Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by DrVogel (talk | contribs) at 23:04, 5 September 2022 (→‎Uncontroversial technical requests: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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.

Technical requests

Uncontroversial technical requests

Administrator needed

Contested technical requests

  • Mari native religion (currently a redirect to Mari religion)  Mari religion (move · discuss) – Per WP:CONCISE - the proposed name is already a redirect to the article. Cinderella157 (talk) 04:08, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I think this one makes sense, and it's entirely possible that there may have been support for it if anyone had proposed this alternative title at the RM that was closed last week. But because of that RM, we can't process this request as uncontroversial. Dr. Vogel (talk) 12:13, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    That RM ended only about 14 hours ago. The suggested title seems reasonable to me, but was not the title chosen by the consensus in that RM. It may be more prudent to hold a (new RM) discussion about the further proposed refinement of the title. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 16:39, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Eh... I closed this RM and moved to the current title by consensus. Why not just open another RM? Unless I remember it correctly, reopening the current RM would mean that I will have to revert the move. – robertsky (talk) 18:28, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Natatorium (currently a redirect to Swimming pool)  Indoor pool (currently a redirect instead to Swimming pool) (move · discuss) – "Natatorium" is a very rare term not normally used except in the names of a few specific buildings, and it can also refer to an outdoor swimming pool. Espoo (talk) 08:14, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Until your recent edits, Indoor pool redirected to Swimming pool. What you're doing here is changing the scope of the Natatorium article. I'm tempted to revert it all, since I don't think it actually improves any of the affected articles. 162 etc. (talk) 16:33, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Both articles seem to treat "natatorium" as primarily as distinct facility (a separate building or relatively elaborate wing or extension) rather than a generic term for any indoor pool. The Swimming pool article repeatedly emphasizes this, referring to "buildings such as natatoriums and leisure centers" and saying "If a pool is in a separate building, the building may be called a natatorium." None of the examples in the Natatorium article are ordinary indoor pools such as one might encounter in a typical hotel or luxurious private home. I also somewhat wonder whether that article is needed at all. It almost seems to be about the word natatorium as much as it is about the facility itself – e.g. most of the article is devoted to the use of the term as primarily a North American phenomenon, and the examples and "see also" topics are primarily from the United States. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 16:59, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Chessmaster 2000  The Chessmaster 2000 (currently a redirect back to Chessmaster 2000) (move · discuss) – Full, common title DigitalIceAge (talk) 02:35, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Whether or not to include "The" at the beginning of a title is a common and difficult question on Wikipedia per WP:THE. The OP here has not provided any evidence for the assertion that this topic meets the criteria for prefixing with "The". I personally don't think it does. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 16:42, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    DigitalIceAge This should go to a full WP:RM if want to pursue it. -Kj cheetham (talk) 18:41, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Io Shirai (currently a redirect to Iyo Sky)  Iyo Sky (move · discuss) – Shirai's ring name in WWE has changed to Iyo Sky. SeosiWrestling (talk) 07:54, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Kay Lee Ray  Alba Fyre (currently a redirect back to Kay Lee Ray) (move · discuss) – Ray's ring name in WWE has changed to Alba Fyre. SeosiWrestling (talk) 07:54, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I've moved the other three wrestlers, but Iyo Sky and Alba Fyre have previously been contested. I agree the names have changed and they should be moved but I'll leave these two for a second opinion. Polyamorph (talk) 09:16, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, I understand. SeosiWrestling (talk) 17:23, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I've had an independent look, and like @Polyamorph, I'm a bit apprehensive about these. I'd be less apprehensive if the sources cited by the articles actually used the new names. For the first one, there are only like a couple sources in the middle of 300+, and for the second one, there are no sources using the new name. Dr. Vogel (talk) 14:31, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    One has been moved before (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&logid=130649671) and one already has a RM open, so neither are simple technical requests. -Kj cheetham (talk) 20:25, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requests to revert undiscussed moves