The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Adumbrativus ( talk) 00:45, 4 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Riversleigh rainforest koala → Nimiokoala – No evidence that "Riversleigh rainforest koala" is a more common name for this taxon than the genus name. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 23:03, 24 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: WikiProject Palaeontology has been notified of this discussion. UtherSRG (talk) 00:20, 25 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: WikiProject Mammals has been notified of this discussion. UtherSRG (talk) 00:20, 25 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: WikiProject Australia has been notified of this discussion. UtherSRG (talk) 00:20, 25 February 2024 (UTC) reply

• Support - A quick Google search shows the genus has about 20x the number of search results as the "common" name. - UtherSRG (talk) 00:21, 25 February 2024 (UTC) reply
• Support per above. Lythronaxargestes ( talk | contribs) 06:22, 25 February 2024 (UTC) reply
• Support Excluding Wikipedia-derived sources, aggregator sites and pages where "Riversleigh rainforest" is included as the location rather than part of the name, only the Australian Museum (and a NSW government page that cites the Australian Museum) seems a credible source for the use of the name. That isn't enough to meet Wikipedia common name. —   Jts1882 |  talk  07:18, 25 February 2024 (UTC) reply
• Support per above. The Morrison Man ( talk) 11:10, 25 February 2024 (UTC) reply
• Support per above, this is a crufty relict of old wiki forces that want to create names for all taxa.-- Kev min § 16:45, 25 February 2024 (UTC) reply