Jump to content

Talk:Muhammed Khan Tumani

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

move[edit]

What is the source for the name that is used now? After carefully evaluating the sources in the article and multiple secondary sources from search results. I plan to move the article to Muhammed Khan Tumani. Any objection? IQinn (talk) 06:24, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see the need to move this article to a name that is not confusing or misleading. I left an announcement on this talk page with the suggested name and left enough time for other editors.
IMO that should be enough to perform the move now under established Wikipedia editing practice. Nevertheless another editor demanded that i provide him with a detailed explanation for each intended page move in advanced. I do not think that is necessary because there is time enough for other editors to check the suggested new name and to start an argument base discussion if she/he disagrees.
Here are a few sources and arguments that could help other editors to form their opinion over the suggested move. These sources are also easily accessible by putting the new name into the search engine together with a few Guantanamo keywords or keywords related to the individuals live.
The old name is IMO based on documents provided by OARDEC (The United States military body responsible for organising Combatant Status Review Tribunals (CSRT) at the Guantanamo Bay detention camps). As OARDEC has frequently given multiple different names or multiple different spelling versions for one prisoner name. OARDEC provides us here also with various versions of the name of "Captive 312". I doubt that OARDEC can be seen as a reliable source for the correct name or correct spelling of the name of the individual of this article.
The new name Muhammed Khan Tumani i think is the right choice because it is based on reliable sources:
and more...
I strongly believe this article should be moved to Muhammed Khan Tumani. And i think there was more than enough time and information for any other editor to form their own opinion. IQinn (talk) 03:57, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No objection since weeks. Perform the move now. IQinn (talk) 10:44, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]