Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests

Shortcuts

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.

Add a new request

Remove all requests

Technical requests

Uncontroversial technical requests

Pomeroy, KwaZulu-Natal (currently a redirect to Pomeroy, South Africa) → Pomeroy, South Africa (move · discuss) – Per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)#South Africa GeographicAccountant (talk) 18:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fort Detroit (currently a redirect to Fort Pontchartrain du Détroit) → Fort Pontchartrain du Détroit (move · discuss) – Proposed on talk page 17 Jul 2024. No objections. Griffin's Sword (talk) 19:02, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requests to revert undiscussed moves

Contested technical requests

Special Forces Tab → Special Forces tab (currently a redirect back to Special Forces Tab) (move · discuss) – Parallel to Ranger tab and consistent with Army's own AR 670-1 document about insignia (and basic English/WP MoS), "tab" should be lowercase. I can't do the move myself because there's a redirect in the way (they should be swapped). — JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 19:52, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if Ranger tab should be moved instead so both words are capitalized in that title, because both of these military awards appear to be proper terms in which title case should be used. Also, both articles are currently written as if that is the case, with the title at the top of the Ranger tab article being the only exception. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 20:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking at this, Doomsdayer. When I first stumbled across this, I was irritiated by the "Tab" on these things, as it seemed another case of overcapitalization, but I looked around to see if it wasn't exactly that: a special, proper noun. Tabs of the United States Army used (already, before I started standardising the texts) a mixture. There was some inconclusive mention on the Talk of that article, but otherwise, I haven't found any discussion, just a bit of sloppiness.

For me, the deciding factor (apart from my understanding of English rules) was the use by the Army itself in the Wear and Appearance of Army Uniforms and Insignia document I linked to. I figure, if anybody can be expected to inappropriately overcapitalize words, it'd be the US military, but they consistently downcase not just "the tab" but "the airborne tab", e.g., at p.2 (even "airborne" is lowercase there). Also I find at [1] ("...awarded the Governor's Dozen tab...") and [2] (PDF's p.11, 4th-last paragraph "arctic tab").

Unfortunately, I've already gone ahead and made changes to article text as well as redirects (where I could) so as to unify the mix of usages contrary to Army/military usage. I didn't mean to throw a WP:FAIT situation at you, so I've stopped to see what you decide. If you think these changes might, in fact, be controversial, I can open up discussions on the (I think) four pages I've tweaked. If folks don't like what I've done, I'll go around with my reverting hat on (I mean my Reverting Hat). — JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 21:06, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If various articles in this area are sloppy and inconsistent in capitalization, then we absolutely need you to clean everything up. Your efforts are appreciated. If anyone familiar with these precise military terms pops up here, we may be able to nail down whether these terms should all be in Title Case or Sentence case. Whatever the ultimate verdict, reverting some of your recent edits and moving some remaining page titles shouldn't be too difficult. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 12:49, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JohnFromPinckney Sounds like more expert input is needed here. Perhaps a post on WT:MILHIST would help. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 23:48, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per source stats, capping "tab" is clearly not necessary. We should fix them all. Dicklyon (talk) 02:47, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dicklyon I'm not reading it as cut-and-dry enough for a technical request. In your link, in 2009, "Tab" outnumbered "tab" 4:1. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 20:15, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, worth a discussion. Dicklyon (talk) 04:55, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tanda thermal power plant → Tanda Thermal Power Plant (currently a redirect back to Tanda thermal power plant) (move) – Capitalisation only Thewikizoomer (talk) 17:54, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Thewikizoomer Wait for the current merge proposal to be resolved first. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 20:29, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yuan Meng Star → Party Stars (move · discuss) – The game was officially registered by Tencent as "Party Stars" in the US and Europe, as seen in the following trademark registrations: [USPTO](https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=98420268&caseSearchType=US_APPLICATION&caseType=DEFAULT&searchType=statusSearch) and [EUIPO](https://euipo.europa.eu/eSearch/#details/trademarks/018987609). JuliaZusk (talk) 24 September 2024

The Reuters source from the same article refers to "DreamStar", which is a bit confusing. Generally when we title articles, we prefer the WP:COMMONNAME as reported in reliable sources, ideally in English (especially in this case as you are looking to change it to an English title, we probably will have more luck if we find English sources discussing it). Failing that, the current name might be the best choice. Generally, trademark applications and such are primary as they are filed by the IP holder, we would require secondary sources to document the title. ASUKITE 14:26, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JuliaZusk moved to contested until we can find applicable sources. Feel free to click "discuss" and fill in your rationale if you wish to open a discussion to move this. ASUKITE 14:28, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ojuelegba, Lagos (currently a redirect to Ojuelegba) → Ojuelegba (move · discuss) – I'm requesting this article to be renamed because there isn't another place with the name "Ojuelegba". Ojuelegba is the primary topic and there's no need for Lagos to be included in the title. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 15:06, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Versace1608 Both the suburb and the song get around 1000 pageviews per month, it's not clear which is the primary topic. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 15:29, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If we're keeping the dabpage, then it will need to be moved back to Ojuelegba. OP, such primary topic grabs are, by definition, not uncontroversial. 162 etc. (talk) 17:18, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator needed