Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests
Appearance
The discussion process is used for potentially controversial moves. If any of the following apply to a desired move, treat it as potentially controversial:
- There is an existing article (not just a redirect) at the target title;
- There has been any past debate about the best title for the page;
- Someone could reasonably disagree with the move.
If a desired move is uncontroversial and technical in nature (e.g. spelling), please feel free to move the page yourself. If the page has recently been moved without discussion, you may revert the move and initiate a discussion on its talk page. In either case, if you are unable to complete the move, request it below.
- To list a technical request, add the following code at the top of the subsection Uncontroversial technical requests below:
{{subst:RMassist|<!--old page name, without brackets-->|<!--requested name, without brackets-->|reason= <!--reason for move-->}}
- This will automatically insert a bullet and include your signature. Do not edit the article's talk page.
- If you object to a proposal listed in the uncontroversial technical requests section, please move it to the Contested technical requests section.
- If your technical request is contested by another editor, please remove it from the contested technical requests section and follow the instructions at Requesting potentially controversial moves.
- Alternatively, if the only obstacle to an uncontroversial move is another page in the way, you can ask for the deletion of the other page. This may apply, for example, if the other page is currently a redirect to the article to be moved, a redirect with no incoming links, or an unnecessary disambiguation page with a minor edit history. To request the other page be deleted, add the following code to the top of the page that is in the way:
{{db-move|<!--page to be moved here-->|<!--reason for move-->}}
- This will list the undesired page for deletion under criterion for speedy deletion G6. If the page is a redirect, place the code above the redirection. For a list of articles being considered for uncontroversial speedy deletion, see Category:Candidates for uncontroversial speedy deletion.
Uncontroversial technical requests
- Jess Morgan (folk and trance singer) → Jess Morgan (move · discuss) – If the above request is successful, this page could be moved as well. Will add "For …, see …" to each article to avoid any confusion. Thanks! – Jonny (talk) 04:17, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- Object to speedy move the target is a disambiguation page, so this needs a full discussion, not an RMTR -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 05:13, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- M5 Half-track (APC) → M5 Half-track (move · discuss) – The "(APC)" element in the title is superfluous – – Nohomers48 (talk • contribs) 22:40, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
- Comment M5 Half Track, M5 Half-track, M5 halftrack all currently redirect to M3 Half-track, of which the M5 is a variant of. If this is moved the other two titles will need to be retargetted -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 05:20, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- Comment isn't this a minor variant? Shouldn't it be merged into M3 Half-track ? (I note that this M5 article is a new article) And the M3 article already contains many variants. -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 05:23, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- Comment M5 Half Track, M5 Half-track, M5 halftrack all currently redirect to M3 Half-track, of which the M5 is a variant of. If this is moved the other two titles will need to be retargetted -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 05:20, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- Michael Hare-Duke → Michael Hare Duke (move · discuss) – The surname of Michael Hare Duke is not hypenated – 86.188.143.201 (talk) 13:04, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
- Comment: There is only one source cited in that article that is an online citation that is not a dead link. In that source, published by the institution to which this person was affiliated, the name appears twice and is hyphenated in both places. The article was previously hyphenated, but the hyphen was removed by an anon IP without providing an edit summary at 06:20, 19 July 2012 (UTC). I suggest that there ought to be some source to verify the lack of hyphen before moving the article. It also does not really seem clear whether the article would pass WP:GNG. —BarrelProof (talk) 17:22, 19 December 2014 (UTC)