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:..."
If you are here because you want an admin to approve of your new article or your proposed page move, you are in the wrong place.
If this is your first article and you want your draft article moved to the
mainspace, please submit it for review at
Articles for creation, by adding the code {{
subst:submit}} to the top of the
draft or
user sandbox page instead of listing it here.
Because you are
autoconfirmed, you can
move most pages yourself. Do not request technical assistance on this page if you can do it yourself.
If you need help determining whether it's okay to move the page to a different title, then please follow the instructions at the top of
Wikipedia:Requested moves.
To list a technical request: 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=reason for 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.
This case is similar to one a couple of weeks ago. The disambiguation page was changed to a redirect by an editor who's now left, but based on an incorrect reading of
WP:PRIMARYRED. Just because the other Bayne House doesn't yet have an article doesn't mean it's not considered as part of the primary topic assessment. From a brief look around the Web I don't think either is necessarily primary over the other, and it should be discussed. I've restored the dab page. —
Amakuru (
talk) 08:22, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Yeah, this user
Renamed user g5s6n3yi8z7g08cs cited them all (no NPA or HARASS intended, else self-blocked!). This reply is for both my requests. But I was expecting a thanks from you and their removals for bringing them here to your attention (if not the attention of page movers, reviewers and admins). Remember that this is a chain reaction stemming from my frequent glances at
R'n'B's contributions page, where I see entries with this edit summary: Redirect bypass from (say
Ballintemple (disambiguation) to
Ballintemple), which you've dealt with already); which then sparks my curiosity to head to their page histories and see the first line of this text in the form of actions from the user citing PRIMARYRED after previous then-worthy DAB entries popped up and were then removed by other users. Yes, this is RMTR, but I listed them here, maybe could've pinged you on my talk page on these, so that the appropriate actions could be taken on them so as not to return to them again. And the frustrating bit is that, this repetition could go on and on since I've bookmarked R'n'B's contribs page for over 100 days now. It/They could be for discussion(s), unsure about that, but with other similarly-named but redlinked entries in their DAB pages, hmmm! Confusion, confusion confusion!
Intrisit (
talk) 10:37, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
This case is similar to one a couple of weeks ago. The disambiguation page was changed to a redirect by an editor who's now left, but based on an incorrect reading of
WP:PRIMARYRED. Just because the other Bay Point, Florida, doesn't yet have an article doesn't mean it's not considered as part of the primary topic assessment. From a brief look around the Web I don't think either is necessarily primary over the other, and it should be discussed. I've restored the dab page. —
Amakuru (
talk) 08:22, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
This one may be slightly different from that of Bayne House above. The current red linked entry requires a blue link to an article with relevant content about the topic )
WP:DABMENTION). There are a few candidates in what links here, although none are particularly good. And there might even be another place in Alabama.
older ≠
wiser 11:10, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Why is this move needed? While there is a convention to include the state in naming articles for US cities/towns -- this does not necessarily apply to the parenthetical disambiguator. Consider, for example,
Category:Culture of Jersey City, New Jersey -- there are several others using only "(Jersey City)" and the same can be found for many other US cities/towns.
older ≠
wiser 11:41, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Agreed. The disambiguator is only there to disambiguate, it doesn't need to fit in with other naming conventions necessarily. —
Amakuru (
talk) 11:06, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
@
MrMkG I don't know too much about how Indian names/titles work, but only one of the sources in the article uses Bhanwar Jitendra Singh, while most just Jitendra Singh or Shri Jitendra Singh seem more common. --
Ahecht (
TALK PAGE) 14:48, 18 April 2024 (UTC)reply
It's like a first first name, if that makes sense. Some people have it. Shri is a honorific like Mister. Only two of the sources in the article are independent news sources and Bhanwar is used by one of them. News sources commonly use Bhanwar so that he doesn't get confused with another Jitendra Singh who is an active politician. Even if it were less used which it isn't, it would still be more accessible without the disambiguation (who knows birth years?).
MrMkG (
talk) 22:17, 18 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Administrator needed
Edit this section only if your request requires an administrator. Usually, do so if the page has been
fully protected or
move protected (see
this guide to which moves need administrators). Place your request in another section if it only requires a
page mover.
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:..."
If you are here because you want an admin to approve of your new article or your proposed page move, you are in the wrong place.
If this is your first article and you want your draft article moved to the
mainspace, please submit it for review at
Articles for creation, by adding the code {{
subst:submit}} to the top of the
draft or
user sandbox page instead of listing it here.
Because you are
autoconfirmed, you can
move most pages yourself. Do not request technical assistance on this page if you can do it yourself.
If you need help determining whether it's okay to move the page to a different title, then please follow the instructions at the top of
Wikipedia:Requested moves.
To list a technical request: 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=reason for 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.
This case is similar to one a couple of weeks ago. The disambiguation page was changed to a redirect by an editor who's now left, but based on an incorrect reading of
WP:PRIMARYRED. Just because the other Bayne House doesn't yet have an article doesn't mean it's not considered as part of the primary topic assessment. From a brief look around the Web I don't think either is necessarily primary over the other, and it should be discussed. I've restored the dab page. —
Amakuru (
talk) 08:22, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Yeah, this user
Renamed user g5s6n3yi8z7g08cs cited them all (no NPA or HARASS intended, else self-blocked!). This reply is for both my requests. But I was expecting a thanks from you and their removals for bringing them here to your attention (if not the attention of page movers, reviewers and admins). Remember that this is a chain reaction stemming from my frequent glances at
R'n'B's contributions page, where I see entries with this edit summary: Redirect bypass from (say
Ballintemple (disambiguation) to
Ballintemple), which you've dealt with already); which then sparks my curiosity to head to their page histories and see the first line of this text in the form of actions from the user citing PRIMARYRED after previous then-worthy DAB entries popped up and were then removed by other users. Yes, this is RMTR, but I listed them here, maybe could've pinged you on my talk page on these, so that the appropriate actions could be taken on them so as not to return to them again. And the frustrating bit is that, this repetition could go on and on since I've bookmarked R'n'B's contribs page for over 100 days now. It/They could be for discussion(s), unsure about that, but with other similarly-named but redlinked entries in their DAB pages, hmmm! Confusion, confusion confusion!
Intrisit (
talk) 10:37, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
This case is similar to one a couple of weeks ago. The disambiguation page was changed to a redirect by an editor who's now left, but based on an incorrect reading of
WP:PRIMARYRED. Just because the other Bay Point, Florida, doesn't yet have an article doesn't mean it's not considered as part of the primary topic assessment. From a brief look around the Web I don't think either is necessarily primary over the other, and it should be discussed. I've restored the dab page. —
Amakuru (
talk) 08:22, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
This one may be slightly different from that of Bayne House above. The current red linked entry requires a blue link to an article with relevant content about the topic )
WP:DABMENTION). There are a few candidates in what links here, although none are particularly good. And there might even be another place in Alabama.
older ≠
wiser 11:10, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Why is this move needed? While there is a convention to include the state in naming articles for US cities/towns -- this does not necessarily apply to the parenthetical disambiguator. Consider, for example,
Category:Culture of Jersey City, New Jersey -- there are several others using only "(Jersey City)" and the same can be found for many other US cities/towns.
older ≠
wiser 11:41, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Agreed. The disambiguator is only there to disambiguate, it doesn't need to fit in with other naming conventions necessarily. —
Amakuru (
talk) 11:06, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
@
MrMkG I don't know too much about how Indian names/titles work, but only one of the sources in the article uses Bhanwar Jitendra Singh, while most just Jitendra Singh or Shri Jitendra Singh seem more common. --
Ahecht (
TALK PAGE) 14:48, 18 April 2024 (UTC)reply
It's like a first first name, if that makes sense. Some people have it. Shri is a honorific like Mister. Only two of the sources in the article are independent news sources and Bhanwar is used by one of them. News sources commonly use Bhanwar so that he doesn't get confused with another Jitendra Singh who is an active politician. Even if it were less used which it isn't, it would still be more accessible without the disambiguation (who knows birth years?).
MrMkG (
talk) 22:17, 18 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Administrator needed
Edit this section only if your request requires an administrator. Usually, do so if the page has been
fully protected or
move protected (see
this guide to which moves need administrators). Place your request in another section if it only requires a
page mover.