RMs made by IP editors with copy-and-paste reasoning, and I only supported the move because (at the time) there was no reason to oppose it despite this procedural error. With it now having become clear that the title for the film does not include a colon, the previous RM should be overturned and this page moved back to its old title.  ONR  (talk)  06:51, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Louisiana–Lafayette Ragin' CajunsLouisiana Ragin Cajuns – It's time to make this move. Most national sports media, and all local media, are referring to sports programs at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette as "Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns". Many in-state media also use Louisiana, and some continue to use Louisiana-Lafayette and ULL; however, the ones who do use this outdated reference have ulterior motives to do so. As for the abbreviation, the school guide requests LA, which would fit stylistically with Louisiana. Here is a list of media that uses Louisiana Ragin' Cajuns: ESPN CBS NBC Sun Belt Conference MSN Fox Sports Daily Advertiser (local paper) KATC TV (local television stations) Yahoo Airbill (talk) 03:21, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Matanza CuetoJeff Cobb – With a recent stint in New Japan Pro-Wrestling, he is becoming more well known under his birth name rather than the ring name he uses in Lucha Underground. APM (talk) 01:18, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Doug Jones (politician)Doug Jones – I think this is the primary topic. The actor is not obscure, but I think the future U.S. senator is both what people will currently search for and what has long term historical impact. Casprings (talk) 01:04, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)MasticationChewing – Overcomplicated name for an extremely basic process that we have a simple, commonly used vernacular term for. The article got its current name in 2005 because there were two parallel articles; this article and the old Chewing article. The former article seems to have been picked solely because it contained more raw content than the latter, which isn't even a reason to title a page in the first place. Hill Crest's WikiLaser! (BOOM!) 00:24, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

December 13, 2017

  • (Discuss)Libyan Civil War (2014–present)Libyan conflict – This conflict isn't really a 'civil war'. After a few months of violence in 2014, the country is no longer struck by a conflict that we could call 'civil war' anymore. The country is split between different governments (and a few militias) but unlike for example the Iraqi Civil War, the Libyan one has had little amount of serious violence, nor has it had so many deadly battles. It resembles a frozen conflict a lot more than a proper civil war. The amount of people killed and injured or displaced is also not as high as, for example the Yemeni Civil War which has had a lot more violence and injuries in less time. This conflict has not experienced the daily and deadly bombings like Syria, Iraq and Yemen have. Nor do the media really mention Libya as being in a state of 'civil war' to be specific. Therefore I think it should just be called 'Libyan conflict'. --Wq639 (talk) 17:33, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)GuoneiGungnae – Here, I will demonstrate through Google Books search and Google Scholars search that Gungnae and Kungnae, the Korean terms, not Guonei, the Chinese term, are the commonly used term in reliable sources, thereby justifying this move. Google Books search, Gungnae Goguryeo OR Koguryo OR Gaogouli -wikipedia, 110 results[2] Google Scholars search, Goguryeo OR Koguryo OR Gaogouli "Gungnae" -wikipedia, 20 results[3] Google Books search, Kungnae Goguryeo OR Koguryo OR Gaogouli -wikipedia, 1490 results[4] Google Scholars search, Goguryeo OR Koguryo OR Gaogouli "Kungnae" -wikipedia, 31 results[5] Google Books search, Guonei Goguryeo OR Koguryo OR Gaogouli -wikipedia, 447 results[6] Google Scholars search, Goguryeo OR Koguryo OR Gaogouli "Guonei" -wikipedia, 25 results[7] The Korean term, Gungnae, results in 130 hits. Kungnae, an alternative romanization of the same Korean term, results in 1,521 hits. By comparison, the Chinese term, Guonei, results in 472 hits, which is outnumbered by Kungnae by 1,049 hits. Here, Kungnae is clearly the most commonly used name. However, according to Korean naming convention, Gungnae should be used. Since Gungnae is clearly a historical term, its use should be limited to historical uses. The Chinese term "Guonei" can be used for modern Chinese sites and places. Sacker23 (talk) 13:12, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)WanduHwando – In the previous request for move discussion, UNESCO using the Chinese term Wandu played a large role in convincing people that Wandu is a commonly used name and is neutral. I argue that this is not the case. In requests for registration of something in UNESCO, the country making the request writes a report, and as this is a request made by China, it is natural for them to use Chinese names. This case is more complex as this was a dual registration of both Goguryeo cultural sites in China and North Korea, which is perhaps why Koguryo, a Korean word, and the most commonly used term for Goguryeo, was used instead of the Chinese term, Gaogouli. However, all local sites in China were given a Chinese name, which is because the report for the request was written by China. The gist of this is that UNESCO geographical names in some cases, such as this, are not neutral as discussed above. Here, I present real evidence based on WP:NCGN, that most, if not more, reliable sources use the name Hwando. I demonstrate this through searching for "Hwando" and "Wandu" in Google Books and Google Scholars, and compare total relevant hits between the two contested terms. I used the parameters "AND "Koguryo" OR "Goguryeo" OR "Gaogouli" -wikipedia" to exclude Hwando or Wandu not relevant to the kingdom of Goguryeo. Google Books search, Hwando Goguryeo OR Koguryo OR Gaogouli -wikipedia, 297 results[8] Google Scholars search, Goguryeo OR Koguryo OR Gaogouli "Hwando" -wikipedia, 55 results[9] Google Books search, Wandu Goguryeo OR Koguryo OR Gaogouli -wikipedia, 208 results[10] Goole Scholars search, Goguryeo OR Koguryo OR Gaogouli "Wandu" -wikipedia, 52 results[11] Hwando has a total of 352 hits, while Wandu has a total of 260 hits, Hwando outnumbering Wandu by 92 hits in reliable sources. Other matters to consider are consistency of using the Korean language in Goguryeo articles and treating Goguryeo articles as historical articles, where historical names matter more than modern geographical names that sometimes have absolutely no relevance to Goguryeo at all. One prime example is the UNESCO name of Wunu Mountain City. The historical name of this Goguryeo city is Jolbon, and the name Wunu Mountain City comes from Tang Dynasty, long after Goguryeo fell. The gist of my argument is that considering the use of a common name, linguistic consistency and historical nature of this article, Hwando is the appropriate name of this article. While Hwando should be used in general, the Chinese name Wandu should be used only to refer to today's UNESCO world heritage site, Wandu Mountain City. Sacker23 (talk) 12:42, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)The Evergreen State CollegeEvergreen State CollegeWP:THE. Like thousands if not millions of other organizations, Evergreen State College prefers to prepend a "The" on the front of their name, and WP just doesn't do that. WP does not care if it's the WP:OFFICIALNAME. An overwhelming number of reliable sources do not stick a "the" (much less a "The") on the front of the name of this college [12] – including major news outlines like Forbes and New York Post, and education-focused publishers like The Chronicle of Higher Education. Plenty of "the"-free book results [13], and journals, too [14]
     — SMcCandlish ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ʌ<  15:43, 12 December 2017 (UTC); links added: 09:09, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Barbara Bush (born 1981)Barbara Pierce Bush – This page was moved with very little, to no input. Actually, it had no discussion to it, but was moved anyway. The daughter of George W. Bush, Barbara Pierce Bush, is commonly known as Barbara Pierce Bush as described in several sources Vanity FairVanity FairPeopleTodayUSA Today – the mother of George W. Bush, Barbara Bush is not known as Barbara Pierce Bush – that isn't even her name. Her maiden name is Pierce, while the Bush daughter's middle name is Pierce. Requesting this move per WP:NATURALDIS which encourages natural disambiguation when available. The Bush daughter is WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the name, and not Bush's mother, who does not even go by such a name. CookieMonster755 𝚨-𝛀 03:47, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)St. Boniface General Hospital (Winnipeg)Saint Boniface Hospital – The name of the hospital was changed approximately 8 years ago to Saint Boniface Hospital (dropping the "general"), reflecting it's primary role as a tertiary care centre in Winnipeg. This is reflected in the hospital's website (, as well the health authority's webpage ( Thgere should still be a link to the page from a search using "Saint-Boniface general hospital" as some people still recognize it by it's older name. Thanks! (talk) 01:31, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

December 12, 2017

  • (Discuss)MacintoshMac (computer) – As per WP:COMMONNAME, we should be using an article name that it's commonly used. Macintosh might be the original name but nowadays everyone refers to them as a Mac computer. Google Trends shows that more people are searching for "Mac computer" than "macintosh". And yes, Mac is short for Macintosh but I again refer you back to WP:COMMONNAME, we should be using the most common name, even if it's a shortened version. Swedeaction (talk) 22:52, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Settlement of the AmericasPrehistoric migration and settlement of the Americas from Asia – "Settlement" is very ambiguous - could mean Caucasion "settlers" in covered wagons heading west from the East Coast in the 1800s, "settlers" from Europe 1492-1700s, ~1000 AD Norse settlements in Newfoundland, etc. Clearly this article is talking about prehistoric peoples and is primarily concerned with their migration from Asia. For examples see over 69,000 articles in Google Scholar: Prehistoric Migration to the Americas. Facts707 (talk) 16:30, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Fortunata (film)FortunataWP:PRIMARYTOPIC. No other Wikipedia articles have a real claim to this title. Most of the disambig items don't have articles, and likely never would, since they're minor fictional characters. Two historical figures, Maria Fortunata d'Este and Maria Fortunata Viti, are both known as Maria according to their respective articles. The two red links with potential to rival this film are Saint Fortunata, with little long-term significance with 90 hits on Google Books, or Fortunata by Marjorie Patterson with 1,700 hits, as opposed to the film with 3,180 hits on Google News Ribbet32 (talk) 05:23, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Old Post Office PavilionOld Post Office Building (Washington, D.C.) – The existing page name ("Old Post Office Pavilion") is obsolete, because the building no longer contains a pavilion (construction of the Trump International Hotel Washington D.C. removed the food court and associated retail establishments). While the National Register of Historic Places identifies the building as the "Old Post Office Building and Clock Tower", this name is unwieldy and has never been in common use. A 17 September 2016 request to rename and move the page to "Trump International Hotel Washington, D.C." has been rejected. My prior page move to "Old Post Office Building (Washington, D.C.)" has been reverted, with a recommendation to initiate a new page move request (see discussion above). I therefore request this page move and renaming. Corker1 (talk) 05:15, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

December 11, 2017

  • (Discuss)Computer securityCybersecurity – "Cybersecurity" or "cyber security" is a much more commonly used name to refer to this field, compared to "computer security". Perhaps 10 years ago, this wasn't the case, but it's different now. I did a quick survey of the article's references, and the results were: 3 sources (1, 4, 21) used the term "computer security", 18 sources (6, 94, 104, 143, 149, 150, 151, 153, 155, 156, 157, 158, 163, 165, 170, 171, 193, 199) used the term "cyber security", and 16 sources (29, 36, 44, 71, 84, 85, 93, 172, 181, 182, 183, 184, 190, 191, 192, 194, 198) used the term "cybersecurity". 3 more sources also used "cybersecurity" (under "Further reading" section), while 2 more sources also used "computer security" (under "External links" section). This gives a total of 5 sources using "computer security", 18 sources using "cyber security", and 19 sources using "cybersecurity". Additionally, several government agencies use the term "cyber security" instead of "computer security", such as the Cyber Security Agency of Singapore, the National Cyber Security Centre of the United Kingdom, the Australian Cyber Security Centre, the National Cyber Security Centre of Ireland, and the National Cybersecurity Center of Excellence of the United States. Furthermore, a quick search reveals that countless different companies and organisations such as BAE Systems, Oxford University, Coursera, Horangi, Ernst & Young, the Institute of Systems Science, the United States Department of Homeland Security, the University of Maryland University College, and Raytheon, all use the term "cybersecurity" or "cyber security". However, very few use "computer security" instead. Therefore, I believe it is reasonable to suggest that either "cybersecurity" or "cyber security" would be a much better article title than "computer security", given their much more widespread usage as compared to the latter. Note: Even if WP:SNOW consensus is reached on moving the page, please don't move this page until consensus is also reached on whether "cybersecurity" or "cyber security" should be used as the new article title. Weslam123 (talk • contrib) 14:20, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

December 10, 2017

  • (Discuss)Yoandry LealYoandy Leal – Yoandy Leal (without the 'r' before 'y') is Leal's correct name. The results in Google, including his official profiles on social media (instagram and facebook) and on the FIVB website credits it as Yoandy Leal as well. Even in the aforementioned article the subject is refered as Yoandy with sources who back the lack of an 'r' in his name. Arielslytherin (talk) 19:31, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Anonymouse (collective)Anonymouse – The existing title Anonymouse has been a redirect to Open proxy since 2009. It is ostensibly about, however that isn't mentioned anywhere in the article it redirects to so I doubt that keeping it as a redirect and disambiguating the article about the art collective is the best solution. I think this topic here should be moved to Anonymouse and the redirect's history can be moved to (and then listed at RfD maybe, since not mentioned at the target?); perhaps a hatnote can be added here paraphrasing "this ia about the Swedish art collective, not about the open proxy service" (although I'm not sure if even that is justified...) Ben · Salvidrim!  08:37, 3 December 2017 (UTC)--Relisting.usernamekiran(talk) 13:52, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Shes AnkoSesh Anka – This is the official spelling as per the film's censor certificate. However, "Shesh Anka" is another spelling, though not yielding as many search results as the earlier one. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:02, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

December 9, 2017

  • (Discuss)Council of State (Finland)Finnish Government – The currently-separate pages "Council of State (Finland)" and "Government of Finland" should be combined under one title, as they cover the same realm of content. There is no proof on that "Council of State" is an official version of the governemnt's name in English, but there are numerous mentions of "Finnish Government" and even "Government of Finland" on the page. Pessimistipasta (talk) 19:31, 2 December 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. bd2412 T 20:21, 9 December 2017 (UTC) bd2412 T 20:21, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Sana NawazSana Fakhar – Per the references like [19] [20], [21], Sana Fakhar is used more than Sana Nawaz. So please move it. (talk) 15:49, 2 December 2017 (UTC)--Relisting.usernamekiran(talk) 17:35, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Julian Casablancas+The VoidzThe Voidz – Band has changed its official name to The Voidz. Michi (talk) 10:21, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Madonna (Madonna album)Madonna (album) – The repeated "Madonna" in the disambiguation of this title is clearly redundant, serves no purpose, is totally unnecessary and is, frankly, stupid looking. WP:PDAB was rejected as a guideline; it's an essay, and rightfully so. Yes, I'm aware of the previous discussion and outcome, as well as dearth of policy-based arguments favoring the current embarrassing title in that discussion. The blind-following of short-sighted rules and conventions that obviously should not apply in this case and miss the big picture is no excuse. That discussion was over a year ago, and even it established that this topic is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for Madonna (album) (it is a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT to this article). This time, let's not ignore WP:COMMONSENSE ("Being too wrapped up in rules can cause loss of perspective, so there are times when it is better to ignore a rule") and fix this abomination, once and for all. Shall we? В²C 18:59, 1 December 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. Bradv 01:56, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

December 8, 2017

  • (Discuss)Template:DmozTemplate:Curlie – is, in fact, the successor to DMOZ with access to non-public information from DMOZ and the same editor community. The template has been repurposed to point to curlie. The only objections I can see are (1) there is no reliable proof that is the actual successor to DMOZ, and (2) {{}} may be a better location than {{Curlie}}. The latter is the primary reason I didn't do the move, myself. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 21:38, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Sarah TownsendSarah McGuinness – Sarah McGuinness is the stage name of Sarah Townsend and the professional name she now uses. It's prudent for artists to have a Wikipedia page under their stage name, as they are most likely to be found using this name. For example, Yusuf Islam has his own page under his stage name Cat Stevens. I realise Sarah, as Sarah Townsend, has a history of her own and this would need to be reflected in the moved/merged page. Beetree (talk) 16:59, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Ajahn Maha BuaLuangta Maha Bua – The subject is overwhelmingly referred to with the honorific "Luangta" (or "Luang Ta"), both by the public and generic sources. Paul_012 (talk) 04:09, 23 November 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. Jenks24 (talk) 05:21, 1 December 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. Bradv 15:54, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Richard B. SpencerRichard Spencer (white supremacist) – Per WP:INITS and previous discussion, Richard B. Spencer is unnacceptable according to established Wikipedia policy, as the subject is rarely referred to with a middle initial. A parenthetical is the next obvious choice, and "white supremacist" is entire reason the subject has a Wikipedia article in the first place, it is how he is described in the first sentence of the article, on the Richard Spencer disambiguation page, it is well sourced, and was the topic of an exhaustive RfC in which overwhelming consensus agreed that the primary descriptor should be "white supremacist." Rockypedia (talk) 14:41, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Sir Robert FenwickRobert Fenwick (New Zealand environmentalist) – Despite among the entries in Robert Fenwick (disambiguation), the New Zealander was the only one called Robert Fenwick as common name, however, the incoming link of the disambiguation page shown there was a MP of the United Kingdom in the 1650s, was also called Robert Fenwick, while also likely a noble the have the prefix Sir, the New Zealander may need a new disambiguater, or drop it entirely and just required to clean up the incoming link of the disambiguation page Matthew_hk tc 10:24, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Génération.s, le mouvementGénérations Mouvement – Per WP:COMMONNAME, MOS:TM, and their own website (WP:ABOUTSELF); it will also satisfy WP:RECOGNIZABLE and WP:PRECISE, while also keeping with the spirit of WP:CONCISE (adding extraneous characters to be cute does not). It's basically immaterial that various and rather random "we're not sure what to do" symbol-laden renderings have appeared (apparently in response to marketing the party no longer even uses), including "Génération·s Mouvement", "Génération•s Mouvement", and "Génération(s) Mouvement" (with "le" versions being rare) is immaterial. We do not apply unusual stylization unless it is consistently used in the majority of reliable, independent sources (with preference given to English-language ones). And this version with "." is virtually unattested. I moved this stuff around yesterday in an attempt to get all the mangled names (there were some earlier move errors) and their redirects pointing to a single, non-confusing place. After this new unduscussed move, I'm not sure what the status of things is. Anyway, this is basically the same case as Macy's versus "macys", except Macy's actually asserts that stylization as their official logo, and Générations Mouvement seems to do no such thing with any of these strange renderings.  — SMcCandlish ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ʌ<  08:26, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)SpiresSpires (disambiguation) – The clear primary topic of "spires" is spire. Other topics on the disambiguation page are comparatively obscure. SPIRES is distinguished by being an all-caps acronym; Speyer is a different spelling; The Spires (besides having a leading "The") merely redirects to Church House (Presbyterian Church in Ireland). There are, of course, topics missing from the page, namely a handful of buildings, and some people with the surname Spires, but those are equally obscure. Move this page to redirect "spires" to spire. bd2412 T 04:13, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)NRE N-ViroMotive SeriesNRE 3GS21B – This article was originally about the NRE 3GS21B locomotive model. In March 2017, @Bacon BMW: tried to make this into what I believe is a listicle on all of the models in this series, and apparently copied the contents of NRE 2GS14B into the page without attribution. Later, @Loco2018: added content which can easily be seen as improper advertising. A few minutes ago, I boldly reverted all edits to this article (except for one, which was a valid category swap) back to Onward2's version, which I saw as the last "good" version about this specific model. However, I could not move the page back because it was moved twice and the original title has had a double-redirect fix. The move would not normally be controversial, but the refocus back to the model may be. -happy5214 03:44, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Pullman StrikePullman strike – It's been three years, and all the other articles discussed in the batch above have since had their over-capitalization fixed by consensus. The evidence is not changed, and the 6–4 in favor of following MOS:CAPS is probably about where we are, but maybe we can get a consensus to fix it this time. Dicklyon (talk) 02:56, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

December 7, 2017

  • (Discuss)The Burmese HarpThe Burmese Harp (novel) – The novel stub is not the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC in the English-speaking world. In the event of insistence upon a primary topic, it would have to be the 1956 film version which had been acclaimed as one of the great antiwar films and received a Best Foreign-Language Film nomination at that year's Academy Awards. The base title should be at The Burmese Harp disambiguation page. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 22:52, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)The AvalonAvalon Ballroom – This is the name used by most (all?) of the cited sources. Apparently this page was moved back in 2013 to the current name after a discussion, but I can't figure out from that discussion why it's not called Avalon Ballroom. Kendall-K1 (talk) 20:05, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Samantha ChapmanPixiwoo – Samantha Chapman has limited name recognition outside of the context of Pixiwoo, the branding used by her and her sister Nicola Haste Chapman for their YouTube channel. See this article and this article for examples of how the media refers to the duo. The name Pixiwoo is also incorporated into their branding for their makeup brush brand, Real Techniques. See their website, as well as the links above. Therefore, I propose renaming this page 'Pixiwoo' and rewriting it to incorporate information about both sisters. Lenoresm (talk) 15:54, 30 November 2017 (UTC)--Relisting.usernamekiran(talk) 18:28, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Akani SongsermsawadSunny Akani – Currently he goes by the name on Sunny Akani. His profile on the World Snooker website also lists him as Sunny Akani as opposed to his birth name. Boddefan2009 (talk) 16:50, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Elapsed listings

  • (Discuss)Seto Car-waiCarwai SetoCarwai Seto is the spelling & order used in all English sources cited in the article besides Sports Reference, the only name that gets any hits in Google News or Google Books, and the name that appears on her current employer's homepage and on her social media pages. (talk) 13:06, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Showtime!Showtime (The J. Geils Band album) – decorative "!". WP:COMMONNAME; this article has no sources, but a GBooks search shows COMMONNAME in Billboard and Musician mentioning the album without the "!" as straight "Showtime" no exclamation, Musician 1987 "J. Geils Band ... when Showtime, a live set that was Wolfs pet project, stiffed commercially right after the band had hit the top with Freeze Frame.. Therefore ! isn't likely to recognizable as = (The J. Geils Band album) when the result Showtime! pops up in autocomplete searches. NB we have 11 other Showtime (album) articles. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:14, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Kobanî CantonEuphrates Region – The cantons have been organized into regions. No longer referred to Kobanî Canton in DFNS media. Keeping name here creates confusion as the subordinate provinces are also sometimes referred to as cantons. AntonSamuel (talk) 11:31, 28 November 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. Bradv 04:23, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Jazira CantonJazira Region – The cantons have been organized into regions. No longer referred to Jazira Canton in DFNS media. Keeping name here creates confusion as the subordinate provinces are also sometimes referred to as cantons. AntonSamuel (talk) 11:32, 28 November 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. Bradv 04:21, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Cantons of RojavaRegions of Rojava – The cantons have been organized into regions. No longer referred to as cantons in DFNS media. Keeping name here creates confusion as the subordinate provinces are also sometimes referred to as cantons. AntonSamuel (talk) 11:33, 28 November 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. Bradv 04:16, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Afrin CantonAfrin Region – The cantons have been organized into regions. No longer referred to Afrin Canton in DFNS media. Keeping name here creates confusion as the subordinate provinces are also sometimes referred to as cantons. AntonSamuel (talk) 11:34, 28 November 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. Bradv 04:11, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Emperor Bing of SongEmperor Huaizong of Song – I'm not aware of any other Chinese emperor who uses this weird, totally invented "Emperor + personal given name + of + name of dynasty" format. Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese) says "use temple names" for Song emperors, but this kid had no well-known temple name. Like User:星光下的人 mentioned in the discussion above, the temple name (and posthumous name) listed in the article's infobox are probably fabrications by netizens. The linked article was created by an IP without any source. Finally, Google Ngram shows no graphs for "Emperor Bing" or "Bing Emperor". Timmyshin (talk) 01:25, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
  • (Discuss)Milano (disambiguation)Milano – Upon reviewing the page views of Milano vs. Milano (disambiguation), I fail to see how it can be assumed without a doubt that most readers who look up the term "Milano" are intending to locate the city of Milan. In addition, the top results for Google books for "Milano" contain next to no results for the city of Milan. For English readers, readers are probably trying to locate pages like Alyssa Milano or Milano (cookie), for example. It would probably be best to move the disambiguation page to the ambiguous title so that readers can figure out which page they are trying to locate. Steel1943 (talk) 20:41, 6 December 2017 (UTC)


Malformed requests


  1. ^
  2. ^
  3. ^
  4. ^
  5. ^
  6. ^ "Don't use 'university' in institute names, UGC directs deemed-to-be varsities". The Indian Express. 15 November 2017. Retrieved 1 December 2017. 
  7. ^ "KIIT | Kalinga Institute of Industrial Technology Bhubaneswar". Retrieved 7 December 2017. 
  8. ^ "KIIT logo". Retrieved 7 December 2017. 

See also

Retrieved from ""
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia :
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Wikipedia:Requested moves"; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA