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: 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.

Add a new request

Remove all requests

Technical requests

Edit this section if you want to move a request between sections.

Uncontroversial technical requests

Most requests should be placed below this heading.

• Hwang Hyun-jin → Hyunjin (currently a redirect instead to Hyun-jin) (move · discuss) – Newly created article for mononymous individual. Requesting to usurp existing redirect per WP:COMMONNAME, combined with adding hatnote to article for Hyun-jin (as is widespread precedent for people who use a mononymous unhyphenated version of a Korean name where a hyphenated name article also exists). Hwang Hyun-jin is the only individual with a Wikipedia article that does not commonly use a hyphen. RachelTensions (talk) 16:23, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
• Amaan Ali Khan → Amaan Ali Bangash (currently a redirect back to Amaan Ali Khan) (move · discuss) – name inconsistent, see credit used Hekerui (talk) 17:45, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

More info may be needed here. This musician and his brother both have articles: Amaan Ali Khan (this one) and Ayaan Ali Khan, but the text in the two articles use "Khan" and "Bangash" in haphazard ways so it's tough to decipher birth names, stage names, matronyms, patronyms, or whichever is more relevant. Also, if this request is granted we may have to do the same for his brother too. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 12:57, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

• B–unit → B unit (currently a redirect back to B–unit) (move · discuss) – typo (With a hyphen this would be the modifier form, but this form, with an en dash, is incorrect in any usage. The corresponding article “A unit” is already named correctly in this respect.) Stephan Leeds (talk) 23:35, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

  To be honest it'd probably be best to rename both articles to "A-unit" and "B-unit" (hyphen, not en dash) - it'd be more clear. "A unit" could be construed as meaning "a unit" RachelTensions (talk) 00:52, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

  I agree, that seems to be a reasonable alternative. ASUKITE 16:12, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Requests to revert undiscussed moves

If your request involves reverting a move, place it here.

Contested technical requests

Do not insert new requests in this section. Only move requests here if the requested move has been contested.

• Alan Rose (public servant) → Alan Rose (Australian public servant) (move · discuss) – WP:AT ambiguous disambiguation is a bad idea wP:PRECISE multiple public servants named Alan Rose with articles on Wikipedia, particularly, the nominal primary topic is a British judge, Alan Rose; The article should be moved without leaving a redirect behind, as there's no disambiguation page for "Alan Rose" to repoint it to. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 11:48, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

  This title is fine as it is; unless you instead want a DAB out of "Alan Rose"! Intrisit (talk) 14:59, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

  Yes, I was going to say this would be fine as is too. "Public servant" appears to have a fairly narrow meaning of someone working in the civil service, so this isn't ambiguous as far as I can see, at least with the judge. The fact that the OP suggested suppressing the redirect altogether tells us that this is already the correct title anyway, otherwise it would redirect somewhere.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:02, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

  No, if we kept the redirect, it would have to redirect to the judge. Judges are public servants, thus this is a bad disambiguation. Judges are employed by the government, thus public employees, thus public servants. Judges are not private sector workers. This judge was part of the colonial service, a governmental sector of the British Empire. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 04:18, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

• Dalbello → Lisa Dal Bello (currently a redirect back to Dalbello) (move · discuss) – Per WP:PRIMARY, WP:COMMONNAME and WP:CONSISTENT. Dalbello is a stage name only. — User:Dolovis (User talk:Dolovis • Special:Contributions/Dolovis) — Preceding undated comment added 02:53, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

  Yes, it's a stage name, but that doesn't make it a bad choice of title per se. So is Eminem, and so are a lot of other stage names that are used as article titles. What's the problem? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 05:05, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

  This should probably be an RM discussion with reliable sources to back up the assertion that this person is more commonly referred to by her given name in English language reliable sources than by her stage name. RachelTensions (talk) 05:06, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

  @Dolovis; your technical request has been contested and thus requires an RM discussion to evaluate if consensus exists for the move. Please use the "discuss" button in your request to open a full RM if you wish to continue with the potential rename. Sennecaster (Chat) 19:29, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

  Since when has there ever been a rule that Wikipedia articles invariably have to be titled with the person's legal birth-certificate name instead of a stage name? The WP:COMMONNAME that people know her by is clearly Dalbello, and there aren't multiple competing stage names like Dan Snaith's to worry about here (his article is at Dan Snaith to preclude edit warring over whether it should be at "Caribou" or "Daphni", not because articles about musicians always have to be at the person's birth name on principle), so why would what's technically on her birth certificate override the name she's best known by? Bearcat (talk) 19:41, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

• Pablo Escobar, The Drug Lord → Pablo Escobar, el patrón del mal (currently a redirect back to Pablo Escobar, The Drug Lord) (move · discuss) – Netflix title is "Pablo Escobar, el patrón del mal" (With that stylisation, is also the original stylisation). So I think we can consider that the new international title. "The drug lord" is also a very poor translation of "El patrón del Mal" Tazelaar (talk) 09:56, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

  @Tazelaar Apple TV+ Still calls it "Pablo Escobar: The Drug Lord" here. --Ahecht (TALK
  PAGE) 14:24, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

  Netflix (here) and IMDb (here) and MUBI (here) call it "El patrón del mal". Tazelaar (talk) 13:10, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

@Tazelaar Contesting as this likely needs a discussion to move forward. This wiki prefers English titles when possible, and we use the WP:COMMONNAME which is the name reported by majority of sources (again, preferably English sources, which are typically going to favor an English translation) - as for the translation, if the official translation is incorrect, it might be borderline editorializing if we try to correct it unless the correction we go with is also supported by majority of RS. At the very least, we would need to see sources or evidence of which title is the common name to move forward (and that would be most productive in a discussion where editors can bring forward opposing evidence that may have been missed.) ASUKITE 14:46, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

I concede that the content of the translation is a circumstantial argument, but an argument nonetheless. Tazelaar (talk) 13:01, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Another circumstantial argument is that: "El patrón del mal" is a better recognisable title. Pablo Escobar was a drug lord, so the title could be used normally in a sentence. "El patrón del mal" is a unique title, more distinguishing from the "Pablo Escobar" article and Google results. Tazelaar (talk) 13:16, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

@Tazelaar; your technical request has been contested. If you wish to continue with the request, please use the "discuss" link in your request to open a full RM. Sennecaster (Chat) 19:28, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

• Bedroom Farce (play) → Bedroom Farce (currently a redirect back to Bedroom Farce (play)) (move · discuss) – unnecessary disambiguation Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 19:08, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

@Jean-de-Nivelle It appears that Bedroom farce has about twice the pageviews of the play, so more likely, the alternative capitalization of Bedroom Farce should redirect to Bedroom farce instead. Raladic (talk) 21:27, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

@Raladic That's a good point, but wikinav analysis ([1][2]) shows that only 13% of "Bedroom farce"'s traffic is from search results, the majority coming from internal links, while over 60% of "Bedroom Farce (play)"'s traffic is from "other search" - if I'm interpreting the results correctly. Worth an RM, or would WP:RFD be a better course? Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 10:57, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Since I believe you'd still like to move Bedroom Farce (play) to Bedroom Farce, I'd say a RM is probably best to answer both the question of if it should be moved, or if not, if Bedroom Farce should instead redirect to Bedroom farce as a redirect from alternative capitalization and then just post a note at the lowercase article to let people watching that article know about the RM. Raladic (talk) 00:19, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

• The Mexican → The Mexican (film) (currently a redirect back to The Mexican) (move · discuss) – The title should clarify that this is a film as per WP:PARENDIS. According to WP standards, parenthetical disambiguation is needed because the standard use of Mexican is not for a film, but a person from Mexico. Currently, there is a backward redirect MexFin (talk) 06:22, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

  Currently the 2001 film is set as the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the term The Mexican, which seems reasonable as it has a large lead in page views over the other four topics from the Mexican disambiguation page which are called The Mexican. I'm guessing the OP is suggesting perhaps the generic use of Mexican as defined by the other usages on that disambiguation page should be considered for The Mexican too, but we don't normally regard such titles as ambiguous if there's a clear primary topic for the exact term as specified. @MexFin: please start a full RM discussion if you wish to proceed. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 11:15, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

  Partial disambiguation of films is never uncontroversial. "The Mexican" is not the same as "Mexican". —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:31, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

• Thyia of Thessaly → Thyia (daughter of Deucalion) (currently a redirect back to Thyia of Thessaly) (move · discuss) – No sources call her "Thyia of Thessaly". Best to use the disambiguator "daughter of Deucalion", per sources such as Gantz's Early Greek Myth, p. 909, and Hard's Routledge Handbook of Greek Mythology, p. 741. Michael Aurel (talk) 14:35, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

  This is just standard naming for princesses and suchlike - <Name> of <Location>. I don't see a strong need to change it and the current tittle is WP:NATURALDIS.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:23, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

  I'm not aware of any source calling her a princess, so I don't know why we would use standard naming for royalty. Her only real significance is genealogical. In addition, as I said, I don't think there is any source which calls her "Thyia of Thessaly", so I don't see how WP:NATDIS applies, since the phrase is not what she is commonly called in English reliable sources. – Michael Aurel (talk) 17:05, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

• FWD Tower → PCP Tower (move · discuss) – The building in question is actually known as Pacific Century Place. As written on the official website https://pcp-jakarta.com there is no record of the building ever being referred to as FWD Tower. This incorrect information is misleading and could cause confusion among users. Andres Arie Wibowo (talk) 09:26, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

  You say "PCP Tower" is the proper name but the article itself and sources you mention make no mention of "Tower"... they say either "Pacific Century Place" or "PCP Jakarta". Keep in mind Pacific Century Place Marunouchi also exists so maybe "Pacific Century Place Jakarta" is the best option and then Pacific Century Place as a disambiguation page; either way this should probably go to an RM. RachelTensions (talk) 14:48, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

@Andres Arie Wibowo There seems to be a reasonably large amount of RS calling it the "FWD tower", so this should probably be discussed in a full RM. Even the indonesian Wikipedia has had this as the name for many also known as names until some user decided to quietly change it. We go by what is the WP:COMMONNAME for article titles, this may not always be what the "official name" is for a place. Raladic (talk) 14:50, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

• Wreck of the Mexico → 1837 wreck of the Mexico (move · discuss) – This is not the only wreck of a ship named Mexico with an article on Wikipedia which has also been the subject of much coverage. Another wreck is covered at Southport and St Anne's lifeboats disaster -- and depends on whether you are British or American on which is prominent -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 08:45, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

  I processed the related move already, I'm caught on this one, 1837 Wreck of the Mexico is a good WP:NATDIS, however, it may also imply that the same ship was wrecked more than once. Wreck of the Mexico (1837) or something similar might be slightly better. ASUKITE 15:37, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

  A move is not necessary. The year is mentioned in the first sentence and there is already a hatnote pointing to Southport and St Anne's lifeboats disaster. Station1 (talk) 16:18, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Administrator needed

Edit this section only if your request requires an administrator. Usually, do so if the page has been fully protected or move protected (see this guide to which moves need administrators). Place your request in another section if it only requires a page mover.