Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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]

Requests to revert undiscussed moves

[edit]


Contested technical requests

[edit]
Since this was previously moved, and has been stable at this name for more than a year, this should require a full RM discussion and would not qualify as uncontroversial or uncontested. TiggerJay(talk) 05:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What reliable sources do you have to support this name change? Current citation seem to support the current article title. See WP:NAMECHANGE for related information. TiggerJay(talk) 04:06, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What reliable sources do you have to support this name change? Current citation seem to support the current article title. See WP:NAMECHANGE for related information. TiggerJay(talk) 04:06, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What reliable sources do you have to support this name change? Current citation seem to support the current article title. See WP:NAMECHANGE for related information. TiggerJay(talk) 04:06, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What reliable sources do you have to support this name change? Current citation seem to support the current article title. See WP:NAMECHANGE for related information. TiggerJay(talk) 04:06, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What reliable sources do you have to support this name change? Current citation seem to support the current article title. See WP:NAMECHANGE for related information. TiggerJay(talk) 04:06, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What reliable sources do you have to support this name change? Current citation seem to support the current article title. See WP:NAMECHANGE for related information. TiggerJay(talk) 04:06, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jonny2x4 We use what reliable sources use, not offical names. Most, if not all, refs in article use current capitalization, any particular reason/source to change it? ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 16:31, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Rebochan Contested as recent activity shows there is controversy - after the related move is closed it may be possible to move this, but even then a discussion might be a good idea. ASUKITE 15:06, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gotitbro The page views do not support PTOPIC outright, so this should be raised under a full RM discussion. Until that is established, I am also going to revert your bold change of the page redirect until a discussion can take place. TiggerJay(talk) 15:46, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator needed

[edit]