Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcuts

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.
Add a new request
Remove all requests

Technical requests

[edit]
Edit this section if you want to move a request between sections.

Uncontroversial technical requests

[edit]
Most requests should be placed below this heading.

Requests to revert undiscussed moves

[edit]
If your request involves reverting a move, place it here.

Contested technical requests

[edit]
  • Chikara → Chikara (disambiguation) (currently a redirect back to Chikara) (move · discuss) – Long story short, I recently informed a user who consistently opposed my edit summaries. In an attempt to address the issue, I reviewed the concerns surrounding WP:PRIMARY in relation to the “Chikara” page. After extensive discussion, it unfortunately escalated into an edit war WP:Arena. The primary concern remains whether this page should be moved to better align with the guidelines.

    Specifically, the proposal is to move “Chikara” to a disambiguation page

    that appropriately reflects its role as a redirect or hub for multiple uses of the term. This move would address the current ambiguity and enhance the page’s functionality as a disambiguation resource. Paul-mcdevil (talk) 15:35, 31 December 2024 (UTC)    [reply]
  • This is not uncontroversial. Suggest you first create an article for whatever it is you think is the primary topic under a disambiguated title (e.g., Chikara (some phrase)) and THEN initiate an RM discussion to establish consensus that there is in fact a primary topic for this term. older ≠ wiser 16:10, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Gray Television → Gray Media (currently a redirect back to Gray Television) (move · discuss) – Per press release issued on December 30, 2024, the Board of Directors approved a formal name change from "Gray Television" to "Gray Media." A page called Gray Media exists, but currently redirects to Gray Television. The redirect should be deleted, the page Gray Television should be moved to Gray Media, and Gray Television should redirect to Gray Media, accordingly. But, this is a bit above my skill set. TheMediaHistorian (talk) 07:58, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is controversial for a few reasons: The rename hasn't taken place yet. Even if it did, we need to see sources using the new name. Additionally, there's been discussion about renaming this at Talk:Gray_Television#Requested_move_19_July_2024. Therefore, a discussion is required to move this. JuniperChill (talk) 13:03, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's been at its current title for almost two years which IMO is a bit late to revert a previously undiscussed WP:BOLDMOVE. Unsure a case for globalization should be made here given the article currently only covers US amusement part incidents and Incidents at European amusement parks already exists in a much more advanced state. Note there is a previous version of the article that had much more thorough coverage of US incidents here before it was gutted in 2022; perhaps that could be fixed up.
Further discussion would probably help here. RachelTensions (talk) 04:30, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's Disney Jr. (programming block), which is not a TV channel, so the current disambiguation tag is correct. See WP:NCBC. 162 etc. (talk) 19:12, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The programming block is for the original American Disney Channel only! If there are other programming blocks with this name, none are as notable as this, hence/thus has its own article! This is for Southeast Asia, which may or may not have a programming block with this name, but like I stated, it'll be non-notable compared to this one. Intrisit (talk) 12:41, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Intrisit Your requested move has been contested. If you wish to proceed, you will need to click "discuss" in your original request to continue with a requested move discussion. RachelTensions (talk) 04:21, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Three (3) RMs (1, 2 & 3) have been (already) done for similar but different titles. If 162 etc. answers my question, de-list as withdrawn and I'll start an RfC on it like Gonnym stated in those RMs. Intrisit (talk) 12:49, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Three RMs that should've been relisted for further participation or closed as "no consensus" once the arguably WP:Canvassed participant was discounted don't exactly strongly support a broad renaming of all related articles. RachelTensions (talk) 15:00, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Intrisit See discussion on previous request RachelTensions (talk) 15:02, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Intrisit See discussion on previous request RachelTensions (talk) 15:02, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Intrisit See above requests. C F A 17:34, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The recent trend of bands YELLING their names in all caps is usually a publicity tactic that causes great consternation around here. Whenever I get something in the mail my name is printed in uppercase but that doesn't mean my name is "stylized in all caps" for official purposes. Unless there is evidence that this band's name is an acronym for a longer four-word name, the article title can stay as-is. See also Flo (group) as a possible precedent. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:45, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, unless like mentioned, if it's an acronym, otherwise, I !vote notdone. - FlightTime (open channel) 17:01, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Shawnbrescia Search shows that current name is also commonly used. Full RM might be needed ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:53, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Where are you seeing H. alba used? The only case I can find is BioLib, which changed the page after the Wikipedia page for H. alba was created. Also, even if H. alba is used by secondary sources, the rules of scientific nomenclature forbid renaming of species unless it is done in a peer-reviewed journal, which I can find no evidence of. Shawnbrescia (talk) 15:14, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator needed

[edit]
Edit this section only if your request requires an administrator. Usually, do so if the page has been fully protected or move protected (see this guide to which moves need administrators). Place your request in another section if it only requires a page mover.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requested_moves/Technical_requests&oldid=1266492864"