Talk:Medieval Serbian nobility

Images of Serbian nobility

• "СРЪБСКА АРИСТОКРАЦИЯ XIII-XIVв".--Zoupan 08:05, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
• "Српска средњовековна властела". Историјска библиотека.--Zoupan 12:23, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 4 November 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: closed, withdrawn by requestor Mike Cline (talk) 21:06, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

---

• Serbian nobility in the Middle Ages → Serbian nobility
• Serbian nobility → To be deleted (1)
• Serbian nobility (disambiguation) → To be deleted (2)

– The current situation is messed up because I tried but failed to make necessary moves. There are 121 new or old inbound links to "Serbian nobility" that used to go to the page now at "Serbian nobility in the Middle Ages" and again do now by a redirect to it. The disambiguation page Serbian nobility (disambiguation) page lists several perhaps-planned pages but is not needed. The only Serbian nobility page is "Serbian nobility in the Middle Ages", which should be moved to "Serbian nobility". If and when there is a well-developed section there on "Serbian nobility in the early Modern ages" or whatever, then such sections can be split off. This move request is to restore the one Serbian nobility list to the simplest possible title. --doncram 19:56, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

• NOTE you cannot request deletion at Requested Moves, that is the wrong process. -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 05:04, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

This is the correct venue, although perhaps the way I requested it made it seem like deletions were involved. The request was essentially to undo what turns out to have been Zoupan's move of the "Serbian nobility" page to "Serbian nobility in the Middle Ages", creating a redirect. I tried to implement the necessary moves but could not complete them. The "deletions" expressed in my nomination were only to implement the appropriate move(s). I could/should have expressed it as "move over redirect", rather than spell out the administrative process to complete that (i.e., it is necessary to "delete" or "move without creating redirect" to make way for a page to be moved there). --doncram 20:01, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose, scramble request. Summarizing Serbian nobility.--Zoupan 05:42, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Comment beginning work. Doncram did not bother to speak to me; I would have taken care of the inbound links.--Zoupan 06:02, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

I did not propose to "scramble" anything. I requested, in effect, admin assistance to unscramble a situation that was created by my attempting and failing in moving "Serbian nobility in the Middle Ages" back to "Serbian nobility", which was an appropriate move in the absence of a different "Serbian nobility" page (which you since created). Zoupan, you're right that I could/should have contacted you perhaps, and normally I would have done that if I just happened to come across the situation that existed. However, the disambiguation page in the situation was the target of many incoming links that previously had gone to "Serbian nobility", and was one of the disambiguation pages with the most number of incoming links in the current month's wp:DPL "disambiguation challenge". If left as it was, other editors in the disambiguation challenge would likely have de-linked many/all of the incoming links, i.e. it would have disconnected the related articles, which I believe you would not have wanted. Either my actually-implemented move or my intended move was urgently needed to protect all of the inbound links. Once my actual moves were done, I believe that undoing them would require an administrator, and opening a Requested Move would then be the right forum.

I am sorry for causing confusion however. Now thinking about it, I could have edited the "Serbian nobility" redirect to be some temporary non-redirect, non-disambiguation page that would take the incoming links out of the challenge's cross-hairs, and then sought to discuss the situation with whomever had caused the situation. Or the situation would have been avoided if Zoupan or others had "created the articles first", per .... oh here it is, per Wikipedia:Write the article first, I think that applies. Again, though, sorry for causing confusion. --doncram 20:01, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

• Admin Comment: @Zoupan:, @Doncram: As long as there is a content article at Serbian nobility this move can not take place. If the content in Serbian nobility can be merged into the article Serbian nobility in the Middle Ages and Serbian nobility converted to a redirect to Serbian nobility in the Middle Ages. This move can take place. I will not do this unilaterally, but await an editor to make the necessary changes and merges before closing this RM. Thanks --Mike Cline (talk) 15:39, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

When I requested the move, there was not a content article there, it was only an inappropriate redirect of all usages of term "Serbian nobility" to the "Serbian nobility in the Middle Ages" article. (Inappropriate especially if any of the many incoming links related to non-Middle Ages periods.) Since then the disambiguation page (which in my view was unnecessary and premature, as it offered only one non-redlink target) was moved over it, and then edited to become a non-disambiguation page article, in these edits. This accomplished the main thing I tried to implement: putting a substantial article at "Serbian nobility" which was an okay target (and not a disambiguation page) for the many incoming links.

After the move(s) and edits which have been done, the situation is okay and no Requested Move is needed. Editor Zoupan or others can refine incoming links at their leisure, for the links that should now go to the "Middle Ages" article, without putting all the incoming links inadvertently in the middle of wp:DPL's "disambiguation challenge" (see my reply to Zoupan above).

So, this can be closed, IMO. Thanks. --doncram 20:01, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.