Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:21, 19 July 2023

NOTE: This is not the place to request moves. Please follow the instructions given on the project page. If you seek instruction on closing existing requests, please see the closing instructions.

Please use the Misplaced Pages:Move review process for contested move request closes.

To help centralize discussions and keep related topics together, most subpages of Misplaced Pages:Requested moves that are unused have talk pages that redirect here.

This page has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination. Discussions: RM, WP:Requested moves → WP:Proposed moves, No consensus, 7 June 2017 RM, WP:Requested moves → WP:Proposed moves, Not moved, 11 February 2018 RM, WP:Requested moves → WP:Articles for renaming, Not moved, 19 September 2018

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36

Administrators' noticeboard/Move requests (2005) For why RM was created, see: requested moves -- policy change? Archives by date Oct 2004–Jan 2005 Jan 2005–Feb 2005 Feb 2005–Mar 2005 Mar 2005–Aug 2005 Aug 2005–Dec 2005 Dec 2005–Jun 2006 Jun 2006–Sep 2006 Sep 2006–Feb 2007 Feb 2007–May 2007 May 2007–Nov 2007 Nov 2007–May 2008 Jun 2008–Oct 2008 Nov 2008–Jan 2009 Jan 2009 Jan 2009–Jun 2009 Jun 2009–Oct 2009 Oct 2009–Jun 2010 Jun 2010–Oct 2010 Oct 2010–Jan 2011 Jan 2011–Sep 2011 Sep 2011–Jan 2012 Jan 2012–Apr 2012 Apr 2012–Aug 2012 Aug 2012–Dec 2012 Dec 2012–Dec 2013 Dec 2013–Nov 2014 Nov 2014–Apr 2015 Apr 2015–Jun 2016 Jun 2016–May 2017 May 2017–Mar 2018 Mar 2018–May 2019 May 2019–Jun 2020 May 2020–Mar 2022 Mar 2022–Jan 2023 Jan 2023–

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Top or bottom?

The instructions for listing a technical request at the top of the "Requesting technical moves" section say:

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...

but when you edit the section, it says:

Insert the following code below, filling in page names and reason: {{subst:RMassist| current page title | new title | reason = reason for move}} and enter on a new line, directly below...

which would place it at the top of the list. Which is correct? DH85868993 (talk) 00:47, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

I always thought it should be at the bottom, perhaps the code when editing needs correcting? -Kj cheetham (talk) 09:22, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

I believe this was changed recently, and I guess one of them was forgotten in the update? I have no idea which is actually correct, though. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 04:47, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

If we look at it logically/consistency wise, the older entries/requests should be on upper levels, while the recent ones should be at the bottom - consistent with Misplaced Pages:Requested moves/Current discussions, deletion sorting, talk page threads, and other stuff. —usernamekiran (talk) 10:14, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

• Relevant discussion earlier in the year: Misplaced Pages talk:Requested moves/Archive 35#RM/TR "at the top". —CX Zoom 14:02, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your replies everyone. I've updated the instructions that appear when you edit the section to say that new entries should be added at the bottom of the list. Feel free to improve my wording. DH85868993 (talk) 23:02, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 20 June 2023

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Mistake on creator's part. Relevant section now opened at Talk:Bangalore#Requested move 20 June 2023. (closed by non-admin page mover) —CX Zoom 06:23, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requested moves → Bengaluru – Bengaluru is more commonly called name and I'd also add that most of the Indian tier one cities have their current official names in Misplaced Pages articles, i.e. Chennai (formerly know as Madras, Kolkata (formerly known as Calcutta. So I strongly propose that Bangalore should also be renamed/moved to Bengaluru, per WP:COMMONNAME. — Akshadev™ 🔱 06:04, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

I posted it here by mistake. Apologies. — Akshadev™ 🔱 06:13, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Backlog notice, revisited

I brought this up a bit over a year ago at Misplaced Pages talk:Requested moves/Archive 34#Backlog notice, and the status quo was kept, but things are changing with the template and it feels like a good time to bring it up again.

Right now, the backlog notice at the top of the page requests help from administrators. In reality, the majority of editors who perform these moves are page movers, or sometimes even just normal editors. Outside of very few cases (which can be brought up at RM/TR if a page mover closes the request, or left for an admin to officially close), most moves are performable by any page mover. Therefore, I suggest changing the backlog notice to something along the lines of "This page has a backlog that requires the attention of one or more page movers.", or just the generic message from {{backlog}}.

The reason I bring this up now is that the currently-used template, {{Admin backlog}}, is being merged into {{backlog}}. If the bot will have to be updated (which it probably will, given I imagine a parameter needs to be added), this would be a convenient time to request wbm1058 update the bot. (We also have a giant backlog at the moment (please help!), and all of the requests I've checked have been closable by me; if anyone wants to check and confirm that a significant portion of the requests do not require admin help, this would be a good time.)

I guess the one question I have is whether this is possible in {{backlog}}, but I imagine someone can update the template if it's not. (Once again, the template has to be updated to account for the merge from Admin backlog, so I don't think this is a big deal.) Skarmory (talk • contribs) 08:09, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

RMCI edits

@2pou: Regarding Special:Diff/1163031477, thanks for the discussion link. It was to make RMCI a guideline, and from what I observe from skimming it, it is likely a no consensus case, so it remained an essay. The "mandatory" part was added by @Red Slash during the course of RfC, but since the RfC itself remains unresolved, I think it would be better as the status quo. Thanks! —CX Zoom 15:29, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

@CX Zoom, I honestly have no qualms with what you are working towards, and you can feel free to restore. More than anything, I thought that the lack of linkage to the previous discussion was an issue considering the {{efn}} word choice and that having it at least linked in the history would help with posterity (since it took me some time to find out what it was even referring to). I figured using the Undo feature would also alert you in case you weren’t aware previously. Concur that mandatory comes off a bit strong. -2pou (talk) 04:20, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Move request from "Draft:Fifty Vinc (record producer) to "Draft:Fifty Vinc"

Hey everyone, I would like to request a move from Draft:Fifty Vinc (record producer) to Draft:Fifty Vinc. I think, in regards to the topic and content in the draft article, the title "Fifty Vinc" is more fitting. Thanks in advance. Matthew Tailor (talk) 15:02, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

 Done —CX Zoom 15:44, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

That was quick. Thank you very much. Matthew Tailor (talk) 15:57, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

WP:CHEMPREFIX moves

In a request for WP:CHEMPREFIX move, the following discussion took place:

While I'd gladly perform any such moves per WP:CHEMPREFIX, I think we could be more systematic and create the huge list of pages that would need to be moved under this criteria and let a bot handle this (TolBot). I expect the number of such pages to range in several hundreds if not thousands. —CX Zoom 22:24, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

I think a potential approach could be to write a query to search "alpha", "beta", etc. in page title, and checking if it falls within WP:WPCHEM domain. —CX Zoom 22:33, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Any such list should also be checked against the WP:COMMONNAME, as some compounds appear frequently in advertising, and lay discussions, nutrition and diet material, so may indeed exist most commonly as the spelled-out latin-lettered form -- 67.70.25.80 (talk) 23:41, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Asked for a query: Misplaced Pages:Request a query#Spelled out Latin characters in Chemistry articles. If anyone has ideas to make the query better, feel free to chime in. I also agree that in some cases, the spelled out form might be common name (e.g., Omega-3 fatty acid), so a manual reviewer might have to go through such a list, to weed out these cases. —CX Zoom 06:51, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Requested moves/Technical enhancements

I've drafted up a template (Template:RMTR) to help make responses to requested moves a little better by adding done and not done with reasons, which could be expanded to standard RMs if wanted, but the point of this discussion is to determine if there is consensus to implement this template to RM/TR. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 10:43, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Is all of this complexity (for either process) really necessary? RMTR seems to be working fine as is. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:23, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes but currently done requests are removed immediately after fulfilment, which makes it hard for users to easily check on their requests. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 14:38, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

People familiar enough with Misplaced Pages processes to request moves should know how to check the page history. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:45, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough, though it makes requesting input easier. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 14:49, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Wouldn't be opposed to having some standard templates for not done (This article has been moved in the past, a name change does not mean the article title should change until COMMONNAME is met, etc.), but I think our removal of requests works fine for now for requests that are done.. The one thing that might be useful is an archive for past requests, which there was an RFCBEFORE for, but I can't figure out if that was ever followed up on. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 04:59, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

RMTR invisible comment

The "remove all requests" button currently uses the old version of the invisible comment, which states to place new requests at the top instead of the bottom. That should be updated, and I would do it myself, but it requires the queue to be cleared using the current method (reverting to an old revision of the page). If the next person who clears the queue and sees this can make this change, that would be appreciated. I've left the code below (it was created above at #Top or bottom?, which seems to be past the 30 day archive limit so that may get archived soon?) – it should be added under the uncontroversial requests. revert requests and admin needed headings.

<!-- Insert the following code below, filling in page names and reason: {{subst:RMassist| current page title | new title | reason = reason for move}} and enter on a new line, at the bottom of the existing list; do not add spare lines between entries; do not add a bullet point; if you do not wish the request to be converted into an RM if contested, then add |discuss=no --> Skarmory (talk • contribs) 01:56, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

I figured this was likely to get forgotten, so I just did it now instead of waiting. Here's the diff between the old and new blank revisions. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:21, 19 July 2023 (UTC)