This page has anadministrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators. This notice will be automatically removed byRMCD bot (talk) when the backlog is cleared.
Requested moves is a process for requesting the retitling (moving) of an article, template, or project page on Wikipedia. For information on retitling files, categories, and other items, see§ When not to use this page.
Anyautoconfirmed user can move a page using the"Move" option in theediting toolbar; seehow to move a page for more information. If you have no reason to expect a dispute concerning a move,be bold and move the page. However, it may not always be possible or desirable to do this:
Technical reasons may prevent a move; for example, a page may already exist at the target title and require deletion, or the page may beprotected from moves. In such cases, see§ Requesting technical moves.
Requests to revert recent, undiscussed, controversial moves may be made atWP:RM/TR. If the new name has not become the stable title, the undiscussed move will be reverted. If the new name has become the stable title, a requested move will be needed to determine the article's proper location.
A pageshould not be moved and a new move discussion should not be opened when there is already an open move request on a talk page. Instead, please participate in the open discussion.
Unregistered and new (not yetautoconfirmed) users are unable to move pages.
Requests are typically processed after seven days. If consensus supports the move at or after this time, a reviewer will perform it. If there is a consensus not to move the page, the request will be closed as "not moved". When consensus remains unclear, the request may be relisted to allow more time, or closed as "no consensus". SeeWikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions for more details on the process.
Wikipedia:Move review can be used to contest the outcome of a move requestas long as all steps are followed. If a discussion on the closer's talk page does not resolve an issue, then a move review will evaluate the close of the move discussion to determine whether or not the contested close was reasonable and consistent with thespirit and intent of common practice, policies, and guidelines.
Moves from draft namespace or user space to article space –Unconfirmed users: add{{subst:submit}} to the top of the article. SeeWikipedia:Articles for creation.Confirmed users: Move the page yourself.
Autoconfirmed editors may move a page without discussion if all of the following apply:
No article exists at the new target title;
There has been no previous discussion about the title of the page that expressed any objection to a new title; and
It seems unlikely that anyone would reasonably disagree with the move.
If you disagree with a prior bold move, and the new title has not beenin place for a long time, you may revert the move yourself. If you cannot revert the move for technical reasons, then you mayrequest a technical move.
If you areunable 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:..."
If you are here because you want an admin to approve of your new article or your proposed page move, you are in the wrong place.
If this isyour first article and you want your draft article moved to themainspace, please submit it for review atArticles for creation, by adding the code{{subst:submit}} to the top of thedraft oruser sandbox page instead of listing it here.
Because you areautoconfirmed,you canmove most pages yourself. Do not request technical assistance on this page if you can do it yourself.
If you needhelp determining whether it's okay to move the page to a different title, then please follow the instructions at the top ofWikipedia:Requested moves.
Please make sure you really need technical assistance before making a request here. In particular, if the target page is a redirect back to the source page that has only one revision,you can usually move the page normally.
To list a technical request:edit theUncontroversial 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 theContested technical requests section, append a note on the request elaborating on why, and sign with ~~~~. Considerpinging 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.
Al-Baqara→Al-BaqarahAl-Baqarah (currently a redirect back toAl-Baqara)(move·discuss) – I think it would be better to remove the redirect and just make the article be named Al-Baqarah since it is the more commonly used name, and the name the article uses. I rarely encounter Al-Baqara online but Al-Baqarah isa much more common name and accurate, since the Arabic letter ة is commonly transliterated as 'ah' in this circumstance.AHWikipedian (talk)10:03, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Graham11, As per WP:THE : "...the default rule is to exclude them unless certain specific conditions are met, usually where they are integral to the article subject's name."The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India always officially uses "The" in the name, ie, it's "integral to the article subject's name";[2],[3],[4].CharlesWain (talk)05:50, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If 'THE' is integral to the subject, then the initialism would be TICAI. That their own style dictates using 'THE' is mostly irrelevant for our purposes. E.g.,The Ohio State University (and several other schools) consistently refer to themselves with 'THE', but our article titles do not.older ≠wiser15:48, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@XCBRO172 Some might argue that because ofWP:SMALLDIFFS, the unique capitalization could potentially refer to another topic, like the ice cream. Policy is technically in favor of leaving the dab where it is (the same as with the example linked, as we have bothIron maiden andIron Maiden.) Whether any the alternatives at the dab meet the cultural or historical significance of either of those two examples is a matter best decided by consensus.ASUKITE12:53, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thediscussion process is used for potentially controversial moves.A move is potentially controversial if either of the following applies:
there has been any past debate about the best title for the page;
someone could reasonably disagree with the move.
Use this process if there is any reason to believe a move would be contested. For technical move requests, such as to correct obvious typographical errors, seeRequesting technical moves. The technical moves procedure can also be used for uncontroversial moves when the requested title is occupied by an existing article.
Do not create a new move request when one is alreadyopen on the same talk page. Instead, consider contributing to the open discussion if you would like to propose another alternative. Multipleclosed move requests may be on the same page, but each should have a uniquesection heading.
Do not create a move request to rename one or moreredirects.Redirects cannot be used as current titles in requested moves.
To request a single page move, click on the "Add topic" (or "New section") tab of thetalk page of the article you want moved,without adding a new subject/header, inserting this code:
{{subst:requested move|New name|reason=Place here your rationale for the proposed page name change, referring to applicable naming convention policies and guidelines, and providing evidence in support. If your reasoning includes search engine results, please prioritize searches limited to reliable sources (e.g. books, news, scholarly papers) over other web results. You don't need to add your signature at the end, as this template will do so automatically.}}
ReplaceNew name with the requested new name of the page (or with a simple question mark, if you want more than one possible new name to be considered). The template will automatically create the heading "Requested move 15 July 2025" and sign the post for you.
There is no need to edit the article in question. Once the above code is added to the Talk page, a bot will automatically add the following notification at the top of the affected page:
A request that this page title be changed isunder discussion. Pleasedo not move this page until the discussion is closed.
A single template may be used to request multiple related moves. Onone of the talk pages of the affected pages, create a request and format it as below. A sample request for three page moves is shown here (for two page moves, omit the lines for current3 and new3). For four page moves, add lines for current4 and new4, and so on. There is no technical limit on the number of multiple move requests, but before requesting very large multi-moves, consider whether anaming convention should be changed first. Discuss that change on the talk page for the naming convention, e.g.,Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (sportspeople).
To request a multiple page move, edit at thebottom of the talk page of the article you chose for your request,without adding a new header, inserting this code:
{{subst:requested move| current1= Current title of page 1 (this parameter can be omitted for discussions hosted on a page that is proposed to be moved)| new1= New title for page 1 with the talk page hosting this discussion| current2= Current title of page 2| new2= New title for page 2| current3= Current title of page 3| new3= New title for page 3| reason= Place here your rationale for the proposed page name change, referring to applicable naming convention policies and guidelines, and providing evidence in support. If your reasoning includes search engine results, please prioritize searches limited to reliable sources (e.g. books, news, scholarly papers) over other web results. You don't need to add your signature at the end, as this template will do so automatically.}}
For example, to propose moving the articlesWikipedia andWiki, put this template onTalk:Wikipedia withcurrent1 set toWikipedia andcurrent2 set toWiki. The discussion for all affected articles is held on the talk page of the article where the template is placed (Talk:Wikipedia). Do not sign the request with~~~~, since the template does this automatically (so if you sign it yourself there will be two copies of your signature at the end of the request). Do not skip pairs of numbers.
RMCD bot automatically places a notice section on the talk page of all pages that are included in your request except the one hosting the discussion, to call attention to the move discussion that is in progress and to suggest that all discussion for all of the pages included in the request should take place at that one hosting location.
For multi-move discussions hosted on a page which is itself proposed to be moved, it is not necessary to include the|current1=Current title of page 1 for the page hosting the discussion, as its current title can be inferred automatically. Occasionally the discussions for significant multi-move requests may be hosted onWikiProject talk pages or other pages inProject namespace, in which case it is necessary to include|current1= to indicate the first article to be moved.
If you have to update a RM from a single move to multiple moves, you need to add the following parameters to the{{requested move/dated}} template call:
Please list every move that you wish to have made in your request. For example, if you wish to moveCricket (disambiguation) toCricket because you do not believe the sport is theprimary topic for the search term "Cricket", then you actually want to move two pages, bothCricket (disambiguation)andCricket. Thus you must list proposed titles foreach page affected by your request. For example, you might propose:
If a new title is not proposed for the sport, it is more difficult to achieve consensus for a new title for that article. A move request that does not show what to do with the material at its proposed target, such as:
Abot will list this discussion on therequested moves current discussionssubpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see theclosing instructions). Please base arguments onarticle title policy, and keep discussionsuccinct andcivil.
Use when the proposed new title is given. Donot sign this template—this tag is auto-signed when substituted. Be sure to use thesubst:. This tag should be placed atthe beginning of the section containing the relevant discussion.
Abot will list this discussion on therequested moves current discussionssubpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see theclosing instructions). Please base arguments onarticle title policy, and keep discussionsuccinct andcivil.
Use when the proposed new title is not known. Donot sign this template—this tag is auto-signed when substituted. Be sure to use thesubst:. This tag should be placed atthe beginning of the section containing the relevant discussion.
Abot will list this discussion on therequested moves current discussionssubpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see theclosing instructions). Please base arguments onarticle title policy, and keep discussionsuccinct andcivil.
This template adds subsections for survey and discussion. Donot sign this template—this tag is auto-signed when substituted. Be sure to use thesubst: Click the "New Section" tab on the talk page and leave the Subject/headline blank, as the template by default automatically creates the heading.
It has been proposed in this section that multiple pages berenamed and moved.
Abot will list this discussion on therequested moves current discussionssubpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see theclosing instructions). Please base arguments onarticle title policy, and keep discussionsuccinct andcivil.
Donot sign this template—this tag is auto-signed when substituted. Be sure to use thesubst: and place this tag atthe beginning of the section containing the relevant discussion. Add additional related move requests in pairs (|current3= and |new3=, |current4= and |new4=, etc.).
It has been proposed in this section that multiple pages berenamed and moved somewhere else, with the names being decided below.
Abot will list this discussion on therequested moves current discussionssubpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see theclosing instructions). Please base arguments onarticle title policy, and keep discussionsuccinct andcivil.
All editors are welcome to contribute to the discussion regarding a requested page move. There are a number of standards that Wikipedians should practice in such discussions:
When editors recommend a course of action, they writeSupport orOppose in bold text, which is done by surrounding the word with three single quotes on each side, e.g.'''Support'''.
Comments or recommendations are added on a new bulleted line (that is, starting with *) and signed by adding~~~~ to the end. Responses to another editor arethreaded and indented using multiple bullets.
The article itself should be reviewed before any recommendation is made; do not base recommendations solely on the information supplied by other editors. It may also help to look at the article's edit history. However, please read the earlier comments and recommendations, as well as prior move requests. They may contain relevant arguments and useful information.
The debate is not a vote; please do not make recommendations that are not sustained by arguments.
Explainhow the proposed article title meets or contravenes policy and guidelines rather than merely stating that it does so.
Nomination already implies that the nominator supports the name change, and nominators should refrain from repeating this recommendation on a separate bulleted line.[a]
Do not make conflicting recommendations. If you change your mind, use strike-through to retract your previous statement by enclosing it between <s> and </s> after the bullets, and de-bold the struck words, as in "•SupportOppose".
Please remember that reasonable editors will sometimes disagree, but that arguments based in policy, guidelines, and evidence have more weight than unsupported statements. When an editor offers an argument that does not explain how the move request is consistent with policies and guidelines, a reminder to engage in constructive, on-topic discussion may be useful. On the other hand, a pattern of responding to requests with groundless opinion,proof by assertion, and ignoring content guidelines may become disruptive. If a pattern of disruptive behavior persists after efforts are made to correct the situation through dialogue, please consider using adispute resolution process.
Relisting a discussion moves the request out of the backlog up to the current day in order to encourage further input. The decision to relist a discussion is best left to uninvolved experienced editors upon considering, but declining, to close the discussion. In general, discussions should not be relisted more than once beforeproperly closing.[b] Users relisting a debate which has already been relisted, or relisting a debate with a substantial discussion, should write a short explanation on why they did not consider the debate sufficient to close. While there is no consensus forbidding participation in a requested move discussion after relisting it, many editors consider it an inadvisable form ofsupervote. If you want to relist a discussion and then participate in it, be prepared to explain why you think it was appropriate.
Relisting should be done using{{subst:RM relist}}, which automatically includes the relister's signature,and which must be placed at the very end of the initial request after the move requester's signature (and subsequent relisters' signatures).
When a relisted discussion reaches a resolution, it may be closed at any time according to theclosing instructions; there is no required length of time to wait before closing a relisted discussion.
If discussion has become stale, or it seems that discussion would benefit from more input of editors versed in the subject area, consider more widelypublicizing the discussion, such as by notifyingWikiProjects of the discussion using the template{{RM notification}}. Banners placed at the top of the talk page hosting the move request can often be used to identify WikiProjects suitable for notification.
Notes
^A nominator making a procedural nomination with which they may not agree is free to add a bulleted line explaining their actual position. Additional detail, such as sources, may also be provided in an additional bullet point if its inclusion in the nomination statement would make the statement unwieldy. Please remember that the entire nomination statement appears on the list on this page.
^Despite this, discussions are occasionally relisted more than once.
This section lists all requests filed or identified as potentially controversial which are currently under discussion.
Do not attempt to edit this list manually;a bot will automatically update the page soon after the {{subst:Requested move}} template is added to the discussion on the relevant talk page. The entry is removed automatically soon after the discussion is closed. To make a change to an entry, make the change on the linked talk page.
(Discuss) –Big Time Rush →Big Time Rush (TV series)Big Time Rush (TV series) – I understand why the RM from ten years ago failed, but I think it's worth considering again. At the time, the group and the show were both over, so there was no real point in moving the show when they are both dead topics. However, the group reunited after that RM and still perform today. I think that means it is fair to consider them the primary topic over the show featuring them which has been over for 12 years. --Quiz shows18:38, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Israel Resilience Party →Blue and White (political party)Blue and White (political party) – I know a similar request was made in 2021, but i believe a lot has changed since then. In 2023, the partyrenamed itself to "Blue and White - Israel Resillience" The party's parliamentary caucusis now called "Blue and White - National Unity", and contains no Independents or members of another political party On top of this, there are exceedingly few references in media to the Israel Resillience Party since 2020/2021 (see the above discussion). Also, on a much smaller note, the current naming scheme is causing a lot of confusion.Opinion polling for the next Israeli legislative election for example links to thedefunct alliance instead of to this article. An alternative name might be "Blue and White Israel Resillience", the party's full name and the current name on hewiki, but id argue its not a common name, and is comprable to the "National Liberal Party" title included in Likud's official name.Totalstgamer (talk)09:03, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Sýn (media corporation) →Sýn (Icelandic company) – Sýn operates in both the telecommunications and media industries, so I felt the "(media corporation)" tag was inappropriate. Also, there was a need to distinguish this company fromSYN Media in Australia, so I think "(Icelandic company)" would be a better compromise. Someone made a separate request that theStöð 2 article be moved toSýn (TV channel) earlier; that request should be discussed on theTalk:Stöð 2 page. ForStöð 2 Sport 2, I think it should instead be merged into what will be moved toSýn Sport, so the latter article can cover all the channels in that group, like how theSky Sports (UK) article does with its network of channels.183.101.53.185 (talk) 07:59, 20 June 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.CNC (talk) 20:20, 28 June 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.CNC (talk) 19:32, 7 July 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.TarnishedPathtalk04:17, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Penticton Vees (junior A) →Penticton Vees (BCHL)Penticton Vees (BCHL) – The "Junior A" classification is no longer applicable to BCHL teams. In 2023, the BCHL became independent from Hockey Canada and subsequently dropped the "Junior A" designation, now classifying its teams simply as "Junior."[1] This change in the BCHL's self-classification makes the "Junior A" disambiguator outdated and inaccurate. Furthermore, BC Hockey (the provincial governing body) now uses the term "Junior A" to refer to a level of hockey that would be considered "Junior B" in most other jurisdictions, adding to the ambiguity and potential for misunderstanding if the old title were retained. Therefore, "Penticton Vees (BCHL)" is the most accurate and clear title, directly linking the team to its current league affiliation.Buffalkill (talk) 03:38, 15 July 2025 (UTC)Buffalkill (talk)03:38, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –The Brooklyn Tower →Brooklyn TowerBrooklyn Tower – PerWP:NCTHE, the title should not include a definite article. The article does not appear in architectural critique[2][3][4] or in the popular press.[5][6][7] Even the building's promotional material is mixed: while the architect[8] and developer[9] use the capitalized article, Silverstein Properties doesn't.[10]
^Nash, Eric P. (2023).Sky-High: A Critique of NYC's Supertall Towers from Top to Bottom. Illustrated by Bruce Katz. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. p. 158.ISBN978-1-79722-254-7.OCLC1347699383.OL27303597W.Already known as the Brooklyn Tower, even though a second supertall is slated for the borough
^Kornblatt, Izzy (2023-09-11)."Gothic shadow: On SHoP's Brooklyn supertall".Architectural Record.Archived from the original on 2025-03-27.Such is the world into which the looming 1,066-foot Brooklyn Tower, the borough's tallest by far and its first to attain the status of 'supertall,' has arrived
^Marzoni, Andrew (2024-04-19)."Cheesecake in Barad-dûr".New York Review of Architecture.Archived from the original on 2025-04-18.Two years later, the firm, undeterred, acquired the neighboring Dime Savings Bank and its air rights for $95 million in order to build the Brooklyn Tower, the borough's first supertall structure
(Discuss) –Ilan Șor →Ilan ShorIlan Shor – Quoting the requested revert of my technical move bySuperΨDro: "Ilan Shor" is used twice as often in Google Scholar, by several international outlets (Reuters, Radio Free Europe, BBC, The Balkan Insight, The Kyiv Independent, Euractiv) and even some Moldovan websites writing in English (IPN, cotidianul.md).Polonius (talk) 10:57, 7 July 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.CoconutOctopustalk12:15, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Mother (video game series) →EarthBound (series)EarthBound (series) – With the release of EarthBound Beginnings a decade ago, it is obvious that Nintendo does not wish to retire the EarthBound brand and rename the series Mother. That makes two video games entitled "EarthBound" in English, and it is highly likely that Mother 3 would just be EarthBound 2 if it ever saw a localized Switch 2 Online release or something. For this reason, the article should use the English common name of the series perWP:USEENGLISH. Some modern articles that call it the EarthBound series:[5][6][7][8][9]ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:39, 6 July 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.CoconutOctopustalk22:09, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –2010 Knox County, Tennessee mayoral election →2010 Knox County, Tennessee, mayoral election2010 Knox County, Tennessee, mayoral election – Move requested to conform withMOS:GEOCOMMA and ultimately to achieve consistency across the project (which is badly lacking). MOS:GEOCOMMA is clear. It prescribes the following:In geographical references that include multiple levels of subordinate divisions (e.g., city, state/province, country), a comma separates each element and follows the last element unless followed by terminal punctuation or a closing parenthesis. The last element is treated asparenthetical. *He traveled through North Carolina before staying in Chattanooga, Tennessee, for the night.(correct) *He traveled through North Carolina before staying in Chattanooga, Tennessee for the night.(incorrect)Also include commas when the geographical element is used as a disambiguator: *Hantratty received a PhD from the University of California, Irvine, in 1977.(correct) *Hantratty received a PhD from the University of California, Irvine in 1977.(incorrect) There is no mention of any specific exception for article titles, and so there isn't any. We have similar constructs involving dates: *He set October 1, 2011, as the deadline for Patterson to meet his demands.(correct) *He set October 1, 2011 as the deadline for Patterson to meet his demands.(incorrect) and royal titles: *Wedding of Frederik, Crown Prince of Denmark, and Mary Donaldson(correct) *Wedding of Frederik, Crown Prince of Denmark and Mary Donaldson(incorrect) *Wedding of Frederik, Crown Prince of Denmark, and Princess Ingrid of Sweden(correct) *Wedding of Frederik, Crown Prince of Denmark and Princess Ingrid of Sweden(incorrect) *Wedding of Wedding of Victoria, Crown Princess of Sweden, and Daniel Westling(correct) *Wedding of Wedding of Victoria, Crown Princess of Sweden and Daniel Westling(incorrect) and possibly more. In the first example, without the closing comma, it would (grammatically) appear that Fredrik's title is "Crown Prince of Denmark and Mary Donaldson". That's obviously not the case, as any reader realizes, but that's no reason to omit the comma.Wikipedia:Article titles has often been invoked as a reason for deviating from the Manual of Style. Unfortunately, over time, this has resulted in different outcomes (consensuses) on different sets of RMs. Recently, an old RM from 2016,Talk:2015 Columbus, Ohio mayoral election, which was closed as "not moved", was referred to as basis for reverting a move back to a comma-less version. That consensus (from 2016) may have been the result of too few editors being aware of the Manual of Style and/or paying attention to theWP:RM listing. If you don't have the listing on your watchlist already, I suggest you add it. Here's the link:Wikipedia:Requested moves/Current discussions. Remember to visit it once in a while. While Wikipedia:Article titles does give some latitude, it isn't desirable that article titles with what should reasonably be the same format end up with a different format, especially when there is no specific reason, other than that the outcome of a local RM, for whatever reason, happened to be different from the outcome of other RMs. Now,consensus can change. It is desirable that we achieve consistency across the project. Editors who oppose this RM – especially if they plan to invoke old RMs – are encouraged to instead seek consensus for an exception for article titles at the MoS, or at least provide a proper rationale other than"silly", "unnecessary", or "not needed". We need consistency. Badly. This RM involves many pages in order to attract attention and input from as many editors as possible.Note to closing editor: some of the redirects "in the way" have been edited, so admin authorization is probably needed. The discussion will probably last more than 7 days.HandsomeFella (talk) 19:07, 6 July 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.CoconutOctopustalk22:08, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Naegleriasis →Primary amoebic meningoencephalitisPrimary amoebic meningoencephalitis –Primary amoebic meningoencephalitis is the primary name for this condition, notnaegleriasis. Google Ngram Viewer[10] shows that the former is used 7.9 times more than the latter, and that doesn't even include "PAM", which a short form for it. Also, on Google Scholar, the former term[11] is used in 3,810 articles while the latter[12] is used in just 123, showing that the former is the primary name of this condition in the scientific literature. Most reliable web sources also use the termprimary amoebic meningoencephalitis, including[13],[14],[15],[16],[17],[18],[19] and[20]. Even if you search "naegleriasis" on a search engine, almost all reliable sources sources will use the termprimary amoebic meningoencephalitis.Cyrobyte (talk)20:08, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Marcus Wesson → ? – Wesson is inevitably the primary focus of media reporting, but the page would be better as an event page than a criminal biography, as the mass murder incorporated into the text, being the single deadliest of its kind in the city's history, deserves a page of its own. Seeing as the sexual abuse and cult-like structure within Wesson's family was also subject to signifcant coverage, a new title should be in vein of other criminal articles with incest such asColt clan incest case orFritzl case. While I'd have no problem naming two separate articles "2004 Fresno murders/Wesson family murders" and "Wesson incest case", I can't really think of a name for the single article they'll remain in should a move request be deemed appropriate.Rubintyrann (talk)13:26, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Steven Pladl triple murder and suicide →Pladl case – The current title feels awkward and doesn't capture the entirety of the case. Steven Pladl and Rose Fusco had already gained significant national and some international attention in February 2018, prior to the murders, after their arrest on adultery charges. The new title would be more in line with other criminal incest cases such asFritzl case orMongelli case. Although the more descriptive "Pladl incest and murder case" would be more accurate, it might be too lengthy while "Pladl incest case" would exclude the murders that led to the most and ultimately sustained coverage.Rubintyrann (talk)13:07, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Etisalat and →E&E& – -- I propose that the articleEtisalat and be moved toE&. The current title is not the official name of the company and does not reflect the branding used by the entity following the rebranding of Etisalat to e&. The company's official name is “e&”, as reflected on their website[21], and is used by reliable secondary sources including Reuters, Bloomberg, and the company itself. The target pageE& currently exists only as a redirect and can be overwritten by an admin. This move would improve clarity and accuracy in naming, aligning with current branding.Fullquarter (talk)11:26, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –GWR Cathedral Class →GWR proposed Hawksworth Pacific locomotive – I have searched for any association betweenFrederick Hawksworth's proposed Pacific locomotive and the name 'Cathedral' or the number '8000', and found nothing remotely contemporaneous or authoritative. (There is evidence - as I have added to the article - of the name being initially proposed for the King class.) I deduce that 'Cathedral' and '8000' are recent inventions, probably for marketing purposes, and are therefore not suitable for the title of this article. Either the article should be moved to a better title, or it should be merged into the article on Hawksworth.-- Verbarson talkedits 22:27, 5 July 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.TarnishedPathtalk11:23, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Cultural depictions of salamanders →Salamander (mythology)Salamander (mythology) – The current, inaccurate title is the result of a series ofWP:BOLD moves done without consensus, or, apparently, even giving the article a single once-over. This article is about a separate mythical/elemental creature known as the salamander, not mythological depictions of actual salamanders. While actual salamanders may overlap somewhat, the vast majority of the article is about a hypothetical fictional animal. I don't know about you, butthis does not look like any actual salamander I've ever seen. Due to the vagueness of the current title, it should be outright deleted upon the move and anything that links to it should be retargeted to either this article or the one on real-life salamanders.ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:20, 5 July 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.TarnishedPathtalk11:16, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Delaware Valley →Greater PhiladelphiaGreater Philadelphia – "Greater Philadelphia" is the more common and less confusing term for the Philadelphia metro area. "Delaware Valley" is mostly used only be media sources, and can be confusing to outsiders, as it could also refer to the area surrounding the Delaware River along the PA/NJ border. Additionally, "Delaware Valley" can cause confusion that it refers to an area solely within the state of Delaware.Red0ctober22 (talk) 21:21, 25 June 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.Tenshi! (Talk page) 18:15, 5 July 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.TarnishedPathtalk11:15, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –GeForce GTX 10 series →GeForce 10 seriesGeForce 10 series – I am requesting that the GTX 10 series and GTX 900 series articles be moved back to their previous titles without 'GTX', as these older series of GPUs includes models branded as GT or even just plain numbers (e.g. GeForce 930M), which makes the titles inaccurate on a technical level. Note, however, that the GTX 16 series move is unopposed by me as that series of GPUsonly includes GTX-branded models (i.e. no GT or plain numbered models). Bit unfortunate that I missed the opportunity to point this out in theprevious RM that resulted in the move to the current titles, but oh well. — AP 499D25(talk)10:19, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Glossary of Generation Z slang →Glossary of 2020s slang – to preface, this move request was prompted bythis recent YouTube Shorts video by American linguist Adam Aleksic. before watching this specific video though, I was still doubtful about this label, which I will elaborate below. I would be classified as part of generation Z and am interested in linguistics, particularly slang terms on the Internet (which I edit on Wiktionary), despite lacking any formal training. the reasoning for moving this article, as well as its associated category and navbox, plus its related articles, is that, while the term "generation Z slang" is popular in usage, it is imprecise in its definition and inconsistent. this term has been used to describe the language across three decades, bleeding into both older and younger generations, as the concept of a "generation" is inherently imprecise. as Aleksic notes, it is serves more as abuzzword. taking a look atits navbox andcategory, it covers many terms from before many of the generation was either born or properly grown up (anything from 2000s, early 2010s) or includes terms that were not coined by the generation (gyatt, any incel slang). while I have not checked every single one, many of the terms listed in the glossary lack any reliable sources claiming that they are either specific to, coined by or popularised by gen Z. the label of "generation Z slang" among the given sources is mostly used by newspapers (as Aleksic notes, taken from influencers). for scientific papers using the label, it refers to the language used by members of gen Z, but not necessarily limited to them. dictionaries, such as Merriam-Webster and Dictionary.com, tend to not use the label, favoring to instead describe the timespan in which the slang terms emerged and were used. I suppose is due to the difficulties of studying the trends of a whole generation while filtering for the often unknown ages of the anonymous users in a large corpus. the growth of a term among a specific age group during a specific timespan is only broadly correlated. similarly, until the creation of this article, there were other categories for slang over time, but these were labelled by the decade in which they were coined or popularised. for these reasons,I request that the list be recategorised into the corresponding time periods (geneneration Z slang is split into "2000s slang", "2010s slang", "2020s slang", etc.; the navbox may grow in scope and to, for example, "slang of the 21st century"; the categories, made redundant, should be deleted).Juwan (talk)21:53, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis →IUPUIIUPUI – IUPUI had three long-form names over the course of its existence: Indiana University–Purdue University at Indianapolis (with the word "at," 1969-1992), Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis (official form, 1992-2024), and Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis (most common form used on official publications, without the dash, 1992-2024). Regarding naming conventions,College and university article advice makes two relevant statements: (1) "This section is a complement to Wikipedia's naming conventions, not a replacement. Always consider the Wikipedia conventions first when naming a page." (It follows deeper below.) (2) "Never use abbreviations or acronyms in titles unless the institution you are naming is almost exclusively known only by including such terms and is widely used in that form. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (abbreviations) for more information." According toAcronyms in page titles, "Acronyms should be used in a page name if the subject is known primarily by its abbreviation and that abbreviation is primarily associated with the subject." Acronyms are usually avoided for disambiguation purposes, but I've never seen anything else called "IUPUI." I worked for IUPUI University Libraries in the late 1990s, and I created IUPUI's Library of Congressname heading within the Library of Congress's Program for Cooperative Cataloging, which is "IUPUI (Campus)." I did that after systematically surveying the presentation of IUPUI's name on its publications throughout its existence to that date, namely 1999. Given that IUPUI had one long-form name for about 13 years and two other long-form names for 32 years, the abbreviation "IUPUI" is by far and away the most common name used both by the organization itself and outsiders, and the long form virtually always appeared with the abbreviation. Therefore, both the general rule and the specific rule apply. IUPUI's article title should follow the example ofNASA and be "IUPUI."Waering (talk)18:22, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –2018 Hamburg stabbing attack →2018 Jungfernstieg double murder – Right now, the title is misleading. Other articles titled "[place] stabbings" and particularly "[place] stabbing attack" are about mass stabbings, whether terrorist or amok violence. The article is about a case of intimate partner violence where the perpetrator killed his ex-girlfriend and their daughter in a public place without attacking anyone else. The motivation was also established as vengeance during the trial, rendering the speculation in the lead outdated. In fact, the focus on the perpetrator's asylum status, while probably worth mentioning, are overstated as a relevant factor in the murders and later coverage focuses more on domestic violence and femicide. Since the surname of the victims was never officially released, the usually preferred "Murder of..." is probably not ideal in this instance. The nominated title is theWP:COMMONNAME used by German media (English coverage was minimal and limited to immediate reports) to refer to the murders during the trial of the perpetrator and subsequent mention.Rubintyrann (talk)18:15, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –A Guy Walks Into a Bar (song) →A Guy Walks Into a BarA Guy Walks Into a Bar – The last RM was all over the place, with two supports, one oppose, and one neutral. I'm surprised it wasn't closed as no consensus or at least relisted, and IMO it should be reassessed. This is the only work with theexact name "A Guy Walks Into a Bar" and should be the primary topic of that form of the exact phrase "A Guy Walks Into a Bar": * The NCIS episode is titled "A Man Walks Into a Bar..." with "man" instead of "guy", and an ellipsis at the end. * The Justified episode does not have the leading "A". * The Mini Mansions work does not have the leading "A", and also has an ellipsis at the end. Therefore, the Tyler Farr song is the only work with theexact title "A Guy Walks Into a Bar", and a hatnote tobar joke is sufficient. Anything else for the song isWP:OVERPRECISION, and I am not convinced of the arguments to the contrary.Ten Pound Hammer •(What did I screw up now?)17:10, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Shriram Lagoo →Shreeram LagooShreeram Lagoo – This was first moved[22] by @NAKHISM with the rationale "Misspelled: disambiguation needed". That was reverted[23] by @Rotideypoc41352, apparently after an IP request at RM/TR, with the intention of opening an RM. It seems this didn't happen, and this move has again been requested by an IP at RM/TR with the rationale "The name of his spelling is officially Shreeram and not Shriram. You can check the spelling when his name is shown in the film credits". I have no opinion in this matter, but am opening an RM on procedural grounds so that editors, including IPs, on both sides of this debate can discuss their reasoning and resolve the issue.Toadspike[Talk] 13:15, 5 July 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.ASUKITE16:04, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –List of entertainment affected by the September 11 attacks →Impact of the September 11 attacks on the entertainment industry – This is a weird (and potentially improper, inappropriate or non-standard) way to use the nounentertainment. This is like having an article be titledList of water affected by development firms instead ofList of bodies of water affected by development firms. However, on account of the content in the body, it doesn't seem like any title beginning with "List of" would work well for this article unless it was significantly longer or more of a handful than the current title. (e.g.List of productions, venues, events, publications and brands affected by the September 11 attacks) Just a moment ago, Iboldly moved this article to asimilar alternative title and was quicklyreverted, hence thisdiscussion. –MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 17:50, 23 May 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.TarnishedPathtalk 12:15, 31 May 2025 (UTC)— Relisting. –MrPersonHumanGuy (talk)12:14, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Superman (1978 film) →Superman: The MovieSuperman: The Movie – I propose moving this article toSuperman: The Movie for the following reasons: * All original Warner Bros. posters, trailers, home media, and film reels used "Superman: The Movie" globally in 1978 to distinguish it from TV serials. This was not a retroactive subtitle but the actively marketed and distributed title at release, aligning withMOS:FILM guidance when ambiguity requires clarification. * "Superman: The Movie" is the name used unanimously on all home media releases, both physical (VHS, DVD, Blu-ray, 4K) and digital platforms. Warner Bros. also archives and stores the original film negative under "Superman: The Movie," confirming this as the consistent, official naming in distribution and archival contexts. This widespread and consistent usage in reliable, authoritative sources demonstrates verifiable, recognizable usage underWP:COMMONNAME. * PerWP:TITLE andWP:PRECISE, this move removes the cumbersome "(1978 film)" disambiguator, providing a clear, natural title aligned with the marketed identity of the film while avoiding confusion with the character or franchise. *Counterpoint: While the onscreen title is "Superman," Wikipedia article titles do not always mirror the onscreen title, including TWO Superman movies already. Examples include: **Superman and the Mole Men, which uses the onscreen title “Superman and the Mole-Men” **Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut, which uses the onscreen title “Superman II” **Dune (2021 film), which has the onscreen title "Dune: Part One" **It (2017 film), which uses the onscreen title “It Chapter One” **Wicked (2024 film), which uses the onscreen title “Wicked: Part I” **School of Rock, which uses the onscreen title “The School of Rock” (also the title in the billing block) **The Irishman, which uses the onscreen title “I Heard You Paint Houses” **Drive-Away Dolls, which uses the onscreen title “Drive-Away Dykes” **Fast & Furious 6, which uses the onscreen title “Furious 6” **Tron: Legacy, which uses the onscreen title “Tron” All the above which help show onscreen title is not a good argument.WP:NCFILM states “Be aware that it is also common for films to use a slightly modified title onscreen.” Moving toSuperman: The Movie aligns with the film’s marketed and consistently used identity, improves clarity and navigation for readers, and aligns withMOS:FILM,WP:TITLE, andWP:COMMONNAME, while maintaining accuracy by noting the onscreen title in the lead. Thank you.SuperFunHouse1 (talk)09:18, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Cancún →CancunCancun – In 2021 there was an attempt to do this. At the time, people argued that since Zürich wasn't changed to Zurich, Cancún shouldn't be changed either. Now, Zürich is listed under its common English name,Zurich. At the time people were cherrypicking the subsection ofWikipedia:Naming conventions (use English-language sources), "WP:DIACRITICS", selectively using the phrases "The use of modified letters in article titles is neither encouraged nor discouraged" and "The policy on using common names and on foreign names does not prohibit the use of modified letters" as a reason not to move the page, yet ommiting the accompanying phrases, "when deciding between versions of a word that differ in the use or non-use of modified letters, follow the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language" and "if they are used in the common name as verified by reliable sources", respectively. Google Ngramsshows that "Cancun" has always been the common name in English. As stated above, the city'stourism agency ommits the accent in the English version of the website (in the same wayCeline Dion's website does it in English vs. French). Spanish is not an official language in Mexico, and insisting that the accent is required merely for "respect for other languages" would support the argument for changing "Mexico" to "México", since that is the country's de facto colloquial name in Spanish.(CC)Tbhotch™ 17:41, 26 June 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.TarnishedPathtalk08:58, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Richard Butler (white supremacist) →Richard Girnt ButlerRichard Girnt Butler – Using his full name forms aWP:NCDAB which is preferred over parenthetical disambs, and I think the name with the middle name is theWP:COMMONNAME for him anyway. His full name is used in most sources that refer to him, including encyclopedias (e.g. Kaplan's encyclopedia) and most obituaries. We could also do "G." because that's common, but full name seems to be more common. Was moved without discussion because it was "better" (I do not think it is, as he is very often referred to with his middle name).PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:09, 18 June 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.Jeffrey34555 (talk) 01:19, 26 June 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.TarnishedPathtalk08:55, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Jarvis Johnson →Jarvis Johnson (politician) – I do not believe there is aprimary topic for the name Jarvis Johnson on Wikipedia. While the YouTuber iscurrently getting more daily pageviews and daily average pageviews, there have been spikes in views in both pages based on current events. The politician's page rapidly spiked in views after U.S. representativeSylvester Turner's death in March. There were smaller spikes at the YouTuber's page on May 1 and July 1 of this year - not sure what the causes of those were. PerWikiNav, about 20% of outbound clicks from the politician's page are going to the YouTuber. I wouldn't mind if a consensus forms that the YouTuber is the primary topic, but I see any possible concerns aboutrecentism and believe that the best course of action would be a disambiguation page.wizzito |say hello! 18:27, 4 July 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.TarnishedPathtalk08:47, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Giovanni Matteo Mario → ? – The article lead starts withGiovanni Matteo De Candia,[1] also known as Mario, fairly consistently uses justMario in the text, and notes:the budding singer adopted the mononym Mario as his stage name when he made his debut on 30 November 1838.[6] Sometimes, however, he is referred to in print by the fuller appellation of "Giovanni Mario", and he is also called "Mario de Candia". (That text seems to have been in the article for over fifteen years.) So this title "Giovanni Matteo Mario" isn't actuallycommon, then? Here's a relevantGoogle Books Ngrams, a graph of book references to these names. The name we have in the lead isn't even detected. At the same time, the 19th century spike in the number of references to "Mario" can probably be attributed to this person. That element of the graph alone is large enough that we have to remove it in order to see the rest. If we look at more variants,like this orlike this, it looks like at the time there's a lot of references toSignor Mario, too, as well as further mononymous references to Mario and other contemporary artists. The second name Matteo doesn't seem to be commonly used in comparison. So, maybeMario (opera singer)?Mario (tenor) already redirects here, but wasmoved in 2011. I came across this incongruity while researching atTalk:Mario.Mario (singer) is already taken - maybe that needs to be disambiguated, too.Joy (talk) 10:30, 5 July 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.Jeffrey34555 (talk)07:43, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –PC World →PCWorldPCWorld – I propose renamingPC World toPCWorld to reflect the magazine's current official stylization and branding. The website and publication now consistently use "PCWorld" as a single word. === Rationale === * The official site is branded as PCWorld (seehttps://www.pcworld.com). * Most modern references use the one-word version. * It aligns with Wikipedia's policy on using the most commonly recognizable name (WP:COMMONNAME).Icaldonta (talk) 19:54, 4 July 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.Jeffrey34555 (talk)07:43, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For the possessive of singular nouns, including proper names and words ending ins, add's (my daughter's achievement,my niece's wedding,Cortez's men,the boss's office,Illinois's largest employer,the US's partners,Descartes's philosophy,Verreaux's eagle). Exception: abstract nouns ending with an /s/ sound when followed bysake (for goodness' sake,for his conscience' sake). If a name ending ins orz would be difficult to pronounce with's added (Jesus's teachings), consider rewording (the teachings of Jesus).
(Discuss) –The Highwaymen (country supergroup) →The HighwaymenThe Highwaymen – This page has about 1200 views a day, while no other subject called "Highwaymen" or "The Highwaymen" comes even remotely close to that. Even the next-most viewed work of that name, the 2019 film, is barely half of that even with recency bias putting its thumb on the scale. Just entering "The Highwaymen" on Google without any additional words turns up almost exclusively content about the supergroup. Given the vast number of inbound links and extremely high page views (no doubt owing to the high notability of all four members), I think this is by far the most notable subject to have the exact name "The Highwaymen" and should therefore be the primary topic.Ten Pound Hammer •(What did I screw up now?) 22:45, 4 July 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.TarnishedPathtalk06:56, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Kernicterus →Bilirubin Encephalopathy –kernicterus is theChronic form of Bilirubin Encephalopathy. There is also an Acute Bilirubin Encephalopathy (ABE) which takes place before the chronic phase and it isnot Kernicterus. We can not have the acute phase on an article purly based on its chronic phase, but with a title change there wont be any confusions. This way the article can be written for both phases with a lot more information, but if we keep it as Kernicterus then there needs to be another article for its Acute phase which does not make sense. Thisshort article explains my reasoning. Also as perWP:COMMONNAME, results onNational Library of Medicine showsBilirubin Encephalopathy close to30,000, andKernicterus shows5500. That is widely because Kernicterus is the specific type of Bilirubin Encephalopathy.DrTheHistorian✎ 23:00, 27 June 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.Jeffrey34555 (talk) 05:59, 5 July 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.TarnishedPathtalk06:46, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There's no need for the year to appear in the title. We have no other articles about mushroom murders in Leongatha; I seriously doubt that there have been any other mushroom murders there, and if I'm wrong, this one is overwhelmingly the primary topic. There's no need to include the year in the title, unless (1) it's needed for disambiguation, e.g.2025 Queensland floods, or (2) people routinely include the year when referring to it, e.g.2025 Australian federal election. When neither is the case, we omit the year (Black Saturday isBlack Saturday bushfires, not2009 Black Saturday bushfires), so let's cut "2023" from this article's title.Nyttend (talk)02:17, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Season 2, Episode 10 (30 Rock) →Episode 210Episode 210 – The article existed at this title until it was unilaterally moved to30 Rock episode 210 bySrleffler (diff) for being "too generic". It was later moved toSeason 2, Episode 10 (30 Rock) byAlex 21 (diff) so it wouldn't accidentally be considered the 210th episode (seethis discussion), but I find this both clunky and unnecessary. While this episode has no official title from the show's writers, it isconsistently called "Episode 210" (in the same way a certain untitled album is calledLed Zeppelin IV, as an example). SeeIMDb,NBC,Peacock,IGN,The A.V. Club (twice),the30 Rock YouTube channel... while it's a generic title format, thisspecific generic format is the only one used for this episode, and it's used in quotes like a regular episode title (unless websites don't use quotes for style reasons). To avoid a move war, I'm opening this discussion, but since the long-standing title was "Episode 210", I feel the episode should be moved back if the discussion finds no consensus. If disambiguation is needed,Episode 210 (30 Rock) is a better alternative.RunningTiger123 (talk)00:15, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
July 11, 2025
(Discuss) –Canadian (disambiguation) →CanadianCanadian – After just under a year, I'll go and revisit whether demonyms (referring to people from specific country) shouldn't have a primary topic. The reason why they all don't is because the term also commonly refers to the language or from the country, since most countries have their own language. But even when the term cannot refer to a language, then the demonym still isn't the primary topic. This is the case withAlgerian,Andorran,Australian,Austrian,Brazilian,Belgian,Egyptian,Israeli,Moldovan,Moroccan,Swiss. This leavesCanadian as one of the only examples of where the demonym is the primary topic. I don't see any reason why Canadian should be in a unique position. This time, I also addedPakistani andSingaporean since I failed to realise about them in the previous discussion.JuniperChill (talk)22:33, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Cuauhtémoc–Brooklyn Bridge collision →Cuauhtémoc–Brooklyn Bridge crash – Follow-up to resolve lingering question fromthe last RM as to whethercrash,collision, or some other noun is the best descriptor for this incident.Crash is my top choice and I will present the others in rough order of preference from the prior RM; note that I was involved in this lengthy discussion and may miss details and nuanced arguments. I thinkcollision is reasonable but I appreciate the objections raised. I would not use the other terms. #crash: This appeared to be the most common noun used at the time of the last RM and in the initial wave of coverage. This term is widely used in reliable sources and is accessible to a general audience. It satisfies the namingWP:CRITERIA well: it is certainly recognizable, natural, precise, and concise. #collision: A few editors pointed out that in maritime terminologycollision specifically refers to an incident involving two moving vessels (hence the prefixco-). Thus a "crash" between a moving ship and a stationary object such as a bridge is not properly described as acollision. This may explain why high quality sources usedcrash more often. Common usage does not make this distinction and many reliable sources do usecollision andcollide to describe this incident. On the other hand, where a suitable alternative exists (crash) it may be good editorial practice to avoidcollision even if most readers won't notice. #strike: This had limited support but is reasonably descriptive and is found in sources, especially as a verb (The shipstruck the bridge). #accident: Some sources including theNTSB do use this terminology. Though often used imprecisely in every day language,accident can imply that an event was unavoidable or that a finding of no fault has been made. Style guides for motor vehicle collisions often recommend against this word (e.g.,Washington State Department of Transportation andthis from Rutgers). #allision: This was raised several times and met with vigorous opposition. In maritime terminology,allision is the term for a moving vessel striking a stationary object. This word is found in dictionaries but will be inaccessible to most readers.Allision is not used inany article titles on WP.WP:DISASTER is silent on this usage question for maritime incidents but does have guidance for trains. (EDIT 18:16, 9 July 2025 (UTC): WP:DISASTER guidance on "accident" is discussed in the thread.) I could not find many articles to review for consistency.1938 Muncy Raft crash does involve a moving vessel striking a bridge. --MYCETEAE 🍄🟫—talk 16:06, 4 July 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.CoconutOctopustalk18:32, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In Wikipedia, an article title is anatural-language word or expression that indicates the subject of the article; as such, the article title is usually the name of the person, or of the place, or of whatever else the topic of the article is. However, some topics have multiple names, and some names have multiple topics; this can lead to disagreement about which name should be used for a given article's title. Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject'sofficial name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority ofindependent,reliable, English-language sources) as such names will usually best fit thefive criteria listed above.[a] When there is no single, obvious name that is demonstrably the most frequently used for the topic by these sources, editors should reach aconsensus as to which title is best by considering these criteria directly. For cases where usage differs among English-speaking countries, see also§ National varieties of English, below. Editors should also considerall five of the criteria for article titles outlined above. Ambiguous[b] or inaccurate names for the article subject, as determined in reliable sources, are often avoided even though they may be more frequently used by reliable sources. Neutrality is also considered; see§ Neutrality in article titles, below. Article titles should be neithervulgar (unless unavoidable) norpedantic. When there are multiple names for a subject, all of which are fairly common, and the most common has problems, it is perfectly reasonable to choose one of the others. Although official, scientific, birth, original, or trademarked names are often used for article titles, the term or name most typically used in reliable sources is generally preferred. Other encyclopedias are among the sources that may be helpful in deciding what titles are in an encyclopedicregister, as well as what names are most frequently used. The following are examples of the application of the concept of commonly used names in support of recognizability:People *Mahatma Gandhi (not: Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi) *Mansa Musa (not: Musa I) *Bill Clinton (not: William Jefferson Clinton) *J. K. Rowling (not: Joanne Rowling) *Bono (not: Paul Hewson) *Mark Antony (not: Marcus Antonius) *Shirley Temple (not: Shirley Temple Black)Places *Germany (not: Deutschland) *Great Pyramid of Giza (not: Pyramid of Khufu) *North Korea (not: Democratic People's Republic of Korea) *Westminster Abbey (not: Collegiate Church of Saint Peter at Westminster)Scientific and technical topics *Aspirin (not: acetylsalicylic acid) *Diesel engine (not: compression-ignition engine) *Guinea pig (not:Cavia porcellus) *Polio (not: poliomyelitis) *Spanish flu (not: 1918 influenza pandemic)Product names and fictional characters *Windows XP (not: Windows NT 5.1) *Sailor Moon (character) (not: Usagi Tsukino) *Darth Vader (not: Anakin Skywalker)Other topics *Cello (not: Violoncello) *FIFA (not:Fédération Internationale de Football Association or International Federation of Association Football) *Mueller report (not:Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election) *Proxima Centauri (not: V645 Centauri or Alpha Centauri C) In determining which of several alternative names is most frequently used, it is useful to observe the usage of major international organizations, major English-language media outlets, quality encyclopedias, geographic name servers, major scientific bodies, and notable scientific journals. Asearch engine may help to collect this data; when using a search engine, restrict the results to pages written in English, and exclude the word "Wikipedia".[c] When using Google, generally a search of Google Books and News Archive should be defaulted to before a web search, as they concentrate reliable sources (exclude works fromBooks, LLC when searching Google Books[d]). Search engine results are subject to certain biases and technical limitations; for detailed advice on the use of search engines and the interpretation of their results, seeWikipedia:Search engine test.
^This includes but is not limited to usage in the sources used as references for the article. Discussions about article titles commonly look at additional off-site sourcing, such as frequency of usage in news publications, books, and journals. "Common name" in the context of article naming means acommonly or frequently used name, and not necessarily acommon (vernacular) name, as opposed toscientific name, as used in some disciplines.
^Ambiguity, as used here, is unrelated to whether a title requiresdisambiguation pages on the English Wikipedia. For example, "heart attack" is an ambiguous title, because the term can refer to multiple medical conditions, includingcardiac arrest andmyocardial infarction.
^Add this code in the search:-inauthor:"Books, LLC" (the quotation marks " " are essential); Books, LLC "publishes" compilations of WP articles.
Currently the article title forGrass is a redirect toPoaceae and the word "Poaceae" is a scientific term for grass that we do not use everyday but the word "grass" is the common word that we use for that plant.Vitaium (talk) 07:44, 27 June 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.TarnishedPathtalk16:05, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Jesse Welles (musician) →Jesse Welles – Pageviews and outlinks from theJesse Welles disambiguation page seem to support the notion that the musician is theprimary topic over the actress. This page was moved fromWelles (musician) to its current title on May 3 of this year.Pageview stats show that the musician receives about 700 to 1k daily pageviews on average, compared to about 100 to 300 for the actress.WikiNav shows that about 58% of outgoing views from the disambiguation page go to the musician, with the actress hovering between 25% and 40% of those views.Google search results for the name "Jesse Welles" trend towards the musician rather than the actress.wizzito |say hello! 14:07, 4 July 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.TarnishedPathtalk16:02, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Supreme Hockey League →All-Russian Hockey League – The Russian official name has been changed in 2022.Source The current name of the article is therefore no longer a translation of the current name of the league in Russian. The English version of the official website (www.vhlru.ru/en/) still has the old name in the <title> tag (maybe they forgot to change it), but does not refer to it in the main body, only referring to the league as OLIMPBET VHL.Шахматист2025 (talk) 13:48, 4 July 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.TarnishedPathtalk16:01, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Sylvia Seegrist →1985 Springfield Mall shooting –WP:BIO1E. While there is some notability to Seegrist as an individual, the primary focus is still the shooting. The aftermath section borders onWP:SOAP rather than being informative about either the state of gun control then and after or treatment of Seegrist's mental health. The last three paragraphs, particularly the last two, seem to hold undue weight and are written in a weirdly personal manner with lengthy quotations for what look to be just Seegrist's musing rather than anything relevant. The year in the title differentiates it from a more minor shooting that took place at the mall in 2018, reports of which reference the 1985 one fairly often without mention of Seegrist.Rubintyrann (talk)14:11, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Ronald K. Crumpley →West Street Massacre –WP:BIO1E. The article is evidently more about the shooting than Crumpley or the criminal proceedings that followed. "West Street Massacre" appears to be aWP:COMMONNAME, used by both contemporary and more recent media mention, when compared to the other alternative "Ramrod Massacre", used by Greenwich Village's Historic Society, but nowhere else.Rubintyrann (talk)13:42, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –No Malice →Malice (rapper)Malice (rapper) – I believe that, due to Malice's return to the music industry following the release and media coverage ofClipse's albumLet God Sort Em Out warrants moving this page to Malice (rapper), and leavingNo Malice as a redirect, as perWP:SUSTAINED, and under guidance given onWP:MOVE andMOS:PSEUDONYM. I believe the change to be uncontroversial, considering that Malice has not gone by the name No Malice for a considerable time, and is referred to in all reliable media coverage[40][41][42][43] I have seen as of recent as simply Malice, and he has discussed the stage name change in interviews, too.[44] More than happy to copyedit the page to remove references to No Malice, too. As well, the page Malice (rapper) is simply a redirect, so the change would not be destructive.EphemeralPerpetuals(they/them)talk09:20, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –City West station → ? – The suburbs of Minneapolis and Perth are very far apart. Unfortunately, these article titles are uncomfortably close together. The culprit seems to be an ENGVAR-type issue in how railway stations are titled: in the United States, just "station", and in Commonwealth countries including Australia, "railway station". This is not my field for disambiguating, but here are some thoughts on my end: * WouldCity West light rail station orCity West LRT station be appropriate for the one in Minnesota? * Would disambiguating by city, state, system, or country be appropriate?Sammi Brie (she/her · t ·c) 07:43, 4 July 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.TarnishedPathtalk09:02, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Tornado outbreak of February 21–22, 1971 →1971 Mississippi Delta Tornado Outbreak – This outbreak has been, especially in more recent times, refereed to as either the 1971 Mississippi Delta Tornado Outbreak, or just the 1971 Delta Tornado Outbreak. This page used to be titled as such but for some reason was changed to its current title. It is also important to note that most of the violent tornadoes from this outbreak occurred on 1 day and in the Mississippi Delta region, so naming the outbreak after its location makes sense and would give it a more recognizable title.Quincy Gordon (talk)02:46, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Gautam →Gautam (first name)Gautam (first name) – This page initially was started to provide the list of the persons having Gautam as their first name. But @KnowDeath has moved it without discussing to another name and deleted its contents. So I would like to move it back as Gautam (first name) along with its original listLomasha (talk)19:55, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Neo Geo Pocket Color →Neo Geo PocketNeo Geo Pocket – I realize there was a very recent move discussion with overwhelming opposition (including from myself), but the article has undergone substantial changes which effectively changes the primary topic from the NG Pocket Color to the NG Pocket hardware line. I think these changes are an improvement, and the article title should change to align with this.TarkusABtalk/contrib 19:10, 2 July 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.CoconutOctopustalk21:05, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Richard Hauptmann →Bruno Richard HauptmannBruno Richard Hauptmann – PerWP:COMMONNAME. I do not dispute that use of the term "Bruno" was foisted on the public's consciousness by prosecutors even though "neither Hauptmann nor his family or friends used the name Bruno." But while that might have been an injustice, one of many, it is not the job of Wikipedia to "right great wrongs." Googling "Bruno Richard Hauptmann" results in 62,000 hits, and the name "Bruno" is included even in the titles of books that are sympathetic to him.Coretheapple (talk)19:15, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Kirisuto no Haka →Tomb of Christ (Japan) – This article's current title uses the monument's Japanese name (romanised) instead of an English translation. I can't easily find an English source which refers to it asKirisuto no Haka, rather, most tend to use translations such as "Christ's Grave," "the Grave of Jesus Christ," or "the Tomb of Christ." Similar translations are also reflected on the area's local signage. To best honour the spirit ofWP:UE, I believe that the article should be renamed and moved to a space such as "Tomb of Christ (Japan)" — with the inclusion of "(Japan)" to remove ambiguity from other, similar monuments.ItsSwimm (talk) 10:45, 1 July 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.ASUKITE14:59, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Mario →Mario (character)Mario (character) – Per the recent move fromLuigi toLuigi (character), I am now suggesting the same be done to Mario. As with Luigi, in spite of easily being the most well-known Mario, the name is very common in real life (in fact the character Mario was named after a real person), to the point that the real life given name should take precedence. Specific disambiguation of (character), (Nintendo), etc. could be done later, but at the moment we should make Mario's page name consistent with Luigi's.Unnamed anon (talk) 20:23, 1 July 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.CoconutOctopustalk13:05, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Hiawatha (Amtrak train) →Hiawatha (train)Hiawatha (train) – PerWP:PRIMARYTOPIC, the qualifier "Amtrak" is redundant in each of these article titles. These three Amtrak routes are unequivocally the primary topics of each of their respective named trains, as current (and in the latter, temporarily discontinued) train routes versus historical ones, and pageviews analysis confirms this trend. PerWP:TITLECON, otherAmtrak routes that are the primary topic in each of their respective names already have their articles titled in similar fashion.OrdinaryScarlett (talk)08:29, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Elapsed listings fall into the backlog after 24 hours. Consider relisting 8-day-old discussions with minimal participation.
(Discuss) –The Hundred (cricket) →The HundredThe Hundred –This page can be moved to just The Hundred, because that is the name everyone uses. The cricket tournament is called simply The Hundred by media, fans, and even the official site. There is no need for (cricket) because no other page with this name exists or is popular. So this can be the main title.ইমরান ভূইয়া (talk)sock strike 06:32, 19 June 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.TarnishedPathtalk 12:05, 29 June 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.TarnishedPathtalk12:00, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Free Church of Scotland (since 1900) →Free Church of Scotland – This church has a continuous identity going back to 1843. Our lead says "It is the continuation of the original Free Church of Scotland," and apparently Scottish courts agree. The legal situation isn't determinative, but when someone says "Free Church of Scotland," they mean an identifiable organization which claims a continuous identity to 1843. In the earlier move request, it seemed to be argued that older historical works about the church before 1900 should be weighed as if they were calling a different entity the "Free Church of Scotland" than the one that exists now, but that's not how it works. It doesn't become a new thing when the majority leaves it. I believe a majority of the Church of Scotland's members have left it in the last 20 years, but it's still the Church of Scotland.--JFHutson (talk) 14:18, 20 June 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.CoconutOctopustalk 18:18, 27 June 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.CoconutOctopustalk19:28, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –2017 Hamas charter →Hamas Document of General Principles and Policies – The current title does not reflect how this document is most commonly and neutrally described in reliable sources, contrary toWP:COMMONNAME andWP:NPOV. Ananalysis of sources shows that sources more frequently use "document" or similar terms than "charter", even when generously counting sources that use "charter" only with qualifications like "could be considered." Among sources that consider whether this constitutes a charter, there is no consensus, with some explicitly noting the document "does not replace the charter." The proposed title uses the official name given by Hamas, reflects the predominant terminology in sources, and maintains neutrality on the contested question of whether this document constitutes a new charter. If you're concerned about the length of the proposed title, please indicate whether an alternative2017 Hamas policy document would be preferable. The current name is the result of a move that was done without a RM despite being clearly controversial and was challengedalmost immediatelyhere, so it doesn't constitute a stable consensus version.Alaexis¿question? 21:02, 18 June 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.CoconutOctopustalk17:50, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Nuseirat rescue and massacre →Nuseirat raidNuseirat raid – The term massacre is absent from neutral and pro-Israel sources and thus violates NCENPOV. Two reasons, the RfC on EuroMed as yellow and always attribute andWP:TITLEWARRIOR, which called out opinion pieces and failing to recognize authorial voice (newspaper quotes X who says massacre, therefore newspaper says massacre which is false). This is similar to Entebbe raid, and the AP (premier neutral source) has also clarified less than a month ago that the Paletinian deaths ocurred during a gun battle during the raid (see[50])Closetside (talk)23:31, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Ahsoka (TV series) →Star Wars: AhsokaStar Wars: Ahsoka – According to official press releases from Disney, the full, official titles for these two shows areStar Wars: Ahsoka andStar Wars: The Acolyte, respectively.WP:NATURAL states:Using an alternative name that the subject is also commonly called in English reliable sources, albeit not as commonly as the preferred-but-ambiguous title, is sometimes preferred.WP:SUBTITLE supports this by noting:When the most commonly used name is ambiguous, the full title and subtitle might be suitable to be used as a form of natural disambiguation. Finally,WP:NCDAB writes:Natural disambiguation that is unambiguous, commonly used, and clear is generally preferable to parenthetical disambiguation. For example, the official title ofRogue One isRogue One: A Star Wars Story, but we omit the franchise-denoting subtitle perWP:CONCISE andWP:COMMONNAME; on the other hand, although a more ideal title forSolo: A Star Wars Story would be simplySolo, it requires parenthetical disambiguation in the form ofSolo (2018 American film), so per NCDAB, we opt for the full title even though it is less common and concise. Likewise, althoughAhsoka andThe Acolyte are indeed most preferable, their full titles provide natural disambiguation. This is consistent with otherStar Wars spin-offs such asStar Wars: The Bad Batch andStar Wars: Skeleton Crew, whose shortened titles would similarly require parenthetical disambiguation. It is also prevalent beyondStar Wars, for exampleGlass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery,Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga, andGuillermo del Toro's Pinocchio — butHobbs & Shaw andWake Up Dead Man because no disambiguation is necessary. To satisfy the "also commonly called ... albeit not [the most] common" stipulation of NATURAL, reliable sources that useStar Wars: Ahsoka include:[57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69][70]; reliable sources that useStar Wars: The Acolyte include:[71][72][73][74][75][76][77][78][79][80][81][82][83][84]. Rotten Tomatoes uses the full titles as well:[85][86]. Disney+ demonstrably does not always use the official title, for example[87][88][89][90][91][92], so it should not be regarded as the most authoritative source for the official title. To address potential concerns with ambiguity, asStar Wars: AhsokaStar Wars: Ahsoka currently points toAhsoka (disambiguation) for some reason, it is highly unlikely for someone to refer to the character (Ahsoka Tano) as "Star Wars: Ahsoka", while the only other primary-topic contender (Ahsoka (novel)) is clearly far less notable; as forStar Wars: The AcolyteStar Wars: The Acolyte, it already redirects to the TV series since no otherStar Wars–related article contains "Acolyte" in its title.InfiniteNexus (talk)19:25, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Discuss) –Negative responsiveness →Mono-raise criterionMono-raise criterion – Last year these three pages were moved from their earlier names of "Monotonicity criterion", "Consistency criterion", and "Reversal symmetry" (as was "Participation criterion"). Two of the stated justifications for these moves were that the terms "monotonicity" and "consistency" are vague and can mean multiple things and that the pages should be named consistently. But these changes created aninconsistency between these pages and the other pages on voting system criteria (which are named after the criteria themselves and not the paradoxes that occur when they are violated). And the vagueness of the terms "monotonicity" and "consistency" could be addressed by simply making the titles more specific. "Monotonicity criterion" could have been renamed "Mono-raise criterion" or "Monotonicity criterion (electoral systems)" and "Consistency criterion" could have been renamed "Join-consistency criterion" or "Consistency criterion (electoral systems)". As shown in the pages' histories, I tried to fix this. I moved "Best-is-worst paradox" back to "Reversal symmetry". I requested that "No-show paradox" be moved back to "Participation criterion", which later happened. I moved "Negative responsiveness" to "Mono-raise criterion" (which required editing to restore the page's earlier language). And I moved "Multiple districts paradox" to "Join-consistency criterion". However, the user who made the initial changes (Closed Limelike Curves) reversed most of what I did. They moved three of the pages back (but couldn't move back "Participation criterion") and reverted the aforementioned edits to the one page. I apologize if my actions have come across as aggressive, but in my opinion the pages "Participation criterion" and "Reversal symmetry" were fine under those names and the other two pages should have names that, while precise, are consistent with those of the other pages on voting system criteria. Discussion is welcome. But I do want to note that as it stands the page "Negative responsiveness" has the same paragraph (about monotonicity violations in proportional representation systems) appear twice in different sections. One of my reverted edits fixed this by removing one of the duplicates, and it would need to be fixed again in a future edit. I would do it myself, but I might as well let people first discuss which location is more appropriate for the paragraph. Thank you for your input.Man of Steel 85 (talk) 03:25, 16 April 2025 (UTC)— Relisting. — Amakuru (talk) 05:36, 27 April 2025 (UTC)— Relisting.TarnishedPathtalk12:51, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
![[4]](/mt/?noimg=&dark=on&url=https%3a%2f%2fcommons.m.wikimedia.org%2fwiki%2fFile%3aThe_President%2c_Shri_Ram_Nath_Kovind_at_the_inauguration_of_the_platinum_jubilee_celebrations_of_the_Institute_of_Chartered_Accountants_of_India_(ICAI)%2c_in_New_Delhi.JPG){kind=link}
_BHL40218281-detail.jpg){kind=link}
