This page has an administrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators. This notice will be automatically removed by
RMCD bot (
talk) when the backlog is cleared.
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.
Any
autoconfirmed user can use the
Move function to perform most moves (see
Help:How to move a page). If you have no reason to expect a dispute concerning a move,
be bold and move the page. However, it may not always be possible or desirable to do this:
Technical reasons may prevent a move; for example, a page may already exist at the target title and require deletion, or the page may be
protected from moves. See: § Requesting technical moves.
Requests to revert recent, undiscussed, controversial moves may be made at
WP:RM/TR. If the new name has not become the stable title, the undiscussed move will be reverted. If the new name has become the stable title, a requested move will be needed to determine the article's proper location.
Unregistered and new (not yet
autoconfirmed) users are unable to move pages.
Requests are generally processed after seven days. If consensus to move the page is reached at or after this time, a reviewer will carry out the request. If there is a consensus not to move the page, the request will be closed as "not moved". When consensus remains unclear, the request may be relisted to allow more time for consensus to develop, or the discussion may be closed as "no consensus". See
Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions for more details on the process.
Wikipedia:Move review can be used to contest the outcome of a move request as long as all steps are followed. If a discussion on the closer's talk page does not resolve an issue, then a move review will evaluate the close of the move discussion to determine whether or not the contested close was reasonable and consistent with the
spirit and intent of common practice, policies, and guidelines.
Moves from draft namespace or user space to article space – Unconfirmed users: add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the article. See
Wikipedia:Articles for creation. Confirmed users: Move the page yourself.
Autoconfirmed editors may move a page without discussion if all of the following apply:
No article exists at the new target title;
There has been no previous discussion about the title of the page that expressed any objection to a new title; and
It seems unlikely that anyone would reasonably disagree with the move.
If you disagree with a prior bold move, and the new title has not been
in place for a long time, you may revert the move yourself. If you cannot revert the move for technical reasons, then you may
request a technical move.
If you are unable to complete a move for technical reasons, you can request technical help below. This is the correct method if you tried to move a page, but you got an error message saying something like "You do not have permission to move this page, for the following reasons:..." or "The/This page could not be moved, for the following reason:..."
If you are here because you want an admin to approve of your new article or your proposed page move, you are in the wrong place.
If this is your first article and you want your draft article moved to the
mainspace, please submit it for review at
Articles for creation, by adding the code {{
subst:submit}} to the top of the
draft or
user sandbox page instead of listing it here.
Because you are
autoconfirmed, you can
move most pages yourself. Do not request technical assistance on this page if you can do it yourself.
If you need help determining whether it's okay to move the page to a different title, then please follow the instructions at the top of
Wikipedia:Requested moves.
To list a technical request: the
Uncontroversial technical requests subsection and insert the following code at the bottom of the list, filling in pages and reason:
{{
subst:RMassist|current page title|new title|reason=edit summary for the move}}
This will automatically insert a bullet and include your signature. Please do not edit the article's talk page.
If you object to a proposal listed in the uncontroversial technical requests section, please move the request to the
Contested technical requests section, append a note on the request elaborating on why, and sign with ~~~~. Consider
pinging the requester to let them know about the objection.
If your technical request is contested, or if a contested request is left untouched without reply,
create a requested move on the article talk and remove the request from the section here. The fastest and easiest way is to click the "discuss" button at the request, save the talk page, and remove the entry on this page.
Does Wikipedia have a convention about this sort of title format with a dash just before a closing parenthesis? To me it looks a bit strange. I would expect something like "... (2020–present)". I found only 28 titles like that on the entire English Wikipedia, so it must not be considered proper. —
BarrelProof (
talk)
14:20, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
None that I know of. I agree that the "(2020 -)" qualifier looks a bit strange, as if the team is under a deathwatch. There are many examples of new(er) sports teams choosing to take the name of a historical antecedent:
I suggest that the
Collingwood Blues (2020–) should be considered the primary topic. As I noted above,
Collingwood Blues (2020–) has more than double the number of page views in the last 2 months, and it seems intuitive that any person looking for either of the articles would make the same assumption, that an active team would have primacy over the defunct one. I don't recommend using
Collingwood Blues (2020–present), as I think it's unnecessary and inconsistent with most other articles about sports teams.
Buffalkill (
talk)
19:13, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Regarding the number of page views I note that, until a day ago, the redirect page was automatically sending readers to
Collingwood Blues (1988–2011), which suggests to me that many of the page views for the defunct team's article were misdirected. There was a significant spike in views for both articles in May 2024, which was around the time when the
Collingwood Blues (2020–) were winning a national championship.
Buffalkill (
talk)
19:28, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
The discussion process is used for potentially controversial moves. A move is potentially controversial if either of the following applies:
there has been any past debate about the best title for the page;
someone could reasonably disagree with the move.
Use this process if there is any reason to believe a move would be contested. For technical move requests, such as to correct obvious typographical errors, see Requesting technical moves. The technical moves procedure can also be used for uncontroversial moves when the requested title is occupied by an existing article.
Do not create a new move request when one is already open on the same talk page. Instead, consider contributing to the open discussion if you would like to propose another alternative. Multiple closed move requests may be on the same page, but each should have a unique
section heading.
Do not create a move request to rename one or more
redirects. Redirects cannot be used as current titles in requested moves.
To request a single page move, click on the "New section" (or "Add topic") tab of the talk page of the article you want moved, without adding a new subject/header, inserting this code:
{{subst:requested move|New name|reason=Place here your rationale for the proposed page name change, ideally referring to applicable naming convention policies and guidelines, and providing evidence in support where appropriate. If your reasoning includes search engine results, please prioritize searches limited to reliable sources (e.g. books, news, scholarly papers) over other web results. You don't need to add your signature at the end, as this template will do so automatically.}}
Replace New name with the requested new name of the page (or with a simple question mark, if you want more than one possible new name to be considered). The template will automatically create the heading "Requested move 1 August 2024" and sign the post for you.
There is no need to edit the article in question. Once the above code is added to the Talk page, a bot will automatically add the following notification at the top of the affected page:
A request that this page title be changed is
under discussion. Please do not move this page until the discussion is closed.
A single template may be used to request multiple related moves. On one of the talk pages of the affected pages, create a request and format it as below. A sample request for three page moves is shown here (for two page moves, omit the lines for current3 and new3). For four page moves, add lines for current4 and new4, and so on. There is no technical limit on the number of multiple move requests, but before requesting very large multi-moves, consider whether a
naming convention should be changed first. Discuss that change on the talk page for the naming convention, e.g.,
Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (sportspeople).
To request a multiple page move, edit at the bottom of the talk page of the article you chose for your request, without adding a new header, inserting this code:
{{subst:requested move| current1 = Current title of page 1
| new1 = New title for page 1 with the talk page hosting this discussion
| current2 = Current title of page 2
| new2 = New title for page 2
| current3 = Current title of page 3
| new3 = New title for page 3
| reason = Place here your rationale for the proposed page name change, ideally referring to applicable naming convention policies and guidelines, and providing evidence in support where appropriate. If your reasoning includes search engine results, please prioritize searches limited to reliable sources (e.g. books, news, scholarly papers) over other web results. You don't need to add your signature at the end, as this template will do so automatically.
}}
For example, to propose moving the articles Wikipedia and Wiki, put this template on Talk:Wikipedia with current1 set to Wikipedia and current2 set to Wiki. The discussion for all affected articles is held on the talk page of the article where the template is placed (Talk:Wikipedia). Do not sign the request with ~~~~, since the template does this automatically (so if you sign it yourself there will be two copies of your signature at the end of the request). Do not skip pairs of numbers.
RMCD bot automatically places a notice section on the talk page of all pages that are included in your request except the one hosting the discussion, to call attention to the move discussion that is in progress and to suggest that all discussion for all of the pages included in the request should take place at that one hosting location.
For multi-move discussions hosted on a page which is itself proposed to be moved, it is not necessary to include the |current1=Current title of page 1 for the page hosting the discussion, as its current title can be inferred automatically. Occasionally the discussions for significant multi-move requests may be hosted on
WikiProject talk pages or other pages in
Project namespace, in which case it is necessary to include |current1= to indicate the first article to be moved.
Please list every move that you wish to have made in your request. For example, if you wish to move
Cricket (disambiguation) to
Cricket because you do not believe the sport is the
primary topic for the search term "Cricket", then you actually want to move two pages, both
Cricket (disambiguation)andCricket. Thus you must list proposed titles for each page affected by your request. For example, you might propose:
If a new title is not proposed for the sport, it is more difficult to achieve consensus for a new title for that article. A move request that does not show what to do with the material at its proposed target, such as:
A bot will list this discussion on the
requested moves current discussions
subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the
closing instructions). Please base arguments on
article title policy, and keep discussion
succinct and
civil.
Use when the proposed new title is given. Do not sign this template—this tag is auto-signed when substituted. Be sure to use the
subst:. This tag should be placed at the beginning of the section containing the relevant discussion.
A bot will list this discussion on the
requested moves current discussions
subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the
closing instructions). Please base arguments on
article title policy, and keep discussion
succinct and
civil.
Use when the proposed new title is not known. Do not sign this template—this tag is auto-signed when substituted. Be sure to use the
subst:. This tag should be placed at the beginning of the section containing the relevant discussion.
A bot will list this discussion on the
requested moves current discussions
subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the
closing instructions). Please base arguments on
article title policy, and keep discussion
succinct and
civil.
This template adds subsections for survey and discussion. Do not sign this template—this tag is auto-signed when substituted. Be sure to use the
subst: Click the "New Section" tab on the talk page and leave the Subject/headline blank, as the template by default automatically creates the heading.
It has been proposed in this section that multiple pages be
renamed and moved.
A bot will list this discussion on the
requested moves current discussions
subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the
closing instructions). Please base arguments on
article title policy, and keep discussion
succinct and
civil.
Do not sign this template—this tag is auto-signed when substituted. Be sure to use the
subst: and place this tag at the beginning of the section containing the relevant discussion. Add additional related move requests in pairs (|current3= and |new3=, |current4= and |new4=, etc.).
It has been proposed in this section that multiple pages be
renamed and moved somewhere else, with the names being decided below.
A bot will list this discussion on the
requested moves current discussions
subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the
closing instructions). Please base arguments on
article title policy, and keep discussion
succinct and
civil.
All editors are welcome to contribute to the discussion regarding a requested page move. There are a number of standards that Wikipedians should practice in such discussions:
When editors recommend a course of action, they write Support or Oppose in bold text, which is done by surrounding the word with three single quotes on each side, e.g. '''Support'''.
Comments or recommendations are added on a new bulleted line (that is, starting with *) and signed by adding ~~~~ to the end. Responses to another editor are
threaded and indented using multiple bullets.
The article itself should be reviewed before any recommendation is made; do not base recommendations solely on the information supplied by other editors. It may also help to look at the article's edit history. However, please read the earlier comments and recommendations, as well as prior move requests. They may contain relevant arguments and useful information.
The debate is not a vote; please do not make recommendations that are not sustained by arguments.
Explain how the proposed article title meets or contravenes policy and guidelines rather than merely stating that it does so.
Nomination already implies that the nominator supports the name change, and nominators should refrain from repeating this recommendation on a separate bulleted line.[a]
Do not make conflicting recommendations. If you change your mind, use strike-through to retract your previous statement by enclosing it between <s> and </s> after the bullets, and de-bold the struck words, as in "• SupportOppose".
Please remember that reasonable editors will sometimes disagree, but that arguments based in policy, guidelines, and evidence have more weight than unsupported statements. When an editor offers an argument that does not explain how the move request is consistent with policies and guidelines, a reminder to engage in constructive, on-topic discussion may be useful. On the other hand, a pattern of responding to requests with groundless opinion,
proof by assertion, and ignoring content guidelines may become disruptive. If a pattern of disruptive behavior persists after efforts are made to correct the situation through dialogue, please consider using a
dispute resolution process.
Relisting a discussion moves the request out of the backlog up to the current day in order to encourage further input. The decision to relist a discussion is best left to uninvolved experienced editors upon considering, but declining, to close the discussion. In general, discussions should not be relisted more than once before
properly closing.[b] Users relisting a debate which has already been relisted, or relisting a debate with a substantial discussion, should write a short explanation on why they did not consider the debate sufficient to close. While there is no consensus forbidding participation in a requested move discussion after relisting it, many editors consider it an inadvisable form of
supervote. If you want to relist a discussion and then participate in it, be prepared to explain why you think it was appropriate.
Relisting should be done using {{
subst:RM relist}}, which automatically includes the relister's signature, and which must be placed at the very end of the initial request after the move requester's signature (and subsequent relisters' signatures).
When a relisted discussion reaches a resolution, it may be closed at any time according to the
closing instructions; there is no required length of time to wait before closing a relisted discussion.
If discussion has become stale, or it seems that discussion would benefit from more input of editors versed in the subject area, consider more widely
publicizing the discussion, such as by notifying
WikiProjects of the discussion using the template {{RM notification}}. Banners placed at the top of the talk page hosting the move request can often be used to identify WikiProjects suitable for notification.
Notes
^A nominator making a procedural nomination with which they may not agree is free to add a bulleted line explaining their actual position. Additional detail, such as sources, may also be provided in an additional bullet point if its inclusion in the nomination statement would make the statement unwieldy. Please remember that the entire nomination statement appears on the list on this page.
^Despite this, discussions are occasionally relisted more than once.
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 soon after the discussion is closed. To make a change to an entry, make the change on the linked talk page.
(
Discuss) – Baek Jong-won → Paik Jong-won – This is the
WP:COMMONNAME spelling and closer to what I think is his preferred spelling of "Paik Jong Won" (based on
his YouTube channel, although the titles of his videos use a variety of spellings lol; probably hired translators). Common name proof: exact google news search for "Paik Jong-won" yields 381 results, and "Baek Jong-won" yields 300 results with more spurious results due to overlapping people names. I can't find evidence that the "Paik Jong Won" spelling is used much; news coverage of him tends to use "Paik Jong-won".
104.232.119.107 (
talk)
06:52, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – R Vaishali → Vaishali Rameshbabu – This page used to be at Vaishali Rameshbabu. It was moved only because her brother's page was moved, even though this page was barely part of that discussion. Also at the time, Vaishali's name on
her FIDE page was "Vaishali R". But since then, she changed
her FIDE name to the full "Vaishali Rameshbabu", while her brother remains at "Praggnanandhaa R". In most cases, we set the page name on Wikipedia to be what it is on the FIDE website, so we should do that here. (From media sources, there is no clear preferred choice whether to abbreviate or not. Some abbreviate, others do not.)
Sportsfan77777 (
talk)
04:57, 1 August 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Aegukka →
National Anthem of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea – After the DPRK's abandonment of unification, the title Aegukka seems to have fallen out of use at least on KCTV (first on the
Hwasŏng Area completion event, and now the
July 27 "victory" celebration), and
Korean: 조선민주주의인민공화국 국가,
lit. 'National Anthem of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea' has taken its place. On the other hand, the site of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the DPRK, as well as the current constitution, still mentions that the national anthem is titled "애국가". Another reason of my proposal is due to the current title's possible confusion with the ROK's
Aegukga, where currently neither title has a modifier, which may cause confusion to readers not familiar to the two romanization systems.
OosakaNoOusama (
talk)
22:32, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Calls for the destruction of Israel →
Calls for the dissolution of the State of Israel – More
WP:NEUTRAL and
WP:PRECISE. Change loaded word 'destruction'—which suggests physical damage or violence, as if it were about a physical object and not a political formation—to the more NEUTRAL and PRECISE 'dissolution' as in
Dissolution of the Ottoman Empire. Because this article is about calls for the dissolution of the state, change the ambiguous 'Israel' to 'State of Israel' to avoid conflation with בני ישראל (Bənēy Yīsrāʾēl 'children of Israel/Jacob'), a biblical metonym for Jewish people. Calls for the dissolution of a state are not calls for the eradication of a people; that would be a separate topic.
إيان (
talk)
20:58, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Douglas Fairbanks in Robin Hood → Robin Hood (1922 film) – Per
WP:COMMONNAME, "Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's official name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable, English-language sources) as such names will usually best fit the five criteria listed above." and per
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) "Common names – Sometimes, it is acceptable to use an alternative common name that is more concise or recognizable.". In all historical articles of the film I've read and most film databases, the film is known as "Robin Hood" not "Douglas Fairbanks in Robin Hood". The title alone makes it sound like a represetnation of acting in the film.
Andrzejbanas (
talk) 13:37, 23 July 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. ASUKITE17:35, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Shin Hye-sun → Shin Hae-sun – With the continuing rise in popularity of actress <Shin Hae-sun>, the spelling of her English name has been up for debate for quite some time. Since her debut in
School 2013, many have spelled her name as <Shin Hye-sun>; others have spelled it as <Shin Hae-sun> (a difference in Hye or Hae). In recent years, many have pointed out that her own signature and places like her agency (
YNK Entertainment under
IOK Company) spelled her name with Hae, yet, many sources continued to spell it as Hye since it was the most common spelling since her debut (Hye is also a common spelling amongst other Korean celebrities like
Park Shin-hye and
Kim Hye-yoon, adding to its credibility at the time). Here are some other reliable sources that correctly spells her name with Hae:
KoBiz,
The Korean Herald,
Korea JoongAng Daily, and
The Korea Times. It was only until last year that the actress added her English name to
her Instagram account, spelling it herself as Hae. But due to the immense commonality of Hye across the internet, there wasn't a big change in how articles/sources/new fans spelled her name. As such, I am proposing that we change the spelling of her name to Hae, rather than Hye, as to fix the misinformation that is still at large. It is only right that we respect how the actress spells her own name.
Imanomynous (
talk) 22:02, 22 July 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.Bensci54 (
talk)
16:50, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Paul Mullin (footballer, born 1994) →
Paul Mullin – After featuring as a prominant part of the widely viewed "Welcome to Wrexham" series and now having featured as a cameo character in a $200mil film, it is clear that Paul Mullin is a pretty well recognised celebrity. In my opinion, this means that this Paul Mullin should definetly deserve primary status over a non-league footballer who may have done well in the lower levels, but definetly lacks enough relevance to force this Paul Mullin into having to have a disambiguation.
WikiHmmmm... (
talk)
12:48, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – The Doctor (Doctor Who) → The Doctor – The definite article 'the' in the title designates this topic as the primary one for 'The Doctor' (but only with the definite article). This is consistent with titles such as
The Guardian,
The Signpost,
The Postal Service,
The Edge,
The 1975, and
The Undertaker. A
Google search for "The Doctor" returns results related to Doctor Who, as does a
Google image search. Similarly, a
Google News search returns Doctor Who-related coverage. While a search for
"The Doctor" on JSTOR for produces variable results, a search for
"The Guardian" on JSTOR wouldn't establish the newspaper as the primary topic alone. A Google Ngram
analysis reveals that the term 'The Doctor' saw an increase in usage in 2005, coinciding with the
show's revival. Worldwide Google Trends
indicate that "The Doctor" is predominantly used in reference to searches about Doctor Who, per the 'related topics' and 'related searches'; with a notable peak in November 2013, coinciding with the show's
50th anniversary special. This 'The Doctor' (with the definite article) has more coverage from reliable sources than others (with the definite article) listed on the
disambiguation page. Note: When researching, "The Doctor" should be enclosed in quotation marks as some databases often exclude definite articles.
Svampesky (
talk)
12:16, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Canine pancreatitis →
Pancreatitis (veterinary) – I plan on expanding this article and include coverage of cats which have a similar rate of pancreatitis as dogs. The condition is very similar in both animals and is usually treated as the same condition in the literature. Splitting the articles would not be beneficial to the project. But I don't wish to start writing anything without any support for it.
Traumnovelle (
talk)
07:10, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Whau Lunatic Asylum → Carrington Hospital – Common name as shown by Google Scholar results where it's more than 5 times more common than names using Whau and more common than Oakley Hospital. The name Carrington Hospital is more common in Google News results, is used by the NZ encyclopaedia:
[7] and is used by the Ministry of Urban Development in their Carrington development:
[8] Recent sources use the name Carrington Hospital typically whilst historic sources use different versions of the old name.
Traumnovelle (
talk)
04:43, 31 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Northern League (ice hockey, 2005–) →
Northern League (ice hockey, 2005–present) – The current date range format for the first three of these hockey leagues doesn't seem to follow the usual Wikipedia convention. I found only 27 titles like this on the English Wikipedia. As for the fourth one, I found no indication that the older New Brunswick Junior Hockey League is a primary topic over the newer one, so I suggest disambiguation. Pageviews
here. If we need to pick one of the two as primary, I suggest picking the new one. Some people looking for the new one are almost certainly landing on the article about the older one by accident. There is no hatnote to indicate that a reader might have found the wrong article. There is also a
New Brunswick Junior C Hockey League article. Also, is it necessary to use "ice hockey" for the Northern League rather than just "hockey"? —
BarrelProof (
talk)
21:58, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Zamindar →
Zamindar of India – This article heading rationally seems to misleading and unconsciously biased toward the accurate Indian spectrum for the broader term Zamindar contrasting since zamindar term also implies under the wider View of broader “
Universal Expedation.
WP:NPOVTITLEWP:GNG and against the
WP:Notability ”beside such persisting module, this Article consisting various socio ethnic group Instincts in Some of proceeding from Paragraph inclosing word such as Bhumihar, Bhramin and Rajput therefore definitely its entire relevance which posses its course of Interest only accommodate the Indian Community thus its initially whole framework seem more intermediating toward Zamindar of India
Downforwiki (
talk)
20:46, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Ive (group) → IVE (group) – Per
MOS:TMRULES, When a name is almost never written except in a particular stylized form, use that form on Wikipedia. As well, under
MOS:IDENTITY, living subjects of articles are entitled to exceptional stylization if they clearly and consistently use an exceptional style, and an overwhelming majority of sources use the same exceptional style. When read in the context of
WP:BLP, Wikipedia is probably necessarily compelled to use the exceptional style in such situations. A Google News search for
"ive kpop" yields a majority of sources which write the name of the group as IVE in both title and body of the news articles. This includes
NME,
USA Today,
L'Officiel Singapore,
Variety,
Korea JooAng Daily,
The Times of India,
Spin magazine,
Allkpop,
NYLON,
Korea JoongAng Daily,
the Grammy Awards website,
Billboard,
Forbes India,
Hindustan Times In fairness, I made note of those articles I find not observing the stylization. I also include for your convenience a link to Google results which give you an idea whether the source that article is from consistently does or does not observe the stylization; *
The Korea Herald – consistently does not (
Google search for "ive" site:koreaherald.com) *
Buzzfeed - inconsistent (
Google search for "ive" site:buzzfeed.com; see also
WP:BUZZFEED) *
The Korea Times - consistently IVE otherwise? (
Google search for "ive" site:koreatimes.com is consistently IVE, but all almost the results I get in the first 10 pages are primarily written in Korean. Some false positives appear for user comments where they are incorrectly spelling the contraction for I have, and not discussing the group. Page 10 was an arbitrarily chosen cut-off, there was no gotcha on page 11 to make me draw that line.) Their
label's official website presents it as IVE, but this could be taken with a grain of salt because it also renders the individual group members as ANYUJIN, GAEUL, REI, JANGWONYOUNG, etc. The
official website for the group proper does the same, with the same caveat . Their
official fanclub is about the same – IVE is never not IVE, but almost everything English is rendered in all caps. Still, there are some notable exceptions for these sites – for example, one of their EPs is always
After LIKE, which is more relevant to a move request for that article, but gives you some idea of intentionality here. Note that while these official websites are not conclusive given some ambiguity with how they're rendering English overall, but in no case are they not referring to the group as IVE instead of Ive. Their social media profiles hopefully make things a bit more obvious – they are always IVE on
X,
Instagram,
Facebook,
YouTube,
TikTok, and
Weibo all consistently render the name of the group in IVE. I say that this should make it a little bit more obvious because if you check their posts on these services, you can see they are less stringent in maintaining an ALMOST EVERYTHING IN ENGLISH IS ALL CAPS convention. In more typical posts, the IVE stylization is still prefered. Marketplaces and/or streaming services including
Amazon,
Apple Music,
Spotify, and
Tidal all observe the IVE stylization. Wikipedia is not beholden to fans on SNS or fan wikis, but they can help give some indication of the
WP:COMMONNAME; users on
the group-dedicated reddit and
X appear to overwhelmingly observe the IVE stylization, as do users on any number of fan wikis I found;
[9],
[10],
[11]. I could also link to an untold number of fansites which all observe the IVE stylization. Finally – at least for now – I'll also suggest it's worth looking at the Korean language edition of Wikipedia (title
IVE) as well as the Japanese language edition (titled
IVE (音楽グループ)). Korea and Japan receive the bulk of the group's marketing efforts. I am requesting here the same move as was done in January 2024. This isn't simply taking another bite at the apple, but making a more robust argument on the basis of aspects of MOS:TMRULES which I believe were overlooked last time – specifically, how should we interpret the almost never in TMRULES? (And does the result of that interpretation agree with
WP:COMMONNAME, or come into conflict with it?) I mentioned some other considerations at the top as well. Given the subjects of the article fall under
WP:BLP, we might also obliged to consider
MOS:IDENTITY; When there is a discrepancy between the term most commonly used by reliable sources for a person or group and the term that person or group uses for themselves, use the term that is most commonly used by recent reliable sources. If it is unclear which is most used, use the term that the person or group uses.MOS:BIOEXCEPT may also be relevant.
122141510 (
talk)
20:39, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Estoile Naiant → ESTOILE NAIANT – Per
MOS:TMRULES, "When a name is almost never written except in a particular stylized form, use that form on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not beholden to the
WP:OFFICIAL NAME, but by way of introduction, the title of both albums are 'officially' rendered in all caps as we can see on
Bleep[12], the webstore of the label the artist is signed to. We can also refer to Warp Records Bandcamp for
EOLIAN INSTATE and
ESTOILE NAIANT. The question is, how consistent have sources been in observing this official rendering? * Album reviews or other third party write-ups about ESTOILE NAIANT which observe the all caps stylization in both title and body of their article (from those reviews aggregated to Metacritic and have links available): :
Dusted Magazine,
exclaim.ca,
Pitchfork,
Sputnikmusic,
The Line of Best Fit,
Tiny Mix Tapes,
MusicOMH,
ResidentAdvisor * Album reviews or other third party write-ups about ESTOILE NAIANT which does not observe all caps stylization in either title or body of the article: :
Allmusic(Observed in write-up, but not in title.) I'll note as an aside that Metacritic itself does not consistently observe the stylization, and sometimes in a manner that contradicts the reviews they're citing. Compare, for example, that on their
aggregate page they paraphrase Exclaim as saying Estoile Naiant works as a satisfying continuation of patten's work, albeit one that moves his sound in a sideways direction. but Exclaim itself discussed the album as ESTOILE NAIANT in both title and in body of their review. * Album review or other third party write-ups about EOLIAN INSTATE which observe the all caps stylization in both title and body of their article:
ResidentAdvisor,
Pitchfork(n.b. as "EOLIAN INSTATE EP"). I cannot find or load a respective Metacritic page for EOLIAN INSTATE so here have simply gone off what I could find in results. * Peripheral mention of EOLIAN INSTATE which observes the all caps stylization:
Pitchfork again, discussing as EOLIAN INSTATE when reviewing a track from GLAQJO XAACSSO;
The Line of Best Fit, discussing Aviary from the then-upcoming EOLIAN INSTATE;
FACT Magazine, announcing patten's signing to Warp and their debut EP as EOLIAN INSTATE;
Dazed as Now, after a two year recording silence, he's signed to Warp and back with the brain-meltingly good five-track EOLIAN INSTATE EP. [emphasis not mine];
Juno in both title and in body (News now arrives that patten has signed to UK institution Warp, with the first fruits of the new union being a five-track EP entitled EOLIAN INSTATE.). I think it might also be constructive to consider – if the name is almost never written except in a particular stylized form, we might expect that to still be the case even on third-party streaming services and/or music stores, even if it has been a non-trivial period of time since the works were released; * Spotify; as
EOLIAN INSTATE and
ESTOILE NAIANT * Apple Music; as
EOLIAN INSTATE - EP and
ESTOILE NAIANT * Tidal; as
ESTOILE NAIANT(n.b. EOLIAN INSTATE not on site) * Amazon Music;
EOLIAN INSTATE and
ESTOILE NAIANT * Beatport; as
EOLIAN INSTATE and
ESTOILE NAIANT * Boomkat; as
EOLIAN INSTATE and
ESTOILE NAIANT I have had limited success finding examples where the particular stylized form(s) are not observed. Discogs has
ESTOILE NAIANT, but also
EOLIAN INSTATE. However, per
WP:DISCOGS, it not a reliable source so it can inform the discussion only so much. Having made the case the names of the works are almost never written except in a particular stylized form, I assert the articles are obliged to be moved per MOS:TMRULES.
122141510 (
talk)
19:16, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – World Rowing Federation → World Rowing – I believe the COMMONNAME is World Rowing, which is what they consistently use fro themselves. There are examples out there of using World Rowing Federation but I think they're rare. World Rowing is also more CONCISE. For what it's worth, World Rowing Federation is not the official name. According to their
Bylaws, the official name is still FISA, but "World Rowing is the designation used operationally by FISA." In searching for references online it's tricky to separate references to World Rowing from the World Rowing Championships, but here are some recent examples:
[13][14][15]JFHutson (
talk)
16:49, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Sh2-1 →
Sh 2-1 – Per
Talk:Sh 2-185, as an alternative to that proposed move. Praemonitus appears to be correct that the form with a space is more commonly used. For the sake of consistency, one and only one of these two proposed moves should be done.
SevenSpheres (
talk)
16:07, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – In a Word →
In a Word (disambiguation) – On Allmusic and Amazon, the band's name and the date range are not included in the title – this box set is simply called In a Word. On the cover art, the band name and date range also appear very separated from the main title, which is simply "In a Word". The band is identified by its elaborate logo on the cover art – not using plain text, and the date range is shown separately in a small difficult-to-read font. There is only one other topic on the disambiguation page, which is a non-album song by
Toto released as a B-side (of "
I'll Be Over You") and then later on a compilation album (Toto XX). —
BarrelProof (
talk)
15:06, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Peregonovka offensive → Battle of Peregonovka –
Dushnilkin just unilaterally moved this article from "Battle of Peregonovka" to "Peregonovka offensive", without any prior discussion or consensus building on the matter. Their edit summary states "All sources in the article do not reflect the battle for the village, they refer to a full-scale battle in the Uman-Peregonovka area along the entire front, such a name would be correct". Now, this is very confusing, because none of the sources refer to this as an "offensive": Avrich 1971 uses the term "battle of Peregonovka" in the index and never uses the term "offensive" in sections about the Makhnovists; Darch 2020 refers to it as the "Battle of Peregonovka" and alternatively as the "Battle at Peregonovka", he never uses "Peregonovka offensive" (the only time he refers to an "offensive" in the Peregonovka chapter refers to the broader White gains in mid-to-late 1919); Footman 1961 describes Peregonovka as "one of the decisive battles of the Civil War in the south", he never refers to an "offensive" in the context of Peregonovka; Malet 1982 describes at as the "Battle of Perehonivka" (in the Ukrainian fashion), he never mentions an "offensive" in the context of Peregonovka; Shubin 2010 doesn't describe it as either a "battle" or an "offensive", he uses the term "sudden strike [...] at Peregonovka"; Skirda 2004 refers to it as the "battle of Peregonovka", even describes it as a "crucial battle", he never refers to an "offensive" in the context of Peregonovka. So none of the sources refer to it as an offensive and almost all of them describe it as a battle. I don't know what rationale there was for moving this other than naked
OR, but it sure wasn't enough for a unilateral move.
Grnrchst (
talk)
14:58, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Muppies – Muslim Urban Professionals → Muppies – The current exact name, with formatting/whitespace, is an unlikely search-term. Although their website does use this in the header, they seem to use the short-form Muppies universally on the pages except that place where explaining what the term means. For conciseness and commonname, I propose renaming it to simply "Muppies". Alternately, I could live with "Muslim Urban Professionals", being its full expanded name that might be more self-defining. The article has previously been at both locations over the years, so I'm taking a discuss-not-bold route to get some further input.
DMacks (
talk)
00:00, 30 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Toothed belt → timing belt – The most common name for this concept is "timing belt" not "toothed belt". The move is currently blocked by a redirect to a pointless disamb page. The move will either make no difference to the reader or will avoid one unnecessary step through the disamb.
Jorge Stolfi (
talk) 00:14, 29 July 2024 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (
permalink).
Jorge Stolfi (
talk)
22:07, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – STEAM fields →
STEAM education – The Slate article cited in the first sentence states that STEAM is not just a collection of five fields, but a movement to integrate creative thinking and design skills into STEM education. And this is how much of the article describes it. But the first sentence defines it as a collection of five fields, and the presence of "fields" in the title reinforces that definition. I think the lede would be more consistent with the sources and with the rest of the article if we change the title to something like "STEAM education" or "STEAM movement" or just "STEAM", and change the first sentence to something like:
(
Discuss) – Mr. Bojangles → Mr. Bojangles (disambiguation) – Inbound links and page views suggest that most people searching for "Mr. Bojangles" are looking for the song. The only other element that has that exact name and an article is an obscure album released well after the song became popular, so I think it's safe to say the song is the primary topic. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?)19:51, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Dan Hawkins → Dan Hawkins (American football) – No clear primary topic, the American footballer was moved in 2013 due to pageviews but now the musician has more views (2,338) than the American footballer (1,266), D. L. Hawkins has 316, the politician has 168, the footballer has 108 and the rugby union player has 65[
[16]] Only 1 Google result is for the American footballer (the Wikipedia article,
Dan Hawkins but note that
Dan Hawkins (musician) is the 1st result) all other results are for the musician or I can't determine though this may be partly due to my location. The musician is still active while the American footballer doesn't appear to be so its more likely the musician will be searched for in the future. Crouch, Swale (
talk)
17:46, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – 2024 Yemeni drone attack on Israel →
2024 Houthi drone attack on Israel – Not accurate to call this a "Yemeni drone attack" when it wasn't conducted by Yemen's internationally-recognized government. We don't treat other attacks in such a manner; for example, we don't call Hezbollah's missiles "Lebanese attacks". This doesn't need to be consistent with
2024 Israeli strikes on Yemen, because those strikes were conducted on Yemen's internationally-recognized territory (even though said territory is currently under Houthi control).
Elli (
talk |
contribs)
14:47, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – General Assemblies of Álava → General Assembly of Álava – The first two were moved without discussion to their current titles. While indeed their official names in Spanish and Basque are grammatically plural (Juntas Generales and Batzar Nagusiak), English sources seem to prefer the singular form. The singular form is used in English by the
the Basque Government, a
website operated by the government of Biscay and various scholarly books (
[17],
[18]). The websites of the Juntas Generales of Biscay and Gipuzkoa use the singular and plural forms rather inconsistently (
Biscay,
Gipuzkoa), the website of the Juntas Generales of Álava doesn't have an English version. As for the third article, it makes sense to keep the title plural, but the disambiguator shouldn't be the Spanish name.
Santi2222 (
talk)
13:55, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – IOC Refugee Olympic Team at the 2020 Summer Olympics → Refugee Olympic Team at the 2020 Summer Olympics – Hey all! I believe this article title should be simplified for a couple of reasons: # Concision: Per
WP:CONCISE, we need to balance brevity with sufficient information. IOC Refugee Olympic Team may be the official name of the team, which was the rationale for
the move to the current title, but I see absolutely no reason to essentially say "Olympics" three times in this title. # Consistency:
WP:CONSISTENT says article titles should be consistent among similar articles.
The team and their participation in
2016 and
2024 all start their titles with Refugee Olympic Team at while this is the only article starting with IOC Refugee Olympic Team at. I think this is a very clear case for both of these policy sections, but I would like to check for consensus from the community. Fire away!
Bsoyka (t •
c •
g)
03:48, 29 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Lipiodol → Iodized oil – Generic name as with most other drug articles we use the generic not the tradename and Lipidol is a tradename so it should be moved as this article talks about all brands not just Lipidol brand Isla🏳️⚧
21:17, 28 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Palestinian genocide accusation → Palestinian genocide – Given the movement of
Gaza genocide to that title, the current title here has become incongruously inconsistent. How can the parent of a child topic that is not couched in the language of "accusation" be couched in that language? It should be obvious than it should not. More generally, it has become apparent that the language of "accusation" is generally inappropriate. This is not only per
MOS:ACCUSED (which outlines how the language of accusation is problematic in its presumptive deployment of doubt (presumably ultimately as a corollary of
WP:NPOV)), but also per consistency with similar titles on similar subjects. There are many pages on the topics of presumed or suspected (but not legally ruled on) genocides -- this is in fact the majority of them -- but no other genocide topic on Wikipedia, regardless of how speculative it is, is couched as a "genocide accusation". See the
search results. Likewise, the phrase "Palestinian genocide accusation" is
all but unknown to scholarship, in stark contrast to "Palestinian genocide", which is a
common and widely used phrase, including in titular form, such as in the 2013
The Palestinian Genocide by Israel by the eminent
Francis Boyle. In the
previous move discussion, I somewhat rallied support around the current title, but that was in October last year, before much of the subsequent discussion around developments in Gaza. It seemed sensible at the time, but that was then, and this is now. Events have moved on significantly since then, not least with the ICJ case and provisional measures -- and hence the
Gaza genocide move. As this page covers the overarching legal and scholarly topic of Palestinian genocide, the weight of both everything that went into the
Gaza genocide RM discussion, and everything that precedes it in Palestinian history, including the Nakba and all subsequent Israeli policies and actions that have been discussed as conceivably genocidal by legal and academic experts, is under consideration. Given that this page has a significantly grander scope than its child, its title cannot reasonably contain greater doubt than that of its child.
Iskandar323 (
talk) 12:29, 21 July 2024 (UTC)— Relisting.Jerium (
talk)
15:16, 28 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Tales of the Jedi (TV series) → Star Wars: Tales – Since this move made nearly three months ago has been objected to, here is an RM. I personally don't agree with the need as
consensus was reached on the matter. Never the less, this anthology series had its first installment released as (formally) Star Wars: Tales of the Jedi (commonly Tales of the Jedi) in October 2022, with it announced in April 2023 that
it would get a second season (wording used by media outlets, though the quote from Filoni was "Tales of the Jedi was so fun the first time, I decided to do some more.") Subsequently, it was announced a year later in April 2024 that this second "season" was a new "installment", Star Wars: Tales of the Empire (commonly Tales of the Empire).
This press release shows the use of both formal names as well as the key quote in my view (and the determination of the previous consensus) that Tales of the Empire was the second installment of the "Tales" series. Thus, an appropriate name to address this anthology series considering the formal name would be
Star Wars: Tales, which provides a
WP:NATURAL name. -
Favre1fan93 (
talk) 17:25, 2 July 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.BilledMammal (
talk) 17:46, 9 July 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.BilledMammal (
talk) 05:42, 21 July 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.BilledMammal (
talk)
10:39, 28 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Untitled Jack White album → No Name (album) – I believed the safer option for naming this article was "Untitled Jack White album" due to the unique release method that did not immediately establish an official title for the album. However, it seems "No Name" is the
common name for this album, as it has been widely used by fans and music journalists as well as
Metacritic. More search results appear for "Jack White No Name" rather than "Jack White untitled", and the latter still yields results that include a mention of the title "No Name". Images of a forthcoming official vinyl release have also begun circulating the internet, with the liner notes confirming an official title of "No Name". My only source for this at the moment is a
Reddit thread, although I will provide an update if I find a reliable secondary source reporting on this, so I will not make this the primary reason for the move at the moment as it is not a reliable source. This has been confirmed in a
Stereogum article. This report and WP:COMMONNAME indicate that the article title should be changed.
Aria1561 (
talk)
04:49, 28 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Violent Cop (1989 film) →
Violent Cop –
Violent Cop is currently a disambiguation page with only 2 links after
Violent Cop (2000 Kant Leung film) was deleted. The 1989 movie seems significantly more notable: daily average traffic over 30x more than the 2000 film :[
[22]], Rotten Tomatoes lists 6 reviews with additional ones found like
BFI,
Telegraph,
The Vindicator. I didn't find any reviews for the 2000 film. The disambiguation page should actually be deleted after this move but I don't know if it's possible through this process or should a separate AfD started for that.
Mika1h (
talk)
21:15, 27 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – The Black Widow (1951 film) → Black Widow (1951 film) – I've done a search of sources and I believe this article is mistitled. Sources consulted split as follows: Steve Chibnall & Brian McFarlane: The British 'B' Film (2009) (referenced in article) Uses both names.
[23]The Black Widow (1951 film) (current title): Monthly Film Bulletin (1951) (referenced in article) IMDb (unreliable source, external link in article) AllMovie (reliability unknown, external link in article) BritMovie (reliability unknown, external link in article) Peter Hutchings: The A to Z of Horror Cinema (2009)
[24] Robert Michael “Bobb” Cotter: The Women of Hammer Horror (2014) p.108
[25] Alan Burton & Steve Chibnall: Historical Dictionary of British Cinema (2013) p.372
[26]Black Widow (1951 film) (proposed title): Film's opening titles (image shown in article) BFI Collections Search (usually reliable, referenced in article) Michael F. Keaney: British Film Noir Guide (2015) p.19 (extensive discussion)
[27] Michael Singer: Film Directors (2001) p.455
[28] Chris Fellner: The Encyclopedia of Hammer Films (2019) p.532
[29] Andrew Spicer: Historical Dictionary of Film Noir (2009) p.441
[30] Jay Robert Nash & Ralph Ross: The Motion Picture Guide (1985) p.116
[31] I think the balance is towards omitting the definite article, and the clincher is the films' own opening titles.
Masato.harada (
talk)
15:28, 27 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Jang Won-young → Jang Wonyoung – Per
WP:COMMONNAME, She is often referred to without the hyphen, with or without her surname. This includes her company profile
[32] and in the news
[33][34][35]. Perhaps more importantly per
WP:NCKOREAN, where there is a personal preference, Wikipedia should forgo the hyphen, and she has forgone the hyphen on her own Instagram
[36]. I don't believe this would be confusing for anyone as the hyphen doesn't have a role in differentiating her name like it would for 유나 vs 윤아, so I think we should honour the name on her Instagram and company profile. I also think this applies to
An Yu-jin but if this is uncontroversial I believe we can just move that one over too.
Orangesclub (
talk)
04:34, 27 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – PG 1047+003 → UY Sextantis – According to
WP:STARNAMES, for stars without proper names, Bayer designations, Flamsteed designations, Gliese Catalog designations or HD numbers (the case of this star), variable-star designations are prefered over other designations. This is similar with
V1400 Centauri, where the name isn't the common name, but satisfies this guideline and has the advantage of being a simpler designation.
21 Andromedae (
talk)
21:44, 26 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Riley Green → Riley Green (disambiguation) – The singer's page has 104 inbound links and a daily average of 1400 page views a day.
Riley Green, Lancashire has 68 inbound links and about two page views a day. From these numbers, I think it's clear by a wide margin that almost anyone looking for "Riley Green" on Wikipedia is looking for the singer. The Lancashire landmark and the identical sounding
Riley Greene are both plausible for a dab, so I propose that the singer be made the primary topic and, optionally, that the other two items listed at
Riley Green (disambiguation) instead. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?)18:43, 26 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Laura Trott (politician) →
Laura Trott – The current
Laura Trott article links to a disambiguation page whereas the former Laura Trott now goes by
Laura Kenny. I see the argument above who were against the move, but if you look at it, I can't understand why
Laura Trott can't simply be the main article title for this one. When you search up Laura Trott on Google (at least on my end) you get the British politician and not the cyclist since she now goes by Laura Kenny. Wouldn't this mean that that would fall under Wikipedia:COMMONNAME? I feel that having Laura Trott (politician) as the article title is a bit redundant since she's the only Laura Trott with an article and then Laura Trott article is a disambiguation page. Also, the argument above said they were opposed to the move as Laura Trott the cyclist was more accomplished as an Olympian winner, however, if that were the case, how come Laura Trott doesn't redirect to her article, but instead leads to a disambiguation page? I feel since she now goes by Laura Kenny, a simple Laura Trott (cyclist) would suffice. However, since this Laura Trott (politician) is her common name, she should become the main article Laura Trott. *
Laura Trott (politician) →
Laura Trott or delete --
TDKR Chicago 101 (
talk)
15:18, 26 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Nushki District →
Noshki District – There seem to be conflicting sources on the name of the district; some sources will use Noshki, renamed from Noshkay, while others will use Nushki. Noshki, from what I can find, seems to be both the more common among reliable sources, and also the correct name. If consensus can be found to move this page, I'll also be renaming related pages
Nushki and
Nushki shooting, as they'd be renamed for the same reason.
SmittenGalaxy|talk! 06:40, 11 July 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.Quadrantal (
talk) 07:00, 18 July 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. ASUKITE14:28, 26 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Glima → Glíma – Rationale: # Glíma is the correct spelling in Icelandic. # There is no proper English name for glíma; glima is merely an anglicized spelling variant. (Contrast this with e.g. Ísland, which is properly called
Iceland in English.) # The presence of a single diacritic mark is harmless for English-language readers. # It is standard practice in the English-language Wikipedia to retain such diacritics in Icelandic article names (e.g. Reykjavík rather than Reykjavik). # i and í are in fact different letters in Icelandic: although the latter is historically formed from the former by adding a diacritic mark, it is not merely a spelling variant, as in e.g. Spanish. I would therefore like to suggest moving this article over the existing redirect, and having glima redirect to glíma instead. Thanks,
188.96.172.204 (
talk)
11:10, 26 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Pin Princess → ? – "Pin Princess" isn't normal English word order, and this stub appears to have been put together either with machine translation or efforts of a non-native English speaker. I'm not sure what this bordering-on-obscure figure's
most common name in English-language sources might be (I lack a body of source material on this period and region). "Princess of Pin" seems reasonably likely, but it might really be one of her longer names, and "Prince of Pin" appears to be a title (and an earlier one) not a name anyway. —
SMcCandlish☏¢ 😼 01:03, 26 July 2024 (UTC); rev'd. 02:57, 26 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – German Taurus controversy →
Proposed German supply of Taurus cruise missiles to Ukraine – This is a title that would feel more common for English Wikipedia to me, even if the article is a translation from German Wikipedia. The current title is vague and when looking it up in Google I only get a link to
German Taurus leak and to news websites, not to this article. This sequence of words, or the word controversy, do not seem to be commonly used among English-language media outlets, so we can create here a descriptive title if it is deemed more appropriate.
SuperΨDro00:36, 26 July 2024 (UTC)reply
July 25, 2024
(
Discuss) – Artms → ARTMS – Per
MOS:TMRULES, When a name is almost never written except in a particular stylized form, use that form on Wikipedia. As well, under
MOS:BIOEXCEPT and
MOS:IDENTITY, living subjects of articles are entitled to exceptional stylization if groups clearly and consistently use an exceptional style, and an overwhelming majority of sources use the same exceptional style. When read in the context of
WP:BLP, Wikipedia is probably necessarily compelled to use the exceptional style in such situations. A Google News search
[40] does not yield any results which do not stylize the group as ARTMS. Included in the articles which populate in the search results for me are
NME,
allkpop,
Billboard,
Hindustan Times,
Korea JoongAng Daily,
ABS-CBN News,
Pop Matters. Outside of Google News, sites like
Sputnik Music which reviewed their debut album earlier this year all took care to stylize the group's name as ARTMS.
The Korean language edition of Wikipedia titles the respective article as ARTMS, as does the
Japanese language edition. While I invite editors to debate the
reliability of these sources or discuss points of difference in policy (so as to set a robust precedent), I also invite them to find any reliable sources which do not use the exceptional stylization. Officially, their
primary website could be argued as ambiguous since we only have the all caps logo to go off of, but their
official fansite consistently stylizes the name of the group as ARTMS. Their social media is consistent with the ARTMS stylization on
Youtube,
TikTok,
Instagram,
X, and their
official Discord server. Marketplaces including
Barnes & Noble,
Amazon,
Apple Music, and streaming services such as
Spotify all observe the ARTMS stylization. The only exception I was successful in finding was
Tidal, but it's not clear to me if this is because there is another musical act
by the same name but opposite stylization(it doesn't appear to be
WP:NOTABLE or in possible contention as the
WP:PTOPIC in the future, but this could help disambiguate down the line). Wikipedia is not beholden to fans on SNS or fan wikis, but they can help give some indication of the
WP:COMMONNAME; users on
reddit and
X appear to overwhelmingly observe the ARTMS stylization, as do users on any number of fan wikis I found;
[41],
[42],
[43].
122141510 (
talk)
23:42, 25 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Lakhimpur Kheri violence → 2021 Lakhimpur Kheri violence – The naming convention for events
WP:NCE recommends a date in the title, as it's a useful indicator to the reader. This would also make the title consistent with the set of articles in
List of vehicle-ramming attacks. The exception, which is
WP:NOYEAR, doesn't seem to apply here, given that a reader would have little historic perspective because the coverage was mostly contemporary: "2021" appears 108 times in this article, "2022" eight times, "2023" zero, etc. This suggests that the event wouldn't qualify for the NOYEAR exception.
Pilaz (
talk)
09:52, 25 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Ohio State University attack → 2016 Ohio State University attack – The date should be included in the title according to the naming convention
WP:NCE, as it's a useful indicator to the reader and would make it consistent with the majority of articles under
List of vehicle-ramming attacks. The exception NOYEAR doesn't seem too pertinent here, as most of the coverage for this event hasn't gone beyond the time period it happened in, which suggests that the historical perspective required to make an exception under NOYEAR isn't quite met.
Pilaz (
talk)
09:42, 25 July 2024 (UTC)reply
The 7-day listing period has elapsed. Items below may be closed if there's a consensus, or if discussion has run its course and consensus could not be achieved.
(
Discuss) – All-purpose Lightweight Individual Carrying Equipment → All-purpose lightweight individual carrying equipment – These military equipment designators are often capped in official lists, but also often lowercase in sentences in both official and "independent" publications, so per
MOS:CAPS and
WP:NCCAPS we should default to lowercase, in titles and in article text (except Interceptor should be capped even mid-sentence, as that's the proper name of the armor system, not a descriptive term). I had moved them already, thinking they'd be uncontroversial in light of a bunch of previous military equipment designation RMs, but these were objected to and reverted, so let's discuss.
Dicklyon (
talk)
22:01, 24 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Prince Yi (儀) → ? – Having a non-English disambiguation isn't helpful on en.Wikipedia where most of the readers except to read text in English. I have no idea what the correct disambiguation is here, but I'm hopeful someone here would.
Gonnym (
talk)
19:29, 24 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Prince Rui (睿) → ? – Having a non-English disambiguation isn't helpful on en.Wikipedia where most of the readers except to read text in English. I have no idea what the correct disambiguation is here, but I'm hopeful someone here would.
Gonnym (
talk)
19:28, 24 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Nusantara → Nusantara (disambiguation) – When this move was nominated a year ago, the primary reason against such move was that it was too soon with the city then only in its planning stages along with doubts whether or not the city would even be completed. Now, in about a month the city would become the new capital of Indonesia, which I argue would make it the primary topic. The city also gets significantly more views than other topics with such name.
Zinderboff(
talk) 16:10, 16 July 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. ASUKITE17:56, 24 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Au Hasard Balthazar → Au hasard Balthazar – The result of the 'Requested move' discussion from August 2016, above, was to move the previous page to 'Au hasard Balthazar'. For unknown reasons, the move was made to 'Au Hasard Balthazar'. I propose a move to 'Au hasard Balthazar'. Rationale: * The film is almost invariably referred to by its French name in the English-speaking world, and is rarely translated. * The film is referred to as 'Au hasard Balthazar' by: ** French Wikipedia
Au hasard Balthazar [
fr ** The article's external links to IMDb, Metacritic, James Quandt/Criterion Collection article ** Approx. half of the references ( I haven't checked all the books and magazines, and some of the links are broken) *
MOS:FRENCHCAPS would specify 'Au hasard Balthazar' Note that the film's opening credits are stylised as 'au hasard bathazar', which doesn't support an argument either way.
Masato.harada (
talk)
17:19, 24 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Eights Week → Summer Eights – While referred to as Eights Week in the past, the event is far more commonly known as Summer Eights today. All University, College, and town publication, including all material from the actual organisers refers to the event as 'Summer Eights', not 'Eights Week'. Additionally, as referred to by the last move request back in 2016, there are far more common results for Summer Eights than Eights Week in search engines. You don't need to add your signature at the end, as this template will do so automatically.
OxfordRowing (
talk) 20:34, 15 July 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.microbiologyMarcuspetri dish·
growths15:33, 23 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Lady Henry Somerset → Lady Isabella Somerset – As mentioned in the article, this person "won the court case in 1878 and resumed the style of Lady Isabella Somerset", and after 1878 she used "Lady Isabella Somerset" as her official style. Because of this name change,
the article title of this person in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography is "Somerset [née Somers-Cocks], Lady Isabella Caroline [Lady Henry Somerset]", and the ODNB calls her "Lady Isabella" in the article. The British Museum also registers her as "
Lady Isabella Somerset". There is also an academic article which calls her "
Lady Isabella Somerset". According to
Wikipedia:Article_titles#Name_changes, "When this [a change of name] occurs, we give extra weight to independent, reliable, English-language sources ("reliable sources" for short) written after the name change". Since this person is called "Lady Isabella Somerset" in recent reliable sources, the name of the article should be "Lady Isabella Somerset". The move was already proposed in 2017, but it was not performed.
saebou (
talk) 08:04, 14 July 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.BilledMammal (
talk)
21:44, 21 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Ascalon →
Ashkelon (ancient city) – Recently, the name of this article was changed from Tel Ashkelon to Ascalon. The rationale was that Ashkelon and Tel Ashkelon are too similar, and that readers cannot be expected to differentiate. It was said that Ascalon is the name of the historical site. This rationale is invalid. The name Ashkelon, is the conventionally accepted name for both the modern city, and the ancient site. In many cases, the name Ashkelon is even used when referring to periods in which it was historically known as Ascalon. This place has at least 20,000 years of history, accros many periods of times. It was a prehistoric site, a Canaanite, Philistine, Hellenistic city, a Crusader city, an Islamic city... We don't always know its actual name, and it has never had a single way to pronounce its name. I am suggesting to change the name to Ashkelon (ancient city). I divided my argument into three parts: (1) Ashkelon and Ascalon are virtually the same and therefore confusing; (2) The toponym for the ancient site is known in maps and sites as "Ashkelon"; (3) the conentional scholarly name for the city in all periods is "Ashkelon", including periods in which it was called in different names. 1. Ascalon and Ashkelon are virtually the same. It is very confusing still. Differetiating them with "ancient city" in brackets makes no mistakes. Another option would've been "Tel Ashkelon", but there were times in which the ancient settlements in Ashkelon were not exactly on the Tel, and the city often controlled a much broader territory. Tel Ashkelon would strictly refer to the antiquties, but the article's scope goes beyond it. Another opition I thought about was "History of Ashkelon", simmilar to how we have "
History of Athens", but I think that this might confuse the people who are looking for the history of modern Ashkelon, whose place should be in the article about the modern city. Therefore, I think that
Ashkelon (ancient city) is the clearest option for the scope of the article. 2. Location identification: Today, the principal site of ancient Ashkelon is known as Tel Ashkelon. This is a declared national park in Israel, and it apears by that name. The official name of the park is
"Ashkelon National Park". I think it makes a lot of sense to assume, that many people who visit Israel as tourist, will likely enter this Wikipedia article. They will not be referred to Ascalon, but to Ashkelon, either Tel Ashkelon (mentioned
here,
here,
here and
[48], which were the first results I was given by google. Therefore, the site, as a location, is better identified with Ashkelon rather than Ascalon
Bolter21(
talk to me)11:03, 20 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Names for books of Jewish and Christian scripture →
Names for Jewish and Christian holy books – This is a worthwhile article, but IMHO its current title is misleading. I expected "Names for books of Jewish and Christian scripture" to list the Jewish and Christian names for
books of the Bible. Instead, it lists divisions within the Bible, and the more authoritative of the other Jewish types of holy books. I believe that in both religions "scripture" is only used for the Bible. "
Sifrei Kodesh" is a wider category used in Judaism, literally meaning "holy books", although this does have a wider scope than the current content of the nominated article. –
FayenaticLondon 14:51, 1 July 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.Bensci54 (
talk) 16:30, 8 July 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.BilledMammal (
talk)
23:48, 18 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Tonlé Sap → Tonlé Sap Lake – The original name before renamed after the discussion
Talk:Tonlé_Sap#Rename above, due to possible confusion with the river that connect the lake and Mekong. The name "Tonlé Sap Lake" is NOT redundant at all. In that discussion user Markalexander100 stated that "Khmer and English terms aren't quite equivalent. In Khmer, as far as I can tell, there is one name- Tonle Sap- which refers to the lake and river together, while in English we differentiate them." This is not quite right because the official name of the lake in Khmer is "បឹងទន្លេសាប" (Boeng Tonle Sap), where បឹង/boeng means lake. So clearly they still have the word "lake" in the name, to differentiate it from the river. ទន្លេ/Tonle means river and that's its only meaning, not "Tonlé already means lake (or a very large, wide river)" as stated by user Dara above. For example,
Mekong is "Tonlé Mekong",
Bassac River is "Tonlé Bassac",
Kong River is "Tonlé Kong". There's no known translation as Tonlé to "lake". Another similarly named geographic feature is the
Boeng Tonle Chhmar (a smaller lake next to the Tonle Sap Lake). So to sum up, if we say "Tonle Sap" (without adding "Boeng") to the Khmer-speaking people, theoretically we are referring to the river (according to the meaning of the words). But then since the lake is too well-known, the term "Tonle Sap" will become ambiguous. However, as a matter of fact, they should be able to tell which one you are referring to, based on the context of the conversation. My suggestion is to rename this article to
Tonlé Sap Lake, and have a separate article about the river. Two options for this separate article's name is: #
Tonlé Sap (as per its literal meaning in Khmer) or, #
Tonlé Sap (river) and
Tonlé Sap becomes the disambiguation page. The reason for having a separate article for the river is simply because not everything about the river can be merged into the lake's article. For example,
Phnom Penh, the state's capital, is located at the mouth of the river and there's probably something about the river related to Phnom Penh's urban planning that's worth writing about. And merging these into the lake's article would be inappropriate.
ទន្លេតូច (
talk) 23:27, 10 July 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.BilledMammal (
talk)
22:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel → 7 October Hamas-led attack on Israel – I believe that enough time has passed since the last RM (which proposed the simpler "7 October attacks" name and closed with consensus to retain the current title) to re-propose a title change for this article. I believe that "7 October Hamas-led attack on Israel" is the
WP:COMMONNAME for this event, as seen in sources such as: *
Al Jazeera: "... counter the October 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel, which saw ..." *
Bloomberg: "... trapped in Gaza since the Oct. 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel, which prompted ..." *
CBC: "... around the world since the Hamas-led attacks on Israel of Oct. 7 but are now ..." *
CNN: "... from the October 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel being held ..." *
Euracitiv: "... triggered by the 7 October Hamas-led attack on Israel in which ..." *
France24: "Before the October 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel that triggered ..." *
ISW: "... spokesperson claimed that the October 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel was retaliation ..." *
Middle East Eye: "Following the 7 October Hamas-led attack on Israel and subsequent ..." *
NPR: "... Palestinian armed groups since the Oct. 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel that set off the war ..." *
NYTimes: "... including some who participated in the Oct. 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel, and that ..." *
Reuters: "... were involved in the Oct. 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel that precipitated ..." *
Times of Israel: "... during and after the October 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel." *
The Conversation: "... participated in the October 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel, which resulted ... " *
WaPo: "Since the Oct. 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel, restrictions have ..." Many sources simply say "7 October" or "October 7 attacks" instead of spelling out the full name, but I believe that while "7 October attacks" could be a more COMMON name, I think that it fails
WP:AT#Precision in favor of "7 October Hamas-led attack on Israel."
DecafPotato (
talk) 00:43, 15 June 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. —
Amakuru (
talk)
14:09, 9 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – De La Salle Green Spikers volleyball →
De La Salle Green Archers volleyball – The above existing pages have titles that do emulate the placement of a disambiguating sports descriptor after the team name, per
WP:QUALIFIER. This style of adding descriptors has been prescribed by example by, among other similar college-sports WikiProjects,
this page under
WP:CBBALL and
this page under
WP:CFB for titles of pages about United States college teams. Clearly, these descriptors were prescribed in order to naturally disambiguate (by
WP:NATURAL) a page about a team playing a certain sport from pages about namesake teams that are playing in other sports. In each of the team pages above being requested for moving, however, 1) the team name used is not that of its institution's team's uniform or collective name but the special nickname or unique moniker given to that specific team playing in its sport, so much so that the need for disambiguation disappears. 2) what is produced by the addition of a disambiguating sport descriptor after the team's special nickname is a redundancy. For example, there are no other De La Salle Green Spikers other than the De La Salle Green Archers team playing men's volleyball. For having a redundant title, the page's title then creates
WP:OVERPRECISION and breaches the
WP:CONCISE rule. That, however, can be salvaged by replacing the special moniker with the institution's team's uniform or collective name, a replacement which is what would have the need for disambiguation and erase the redundancy.
Bagoto (
talk) 09:04, 25 June 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.BilledMammal (
talk)
18:46, 4 July 2024 (UTC)reply
(
Discuss) – Sexual and gender-based violence in the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel → Sexual violence in the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel – Gender-based violence is defined as "any type of harm that is perpetrated against a person or group of people because of their factual or perceived sex, gender, sexual orientation and/or gender identity".[1] It is not currently clear that this article deals with any such violence other than that of a sexual nature, and even then, the lede states that male Israelis were also subjected to sexual violence (which if true suggests that it was not gender-based). A previous discussion on this topic has also shown that many people do not understand what the term "gender-based violence" actually means, so whether including it in the title is usefully descriptive is quite questionable.
(
Discuss) – 2024 Nuseirat rescue operation →
Nuseirat raid and rescue – Most sources are dual referencing this as a raid, attack or assault rather than just as a rescue.
Guardian "Israeli attacks in central Gaza killed scores of Palestinians, many of them civilians, on Saturday amid a special forces operation to free four hostages held there, with the death toll sparking international outrage."
NYT "Israeli soldiers and special operations police rescued four hostages from Gaza on Saturday amid a heavy air and ground assault",
CNN "Israel’s operation to rescue four hostages took weeks of preparation and involved hundreds of personnel, its military said. But the mission began with a trail of destruction in central Gaza and ended in carnage, according to local authorities."
Selfstudier (
talk)
15:06, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply