Wikipedia talk:Requested moves

This is the talk page for discussing Requested moves and anything related to its purposes and tasks.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

WT:RM

NOTE: This is not the place to request moves. Please follow the instructions given on the project page. If you seek instruction on closing existing requests, please see the closing instructions.

To help centralize discussions and keep related topics together, most subpages of Wikipedia:Requested moves that are unused have talk pages that redirect here.

This page has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.

Discussions:

RM, WP:Requested moves → WP:Proposed moves, No consensus, 7 June 2007
RM, WP:Requested moves → WP:Proposed moves, Not moved, 11 February 2018
RM, WP:Requested moves → WP:Articles for renaming, Not moved, 19 September 2018
RM, WP:Requested moves → WP:Requested title changes, Not moved, 22 July 2024

Enter the title (or part of a title) to search for after "intitle:", then click "search"

Try other variants (e.g. "move discussion") to broaden or narrow your search

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36

Administrators' noticeboard/Move requests (2005)
For why RM was created, see:
- requested moves -- policy change?

Archives by date

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Severance Hall

There have been three RMs on the article about a move to Severance Music Center (currently a redirect). I initiated the first two, but had no idea about the third until recently. All three were closed with a maximum of two oppose votes, both of them by either EurekaLott or Necrothesp, and two only have one oppose, by the latter. I was going to relist this, but that would make three of four that I started, so I decided to put my comments here before doing so. I didn't use WP:MR because all three closers have been different editors. As to RSs, I believe that the last RM, again the one that I didn't start, has an adequate amount of them as examples. I encourage the two opposing voters to comment here. Mapsax (talk) 00:54, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[Followup] Apparently, this is the wrong place for this. Please let me know where a more appropriate place is. Mapsax (talk) 00:16, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Re the clerking bot at RMTR

I mentioned a long(ish) time ago about creating a clerking bot, and I am working on it, but I was wondering your thoughts on what the responses from the bot should be for the different occasions. Zippybonzo | talk | contribs (they/them) 17:43, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What would this bot be clerking? Primefac (talk) 11:51, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Primefac completely forgot to mention what the bot would do, but it was discussed a few months ago to clerk WP:RMTR, remove requests after they are moved, and move requests to the admin needed section if the pages are protected. Zippybonzo | talk | contribs (they/them) 12:42, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Link: Wikipedia talk:Requested moves/Archive 35#Bot to clerk RM/TR – DreamRimmer (talk) 14:08, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, right. I have adjusted the header to be more clear. Primefac (talk) 11:53, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Zippybonzo: what do you mean by responses from the bot...for the different occasions? You mean what message the bot should leave on the requester's user talk? Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 00:18, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Basically the message it should leave on the talk page when it's been contested and there's been no action for 72 hours, plus how should it note down that it has moved an request needing an admin to the admin page. Zippybonzo | talk | contribs (they/them) 08:06, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Zippybonzo: As a very rough draft for the first, what about this? Your request at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests has been removed because it remained inactive for seventy-two hours after being contested. If you would like to proceed with your original request, please follow the directions at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Controversial. The third sentence can be something similar to the last sentence of User:Muninnbot/Teahouse archival notification. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:11, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, I’ll note that down when finishing off the bot. Zippybonzo | talk | contribs (they/them) 13:02, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move “Belarusian Peopleʻs Republic” to “Belarusian People's Republic”

I tried to move it a while ago to correct it, and I messed up and used the wrong apostrophe. And I can't fix it. Ironzombie39 (talk) 12:05, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should be sorted. Primefac (talk) 12:15, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move "Mathematical object (philosophy)" back to "Mathematical object"

A user renamed the long-standing "Mathematical object" article to Mathematical object (philosophy) without any discussion, I can't move it back or rename it as the original title was made a redirect to Mathematical object (disambiguation). Farkle Griffen (talk) 15:42, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved Farkle Griffen (talk) 18:39, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move the article of Yifei Ye to Ye Yifei

I want to move the article based on the Chinese name format where the surname placed first. In motorsport, he always called by Yifei Ye than Ye Yifei, but to make it consistent with other Chinese figures, and people his name has to be Ye Yifei. It's not Zedong Mao, it's Mao Zedong for example. Hope someone can accepts the changes. Thank you. Thfeeder (talk) 06:37, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thfeeder, please see WP:RM#CM for how to start a move request at the article's talk page. Primefac (talk) 13:10, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overcomplication

Making move requests is way too overcomplicated, this page should be handled like the protection request page. RaschenTechner (talk) 18:01, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Protections aren't generally controversial, so the format isn't very useful for something that typically requires debate. There is WP:RMTR for uncomplicated moves that no one will object to. Nohomersryan (talk) 16:49, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What I mean is that there isn't an "add topic" button or something like this on this page, unlike the protection request page, you would have to edit the page manually, which you can't do as an IP user, because this page is semi-protected. RaschenTechner (talk) 18:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- There is no reason to edit it. WP:RMTR has no protection. Regular RMs are made on article talk pages and transcribed here. Nohomersryan (talk) 18:50, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  I mean the move request page, not Wikipedia:RMTR. RaschenTechner (talk) 19:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Do you find using a single template on the talk page of an article difficult? See WP:RSPM -- there is only two parameters: the requested new name and your reason. TiggerJay (talk) 21:01, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  But you still need to edit this page, there is no "add topic" button even though there should be one. RaschenTechner (talk) 12:54, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  As Nohomersryan stated, they are very different applications, used in different places. The "add topic" is used on the WP:RMTR page, and that discussion is not included on the article talk page -- its not necessary since it is specifically "discussed on the article talk page". However, by contrast, regular moves are discussed on the talk page, so a simple button on the WP:RM would be impossible to work currently, as it would require backend changes to the Mediawiki software or requiring people to otherwise run untrusted Javascript. However, an example of a tool talk might help you specifically is to look over at Wikipedia:Twinkle and make a request on that talk page. That is a tool that would add an extra navigation tab at the top of your browser that would let you do RMs when viewing the article itself. TiggerJay (talk) 19:24, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move cleanup

Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions § Cleaning up after the move reads:

You should not close any move if you are unwilling to do the necessary clean up tasks described at WP:POSTMOVE

Maybe I just more notice and remember the cases where this isn't done, but to what extent does the community consider this a closer requirement versus some WP:NODEADLINE laundry list that anyone can volunteer to do, not necessarily the closer. I'm trying to have the proper perspective on this. —Bagumba (talk) 04:25, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The line is pretty clear, if an editor wants to close a move, they should be willing to do the postmove cleanup, such as fixing bypass redirects in templates or retargeting links and cleaning up leads.

The only general exception I'd see to that is if some editors in the discussion have volunteered preemptively that they will do some of the cleanup if it's not just ordinary cleanup. Like say an alternative result of a split or so that requires more than routine cleanup. Raladic (talk) 04:34, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My perspective has been that editors should avoid closing articles if they cannot complete the task within a reasonable amount of time, say an hour or so. The exception to this that I can think of have been in RMnac situations where sometimes an experienced editor can perform most (but not all) of the necessary close steps (such as a delay such as waiting for a CSD to make room) or they might be closing the discussion, and then asking requesting a technical move, etc. But in these cases, they should be monitoring for those changes to take place and promptly go about finishing up any cleanup work, which I'd AGF and gracefully give many hours (but not multiple days) for this to be accomplished (e.g. an Admin performs their action while the closer is now asleep). However, at this point, I would say it would be acceptable for another experienced editor to jump in and help out as well with wrapping up the cleanup tasks. However, if any RM closer is consistently dropping the ball with regards to cleanup tasks, do AGF and use their talk page. TiggerJay (talk) 08:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

However, at this point, I would say it would be acceptable for another experienced editor to jump in and help out as well with wrapping up the cleanup tasks: Yeah, I'm sure nobody would mind if a non-closer volunteers to help cleanup. But my original question was about the expectation of closers to cleanup their moves, such as old titles that got usurped or links in navboxes. —Bagumba (talk) 13:21, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]