Wikipedia:Requested moves/Current discussions: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Updating requested pagemoves list
lower
Line 16: Line 16:
** [[Fascist Italy]] → {{no redirect|Fascist Italy (disambiguation)}}
** [[Fascist Italy]] → {{no redirect|Fascist Italy (disambiguation)}}


* ''([[Talk:Palestinian genocide accusation#Requested move 16 November 2023|Discuss]])'' – '''[[:Palestinian genocide accusation]] → [[Genocide Allegations in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict]]''' – According to reliable sources as stated in the article itself; both Israeli and Palestinian sources frequently accuse each other of genocide or genocidal intention, both are covered in this page. For example several Palestinian charters or former charters, political figures and leadership have made declarations described as genocidal threats to Israelis and Jews at large. In order to gain objectivity, article name ought to changed as it will better reflect the diverse sources. Neutrality (NPOV) will be better served by such an article. [[User:Homerethegreat|Homerethegreat]] ([[User talk:Homerethegreat|talk]]) 11:09, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
* ''([[Talk:Palestinian genocide accusation#Requested move 16 November 2023|Discuss]])'' – '''[[:Palestinian genocide accusation]] → [[Genocide allegations in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict]]''' – According to reliable sources as stated in the article itself; both Israeli and Palestinian sources frequently accuse each other of genocide or genocidal intention, both are covered in this page. For example several Palestinian charters or former charters, political figures and leadership have made declarations described as genocidal threats to Israelis and Jews at large. In order to gain objectivity, article name ought to changed as it will better reflect the diverse sources. Neutrality (NPOV) will be better served by such an article. [[User:Homerethegreat|Homerethegreat]] ([[User talk:Homerethegreat|talk]]) 11:09, 16 November 2023 (UTC)


* ''([[Talk:Meta#Requested move 16 November 2023|Discuss]])'' – '''[[:Meta]] → {{no redirect|Meta (prefix)}}''' – The readership interest in [[Meta Platforms]] dramatically exceeds that of this prefix, and the company operates as "Meta" (since 2021). If there is a [[WP:primary topic]] for "Meta", it is not the prefix. If someone has a suggestion for an alternative disambiguation term (considering the recent practice of using "meta" as a stand-alone word, as in "That's really meta"), that seems worth considering; however, the article does not currently discuss that usage (at least not in the lead section). I don't have an opinion about whether {{-r|Meta (disambiguation)}} should be moved to {{-r|Meta}} or if {{-r|Meta}} should become a "primary redirect" to {{-r|Meta Platforms}} or if {{-r|Meta Platforms}} should be moved to {{-r|Meta}}. —⁠ ⁠[[User:BarrelProof|BarrelProof]] ([[User talk:BarrelProof|talk]]) 10:20, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
* ''([[Talk:Meta#Requested move 16 November 2023|Discuss]])'' – '''[[:Meta]] → {{no redirect|Meta (prefix)}}''' – The readership interest in [[Meta Platforms]] dramatically exceeds that of this prefix, and the company operates as "Meta" (since 2021). If there is a [[WP:primary topic]] for "Meta", it is not the prefix. If someone has a suggestion for an alternative disambiguation term (considering the recent practice of using "meta" as a stand-alone word, as in "That's really meta"), that seems worth considering; however, the article does not currently discuss that usage (at least not in the lead section). I don't have an opinion about whether {{-r|Meta (disambiguation)}} should be moved to {{-r|Meta}} or if {{-r|Meta}} should become a "primary redirect" to {{-r|Meta Platforms}} or if {{-r|Meta Platforms}} should be moved to {{-r|Meta}}. —⁠ ⁠[[User:BarrelProof|BarrelProof]] ([[User talk:BarrelProof|talk]]) 10:20, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:05, 16 November 2023

Shortcuts
This page lists all requests filed or identified as potentially controversial which are currently under discussion.

This list is also available in a page-link-first format and in table format. 47 discussions have been relisted.

November 16, 2023

  • (Discuss) – Fascist Italy (1922–1943) → Fascist Italy – The name "Fascist Italy" is only used in two pages, this and the disambiguation page. Except the disambiguation page only has two (three if you count Italian Fascism at the bottom) links, and the second one doesn't even have "Fascist Italy" in the name. Since "Fascist Italy" is a much simpler title, I request that, potentially under WP:COMMONNAME, this page be moved to "Fascist Italy", and the disambiguation page be moved to "Fascist Italy (disambiguation)" or even deleted altogether, as it seems pretty redundant since the links "Italian Social Republic" and "Italian Fascism" can simply be placed at the top of the page like: "This article is about the Italian state from 1922 to 1943. For the puppet state of Nazi Germany, see Italian Social Republic. For Italian fascism in general, see Italian Fascism." This move is different from the two moves before requesting to move this page back to "Kingdom of Italy under Fascism", so the reasons for opposing those requests should probably not be used here, since this move is to a different name. Altendo 13:30, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Palestinian genocide accusation → Genocide allegations in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict – According to reliable sources as stated in the article itself; both Israeli and Palestinian sources frequently accuse each other of genocide or genocidal intention, both are covered in this page. For example several Palestinian charters or former charters, political figures and leadership have made declarations described as genocidal threats to Israelis and Jews at large. In order to gain objectivity, article name ought to changed as it will better reflect the diverse sources. Neutrality (NPOV) will be better served by such an article. Homerethegreat (talk) 11:09, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Meta → Meta (prefix) – The readership interest in Meta Platforms dramatically exceeds that of this prefix, and the company operates as "Meta" (since 2021). If there is a WP:primary topic for "Meta", it is not the prefix. If someone has a suggestion for an alternative disambiguation term (considering the recent practice of using "meta" as a stand-alone word, as in "That's really meta"), that seems worth considering; however, the article does not currently discuss that usage (at least not in the lead section). I don't have an opinion about whether Meta (disambiguation) should be moved to Meta or if Meta should become a "primary redirect" to Meta Platforms or if Meta Platforms should be moved to Meta. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 10:20, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Syrian Football Federation → Syrian Football Association – The officially shortened code name of the Syrian federation is the SFA, standing for Syrian Football Association, and the badge of the Syrian federation also written as SFA. However, the article's name is Syrian Football Federation, which is SFF. This doesn't make sense at all. HiddenFace101 (talk) 09:46, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Ashley Lawrence (soccer) → Ashley Lawrence – Ashley Lawrence the soccer player has 162,377 pageviews in the past 5 years. Ashley Lawrence the musician has 6,504. That's 25 times the amount for the soccer player. It was the correct decision when her page was created and she was not yet famous, but since then she has become the clear primary topic, and doesn't need soccer in the parenthesis. Most professional international footballers are the primary topic for their name, so I think this is consistent. The other Ashley Laurence spells her name differently. We could put a notice on top directing to that Ashley Laurence. Helpfulwikieditoryay (talk) 08:17, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 15, 2023

  • (Discuss) – Leptoteuthis → Leptotheuthis – "Leptoteuthis" is an unjustified emendation of Leptotheuthis, and this article was originally under the correct original spelling. Someone in 2012 incorrectly moved it to the wrong spelling and created a redirect at Leptotheuthis, which is now blocking me from moving the article back to the correct spelling. Authoritative sources and recent authors (e.g., [2], [3], [4]) use the correct, original spelling. Dyanega (talk) 22:13, 15 November 2023 (UTC) Dyanega (talk) 23:04, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Kirovske, Donetsk Oblast → Khrestivka – "Khrestivka" is the clear WP:COMMONNAME. Compare Google results: Kirovske: * Web (262 raw results) * News (4 raw results) * Books (no meaningful results) Khrestivka: * Web (12,100 raw results) * News (6 raw results) * Books (no meaningful results) The difference in proportion in the number of raw web results is a gigantic 46x. And this doesn't even take into account that many of the "Kirovske" results are actually false positives and are referring to the unrelated Kirovske, Crimea and Kirovske Raion. The results aren't just garbage data, either - I've gone through both results lists and found that they have a roughly equal ratio of high-quality written sources to low-quality autogenerated stuff, so my "46x" assertion still stands. One can further observe that in the news results, all three of the sources using "Kirovske" (not counting the Kyiv Independent article which is about the one in Crimea) are from the low-quality source Euromaidan Press, which has had articles that are just transcriptions of videos by Ukrainian YouTube milbloggers. On the other hand, "Khrestivka" is used by high-quality sources like the ISW and international publications. Khrestivka is also the official legal name used by the Ukrainian government which is overwhelmingly internationally recognized as the legitimate government of Donetsk Oblast. I think overall, this evidence shows that the title should be "Khrestivka". HappyWith (talk) 21:24, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Telmanove → Boikivske – I did some research via Google results to find a WP:COMMONNAME here. In normal web search, when I search Boikivske/Boykivske [5] vs Telmanove [6] I find that the names are roughly even in terms of raw results (279 vs 288 results), though many of the "Telmanove" sources are referring to the town in a historical sense, or saying "Boikivske, former(ly) Telmanove" or are quoting DPR officials, which makes them not count here. When it comes to international organiations, they seem to noticeably prefer Boikivske/Boykivske. These are the closest thing to indicators of "official" names we will get - especially given the fact that the town doesn't really show up in English-language sources at all outside of the context of international orgs covering the war. When it comes to news sources,[7][8] it's roughly 50/50, with too little data to really determine anything. Same goes for books.[9][10] There seems to be no clear WP:COMMONNAME in English here. We should, in that case, stick to Boikivske, the name used by the legitimate Ukrainian government of the town, per WP:UAPLACE. Also, the most reputable sources we have are ones that use language indicating Boikivske is the more "official" or legitimate name. There are, meanwhile, zero English-language sources that treat "Telmanove" as an official name past 2016. As far as I can tell, there are essentially zero sources that ever mention either "Boikivske Raion" or "Telmanove Raion" (including permutations with "district", etc) in English past 2016, indicating even less of an extant COMMONNAME for that administrative unit. Thus per WP:CONSISTENCY, if we move Telmanove, we should also move the associated raion page. HappyWith (talk) 22:18, 5 November 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Polyamorph (talk) 18:51, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Friuli Venezia Giulia → Friuli-Venezia Giulia – As anyone can see above, the previous three requested moves did not show strong support for the current name, "Friuli Venezia Giulia". After an interesting discussion on the issue at Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks#Friuli Venezia Giulia, I am proposing once again to move the article back to its original and most common name, "Friuli-Venezia Giulia". Please note that "Friuli-Venezia Giulia" is not only the most common name, but also the official one. Indeed, the Italian Constitution mentions the region twice and in both cases as "Friuli-Venezia Giulia" (see articles 116 and 131). Moreover, all Italian laws mentioning the region refer to it as "Friuli-Venezia Giulia" (see here). These notably include the ongoing process of reviewing the regional statute (see here). Finally, the official version of the latter, according to the Italian Government, features "Friuli-Venezia Giulia" (see here) and, interestingly enough, also the regional council has the hyphen in its online (see articles 1 and the following). Moving the article back to "Friuli-Venezia Giulia" would match the names of the other two regions with composite names, Emilia-Romagna and Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol. The three regions are composed of two historically distinct entities, in our case Friuli and Venezia Giulia. It is no surprise then that the it.Wikipedia article is named "Friuli-Venezia Giulia" and that all the largest Wikipedias (es.Wikipedia, pt.Wikipedia, fr.Wikipedia, de.Wikipedia, etc.) feature articles on the subject with names including the hyphen. -- Checco (talk) 14:14, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Al-Shifa Hospital siege → ? – When reliable sources are discussing the claim that this hospital is under siege they generally attribute this claim outside of headlines - which, per WP:HEADLINES, are not reliable and cannot be used as the basis for an article. As such, our current position of putting this claim in Wikivoice is an WP:NPOV violation, and means we are taking a partisan position that is not backed by reliable sources. For example, we have two sources in the lede to support the claim Al-Shifa Hospital ... is under siege, the Washington Post and the Guardian. The former's only mention of a siege outside of the headline is On Friday, at least six hospitals in Gaza City reported being under siege or close to heavy urban combat, while the latter's is An Israeli officer, Colonel Moshe Tetro, confirmed to Reuters that there were clashes outside the hospital but denied that al-Shifa was under siege or direct attack. Neither of these are claims from either source that the hospital is under siege. Reviewing every other sources in the article, only two agencies - out of dozens - make the claim in their own voice that the hospital is under siege; Al Jazeera and The New Arab. Most either don't use the word "siege" in the body or attribute it; for example, Reuters attributes it to Ashraf Al-Qidra, who represents the health ministry in Hamas-controlled Gaza and CNN did similar, attributing it to A senior official at the Hamas-run health ministry in Gaza. Egypt Today attributes it to Minister of Health Mai Al-Kaila, and Newsweek attributes it to Health officials in Gaza. Others, like the Hill, only mention the claim that the hospital is under siege in the context of Israeli denials of that claim. I'm not certain what the best title for this article would be - perhaps Al-Shifa Hospital conflict - but most would be better and more compliant with our core policies than the current title. BilledMammal (talk) 13:49, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 14, 2023

  • (Discuss) – La Capitale (company) → Beneva – Previous move was not done correctly. The title of article remains La Capitale which is defunct, while Beneva is the redirect page. It should be the other way around. Kazuha1029 (talk) 00:43, 7 November 2023 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). 2pou (talk) 18:24, 7 November 2023 (UTC) — Relisting.  — Amakuru (talk) 17:33, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Nirim massacre → Nirim attack – None of the English sources for the page call the event a massacre; instead they call it an attack, and indeed, it appears to be an attack that was fended off. There is no obvious source-based, policy-based or description-based reason for the language used in the current title. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:08, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 13, 2023

  • (Discuss) – Xian Y-7 → Xi'an Y-7 – WP:CONSISTENT with name of the aircraft company, also WP:PINYIN: the apostrophe in Xi'an is needed to mark the syllable boundary. Otherwise, it looks like xian, which is a valid, but different word. Some English sources unfamiliar with how pinyin works omit the apostrophe. Wikipedia sometimes uses a non-pinyin transliteration if it's common enough (i.e., Chiang Kai-shek rather than Jiang Jieshi), but this is not an alternative transliteration, it's just a very common misspelling. The fact that it's repeated by some reliable sources doesn't mean we should replicate the error. SilverStar54 (talk) 19:56, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Lutung → Trachypithecus – Lutung is not the term for all members of the genus Trachypithecus, it refers only to certain members of the genus whose common names have the term "lutung", whereas other members are called "langurs" (shared with Semnopithecus) or "leaf monkeys." If we look at Google Scholar results, it's clear that members of the genus are not defined by a single common name but is just referred to as a colobine. Even one source from 2022 suggests that T. germaini is referred to as either the Indochinese silvered langur or the Indochinese Lutung.1 Therefore, Trachypithecus is the most suitable article name for the page. PrimalMustelid (talk) 16:24, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Julia Baird → Julia Baird (teacher) – No primary topic vs Julia Baird (journalist). Pageviews show John Lennon's sister ahead by a ratio of 3:2 to the journalist, and the journalist exceeds daily page views relatively frequently. The journalist has been edited more much frequently of late. Can't see an argument for favouring John Lennon's sister on the grounds of long term significance. ITBF (talk) 15:35, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Nahal Oz massacre → Nahal Oz attack – The title of this article is out of step with the contents it describes (WP:NCE) and the sources (WP:NPOV). The bulk of what this page describes is an attack on military base, and the bulk of the casualties it describes are military personnel - and I do not see any sources using the word "massacre" to describe the events at the military base. The rest of the material is about a related attack on the nearby kibbutz, but even in the sources for this the word "massacre" is not obviously forthcoming. The only extant source that uses "massacre" in its headline does so, in the body, in reference to the festival massacre. Iskandar323 (talk) 11:11, 6 November 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Reading Beans (talk) 11:45, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Lenina, Luhansk Oblast → Mariia, Ukraine – This settlement is completely unknown in English-language sources. Searching "Lenina, Luhansk Oblast" (without the quotes) gives me literally zero sources that aren't just autogenerated websites that scrape data from open-source geographic databases. The only results are about streets with the name unrelated to the settlement. Because there is no English WP:COMMONNAME, we should use the official name of the town given to it by the Ukrainian government with the national transliteration system per WP:UAPLACE. See consensus in similar discussions at Talk:Khrustalnyi and Talk:Bunhe for precedents. HappyWith (talk) 22:39, 4 November 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Jenks24 (talk) 10:10, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – R. Charleroi S.C. → ? – As we said before, the current title is far from convincing. There is no new title assigned. What do you suggest? Dl.thinker (talk) 20:59, 5 November 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Jenks24 (talk) 10:03, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Lago di Mezzola → Lake Mezzola – How does this article meet WP:COMMONNAME, several large lakes in Italy make use of the name in English; why does this lake and some others remain in Italian? I will like an editor to share me the link to Italian naming conventions on Wikipedia for geographic articles. Jõsé hola 08:07, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 12, 2023

  • (Discuss) – Pradal serey → Kun Khmer – I initially moved this pace per a WP:RMT request however after another user followed up on it stating it was controversial I decided it does need an RM. The original reason for the RM/TR was 'The term "pradal serey" has become obsolete in both Khmer and international literature. The inscription of the sport in the SEA Games 2023 as well as the name of the official federation (Kun Khmer International Federation) under the name "Kun Khmer" makes it legitimate to consider that Kun Khmer is now the reference term to design Khmer Boxing)'. Zippybonzo | talk | contribs (he|she|they) 21:26, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Konaseema district → Dr. B. R. Ambedkar Konaseema district – Kindly move the "Konaseema district" page to "Dr. B. R. Ambedkar Konaseema district" to accurately reflect the official name of the district. Previously some users tried to move the page when its under proposal which caused the error for me while moving. But now its official title of the district. Thanks RevenueDPT✉ 13:34, 11 November 2023 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). – robertsky (talk) 07:22, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Sverdlove → Kholodne, Donetsk Raion, Donetsk Oblast – I decided to make this a (limited) multimove because I realized - belatedly - that it's pretty annoying to have numerous move discussions where the exact same arguments are being repeated in parallel. The name "Sverdlove" is completely unheard of in English-language sources past 2016. See this Google research [13]. I get exactly zero results with Google Books and News. Same goes for Kholodne.[14] For "Voikovskyi", the same results were found, with zero human-written English coverage.[15] I also searched for all the spelling variations I could think of and still got nothing. (I didn't bother trying to search for sources with the new name because there are so many settlements with that name in Ukraine that I thought it would be basically impossible to narrow the search to just the one in Donetsk Raion.) In the absence of the old name being the WP:COMMONNAME, we should use the official name given to these settlements by the Ukrainian government that is legally recognized as having sovereignty over it. See WP:UAPLACE, and precedents at Talk:Buran, Ukraine and Talk:Sofiivka, Horlivka Raion, Donetsk Oblast. HappyWith (talk) 04:16, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 11, 2023

  • (Discuss) – Sir David's long-beaked echidna → Zaglossus attenboroughi – All of the supposed "common names" listed in the lead are not widely used. The titular Sir David's has only been used 3 times [16]. "Attenborough's long-beaked echidna" has more uses, but has only been used 7 times. [17], and the cyclops one has only been used twice [18]. In cases where there is no clear common name, the species name should be preferred. Hemiauchenia (talk) 22:19, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Stepanakert → Khankendi – Due to recent events, control of the city and region has shifted. Reflecting this, English-language sources have now started using Khankendi as the WP:COMMONNAME for the city instead of Stepanakert. This is demonstrated in sources like the Associated Press, Al Jazeera, the BBC, France 24, and more. Remember that due to WP:NAMECHANGES, extra weight is given here. Also at times, English-language sources use both names of the city at the same time, but very rarely is the city only referred to as Stepanakert since Azerbaijan has taken control. After all, it is fully integrated into the country today, and I think that sources have reflected this change in the way they refer to the city. Paul Vaurie (talk) 19:48, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Te Kāhui Tātari Ture Criminal Cases Review Commission → ? – As per @Clooless I think that having the English text placed before the Māori text or the removal of Māori text in the title would be more in line with what other crown entities with Māori names do on there Wikipedia articles such as New Zealand Law Commission and Commerce Commission which have their Māori names in the infobox and lead section rather than the title. I am not confident about this though, so I would like someone else to comment on this. (Originally this request was for the page to be renamed to "The New Zealand Criminal Cases Review Commission - Te Kahui Tatari Ture" but I have decided to edit the request and change it to a question mark as other suggestions in the comments were better) CoderThomasB (talk) 10:48, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Wikipedia:Vital articles → Wikipedia:Essential articles – I saw that there seemed to be very little discussion from the archives that discusses what this list should be called. Given that this change would likely be controversial, I think discussing on the talk page is sensible. I have brainstormed some ideas of what the best title for the list could be. Some of the possible names I came up with would be WP:Essential articles, WP:Essential topics, WP:Important articles, WP:Important topics, WP:Core articles, WP:Core topics. My preference out of all those names would be essential articles or topics since it seems to serve as a gateway of importance of topics. I encourage you to think about other names for this project even if you think the current title of vital articles seems to serve its purpose well. This is the process called improving. I look forward to hearing your comments. Interstellarity (talk) 01:24, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 10, 2023

  • (Discuss) – Saplings → Saplings (novel) – WP:ASTONISH, DAB from Sapling, The Saplings and Saplings (Weeds). The novel has 51 views but the film has 22, the sculpture (which may be a PTM) has 23 and the plant has 246 despite is being a redirect, the target Tree has 51,580[[22]]. Google only returns one result for the novel, Images only returns the plant and Books returns the novel as the 1st result but only once it appears. By long-term significance the plant is clearly primary. Per Wikipedia:WikiProject Bluelink patrol/Archive 2022 there were 13 links for the plant while there are now only 5 mainspace links which suggests despite the bias of the title being about the novel users still link to the plant more often. Either the title should become a DAB using the plural as there aren't any singular matches apart from the countable noun or the title can redirect to the same target as the singular. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:49, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – New Zealand merganser → Auckland Island merganser – New Zealand merganser is the IOC name.[1] However, this appears to be out-of-date. New Zealand Birds Online says, "In addition to the Auckland Island merganser, there was a separate merganser species on the Chatham Islands (Mergus milleneri). Merganser fossils from mainland New Zealand cannot yet be assigned to either of the named species."[2] The authoritative Checklist of the Birds of New Zealand (5th edition, 2022) says, "The English name for this species should be Auckland Island merganser rather than New Zealand merganser, following M. Williams et al. (2014). The only historical records are from Auckland and Adams Islands in the Auckland Islands / Maukahuka; the last specimens were apparently a pair shot on 9 Jan. 1902, and the species is now extinct (Kear & Scarlett 1970; M. Williams 2012). Holocene bones found on Enderby Island (Tennyson 2020a). The specific identity of North Island, South Island, and Stewart Island / Rakiura Mergus bones is unresolved (M. Williams et al. 2014)."[3] The New Zealand Birds Online page cited above also says, "A total of 27 specimens are known to have been obtained from the Auckland Islands. Merganser bones found in natural deposits and Maori middens at sites on North, South, and Stewart Islands are possibly referable to the same species."[4]

References

  1. ^ "Screamers, ducks, geese, swans – IOC World Bird List". www.worldbirdnames.org. Retrieved 2023-11-10.
  2. ^ "Auckland Island merganser | Miuweka | New Zealand Birds Online". www.nzbirdsonline.org.nz. Retrieved 2023-11-10.
  3. ^ Miskelly, Colin & Forsdick, Natalie & Gill, Brian & Palma, Ricardo & Rawlence, Nicolas & Tennyson, Alan. (2022). CHECKLIST OF THE BIRDS OF NEW ZEALAND. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/361824003_CHECKLIST_OF_THE_BIRDS_OF_NEW_ZEALAND
  4. ^ "Auckland Island merganser | Miuweka | New Zealand Birds Online". www.nzbirdsonline.org.nz. Retrieved 2023-11-10.
Columbianmammoth (talk) 17:07, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Air Balloon (pub) → Air Balloon, Birdlip – This was moved without a discussion recently to this title. However, since the article has been listed on the main page with no objects to the title, I think this falls under the proviso of "Use this process if there is any reason to believe a move would be contested." and we should discuss it here. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:21, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 9, 2023

  • (Discuss) – Fireworks → Firework – Per WP:PLURAL, both Britannica and Oxford Dictionary use "firework" unlike bacteria and Oxford Dictionary notes "Bacteria" should always be used with a plural verb. Yes its more common to have multiple but you can easily talk about a single firework such as someone throwing a single firework at someone or Firework organisers. And there are many things like Shoe or Sock that are more commonly in the plural but we tile singular. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:49, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Vusi Ncogo → Vusi Mthimkhulu – Move without leaving a redirect please. I can't find any reliable sources that use 'Vusi Ncogo' as his name. This footballer gets a decent amount of coverage but this is all under Vusi Mthimkhulu, which appears to be the correct name for the footballer. 'Vusi Ncogo' gets 207 Google results, all of which seem to be Wikipedia mirror sites (I include FBRef and Playmaker Stats as such). 'Vusi Mthimkhulu' gets 11800 Google results, a lot of which are reliable sources like Sowetan Live, SNL24, Football Database and World Football. The same article creator seems to have deliberately created a lot of articles under incorrect names. This also includes Yanga Gcilisha whose real name is Mapogo Maphakane, Gastón Rapolo whose real name is Gastón Silva and James Agrono, whose real name I wasn't able to establish. Those articles have notability concerns, though, so I have sent them all to AfD. Mthimkhulu seems to be at least slightly notable so a move without redirect would be preferred. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 19:06, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Montichelvo → Montitxelvo – See the talk page. This was the stable name of the article for 12 years until a user unilaterally changed it less than a week ago. As the sources provided in the discussion show, English language sources predominantly use "Montitxelvo". Fromcs (talk) 17:57, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Elapsed listings

Shortcut
The 7-day listing period has elapsed. Items below may be closed if there's a consensus, or if discussion has run its course and consensus could not be achieved.
  • (Discuss) – Dêqên Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture → Diqing Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture – TL;DR: Per WP:COMMONNAME. In both cases, Dêqên, with or without the circumflexes, is not the common name. Using Google Ngrams, compare Diqing with Deqen, Diqing Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture with Deqen Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, Diqin with Deqen and Deqin County with Deqen County (Dêqên does not have enough mentions to even appear on the graph). Using other search engines and tools like Google Search or Google Scholar will return similar results and the same conclusions. The long explanation, including the above section titled "Diqing, not Dêqên": The main concern regarding such a move seems to be the perceived erasure of Tibetan names. In these specific cases, however, this is untrue. As I explained in detail in a section above this proposal, the borders of this specific prefecture and county were not drawn by Tibetans, but rather the government of the People's Republic of China. As such, Tibetans did not have a name for this specific area of Tibet, or more specifically, what has traditionally been regarded as the eastern peripheries of Kham. When the PRC government created the prefecture and county, it was their officials, specifically their appointed governor, who decided on the names Diqing and Deqin, and the Tibetan name Deqen. Deqen has never been the English name of either the prefecture or county, and most certainly not with the circumflexes (i.e. Dêqên). Some editors may believe (mistakenly) that the story of these two articles is as follows: * The name in English has been Dêqên, and then some editors (including myself) changed the name to the Mandarin pinyin spellings, perhaps in an attempt to erase Tibetan presence on Wikipedia. * However, the actual course of events is that Diqing Prefecture was created first, and then an editor thought it would be more appropriate to have the article titled Dêqên Prefecture. This was an error on their part because not only was their reasoning non-policy based and contradictory to WP:COMMONNAME, they also failed to fulfill their objective. If their objective was to increase Tibetan presence, why bother coining a new spelling on a Chinese government creation (the prefecture) using a Chinese government spelling (Dêqên is from Tibetan pinyin)? * When Dêqên County was created, Diqing Prefecture was under its current name (Dêqên Prefecture), and so the article's creator most likely followed the existing article's title while ignoring the English spelling in the only English source they provided. Even if we disregard site policy (WP:COMMONNAME) and the etymological history of the prefecture and county, I would still advocate this move because I make a moral distinction between the naming of something traditionally a part of Tibet or Tibetan culture, and a Chinese government-created political division in Tibet. Renaming Lhasa "Chengguan" would be ridiculous because, even if Chengguan was hypothetically the common name (it isn't), the name Lhasa itself bares a profound historical and cultural legacy that even the Chinese government recognises. It was a name decided upon by Tibetans before the entrance of the Chinese, and so changing it would raise serious moral questions. Diqing and Deqin, however, are creations of the Chinese government. A non-Tibetan and non-Chinese third-party unilaterally deciding to use the Tibetan pinyin spelling does not add Tibetan voice; it introduces a new spelling that has not widely been used (again, in English). Personally, I only care about site policy and reader accessibility, and WP:COMMONNAME is a policy that I feel upholds the latter. To those opposed who may have moral qualms about such a move, I invite your input, but I hope I have adequately explained my reasoning for the proposal and why I do not feel that such a move is problematic. Yue🌙 06:09, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Missouri Executive Order 44 → Mormon Extermination Order – I believe the title "Mormon Extermination Order" better fulfills the criteria outlined in Wikipedia:Article titles. # Recognizability and Naturalness: The use of the term "Mormon Extermination Order" extends beyond academic circles and has permeated popular culture, literature, and media. Moving would make it easier for readers to find and access the article, since it is a more intuitive and recognizable term # Precision: "Mormon Extermination Order" accurately describes the content and significance of the historical event. The order called for the expulsion, or extermination, of Mormons in Missouri. # Concision: The title "Missouri Executive Order 44" does not clearly distinguish the article from other executive orders issued in Missouri, none of which are notable enough for an article. "Mormon Extermination Order" specifically identifies the historical setting the event took place in. Gottagitgud (talk) 21:47, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Backlog

Shortcut
Elapsed listings fall into the backlog after 24 hours. Consider relisting 8-day-old discussions with minimal participation.
  • (Discuss) – State actor → State action – This concept in U.S. constitutional law is most commonly known as "state action" or the "state action doctrine" (as can be seen in the article's references). Moreover, "state actor" is also used outside the context of U.S. law as the opposite of a non-state actor, which is a phrase commonly used in international relations and national security. So this is the WP:COMMONNAME and more WP:PRECISE. SilverLocust 💬 20:31, 31 October 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Lightoil (talk) 14:51, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

References generally should not appear here. Use {{reflist-talk}} in the talk page section with the requested move to show references there.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requested_moves/Current_discussions&oldid=1185407333"