Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requested moves/Current discussions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Requested moves

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RMCD bot (talk | contribs) at 18:53, 21 May 2024 (Updating requested pagemoves list). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Shortcuts
This page lists all requests filed or identified as potentially controversial which are currently under discussion.

This list is also available in a page-link-first format and in table format. 67 discussions have been relisted.

May 21, 2024

  • (Discuss) – Canning, Liverpool → Georgian Quarter, Liverpool – Georgian Quarter already redirects here and seems to be the more notable name for this neighbourhood. Most references to Canning refer to the electoral ward. The first reference on this article does not include the word Canning at all, instead uses Georgian Quarter. "The area's boundaries have been formalised by both Liverpool City Council and Merseyside Police" is misleading, the police have demarked an area for operational purposes and the council, when not talking about the electoral ward, use "The Canning Georgian Residential Quarter" in this reference. To expand this article would require using more references that refer only to Georgian Quarter and not Canning (example). There are Georgian Quarters in other cities (Dublin, Edinburgh, Limerick) so the full title is needed. Orange sticker (talk) 11:30, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – I Am... (Beyoncé tour) → I Am... World Tour – This request is to restore the former name of the page. The previous move was closed under a quintaessential example of why supervoting is inappropriate and why Wikipedia is built upon consensus and not a polling democracy. The argument provided by the closer, @BilledMammal:, reads as follows: Consensus to move per WP:PRECISION; the current title is ambiguous. Ambiguity was never a reason provided for the move by itself; the argument was "There are multiple albums by multiple artists called I Am which could be easily confused as being the subject of this tour", which is not a valid argument to move a page. The tour is not a subsection of an album to argue such thing. Furthermore, being ambiguous is not a reason to move pages mainly because the titling criteria is not a set of imposed rules. The closing didn't address the arguments provided by either side and it never explained where the consensus arised. Additionally, it was never demonstrated that the official name is the WP:COMMONAME, why we should follow an WP:OFFICIALNAME, why WP:SMALLDETAILS is not applicable, why WP:NATURAL is not applicable, and since the page was moved and the redirects corrected, exactly where is the ambiguity in the title, since the Lewis tour has not improved its views caused by the alleged ambiguity. (CC) Tbhotch™ 01:49, 16 April 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 06:00, 24 April 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 02:47, 13 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 06:26, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – HP Inc. → HP – Primary topic. Probably half of the links on HP (disambiguation) are rarely, if ever, referred to as "HP" — most of the articles don't mention "HP" in the lead — and should probably be removed from the list anyway per WP:DABACRONYM. The most notable entries that are commonly referred to as "HP" are HP Inc. and its predecessor, Hewlett-Packard, the latter of which was commonly referred to by its full name and is therefore naturally disambiguated. Pageviews show Harry Potter with a sizable lead (unsurprising, but no evidence suggests "HP" is commonly used to mean "Harry Potter"), followed by several similar cases before HP. Horsepower is an interesting case, as it's arguably equally notable in terms of long-term significance, but WP:DIFFCAPS comes into play. Plenty of other two-letter companies are undisambiguated or redirect to the company's article, e.g. LG, GE, BP, EA, GQ, VW, QQ, 3M, etc. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:37, 13 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 02:59, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – It's April Again → The Song from Moulin Rouge – This is the title of the song when it was published in the Catalog of Copyright Entries (see page 13). The current page title is not how the song is generally known. When the record made #1 in the US, it used that title. When it was #1 in the UK, it used a similar title, "The Song from the Moulin Rouge". Even though "It's April Again" was the original title, I think it would be easier to find with the registered title. Also, the original page title lasted for nearly ten years before the page was moved without discussion. TrottieTrue (talk) 18:57, 20 May 2024 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). TrottieTrue (talk) 00:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 20, 2024

  • (Discuss) – ChristChurch Cathedral → Christ Church Cathedral, Christchurch – There are several discussions and a (successful) past move request on this talk page about the correct article title. In the latest discussion, an IP editor has provided an explanation why we had previously used the camel case and that this is now a thing of the past. As is documented in that discussion, I've had a look what The Press (the largest South Island newspaper) is using as the common name and that is what is guiding this move request. And that leaves us with the subject of disambiguation, as it's not the only Christ Church Cathedral in New Zealand. What makes this even more complex is that the Christchurch cathedral has views about a magnitude higher than the Nelson cathedral. That said, it would seem silly to use "New Zealand" as the dab for the Christchurch cathedral when there's another one in the country, hence I've settled on "Christchurch" for the dab. Schwede66 08:54, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 19, 2024

  • (Discuss) – Wallaceina → Wallacemonas – As of 2014 onward, the type species of Wallaceina (W. brevicula) was returned to Crithidia, and the remaining species are now under the new name Wallacemonas (see: doi:10.1016/j.protis.2014.07.001 and doi:10.1098/RSOB.200407). — Snoteleks (talk) 15:28, 9 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. ToadetteEdit! 14:13, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Nerodimka River → Nerodime River – The name Nerodime is the most common name for this river in Kosovo by its citizens. Also there appears to be an advantage of "Nerodime" to "Nerodimka" in a simple Google Scholar search. The Nerodime River is especially famous for its bifurcation. Nerodime [16] - About 215 results. Nerodimka [17] - About 93 results. Also, international agencies have also used the name Nerodime to refer to this river. [18][19][20] So, I kindly request to change this name article to the one which the facts support. Typical Albanian (talk) 13:18, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Canadian Writing Centres Association → ? – Not sure of the best title for this, possibly "Writing centres in Canada", same as the current section one heading, but it seems that the general topic has much more written about than the specific organisation, suggest the 1st section become the new lead and lead be moved down to a section, and thus re-scoping this article. Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:32, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 18, 2024

  • (Discuss) – Tungipara Sheikh family → Family of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman – The current name of the article is Tungipara Sheikh family which is WP:OR. The name is originated from original research and no historical book or news article call this family by Tungipara Sheikh Family. This family, unlike Suhrawardy family, wasn’t part of publication or scholarly research before the creation of Bangladesh and before Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and that's why people didn’t give any specific name for the family of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. There are many books and research papers mention the family as "Family of Bangabandhu" or "Family of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman". Bangabandhu is his title so it is reasonable to name this article Family of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. There are sources to verify my claim. For example, see this article where it says "8 Bangabandhu family members, relatives to contest polls". The Daily Star states "Bangabandhu family to get more security, free utility, foreign treatment" (see here). Now some sources also call this family as Sheikh family. See this Bengali source where it says in title "শেখ পরিবার থেকে নেতৃত্বে যারা" (lit. 'Those led from the Sheikh family'), but if you read the content then you will get "...দশম জাতীয় সংসদে বঙ্গবন্ধু পরিবারের সাত সদস্য ছিলেন। একাদশ জাতীয় সংসদ নির্বাচনে অংশ নেওয়া বঙ্গবন্ধু শেখ মুজিবুর রহমানের পরিবারের ৯ সদস্যই প্রতিনিধিত্ব করছেন.." (lit. '...There were seven members of the Bangabandhu family in the 10th National Parliament. 9 members of the family of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman who participated in the 11th National Parliament election are represented...'). Now the question is if the nine members are really from the direct bloodline of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman or not. * Sheikh Hasina : Daughter of Mujib * Sheikh Selim : Son of Mujib's sister * Sheikh Fazle Noor Taposh : Son of Mujib's nephew * Sheikh Helal Uddin : Son of Mujib's brother * Noor-E-Alam Chowdhury Liton : Son of Hasina's cousins * Abul Hasanat Abdullah : Son of Mujib's brother-in-law * Sheikh Tonmoy son of Hasina's cousin * Sheikh Salahuddin Jewel : Son of Mujib's younger brother. * Mujibur Rahman Chowdhury : Son of Hasina's cousins. So it is not important if they are directly from Mujib's bloodline or not, the sources still call the family as Mujib's family and that family includes relatives and even distant relatives of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. Naming this family as Sheikh family or Sheikh–Wazed family or Sheikh–Kazi family is original research, and we should name it as Family of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman because we know the family because Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, father of the nation, came from the family. And the most important fact is reliable sources call the family by the family of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. Mehedi Abedin 05:58, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 17, 2024

  • (Discuss) – Sexual and gender-based violence in the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel → Alleged sexual and gender-based violence in the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel – I moved the page earlier today on the basis that I assumed that it would be "unlikely that anyone would reasonably disagree with the move" as of WP:RM. Apparently, and confusingly, this is not the case. I think it should be moved to an article title which explicitly expresses the uncertainty of the alleged sexual and gender-based violence. The article itself repeatedly uses the phrases "reportedly" and "alleged", as these are allegations, not facts. Israel has constantly lied throughout the war, and cannot be trusted as a reliable source, immediately casting doubt over any of the allegations they have made. The ARCCI report is frankly libel, and throughout the article there are multiple claims with no tangible proof whatsoever. The article should definitely highlight each and every quote from people making these allegations, as it just shows how ridiculous the premise is; "legs and pelvis bones were broken"? It's frankly astonishing that anyone would take these kinds of allegations seriously. If we are not referring to Israel's abhorrent attacks on the people of Gaza and the West Bank as "genocide", which it very clearly is, then why is this article given a name which implies that this is a fact that happened? With no actual evidence, are members of Hamas not "innocent until proven guilty"? With SO many photos and videos circulated of the atrocities committed, why is it that there is no footage of anything being claimed? Wikipedia is a bastion of knowledge in the world, but I am growing increasingly concerned that it is being used nefariously by zionists to skew coverage of the conflict to reflect Israeli views. It is well known that this kind of thing has happened in the past, it would not surprise me if it was still happening. We as Wikipedians need to stop this. Davidlofgren1996 (talk) 21:26, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Twitter → X (social network) – The arguments presented in the talk page notice are not sufficient; such a supposition must be stated before I may present my arguments. Likewise, the previous discussions referenced do not adequately express the necessity of a move request. I believe this qualifies as both a "substantial new development", as references to "Twitter" now appear officially absent, and an objection to a previously and overwhelmingly considered argument. The argument that Twitter is the WP:COMMONNAME for the topic of this article is not well-supported, and the referenced articles above are not comparable. For instance, Kanye West is the name Ye chooses to perform under. The Washington Post lists several companies that have changed their name after becoming established. Though these examples often predate Wikipedia or occurred before the pages for these companies were made, it is not uncommon for a company to change its name or the name of its service; despite the strange decision, the usage of "Twitter" does not reflect self-references to Twitter or X by the company and an increasing acceptance towards "X". Though not infallible, Google Trend data suggests an acceptability towards X. Though there remains a significant usage of the term, I believe sufficient time has passed to support the claim that X may be used to a degree wide enough that—with consideration for official usage—this move request is supported. The term "X" has largely replaced "Twitter" in news articles where the service is not being referred to in the past, though "formerly known as Twitter" remains a common descriptor. This appears to be associated with a change in the AP Stylebook. help.x.com refers to "X Rules" and "X accounts", and twitter.com is now x.com, the reason why I have suggested this move; The Verge wrote "it's not Twitter anymore". In a personal account, many articles I edit where a person is quoted on the topic have increasingly referred to X, not Twitter. This move request is largely without precedent, but there exist instances where object within the real world have changed names, creating an inconsistency with colloquial references to said object. Willis Tower in Chicago is commonly referred to as Sears Tower because the tower had been known as that for 35 years. Similarly, Comiskey Park is known as Guaranteed Rate Field and formerly U.S. Cellular Field, but Chicago residents continue to refer to the field as "Comiskey". Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport is Washington National Airport to many. Name rights moves may be comparable in this circumstance, as they present a shift in colloquial terminology and official terminology that is reflected within Wikipedia to adhere to the present name of the field or building. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 13:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Too Many Humans..... → Too Many Humans – The article title contains five consecutive dots, which is a phenomenon that is basically never used in ordinary English – I found only four articles like that on all of Wikipedia. MOS:TM says to try to use ordinary English formatting. Although this (self-released, apparently not very notable) album does indeed have five dots on its cover art, this typographical embellishment is not supported by the cited sources. The article cites three independent (non-user-generated) sources: Louder, Vinyl District, and Strauss Media. All three of them use no dots at all when referring to this topic. One non-independent source is also cited (Drag City), and it doesn't use any dots either. The proposed title already redirects to this topic. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 07:35, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 16, 2024

  • (Discuss) – American major traditional television networks → ? – This page has been recently moved a bit, without any explanation or reason, from its original stable title, Big Three (American television). I assume it was because the name "Big Three" is more or less an informal term, and therefore the original page mover wanted to have a more descriptive title instead. I tried to make it less ambiguous and subjective. The subjective part in my disagreement in one of the page moves was in regards to the Fox Broadcasting Company, and whether it should also be considered "major" while the other three networks are more "major traditional". But instead of possibly getting into another move war, I'm opening this RM to the community for suggestions. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 20:33, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Who Killed...... The Zutons? → Who Killed the Zutons? – or Who Killed the Zutons (without the question mark) – or Who Killed ... the Zutons? – or Who Killed ... the Zutons (without the question mark). This is the only article title I can find on Wikipedia that includes more than five consecutive dots in its title (and I found only four that have five consecutive dots). That's a rather strange form, and it is not supported consistently in the cited sources. Although the album cover does include six dots, most of the cited sources appear to just use "Who Killed the Zutons?" (or "Who Killed The Zutons?", which Wikipedia would not do), with or without the question mark at the end. Some use an ordinary three-dot ellipsis (with or without spaces around the ellipsis). Also, as pointed out in 2012 by nagualdesign, the album cover and many sources omit the question mark. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:11, 8 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.  ASUKITE 20:22, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Armenian alphabet → Armenian script – This article encompasses more than just the alphabet; it covers the entire script. The alphabet is merely one part of it. I noticed that a move was already requested. Previously, the main argument against this was that the Armenian script is used exclusively for the Armenian language. However, similar articles about native Caucasian scripts are titled Caucasian Albanian script and Georgian scripts, even though they are predominantly used for a single language as well. Moreover, the Armenian script has occasionally been used for other languages, as exemplified by the Armeno-Turkish alphabet and the relevant section in this article. Therefore, to ensure consistency, I propose the move. Aldij (talk) 13:54, 8 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.  ASUKITE 17:34, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Mahmood (singer) → Mahmood – Primary topic due to being one of the most streamed artists in Italy and the only person known as just "Mahmood", does not have disambiguation in most other Wikipedias such as Italian Wikipedia. The name is one of the many variants of Mahmud and a hatnote would be sufficient for that. Sahaib (talk) 07:03, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Pallar → Devendrakula Velalar – Parliament Passes Bill To Classify 7 Scheduled Caste Groups Of Tamil Nadu As 'Devendrakula Velalars', having a page as pallar to refer as devendrakula Velalar is not right. It’s better to move this page as Devendrakula Velalar as it comprises 7 subcastes. The Indian Government parliament ammendment has been given for viewing where pallar and others 6 subcastes don’t exist in the government records. [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] Page I want to move it to is currently a redirect. worldgiant (talk) 04:39, 15 May 2024 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). Worldgiant (talk) 04:54, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 15, 2024

  • (Discuss) – Upper Silesian metropolitan area → ? – While "Upper Silesian metropolitan area" is a common name, virtually all available sources, including academic papers (as I listed here), actually define the term as wikidata:Q125563738 (which is currently shortly described in Katowice urban area#Metropolitan area), while the article text describes a much bigger area of wikidata:Q3495359. Other names appearing for the latter area in academic and research papers are Silesian-Moravian polycentric metropolitan area and Katowice-Ostrava metropolitan area. Sources and initial discussion about the names is available on the talk page. After the move, due to a long-lasting confusion, I propose that the "Upper Silesian metropolitan area" name should be a disambugation page between the two entities, looking for example like this. Dżamper (talk) 13:04, 6 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 18:46, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Caliber conversion sleeve → Caliber conversion – Since there are several different methods of caliber conversion covered in this article, and it doesn't actually get to the caliber conversion sleeve until the third section, I am proposing a move and rescope to the general concept of converting calibers. This will also mean a merge of anything suitable from the newly created caliber change (which I feel is a useful redirect, but conversion seems significantly more common). Alpha3031 (t • c) 12:36, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 14, 2024

Elapsed listings

Shortcut
The 7-day listing period has elapsed. Items below may be closed if there's a consensus, or if discussion has run its course and consensus could not be achieved.
  • (Discuss) – Three-dimensional electrical capacitance tomography → Electrical capacitance volume tomography – This page was originally titled "Electrical capacitance volume tomography" and was recently moved to a page called "Three-dimensional electrical capacitance tomography". These two terms are not the same. The latter is a broader term as shown in the wikipedia article edit on 5/14/24 in the introduction section. References are given for the distinction between terms. When the page was moved to the new term, it stated that the term ECVT is not widely used. However, in the later 5/14/24 edit of the introduction, citations are given for the term being used in China, Indonesia, and three different research groups in the USA. It is suggested that this page return to "Electrical capacitance volume tomography". A separate page should be made for "Three-dimensional electrical capacitance tomography", if desired, as it is a distinct term that can include stacking of 2D tomographs whereas ECVT does not. Marashdeh (talk) 15:28, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Backlog

Shortcut
Elapsed listings fall into the backlog after 24 hours. Consider relisting 8-day-old discussions with minimal participation.
  • (Discuss) – Parachromis managuensis → Jaguar cichlid – So, the last time a name change for this article has been discussed was back in 2007 (see "article title" up above). This article used to be named "Managuense cichlid," but was later changed to the Latin name and current title, Parachromis managuensis, on the basis that it was the least ambiguous epithet for the species. Which is true. Latin names are almost always less ambiguous than vernacular names, but they're almost never as concise or recognizable - for the same reason we have articles named Great white shark and Largemouth bass rather than Carcharodon carcharias and Micropterus salmoides, I'm going to propose that this article be renamed to Jaguar cichlid. For the WP:CRITERIA of recognizability and naturalness, I present the Google Search results for the names listed in the article's lede (in order from most hits to least): * "jaguar cichlid": ~93,700 results * "parachromis managuensis": ~40,900 results * "jaguar guapote": ~9,680 results * "managuense cichlid": ~8,720 results * "guapote tigre": ~8,640 results * "aztec cichlid": ~4,090 results * "managua cichlid": ~1,470 results * "spotted guapote": ~812 results "Jaguar cichlid" is more than twice as prevalent on the web as the Latin name. It's nearly a full order of magnitude more prevalent than the next most popular vernacular name, "jaguar guapote" - and if that's where we draw the line, then names like "managuense cichlid" and "guapote tigre" aren't even in the running. This is supported by Google Trends, which shows that on average, "jaguar cichlid" is searched for 47 times more than "parachromis managuensis" and "managuense cichlid" worldwide. We should name the article accordingly. Simple as. Kodiak Blackjack (talk) • (contribs) 00:06, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Motor Launch → Motor launch (naval) – This title is miscapitalized and is ambiguous with Motor launch; both capitalizations should redirect to Launch (boat). Since this article is specifically about the naval use, the parenthetical disambiguator seems like a good way to distinguish (and it's not just the Royal Navy, as the article shows). Previous claims that this term is a proper name to the Royal Navy are not born out by evidence from sources (to be provided and discussed at length). Dicklyon (talk) 22:35, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Bengaluru Airport → Bangalore Airport – This article has gone through a number of move changes but the most recent discussion (seen above) concluded that it should be named Bengaluru Airport. One editor has unilaterally moved the article to reflect the airport's official name without opening a new discussion which I have undone. However, upon reflection, I feel that the WP:COMMONNAME for this article would be Bangalore Airport. This would reflect the consensus seen at Talk:Bangalore#Requested_move_21_March_2024 that Bangalore is the common name of the city, not Bengaluru. Bangalore is also what major English-speaking international carriers describe the airport as including United [33] and British Airways [34]. Qantas, meanwhile, feels the need to clarify that Bengaluru is Bangalore using quotations further underlining that Bangalore is more common [35]. Additionally, given the consensus for the Bangalore article, having the equivalent name for the airport is supported by WP:CONSISTENT. Avgeekamfot (talk) 11:21, 4 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. SilverLocust 💬 16:28, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Tamil genocide → Tamil genocide allegation – There is neither academic consensus nor even a mainstream narrative that the persecution of Tamils in Sri Lanka constituted a genocide; especially that the article's creator and main author tries to stretch it as far back as 1948. There are very few reliable sources, if any, barring a handful of PhD theses, that would discuss the legal aspect in the terms of the Genocide Convention. The concept of calling the persecutions "genocide" arose fairly recently, predominantly among the Canadian Tamil émigrés – if we run a Google search for "Tamil genocide" excluding "Canada", we get rather few meaningful results.[36]. Add to it the fact that there has been no case, not even a complaint to the International Court of Justice about a "Tamil genocide". Considering all this, Wikipedia should, at a minimum, apply the same rule as in Palestinian genocide accusation, where highly contentious claims are always qualified as accusation or allegation; especially when they are so poorly sourced as in this article. — kashmīrī TALK 11:24, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – September 2022 Armenia–Azerbaijan clashes → 2022 аttack of Azerbaijan on Armenia – I have not seen a single reliable source saying that Armenia attacked Azerbaijan. But multiple reliable sources say the opposite. Various sources describe the events as an “invasion”, “offensive”, “attack”, or “assault.” There is consensus that Azerbaijan was the one who initiated the hostilities. Some talk about “Azerbaijan’s Invasion of Armenia”, “Azerbaijan’s Offensive on Armenia”, “Azerbaijan’s Attack on Armenia”, but they all agree on one thing: Azerbaijan was the initiator of the clash, and it was Azerbaijan who attacked. Therefore, the title “Attack of Azerbaijan on Armenia” perfectly reflects the vast majority of reliable sources and is the least ambiguous. I will provide the overwhelming evidence below: * Human Rights Watch:  :“The killings took place during fighting between Armenian and Azerbaijani forces that broke out in mid-September, when Azerbaijan made incursions into Armenia...” * Genocide Watch:  :“Azerbaijani military attacks on Armenian territory show Azerbaijani disregard for Armenian sovereignty.” * Freedom House:  :“Freedom House Condemns Azerbaijani Attacks on Armenia”  :“The Azerbaijani armed forces must immediately cease their deadly attacks on Armenian territory” * Axel Gehring, Ph.D., political scientist and expert in the field of foreign and security policy and researcher at the Institute for Critical Social Analysis of the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation in Berlin:  :“On September 13, regular Azerbaijani troops launched a large-scale attack on Armenian territory. This attack took tensions between the countries to a new level.” * Laurence Broers is a specialist in conflicts in the Transcaucasus, founder of the scientific journal Caucasus Survey:  :"Azerbaijan's recent attack seeks to enforce terms in negotiations with Armenia" “ The recent large-scale cross-border attacks inside Armenia by Azerbaijan...” * Maximilian Hess, Research Fellow for Central Asia at the Foreign Policy Institute, in Foreign Policy magazine:  :“Azerbaijani forces who marched into Armenia continue to occupy part of its territory, in particular heights around the town of Jermuk.” * David L. Phillips, conflict analyst in The National Interest:  :“The United States criticized Azerbaijan's recent attacks on Armenia proper” * European Parliament Resolution:  :“Strongly condemns the latest military aggression by Azerbaijan on September 12, 2022 on the sovereign territory of Armenia”  :“calls on the Azerbaijani authorities, therefore, to immediately withdraw from all parts of the territory of Armenia “ * Wojciech Gorecki, senior researcher at the Department of Turkey, Caucasus and Central Asia:  :“in September 2022 Azerbaijan attacked targets located on Armenian territory.” * The Guardian:  : “This week, with attention focused across the Black Sea in Ukraine, fighting on the border between Azerbaijan and Armenia killed about 100 troops after Azerbaijan shelled a number of towns in Armenia, with both sides accusing each other of “provocations”.” * Der Spiegel:  : “Peace negotiations mediated by the European Union have been at an impasse since Baku also attacked territory in the Republic of Armenia in September 2022.” * TIME:  : “...democratic nation that was recently invaded by its authoritarian neighbor”  : “...but also Armenia, which has been suffering from Azerbaijan's invasion for almost three weeks now.” * BBC:  : “I don’t think anyone doubts that Azerbaijan started this operation on the territory of Armenia. Even Azerbaijani commentators admit this. Armenia is currently weak, has little interest in disrupting the status quo.” * Eurasianet  :"Azerbaijan launches large-scale attacks on Armenia"  :“Azerbaijan launched a large-scale attack on targets in Armenia, an unprecedented expansion of the long-running conflict into Armenian territory.” * Michael Rubin, senior researcher at AIP:  :“Last week, Azerbaijan attacked Armenia proper. (Last week Azerbaijan attacked Armenia directly)” * Paul Stronski is a senior fellow in the Carnegie Russia and Eurasia Programs, specializing in Russia and the South Caucasus:  : “..the fact that Russia is preoccupied, certainly led to what looks like an Azerbaijani offensive at this time”  : “And what we even saw just in the last few days is actually attacks inside and shelling inside cities inside Armenia, not just along the border." * Kapil Komireddy, political columnist for The Telegraph:  : “But so little about Azerbaijan's attack, which goes beyond the disputed territory of Karabakh and targets Armenia proper.” *Seth Franzman, Middle East analyst for The Jerusalem Post , contributor to Defense News, The National Interest and Digest of Middle East Studies:  :“Attacks on Armenia represent dangerous escalation” *Carnegie Europe:  :“Nearly 300 soldiers died in a large-scale Azerbaijani incursion into the territory of Armenia on September 13-14.” Vanezi (talk) 21:23, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Allegations of genocide in the 2023 Israeli attack on Gaza → ? – I'm unsure what the new title should be, but I'm sure that this one has an issue. The Israeli attack on Gaza has gone past 2023 into 2024. So, we can't keep the "2023 Israeli attack on Gaza" part. Perhaps we could change it to "Allegations of genocide perpetrated by Israel in the Israel–Hamas war", "Allegations of genocide in Gaza in the Israel–Hamas war", or something different. Note that "2023 Israeli attack on Gaza" just redirects to Israel–Hamas war. Paul Vaurie (talk) 19:49, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Maratha Empire → Maratha Confederacy – The Maratha state had been a confederation of some sort for much of its existence from at least 1721 when the Baroda State was founded and 1732 when Indore and Gwalior States were founded till 1818. The Maratha state during the Deccan wars under Shivaji and his descendents was not in the slightest an "empire", rather a quasi-state or rebel kingdom from 1674 till 1707. Besides in most non-biased scholarly sources the Maratha realm has been referred to as the "Maratha Confederacy" or "Maratha States". (Look at the infobox map itself. It says "Maratha States".) Calling it an empire is an overly biased PoV. "Maratha Confederacy" should be used per WP:NPOVTITLE. PadFoot2008 (talk) 14:31, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Karma (2024 song) → Karma's a Bitch – This page keeps getting moved. The previous rationale was "The song was originally called that in the Miley Cyrus demo, and the Brit Smith demo. It also takes away the disambiguating, so it more succinct." I’m unsure, however. The article is about the song as an entity, but that 'entity' hasn’t got a name, but it’s clear that there are two versions of the same song, and that they are not covers of each other. I don’t think this has ever happened before. Plus the proposed title is already a redirect to the page, so seems like the most logical title. This is a case of 'what came first, the chicken or the egg?' Another suggestion is Karma and Karma's a Bitch. 109.235.247.80 (talk) 01:57, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – Orlando (disambiguation) → Orlando – I realise that this was discussed before in 2016, but consensus may have changed. A recent discussion at Talk:Orlando, Florida showed no consensus that this is the primary topic. I would put forward two reasons. Firstly, the sheer number of entries on this page means that we should be cautious about deciding that there is a primary topic. Secondly, some people argued that the Florida city is widely known outside the USA because it attracts a large number of tourists as the location of Disney World. However, speaking as a European who has never visited the USA, the extent to which US cities are widely known elsewhere is not necessarily a function of the number of tourists, it's not like e.g. Chicago or Los Angeles. PatGallacher (talk) 17:07, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Discuss) – 2024 Iranian strikes in Israel → ? – The previous discussion was on moving 'Strikes' to 'strike' version, and it was speedy closed by me as there is a speedy consensus on that matter. However, what had been raised in that discussion is which proposition to be used in the article title.  : The previous discussion was moving "Strikes" to "strikes", rather than to "strike", I believe? I mention this because there may be further strikes by Iran on Israel later in the year, and it's not clear whether this article would include those, or if they would get their own articles. I think clearest would be to include the full date, so this article is specifically about the missile and drone attack on the one day, which I think would be 14 April 2024 (starting in the early morning hours local time). Warren Dew (talk) 05:23, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Malformed requests

See "Bot considerations"

Possibly incomplete requests

See "Request all associated moves explicitly"

References

References generally should not appear here. Use {{reflist-talk}} in the talk page section with the requested move to show references there.
  1. ^ https://www.cfr.org/article/sunni-shia-divide#:~:text=Shias%2C%20a%20term%20that%20stems,succession%20based%20on%20Mohammed%27s%20bloodline.
  2. ^ https://www.history.com/news/sunni-shia-divide-islam-muslim
  3. ^ https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2013/11/Shias-Sunnis-religious-conflict-full-report.pdf
  4. ^ https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2007/02/12/7332087/the-origins-of-the-shiite-sunni-split
  5. ^ https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-16047709
  6. ^ https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-sunni-shiite-divide-in-the-middle-east-is-about-nationalism-not-a-conflict-within-islam/
  7. ^ https://www.vox.com/2016/1/5/10718456/sunni-shia
  8. ^ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2014/06/18/the-sunni-shia-divide-where-they-live-what-they-believe-and-how-they-view-each-other/
  9. ^ https://www.npr.org/2007/02/12/7280905/chronology-a-history-of-the-shia-sunni-split
  10. ^ https://www.bbc.com/news/av/magazine-27945271
  11. ^ https://www.fpri.org/article/2013/12/the-geopolitics-of-the-sunni-shii-divide-in-the-middle-east/
  12. ^ https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/FOID/Reading%20Room/Other/15-F-0940_DOC_05_CSBA-LTSG_Sunni-Shia_Divide_Origins_Theology_Geopolitics_200701.pdf
  13. ^ https://origins.osu.edu/article/tradition-vs-charisma-sunni-shii-divide-muslim-world?language_content_entity=en
  14. ^ https://carnegie-mec.org/posts/2007/03/the-shia-sunni-divide-myths-and-reality?lang=en&center=middle-east
  15. ^ https://www.researchgate.net/publication/346724893_Sunni-Shia_Division_in_Islam_Its_Origin_Development_Political_Socio-Economic_Implications_Contemporary_Relations
  16. ^ https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/04/sunni-shia-sectarianism-middle-east-islam
  17. ^ https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691186610/sunnis-and-shia
  18. ^ https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/resrep03717.6.pdf
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requested_moves/Current_discussions&oldid=1224997232"