Wifedogging

Wikipedia:Requested moves

Welcome to our website. It is generaly simplier version of wikipedia. You will find there selected articles. Enjoy!

Closing instructions

"WP: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. See also Category:Requests to move a userspace draft.
Click here to purge this page
This page has a backlog that requires the attention of one or more administrators.
This notice is automatically updated by RM bot (talk) and will no longer be displayed when the backlog is cleared.

Contents
Shortcuts:

Requested moves is a process for requesting the retitling of an article, template, or project page on Wikipedia. (Renames for files, categories and other items are requested elsewhere; see When not to use this page below.)

Any autoconfirmed user can use the [move] tab located at the top of any page to perform most moves (see Wikipedia:Moving 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:

  • Sometimes, technical reasons prevent a move from succeeding (for instance, if a page already exists with the desired name). In these circumstances, administrator help is required to move a page. You can request such help through this process: please see the section Requesting technical moves.
  • In some situations, the appropriateness of a move may be under dispute, and discussion is necessary in order to reach a consensus. It is not always necessary to formally request a move in these circumstances: you can start an informal discussion at the article's talk page instead. If you do choose to place a formal request for a potentially controversial page move, please see the section Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves.
  • Thirdly, unregistered users and new (non-confirmed) 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. Two pages often cited during move discussions, which you might want to familiarize yourself with before making your request, are our naming convention regarding primary topics and our guideline on using common English names. See also the How to Determine Wikipedia Article Titles and Title discussions essays for additional guidance.

Requests are generally processed after seven days, although backlogs often develop. If there is a clear consensus after this time, the request will be closed and acted upon. If not, the closer may choose to re-list the request to allow time for consensus to develop, or close it as "no consensus". (For uncontroversial technical moves, the page will often be moved after seven days, even without any discussion.) The processes involved in closing requests, performing moves, and cleaning up after moves can be viewed at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions.

  1. ^ Note to closers: according to an ArbCom ruling of June 2009, confirmed in September 2011, discussions relating to the naming of Ireland articles (Ireland, Republic of Ireland, Ireland (disambiguation)) must occur at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland Collaboration, unless it is agreed there to hold the discussion elsewhere. Any requested move affecting these articles that is opened on the article talk pages or any other venue should be speedily closed, with a pointer to the ArbCom ruling.

When not to use this page

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

Requesting technical moves

Consider the following points before listing pages here:

  • If the move you are suggesting is uncontroversial or technical in nature (e.g. spelling and capitalization), please feel free to move the page yourself. If you cannot move the page yourself, then request it below.
  • If any of the following situations applies to the requested move, it should be treated as controversial:
    • There is an existing article 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 the page has recently been moved without discussion, then you may revert the move (although this is not required, and may not always be possible) and initiate a discussion of the move on the talk page of the article. (See also: Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle.)
  • If the only obstacle to a technical move is a navigation aid (e.g., a redirect or an unnecessary disambiguation page with a minor edit history), you may 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 page for deletion under criterion for speedy deletion G6. If the page is a redirect, place the code above the redirection.

Otherwise, list new technical requests at the bottom of the sub-section "Technical requests" immediately below, using the following code:

{{subst:RMassist|old page name|requested name|reason for move}}

This will automatically insert a bullet and include your signature. No edits to the article's talk page are required.

If you object to a proposal listed in Technical requests, please move it to the Contested technical requests section below.

If your technical request is contested by another editor, remove the request from the "Contested technical requests" section and follow the instructions at Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves, below.

Technical requests

Contested technical requests

Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves

Do not put more than one move request on the same article talk page, as this is not supported by the bot that handles updates to this page. (For requesting multiple moves, see below.)

This process is necessary if there is any reason to believe a move would be contested. For technical move requests (e.g. spelling and capitalization fixes), see Technical requests above.

Requesting a single page move

(If your proposal involves moving more than one page—for example, if you will need to move one page, such as a disambiguation page, to move another page to that title—please use the process for "Requesting multiple page moves" below.)

To request a single page move, create a new section at the bottom of the Talk page of the article you want moved. Format it like this:

== Requested move ==
{{subst:requested move|NewName}} 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. ~~~~

The name of the section does not necessarily need to be "Requested move", though it is suggested. "NewName" is what you want the new name of the page to be. If there was a previous discussion use == Requested move xxxx == where xxxx can be the year if that is appropriate, or "2" for a second discussion.

As an alternative, you can click the "New Section" tab on the talk page and insert {{subst:RMtalk|Proposed new name|Reason for move.}} Leave the Subject/headline blank, as the template automatically creates the heading "Requested move", along with a location for survey and discussion. Also note that the template must be substituted. The template will automatically include your signature.

Note: Nominators should not add a separate support !vote, as the nomination itself qualifies as a !vote. Nominators may, of course, make comments and otherwise participate in the discussion.

Requesting multiple page 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:

==Requested move==
{{subst:move-multi
| current1 = Current title of page 1, with the talk page hosting this discussion
| new1 = New title for page 1
| current2 = Current title of page 2
| new2 = New title for page 2
| current3 = Current title for 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. Do not sign this.

}}

For example, if you were proposing a move for the article Wikipedia and other articles, put this template on Talk:Wikipedia and current1 would be Wikipedia. Note that the discussion for all the affected articles is held on the talk page of the first article - current1. It is not necessary to sign a request using this template with ~~~~ as the template does this automatically. Do not skip pairs of numbers. The template currently supports up to 30 listings.

After you make your move request on the talk page of one of the articles, per above, RM bot will automatically place a notice 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.

The template {{movenotice}} can be used on the current page (not the talk page) to draw attention to the proposed move and the discussion on the appropriate talk page.

Note: Nominators should usually not add a separate support !vote, as the nomination itself qualifies as a !vote. Nominators may, of course, make comments and otherwise participate in the discussion. If you feel the need to explicitly !vote (e.g. to add a personal observation that isn't part of the formal nomination rationale, or because you no longer agree with the nomination but it is already supported by other parties and can't really be retracted), do so with "as nominator", e.g.  * '''Rename, as nominator''': ...

Current discussions

This section lists all requests filed or identified as potentially controversial which are currently under discussion.
Do not attempt to edit this list manually; a bot will automatically update the page soon after the {{subst:Requested move}} template is added to the discussion on the relevant talk page. The entry is removed automatically when the discussion is closed.
To make a change to an entry, make the change on the linked talk page.

This list is also available in a page-link-first format.

May 23, 2012

  • (Discuss) – SS Washingtonian → SS Washingtonian (1913) – There were other ships named Washingtonian, including one launched in 1919 that was involved in a collision with USS Henley (DD-391) in 1938. Thus the current title should be a shipindex page. This should be an uncontroversial request, but as it affects a featured article I'm bringing it here for discussion. relisted --Mike Cline (talk) 15:46, 23 May 2012 (UTC) Mjroots (talk) 06:55, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – No Gun Ri → Nogeun-ri – "The preference is to use Revised Romanization for South Korean articles," according MOS:KO. This policy was recently confirmed at Talk:Joseon#Requested_move, (despite the fact that "Choson" is a far more common romanization.) This is an article about the village, so this move would free up the lemma No Gun Ri to become a redirect to No Gun Ri Massacre. Yonhap, the official news agency, uses the proposed form. From List of cities in South Korea, it looks like every other town in South Korea is given using Revised Romanization, aside from Panmunjom. There was a formal vote to create an article on the 1950 Korean War incident at No Gun Ri. The consensus was that the word "massacre" is POV and should not appear in the title. But the historical material was later cut-and-pasted to recreate an article entitled No Gun Ri Massacre. In short, this article is the accidental byproduct of an edit war. It was never anyone's intention to create an article about a village at this non-standard romanization. Kauffner (talk) 13:22, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Peggy Gordon (song) → Peggy Gordon – The song is fairly well known, as can be seen from the number of well-known singers who have recorded it, it is the primary meaning. The singer seems like a fairly minor figure who only just passes notability. PatGallacher (talk) 11:02, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Edouard Nanny → Édouard Nanny – per French orthography and WP:UE example of Besançon. French composer, move contested by WikiProject Tennis editor Fyunck. Even though the old metal typeface used on the cover of his Méthode complète pour la contrebasse à quatre et cinq cordes (1920) does not display the É majuscule, still the spelling of this Édouard as all other French Édouards is confirmed by E. Bozza Pièce sur le nom d'Édouard Nanny: pour contrebasse et piano. A. Leduc 1956. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:02, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – EXO (band) → Exo (band) – Per the discussion above. The current all caps title of the article appears to be solely for stylization purposes. "Exo" does not appear to be an acronym, initialism or abbreviation of any kind, and I have yet to see a justification for all caps. — ξxplicit 01:33, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

May 22, 2012

  • (Discuss) – Connie Mak → Kitman Mak – Her stage name was Connie while she was on contract with Crown Records. Then she became Kitman after she left Crown. Some sources declare her as Kitman. Nevertheless, I'm torn. --George Ho (talk) 23:29, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Conoco Inc. → Conoco – Per WP:COMMONNAME as the company was known and branded as Conoco and not as Conoc Inc. Conoco is not ambiguous term and it currently redirects here, so need to add the company type in its name. Beagel (talk) 16:18, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Death of Phylicia Barnes → Murder of Phylicia Barnes – When I created this article over a year ago, I gave it this target title, but for the second time, someone has renamed it to "Death of ..." This is a case that in every way has been viewed as a murder. Even before the victim's body was found, foul play was suspected. When the victim's body was found and autopsied, the cause of death was ruled a homicide[2]. It did take about a year following that for a suspect to be named, but what's more, the police have classified this case as a homicide and recently added it to their homicide count of the year the victim disappeared[3]. Common sense says that this case has all the makings of murder. Hellno2 (talk) 15:21, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Mouda → Mauda – Correct spelling as per government records. Currently, Mauda takes us to a small place in Poland with population of just 50. This article is about a town in Maharashtra, India with a population of about 32,000 relisted --Mike Cline (talk) 11:59, 22 May 2012 (UTC) Shivashree (talk) 12:53, 14 May 2012 (UTC) Orig. time stamp: 06:29, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Microsoft Windows Intune → Windows Intune – Hello everyone. I think this article should be renamed "Windows Intune" because it is the most commonly used form of the service name. Actually, I have never seen "Microsoft Windows Intune" anyware. Regards,
    Codename Lisa (talk) 11:56, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – South Florida metropolitan area → Miami metropolitan area – This is a long time coming: basically, this is far and away the most common name for this subject in the sources. The form "South Florida metropolitan area" is virtually never used outside of Wikipedia. Many sources that do use it are copies of or referring to Wikipedia,[4] suggesting that Wikipedia's observer effect is making it more prominent - which is a problem. "South Florida" is used widely, but as the new article South Florida and its cited sources demonstrate, this term can refer to a much larger part of the state than just this three-county area.
    Reviewing sources for the Dade-Broward-Palm Beach County metro area, "Miami metropolitan area" or "Miami metro area" are by far the most common names for the topic. They return 5120 and 4170 sources on Google Books, respectively. I found a few dozen for "Miami-Ft. Lauderdale metropolitan area" and related searches, and 205 for the full Census name "Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Miami Beach, FL MSA". There though, some sources like this that refer to the MSA name then use the simpler form in the rest of the work. It's pretty clear that "Miami metropolitan area" is the most common, concise, natural, and precise name for this subject, and is consistent with Wikipedia practice on similar articles. relisted --Mike Cline (talk) 11:54, 22 May 2012 (UTC) Cúchullain t/c 14:38, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

May 21, 2012

  • (Discuss) – Opium poppy → Papaver somniferum – Papaver somniferum should be the title (name) of this article with "Opium Poppy" used as a redirect, not the other way around.Why is it that almost every plant is listed by it's binomial name and this one gets special treatment? Cannabis sativa doesn't have it's title set to "Marijuana Cannabis" or "THC Cannabis". Adding vernacular names as titles (especially ones that have drug references in them), seems to encourage vandalism and useless edits. Opium has it's own page. Poppy seed has it's own page. Poppyseed oil has it's own page. Every Papaver species has it's name listed by binomial nomenclature, except poor old P. somniferum. Can we leave Opium out of the title & be a bit more scientifically accurate/botanist minded about the article?In addition, P. somniferum is grown more for pharmaceuticals, culinary purposes and ornamental purposes in most countries. The cultivation of P. somniferum for opium is somewhat minimal in present-day. As stated in the formal move request, small amounts of opiates have been found in other Papaver species, "Opium Poppy" could refer to these species as well, making the current article title inaccurate and over-encompassing, though the article itself is specific to P. somniferum . "Morphine poppy" would be more appropriate, as Papaver somniferum's notoriety for it's high morphine content is it's only distinguishing characteristic from non-somniferum Papaver species containing opiates. Thus, making the article seem either slightly obsolete, or encouraging education of the raw-form drug's existence beyond the precedents set by other, similar Wikipedia articles about plants that contain psychoactive alkaloids and compounds. (e.g. Lactuca virosa's title isn't "Opium Lettuce"...) relisted --Mike Cline (talk) 17:05, 21 May 2012 (UTC) FrostyCee (talk) 08:35, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Finnish submarine AG 12 → Russian submarine AG 12 – This submarine was bought and built for Russian navy and served in it from 1916 till 1918. She was scuttled and later raised by Finland but never commisioned into Finnish navy, so I think, that proposed name is more correct. --Rave (talk) 11:39, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Finnish submarine AG 16 → Russian submarine AG 16 – This submarine was bought and built for Russian navy and served in it from 1916 till 1918. She was scuttled and later raised by Finland but never commisioned into Finnish navy, so I think, that proposed name is more correct. Rave (talk) 11:35, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Botanical Garden in Kraków → Botanic Garden in Kraków – Not sure about the final name. Alternatives could be "The Botanic Garden in Kraków" or "Botanic Garden (Kraków)" or "The Botanic Garden (Kraków)". Rationale is that on its homepage the garden refers itself to as either "The Botanic Garden" or "Botanic Garden". bamse (talk) 05:44, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

May 20, 2012

  • (Discuss) – Carlos Silva (baseball) → Carlos Silva – This Silva is the primary topic. Silva has been a starter for several years in Major League Baseball, the highest level of baseball. MLB has a larger following than hurdling or cycling, and the footballer is rather obscure. Also, this Carlos Silva has more GHits and Wikipedia searches than the rest. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 23:05, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – List of IPL centuries → List of Indian Premier League centuries – The term "IPL" is ambiguous and can refer to many things, including some other sports leagues. See the IPL disambiguation page. jfd34 (talk) 07:34, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Inhibitory Control Test → Inhibitory control test – Per WP:MOSCAPS ("Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization") and WP:TITLE, this is a generic, common term, not a propriety or commercial term, so the article title should be downcased. Lowercase will match the formatting of related article titles. It's not even upcased in the sole reference, an authoritative one. Tony (talk) 05:47, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Helsingør → Elsinore – * This page has been back and forth between these two spellings recently. Let's discuss this properly. The difference from Copenhagen/København is that København city has been widely known of for centuries and long-used foreign forms develop and stay in use. Helsingør is rarely in the news and of little concern usually, and 'Elsinore' is known of only in one play by one playwright. Newspaper uses of 'Elsinore' for the modern town are journalese; I get the impression that good books and serious articles and maps call it Helsingør nowadays. Google search just now showed about 8,480,000 results for Helsingor OR Helsingør, and about 15,000,000 results for Elsinore; but most of the Elsinore results are for other places called Elsinore, including many for Lake Elsinore in California. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:30, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – List of successful Hail Marys in American football → List of notable Hail Mary passes in American football – The term "Hail Marys" sounds much like a slang term. Also, there would be these benefits:*This edit can be reverted. Everything written in the section is about unsuccessful Hail Mary pass attempts, and, although it doesn't match the current name of the title, it is still of interest to most readers.*You won't have to worry about "missing a few". The current name suggests this is a list of every Hail Mary pass in the history of mankind. We only care about the notable ones, and those are the ones included. --67.180.161.183(talk)03:25, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

May 19, 2012

  • (Discuss) – Thomas Dick → Thomas Dick (scientist) – There are two people of the name Thomas Dick on Wikipedia; this one and Thomas Dick (politician). This person is not the primary topic (April page views were 375 and 67), especially when one takes into account that a good number of the incoming links to this page were from the politician (which I will tidy up). I thus propose that the disambiguation page (that I have just set up) gets moved to this page, and this page gets disambiguated. It's a reasonably straightforward thing, apart from it not being obvious to me what the disambiguator for the Reverend should be. Schwede66 22:29, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – The Miracle of Flight → Miracle of Flight – It seems that the name The Miracle of Flight was taken from IMDb, which is not considered a reliable source. The film itself can be seen on YouTube (check the external links section), and despite the name entered by the uploader, the actual title screen of the film clearly says Miracle of Flight – no The. —Flax5 21:00, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Book of Rites → Record of Rites – I agree that the title Classic of Rites is not the most appropriate name for this book, however I think the current title Book of Rites is also not as appropriate, as it does not correspond at all to the original Chinese title, Li Ji, which refers to record, the Record of Rites [5]. Further, the term "Book" might confuse readers with the Four Books, which is often associated with the Five Classics. --Relisted JHunterJ (talk) 18:22, 19 May 2012 (UTC) --Sevilledade (talk) 01:25, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – 1st United States Volunteer Sharpshooter Regiment → 1st United States Sharpshooters – This unit was officially designated as the 1st United States Sharpshooters. The words 'volunteer' and 'regiment' were never part of the designation. Although the soldiers were 'volunteers', the unit was activated by the U.S. War Department, thus giving the unit Federal Army (regular) status, not a volunteer regiment; as they are created by indivdual states who pledge them to the Union Army. Wi hooligan (talk) 15:52, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – 2nd United States Volunteer Sharpshooter Regiment → 2nd United States Sharpshooters – This unit was officially designated as the 2nd United States Sharpshooters. The words 'volunteer' and 'regiment' were never part of the designation. Although the soldiers were 'volunteers', the unit was activated by the U.S. War Department, thus giving the unit Federal Army (regular) status, not a volunteer regiment; as they are created by indivdual states who pledge them to the Union Army. Wi hooligan (talk) 15:50, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Seamus incident → Mitt Romney dog incident – I'm not sure if opening a new move request discussion is the best way to handle this; if consensus seems to be that this is needlessly tedious or inflammatory, or that another process to reconsider the name should be used, I will withdraw. But I disagree that Seamus incident is a good title and that it had a consensus of support. (It is, however, a better title than Seamus (dog).) It looks to me like a title using Mitt Romney's name had the most support, but that a minority of users objected to using Mitt Romney's name, and because most people in favor of a title using his name didn't go out of their way to argue in support specifically of using his name, it was mistakenly perceived that everybody would be just as happy with NOT using his name.The problem with Seamus incident is that, I believe, very few people who are aware of this topic would identify it by the name of the dog, but virtually anyone who is aware of the topic would be able to identify it by reference to Mitt Romney's dog. Our article naming policy says: "the ideal article title will resemble titles for similar articles, precisely identify the subject, be short, be natural, and be recognizable." I don't agree that invoking the name "Seamus" meets these ideals anywhere near as well as the name "Mitt Romney" does.I also don't see any basis for claiming that using Romney's name would be any sort of BLP violation. While the debate over naming Campaign for "santorum" neologism obviously springs to mind (especially since the closer of the RM discussion here used the word "neologism" in his closing rationale despite absolutely nobody on either side of the actual discussion using that word), that topic bears little resemblance to this one, because that article is about a campaign, developed independently of Rick Santorum, seeking to associate his name with something disgusting, and this article is about something that Mitt Romney inarguably, undeniably did, and how people feel about it. A precedent that prevents us from titling articles about political incidents in a way that allows people to identify what the article is about would be a very bad convention to adopt. relisted (See comment below) -- Mike Cline (talk) 15:44, 19 May 2012 (UTC) Theoldsparkle (talk) 16:04, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Racist music → White power music – All of the content in the article is about white power music. It doesn't describe or even mention any other types of racist music. There is no specific genre called racist music, and there is no logical reason why the term should only refer to white racist music. The current White power music page is a redirect. 10:48, 19 May 2012 (UTC) Spylab (talk) Orig. time stamp: 00:07, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Mast Seeding → Mast seeding – Per WP:MOSCAPS ("Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization") and WP:TITLE, this is a generic, common term. Looks like another article creator simply thought we use title case in article titles. Lower case is used in the article text. Tony (talk) 04:15, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Arabeem Ottakom P. Madhavan Nayarum in Oru Marubhoomikkadha → Oru Marubhoomikadha – The official title of the film used in the censor certificate is 'Oru Marubhoomikadha' only. Arabeem Ottakom P. Madhavan Nairum' is only used in promotions and titles for posters. So, proposing to name the article as 'Oru Marubhoomikadha' with a re-direct from 'Arabeem Ottakom P. Mahavan Nairum'.
    Anish Viswa 02:53, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Drivast → Drisht – This isn't so much as page rename as a problem with two slightly messy articles at inconsistent page names, but the page rename may help in sorting it out. The other article is Drisht Castle, a stub about the ruined medieval castle of Drivastum (Latin)/Drivast (Serbian)/Drisht (Albanian), to which 80% of the content of article Drivast refers, except that the usual geographical map, template, etc. on Drivast obviously refer to the modern Albanian-speaking village of Drisht (Albanian) at the foot of the hill where the ruins and archeological site of old Drivastum lie. Ideally the 80% which refers to the old ruined fortress and settlement needs cut-and-paste from the village stub to the ruined castle stub - old Drivast was physically next to the castle not the village. But before doing that bringing it to WP:RM to get input on whether the village and the ruins should have consistent names, and if so in Albanian or Serbian or Latin. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:46, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

May 18, 2012

  • (Discuss) – China Central Television Headquarters → CCTV Headquarters – split article (over redirect). Article currently inappropriately covers two buildings. per emporis and skyscraperpage, old building=China Central Television building and new building=CCTV Headquarters. the easiest way would be to cut and paste new building content out to the CCTV Headquarters redirect page, but i'm sure that would probably screw things up. emerson7 17:07, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Bedsore → Pressure ulcer' – * Bedsores, decubitus ulcers and pressure ulcers all refer to the same disease process, however the terms bedsore and decubitus ("to lie") ulcer are misleading as they refer only to ulcers caused by prolonged bed rest. Pressure ulcers can form any place on the body where the skin is subjected to continuous pressure, such as in a patient confined to a wheelchair developing ulcerations over their coccyx or ischial tuberosity. relisted - please see comment below -- Mike Cline (talk) 11:20, 18 May 2012 (UTC) relisted --Mike Cline (talk) 20:12, 10 May 2012 (UTC) 68.32.94.54 (talk) 02:32, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Himalayan Wolf → Himalayan wolf – per WP:FNAME species titles should be in sentence case. However, as the Himalayan wolf has not been officially recognised as a species by any authoritative bodies, I thought it best to bring it to a full discussion, in case our naming conventions are different for proposed species. Jenks24 (talk) 08:00, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Information processing → Cognitive information processing – The article as it is now seems to confuse computational and psychological information processing. It mostly focuses on cognitive information processing, so I propose changing the name to that, and mentioning computational information processing on a disambiguation page (which I have already created). Tigrennatenn (talk) 04:57, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Ruby Tuesday → Ruby Tuesday (song) – I propose that this article gets moved back to "Ruby Tuesday (song)". This would allow the "Ruby Tuesday" page to be used as a disambiguation page for the song, restaurant and actress. A google search for "ruby tuesday restaurant" returns 5.17 million results, while a search for "ruby tuesday song" returns 1.84 million. A google search for "ruby tuesday" results in the restaurant being the number one result, while wikipedia returns the song as the primary link. This confusion could be easily cleared up with a disambiguation page. Chilled616 (talk) 04:18, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Massachusetts Avenue → Massachusetts Avenue (disambiguation) – Proposing the current "Massachusetts Avenue" be moved to the current redirect page "Massachusetts Avenue (disambiguation)". Reasons: 1) There are other Massachusetts Avenues in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts which aren't attached to the major linear one which stretches most of Massachusetts towards Western Mass. 2) The other current 'Mass. Ave' articles seem to have defined boundaries. 3) The "Massachusetts Avenue (Boston)" one actually spans several Mass. state counties, *and* municipal borders so even "Massachusetts Avenue (Boston)" is as incorrect in title as would be: "Massachusetts Avenue (Metro Boston)", "Massachusetts Avenue (Eastern and Central Massachusetts)", too strange to be "Massachusetts Avenue 1 (Massachusetts)" or "Massachusetts Avenue (Suffolk, Middlesex, and Worcester Counties)".My proposal is to move "Massachusetts Avenue" to "Massachusetts Avenue (disambiguation)" Then "Massachusetts Avenue (Boston)" to "Massachusetts Avenue" to serve all of separat cities on Mass AveAt the top, a link can be place to the main disambiguation page with all other 'Mass. Ave' articles. Any other 'Mass. Ave's in Massachusetts (not attached to this one) can go by "Massachusetts, Avenue (whatever municipality they're in)". The problem is the presently named "Massachusetts (Boston)" doesn't fit into any neat naming designations. Its in multiple counties; multiple municipalities; both eastern and central Massachusetts regions, and it seems like it might be out toward Western Massachusetts too since it parallels Route 2. CaribDigita (talk) 00:55, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

May 17, 2012

  • (Discuss) – Miscarriage → Spontaneous abortion – Rename to Spontaneous abortion.*Support I think it is ridiculous that the whole article uses the term "spontaneous abortion", but the title of the article is "miscarriage". Either the article is renamed "spontaneous abortion", or if it stays with the current title of "miscarriage", than the text is changed back to "miscarriage" everywhere it currently uses "spontaneous abortion". 5.12.65.248 (talk) 23:46, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Baron of Renfrew (ship) → Baron of Renfrew – At present the Prince of Wales is the primary meaning, on the grounds that "Baron Renfrew" is one of his several subsidiary titles. This is a fairly obscure point about him, I suggest that the ship is the primary meaning. PatGallacher (talk) 20:49, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – The Shift (film) → The Shift – Currently, this article uses parentheses only because once someone created an article for the song "The Shift" from The Beach Boys' Surfin' Safari, which has been deemed unnotable and thus been redirected to the album page. As there's now only one article named "The Shift", it should have the primary page and a hatnote should redirect users to the Beach Boys album, rather than the other way around, as is the case now. --The Evil IP address (talk) 16:26, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Kowloon—Canton Railway → Kowloon–Canton Railway – . user:Scriber en undiscussed move. The disambiguation qualifier is needless because there's no article and no need for an additional article for the original "Kowloon–Canton Railway", it is already covered in the history section. Scriber en also moved the DE, FR, IT and FI respective articles too, but I only know there's the similar move request template available to wp.it. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 14:14, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Rock Pigeon → Rock Dove – "Rock Pigeon" was really just the IOC World Bird List name, while "Rock Dove" is the customary name, most common species name, and now the IOC name. (Most people probably know the feral birds as "pigeons", but this refers to many species; "Rock Pigeon" was removed from the IOC List since it also refers to some Australian birds.) --Relisted JHunterJ (talk) 11:46, 17 May 2012 (UTC) —innotata 20:41, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Gravitomagnetism → Gravitoelectromagnetism – This article has a history of contention relating to the name, e.g. Talk:Gravitomagnetism/Archive_1#Requested_move. My own (somewhat limited) reading of authors such as Mashhoon suggests that the usage is consistent with the intuitive analogy:electromagnetism ↔ gravitoelectromagnetism:electric field ↔ gravitoelectric field:magnetic field ↔ gravitomagnetic fieldIn particular, this article should be considered as an analogy of electromagnetism and not of only magnetism, and since I've seen no reference using the word gravitomagnetism for the analogy to electromagnetism as a whole as opposed to specifically magnetism, I consider it appropriate to move this article as indicated.Previous contention appears to have been based on Google hit rates for the respective terms, with very few editors involved. It seems to me that such an argument would in general lead to rather inappropriate article renaming, since it omits to consider what is being referred to in each instance (e.g. it would suggest we should rename the article Birth control to Carrot – or vice versa, but you get the point). Barring contradicting input by experienced physicists etc., I think this move should be made. — --Relisted JHunterJ (talk) 11:32, 17 May 2012 (UTC) Quondum☏ 15:40, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Sphenodontia → Rhynchocephalia – My rationales are:1. The name Rhynchocephalia (Günther, 1867) has priority over the name Sphenodontia (Williston, 1925).
    2. Both names aren't phylogenetically defunct, and have different definitions (so they can't be synonymous).
    3. Rhynchocephalia is more inclusive than Sphenodontia, and the former contains the later.
    4. Although Sphenodontia is used more often, it is probably due to the fact that only some analyses include Gephyrosaurus as an ingroup taxon, and Rhynchocephalia currently composed only of Gephyrosaurus and Sphenodontia.
    5. Other reptiles (not related to Sphenodon, such as rhynchosaurs) were removed a long time ago from Rhynchocephalia. (although I think we should discuss the complex history of Rhynchocephalia somewhere)Rnnsh (talk) 08:35, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Kadı → Kadi (Ottoman empire) – WP:ENGLISH states that we should use whatever spelling is used in English language sources. English sources use "Kadi", not the Turkish spelling "Kadı". Kaldari (talk) 06:48, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Ceramic plate → Trauma plate – The ceramic plate article has been edited and expanded to encompass all forms and types of trauma plates. Given this, the page should be renamed. If further detail is needed, specifically about ceramic plates, it can be added to the ceramic sub-section of the materials section of the new article. Mtotin (talk) 02:51, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

May 16, 2012

  • (Discuss) – Adventure Island (disambiguation) → Adventure Island – The video game may be the popular topic of all with the same name with 200 rounded average views per day. However, if the film (10), the TV show (25), the amusement park (70), and the water park (40) are combined (10+25+70+40), the combined total of all other pages are 145 (42% of all, 72.5% of video game). If the numbers of dab page (which includes See also) (40) is included, it becomes 185 (48% of all, 92.5% of video game). Also, how is the video game more significant than either the children's show or the amusement park, regardless of page views? Who really wants to learn more about the video game nowadays? The dab page this month was moved from "Adventure Island" to "Adventure island (disambiguation)" (seriously, without caps). Why should the video game be primary besides vague statistics? -- George Ho (talk) 23:52, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Backlog

  • (Discuss) – Season 2 → Season 2 (album) – JHunterJ has used WP:PRECISION as a reason to move the album to "Season 2" and deemed "(album)" as unnecessary qualifier. However, this would be considered <if it is not unilateral and disruptive, what else is it?> contradictory to the ongoing discussion at Talk:Season 4 (30 Rock). Imagine "Season 1" and "Season 3" as titles for anything not related to the seasons of television shows. --George Ho (talk) 20:32, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Expansion chamber → Tuned pipe – I support the merge, because there was major duplication across the same topic (although was anything actually merged, or needed merging?). However the name tuned pipe is much better than expansion chamber. It is also the rather more common everyday name for such a system.A tuned pipe is a system used for two-stroke engines with inertial scavenging or the Kadenacy effect. An expansion chamber is one component, albeit a necessary one, of this. However expansion chambers are also found in other exhaust systems, including four-stroke engines where the expansion chamber is only used for silencing (by simple expansion) or for the balancing of exhaust pulses between banks of a vee engine. Neither of these are tuned systems, or have any relation to scavenging. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:09, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
  • (Discuss) – Lovin' You → Lovin' You (Minnie Riperton song) – The previous discussion was closed as moved based on statistics and interpretations of statistics. However, there are concerns over the song's qualifications as the "primary topic". Nevertheless, I haven't considered, in the previous discussion, that, according to WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, "there is no single criterion for defining a primary topic". In fact, two criteria were used: long-term significance and usage.As I pointed before, usage criteria is totally vague, even when it is spelled "Lovin' You" without the 'g'. WP:PRECISION can distinct two names as two topics with various capitalizations, punctuations, spacing, and other modifications. However, I don't even know "Lovin' You" is also the Minnie Riperton song, as I confused the title as anything related to Elvis Presley or a catchy song of someone else.Which brings me statistics. The Minnie Riperton song in the last 90 days is a popular search term. Meanwhile, The O'Jays song, Japanese song, Kristine W song, and TVXQ song are the least searchables. However, which brings me one question: how familiar is the Minnie Riperton song? Do they have to know Minnie Riperton song of all titles with the same name, "Lovin' You"? George Ho (talk) 15:08, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
The current Wikipedia time is:
22:41, Wednesday, May 23, 2012 (UTC)
To update time purge page cache!


Advertisement. Check our sponsors: gold
Thanks for your time.
All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License