Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests

If you are unable 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:..."

  • To list a technical request: edit the Uncontroversial 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 the Contested technical requests section, append a note on the request elaborating on why, and sign with ~~~~. Consider pinging 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.

Technical requests

edit

Uncontroversial technical requests

edit
  • Leonid Slutsky (football coach)  Leonid Slutsky (football manager) (currently a redirect back to Leonid Slutsky (football coach)) (move · discuss) – From a Wikipedia search, I've found that association football managers who need disambiguation after their name tend to be disambiguated with (football manager) (my search}, while American football managers are more commonly disambiguated by (football coach) (my search). Slutsky is an association football manager. (Although I do feel there might be ambiguity between "football manager" and "football coach" as they're basically interchangeable especially in association football, but I'm just trying to follow what seems to be the tradition on English Wikipedia) IDontHaveSkype (talk) 04:17, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@IDontHaveSkype, per WP:RM#CM (below) any title that has been debated before should be debated again rather than moved, however it looks like in 2016 somebody else moved this shortly after the discussion and that move was never contested, either because it was accepted as a better title or because nobody noticed. It may be a good idea to discuss it anyways if we follow policy to the letter, but from looking at the article it seems his coverage as a "footballer" is eclipsed by his work as a coach, so it may be okay? I'll leave this up for anybody to chime in if they want, otherwise I won't contest it. ASUKITE 13:53, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair – didn't cross my mind that it could have previously been discussed. I agree, his playing career looks very short-lived and started working as a football manager at a fairly young age (and is most likely what he is known by), so "footballer" might not make sense. IDontHaveSkype (talk) 14:18, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, "footballer" really doesn't make sense here. I will move this later today if nobody contests it, I think it's safe, just want to give it a minute. ASUKITE 14:59, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requests to revert undiscussed moves

edit

Contested technical requests

edit
  • Justine (de Sade novel)  Justine (Sade novel) (currently a redirect back to Justine (de Sade novel)) (move · discuss) – In the French naming custom, the particle "de" is not part of the last name and shouldn't appear when the first name or a title doesn't appear, e.g. Guy de Maupassant's last name would be Maupassant, etc. P. T. Tabayi (talk) 09:25, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That doesn't seem to match common English usage. For example Charles de Gaulle is always De Gaulle, not Gaulle. Britannica also uses De Sade.[1]  — Amakuru (talk) 15:25, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think it is Gaulle that doesn't match common English usage. You will find that the vast majority of works about Sade refer to him as such in the context we are talking about, from famous books, to famous essays, to even the English Wikipedia page of the writer itself. Taking a quick look at that page and its references will show that "Sade" is, beyond the correct linguistic choice, the common usage in literature and academia as well. P. T. Tabayi (talk) 09:18, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Spencer Dickinson (politician)  Spencer Dickinson (move · discuss) – Moved the page originally called "Spencer Dickinson" since it was just some random stub with 3x less pageviews per month, however the move left behind a redirect page so I cannot move this page. SusImposter49 (talk) 21:55, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure if that's a strong enough argument to declare the politician to be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC over the music project. That music article could be expanded, and the current name-only redirect could become a new disambig page, IMO. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 00:41, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I created a dab at the base page name purely as a procedural matter to avoid WP:MISPLACED while this technical move request is being discussed. I have no opinion on the primary topic. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 02:22, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SusImposter49: This move is potentially controversial, so it would require a requested-move discussion, which you can begin by clicking "discuss" on your request. You can remove this request after opening a discussion (or if you do not want to continue). SilverLocust 💬 06:39, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could the music project be expanded? I was looking into its background just out of curiosity, I'd say it barely even qualifies a page of its own. But the disambig page is a fine solution. SusImposter49 (talk) 12:07, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@OrdinaryScarlett Sounds like this could use a little more discussion before being moved. To open a discussion, please click the "discuss" link in your request above. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
)
17:56, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The bulk of the content relates to the former constituency. I wanted to preserve the edit history rather than cut and paste as you've suggested.--Obi2canibe (talk) 18:56, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do the two have significantly different borders? If not, I think it's standard practice to leave them as one page.  — Amakuru (talk) 07:21, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the two constituencies are significantly different. This map shows the arrondissement (old constituency) within the province (new constituency). The area of the constituency increased from 797 km2 to 3,857 km2. The electorate increased from 400,000 to 725,000.--Obi2canibe (talk) 18:22, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator needed

edit