Cannabis Ruderalis

thcscience_admin

Closing instructions

For the current list of potentially controversial requested moves, see § Current discussions.
"Wikipedia:RM" and "Wikipedia:RFPM" redirect here. For requested mergers, see Wikipedia:Proposed article mergers. For removals, see Wikipedia:Guide to deletion. For page history mergers, see Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. For requesting the page mover user right, see Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Page mover.
Note: For retitling files, categories and other items, see When not to use this page.
For detailed guidance on how and when to move a page, see Wikipedia:Moving a page.
Click here to purge this page
Shortcuts

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 moves 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 consensus is reached at or after this time, a reviewer will enact the request. If not, the request may be re-listed to allow more time for consensus to develop, or the discussion closed as "no consensus". See Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions for more details on the process.

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

When not to use this page

Shortcuts

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

Undiscussed moves

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 discussion (especially no recent 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 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

Shortcut

If you are unable to complete a move for technical reasons, you can request technical help below. This is the correct page if you tried to move a page, and you got an error message saying something like "You do not have permission to move this page, for the following reasons:".

  • To list a technical request: edit the Uncontroversial technical requests subsection and insert the following code at the top of the list, 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 ~~~~. Consider pinging the requester to let them know about the objection.
  • 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


Uncontroversial technical requests

Administrator needed

I submitted a draft:iqos back in December because of my CoI. The draft has already been reviewed positively (yay!) but according to the reviewer it appears that there is a redirect in the way that prevents a simple move. I did a bit of digging around and according to WP:RFD#DELETE a page can not be moved over a redirect if the latter has a history of its own (the target page has been renamed several times, and the redirect edited accordingly).

I've asked on the AfC Help desk and they confirmed this was the place to ask. Thanks Aphis Marta (talk) 11:22, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

  • Comment - @Aphis Marta: this page doesn't appear to be ready for main space yet. It has an orange COI tag on it, added by Robert McClenon. Until that issue is resolved satisfactorily, it should remain in draft space IMHO. Maybe get an opinion at WP:COIN if this is incorrect. Also, the template technically still says "review waiting".  — Amakuru (talk) 12:40, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
    @Amakuru: thanks for the quick reply! I discussed this with Robert McClenon at the time - the CoI declaration had been correctly made on the article talk page and it seems he wanted it to be a little more obvious but had no other issue to address. As for your suggestion that I go ask WP:COIN, happy to do so but most discussions I see are around undisclosed paid editing, not sure what their opinion on redirects could be (and 331dot at the AfC Help Desk did point me here, not there).
    I should also make it clear that I am actually not asking for the article to be moved to mainspace by you here but the default template made it so: I only need the redirect deleted so that AfC folks without admin rights can move the page themselves if/when they see fit. Thank you, --Aphis Marta (talk) 13:33, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
    @Aphis Marta: Thanks, and I think the main thing is that if @Robert McClenon and 331dot: are happy that the draft is free of COI issues, then there's no problem doing as you ask. But if doubts remain then they should be handled in draft space rather than in article space. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 14:33, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Contested technical requests

Requests to revert undiscussed moves

Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves

Shortcut

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

  • 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. For technical move requests, such as to correct obvious typographical errors, see Requesting technical moves. The technical moves procedure can also be used for uncontroversial moves when the requested title is occupied by an existing article.

Do not create a new move request when one is already open on the same talk page. Instead, consider contributing to the open discussion if you would like to propose another alternative. Multiple closed move requests may be on the same page, but each should have a unique section heading.

Do not create a move request to rename one or more redirects. Redirects cannot be used as current titles in requested moves.

Requesting a single page move

Shortcut

To request a single page move, click on the "New section" tab of the talk page of the article you want moved, without adding a new subject/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. You don't need to add your signature at the end, as this template will do so automatically.}}

Replace NewName with the requested new name of the page (or with a simple question mark, if you want more than one possible new name to be considered). The template will automatically create the heading "Requested move 16 February 2022" and sign the post for you.

There is no need to edit the article in question. Once the above code is added to the Talk page, a bot will automatically add the following notification at the top of the article:

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

WikiProjects may subscribe to Article alerts to receive RM notifications. For example, Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Article alerts/Requested moves is transcluded to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography. RMCD bot notifies many of the other Wikiprojects listed on the talk page of the article to be moved to invite project members to participate in the RM discussion. Requesters should feel free to notify any other Wikiproject or noticeboard that might be interested in the move request, as long as this notification is neutral.

Single page move on a different talk page

Occasionally, a move request must be made on a talk page other than the talk page of the page to be moved. For example, a request to rename Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Resources to Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewing and templates would need to take place at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation because the talk page of the project page to be moved, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/Resources, is a redirect to that centralized discussion page. In this type of case, the requested move should be made using the following code: 

{{subst:requested move|reason=(the reason for the page move goes here).|current1=(present title of page to be renamed)|new1=(proposed title of page)}}

Note that the |1= unnamed parameter is not used, and that the |current1= and |new1= parameters are used similar to multiple page moves described below.

Requesting multiple page moves

Shortcut

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).

To request a multiple page move, edit at the bottom of the talk page of the article you chose for your request, without adding a new header, inserting this code: 

{{subst:requested move
| current1 = Current title of page 1
| new1 = New title for page 1 with the talk page hosting this discussion
| current2 = Current title of page 2
| new2 = New title for page 2
| current3 = Current title of page 3
| new3 = New title for page 3
| reason = Place here your rationale for the proposed page name change, ideally referring to applicable naming convention policies and guidelines, and providing evidence in support where appropriate. If your reasoning includes search engine results, please prioritize searches limited to reliable sources (e.g. books, news, scholarly papers) over other web results. You don't need to add your signature at the end, as this template will do so automatically.
}}
See also: Template:Requested move/extended blank

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.

Occasionally the discussions for significant multi-move requests may be hosted on WikiProject talk pages or other pages in Project namespace. For multi-move discussions hosted on a page which is not itself proposed to be moved, specify |current1=Current title of page 1 for the first page to move.

Request all associated moves explicitly

Please list every move that you wish to have made in your request. For example, if you wish to move Cricket (disambiguation) to Cricket because you do not believe the sport is the primary topic for the search term "Cricket", then you actually want to move two pages, both Cricket (disambiguation) and Cricket. Thus you must list proposed titles for each page affected by your request. For example, you might propose:

If a new title is not proposed for the sport, it is more difficult to achieve consensus for a new title for that article. A move request that does not show what to do with the material at its proposed target, such as:

is incomplete. Such requests may be completed as a request to decide the best new title by discussion.

Template usage examples and notes
Talk page tag Text that will be shown (and usage notes)
{{subst:Requested move|new|reason=why}}
links talk edit
Requested move 16 February 2022

Wikipedia:Requested moves → New – why Example (talk) 14:53, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Use when the proposed new title is given.
Do not sign this template—this tag is auto-signed when substituted. Be sure to use the subst:.
This tag should be placed at the beginning of the section containing the relevant discussion.

{{subst:Requested move|?|reason=why}}
Requested move 16 February 2022

Wikipedia:Requested moves → ? – why Example (talk) 14:53, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Use when the proposed new title is not known.
Do not sign this template—this tag is auto-signed when substituted. Be sure to use the subst:.
This tag should be placed at the beginning of the section containing the relevant discussion.

{{subst:Requested move|new|reason=why|talk=yes}}
Requested move 16 February 2022

Wikipedia:Requested moves → New – why Example (talk) 14:53, 16 February 2022‎ (UTC)

Survey
Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this subsection with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
Discussion
Any additional comments:



This template adds subsections for survey and discussion.
Do not sign this template—this tag is auto-signed when substituted. Be sure to use the subst:
Click the "New Section" tab on the talk page and leave the Subject/headline blank, as the template by default automatically creates the heading.

{{subst:Requested move|new1=x|current2=y|new2=z|reason=why}}
Requested move 16 February 2022

– why Example (talk) 14:53, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Do not sign this template—this tag is auto-signed when substituted.
Be sure to use the subst: and place this tag at the beginning of the section containing the relevant discussion.
Add additional related move requests in pairs (|current3= and |new3=, |current4= and |new4=, etc.).

{{subst:Requested move|new1=?|current2=y|new2=?|reason=why}}
Requested move 16 February 2022

– why Example (talk) 14:53, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Commenting on a requested move

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 Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI.

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.
  • Nomination already implies that the nominator supports the name change, and nominators should refrain from repeating this recommendation on a separate bulleted line.[a]
  • 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

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.[b] Users relisting a debate which has already been relisted, or relisting a debate with a substantial discussion, should write a short explanation on why they did not consider the debate sufficient to close. While there is no consensus forbidding participation in a requested move discussion after relisting it, many editors consider it an inadvisable form of supervote. If you want to relist a discussion and then participate in it, be prepared to explain why you think it was appropriate.

Relisting can be done using {{subst:relisting}}, 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 discussion has been relisted a bot partially underlines the "Discuss" link in the lists of debates: (Discuss).

When a relisted discussion reaches a resolution, it may be closed at any time according to the closing instructions; there is no required length of time to wait before closing a relisted discussion.

If discussion has become stale, or it seems that discussion would benefit from more input of editors versed in the subject area, consider more widely publicizing the discussion, such as by notifying WikiProjects of the discussion using the template {{RM notification}}. Banners placed at the top of the talk page hosting the move request can often be used to identify WikiProjects suitable for notification.

Notes

  1. ^ A nominator making a procedural nomination with which they may not agree is free to add a bulleted line explaining their actual position. Additional detail, such as sources, may also be provided in an additional bullet point if its inclusion in the nomination statement would make the statement unwieldy. Please remember that the entire nomination statement is transcluded into the list on this page.
  2. ^ Despite this, discussions are occasionally relisted more than once.

Current discussions

Shortcut
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. 62 discussions have been relisted, indicated by (Discuss)

February 16, 2022

  • (Discuss) – Kefford Corporation → CDC Victoria – Kefford was sold to ComfortDelGro Australia in 2009 and was renamed CDC Victoria. This meant that the entity pre-2009 (Kefford) and the entity post-2009 (CDC Victoria) are the same. This included operations, subsidiaries and assets; the only thing changed was the branding of the Kefford company. The rebranding of subsidiaries is a separate issue and is just a reorganisation of the CDC Victoria structure. After the move, I also propose moving content from ComfortDelGro Australia#CDC Victoria and adding them to the bottom of the CDC Victoria article. The content in ComfortDelGro Australia (CDC Victoria section) can then be simplified to summarise the post-2009 history and operations. Marcnut1996 (talk) 09:29, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Annual Plan 2017/2018" (PDF). Auckland Museum. p. 3. Retrieved 8 February 2022.
  2. ^ "A walk in the park". Auckland Museum. Retrieved 8 February 2022.
  3. ^ "War Memorial Museum [Auckland War Memorial Museum - Pukekawa/Auckland Domain]". Auckland Museum. Retrieved 8 February 2022.
  4. ^ "Plan your visit, 1929 Espresso Bar". Auckland Museum. Retrieved 8 February 2022.
  5. ^ "A new approach to understanding our past". Auckland Museum. Retrieved 8 February 2022.
  6. ^ Anna, Rawhiti-Connell. "Learning to look Tāmaki Makaurau in the face: a review of Shifting Grounds". The Spinoff. Retrieved 6 February 2022.
  7. ^ Sharon, Stephenson. "Auckland: Three of the best volcanoes to climb". Stuff. Retrieved 6 February 2022.
  8. ^ Michael, Neilson. "Auckland's Matariki Festival tells the stories of Waikato-Tainui". NZ Herald. Retrieved 6 February 2022.
  9. ^ "The Shifting Grounds of Tamaki Makaurau". Radio New Zealand. Retrieved 6 February 2022.
  10. ^ Lucy, Mackintosh (2021). Shifting Grounds. Bridget Williams Books. ISBN 9781988587332.
  11. ^ The Rough Guide to New Zealand. Rough Guides Ltd. p. 81. ISBN 9780241186701.
  12. ^ Rachael, Bell (2017). The Treaty on the Ground. Massey University Press. ISBN 9780994136305.
  13. ^ Bruce, Hayward (7 November 2019). Volcanoes of Auckland: A Field Guide (PDF). Auckland University Press. p. 112. ISBN 9781869409012. Retrieved 8 February 2022.
  14. ^ "Pukekawa / Auckland Domain". Auckland Council. Retrieved 10 February 2022.
– E James Bowman (talk) 06:02, 6 February 2022 (UTC) — Relisting.  — Amakuru (talk) 08:44, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

February 15, 2022

  • (Discuss) – ViacomCBS → Paramount – Paramount, or any other identifier. It was annouced at the Investor Connect. 71.250.212.163 (talk) 22:25, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Macdonald (disambiguation) → Macdonald – I don't think there's a clear primary topic. All Google, Images and some Books results are for McDonald's, the restaurant. While the name gets around 2 thirds of views of things called Macdonald/McDonald, 2,047 for the name 793 for Pennsylvania, 264 for Ohio, 255 for Kansas, 66 for Manitoba, 62 for North Carolina, 22 for West Virginia, 14 for the electoral district, 6 for Missouri and 5 for the crater, the restaurant gets 139,042 and Macdonald triad gets 13,927. The surname may be the original meaning but it doesn't seem primary especially when the "D" is capitalized. There is 1 given name namely Macdonald Carey so I have used "name" per WP:APOAT but Macdonald Carey could be moved to the DAB and we instead use Macdonald (surname) for the article. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:11, 8 February 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:29, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Lega per Salvini Premier → Lega (Italy) – or Lega (political party) per WP:COMMONNAME. This party is never ever mentioned in the Italian nor English media with its full name, unless the article is specifically about the creation of such party and specifies its official name (also see the results of this search versus this one). Furthermore, 99% of the the times this article is wikilinked in another page on WP, it is always as either [[Lega per Salvini Premier|Lega]] or [[Lega per Salvini Premier|League]], because nobody wants to read its full official name. I prefer Lega (Italy) or Lega (political party) over League (Italy) for disambiguation purposes, since "league" is a very generic word in English (and "Lega" is also more commonly used to refer to this party even in English media). Yakme (talk) 11:25, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

February 14, 2022

  • (Discuss) – Canberra Darters → Capital Darters – According to Netball ACT the team has been relaunched/rebranded. "The Capital Darters will return to the competition in 2020, as a rebranding of the Canberra Darters who competed in the 2008 to 2016 ANL seasons".[1][2] Djln (talk) 23:31, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Irechecua → Tarascan state – The title of this article was recently moved without discussion from "Tarascan state" to "Irechecua"; however, irechecua seems to simply be the Purépecha word for "kingdom", and has minimal usage in English-language literature. Ngrams suggests that "Tarascan state" remains the most common name for the polity ([2]), so I'm proposing a return to that nomenclature. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 19:53, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Battle of the Stugna River → Battle of the Stuhna River – Spelling according to the main article Stuhna: name of a river in Ukraine, spelled according to standard Ukrainian romanization per WP:UKR. The title term “battle of the Stugna River” does not occur in the only source cited here;[3] it does refer to the river in Ukraine by the Russian or Old East Slavic-derived “the Stugna” and “the Stugna River,” but it is a 1967 book, demonstrating its dated WP:POV language with the title referring to Kyivan Rus as “Medieval Russia.” The current title is not a WP:COMMONNAME, as it seems to appear in only a single source found in Google Scholar[4] and the term returns only 27 results in Google Advanced Book Search (per WP:GOOG),[5] but having loaded all of them I can only find the phrase in a single one (many can’t be searched inside).  —Michael Z. 19:15, 7 February 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 19:42, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Modun Chanyu → Modu Chanyu – This was a move by Erminwin, without a request. However we can [7] see that Modun Chanyu is not used in English. It might be correct in foreign languages, but per WP:COMMONNAME this should be moved back to Modu Chanyu. Beshogur (talk) 12:10, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – RISAT-1A → EOS-04 – The satellite this article refers to is now called 'EOS-04'. It was previously called 'RISAT-1A' which is the current article title. The article acknowledges this but in my opinion it would be better if the article title is changed to 'EOS-04' to maintain consistency and accuracy mohitraj (talk) 08:28, 14 February 2022 (UTC) mohitraj (talk) 08:28, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Anna Sorokin → Anna Delvey' – WP:COMMONNAME, in light of Inventing Annas debut. Google search results are currently 63 million for Delvey vs. 30 million for Sorokin, with multiple article [8][9][10][11] responding to the series taking Delvey as the primary name, with even an exception from the New York Times [12] acknolwedging she is "better known" as Delvey. SItuation clearly changed substantially from rationale at time of 2019 page move. U-Mos (talk) 07:04, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Coyote Reconnaissance Vehicle → Bison/Coyote – The merge discussed in the above section was probably a good idea, but the Bison is probably the main topic. The Bison was designed before the Coyote. It makes more sense chronologically to talk about the Bison first. My Jane's combat vehicle reference guide has a whole entry for the Bison with the Coyote only listed as a variant. I think a combination Bison/Coyote title is in order so that the reader isn't confused. Schierbecker (talk) 04:15, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

February 13, 2022

  • (Discuss) – Idle (disambiguation) → Idle – While in a dictionary Idleness may clearly be primary it doesn't seem to be for the encyclopedia. Idleness gets 679 views but Idle (engine) gets 1,656 and that also has long-term significance, Idle (CPU) gets 926 views and probably also has a fair amount of long-term significance, IDLE has 4,541 and Eric Idle has 29,348[[13]] though he is a PTM the others are more likely to be searched with just "Idle" than Idleness. Google mainly returns IDLE and the dictionary meaning, which is 1st, Images also mainly returns IDLE while Books mainly returns Idleness. See a similar discussion at Talk:Boring#Requested move 20 April 2019 Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:34, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Medinet Habu (temple) → Medinet Habu – ...and merge with Medinet Habu (location). This one has bothered me for some time; I have spent many years trying to verify the two-article split we have had since these articles were created almost-simultaneously by two different editors in 2005. We still have no sources justifying the split. Having just visited the place I can confirm that there really is only one place known as Medinet Habu. I think the confusion stems from the fact that there was once a village on the grounds of the temple,[15] presumably the same one in which the Coptic church once stood, but this has not existed for a long time. Onceinawhile (talk) 14:14, 13 February 2022 (UTC) Onceinawhile (talk) 14:14, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Template:Botsum → Template:Summoned by bot – Summoned by bot is what appears on the use of this template. As such, the obvious title for this template should be {{Summoned by bot}}, though current title and redirects must be retargeted to the new title to help those who are accustomed with this title. ---CX Zoom(he/him) (let's talk|contribs) 09:06, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

February 12, 2022

  • (Discuss) – REDTV (online TV channel) → RedTV (streaming service) – Twofold move request: to satisfy MOS:TM and to get a better disambiguator. I'm unsure if (YouTube channel) would be correct; all their content is on YouTube, but they seem to be a bit more than that. "Online TV channel" is awkward phrasing and used by no other page. It also implies that there is a linear feed of RedTV programming, which there is not (I am using this as a bright line to determine eligibility for the television stations task force and will likely remove it from there after this RM). Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 07:47, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Silicon nitride → Trisilicon tetranitride – This article is about trisilicon tetranitride. The introductory sentence is the exception; it can be put in its own article about general silicon-nitrogen compounds titled Silicon nitride, and if possible focus on other such compounds. But this article in general is almost exclusively about trisilicon tetranitride. Georgia guy (talk) 18:35, 4 February 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:31, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

February 11, 2022

  • (Discuss) – Sia (musician) → Sia – This was discussed once, back in 2015 [24], and had considerable support then. Now, seven years later, it is clear that Sia has enduring notability and can be considered the primary topic. While it's true that there are many pages listed at the dabpage Sia, most are for things named "SIA"; of the others, it's clear that the musician is the most notable. Much like Nelly, Robyn, Adele, Cher, and many others, we can move this article to the undisambiguated title for the benefit of the 5,000+ [25] readers that visit this page daily. 162 etc. (talk) 06:43, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Clark Kent (Arrowverse) → Superman (Arrowverse) – Why is the article titled "Clark Kent"? Why are we not naming it "Superman"? That's how people know the character as and how they like him best. I just don't see why do we need to use the civilian names for characters that are better known for their superhero code-names. For example, people know Anakin Skywalker as Darth Vader and Orion Pax as Optimus Prime. I don't see why should Superman be the exception to that rule. Leader Vladimir (talk) 01:00, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

February 10, 2022

  • (Discuss) – Vijayalakshmi (Kannada actress) → Vijayalakshmi (actress) – No other actress with just the name Vijayalakshmi. Also, she acts in other languages as well (such as Tamil films). She has more page views than Vijayalakshmi Feroz, so this can be considered a primary topic. Current title "Kannada" is confusing as she has stopped acting predominately in Kannada for a while. DareshMohan (talk) 07:23, 1 February 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Colin M (talk) 19:57, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Kwezana → Khwezana – Town's spelling was corrected in 2015.[8] Sources were not provided when reverting bold move. Town is minuscule but I found one source using the new name.[9] We should adopt the more up to date name. Desertambition (talk) 14:44, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Bitesize → BBC Bitesize – BBC officially named its online learning service as BBC Bitesize, not just Bitesize [26]. 125.167.59.74 (talk) 12:19, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Hot Coffee (mod) → Hot Coffee (minigame) – This article discusses two things: a sexual intercourse minigame and a mod that unlocks said minigame. The main subject of this article is the minigame. The development, controversy, all revolve around the minigame. Several sentences in the article erroneously referred to the minigame as "mod", meanwhile the mod itself is sometimes referred as "patch". Neocorelight (Talk) 11:52, 10 February 2022 (UTC) Neocorelight (Talk) 11:52, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

February 9, 2022

  • (Discuss) – The Mandalorian (character) → Din Djarin – The character's real name is growing to be more prominent, being referred to as such in both the primary and many secondary sources, especially after he's canonically no longer considered a Mandalorian. Unnamed anon (talk) 20:32, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Francis Bourgeois (disambiguation) → Francis Bourgeois – It should be obvious that there is no primary topic for this name right now. If you think an obscure painter from the 1800s is more of a """primary topic""" than someone who has had recent coverage in the news, then I feel that you are not considering the reader, as it would be an inconvenience for readers searching for one article to get directed to another. In my previous discussion, I noted that according to Toolforge's pageviews analysis, the trainspotter's article had an average of 992 views a day and 20,833 views in total, while the article about the painter had an average of 229 views a day with 4,816 views in total, and that most of the traffic to the painter's article is likely people looking for the trainspotter (as most RM participants should know that having the undisambiguated title gives a boost in view counts), and that Toolforge also shows a daily average of 6 views to the painter's article before the trainspotter became well-known. However, the trainspotter probably also shouldn't have the undisambiguated title because of WP:RECENTISM concerns, although the article about the trainspotter is clearly the most visited for the name at this point in time. Vaticidalprophet's comments in that discussion should also be looked at as well. wizzito | say hello! 20:24, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Reunification of Jerusalem → Israeli annexation of East Jerusalem – See the discussion preceding this RM. This article, together with the Jerusalem Law article are respectively, the de facto and de jure annexation of East Jerusalem. The proposed title is a redirect to the latter. Apart from renaming, a merge of the two articles can also be considered in the alternative, with this article being the history of the other. In the past, because Israeli authorities avoided using the term officially, there were some doubts about whether it was in fact an annexation but it is not denied nowadays and is now treated as such by Israeli courts. Selfstudier (talk) 19:20, 9 February 2022 (UTC) Selfstudier (talk) 19:20, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Apple One (service) → Apple One – Apple I, which Apple One currently redirects to, is usually spelled either "Apple I" (with a Roman numeral I) or less commonly "Apple 1" (with an Arabic numeral 1). It is rarely spelled as "Apple One". When readers search for "Apple One", they are looking for the subscription service offered by Apple, not a computer of which only a few hundred units were produced 45 years ago. feminist (talk) 15:46, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Elapsed listings

Shortcut
The 7-day listing period has elapsed. Items below may be closed if there's a consensus, or if discussion has run its course and consensus could not be achieved.
  • (Discuss) – Pākehā settlers → 19th century settlement of New Zealand – As was largely agreed above, the article's focus is, and should be, on the fact of the country's settlement, rather than on the particularities of the settlers themselves. With this focus on the country's (secondary) settlement, we should not exclude non-pākehā/European peoples who also play a vital part of the country's history (as Pākehā settlement of New Zealand would). This also has the warm side-effect of resolving any lingering dispute about the choice of wording between pākehā and European. The primary objection will be in setting such a narrowed timeframe. My impression is that the qualitatively different nature of settlement since 1900 (well after the dissolution of the New Zealand Company, as well as the gold rushes) means that it has been covered quite separately by the histories. And of course it can be included as a sort of epilogue within this article, as it already is. As initiator, I am open to alternative equivalent phrasings. For example, Settlement of New Zealand since 1839 offers the opportunity for a much more open-ended article that touches on immigration even into the 21st century. I would choose this option second though; as many of us know, Wikipedia articles can struggle under their own weight if they are left too open-ended, with a real risk of losing focus. If necessary, an article could be created in future, or a renaming and refocussing could be done if 20th century immigration burdens this article too heavily. — HTGS (talk) 09:22, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Hegira → Hijrah – It has been a long time now since the medieval Latin transliteration of "Hegira" has been used as the standard definition, common name or principle title used in tertiary sources for this event, which is far more commonly known as either "Hijrah" or "Hijra". Sources such as Encyclopedia Britannica and recent scholarly sources tend to prefer "Hijrah", as the "h" at the end is technically correct given the presence of a Taa Marbouta. This is well corroborated by many of the principle sources in the article here (e.g.: Shamsi, Marom). "Hegira" is a version that was a dominant term historically, but no longer in modern academic literature. The decline of the term is shown clearly in Ngrams, which also clearly shows the rise in "Hijra" as the more common colloquial expression of the term. However, for the purposes of Wikipedia, it seems fitting to stick with the more academically rigorous and reliable, secondary source-supported "Hijrah" with an "h", for both the reasons above and to prevent confusion with Hijra (South Asia), which refers to a transgender identity in India. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:47, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Vacuum angle → Theta vacuum – "Theta vacuum" is the main relevant topic of the page while "Vacuum angle" is a much less common name for what is being described as it is merely the parameter that indexes the various theta vacua. Most common textbooks and papers usually refer to the theta vacuum rather than vacuum angle as well. I cannot make the move myself as Theta vacuum is already a redirect on the page. OpenScience709 (talk) 01:54, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Ice age (disambiguation) → Ice Age – I do not believe the clear primary topic for the proper noun form of "Ice Age" is the natural phenomenon. If anything it is either the Last Glacial Period (commonly referred to as "The Ice Age") or the franchise named after it. If I were searching for the Last Glacial Period you could even argue it would be WP:SURPRISE to send me to an article about the phenomenon of ice ages in general. In the absence of a true primary topic, the disambiguation page should be moved to it, as Ice age is the only potential topic not referred to with a proper noun. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:44, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – March 2019 North American blizzard → March 2019 North American storm complex – It produced a fair amount of tornadoes which are mentioned in the article, which is nearly enough to justify its own article, which also caused a fair amount of impacts. There were also other non blizzard impacts. This recognizes all aspects of the storm, which is useful as it wasn’t strictly known for just being a blizzard. 108.170.65.170 (talk) 23:42, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – List of deadliest Atlantic hurricanes → List of deadliest tropical cyclones – So there's no equivalent for this type of article in any other basin. The EPAC would only have two storms, the SHEM just three, but the WPAC and NIO would have a bunch. Most of the Atlantic ones can be easily sourced to the NHC deadliest storms list, but sources for the other basins might be trickier. Still, I think it is a worthy endeavor to have a more global approach, rather than just one basin. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:02, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Radio 1 FM (Gambia) → ? – I am unsure if (Gambia) is a proper disambiguator but wondering if the correct style for one with the definite article is (the Gambia) or (The Gambia)? Capitalization is inconsistent in other pages ([28]) and I cannot find an appropriate guideline. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 07:42, 15 January 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 19:04, 22 January 2022 (UTC)— Relisting. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 19:58, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Sergey Sirotkin (racing driver) → Sergey Sirotkin – The racing driver is an overwhelming primary topic in views over the politician (whose daily average is a 0 over the year) [29], even three years since his Formula One season (and exit), and part-time appearances in some racing series. A hatnote is more than enough to mention the politician, and the disambiguation would be unneeded if this move goes through. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 18:19, 1 February 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Favonian (talk) 18:26, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Backlog

Shortcut
Elapsed listings fall into the backlog after 24 hours. Consider relisting 8-day-old discussions with minimal participation.
  • (Discuss) – Schön scandal → Jan Hendrik Schön – Restore original title of article. This article was moved to "Schön scandal" without discussion in 2010 on WP:BLP1E grounds, and probably should have been moved back after a no consensus RM in 2014 on procedural grounds. Regardless, it should be moved back anyway on the merits. BLP1E doesn't apply: there are three conditions that each must be met. Schön was covered in relation to his scientific work before fraud happened (criterion 1), this was not a low-profile individual, this was an individual appearing in mainstream magazine articles and winning awards (criterion 2), and the related fraud events was very significant and Schön's role is well-documented, so he's not an incidental figure (e.g. a murder victim notable for nothing else), criterion 3. Again, each of those should be met for BLP1E to really apply, but arguably only half of a single criterion is met (criteria 1, maybe). Finally, sometimes a title like this gets used to "spread blame" when there's a scandal with a ringleader but the article also covers the actions of collaborators in detail too. However, per the article, "All of the coauthors (including Bertram Batlogg, who was the head of the team) were exonerated of scientific misconduct." So no, this article really does focus on Schön. Of course, the system bears blame too, but that doesn't change that we have biography articles on similar academic hoaxers by name (e.g. Diederik Stapel) for whom The System failed too, and this article is the odd one out. SnowFire (talk) 06:07, 31 January 2022 (UTC) — Relisting.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:44, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Bataan Day → ? – Based on this Google Ngram graph, "Bataan Day" was indeed this holiday's common name (especially in the 1950s, when most sources used it solely to refer to the holiday) and official name from the 1960s to the late 1980s, but the name has since declined in favour of "Araw ng Kagitingan", a Filipino-language name introduced in 1987 by Executive Order No. 203. Another name came out of existence somewhere, "Day of Valor". I don't know if this was meant to be a literal translation of the Filipino name, but this one got stuck too. The only catch here is that, it's usually not used by itself (even in English sources). So, I don't know if moving this article to that name would be a good idea or not. "Day of Valor" would be a good compromise, but there's no denying the fact that "Araw ng Kagitingan" is more common than it. Let me see what you think. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 15:45, 31 January 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Steel1943 (talk) 20:03, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Acclimatisation society → Acclimatisation movement – In the spirit of the WP:BROADCONCEPT guideline, articles should have the broadest possible scope that allows them to cover a discrete topic. In this case, acclimatisation societies were just a manifestation of the acclimatisation movement, so the article should be titled after the movement, and should discuss the societies as well as any other parts of the movement that went beyond them. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 20:19, 23 January 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 19:33, 31 January 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Steel1943 (talk) 20:02, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Caesars Entertainment (2020) → Caesars Entertainment – (over dab) Reopening the above discussion from 18 mos. ago: even though there have been multiple companies named "Caesars Entertainment", the article on the current company should be located at the unqualified title (with hatnotes/dab's/redirects used to assist navigation to the others). And the present (2020) disambiguator is now terrible in 2022; makes it seem like this company only existed for one year and no longer exists? I think a careful reader of the 2020 rm discussion would conclude that this title does not conform to the consensus of that discussion. My proposed titling is consistent with how we have titled the DuPont (1802–2017)/DuPont pair, which is an identical case. UnitedStatesian (talk) 22:43, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Phi Phi O'Hara → Jaremi Carey – Carey does not regularly perform in drag any more, creates content under his legal name, and is on the record as disliking being called his drag name out of drag. Jedzz (talk) 19:01, 29 January 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 22:38, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Jason Witt (fighter) → Jason Witt – This request was made in June 2021 and most supported the move. There are only two Jason Witts. The runner gets 0 views a day while the fighter gets 137 views a day. A hatnote on the fighter article leading to the runner would reduce the needed clicks to get readers to their intended article. Marty2Hotty (talk) 21:46, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – The Mask → The Mask (comics) – Pageviews show that The Mask (1994 film) gets on average at least three times as many pageviews of the comic series. That means the comics, despite inspiring the film and other media, are not the primary topic. In fact, the comics' pageviews are probably inflated because of readers searching for the film and ending up on the wrong page. I would not be opposed to making the film primary, but moving the disambiguation page to the base title is probably the safest approach for now. (I'm not sure if The Mask (comics) could be confused with Mask (DC Comics), but the latter seems a relatively obscure topic and a hatnote would suffice to deal with this, if necessary at all.) Lennart97 (talk) 20:54, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Socialist Republic of Romania → Communist Romania – This article's scope is all of Romania's communist period (1947–1989), but the title only refers to the Socialist Republic of Romania (1965–1989). As far as I know this is an unique case among former communist countries, at least in Europe, so we don't have any precedents to go by on how to act here. However, I believe it'd be better if we renamed this article to the more general proposed title. Super Ψ Dro 19:12, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – 2006 Somali warlord offensive → Advance of the Islamic Courts Union – I'm reversing and revising some of the non-consensus edits, vandalism, and suspicious edits of the banned sockpuppet 'AmirahBreen'. This article is one of the pages he edited. The article's scope was originally the advance of the Islamic Courts Union in Somalia occurred between May and December 2006. However, as of September 2020, several strange and confusing editions disfigured the text and the scope was changed to an offensive that took place between May and July 2006 against the Union of Islamic Courts by an alliance of warlords. On 19 December 2020 the title was also changed (without consensus) to "The rise of the Islamic Courts Union", a title totally absurd and incompatible with our policies and practices. Due to unfamiliarity with the editions, in June 2021, there was a requested move and the title was changed to "2006 Somali warlord offensive". As there was no debate regarding this scope change on the talk page, I restored the original version. I propose to return the original title 'Advancement of the Union of Islamic Courts', which is supported by sources (example 1, example 2, example 3]). Fontaine347 (talk) 15:44, 31 December 2021 (UTC)— Relisting. -- Aervanath (talk) 03:34, 11 January 2022 (UTC)— Relisting. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 02:16, 24 January 2022 (UTC) — Relisted. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:38, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Stade National de la Côte d'Ivoire → ? – The article currently has 5 different names for the stadium: *Stade National de la Côte d'Ivoire *Stade Olympique d'Ebimpé *Stade Olympique Alassane Ouattara *Ebimpé Stadium *Olympic Stadium of Ebimpé I'm not advocating for any specific name, but there's a good chance the article should be moved to something else. Nehme1499 22:39, 28 January 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. دَستخَط، اِفلاق (کَتھ باتھ) 04:31, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Matt Silva (soccer) → Matt Silva – "Matt Silva" currently redirects to Buddy Murphy; Murphy is a professional wrestler who once used "Matt Silva" as a ring name. Murphy has performed under several names of which "Matt Silva" is the least well known. There is not a strong case for having Matt Silva primarily be a redirect to Buddy Murphy rather than pointing to the individual who is only known by this name. This move will avoid the need for parenthetical disambiguation and allow for more direct linking. McPhail (talk) 10:55, 26 January 2022 (UTC) — Relisting.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:19, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Mark Rosenberg → Mark Rosenberg (producer) – I don't think that the producer quite makes the cut for the clear primary topic of this name, which has a surprising number of other inhabitants, particularly if the identically pronounced variation "Marc" is added into the mix. I would move this page to a disambiguated title, and move the current disambiguation page from Marc Rosenberg to Mark Rosenberg (noting also that there are more entries spelled with a "k", and that includes the most developed and most viewed topics). BD2412 T 21:21, 26 January 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 01:13, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – CAAC Airlines → CAAC (airline) – I'm not sure whether the word 'Airlines' comes from a reliable source or if it's just a made-up name but it seems made-up here as almost no source refers it to as CAAC Airlines but just CAAC. I think that the name should be CAAC (airline). 27.56.146.28 (talk) 05:30, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Chandra Levy → Killing of Chandra Levy – Three years ago, it was noted above, here on this page, that the article seemed to really be about her death and the fallout from it, not her. I responded that there had been two previous RM discussions on exactly this premise, both of which did not succeed. A 2013 discussion was closed as no consensus; its 2016 sequel, prompted by my own move (which I believed would be uncontroversial) was closed as no move on the basis of "no coherent arguments supporting the move that would provide substantial benefit to WP readers." An issue in those previous discussions was the lack of clear naming policy behind the move. That is no longer the case. Since then, further discussions of the issue have led to WP:NCDEATH, the flowchart for which leads us to the more appropriate title of Killing of Chandra Levy: the medical examiner ruled her death a homicide. A suspect was convicted, but after that verdict was overturned on appeal the prosecution decided against a retrial, dropping the charges and having the suspect deported to his native El Salvador instead. So homicide - conviction="Killing of ..." Beyond that is the question, doggedly answered as "yes" by so many opponents of the move in the previous discussions, of whether Levy was notable enough apart from her disappearance and death to justify her name alone as the article title. Sentimentality prevailed, or was allowed to prevail, in 2016, even though no one arguing from that premise could really say what we might have known about her but for her demise. Similarly, in 2013, we had less of these articles about a notable event centered around a non-notable, usually dead or missing, person, and those that we had were often still titled after the person, rather than the event. There were so few of those latterly-titled articles that one participant in that debate could somewhat credibly claim at the time that this attempt to rename the article was a symptom of institutional sexism and that no article about a similarly situated straight white man would even get considered for such a rename (even though evidence to the contrary had already been introduced). Again, that no longer holds. Due to the work of myself and others, we have today many more articles about the dead and missing, regardless of gender, all of which are generally titled "Death/Murder/Disappearance of ..." without objection, save for those notable for something else during their lives that would be notable by our standards even if they had not met such an ignoble end. It is 2022. It has been more than two decades since Ms. Levy's disappearance and the intrigues it revealed captured the idle fancies of America over that last good summer before 9/11 (and made some history, I think, as the first major missing persons case where the disappeared person's Internet search results were a possible clue). It is almost that much time since her remains were found. A whole generation of Americans has grown up and reached college since then. I cannot imagine that they, looking upon this article, would not ask the same question that the 2018 poster whose remarks that I belatedly discovered last month did. And even for those of us well graced with the years to remember this affair, it is "a distant ship, smoke on the horizon". While no one would want it so, the dark clouds that hover still are her fate, not her life, and it is so that this article should be retitled. Daniel Case (talk) 05:42, 19 January 2022 (UTC)— Relisting. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 08:57, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Event of Ghadir Khumm → Sermon at Ghadir Khumm – The main reasons for this move request are for the sake of precision and consistency, as per the WP:CRITERIA guidelines. 'Event' is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a useful or precise descriptor. The event in question is a sermon following a congregational Friday prayer, as described in numerous sources, so I believe 'sermon' would be a more useful and appropriate descriptor. This would also be consistent with the titling of various other famous oratory episodes by religious and Islamic figures, including Jesus' famous "Sermon on the mount", as well as the "Sermon of Fadak", the "Sermon of Zaynab bint Ali in the court of Yazid" and the "Sermon of Ali ibn Husayn in Damascus". The best reason for keeping the existing 'Event of ...' format and descriptor, despite its vagueness, is the fact that it is the direct translation from Arabic. However, "event" has never been an essential part of the episode's common name. Many sources refer to it simply as "Ghadir Khumm". There is meanwhile plenty of precedent on Wikipedia for replacing a literal translation from the Arabic in Islamic primary sources into something a bit more encyclopedically useful on the platform. Take, for example, the article "Attack on Fatimah's house", which in the Arabic is literally "Rib fracture accident" - an extremely unhelpful title. The issue for Ghadir Khumm is not so extreme, but having "Event of ..." adds little to nothing to the title, while titling the page as Sermon at Ghadir Khumm would add considerably more precision. Iskandar323 (talk) 21:00, 9 January 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 22:56, 16 January 2022 (UTC)— Relisting. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 20:34, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Edmund I → Edmund I of England – WP:NCROY states that 'kings, queens regnant and emperors and empresses regnant who are known as "first name + ordinal" (with the exceptions mentioned elsewhere) normally have article titles in the form "Monarch's first name and ordinal} of {Country}".' The normal policy, therefore, would be to title King Edmund as Edmund I of England. Векочел (talk) 04:37, 21 January 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:26, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Irina Walker → Princess Irina of Romania – Per WP:COMMONNAME, WP:NAMECHANGES, WP:TITLECON, and WP:RECOGNIZABILITY. The subject has been known as Princess Irina her whole life (similar to her sisters Elena, Sophie, and Maria) except for the time period between 2014 and 2020 when she was stripped of her titles; however, per the Romanian royal family's official website, her titles and status have been restored. Her bio page is titled and refers to her as ASR Principesa Irina or HRH Princess Irina, while elsewhere on the royal house's website she is listed as a member of the royal house of Romania under Linia de succesiune or Line of succession: "The members of the Royal House of Romania are the following: Her Majesty Margaret, Custodian of the Romanian Crown; His Royal Highness Radu, Prince of Romania; Her Royal Highness Elena, Princess of Romania; Her Royal Highness Irina, Princess of Romania; Her Royal Highness Sofia, Princess of Romania; Her Royal Highness Maria, Princess of Romania." Thus any arguments that she is not a princess is void, because the official website has made the matter completely clear. Keivan.fTalk 23:07, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – John David Roy Atchison → John Atchison – This is his name as most commonly reflected in RSs. Compare "this name google search with this name google search. Though those results include non RSs, the RSs are at the top, and show the same large leaning towards the more common shorter version of the name. It is already a redirect. But no need to encumber the project with this longer name, out of step with other articles at the project. 2603:7000:2143:8500:9B8:B23B:7DDC:518E (talk) 20:53, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Shaitan → Shayatin – Match first mention of topic in lead sentence; also Shaitan is a Yezidi deity, this space is needed for an article on that deity. Skyerise (talk) 14:53, 14 January 2022 (UTC)— Relisting. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 06:10, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Malformed requests

Did you remember to submit your request by using {{subst:Requested move}}? See "Bot considerations"

Possibly incomplete requests

See "Request all associated moves explicitly"

References

References generally should not appear here. Use {{reflist-talk}} in the talk page section with the requested move to show references there.
  1. ^ "Introducing the Capital Darters". act.netball.com.au. 17 January 2020. Retrieved 14 February 2022.
  2. ^ "Capital Darters". act.netball.com.au. 27 February 2020. Retrieved 28 August 2020.
  3. ^ Fitzpatrick, Anne (2005). Mother Teresa. Creative Education. p. 7. ISBN 9781583413302. Retrieved 4 November 2021.
  4. ^ Ruth, Amy (1999). Mother Teresa. Lerner Publications. p. 8. ISBN 9780822549437. Retrieved 4 November 2021.
  5. ^ Slavicek, Louise Chipley. Mother Teresa. Infobase Learning. ISBN 9781438147413. Retrieved 4 November 2021.
  6. ^ Ānanda, Aruna (2013). Indian Nobel Laureates. Ocean Books. ISBN 9788184302370. Retrieved 4 November 2021.
  7. ^ Spink, Kathryn (2011). Mother Teresa (Revised Edition) - An Authorized Biography. HarperOne. p. 5. ISBN 9780062105936. Retrieved 4 November 2021.
  8. ^ https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/201505/38800gen418.pdf
  9. ^ http://vital.seals.ac.za:8080/vital/access/manager/Repository/vital:11774?site_name=GlobalView&view=null&f0=sm_creator%3A%22Majali%2C+Vuyiseka%22&sort=null
  10. ^ https://affidavit.eci.gov.in/show-profile/MTEzMjY=/MjM=/MTM=/Mw==/QUM=

See also

source: https://web.archive.org/web/20220218014903/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requested_moves

Leave a Reply