Wikipedia:Requested moves

For requested mergers, see Wikipedia:Proposed mergers. For removals, see Wikipedia:Guide to deletion. For page history mergers, see Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen.

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; for example, a page may already exist at the target title and require deletion, or the page may be protected from moves. See: § Requesting technical moves.
• Requests to revert recent, undiscussed, controversial moves may be made at WP:RM/TR. If the new name has not become the stable title, the undiscussed move will be reverted. If the new name has become the stable title, a requested move will be needed to determine the article's proper location.
• A title may be disputed, and discussion may be necessary to reach consensus: see § Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves. The requested moves process is not mandatory, and sometimes an informal discussion at the article's talk page can help reach consensus.
• 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 generally processed after seven days. If consensus to move the page is reached at or after this time, a reviewer will carry out the request. If there is a consensus not to move the page, the request will be closed as "not moved". When consensus remains unclear, the request may be relisted to allow more time for consensus to develop, or the discussion may be closed as "no consensus". See Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions for more details on the process.

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

When not to use this page

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

• Making an uncontroversial move – if you can, be bold and do it yourself! If you can't, see § Requesting technical moves.
• Renaming a category – propose the move at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion.
• Renaming a stub template – propose the move at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion.
• Renaming an image or other file – see Wikipedia:Moving a page § Moving a file page.
• Moves from draft namespace or user space to article space – Unconfirmed users: add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the article. See Wikipedia:Articles for creation. Confirmed users: Move the page yourself.
• Merging two articles – make a request at Wikipedia:Proposed mergers, or be bold and do it yourself.
• Splitting an article – make a request at Wikipedia:Proposed article splits, or be bold and do it yourself.
• Requesting that page histories be merged – list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge.
• Contesting a move request close – use the Wikipedia:Move review process.

Undiscussed moves

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

• No article exists at the new target title;
• There has been no 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 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.

Uncontroversial proposals

Only list proposals here that are clearly uncontroversial but require administrator help to complete (for example, spelling and capitalization fixes). Do not list a proposed page move in this section if there is any possibility that it could be opposed by anyone. Please list new requests at the bottom of the list in this section and use {{subst:RMassist|Old page name|Requested name|Reason for move}} rather than copying previous entries. The template will automatically include your signature. No edits to the article's talk page are required.

If you object to a proposal listed here, please re-list it in the #Incomplete and contested proposals section below.

• The Sun Also Rises (film) → The Sun Also Rises (2007 film) — to distinguish The Sun Also Rises (1957 film) per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films)#Between films of the same name. --Neo-Jay (talk) 06:30, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
• Paul Hardin Jr → Paul Hardin, Jr. — Correct style per WP:NCP — Tassedethe (talk) 08:05, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Incomplete and contested proposals

With the exception of a brief description of the problem or objection to the move request, please do not discuss move requests here. If you support an incomplete or contested move request, please consider following the instructions above to create a full move request, and move the discussion to the "Other Proposals" section below. Requests that remain incomplete after five days will be removed.

• Move several city article names There's currently a proposal to amend the naming conventions for US cities to follow the AP Stylebook for all cities, instead of selectively. This would effectively move the following city articles:

Atlanta, Georgia → Atlanta

Baltimore, Maryland → Baltimore

Boston, Massachusetts → Boston

Cincinnati, Ohio → Cincinnati

Cleveland, Ohio → Cleveland

Dallas, Texas → Dallas

Denver, Colorado → Denver

Detroit, Michigan → Detroit

Honolulu, Hawaii → Honolulu

Houston, Texas → Houston

Indianapolis, Indiana → Indianapolis

Los Angeles, California → Los Angeles

Miami, Florida → Miami

Milwaukee, Wisconsin → Milwaukee

Minneapolis, Minnesota → Minneapolis

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma → Oklahoma City

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania → Pittsburgh

St. Louis, Missouri → St. Louis

Salt Lake City, Utah → Salt Lake City

San Antonio, Texas → San Antonio

San Diego, California → San Diego

San Francisco, California → San Francisco

To participate in this discussion, go Move several city article names|here. Dr. Cash (talk) 16:28, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

• • Incomplete. Individual articles are not tagged. JPG-GR (talk) 16:33, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

• Hokkien dialect → Hokkien - The linguistic classification of Hokkien is disputed and this "Hokkien dialect" is inappropriate. Whilst "Hokkien" can also refer to Fujian Province, its most common use by far is in reference to the language. A disambig. page is not required at Hokkien as anyone seeking the article Fujian could be redirected by a disambig. at the top of the page. --Vox latina (talk) 23:34, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Incomplete. JPG-GR (talk) 00:35, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

• Indian media → Media of India — Literally all other "media by country" articles follow the naming convention "Media of x". There is no objective reason that the media article for India should differ from this standard. Neelix (talk) 21:13, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Are you sure that this standardization is necessary? "Indian media" sounds much better to me than "Media of India". I also think it should be "Media in India", rather than "of". (NB, to clarify, "all the other articles follow the naming convention" because Neelix recently moved quite a few others.) 87.115.34.24 (talk) 21:40, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
    • Title standardization is a healthy and generally accepted process for the project in general, as is evidenced by the large number of naming conventions for specific types of articles currently in use. Employing differing titles to refer to the same concept in different countries suggests a difference in content, which is not the case. I looked at all the "Media by country" articles, and saw that over half employed "of", less than half employed "in", and the other two employed a demonym, as in the case of Indian media. Either of the three options would have worked, but choosing one as a standard is a valuable and well-established practice. This article was the only one I was not able to move myself. Is there any reason that this last article should not be standardized other than that the current title subjectively sound better? Neelix (talk) 10:52, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
      • Hi, I agree that title standardization can be a good thing, but it is not essential, and there is nothing explicit about it in the guidelines (afaik). Moreover, once a standard is set, it is hard to revert, and so it is best to request feedback before going ahead with it (see How to propose a new naming convention). By my reckoning, you moved ~28 pages from "Media in X" to "Media of X", when I think the former name is more appropriate. (But here is not the right place to discuss that.)87.115.3.92 (talk) 20:36, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
        • I apologize if I have offended you in my edits. I meant only to be bold and do some cleanup which I believed to be uncontroversial. If you feel that "in" is more appropriate, by all means, propose the naming convention in the way you have suggested, and I will more than happily support it. But couldn't we move this one last article to the current standard until that happens? All I am requesting is that these articles be consistent; I am indifferent to whether "in" or "of" is used. Either seems like a fully viable option, but not both. Neelix (talk) 21:50, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

• Front Row (software) → Front Row — Front Row currently redirects to Front Row (software). As the software has been recognized as the primary article, the qualifier "(software)" is unnecessary. Neelix (talk) 15:31, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
  • How was it "recognized as the primary article"? The only discussion on the talk page about disambiguation is inconclusive at best. older ≠ wiser 17:44, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
    • It is currently recognized by the project as the primary article because Front Row redirects there. I'm not saying that it is the primary article, and I'm not suggesting that any amount of discussion at all has resulted in this recognition, but the current state of affairs makes such a recognition. I would be quite happy if the disambiguation page was moved to the Front Row title instead, but having Front Row as a redirect anywhere unacceptable. It should either be a disambiguation page or the primary article. Neelix (talk) 21:09, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

• Value (philosophy) → Value (ethics) — The whole article deals with "ethic or philosophic value", but ethics may be regarded as a subdivision of philosophy, and the whole article, as far as I can see, only deals with that subdivision. For instance, intrinsic value already has (ethics) as an attribute. I know many redirects need to be changed, but I can deal with the main part of that. — The world deserves the truth (talk) 11:02, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

The article is a bit messy, but it does speak about values other than ethics (e.g. economics). It would be sensible to discuss before moving. 87.114.17.201 (talk) 13:48, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

The fact that it doesn't clearly mean ethic value specifically probably contributes significantly to the mess. Value (economics) already has an own article - the article just describes the possible correlation between it and ethic value. I suggest this discussion be continued on its talk page. The world deserves the truth (talk) 17:49, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Other proposals

15 October 2008

• (Discuss) -- Primary usage is the Vimont in Quebec. The one in Canada is larger, and has continual exposure to an English speaking region (Greater Montreal). --70.51.10.188 (talk) 09:18, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Vimont → Vimont, France
  • Vimont, Quebec → Vimont

• Stamford Robins → Peekskill Robins —(Discuss)— The baseball team moved from Stamford, CT to Peekskill, NY for the 2008 season and is still located there. --67.86.73.252 (talk) 00:28, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

14 October 2008

• List of U-boats → List of German U-boats —(Discuss)— More accurate description of the article contents. There is already a separate List of Austro-Hungarian U-boats for Austria-Hungary, the only other country that identified its submarines as U-boats --Bellhalla (talk) 17:47, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

• Boston, Massachusetts → Boston —(Discuss)— Talk:Boston, Massachusetts --Loodog (talk) 16:23, 14 October 2008 (UTC). We've had a lot of discussion on this and consensus looks to be in favor of the move. I didn't realize this move should be mentioned here, but am adding it now. I don't want the move, if successful, to considered illegitimate because I didn't realize the process here.--Loodog (talk) 16:23, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

It should be noted that this request is now a redundant effort to a current proposal to change the naming conventions for US cities to follow the AP Stylebook. Dr. Cash (talk) 16:39, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

• Friday the 13th Part III → Friday the 13th Part 3 —(Discuss)— Well some sites use roman numerals (like IMDb), the official site does note, all of the posters use "3" and most of the VHS/DVD covers (i've seen some UK ones use roman numerals). --TJ Spyke 15:57, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

• The Whitechapel Murders (1888-91) → Whitechapel murders —(Discuss)— Disambiguation using dates and definite article is unnecessary. Use of definite articles in article names is deprecated at Wikipedia:Naming conventions#Avoid the definite article ("the") and the indefinite article ("a"/"an") at the beginning of the page name. --DrKiernan (talk) 12:40, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

13 October 2008

• Infernus (musician) → Infernus — (Discuss) — Considering that 'Infernus' now redirects to that of the musician, it might as well merit a page move for practicality — Dark Prime (talk) 19:57, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Or move Infernus (disambiguation) to Infernus? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:09, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I agree with Dark Prime, this article should be moved to Infernus. I don't see the big need for the disambiguation page at all, especially since Infernus (car) has been proposed for deletion. Bulgakoff (talk) 14:07, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

• WLFF → WSYN —(Discuss)— The change on WSYN was a frequency change, not a format change, so the new call letters and format for the former WSYN frequency were irrelevant after all --Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 17:01, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

• WSYN → WLFF —(Discuss)— It could be argued that WYAK became WLFF and simply changed its frequency, even though a name change and minor format change were involved too --Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 17:01, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

• Aeroparque Jorge Newbery → Jorge Newbery Airport —(Discuss)— This is the only airport article I know of on the English Wikipedia that uses a non-English version of the word airport/airpark/aerodrome/airfield, etc. The standard convention here has been to use an English version of the name (i.e. Düsseldorf International Airport instead of the German Flughafen Düsseldorf International.) I had previously requested a move to Jorge Newbery Airpark, but it was pointed out that Jorge Newbery Airport the more common English usage. Other Wikipedias have also changed the name to their native languages: the German article Flughafen Buenos Aires-Jorge Newbery, the Lithuanian article Jorge Newbery oro uostas and Polish article Port lotniczy Jorge Newbery. --Zyxw (talk) 16:47, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

• Striker → Forward (association football) —(Discuss)— The current title of this article is not appropriate. The term "striker" may encompass centre-forwards and second strikers, but it is not commonly used to refer to wing forwards such as Cristiano Ronaldo or Lionel Messi. I certainly would never refer to either of those two as a striker. The term "forward", however, refers to any player who plays in an advanced role, whether they be a striker, a second striker or a winger. The disambiguator "association football" is only necessary to disambiguate from other articles about forwards. --– PeeJay 09:57, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

12 October 2008

• Wall (Western Sahara) → Moroccan Wall —(Discuss)— Bring in line with WP:NAME & WP:DISAMBIG --Reisio (talk) 23:16, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

• Linux → Linux (GNU/Linux) —(Discuss)— this would allow both names to be treated equally, without bias to either one. And neutrality is one of Wikipedia's top mandates after all. Ensign Q (talk) 23:13, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Incomplete. JPG-GR (talk) 23:38, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose, endless discussion of this in archives and general agreement that the current title is the most common one. Parentheses misused in the proposed name. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:53, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Excuse me, but Sun Microsystems and a bunch of other companies use the term GNU/Linux. So simply ignoring the name is complete bias.

However, I also understand that the name Linux to describe the operating system came first, and is used widely, so I won't ignore that name either.

I further understand that this issue will never be solved, ever. It is simply impossible. Had Linux-GNU/Linux been made by a company, it would have been simpler. But it wasn't. We simply have to accept the fact that there are two official names to describe this operating system; there is no "right" answer. We shouldn't force the name "Linux" to the readers; we should instead let the reader decide for themselves which name they prefer, and that means we can't make the article give prominance to one name over the other. It is is simply unacceptable.

The reasoning behind renaming the article "Linux (GNU/Linux)" is:

a) It respects both names.

b) It respects that the name "Linux" to describe the OS came first.

c) It makes each name equal.

If it isn't to your liking, then we could go for "Linux-GNU/Linux" or "Linux*GNU/Linux" or similar.

In the end though, the current title is not respecting Wikipedia goal for neutrality.

64.230.125.250 (talk) 14:13, 13 October 2008 (UTC) (aka Ensign_Q)

• Web brigades → Government manipulation of the internet —(Discuss)— The article is mostly about government manipulation of the internet Web brigades is a really vague naming of the article -- Mariah-Yulia (talk) 21:11, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

• Morion (helmet) → Morion —(Discuss)— A GoogleFight revealed that there were more hits for "morion" the helmet than for "morion" the mineral. I think it would be more helpful to have the page "Morion" link to the article for the helmet, and to have the mineral article be renamed "Morion (mineral)") --Witan (talk) 19:36, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

• GPRS_Tunnelling_Protocol → GPRS_Tunneling_Protocol —(Discuss)— Typo is the page name, makes it harder to find it from the search box. --Julienforgeat (talk) 10:34, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

11 October 2008

• Poland Is Not Yet Lost → Mazurek Dąbrowskiego —(Discuss)— See talk for detail. The suggested native name of the Polish anthem is the internationally accepted norm for all anthems in languages other than English. See talk also for advanced search statistics. --Poeticbent talk 18:07, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

• Pentatope number -> Pentachoral number -Discuss)- See talk page for detail. Georgia guy (talk) 16:53, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

• List of newspapers in Ireland → List of newspapers in the Republic of Ireland —(Discuss)— Only contains newspapers in the Republic of Ireland--Googlechrome (talk) 14:02, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

• Derek Kwok → Derek Kok —(Discuss)— This is the correct last name of the HK artist as stated on his blog and other resources on the Internet. --~DARK_PRINZE~ (talk) 11:54, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Was incomplete, relisting and placing the survey.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

• MAVEN (spacecraft) → MAVEN —(Discuss)— The only MAVEN is the spacecraft, hence no need for parens. --Potatoswatter (talk) 10:29, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

• Binary-compatibility → Binary compatibility —(Discuss)— Binary compatibility redirects to Application binary interface, and hyphenation is wrong --Jerome Potts (talk) 06:29, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

10 October 2008

• Aravane Rezai → Aravane Rezaï —(Discuss)— The move will re-instate the diacritic, which is accurate, appropriate, and in accordance with naming conventions and all other articles where diacritics are used. --Maedin\^talk 18:26, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

• Body of Lies (film) → Body of Lies —(Discuss)— Brewcrewer (talk · contribs) considers the film the primary topic. --Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:12, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

• Union Party (Norway) → Unity Party (Norway) —(Discuss)— "Union Party" is a misleading translation of the Norwegian name "Samlingspartiet" --Barend (talk) 15:21, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

• Bill O'Reilly (commentator) → Bill O'Reilly (political commentator) —(Discuss)— Because it doesn't disambiguate sufficiently. Bill O'Reilly (cricketer) had a notable career as a commentator too; just as a sports commentator --Dweller (talk) 10:28, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

• Snow (singer) → Snow (Japanese singer) —(Discuss)— The much more notable artist "Snow (musician)" should have "Snow (singer)" redirect to him and a dablink placed on his page to the J-Pop singer if her article passes notability --TheTruthiness (talk) 02:20, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Backlog

Move dated sections here after five days have passed (September 22 or older).

• De Bono Hats → Six Thinking Hats —(Discuss)— current name is inconsistent with existing print media and franchised training, and is biased --Innovationbrain (talk) 22:29, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

• Shepherd's Bush tube station (Central Line) → Shepherd's Bush tube station —(Discuss)— Disambiguation in title is no longer required, as other station with same name has now been renamed. --Jorvik (talk) 19:30, 9 October 2008 (UTC)} Jorvik (talk) 19:30, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

• 2009 UEFA Women's Championship → UEFA Women's Euro 2009 —(Discuss)— Multiple move; registered and easier name, consistency with mens' UEFA Euro 2008 --Pudeo⺮ 15:37, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

• American Association of Blood Banks → AABB —(Discuss)— article was moved inappropriately to expand an acronym, but the name is no longer an acronym as explicitly cited in the article from the organization's own web page. It is now just a four letter name in capitals. The current location should obviously redirect to the correct location instead of being a disambiguation page. The article was formerly hatnoted for the other definition, which is an acronym. --SDY (talk) 01:41, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

• Violence of Summer → Violence of Summer (Love's Taking Over) —(Discuss)— This is the correct title as listed on the single cover, which can clearly be seen on the article itself - for some reason I can't move it, no matter how many times I try, it just says "Error: Could not submit form" in small type. --Rogerb67 (talk) 00:19, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

• Safety on Singapore Mass Rapid Transit → Safety on the Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore) —(Discuss)— The main article on the subject is "Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore)", "Safety on Singapore Mass Rapid Transit" does not appear to be the official name of the mass rapid transit system and thus is grammatically incorrect, and "Safety on the Mass Rapid Transit" is potentially ambiguous. The following related articles also require moving. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 15:29, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Facilities on the Mass Rapid Transit → Facilities on the Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore)
  • Fares and ticketing on the Mass Rapid Transit → Fares and ticketing on the Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore)
  • History of the Mass Rapid Transit → History of the Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore)
  • Security on the Mass Rapid Transit → Security on the Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore)

• Right → Rights — (Discuss) — target name is currently a redirect to current name; very old consensus on talk page suggested this move, but it never happened — Pfhorrest (talk) 08:12, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
  • That old discussion is very short. More discussion is needed. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 08:33, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Discussion has resumed. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 20:00, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

• • Relisting. JPG-GR (talk) 17:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

• Greatest Hit (Annie song) → The Greatest Hit —(Discuss)— Originally titled "The Greatest Hit". PiracyFundsTerrorism (talk) 15:00, 6 October 2008 (UTC) --PiracyFundsTerrorism (talk) 15:00, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

• Pine Hills, California → Pine Hill, California —(Discuss)— This article is incorrectly named due to the US Census error of listing the community name in the plural, "Hills." If the example given of Lisco, Nebraska is the correct way to manage this issue, why not fix it? --Norcalal 06:48, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

• Decolonization of Africa → Decolonisation of Africa —(Discuss)— The page has strong ties to particular English-speaking nations in Africa and Europe, yet it is written in a different regional form of English which plainly fails to reflect that. --92.1.75.227 (talk) 23:18, 25 September 2008 (UTC)