Closing instructions

"Wikipedia:RM" redirects here. 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.
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 our article titling policy and our 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, such as when a page may already exist at the target title and require deletion, or if the page to be moved is protected from moves. In these circumstances, administrator help is required to move a page, see below: § Requesting technical moves.
  • A title may be subject to dispute, and discussion may be necessary in order to reach consensus, see below: § Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves. It is not always necessary to use the requested move process in these circumstances: one option is to start an informal discussion at the article's talk page instead.
  • Unregistered users and new (not yet autoconfirmed) users do not have the capability to move pages. They must request moves using this process.

Most move requests are processed by a group of regular contributors who are familiar with Wikipedia naming conventions, non-binding precedents, and page moving procedures. Requests are generally processed after seven days, although backlogs often develop. If there is a clear consensus after this time, or if the requested move is uncontroversial or technical, the request will be closed and acted upon. If not, the closer may choose to re-list the request to allow more time for consensus to develop, or close it as "no consensus". For the processes involved in closing requests, performing moves, and cleaning up after moves, see Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions. For a list of all processed moves, see Special:Log/move.

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

When not to use this page

Shortcuts:

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

Undiscussed moves

Shortcut:

Anyone can be bold and move a page without discussing it first and gaining an explicit consensus on the talk page. If you consider such a move to be controversial, 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:

The discussion process is used for potentially controversial moves. If any of the following apply to a desired move, treat it as potentially controversial:

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

If a desired move is uncontroversial and technical in nature (e.g. spelling), please feel free to move the page yourself. If the page has recently been moved without discussion, you may revert the move and initiate a discussion on its talk page. In either case, if you are unable to complete the move, request it below.

  • To list a technical request, go to the bottom of this section that you are reading right now; edit the subsection Uncontroversial technical requests; insert the following code at the top:
{{subst:RMassist|<!--old page name, without brackets-->|<!--requested name, without brackets-->|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 it to the Contested technical requests section.

  • Alternatively, if the only obstacle to an uncontroversial move is another page in the way, you can ask for the deletion of the other page. This may apply, for example, if the other page is currently a redirect to the article to be moved, a redirect with no incoming links, or an unnecessary disambiguation page with a minor edit history. To request the other page be deleted, add the following code to the top of the page that is in the way:
{{db-move|<!--page to be moved here-->|<!--reason for move-->}}
This will list the undesired page for deletion under criterion for speedy deletion G6. If the page is a redirect, place the code above the redirection. For a list of articles being considered for uncontroversial speedy deletion, see Category:Candidates for uncontroversial speedy deletion.

Uncontroversial technical requests

Contested technical requests

Requests to revert undiscussed moves

Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves

Shortcut:

Use this process if there is any reason to believe a move would be contested. For technical move requests (e.g. spelling and capitalization fixes), see Requesting technical moves.

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

Requesting a single page move

(To propose moving more than one page—for example, moving a disambiguation page in order to move another page to that title—see "Requesting multiple page moves" below.)

To request a single page move, edit at the bottom of the talk page of the article you want moved, using this format:

{{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 present Google Books or Google News Archive results before providing other web results. Do not sign this.}}

Replace NewName with the requested new name of the page (or with a question mark, if you want more than one possible new name to be considered). Leave the Subject/headline blank, as the template automatically creates the heading "Requested move 17 June 2015". Do not sign a request with ~~~~ as the template does this automatically. The template must be substituted.

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

Note: Unlike certain other request processes on Wikipedia, nominations need not be neutral. Strive to make your point as best you can; use evidence (such as Ngrams and pageview statistics) and make reference to applicable policies and guidelines, especially our article titling policy and the guideline on disambiguation and primary topic. After the nomination has been made, nominators may nevertheless add a separate bullet point to support their nomination, but should add "as nominator" (for example,  * '''Rename, as nominator''': ...). Most nominators, however, simply allow the nomination itself to indicate what their opinion is. Nominators may also participate in the discussion along with everyone else, and often should.

RMCD bot notifies any Wikiproject listed on the talk page of the article to be moved to invite project members to participate in the RM discussion. Requesters should feel free to notify any other Wikiproject or Noticeboard that might be interested in the move request.

Requesting multiple page moves

A single template may be used to request multiple related moves. On one of the talk pages of the affected articles, create a request and format it as below. A sample request for three page moves is shown here (for two page moves, omit the lines for current3 and new3). For four page moves, add lines for current4 and new4, and so on. There is no technical limit on the number of multiple move requests, but before requesting very large multi-moves, consider whether a naming convention should be changed first. Discuss that change on the talk page for the naming convention, e.g., Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (sportspeople).

{{subst:requested move
| new1 = New title for page 1 with the talk page hosting this discussion
| current2 = Current title of page 2
| new2 = New title for page 2
| current3 = Current title of page 3
| new3 = New title for page 3
| reason = Place here your rationale for the proposed page name change, ideally referring to applicable naming convention policies and guidelines, and providing evidence in support where appropriate. If your reasoning includes search engine results, please default to Google Books or Google News Archive before providing any web results. Do not sign this.}}

See also: Wikipedia:Request multiple page moves, 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.

Closing instructions

Any uninvolved editor in good standing may close a move request, and more closers of move requests are needed, but there are certain procedures that need to be followed. Please read our closing instructions for information on how to close a move request.

Relisting

See also: Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions § Relisting

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. Preferably, a reason for the relist will be given. When a relisted discussion reaches a resolution, it may be closed at any time according to the closing instructions.

To relist a move request discussion, simply type <small>'''Relisted'''. ~~~~</small> before the initial requester's first timestamp (see this diff for an example). This can also be done by using {{subst:Relisting}}, which signs the relisting automatically. The RMCD bot uses the new timestamp to relist the entry on this page.

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. One option is to notify relevant WikiProjects of the discussion using the template {{RM notification}}. Applicable WikiProjects can often be determined by means of the banners placed at the top of the talk page hosting the move request.

Current discussions

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.

June 17, 2015

  • (Discuss) – Oriya language → Odia language – Revisiting the move request, there is enough evidence to show that the official term Odia is now in common use. Consider: 1. Oxford Dictionaries Online, a dictionary by the compilers of the OED, prefers Odia over Oriya. It defines Oriya as the "Former term for Odia". 2. Collins too similarly prefers Odia to Oriya and considers the latter the dated alternative of the former. 3. Mainstream TV channels such as DD Odia and Colors Odia prefer the Odia variant. 4. As for Google results, the trend shows that Odia (language) has already overtaken the use of Oriya and will continue to do so. Here is an alternative comparison of 'Odia' and 'Oriya' confined to India alone. I could go on. But I believe that this is sufficient evidence to support the move.-- Cpt.a.haddock (talk) 11:26, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Northern Pashto dialect → Northern Pashto – The word "dialect" can be removed from the title, as per WP:NCLANG. Varieties can be named by prepending a modifier to the name of the parent language, as at Standard German and African American Vernacular English. This is useful when there is disagreement as to whether a variety is an accent or a dialect, as at Estuary English, or a dialect or a separate language, as at Egyptian Arabic and Mandarin Chinese, or whether it constitutes a single dialect or several, as at Southern American English. The subject of the article is a group of several related dialects and accents which vary regionally. Khestwol (talk) 09:37, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Yilin Zhong → Zhong Yilin – She is based in London, but from what I can see all her novels she wrote while in London are in the Chinese langauge, published in China, and for the Chinese-speaking audience. I think the only work she wrote in English, according to the page, is a research paper titled "Postmodernism and the Third World" which I can't find anything else about. Given that, I think the Chinese naming order is strongly preferred over the Western naming order. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 06:58, 17 June 2015 (UTC) Timmyshin (talk) 19:21, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Comprehensive agreement on the Iranian nuclear program → Comprehensive negotiations on the Iranian nuclear program – The "comprehensive solution" was introduced in the Joint Plan of Action and since then the term "comprehensive" has been widely used. At that time and later it could be assumed that a comprehensive agreement will be signed within about six months and a single article would include all essential information about the negotiations and the "Comprehensive Accord" content. More than 18 months passed but despite intensive negotiations the Accord was not signed yet. When and if the Accord will be signed, a new article (like "Comprehensive Accord...") devoted to the agreement's content should be created. And for now the current article's title should be changed. The retitling will respond to claims like "the agreement itself does not exist" or "it would help if the title of an article actually reflects its content". --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 06:52, 17 June 2015 (UTC) Yagasi (talk) 21:46, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Time-triggered system → Time-triggered architecture – This article is actually about a book "Patterns for Time-Triggered Embedded Systems" by Michael J. Pont. A reviewer might notice that all the sources listed for it were also written by the same author. The book itself probably does not warrant an article, but the subject of the book does. In order to find information on the subject from other authors, you have to search for the term Time-triggered architecture, or TTA. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 06:52, 17 June 2015 (UTC) 2600:1012:B020:9F56:E095:BA5F:E6E1:57A9 (talk) 20:56, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Phoenix Manufacturing Company (Eau Claire WI) → Phoenix Manufacturing Company – It is not necessary to state which city and which state this manufacturing company was located in. There is no other article named "Phoenix Manufacturing Company" on Wikipedia. I am not a US citizen and I was only born over a century after this company was founded, but I would even venture so far as to hazard a guess that there has never been another company named "Phoenix Manufacturing Company" in the entire world. Getting rid of the location specification would make this article easier to find. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 06:47, 17 June 2015 (UTC) JIP | Talk 21:09, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

June 16, 2015

  • (Discuss) – Black-legged dart frog → Phyllobates bicolor – The commonest common name for this species seems to be "black-legged poison frog" (the one used by IUCN), but AmphibiaWeb uses "black leg poison dart frog", and many other names are also in use. However, even frog hobbyists commonly use the scientific name, which WP:NCFAUNA also endorses as the page title when no common name is clearly dominant. Micromesistius (talk) 12:33, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Central Australian Railway → Central Australia Railway – The title of this page is incorrect; the railway was named the "Central Australia Railway" with no "n" after Australia. The title of this page should obviously be consistent with the railway's actual name. References:
    Australian National Railways Commission. (1983). Onward and upward : to commemorate the new Central Australia Railway crossing the border of South Australia and the Northern Territory. [Canberra] : Australian National Railways
    Australia. Commonwealth Railways. Commissioner's Office. (1964). Central and North Australia railways.
    Commonwealth Railways (Australia) (1900), Central Australia railway : historical notes http://trove.nla.gov.au/work/12446621 2001:44B8:23C:C300:E92C:B2E3:A215:1551 (talk) 05:10, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

June 15, 2015

  • (Discuss) – Southern Kurdish dialects → Southern Kurdish – This is a minor change to clean things up a bit in line with our naming conventions. WP:NCL states, Varieties can be named by prepending a modifier to the name of the parent language, as at Standard German and African American Vernacular English. This is useful when there is disagreement as to whether a variety is an accent or a dialect, as at Estuary English, or a dialect or a separate language, as at Egyptian Arabic and Mandarin Chinese, or whether it constitutes a single dialect or several, as at Southern American English. It's not just useful, but quite common on WP. The use of "dialects" in the titles of these articles is being used to sidestep this very issue, and the problem can be more elegantly sidestepped by being completely agnostic. Note that the proposed names will work regardless of whether the main Kurdish article is at "language" or "languages". Whether Northern Kurdish should receive a parallel name can be left to a separate discussion. — kwami (talk) 23:48, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Ireland → Ireland (island) – I know this has been proposed time and time again. But I have to at least try. The current name is a blatant violation of COMMONNAME. If a user enters Ireland into the search box, or links to it from an article, to heavily paraphrase WP:COMMONNAME, it should be more likely than not that they are looking for the island. There is no evidence of such. I have seen users in past contribution make suggestions to this effect, but completely devoid of any supporting evidence. Arguments based on anything but policy are not valid - Most of the arguments for preserving the status quo are based on history, philosophy, politics or a combination of the three. These are not considerations which are used when determining article names, and they certainly do not override COMMONNAME. Countless articles are linked incorrectly - provesIreland is too ambiguous Within the first page alone of "What Links Here" for Ireland there are examples of incorrect linking. Apple Inc. in the same section switches from linking to RoI to Ireland (when it very clearly should be the former). The problem of incorrect linking rampant is throughout the English Wikipedia. Nothing has to be at Ireland - It is not a foregone conclusion that one of the articles must occupy Ireland. Indeed, FR and NL do not do this, with Ireland being a disambiguation page. Again, the name is too ambiguous - The fact is, both the island and the sovereign entity are commonly referred to as Ireland. COMMONNAME does not care about historical provenance or what it "oughtright" be. The primary consideration is whether the average user, when looking for "Ireland" is far more likely to be looking for one over the other. No one has ever demonstrated this to be the case, at least not in any past discussion I've read. If anything, someone is more likely to be looking for the sovereign entity than the island. (Not proposing it move to Ireland, never was. Better off deleting this) Even with non-sovereign entities such as Catalonia, or the Basque region, the primary title is given to the entity that is legally incorporated (those of Spain) not the greater areas which include parts of France. Indeed, the vast majority of Wikipedias (where it can be argued editors are far more likely to be, on average, more detached from the topic) the ambiguity has been resolved in this way: RoI either occupies "Ireland" (its equivalent in the language) or redirects directly to "Republic of Ireland". Wikipedias which either place RoI at Ireland, or redirect in this fashion include: DE, PT, CA, ES, IT, ZH, sv, ru, ceb (or so it seems; it's linked in this manner anyway). Of the top ten Wikipedia's by article count, the only other one which resolves the ambiguity the same way as the English Wikipedia is the WAR. I am not proposing that we move RoI to Ireland. I am proposing to use the Dutch/French model of Ireland being a disambiguation page. If it were the case that people using the term Ireland were far more likely to be looking for the island, and vice versa, that when they refer to RoI, they are far more likely than not, to use the term Republic of Ireland, the current situation where time and time articles are mislinked to Ireland would not arise. Embassies for almost every country in Dublin, except the UK (maybe every, I don't have time to check them all) refer to themselves as the embassy "to Ireland". Even the British Embassy, referred to as British Embassy Dublin makes several uses of the word Ireland where it is clear such usage does not encompass Northern Ireland. (see here). Wikipedia is not supposed to be prescriptive. Nor is Wikipedia supposed to espouse a point of view. Yet, by blatantly ignoring the reality that Ireland in common usage is an ambiguous term, it is doing just that. Estoy Aquí (talk) 15:45, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – S.A. → S.A. (corporation) – No, quite the reverse: I want S.A. (Corporation) moved over this one. Currently, this redirect is misleading, and confusing, as discussed and closed at WP:RFD. Still confusing me here now. Move S.A. (corporation) over this with the appropriate hatnote if we have consensus for the move, the hatnote follows. SA is probably a step too far, right now. Si Trew (talk) 08:08, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Wikipedia:Don't feed the divas → ? – Precedent: Move of WP:Don't be a dick to WP:Don't be a jerk, which didn't even involve any issues relating to WP:BIAS against women. The message of this essay (don't engage, or enable others to engage, in "entitled" demands to get one's way, especially through threats to quit the project) is important, but it offends (I've caught heat for even mentioning it) for the sole reason that its title and a few bits of its wording are pretty much the same thing as having this be at "WP:BITCH". There has to be a way to express this without being misogynistic, when Wikipedia's main point of criticism in academia and the press is a hostile editing environment for, and poor coverage of, women.[3][4][5]   I detest unwarranted "political correction" and picking at "microaggressions", so if I find this troubling, it's probably inappropriate in an encyclopedia project. It's a PR and WP:Editor retention problem. It also defeats the point of the essay, which (as with WP:JERK) is intended to reduce strife, not generate more of it. The name no longer makes sense anyway, since its referent, WP:Don't feed the trolls is now WP:Deny recognition. I suggest many alternatives below (WP:Deny entitlement, etc.). If we kept the current name style, I'm not sure what a good replacement term would be. "Royalty" came to mind first.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  15:37, 14 June 2015 (UTC) [Revised and re-launched; it wasn't showing up in WP:RM the first time for some reason. 06:10, 15 June 2015 (UTC)]
  • (Discuss) – Nepeta cataria → Catnip – WP:COMMONNAME is a policy that states that Wikipedia subjects should be titled under the name by which they are most frequently known rather than their technical names. This policy includes a preference for common names over scientific ones (when a common name exists, as it does here). I looked and saw no significant discussion about the previous move of this article away from "catnip", so am now requesting that it be moved back there. KDS4444Talk 01:43, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

June 14, 2015

  • (Discuss) – Tien Shinhan → Tenshinhan – A technical request, but could potentially be controversial. Wikipedia uses the spellings that the official English publisher, Viz Media, uses in their release of the original manga series; this would be Tenshinhan. "Tien Shinhan" is the English name used by Funimation, which dubbed the anime adaptation. Although Tenshinhan is already used throughout this article and many others, this is the series' only character page not titled by its manga name. Xfansd (talk) 15:18, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Stations of the Namma Metro → List of Namma Metro stations – Without discussion, this article was moved from its original List of Namma Metro stations article title by InfernalH; InfernalH also greatly expanded the content of this article (per WP:COATRACK?) beyond its original intended focus as a simple list article. All of these moves are probably controversial, and probably merit further discussion, especially in regards to whether InfernalH's recent move (and article expansion) was appropriate, which is the purpose of this requested move request. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 06:35, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

June 13, 2015

  • (Discuss) – The male gaze → Male Gaze – easier to find, currently "Male Gaze" redirects to the less specific "Gaze". – 201.37.163.198 (talk) 23:53, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Emirates (airline) → Emirates Airline – Per WP:NATURAL, we should "choose an alternative name that the subject is also commonly called in English reliable sources, albeit not as commonly as the preferred-but-ambiguous title." Parenthetical disambiguation should only be used "if natural disambiguation is not possible." Emirates Airline is the official name of the airline and would not be confusing to readers. It is also a name that is used by many sources, including the airline itself, the Twitter page, Financial Times, the Wall Street Journal, The Guardian, and Business Insider. Other examples of such names include Sia Furler and Condor Flugdienst. I am not saying that Emirates is not the common name of the airline, but Wikipedia prefers natural disambiguation over parenthetical disambiguation, which is used with the current name of the article. 42.98.30.146 (talk) 12:25, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Mungana, Queensland → Mungana – Unique name not requiring disambiguation, as indicated by the fact that the plain name redirects to "Mungana, Queensland" - i.e. no disambiguation page. Was moved to "Mungana" then immediately moved back with the comment " huge need to disambiguate that" but no actual reason given. Both Mungana railway station and Mungana affair have natural names (both of which are derived names anyway) that can either be linked to in the article or hatnoted. Mattinbgn (talk) 04:18, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Biggles (film) → Biggles (film) – Another user reverted my previous move by mistake, but the system requires and administrator to revert the revert. The film's original name is Biggles, which can be verified by checking IMDb, BFI, BBCF and other reliable sources., while the current article name refers to the title the film was given when released in the USA two years after the UK release. – Thomas Blomberg (talk) 01:53, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Kuk Sool Won → Kuk sool – WP:COMMONNAME (and WP:NPOV, WP:COI, etc.): The article's own lead says this is more generally known as kuk sool, and that Kuk Sool Won is a trademark. Google hits confirm this: results for "kuk sool" -"Kuk Sool Won" -wikipedia is 216K hits, but for "Kuk Sool Won" -wikipedia only 182K. As "kuk sool" is not a trademark, it's lower case per MOS:CAPS; we do not capitalize the names of non-trademarked sports, activities, disciplines, techniques, methodologies, schools of training or thought, etc. (Some other non-trademarked martial arts articles are improperly capitalized and need to be moved, but that's an issue for another time. It will take care to sort through them one by one and see which are actually proper names, like Krav Maga, and which are not, like Tai chi. It's probably best for someone from WP:MARTIAL, who is also very familiar with WP:AT/WP:MOS and the concepts of proper naming, to look into that.)  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  01:12, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Whanganui District → Wanganui District – Page move is blocked by a redirect. The article contains up-to-date info about the current name of the subject (which my change in future but WP is not a crystal ball). – Nurg (talk) 00:49, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

June 12, 2015

  • (Discuss) – Vision In White → Vision in White – Move to standard capitalization per WP:NCCAPS:"...each word in English titles of books, films, and other works takes an initial capital, except for ... prepositions and coordinating conjunctions shorter than five letters". Tassedethe (talk) 23:15, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Dan Bălan → Dan Balan – The artist Dan Balan is not recognized by the spelling of his last name Bălan which includes a Moldavian character, as noted on the artist official website[1]. At the request of the Artist and his management his page should be moved to the current re-direct page of Dan Balan while the current page Dan Bălan be used as a redirect – Willflash15 (talk) 20:57, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Christopher Lee (Singaporean actor) → Christopher Lee (actor, born 1971) – Born, raised and educated in Malaysia, nothing I've seen suggests that he has acquired Singaporean nationality. Besides Singapore, he has done quite a bit of work in Taiwan and mainland China especially in recent years, so I don't think the "Singaporean actor" label is ideal if he is not a Singaporean national. Timmyshin (talk) 20:11, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Hydlide 3 → Super Hydlide – Per WP:COMMONNAME. The article was originally at this title, which is the only title the game is known by outside of Japan, but in December 2011 an editor moved the article to Hydlide 3, a title which was only used for certain versions of the game in Japan. The editor who moved the page has apparently since left Wikipedia, and though I've read over his rationale for the move several times I can't make much sense of it. He seems to be suggesting that the game was most commonly released as Hydlide 3 in English-speaking countries, but the fact is it was never released under that title in any country but Japan. Martin IIIa (talk) 18:48, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Chi Nan Temple → Zhinan Temple – The Republic of Taiwan has adopted pinyin as its official romanization medium. It is used extensively by the Taiwanese government and by native and non-native Chinese speakers around the world. Robloblaws (talk) 13:10, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Knanaya → Southists – Per WP:COMMON NAME. The article clearly states that the common Malayalam name for the group is "Tekkumbhagar" and its English equivalent is "Southists". Almost all the citations use the term Southists of Southerners to refer the gorup. Giving some examples here: The most widely used WP:RS, Swiderski, uses the term Southists more often. In fact, the title of his book itself is "Northists and Southists". Again, Baum & Winkler uses the term Southerners, which another variant of Southists, and do not even mention the term Knanaya. Again Knanaya is not used in Neil's book. Also, the title of the book written by Joseph Chazhikkadan is Tekkumbhagasamudaya Charithram which is translated in English as History of the Southist Community (Swidersky also verifies this). Same is the case with other references too. – Achayan (talk) 08:39, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – 3D-printed spacecraft → 3D printing in the aerospace industry – "3D printing" is without hyphen (per: other articles in Category:3D printing). Article does not discuss 3D printed spacecraft, it doesn't even discuss 3D printing of parts for spacecrafts alone. It's discussing printing parts for rockets and spacecrafts. It'd be beneficial to change title into one appropriate to the content and expand article with additional mentions of 3D printing in other disciplines of aerospace industry, such as 3D printing of parts for Airbus A350 XWB, as we currently have no dedicated article to cover a topic of non-rocket or spacecraft 3D printing despite of the fact that it's all on topic of Aerospace and Aerospace manufacturers. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 03:14, 12 June 2015 (UTC) SkywalkerPL (talk) 10:55, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Hungarian Republic (1919–20) → Hungarian state (1919–20) – This government established in the aftermath of the Hungarian Revolutions of 1918–1919 by counter-revolutionary forces was not offical a "Republic". It has a Regent for few days and later Prime Minister acting as de facto head of state. It is not clear if this governmet called itself "Hungarian Republic". --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 03:10, 12 June 2015 (UTC) Srinivasasha (talk) 03:48, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

June 11, 2015

  • (Discuss) – Elton John's Greatest Hits → Greatest Hits (Elton John album) – The title is only listed as "Elton John's Greatest Hits" on the labels of the original 1974 vinyl and cassette releases. But people look at the album cover for the title before they look at the label on the record or cassette inside, and the cover for all vinyl, cassette and CD releases worldwide clearly state the album title as "Greatest Hits" only: there is no possessive "'s" and the words "Elton John" and "Greatest Hits" are in different colours and set apart from each other, indicating the artist and official album title, respectively. The various later CD releases of the album simply call it "Greatest Hits" on the disc: Billboard and AllMusic both call the album "Greatest Hits", as does the entry for the album on the Rolling Stone 500 Greatest Albums of All Time, and all officially recognised chart books such as British Hit Singles & Albums (for example, see page 285 of the 19th edition, 2006). The only place I can find where the album is still called "Elton John's Greatest Hits" is the entry on the UK Official Charts Company website, but then again it doesn't show the correct album cover for the entry on its website either (the cover shown is that for Elton John's Greatest Hits Volume II). The title of the article should therefore be changed in line with the generally accepted name for this record. Richard3120 (talk) 18:17, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Sanity testing → Sanity check – I checked sources after finding this article while looking something up. The WP:COMMONNAME for the topic is "sanity check," which is better represented (by far) in sources, and the current title could refer to legal determinations of insanity rather than to checking mathematical calculations, which is the topic of the article. I couldn't do the move myself because it is over an existing redirect. – WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 16:57, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Nisour Square massacre → Nisour Square shooting – Is the current page name neutral? WP:COMMONNAME states that Wikipedia "prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources. This includes usage in the sources used as references for the article." The sources used as references on the page do not call it a "massacre" but instead a "shooting". Meatsgains (talk) 01:35, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

June 10, 2015

  • (Discuss) – Royal Assent → Royal assent – Not a proper noun, but rather a class of various ceremonies and legal instruments used in many countries. Should be downcased per MOS:CAPS, which specifies the removal of "unnecessary" capitalisation. As sentence case is used for Wikipedia article titles, this article from the British parliament website makes clear that "royal assent" is not capitalised in prose by convention. Regardless, this article is not only about the British tradition, but about others. As this article is not referring to specific instance of "Royal Assent" in one country, the title cannot be considered a proper noun. RGloucester — ☎ 20:18, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Hessian fabric → Burlap – If this is the more common term in the USA and Canada, then it is almost certainly the most common English term. ngram —Srnec (talk) 15:39, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Diavolo Dance Theater → Diavolo: Architecture in Motion – the dance company recently went under a slight name change after having been around for a few years. The new name is a little bit more telling of what the company does and their goals. For this reason, I'd like to change the title of the Wikipedia article by moving the page. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 01:39, 10 June 2015 (UTC) Winterville612 (talk) 18:36, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Hubert B. Wolfe + 666, Sr. → Hubert B. Wolfeschlegelsteinhausenbergerdorff, Sr. – The individual described in this article is notable for his very long name, though reliable sources disagree on the exact length and spelling of it. In any case, the full name (the surname alone having up to 666 letters, by many accounts) is too long to use as an article title. There are several abbreviated forms of the name which we could use instead. At least two reliable sources (Borgmann, 1965 and Borgmann, 1968) say the man preferred to abbreviate his name as "Hubert B. Wolfe + 666, Sr.", and at least one later reliable source (McWhirter, 1984) said his preferred short form was "Hubert Blaine Wolfe+585, Sr." However, all three of the above sources, plus several more (including Brookhouser, 1957; a 1952 Time article; and a 1964 Associated Press wire story) agree that the surname is or can be abbreviated as "Wolfe­schlegel­stein­hausen­berger­dorff". All these sources also agree that his long string of given names was usually abbreviated to "Hubert Blaine" or "Hubert B." I therefore suggest that per WP:COMMONNAME, the article should be moved to either Hubert Blaine Wolfeschlegelsteinhausenbergerdorff, Sr. or Hubert B. Wolfeschlegelsteinhausenbergerdorff, Sr.. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 01:39, 10 June 2015 (UTC) Psychonaut (talk) 12:42, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Backlog

Shortcut:
  • (Discuss) – Song (state) → Song (Zhou dynasty state) – Move in order to distinguish this state from 2 other states also named "Song", i.e. Song dynasty and Liu Song dynasty. The grouped proposal last year at Talk:Chen_(state)#Requested_move did not go through, with the counter-argument being that I was cherrypicking examples, and that somehow the English word "state" in Chinese history is primarily reserved for ancient Chinese states, i.e. vassal states during the Zhou dynasty (a few were created during the Shang dynasty). Here, I did a Google Books Search of "Song state" and the results are summarized as below ("Other results" include stuff like "Kim Il Song state"): {| class="wikitable" |-  ! Webpage# of Search !! #Results on Song (state) !! #Results on Song dynasty !! #Other results !! # "Books by wikipedians" |- | 1 || 0 || 7 || 2 || 1 |- | 2 || 0 || 7 || 2 || 1 |- | 3 || 1 || 4 || 5 || 0 |- | 4 || 0 || 5 || 5 || 0 |- |Summary || 2.6% || 60.5% || 36.9% || |} I think it's clear that "state" is not sufficient a disambiguator as most book references are about the more important Song dynasty. Therefore I believe a move is justified per WP:Precise. Timmyshin (talk) 21:35, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Christian churches and churches of Christ → Christian Churches and Churches of Christ – Both uses of "churches" in the title should be capitalized. While there is no formal name for the collective grouping of churches, the title of the article here is simply borrowing portions of the proper names of individual congregations. For instance "Anytown Christian Church" and "Big City Christian Church" are affiliated only in similarity of belief, with no common church governance. However, both signify their similar beliefs using "Christian Church" in their names. The article here thus essentially concatenates parts of both church proper names; the title of the article should reflect this. --Zfish118 (talk) 19:29, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Grey Wolves → Grey Wolves (Turkey) – (or Grey Wolves (organization)) Is this organization prominent enough to have this title? I'd think readers searching for "Grey Wolves" would expect to find Gray wolf. Some sources use title-case capitalization for species, and we have even done so in the past. If I had to guess, I'd also suspect that "grey" is more common in English than "gray" (cf. Grey). I definitely think it makes sense to retarget Grey wolves there, but this title might be acceptable per WP:DIFFCAPS. What do you think? --BDD (talk) 15:47, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Alan Bond (businessman) → Alan Bond – Of the 4 Alan Bonds listed on the dab page, 2 are redlinks so can be ignored as potential primary topics. The other one is an engineer, who gets about 15-30 page views per day, with very little coverage in secondary sources other than a single TV documentary. Before his recent death, the businessman was getting over 100 per day on most days, obviously a huge spike in the last few days. Google counts are impossible to use, due to the blanket coverage of his death. The-Pope (talk) 13:23, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Neomexicano → Nuevomexicano – WP:COMMONNAME. "Nuevomexicano" is the vastly preferred spelling in sources [15][16], and is the actual endonym of this largely bilingual Spanish/English-speaking population. (It appears even more often as "Nuevo Mexicano" [17], but that usage is broader, including some things that are geographical not cultural/ethnic references.) "Neomexicano" appears far less often [18], and is a "Frankenstein" neologism, a tacking on of a Latin prefix to a Spanish root. It also is used to mean different things than the subject of this article, unrelated combinations of "new" and "Mexican", e.g. both in reference to modern Hispanic American culture outside New Mexico, and to things in Mexico, such as the Collegio Neomexicano, an institution in Monterrey, Nuevo León. "Novomexicano" is even rarer and virtually unknown in English [19]; it also seems to be Spain Spanish, not Mexican much less New Mexican Spanish, so is essentially a foreign exonym. After this, Category:Neomexicanos needs to move as well.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  09:47, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Chinese whispers → Telephone (game) – Guys, this is really embarrassing. It's the 21st century, and we're supposed to be a global encyclopedia that's written neutrally and free of systemic bias. I love Wikipedia, but this is really personally embarrassing. I couldn't justify this to a friend or colleague. I'm sure many people use this phrase and don't hate Chinese people or anything—that's not the point. It's also not about pushing American English; I will support any reasonable alternative that doesn't disparage a whole group. And if the current title were the only policy-based title available to us here, I'd hold my nose and my tongue. But it's not, so I won't. For the love of Jimbo, rename this page. --BDD (talk) 20:36, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Podemos (Spanish political party) → Podemos (Spain) – Per WP:NCPP#Disambiguating name use, suggests to use either, political posture, year or country, never suggest to use further DAB methods. Arguing that "has more meanings in Spain and Spanish language, so this could not be specific enough" lacks of a good rationale. First, this is English-language Wikipedia, not global Wikipedia, in English, the proposed title is WP:PRECISE enough to be distinguished from Podemos, Podemos (Bolivia), or Podemos (Venezuela). Second, the contested mover must prove that in Spain there's another organization or company sharing the name "Podemos". Third, "Podemos (España)", the Spanish-language translation, is not ambiguous, I don't know why the contester gave that argument. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 01:32, 8 June 2015 (UTC) © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 00:47, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Kir Royal (cocktail) → Kir Royal – Primary meaning. The only other item on the dab page is not nearly as significant as the cocktail Since there are only two items on the dab page, it can be eliminated and this is not a multi-move. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 01:31, 8 June 2015 (UTC) Srnec (talk) 01:44, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – University Link extension → University Link Extension – Per the last discussion that had no consensus. To summarize: Sound Transit and other government agencies use the capitalized "extension" in their official documents (board resolutions and motions, FTA funding grants, etc.), while the lowercase "extension" is inconsistently used in news media articles and occasionally in throwaway pamphlets and flyers by Sound Transit. In addition, the lowercase "extension" implies that this is an extension of the University Link line, which it is not (it is actually extending the Central Link line; there is no line named University Link). SounderBruce 23:33, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Anamorava Valley of Binces → Kosovo Pomoravlje – As I understand, this article is about the region in Kosovo. That region is in the valley of the river called Binačka Morava. In Serbian language, the name of this region is "Kosovsko Pomoravlje" (literally "Morava area of Kosovo"). In Albanian, the name is (according to this article) "Lugina e Anamoraves Binçes" (literally "Valley of Binačka Morava"). We need the most WP:COMMONly used name in English. Previously, this region gave its name to a district. The title of the Wikipedia article about the district is "Kosovo Pomoravlje District". So, I propose this article be moved to the title of "Kosovo Pomoravlje". That way, it should be consistent with the title of the district. Current title is very bad: it is a mixture of Albanian words (Anamorava, Binces) and English words (Valley, of), and is not used in any sources. Google English language search returns just a few hits for the current title [23]. On the other hand, it returns much more hits for the proposed title even when the word "district" is ruled out [24]. Vanjagenije (talk) 11:05, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Khosrau II → Chosroes II – In Wikipedia various different transliterations are in use to refer to this specific king (and him), such as "Khosrau" here and also "Khosrow" in another article. Other spellings like "Xosrow" and "Khosro" are also currently in use. I believe there needs to be consistency, we cannot use every permutation and combination of the name possible. To avoid arbitrary transliterations, I suggest moving the page to the original classical name of "Chosroes" (we have maintained the classical names for Achaemenid and Parthian rulers, I do not see why Sasanian rulers should be an exception). According to the GBooks ngraph, Chosroes ranks on top. OR, if a transliterated name has to be used, it must be moved to "Khosrow II". Because most credible sources such as Encyclopædia Iranica, and Britannica use "Khosrow". Many modern scholarly sources like that of Dr. Daryaee, and Dr. Farrokh also use this form. According to Google Books, "Khosrow" is also statistically much more prevalent than "Khosrau". "Khosrau" is simply a phonetically incorrect transcription used only by a minority of authors. Grinevitski (talk) 04:29, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Sight → Sight (disambiguation) – I would like this moved so that Sight can redirect to visual perception, aka sight. I think this is pretty clearly primary topic (see taste (article), touch (redirect), and hearing (article). Not smell, though, because of ambiguity between the sense of smell and smells). I won't lie--the ideal would be for sight itself to host an article on the sense that we use our eyes for, but for now, the redirect would be great, I think. Do you agree? Red Slash 00:54, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Rastafari movement → Rastafari – This title is a leftover of having another article at Rastafari in 2005, while this article was named Rastafarianism (another title which some adherents also find reductive or offensive). The current title is awkward, overly specific, and possibly reductive. Rastafari could be considered or applied as a movement, or a lifestyle, but it is primarily considered a religion (as it says in the lede). This article is about all things Rastafari. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 19:46, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – British Mirpuri community → British Kashmiris – In a recent redirect discussion for British Kashmiri, some editors expressed concern that this article only discusses British people from the Pakistani side of Kashmir. Others countered that British Kashmiris overwhelmingly come from the Pakistani side, but obviously there are also some immigrants from the Indian side. I think the best solution is to expand the scope of the article; it can make clear that most British Kashmiris are from Pakistan while still discussing those that are from India. --BDD (talk) 13:50, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – News Journal, National Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped → News (National Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped) – Cannot find any evidence of a NLS publication called News Journal, after doing extensive searching on Google and tracing the history. The article creator appears to have meant the NLS publication called simply News since at least 1978, and even before that in some sources. It is sometimes in catalogs as "News. Journal; National Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped", so maybe that was why the strange article title exists. I'm suggesting the long disambiguation because other countries also have a "National Library Service", and some catalogs use a modified name such as "News - National Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped" to distinguish it from other publications named News. Closeapple (talk) 11:30, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Hominidae → Great ape – Please take a look at talk:Ape and talk:Ape/Archive 1, if anyone hasn't done so. All the requested moves from ape to Hominoidea or Hominoid has been opposed and rejected. And almost all the people who opposed cited common name. What is the reason that this article should stay at Hominidae and shouldn't be moved to great ape, and the ape article should stay at ape and shouldn't be moved to Hominoidea? Editor abcdef (talk) 03:59, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Template:Types of armour → Template:Personal armouring materials – this is not about types of personal/personnel armour (ie. helmet, codpiece, bulletproof vest, flak jacket) or types of armour (ie. IFV, APC, tank, up-armored Humvee, armored car), this is about various materials used to make personal personnel armours --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 00:46, 6 June 2015 (UTC) 65.94.43.89 (talk) 07:08, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Koncert V Praže (In Prague–Live) → Koncert V Praze (In Prague–Live) – The correct spelling has been 'corrected' to the current spelling for reasons that are beyond me. 'V Praze' is the correct spelling, as any native speaker will tell you, but you can just look up the declension on https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Praha showing you that the correct case (the 6th case, locative) is in fact 'V Praze', no need for diacritical signs. Though the word 'Praže' exists (the wikipedia article about Prague mentions it as a possible source for the city's name), it really hurts my eyes to see it in this context here. And though sources that are not used to diacritical signs should be used with care, even the album cover here has the correct spelling... --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 00:44, 6 June 2015 (UTC) Nitemare224 (talk) 05:16, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Indian Wells Masters → BNP Paribas Open – There is no such thing as the Indian Wells Masters. "Masters" is exclusive terminology that refers to male-only ATP events. The BNP Paribas Open is a stop on both the ATP and WTA tours, so both men and women play at the tournament. Additionally, as the tournament has changed both name and location several times, there's no generic term that refers to this particular event. Therefore, it should be listed as it's currently known: BNP Paribas Open. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 00:40, 6 June 2015 (UTC) – Grahamkins (talk) 22:34, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Schutzstaffel → SS (Nazi Germany) – Per WP:COMMONNAME, our articles should be located at a common English-language name for the subject, if one is available, rather than at a foreign-language name. In addition, the current name of this article is not widely known to the general public, who are our audience, so this move is suggested. BMK (talk) 11:25, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Sturmabteilung → ? – Per WP:COMMONNAME, our articles should be located at a common English-language name for the subject, if one is available, rather than at a foreign-language name. In addition, the current name of this article is not widely known to the general public, who are our audience, so this move is suggested. BMK (talk) 11:25, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Kyle Jenkins → Kyle Abbott (The Young and the Restless) – This The Young and the Restless character as a child was known as "Kyle Jenkins" before 2012. But since 2012 after the character was aged to become an adult, the character has been known as "Kyle Abbott" The character has been commonly known as Kyle Abbott for the better part of 3 years now and multiple websites credit the character as Kyle Abbott, including the TV show's official webpage at CBS.com. Which has listed the character as "Kyle Abbott" since at least June of 2012. The show's credits at the end of the show has credited the character as "Kyle Abbott" since as far back as 2013, and the characters on the show (including the character himself) refers to him as "Kyle Abbott" and has been commonly known by that name since 2012. As the WP:COMMONNAME policy states "If the name of a person, group, object, or other article topic changes, then more weight should be given to the name used in reliable sources published after the name change than in those before the change." As I have previously stated, multiple reliable sources (like the show's own credits and the official webpage) list the character as "Kyle Abbott." Also here on Soap Opera Digest's website back in March of 2013. That is why the name of the page should be updated. Also new viewers of the TV show would not know the character as "Kyle Jenkins" but would know him as "Kyle Abbott," and there is nothing to indicate that the character's name will revert back to "Kyle Jenkins" since that Abbott family has been a prominent family on the show for 35 years now. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 21:55, 4 June 2015 (UTC) MrKing84 (talk) 06:57, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Hemi engine → Hemispherical combustion chamber – This is what the article is about. "Hemispherical combustion chamber" would be a more accurate and more general title, while remaining perfectly understandable. Hemi is a Chrysler trademark and closely associated with Chrysler engines; hemispherical combustion chamber engines were used a wealth of different manufacturers. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 05:52, 30 May 2015 (UTC) Cloverleaf II (talk) 11:58, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Harun ar-Rashid → Harun al-Rashid – Following undiscussed move and this discussion. Both "Harun al-Rashid" and "Harun ar-Rashid" are perfectly fine alternatives for transliterating the same name, with the latter favoured by our WP:MOSAR guideline on Arabic names because it is closer to actual phonetic pronunciation. The problem is that the former form is overwhelmingly the more common in relevant literature (GBooks Ngram, 480 GBooks hits vs 112 hits, 4,120 GScholar hits vs 1,210 hits (all contain a few irrelevant hits of works by a modern biologist and other modern people with the name), and is used by the premier reference works on medieval Islam such as the Encyclopaedia of Islam ([25]), the Cambridge History of Islam ([26]), the Cambridge History of Iran ([27]), the Oxford History of Islam ([28]), the collective translation of al-Tabari ([29]), etc., by scholars like C. E. Bosworth, Hugh N. Kennedy, et al. In short, we have two equally correct forms, one of which is about four times more common in scholarly literature and clearly more common in the major English-language reference works. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 08:00, 26 May 2015 (UTC) Constantine ✍ 21:11, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Iraqi insurgency (2011–2013) → Iraq War (2011-present) – The war can not be really called an insurgency in any sense of the word anymore, It's mainly between two conventional militaries and various paramilitary allies (the Iraqi Government and ISIL; the latter of which functions at this point at a state-like structure with a conventional military force using conventional tactics) and the article name should reflect that. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 07:57, 26 May 2015 (UTC) 97.96.33.181 (talk) 06:13, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Paraguayan War → War of the Triple Alliance (South America) – Google Books: [30] 196,000 results for War of the Triple Alliance, [31] 35,000 results for Paraguayan War. As has been pointed out previously, in the English language, this conflict is predominantly known as the War of the Triple Alliance. As one commentator in the last time said, "Jeez is titles so important?", well yes actually, since an analysis I did of traffic a couple of years ago showed this article is usually hit from the redirect 3 times more often than directly. In my experience, the only place it is predominantly known as the Paraguayan War is in Brazillian textbooks. This should be a simple straightforward and uncontroversial technical move and it is illogical that it remains under what is a fringe term in the English language. WP:COMMON NAME is clear as to what the choice should be. Previously it was suggested this could be confused with other mentions of a Triple Alliance, hence I have added a moniker to denote South American history. The suggestion that Paraguayan War is less ambiguous is somewhat of a red herring, since there have been a number of conflicts involving Paraguay. WCMemail 22:55, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – The Nation of Domination → Nation of Domination – This is something of a test case. I thought it would be straightforward and uncontroversial, until I noticed that many members of Category:WWE teams and stables have titles including "The". I haven't reviewed other articles, but certainly this topic doesn't seem to meet any of the criteria at WP:THE. Also, "The" is omitted in the infobox, and the group is referred to by the abbreviation NOD, not TNOD. Am I overlooking something? --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 22:48, 16 May 2015 (UTC) --BDD (talk) 19:41, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

References

References generally should not appear here. Use {{reflist-talk}} in the talk page section with the requested move to show references there.
  1. ^ http://danbalan.com