[go: up one dir, main page]

Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Melbguy05 (talk | contribs) at 06:36, 13 December 2024 (Requests to revert undiscussed moves: Defence Human Intelligence Unit revert move by sockpuppet). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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

Uncontroversial technical requests

Requests to revert undiscussed moves

Contested technical requests

@Intrisit WP:NCBC says to use the country alone for disambiguation only when "all of the articles with the same base name will be of the same type". --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
)
17:48, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. "RTL" is not a "Germany", what it is a "German TV channel". Gonnym (talk) 08:41, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Miffedpenguin Titles use sentence case (WP:LOWERCASE), I don't see why this should be an exception. Toadspike [Talk] 07:42, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
IUCN Red List calls it "Oxynoemacheilus galilaeus". What gives Eschmeyer priority? The article doesn't even mention Nun galilaeus (except in an infobox and as one of several names in a navbox). —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 05:33, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:WikiProject Fishes#Taxonomy Quetzal1964 (talk) 17:41, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
BarrelProof See also the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fishes#Retry proposal to change the Taxonomy used by Wikiproject:Fishes. This issue has been discussed. Quetzal1964 (talk) 11:40, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since there seems to be some doubt on their status they should go to a formal RM discussion where all the evidence can be presented.  — Amakuru (talk) 18:04, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Amakuru There is no doubt on their status. Previous to October 2024 WP:Fishes used FishBase as the taxonomic source for species and genera, In October 2024 the project changed this to Eschmeyer's Catalog of Fishes (ECoF). This was discussed and agreed, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fishes#Retry proposal to change the Taxonomy used by Wikiproject:Fishes Here is the extract from ECoF for this species.
"galilaea, Cobitis Günther [A.] 1864:493 [Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 1864 (pt 3); ref. 13931] Lake Tiberias, Israel [erroneous, should be Huleh Lake, Israel]. Holotype (unique): BMNH 1863.11.3.8. •Valid as Nemacheilus galilaeus (Günther 1864) -- (Krupp & Schneider 1989:379 [ref. 13651]). •Valid as Oxynoemacheilus galilaeus (Günther 1864) -- (Golzarianpour et al. 2011:205 [ref. 31693], Freyhof et al. 2012:307 [ref. 31752], Kottelat 2012:96 [ref. 32367]). •Valid as Nun galilaea (Günther 1864) -- (Prokofiev 2017:252 [ref. 35630]). •Valid as Nun galilaeus (Günther 1864) -- (Bănărescu et al. 1982:23 [ref. 174], Bănărescu & Nalbant 1995:446 [ref. 23187], Prokofiev 2009:885 [ref. 30604], Çiçek et al. 2023:455 [ref. 40601], Saad et al. 2023:10 [ref. 40501], Çiçek et al. 2024:61 [ref. 40789]). Current status: Valid as Nun galilaeus (Günther 1864). Nemacheilidae. Distribution: Middle East: Huleh Lake, Jordan River basin (Israel). Habitat: freshwater."
I am updating fish pages to reflect this change, it is going to be very wearing if I have to go through a discussion for every change like this when it has already been discussed by the Project. Quetzal1964 (talk) 08:08, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Quetzal1964 You can do a combined move request for multiple articles. See WP:RMPM --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
)
17:29, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ahecht Thank you, noted. However, I am going through these in taxonomic order and in most cases I can move the articles without a request. I request these moves when needed to, as they arise. It is unfortunately a feature of taxonomy that scientific names swap around between different authors. Quetzal1964 (talk) 17:37, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Quetzal1964 The article states that Eonemachilus is a former designation. Bensci54 (talk) 17:11, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See https://researcharchive.calacademy.org/research/ichthyology/catalog/fishcatmain.asp Wikipedia:WikiProject Fishes uses Eschmeyer's Catalog of Fishes for its taxonomy below the level of order. SeeWikipedia:WikiProject Fishes#Taxonomy Quetzal1964 (talk) 17:39, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bensci54 See also the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fishes#Retry proposal to change the Taxonomy used by Wikiproject:Fishes. This issue has been discussed. Quetzal1964 (talk) 11:37, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bensci54 and BarrelProof, do you still object to these moves? They appear to be backed by recent consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fishes#Retry_proposal_to_change_the_Taxonomy_used_by_Wikiproject:Fishes that I wasn't aware of. C F A 16:11, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I asked a skeptical question, but I did not object (and I did not move this to the contested category). —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 01:38, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It seems there was a discussion related to this request, so I am okay moving these back into the uncontroversial section. If another page mover agrees, they can execute the moves. Bensci54 (talk) 17:26, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since there seems to be some doubt on their status they should go to a formal RM discussion where all the evidence can be presented.  — Amakuru (talk) 18:04, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Quetzal1964: This technical request has been contested. As such, it would require a requested-move discussion, which you can begin by clicking "discuss" on your request. You can remove this request after opening a discussion (or if you do not want to continue). SilverLocust 💬 21:14, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Amakuru There is no doubt on their status. Previous to October 2024 WP:Fishes used FishBase as the taxonomic source for species and genera, In October 2024 the project changed this to Eschmeyer's Catalog of Fishes (ECoF). This was discussed and agreed, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fishes#Retry proposal to change the Taxonomy used by Wikiproject:Fishes Here is the extract from ECoF for this species.
"nigromaculatus, Nemachilus Regan [C. T.] 1904:192 [Annals and Magazine of Natural History (Series 7) v. 13 (no. 75) (art. 20); ref. 15197] Sea of Tien [Tien Chih] [= Dianchi Lake], Yunnan Fu, China, elevation 6000 feet. Lectotype: BMNH 1904.1.26.38. Paralectotypes: BMNH 1904.1.26.39 (1). Original genus is correctly Nemacheilus. Lectotype selected by Kottelat & Chu 1988:68 [ref. 13392]. •Valid as Yunnanilus nigromaculatus (Regan 1904), subspecies nigromaculatus (Regan 1904) -- (Zheng et al. 1989:44 [ref. 21202], Chen et al. 2012:61 [ref. 31907]). •Valid as Yunnanilus nigromaculatus (Regan 1904) -- (Zhu 1989:18 [ref. 17744], Yang 1991:199 [ref. 13585], Ding 1992:490 [ref. 22049], Yang & Chen 1995:23 [ref. 23555], Zhu 1995:106 [ref. 25213], Chen & Zhang in Chen 1998:47 [ref. 23556], Li et al. 2000:351 [ref. 26012], Yang 2013:251 [ref. 32910], Du et al. 2015:254 [ref. 34050], Zhang et al. 2016:149 [ref. 34477], Zhang et al. 2019:354 [ref. 36699]). •Valid as Eonemachilus nigromaculatus (Regan 1904) -- (Kottelat 2012:82 [ref. 32367], Du et al. 2021:318 [ref. 38600]). Current status: Valid as Eonemachilus nigromaculatus (Regan 1904). Nemacheilidae. Distribution: East Asia: Dianchi Lake, Yangtze River basin (China). Habitat: freshwater."
I am updating fish pages to reflect this change, it is going to be very wearing if I have to go through a discussion for every change like this when it has already been discussed by the Project. Quetzal1964 (talk) 08:06, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've left a message on the previous mover's Talk page. I'd like to figure out that weird edit summary accusation before performing this move. Toadspike [Talk] 10:18, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've reverted the recent page move, back to Pont de la Concorde (Montreal)... as far as I can tell from sources such as [3][4][5] it is reasonably common to use the French title in English works. At the very least this merits a discussion. Also, as an aside, I wouldn't support the move suggested here anyway. "Concorde Bridge" can just as easily refer to the bridge in Paris as the one in Montreal, even in English.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:51, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Howver, Paris is French, but Montreal is bilingual English and French, so the affinity falls towards Montreal and not Paris. And Montreal English exists, even if the Provincial Government of Quebec has outlawed its use in official contexts, such as the bridge name. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 04:45, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:NCTV, "For the special case of episodic television known as "miniseries", when disambiguation is required, use: (miniseries) or (serial) according to common usage in reliable sources." The sources in the article say "serial", so this move would need some contrary evidence. SilverLocust 💬 06:06, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mvcg66b3r Contesting on 2pou's point, the article is clearly about the character and not the publication. If this changes, feel free to make a new request. Toadspike [Talk] 10:18, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This reverts a 2018 RM. A new RM will be required. Bensci54 (talk) 17:12, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator needed