Misplaced Pages

:Requested moves - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Anthony Appleyard (talk | contribs) at 06:23, 24 November 2007 (→Uncontroversial proposals: done 3). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 06:23, 24 November 2007 by Anthony Appleyard (talk | contribs) (→Uncontroversial proposals: done 3)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
This page has an administrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators.
Please replace this notice with {{no admin backlog}} when the backlog is cleared.

Purge the cache to refresh this page Requested moves is a process for requesting the retitling (moving) of an article, template, or project page on Misplaced Pages. For information on retitling files, categories, and other items, see § When not to use this page.

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 § 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 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 Misplaced Pages:Requested moves/Closing instructions for more details on the process.

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

When not to use this page

Shortcuts

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

Undiscussed moves

Shortcuts

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:WP:RM2|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 relist it in the #Incomplete and contested proposals section below.

Incomplete and contested proposals

That is his real name and he has said that, so we should use it. We have used what Mutiah Muralidaran has said what his real name is (not the common English spelling "Muttiah Muralitharan"). So I guess that covers it.

  • Like I said, I've done that already. Literally asked at 3 policy talkpages, 1 rfc (posted for double-length), the pump (policy), the mailing list wikien-l, and individually asked a few admins. Like dab says, TT is a hard-sell ("filibustering") on whether we have consensus already (I believe that there is: 11 editors (5 of them admins) vs 2 (TT and Phoebe), if counting). Regarding this move, he even posted on ANI (plus 4 other places). If you want to remove this request from this page, that's fine by me (I didn't due to involvement, and instead just added context). If you'd like to help with the discussion too, that'd be even better :) -- Quiddity (talk) 18:52, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I apologize for my lack of reading comprehension. I think what happened is that I noticed the move request from mainspace to portal space for the mathematics topics in the backlog below, and I believed that discussion there should be superceded by the outcome of this one... but looking through the linked talk pages, it didn't appear that discussion was ongoing, or that a conclusion was reached, so I typed a generic suggestion without examining things further. Dekimasuよ! 04:43, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Other proposals

Please use the correct template: see the instructions above.
Do not attempt to copy and paste formatting from another listing.

November 24, 2007

November 23, 2007

  • Royal coat of arms of the United Kingdom → Coat of arms of the United Kingdom —(Discuss)— I took the initiative of moving this page to "Coat of arms of the United Kingdom", dropping the initial royal. Though I'm a long time editor, I totally forgot the rule about "cut and paste" moves. (I couldn't use the automated mechanism since there was already a redirect.) My reasoning is that every other country that has a coat of arms page in the Misplaced Pages is called "Coat of arms of _____", including other Commonwealth nations. (Canada, Australia, etc.). Furthermore, since there is no need to disambiguate between the "Coat of arms of the United Kingdom" and the "Royal coat of arms of the United Kingdom", then I suggest we keep the title as concise as possible. —Lovelac7 13:12, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

November 22, 2007

November 21, 2007

  • Dutch doughnut → Oliebol —(Discuss)— There is no real English name for this Dutch recipe, so we should not attempt to create one. Granted, "Dutch doughnut" does yield some Google results, but it pales in comparison to the phrases "oliebol" and "oliebollen". Since no transliteration is required, we should just assume the original Dutch name. ——msikma (user, talk) 19:44, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

November 20, 2007

November 19, 2007

Backlog

Move dated sections here after five days have passed.

  • Jallianwala Bagh massacre → Amritsar Massacre —(Discuss)— Page was originally moved against policy to its current location, where a poll was undertaken to move it back to its common english name rather than its name in India. After the poll ended in a dead heat, no action was taken. The main argument being put forward against the move was a wikipolicy (that was not written down anywhere) that meant local form was preferred over common English useage and that Amritsar Massacre was only prefered in western text books. Amritsar Massacre is clearly the common English name (as net searches and checking of history books will reveal) and the incorrect move to Jallianwala Bagh should finally be fixed. —-- Narson (talk) 17:08, 16 November 2007 (UTC) -- Narson (talk) 17:08, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Åland → Åland Islands —(Discuss)— General and traditional usage in English, United Nations recognises the autonomous province as "Åland Islands" , Finnish state (in English texts) . Anyway, I sort of have already thought it's obvious that it is Åland Islands in English, since Åland doesn't really tell anything to an English-speaker.--Pudeo⺮ 13:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC) —Pudeo⺮ 13:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Sun Conure → Sun Parakeet —(Discuss)— All major authorities use the name Sun Parakeet (not Sun Conure), e.g. the South American Classification Committee, Clements check-list of Birds of the World, Sibley & Monroe check-list of Birds of the World, Howard & Moore check-list of Birds of the World, Handbook of Birds of the World, BirdLife International, etc. Additionally, all recently published field guides to the region where this species occurs also use Sun Parakeet, these being Birds of Northern South America (Restall et al, 2006), Birds of Venezuela (Hilty, 2003), Aves do Brazil (Sigrist, 2006) and Birds of South America - Non-Passerines (Mata et al, 2006). Hence the recommendation of a move of this article —Rabo3 21:17, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
  • RJ 100 → DZRJ-FM —(Discuss)— I'm in a way, making this for ALL Piony radio stations which have articles which use their brand names as the article name. To have consistancy with all other radio station articles that have call letters, I think they should ALL be moved to their respective call letters as their article name. —ViperSnake151 14:44, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Categories:
Misplaced Pages:Requested moves Add topic