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 mayrequest 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:..."
To list a technical request: edit 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.
@Alexanderkowal Just a note that the title prior to your move, Kerma culture, has historically been the much more common phrase per Google Ngrams, and remains the more common phrase in British english, so this may be an WP:ENGVAR issue where the title should've remained at Kerma culture. --Ahecht (TALK PAGE) 00:19, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm talking here about Mont Mars only. Among the pages of this category, it's the only one with an entirely French name. Some of the other summits of this category stay on the water divide between the Province of Biella and the Aosta Valley. In the latest, French is co-official with Italian, these summits have therefore two official names (in Italian and in French), as you can see in the articles' introduction, but not Mont Mars, which has a name in French only. Simoncik84 (talk) 15:10, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sources are mixed on use of "indian", even the tribe's official website uses it. As to the title, I'm not sure entirely whether we should use the federal register or dive deeper to find the common name via sources, I'm leaning towards the second (not sure if there's a special convention here though) ASUKITE 13:58, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it follows that because some Native American topics have been controversial that all of them are. I don't think it's controversial to ask that the article use the name used on the tribe's website and on the Federal Register. But I'm fine with a full RM if other editors insist on that. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 21:53, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going by the name of the tribe as listed on the Federal Register as well as on the tribe's website. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 21:51, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This can be discussed by clicking the "discuss" link in the header above if you wish ASUKITE 20:52, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just wanted to mention i heard on TV (PBS? i'll need to see if i can find/remember my source so i can cite it properly) the United States government uses "Indian" instead of "Native American" in legal documents. That might not outweigh Wikipedia's policy about common names, but is something else to consider.
Probably worth a discussion, as the historical Kingdom of Meath clearly has a long-term significance as well. Navigation statistics show that around 30% of viewers on the dab page go there, which is reasonably high given that County Meath is a current extant county where people live... Might be worth a discussion? — Amakuru (talk) 15:28, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Still, usually “Meath” simply refers to the county so I’d assume it would be the primary topic, but I’ll make a discussion if necessary. —TwinBoo (talk) 11:19, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly TwinBoo, a community consensus after discussion is the best option. Are you opting in for that? Safari ScribeEdits!Talk! 08:26, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Pepperbeast: I'm contesting this because it appears to be consistently capitalized in sources (i.e., the standard for MOS:CAPS). Additionally, Dives Akuru (without the h) seems to be the WP:COMMONNAME (see Google Ngrams). If you would like to continue with your request, you can open a requested-move discussion by clicking "discuss" on your request. SilverLocust💬 04:43, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mia Mahey:, contesting because 'substantial' is more commonly used as a word than as a name. – robertsky (talk) 04:49, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
though I know the dimensions you're coming at. Searches of substantial yields many words accord meaning that @Robertsky is right for words than the rapper. The better redirect is to substance and the rappers article left as it is. Safari ScribeEdits!Talk! 08:22, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Justified primary redirect. 162 etc. (talk) 18:33, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Josethewikier: You have since moved the page on your own and then another user reverted the move, so this request would require a requested-move discussion, which you can begin by clicking "discuss" on your request. You can remove this request after opening a discussion (or if you do not want to continue). SilverLocust💬 08:08, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. This type requires a community consensus especially when some of the source are without diacritics and there is the city with diacritics Zürich. Safari ScribeEdits!Talk! 08:25, 2 June 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 3 June 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 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:
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.
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.
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.
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.).
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.
(Discuss) – 444th Air Expeditionary Squadron → 444th Bombardment Squadron – Page was moved here in 2017 as most current name of unit. Later material was added concerning the 444th Air Expeditionary Advisory Squadron, an unrelated unit constituted in 2009. (since removed). Although the squadron was redesignated, it has never been active as an expeditionary unit. All of its active duty, campaign credits and decorations have been as a bombardment squadron. Lineagegeek (talk) 21:09, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Ashley Park → Ashley Park, Surrey – Clear primary topic by usage (overwhelming 177x pageviews). The neighborhood makes little impression on Google Books/Scholar among many other uses, while the actor gets basically all the Google News hits. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 20:03, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Jagged Alliance → Jagged Alliance (video game) – Now that Jagged Alliance 3 has been released, there are 6 articles for other games in the series beyond the first game, I think this series page is now the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Also, both have low page views but the series page has over twice the views of the first game: [3]. --Mika1h (talk) 14:23, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – WCML → WCML (disambiguation) – Ok, I know there was another discussion on this six years ago, but things have changed since then and its more than reasonable enough. this chart over here (linked below since It wont work on the RM discussion) clearly tells the story. The West Coast Main Line is the clear primary topic for WCML. The rest of the WCMLs are quite obscure and most people searching for WCML are likely looking for the railway line. JuniperChill (talk) 13:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Nandamuri Taraka Rama Rao district → NTR district – The actual name of the district. The expanded title is not and of course not used by RS. I've reverted an earlier move, but it is again moved to the incorrect title. I did not want to get into a move war, thus this RM. — DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 08:47, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Khanqah → Sufi lodge – Per WP:USEENGLISH and for a more inclusive title that reduces confusion. Recapping what was discussed in the thread above: Until now, this article has been the main overview article for Sufi religious institutions/venues. There are various terms used in Arabic/Persian/Turkish/etc for this type of institution, with the choice varying roughly by region. This is explained in the article already ("Etymology" section) and also conveniently in the equivalent entry of the Encyclopedia of Islam, Three ([4]): ::
Khānaqāh (or khānqāh) is a Persian word for the place where Muslim mystics gather. It was, and still is, used mainly in Iran, Afghanistan, Central Asia, western China, and the Indian subcontinent. Other terms were more common elsewhere, such as zāwiya in Arab lands, Africa, and Indonesia, and tekke in Turkey and the Balkans. All these terms are often interchangeable. Usually translated as “Ṣūfī lodge” (rather than “convent”) in English, the khānaqāh is a room or an establishment where Ṣūfīs assemble around a spiritual master to perform rituals (often by night or in darkness) and to share meals, to communicate with one another, and to follow spiritual teachings.
While the term "khanqah" is one of the most common terms for this type of place, it is not used in all regions, and in some regions the different terms may also have slightly different meanings. This has led to confusion on more than one occasion over this article's scope, over which title editors should link in other articles, etc. Changing to an English term, which is more generic, would avoid this problem and make the title a little more neutral, in addition to being easier for unfamiliar English readers. As the source above indicates, "Sufi lodge" is the favored English term. An ngram of the most common English variants seems to confirm this. The various non-English terms should redirect here (as most already do) or, where appropriate, can be turned into subtopic articles for more specific types of Sufi institutions or for specific regions (e.g. like Zawiya (institution), Dargah). R Prazeres (talk) 07:06, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Srebrenica massacre → Srebrenica genocide – I suggest that we rename this article to "Srebrenica genocide" now that the UN has issued its resolution on the matter today, designating July 11 as the International Day of Reflection and Commemoration of the 1995 Genocide in Srebrenica Please also check the discussion above. Njamu (talk) 06:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Sapphic → Sapphic (disambiguation) – Now, sapphism already exists and explains the meaning of sapphic as the primary topic, as it's directly derived from Sappho. I propose renaming it and retargeting Sapphic to sapphism. --MikutoHtalk! 21:14, 2 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 02:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 17:22, 23 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 05:43, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Timeline of the Donald Trump presidency → Timeline of the presidency of Donald Trump – Please correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I've found, there was never a discussion for the 2018 moves of countless timeline pages regarding the presidencies of US presidents. Based on this, I would like to discuss whether it might be more useful to move those pages so that they follow the format "Timeline of the presidency of ..." rather than having the presidency as a "attachment" to the president's name as it is now. –Tobias (talk) 16:07, 26 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.Safari ScribeEdits!Talk! 04:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – 2023 Perth City Council election → 2023 City of Perth council election – "Perth City Council" is a colloquial and informal name, which is not in official use anywhere. The Local Government Act 1995 does not use the term "City Council" anywhere. Steelkamp (talk) 06:11, 9 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 01:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 12:59, 26 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.Safari ScribeEdits!Talk! 04:06, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Too Many Humans..... → Too Many Humans – The article title contains five consecutive dots, which is a phenomenon that is basically never used in ordinary English – I found only four articles like that on all of Wikipedia. MOS:TM says to try to use ordinary English formatting. Although this (self-released, apparently not very notable) album does indeed have five dots on its cover art, this typographical embellishment is not supported by the cited sources. The article cites three independent (non-user-generated) sources: Louder, Vinyl District, and Strauss Media. All three of them use no dots at all when referring to this topic. One non-independent source is also cited (Drag City), and it doesn't use any dots either. The proposed title already redirects to this topic. — BarrelProof (talk) 07:35, 17 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 12:59, 26 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.Safari ScribeEdits!Talk! 04:05, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Nagi Yanagi → yanaginagi – current name is wrong, see above for explanation, I cannot move it as I am not autoconfirmed, please make the "y" in the name small letter if possible, thank you. Sohryu Asuka Langley Not Shikinami (talk) 09:41, 26 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.Safari ScribeEdits!Talk! 01:26, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Tungipara Sheikh family → Family of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman – The current name of the article is Tungipara Sheikh family which is WP:OR. The name is originated from original research and no historical book or news article call this family by Tungipara Sheikh Family. This family, unlike Suhrawardy family, wasn’t part of publication or scholarly research before the creation of Bangladesh and before Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and that's why people didn’t give any specific name for the family of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. There are many books and research papers mention the family as "Family of Bangabandhu" or "Family of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman". Bangabandhu is his title so it is reasonable to name this article Family of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. There are sources to verify my claim. For example, see this article where it says "8 Bangabandhu family members, relatives to contest polls". The Daily Star states "Bangabandhu family to get more security, free utility, foreign treatment" (see here). Now some sources also call this family as Sheikh family. See this Bengali source where it says in title "শেখ পরিবার থেকে নেতৃত্বে যারা" (lit.'Those led from the Sheikh family'), but if you read the content then you will get "...দশম জাতীয় সংসদে বঙ্গবন্ধু পরিবারের সাত সদস্য ছিলেন। একাদশ জাতীয় সংসদ নির্বাচনে অংশ নেওয়া বঙ্গবন্ধু শেখ মুজিবুর রহমানের পরিবারের ৯ সদস্যই প্রতিনিধিত্ব করছেন.." (lit.'...There were seven members of the Bangabandhu family in the 10th National Parliament. 9 members of the family of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman who participated in the 11th National Parliament election are represented...'). Now the question is if the nine members are really from the direct bloodline of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman or not. * Sheikh Hasina : Daughter of Mujib * Sheikh Selim : Son of Mujib's sister * Sheikh Fazle Noor Taposh : Son of Mujib's nephew * Sheikh Helal Uddin : Son of Mujib's brother * Noor-E-Alam Chowdhury Liton : Son of Hasina's cousins * Abul Hasanat Abdullah : Son of Mujib's brother-in-law * Sheikh Tonmoy son of Hasina's cousin * Sheikh Salahuddin Jewel : Son of Mujib's younger brother. * Mujibur Rahman Chowdhury : Son of Hasina's cousins. So it is not important if they are directly from Mujib's bloodline or not, the sources still call the family as Mujib's family and that family includes relatives and even distant relatives of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. Naming this family as Sheikh family or Sheikh–Wazed family or Sheikh–Kazi family is original research, and we should name it as Family of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman because we know the family because Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, father of the nation, came from the family. And the most important fact is reliable sources call the family by the family of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. Mehedi Abedin 05:58, 18 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.ToadetteEdit! 14:40, 25 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.Safari ScribeEdits!Talk! 00:46, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Mokai Tramway → Taupo Totara Timber Company Railway – The proposed title makes this article easier to find. Many readers will have heard of the "TTT", the tourist town of Taupo, or Lake Taupo. Few people will be familiar with the sawmilling village of Mokai, which today has only a few houses and a marae. The name also distinguishes the main Putaruru to Mokai line from the bush tramways radiating from Mokai. Many of these tramways were accessible only to selected TTT Railway rolling stock. In contrast, all TTT locomotives including the Mallet and the four-wheeled locos were able to run through to Mokai, where the company had its main mechanical workshop. The proposed new title also distinguishes the TTT Railway from the Kinleith Branch, which covered only part of the route and was built on formation that was largely new. (The original TTT formation north of Tokoroa is still visible in some places). I have a large collection of source material on the railway and the company and I hope to add more info and true primary citations as time permits. I will also propose that a separate page be set up covering the TTT company itself Kbwc56 (talk) 00:09, 26 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.Safari ScribeEdits!Talk! 00:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Protestant Church in Germany → Evangelical Church in Germany – Both terms (in English) are used by the EKD itself, but Evangelical is the more common, more accurate term. Etymologically, evangelical/evangelische refers to the gospel (εὐαγγέλιον), while Protestant refers to the Protestation at Speyer. It is not true that "Evangelical" is the former name (see EKD en homepage), and it is also untrue that the term "Evangelical" strictly or primarily refers to the Evangelical/Mainline divide among American denominations. The onus must be on those preferring "Protestant" to demonstrate such a shift in meaning, and I do not feel that prior discussion participants have succeeded. If we are worried that the reader would make this false association, it could easily be cleared up in the body of the article. Survey of use: Ngram, World Council of Churches, Britannica. The lead could read, for example: "the Evangelical Church in Germany, (also called the Protestant Church in Germany)" Dirkwillems (talk) 17:10, 25 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.Safari ScribeEdits!Talk! 00:13, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Words of estimative probability → Verbal probability – Given that this has been here for a decade and a half now, I didn't want to move it unilaterally without giving people a chance to object beforehand, but verbal probability seems to be a much more concise way of defining the same topic, see for example a PLOS article.[1] I don't think "words of estimative probability" is used that much more often in literature, for all that Kent used it in their 1962 work, from what I can see, it's actually the other way around, even though we do have some that use it like van Tiel et al.[2] Of course, most literature does seem to tack on "word" or "phrase" or "expression" or something else like that, but they also seem to drop it easily enough when concision is desired, so I don't think it's necessary for our title here. I suppose probability phrase is another plausible alternate title if we want to stick to proper grammar, and it does seem to see some use in RS as well, but it seems overall less common, which is why I've opted for "verbal probability" instead. Should probably be a redirect though!
(Discuss) – Iṣṭa-devatā (Hinduism) → Ishtadevata – As WP:ONEOTHER, the Sanskrit term Ishtadevata (IAST: Iṣṭa-devatā) is primarily used in Hinduism vis-a-vis Buddhism where Yidam (from Tibetan) is the popular term (ishtadevata is a ceremonial Sanskrit term). The following generic religion encyclopedias define the term in the Hindu context * An_Introductory_Dictionary_of_Theology p. 651 [5] * Encyclopedia of Love in World Religions:Page 301 - Yudit Kornberg Greenberg · 2007 * Encyclopedia of Spirits and Ghosts in World Mythology - Page 44 (under Devata entry) Theresa Bane · 2016 * The Encyclopedia of Yoga and Tantra - Page 352 Georg Feuerstein · 2022 Encyclopedia of Hinduism - Page 203 - Constance Jones, James D. Ryan · 2006: "Ishta devata (desired divinity) is an important concept in theistic Hinduism." - illustrates its importance in Hinduism RedtigerxyzTalk 14:23, 25 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.Safari ScribeEdits!Talk! 00:03, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Isaac Charles Parker → Isaac Parker (Missouri judge) – These articles were both moved to their current location back in August 2020, from "Isaac Parker" (which has since become a dab page) and "Isaac T. Parker" respectively (the latter move probably for consistency), by the same user (Hhfjbaker, hereby notified). In many of the articles linking to these two Isaac Parkers, the links are piped like [[Isaac Charles Parker|Isaac Parker]] and [[Isaac Thomas Parker|Isaac Parker]] respectively, which leads me to believe that both men went by just "Isaac Parker". Now, per WP:MIDDLENAME ("Adding given names, or their abbreviations, merely for disambiguation purposes (if that format of the name is not commonly used to refer to the person) is not advised."), we're not supposed to use middle names/initials to disambiguate unless the middle name(s)/initial(s) is part of the WP:COMMONNAME. So, what is their WP:COMMONNAME? Given the piping pattern above, I'm inclined to believe that it's "Isaac Parker" for both men. I'm open to the idea that former (the "Hanging Judge") is the WP:PRIMARY, but I'll go for disambiguators for both articles for now. Note: Older sources often refer to people using their full name, but that was their way of disambiguating people. Should we follow that, or should we treat each on a case-by-case basis? HandsomeFella (talk) 23:08, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Template:Ln → Template:Namespace links – I will start by acknowledging a previous RM in 2018 on this issue, but I don't see anyone in that discussion who actually cited WP:TMP and it has been 5+1⁄2 years. Per WP:TG, Template function should be clear from the template name, but redirects can be created to assist everyday use of very popular templates. I doubt that there are any editors who can guess what (to pick an arbitrary example) Template:Ln does without having read the documentation / seeing it used, so the current name is a clear violation of the guideline. Using opaque names is no problem for experienced editors, but makes it slightly harder for newbies to learn what templates do (WP:BITE). The current names of these templates might not be the most pressing or largest problem facing Wikipedia, but it is certainly a problem worthy of a solution (in other words, this is not a solution looking for a problem). Using obvious names also makes it easier to remember the names of these templates (see WP:TPN: Template names are easiest to remember if they follow standard English spelling, spacing, and capitalization (also see the naming conventions for articles)). Of course, redirects would be kept and per WP:NOTBROKEN would not be bypassed to use the longer form. Pinging participants at the previous RM: @BD2412, BrandonXLF, Crouch, Swale, Dreamy Jazz, Gonnym, JohnBlackburne, Locke Cole, Primefac, and Steel1943. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 22:11, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Ayub Khan → Ayub Khan (disambiguation) – This article has been moved numerous times and it seems there's never been any discussion about it. The underlying issue appears to be that we have a set index article at the common name for this person. As this person is the primary topic, the solution is simple: move the set index article out of the way. Problem solved. I could have quite simply done a round-robin move but going through a formal move request, we can settle the issue once and for all. Schwede66 22:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Binary search algorithm → Binary search – === === The page was moved in 2005. I believe this extra word is not necessary. Here are what sources say: * CLRS vol. 1, 3rd edition[1] ** "binary search" 21 times (excluding 253 counts of "binary search tree") ** of which "binary search algorithm" appears 2 times (upon first mention) * Programming Pearls[2] ** "binary search" 32 times (excluding 5 counts of "binary search tree") ** no mention of "binary search algorithm" * TAOCP vol. 3 (searching and sorting), 2nd edition[3] ** "binary search" 62 times (excluding "binary search tree") ** of which "binary search algorithm" 4 times, ** and "binary search procedure" once.
(Discuss) – Fallout (disambiguation) → Fallout – the Fallout redirect is to be deleted to make way for the move. – I am here after finding this disambiguation page on top of Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation/Popular pages for April '24 with ~2.8 million views, which is a bit too much to ignore. Page history shows this was moved based on Special:WhatLinksHere/Fallout (which is an indication of editor behavior, not necessarily reader behavior, and WP:RF), and anonymous users tried to move it twice now (but a long time ago). https://wikinav.toolforge.org/?language=en&title=Nuclear_fallout for April shows the by far the most popular outgoing clickstreams from there are to the hatnotes, outpacing the next identifiable clickstream by orders of magnitude. Honestly the main reason I'm even raising a discussion here instead of just moving this is that nobody seemed to complain since 2010. This seems to imply that either navigation was fine, or that the threshold for modifying it was too high. Page view statistics for the popular topics indicate the latest spike is because of the recent reader interest in the TV series. This latest thing also being based on the franchise in turn contributes to the notion that the long-term significance of the franchise isn't ignorable compared to that of nuclear fallout. --Joy (talk) 20:26, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Γ-Aminobutyric acid → GABA – The abbreviation is nearly always the preferred term. I would classify the relevance of this abbreviation as similar to ALS. –Tobias (talk) 18:26, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – 2018 FIVB Volleyball Women's Nations League → 2018 FIVB Women's Volleyball Nations League – This is a multiple-page move request additional to the multiple-page move request titled "Requested move 31 May 2024" posted at the talk page of the article titled "FIVB Volleyball Women's Nations League". These additional move requests are made for the same reason, namely, that these articles' titles each has a misplaced gender modifier. Proof of this is that per WP:UCRN, all the cited sources in all these articles refer to their referred event as either the men's VNL or women's VNL, not the VMNL or the VWNL. Bagoto (talk) 15:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Terence Trent D'Arby → Sananda Maitreya – The artist changed his name to Sananda Maitreya in the mid-90s and has only used that name ever since. Since the previous time this move was considered, there have been some further developments; most notably the artist's entire back catalogue has been renamed and republished under his current name. His entire back catalogue is now only available under the name Sananda Maitreya, which I believe is an unprecedented move within the music industry. This is an unusual and unique situation which merits our reexamination. Comparisons to other artists who've made name changes (e.g. Cat Stevens) don't really apply here. Just to clarify, ALL music streaming services have had the early Terence Trent D'arby albums renamed as Sananda Maitreya albums, including modified album title and cover artwork too so arguably today Sananda Maitreya is the only and most common name for accessing his body of work. For example the first studio album is now only available under the name Introducing the Hardline According to Sananda Maitreya even on physical media. Additionally, the overwhelming majority of his career to date has been under the name Sananda Maitreya. Finally, it is clear from recent press interviews that the artist associates his early stage name with a certain amount of trauma, it seems anachronistic that Wikipedia would continue to display his early stage name as the primary page name. MzK11 (talk) 08:13, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – National Gallery of Denmark → Statens Museum for Kunst – Per WP:COMMONNAME; this result from Google Ngram Viewer suggests that the Danish name is more commonly used than the English in English-language sources. (This could be a test case for WP:ENGLISHTITLE: "On the English Wikipedia, article titles are written using the English language. However ... if a word or phrase (originally taken from some other language) is commonly used by English-language sources, it can be considered to be an English-language word or phrase". Here the Danish name seems to predominate in English-language usage, even though there is an official English-language alternative.) Ham II (talk) 06:26, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Nir Oz massacre → Nir Oz attack – While some sources use the word "massacre" to describe the event, most other sources use the word "attack". "Massacre" carries a judgment. WP:POVNAME allows for such names only when "a significant majority of English-language source" use such a name. That is not the case here and it can be shown that "attack" is at least as common as "massacre", if not more. WP:NDESC also says "Avoid judgmental and non-neutral words". Sources that use "attack" include: *AP News[6]: "Hamas attack unfolding in the kibbutz of Nir Oz" *BBC News[7]: "Nir Oz in Israel, untouched since Hamas attack" *CBS News[8]: "scenes at Kibbutz Nir Oz following Hamas attack" *The Guardian[9]: "attack on Nir Oz kibbutz" *Christian Science Monitor: "attack on Nir Oz" *Forbes: "Kibbutz Nir Oz after *NPR[10]: "The Hamas attack", "a deadly attack by militants two months earlier, in Nir Oz, Israel" *NBC News[11]: "the Oct. 7 attack on the kibbutz" *Times of Israel[12]: "Hamas attack unfolding outside his door in the kibbutz of Nir Oz" *New York Times[13]: "an attack by Hamas militants". *France 24[14]: "Nir Oz kibbutz, which Hamas attacked on October 7" VR(Please ping on reply) 01:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
May 31, 2024
(Discuss) – FIVB Volleyball Women's Nations League → FIVB Women's Volleyball Nations League – Misplaced gender modifier. Per WP:UCRN, all cited sources in these articles refer to the events as either the women's or men's VNL, not the VMNL or VWNL. Bagoto (talk) 23:52, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Transformation (genetics) → Genetic transformation – Natural disambiguation is preferred over parenthetical disambiguation (see WP:NATDIS and WP:NCDAB). The form "genetic transformation" is used in the titles of six of this article's references, so it seems to be common enough to be considered natural. Of the possible natural titles, "genetic transformation" fits the article's current scope better than alternatives such as "bacterial transformation" or "natural transformation". Jruderman (talk) 18:57, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip → Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip (disambiguation) – Just like we don't have a date on Israel-Hamas war, as that is by far the most significant of the wars between Israel and Hamas, the current invasion of Gaza Strip is by far the most significant of the invasions of Gaza Strip. It is the longest in duration, most extensive in damage, the highest in casualties and received the most international attention. VR(Please ping on reply) 18:54, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Kwanso → Kwansŏ – Without the diacritic it's suggesting a completely different word in Korean (관소 vs 관서). There is unlikely to be a WP:COMMONNAME for this place; the geographical region is mostly referred to historically, and historical papers in English use the diacritic. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 20:05, 29 May 2024 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). SilverLocust💬 18:37, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Three-dimensional electrical capacitance tomography → Electrical capacitance volume tomography – This page was originally titled "Electrical capacitance volume tomography" and was recently moved to a page called "Three-dimensional electrical capacitance tomography". These two terms are not the same. The latter is a broader term as shown in the wikipedia article edit on 5/14/24 in the introduction section. References are given for the distinction between terms. When the page was moved to the new term, it stated that the term ECVT is not widely used. However, in the later 5/14/24 edit of the introduction, citations are given for the term being used in China, Indonesia, and three different research groups in the USA. It is suggested that this page return to "Electrical capacitance volume tomography". A separate page should be made for "Three-dimensional electrical capacitance tomography", if desired, as it is a distinct term that can include stacking of 2D tomographs whereas ECVT does not. Marashdeh (talk) 15:28, 14 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 17:05, 23 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.Polyamorph (talk) 18:15, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – + + (EP) → (+ +) – Alternative, less-restricted titles. The titles for these EPs do not seem to be simple stylizations. For [#], the parentheses would substitute the brackets (as above), and either the number sign is substituted with its pronunciation as (Hash) (similar to Back and Forth (film) and "Number 9 Dream") or the number sign is substituted with the sharp symbol as (♯) (similar to ♯P and "Rainy Day Women ♯12 & 35"). JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 21:52, 15 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 16:05, 23 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.Polyamorph (talk) 18:13, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Decocidio → 2010 European Climate Exchange defacement – Nothing notable other than European Climate Exchange defacement 2010 Changeworld1984 (talk) 13:47, 24 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.Polyamorph (talk) 18:08, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Footloose → Footloose_(disambiguation) – The 1984 film has at this point clearly become the primary topic for the term Footloose. This page has a majority of views of all articles in the disambiguation page, and more than half of the others there derive from this film, including the song, remake, and stage adaptation. The 2011 film, which was the main competitor to this film in the previous RM, has mostly been forgotten, while this film maintained the same relevance it had in the previous RM. The cultural significance of this film also outweighs all the other topics on the disambiguation page. Ladtrack (talk) 16:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Caffè macchiato → macchiato – This is the proper English name, as the current title is in Italian. R.L (talk) 01:40, 31 May 2024 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). R.L (talk) 14:44, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Doctor of Philosophy → PhD – Per WP:COMMONNAME the abreviated form without dots is the most common in ngrams, more than twice as common as "Ph.D." and much more common than the full name, which doesn't seem to be very widely used in comparison ([15]). The proposed term is also more common in google scholar, with 18k results since 2010 ([16]), compared to less than 17k for "Ph.D." ([17]) and less than 8k for "Doctor of Philosophy" ([18]). Vpab15 (talk) 16:03, 24 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.Safari ScribeEdits!Talk! 12:18, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – List of ABS-CBN Corporation channels and stations → List of ABS-CBN Corporation channels and former TV and radio stations – Let's be honest, ABS-CBN's TV and radio stations are gone. They are most likely not coming back, no matter how hard we want it. We should be objective here. 179.251.189.36 (talk) 07:22, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Retrograde (2022 film) → Retrograde (2022 American film) – Incomplete disambiguation, due to the existence of Retrograde (2022 Canadian film). Under most normal circumstances I would just move the page immediately as a straightforward incomplete disambiguation, but there have been a few instances in the past where that's been challenged on the grounds that one film was so much more notable than the other one that it should probably still keep "primary" topic status for the partially-disambiguated title anyway — and with this one being a major-studio documentary with Emmy Awards under its belt, while the Canadian film is a limited-release indie drama mainly getting over on a couple of independent film festival awards, this seems like the kind of case where such a debate might crop up. So I believe that the move should happen in principle, but am proposing it for discussion, rather than just moving the page myself, because the possibility exists for debate over it. Bearcat (talk) 16:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – List of foreign brand vehicles developed and manufactured by automobile companies of China → ? – The current title is... a bit of a mouthful, and I think we could drop a few words fairly easily, but I'm not sure how to achieve the best possible WP:CONCISE, so throwing it to a mostly unconstrained discussion here. I think we can drop "developed and" fairly easily, I don't think there's a strong reason to limit the scope that way. For the rest of the second half though, I'm not sure if we can shorten it further, even though I'd like to if possible. For the same length, I think "automotive companies" instead of "automobile companies" is a little more natural. Alternatively, if we want to align with List of automobile manufacturers of China (for consistency), maybe a shorter verb ("made" maybe?) could be used. It might also be possible to drop "vehicles" from the title, though I'm less sure if that is appropriate. So, I think my best would be List of foreign brand vehicles made by automobile manufacturers of China or List of foreign brands made by automobile manufacturers of China. Other suggestions would definitely be appreciated! Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:06, 23 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.Bensci54 (talk) 16:20, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Abdulmejid I → Abdülmecid I – Per WP:TRANSLITERATE. The contemporary Turkish spelling (with the 'ü' but without a 't' replacing the final 'd') is predominantly preferred in credible English-language sources, as searches on Ngram Viewer and JSTOR indicate. Both the Encyclopaedia of Islam and Britannica prefer Abdülmecid. yaguzi (talk) 14:22, 29 May 2024 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). SilverLocust💬 04:08, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Tibet → Greater Tibet – Tibet commonly means Tibet Autonomous Region, more info and common links can be found in Talk page of Tibet, also Talk page of Tibet Autonomous Region, current Tibet page can be moved to Greater Tibet Toto11zi (talk) 14:30, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – NoBull → NOBULL – The official company name is NOBULL, not NoBull, and is always stylized NOBULL Jcostas81 (talk) 13:01, 10 May 2024 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). Jcostas81 (talk) 14:22, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Anti-Normanism → Normanism – The article starts with "Anti-Normanism is an opposition to Normanism, the mainstream narrative..." I find it weird that the mainstream theory of Normanism is but a section inside the fringe theory. The article must be moved and reshuffled upside down. - Altenmann>talk 19:33, 22 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.Safari ScribeEdits!Talk! 10:40, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Hoani Nahi → Hoani Nahe – While 'Nahi' appears in some sources, and sometimes both 'Nahe' and 'Nahi' appear in the same source, it seems that 'Nahe' is the correct spelling. 'Nahe' is the only spelling used in the Dictionary of New Zealand Biography article, the Cyclopedia of New Zealand article, and the numerous articles about him in the Journal of the Polynesian Society. In Papers Past magazines and journals, 'Hoani Nahe' occurs 78 times and 'Hoani Nahi' never. In Papers Past newspapers 'Hoani Nahe' occurs 696 times and 'Hoani Nahi' 47 times. All 47 times were articles about him, not by him; the letters that he wrote to newspapers were always singed 'Nahe'. We did once had an article called Hoani Nahe – it was merged into this one, rather than the reverse merge, for reasons I don't understand. Nurg (talk) 09:59, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Sloboda → Sloboda (settlement) – This word means "freedom" in the original Slavic languages, and while there is a significant usage in Russian and Ukrainian history as well as some usage in modern-day Russian administrative divisions, described at this presumed primary topic, its usage and long-term significance does not actually overshadow the ambiguity over the other uses of the word for the average English reader. In preparation for this move, I went through the list of ~200 incoming links to preemptively disambiguate them. The usage is typically clerical, to explain the strange term, which is most commonly placed in italics. This indicates that the fact that the explanation was directly at "sloboda" was a very easy way to get the etymological explanation. However, that's a possible description of editor behavior, which is not necessarily the reader behavior (WP:RF). It should also be noted that Russian toponymy lists are quite weird from the perspective of a navigation purpose for set indices, with an apparent habit of linking these kinds of terms contrary to what MOS:DABONE would advise. It's not that I'm opposed to having a link somewhere in such a set index to explain the term, but the volume of this skews the statistics. After going through the list, I was left with 19 links (~10%) where I couldn't identify a clear connection to this particular subject. Mostly they seemed to be generic references to the Slavic word for "freedom". This also extended to Russian topics. Some were references to specific places named Sloboda, not the concept. I had also disambiguated numerous others by linking Foobar Svoboda instead of keeping a largely useless partial link (sadly I didn't keep a count of these to be able to note the percentage). A search in Google Books for me does not identify this meaning to be primary - I get more references to people named this way. Likewise for Google Scholar. I don't have reason to believe that this would differ for the average English reader. WikiNav for Sloboda and meta:Research:Wikipedia clickstream archive indicate that the hatnote is consistently one of the most commonly clicked links on the page - even in months where we see a larger readership, it's still among the most commonly clicked links (for example in March '24, with 162 clickstreams to 9 identified destinations, the hatnote was #3 with 17). This is typically indicative of a navigation issue. Another editor reverted the initial preparatory move, thinking this broke links (it did not) and saying this changes a 'long established' status quo - I don't see an actual rationale there. Just because this grew organically as is - doesn't mean it's not subject to evaluation and adjustment. In addition, similar terms like svoboda and swoboda are not short-circuiting here and are indeed disambiguated, so this change would seem to make things more consistent. Joy (talk) 23:14, 22 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.Safari ScribeEdits!Talk! 07:22, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Genocide of Indigenous peoples → Genocide of indigenous peoples – "Indigenous" is only a proper name when adopted as conventional for a particular ethnic group, and when applied to the specific groups who have done so. As a general, global adjective it is not and cannot be a proper name (any more than the opposite, "colonial"), so should not be capitalized. See in particular the lead paragraph of MOS:CAPS: WP does not capitalize that which is not capitalized consistently across nearly all independent reliable sources, and "indigenous peoples" is not so capitalized (indeed, it is overwhelmingly lowercase [26][27], except in highly retrictive contexts that refer to specific populations who have adopted the term self-referentially as a name in English). This same situation is true of all such terms such as "native" and "aboriginal". "Aboriginal" is capitalized in reference to autochthonous Australians, and "Native" is capitalized in "Native Americans" in reference to the autochthonous peoples of what is now the US and sometimes (in mostly US usage) all of the Americas. But "native" is not capitalized (by the preponderance of modern reliable sources) in reference to Australians, nor "aboriginal" in reference to Americans, and neither is capitalized in "the native (aboriginal) peoples and languages of Siberia and Central Asia before the Soviet Union", etc. PS: There may be other over-capitalized articles of this sort, but perhaps take them one at a time, since some might pertain more narrowly to groups that have taken on "Indigenous" as a self-referential name/label. — SMcCandlish☏¢ 😼 04:42, 25 May 2024 (UTC); revised 06:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Karma (2024 song) → Karma's a Bitch – This page keeps getting moved. The previous rationale was "The song was originally called that in the Miley Cyrus demo, and the Brit Smith demo. It also takes away the disambiguating, so it more succinct." I’m unsure, however. The article is about the song as an entity, but that 'entity' hasn’t got a name, but it’s clear that there are two versions of the same song, and that they are not covers of each other. I don’t think this has ever happened before. Plus the proposed title is already a redirect to the page, so seems like the most logical title. This is a case of 'what came first, the chicken or the egg?' Another suggestion is Karma and Karma's a Bitch. 109.235.247.80 (talk) 01:57, 17 April 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 05:27, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – September 2022 Armenia–Azerbaijan clashes → 2022 аttack of Azerbaijan on Armenia – I have not seen a single reliable source saying that Armenia attacked Azerbaijan. But multiple reliable sources say the opposite. Various sources describe the events as an “invasion”, “offensive”, “attack”, or “assault.” There is consensus that Azerbaijan was the one who initiated the hostilities. Some talk about “Azerbaijan’s Invasion of Armenia”, “Azerbaijan’s Offensive on Armenia”, “Azerbaijan’s Attack on Armenia”, but they all agree on one thing: Azerbaijan was the initiator of the clash, and it was Azerbaijan who attacked. Therefore, the title “Attack of Azerbaijan on Armenia” perfectly reflects the vast majority of reliable sources and is the least ambiguous. I will provide the overwhelming evidence below: * Human Rights Watch: :“The killings took place during fighting between Armenian and Azerbaijani forces that broke out in mid-September, when Azerbaijan made incursions into Armenia...” * Genocide Watch: :“Azerbaijani military attacks on Armenian territory show Azerbaijani disregard for Armenian sovereignty.” * Freedom House: :“Freedom House Condemns Azerbaijani Attacks on Armenia” :“The Azerbaijani armed forces must immediately cease their deadly attacks on Armenian territory” * Axel Gehring, Ph.D., political scientist and expert in the field of foreign and security policy and researcher at the Institute for Critical Social Analysis of the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation in Berlin: :“On September 13, regular Azerbaijani troops launched a large-scale attack on Armenian territory. This attack took tensions between the countries to a new level.” * Laurence Broers is a specialist in conflicts in the Transcaucasus, founder of the scientific journal Caucasus Survey: :"Azerbaijan's recent attack seeks to enforce terms in negotiations with Armenia"“ The recent large-scale cross-border attacks inside Armenia by Azerbaijan...” * Maximilian Hess, Research Fellow for Central Asia at the Foreign Policy Institute, in Foreign Policy magazine: :“Azerbaijani forces who marched into Armenia continue to occupy part of its territory, in particular heights around the town of Jermuk.” * David L. Phillips, conflict analyst in The National Interest: :“The United States criticized Azerbaijan's recent attacks on Armenia proper” * European Parliament Resolution: :“Strongly condemns the latest military aggression by Azerbaijan on September 12, 2022 on the sovereign territory of Armenia” :“calls on the Azerbaijani authorities, therefore, to immediately withdraw from all parts of the territory of Armenia “ * Wojciech Gorecki, senior researcher at the Department of Turkey, Caucasus and Central Asia: :“in September 2022 Azerbaijan attacked targets located on Armenian territory.” * The Guardian: : “This week, with attention focused across the Black Sea in Ukraine, fighting on the border between Azerbaijan and Armenia killed about 100 troops after Azerbaijan shelled a number of towns in Armenia, with both sides accusing each other of “provocations”.” * Der Spiegel: : “Peace negotiations mediated by the European Union have been at an impasse since Baku also attacked territory in the Republic of Armenia in September 2022.” * TIME: : “...democratic nation that was recently invaded by its authoritarian neighbor” : “...but also Armenia, which has been suffering from Azerbaijan's invasion for almost three weeks now.” * BBC: : “I don’t think anyone doubts that Azerbaijan started this operation on the territory of Armenia. Even Azerbaijani commentators admit this. Armenia is currently weak, has little interest in disrupting the status quo.” * Eurasianet :"Azerbaijan launches large-scale attacks on Armenia" :“Azerbaijan launched a large-scale attack on targets in Armenia, an unprecedented expansion of the long-running conflict into Armenian territory.” * Michael Rubin, senior researcher at AIP: :“Last week, Azerbaijan attacked Armenia proper. (Last week Azerbaijan attacked Armenia directly)” * Paul Stronski is a senior fellow in the Carnegie Russia and Eurasia Programs, specializing in Russia and the South Caucasus: : “..the fact that Russia is preoccupied, certainly led to what looks like an Azerbaijani offensive at this time” : “And what we even saw just in the last few days is actually attacks inside and shelling inside cities inside Armenia, not just along the border." * Kapil Komireddy, political columnist for The Telegraph: : “But so little about Azerbaijan's attack, which goes beyond the disputed territory of Karabakh and targets Armenia proper.” *Seth Franzman, Middle East analyst for The Jerusalem Post , contributor to Defense News, The National Interest and Digest of Middle East Studies: :“Attacks on Armenia represent dangerous escalation” *Carnegie Europe: :“Nearly 300 soldiers died in a large-scale Azerbaijani incursion into the territory of Armenia on September 13-14.”Vanezi (talk) 21:23, 5 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 05:19, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Inconfidência Mineira → Minas Gerais Conspiracy – English name, or some variation of it. Torimem (talk) 20:46, 21 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 03:59, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Israel–Hamas war → Gaza War (2023–present) – The previous discussion has concluded that WP:COMMONNAME does not stand as other names are also in common use. In such case, WP:COMMONNAME states that When there is no single, obvious name that is demonstrably the most frequently used for the topic by these sources, editors should reach a consensus as to which title is best by considering these criteria directly. I believe the proposed title is better in consistency; previous wars involving Gaza, Gaza War (2008–2009) and 2014 Gaza War, use Gaza War in the title, so this article should also follow suit. NasssaNser 03:42, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
May 28, 2024
(Discuss) – Bryan Rodríguez → Bryan Rodríguez (footballer) – Two individuals with identical names. One just has an accent. Previous RMs have agreed that this is not sufficient disambiguation. Also create a DAB at the base name and also include similarly named pages Brian Rodríguez and Braian Rodríguez at the DAB page as similarly named pages. RedPatch (talk) 22:37, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – 2024 Houston derecho → May 16 Houston derecho – Another derecho is happening today which is about to hit Houston (as of writing this) after it just hit Dallas. Cobblebricks (talk) 18:32, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – NewLabour Party (New Zealand) → NewLabour Party – This was requested ~7 years ago and no consensus was reached. I think it's been enough time to request a new move. WP:SMALLDETAILS was practically created for this type of situation: The general approach is that whatever readers might type in the search box, they are guided as swiftly as possible to the topic they might reasonably be expected to be looking for, by such disambiguation techniques as hatnotes and/or disambiguation pages. When such navigation aids are in place, small details are often sufficient to distinguish topics, e.g. MAVEN vs. Maven; Airplane! vs. Airplane; Sea-Monkeys vs. SeaMonkey; The Wörld Is Yours vs. other topics listed at The World Is Yours. The lack of a space between 'New' and 'Labour' seems more than sufficient enough to distinguish this page from other similar titles. Loytra (talk) 15:30, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Rainy Day Women ♯12 & 35 → Rainy Day Women – or Rainy Day Women Nos. 12 & 35. The current article title is clearly not the song's title and is (very) difficult to type (if you can even figure out what the symbol is, which is not likely). At least two of the cited sources (Billboard and RPM 100) just call it "Rainy Day Women", which is more WP:CONCISE and already redirects here. Alternatively, the "#" could be represented by "Nos", as The Official Charts did. Either of those seems better than poorly imitating the visual appearance of the number sign in the title using a sharp symbol. The short form would revert a bold move of 17 July 2007 by a user who was blocked for vandalizing WP:AIV and then stopped editing in 2009. They did not provide an edit summary to explain their rationale for renaming the page to a longer title. — BarrelProof (talk) 14:56, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Manpool → Northern England supercity – With reference to the article title criteria, "Northern England supercity" is likely to be more: * recognisable than the specific neologism Manpool (or the alternative, Liverchester) * naturally used and searched for, given that supercity is an established term * appropriately precise, avoiding WP:OVERPRECISION, as both John Prescott and Will Alsop's visions mentioned in the article were about more than just Liverpool and Manchester, extending to Hull, Leeds etc. Jonathan Deamer (talk) 22:43, 2 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.SilverLocust💬 16:34, 12 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 12:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Right of way → ? – Do not think this is the primary topic for this term. I expected to be taken to a page about the traffic term. The disambiguation page should be the PT, or maybe there needs to be a dab concept article, to clarify all these related but different terms. Natg 19 (talk) 16:37, 14 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 12:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – List of NBCUniversal television programs → List of Comcast television programs – This article lists shows produced by Sky Studios (and it's subsidiaries), which is not part of NBCUniversal but rather part of Sky Group, another company owned by Comcast. Additionally, Sky has its own section in the article with other companies that are owned by NBCU, which is misleading and confusing as it can make people assume it's part of NBCU. It would be more suitable if most of the sections were put into an NBCU section, which would exist with the Sky section. Inpops (talk) 18:19, 16 April 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.ToadetteEdit! 14:22, 6 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. ASUKITE 16:42, 15 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 12:17, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Parachromis managuensis → Jaguar cichlid – So, the last time a name change for this article has been discussed was back in 2007 (see "article title" up above). This article used to be named "Managuense cichlid," but was later changed to the Latin name and current title, Parachromis managuensis, on the basis that it was the least ambiguous epithet for the species. Which is true. Latin names are almost always less ambiguous than vernacular names, but they're almost never as concise or recognizable - for the same reason we have articles named Great white shark and Largemouth bass rather than Carcharodon carcharias and Micropterus salmoides, I'm going to propose that this article be renamed to Jaguar cichlid. For the WP:CRITERIA of recognizability and naturalness, I present the Google Search results for the names listed in the article's lede (in order from most hits to least): * "jaguar cichlid": ~93,700 results * "parachromis managuensis": ~40,900 results * "jaguar guapote": ~9,680 results * "managuense cichlid": ~8,720 results * "guapote tigre": ~8,640 results * "aztec cichlid": ~4,090 results * "managua cichlid": ~1,470 results * "spotted guapote": ~812 results "Jaguar cichlid" is more than twice as prevalent on the web as the Latin name. It's nearly a full order of magnitude more prevalent than the next most popular vernacular name, "jaguar guapote" - and if that's where we draw the line, then names like "managuense cichlid" and "guapote tigre" aren't even in the running. This is supported by Google Trends, which shows that on average, "jaguar cichlid" is searched for 47 times more than "parachromis managuensis" and "managuense cichlid" worldwide. We should name the article accordingly. Simple as. Kodiak Blackjack (talk) • (contribs) 00:06, 13 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 11:51, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Trisha (actress) → Trisha Krishnan – Trisha Krishnan's name follows the Indian patronymic naming convention, where 'Krishnan' is her father's given name. It's not a mononyme. Anoop Bhatia (talk) 19:57, 20 May 2024 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anoop Bhatia (talk) 03:45, 21 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 11:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – TOPS System → Total posterior spine system – I don't believe WP:ACROTITLE is suitable, most RS seem to introduce by the full name first, and the abbreviation seems to be ambiguous with at least some other uses. There are a few possible title options though, and I'm less sure about the case. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:17, 20 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 11:18, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Paulista Republican Party → Republican Party of São Paulo – Most English speakers won't be familiar with Brazilian demonyns such as Paulista, Mineiro, Carioca etc, so it's better to just name it as proposed. It also sounds better. Torimem (talk) 01:35, 8 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 09:59, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – The Three Ages of Man and Death → The Ages and Death – The article seems to call it "the three ages of woman and death". The museum has The Ages of Woman and Death, in Spanish it is "Las Edades y la Muerte" (Ages and Death). Please note that there is a similarly named painting Die drei Lebensalter und der Tod (Hans Baldung) (Three ages and death).
Las Edades y la Muerte (the ages (of man/woman) and death)
(Discuss) – How to Do Well When You're a Jerk and a Crybaby → Comment réussir quand on est con et pleurnichard – Per WP:NCFFLF: "If the film has never been widely released in the English-speaking world, it is not assumed to have a commonly-recognized English name; in such cases, the native name is to be preferred over potentially variant translated titles used in English-language reliable sources." The current article title is not even identifiable anywhere online from before it was boldly moved here in 2018 with an unconvincing reasoning. The former title at least had some usage.[29] But all of the "English titles" are simply variant translated titles, of which there are many. If the guideline at WP:NCFFLF has any practical application, this would be a prime example. Οἶδα (talk) 04:07, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Merion air disaster → 1991 Merion mid-air collision – The proposed title fits better with the titles found at List of mid-air collisions. The relevant title guideline, WP:NCEVENTS, calls for the year to be included in the title in the majority of cases, with the only exception being historically significant events. Given that we don't have coverage beyond 1991, I don't think this one qualifies for the exemption. I'm also proposing we swap "disaster" for "mid-air collision", since WP:DISASTER recommends not using that word: mid-air collision is more precise and will make this title be more consistent with the rest. Pilaz (talk) 20:44, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – National Security Act, 2024 → Public Law 118-50 – As noted in the prior talk discussion, "National Security Act" is a draft name that may have appeared in an earlier version, but does not appear in the final text of the law[*], so it cannot be the title of this page. It's difficult to discern what the best title is, given that the bill that became law (H.R. 815)'s actual long title is "Making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes." which doesn't feel right for a wikipedia article, nor do shortened variants of it ("Emergency supplemental appropriations for 2024," &c.). There is some precedent for using the law numbers in these cases, e.g. Public Law 114-216 (and many others). Another step would be to delete this article entirely (why does it need to exist?), or perhaps to propose a inversion of the pending proposed (and unanimously opposed) merger with Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act. Of all those choices, going with a renaming to "Public Law 118-50" feels the least controversial. --- [*]: Well, we're still waiting for GPO to publish the final text of the law, but it's not in the final text of the final bill that became law, which should be close enough. jhawkinson (talk) 18:57, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Tel al-Sultan massacre → Rafah tent camp attack – News sources have called it "attack", "massacre", "strike" and "airstrike". It is not yet clear which is the most WP:COMMONNAME. "Massacre" carries value judgement, and "airstrike" obscures the fact that many of the casualties weren't killed directly by the airstrike, but were burned alive in the resulting fire. "Strike" is very similar to "attack", but "attack" is consistent with other similar events like World Central Kitchen aid convoy attack. I also think "Rafah tent camp" is more recognizable than "Tel al-Sultan" and most sources seem to use "Rafah tent camp" or "Rafah displacement camp".VR(Please ping on reply) 18:14, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – James Read → James Read (actor) – There are six men listed upon the James Read (disambiguation) page, with little indication that the septuagenarian supporting actor's renown has attained such heights as to overwhelm the combined notability of the remaining five men. — Roman Spinner(talk • contribs) 12:00, 17 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 16:23, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Washington Crossing Bridge → Washington Crossing Bridge (Delaware River) – I honestly am not sure what the right name should be, but being that there is another bridge in Pittsburgh of the same name, this bridge does not take precedence over the other and needs to be moved to an adjusted title. My suggestion is Delaware River, but I am willing to move to a different title pending discussion. JE98 (talk) 07:53, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Fashion Model → Fashion Model (film) – Formalising the discussion above. I'm neutral on the matter, but WP:DIFFCAPS may be relevant. If moving, we should also decide a target future for the resulting redirect Fashion Model. Certes (talk) 15:48, 9 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 15:08, 19 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 05:07, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Genesis (Woe, Is Me album) → Genesi(s) – The technically-restricted brackets can simply be substituted with parentheses to produce a more-satisfactory title. This would also eliminate the need for parenthetical disambiguation. JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 02:56, 27 May 2024 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). 162 etc. (talk) 05:06, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Judaism in association football → History of the Jews in association football – Will make title of the article the same as similar articles about Jewish history in a region or in a particular field (including one I recently created called "History of the Jews in baseball"). It is also more accurate as the article refers to the historical roles of Jewish people in the sport and the significance of football in the Jewish community rather than any particular religious aspect of it (Yom Kippur alone does not make it so as that holiday, due to its significance, is also observed by secular Jews, not just religious ones). Please also keep in mind that Judaism is an ethnoreligion and so should not be compared to "Islam and association football". Omnis Scientia (talk) 17:27, 19 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 05:06, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Headstone → tombstone – Dear God, no. (a) Not all gravestones are headstones. (b) This isn't an WP:ENGVAR issue. Tombstone is by far the WP:ENGLISHWP:COMMONNAME for gravestones in every dialect of English (1, 2, 3). (c) Tombstone already (appropriately) links here, so this isn't any form of WP:NATURALDAB either. (If one were needed, which it ain't, funeral stela/stele would actually cover more ground and be more appropriate for cremated remains &c.) — LlywelynII 20:46, 19 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 05:04, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Al-Maghazi refugee camp airstrikes → Israeli attacks on Al-Maghazi refugee camp – The attacks on the camp comprised of not only airstrikes but also of ground attacks, as evidenced in the article, while naming the perpetrator makes the title less ambiguous / more precise. — kashmīrīTALK 09:56, 16 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.DannyS712 (talk) 03:02, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Historical capitals of China → Capital of China – While it's in the process of being moved, I'm gonna add the constitutional context like other country related capitals do. Silence of Lambs (talk) 00:46, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) – Allegations of genocide in the 2023 Israeli attack on Gaza → ? – I'm unsure what the new title should be, but I'm sure that this one has an issue. The Israeli attack on Gaza has gone past 2023 into 2024. So, we can't keep the "2023 Israeli attack on Gaza" part. Perhaps we could change it to "Allegations of genocide perpetrated by Israel in the Israel–Hamas war", "Allegations of genocide in Gaza in the Israel–Hamas war", or something different. Note that "2023 Israeli attack on Gaza" just redirects to Israel–Hamas war. Paul Vaurie (talk) 19:49, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
