Wikipedia talk:Requested moves

This edit request to Wikipedia:RM has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Can someone please add the template {{R mentioned in hatnote}} below the redirect category shell so this redirect can be properly categorised? Qwerty123M (talk) 07:36, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

 Done * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:27, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! Qwerty123M (talk) 00:52, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

I wanted to move a draft to an article, but was blocked by a redirect page with the same name. This is the relevant text from the Requested moves page, "In particular, if the target page is a redirect back to the source page that has only one revision, you can usually move the page normally." It has subsequently dawned on me what this text probably means, but it was not clear at all to me at the time. I now think it means that I should have first changed the redirect page (the 'one revision') to refer to itself, and then moved the draft page to the same page name as the redirect. I ended up moving the page Draft:Bodangara to Bodangora, New South Wales, instead of Bodangora (which was a redirect to Wellington), and then changing the redirect to point to the new article Bodangora, New South Wales. So, now the redirect has more than 'one revision', and I cannot move Bodangora, New South Wales, to Bodangora. Long story, but I think the process of moving a draft to replace a redirect page could be more clearly explained for those who have not faced the situation before.TrimmerinWiki (talk) 17:22, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

@TrimmerinWiki Ok, so say there is Example1. User:Example creates a redirect Example2 pointing to Example1, and it is never edited again. Meanwhile, Example3 is created as a redirect to Example4, and then is subsequently retargeted to Example1. When trying to move Example1, you'll be able to move it to Example2, as it's a redirect which has only been edited once. But you won't be able to move it to Example3, as it's been edited twice, despite it targeting Example1. Does that make sense?

When you have to move to redirects which have more than one revision or target another page, you can request it at WP:RMTR where the solution will usually be a swap. There's also {{Db-move}}, but that is significantly slower. HurricaneZeta^C 17:29, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure if my words will be of help, but I will try. When a redirect "has only one revision" it means that it has only one edit on its edit history page. I couldn't tell from your paragraph above whether or not you had been able to discern that. If there are two or more edits on the edit history page, then only administrators (and page movers under certain conditions) can move a page title over the redirect. Secondly, admins and page movers are here to help you. So in the future, if you have trouble with this, or even if you think you might have trouble with stuff like this, then find an admin or a page mover to help you. You still might not succeed if there is another problem with moving the page (not ready for mainspace or something else), but at least you will find that if the page should be an article, then any admin or page mover can help you with it. As the link you gave above tells us, "If a redirect has more than just one line in the page history but still a minor edit history, file a technical move request at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests." That is a good place to find help with moving pages. Thank you for bringing this up, and Best to you and yours! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 17:43, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for replying. I greatly appreciate the information, and the thoughts and care behind it. I forgot to mention that I did try to use the RMassist template to request assistance with the move, before I moved it as described above. The template returned an error message telling me that I must use the RMassist template, which is what I thought I was doing, but obviously something I was doing was wrong. I have done many moves from draft, but this is the first time I have been blocked by a redirect. Thanks to your reply above, I will be much better prepared now if the situation arises again.TrimmerinWiki (talk) 19:59, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

It actually only works on WP:RMTR. HurricaneZeta^C 21:05, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

Happy to help! Paine  07:35, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Can we stop relisting move requests the second they hit the seven-day mark? I can understand why a discussion with no comments gets relisted, though I personally don't think they need to be right away, but why relist a discussion like this one? This seems to be a problem that's popped up in the last year or so. Two years ago there were 66 relisted discussions and three years ago there only 37 Jessintime (talk) 14:49, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

Slogan "All Power to the People" mapping is incorrect ~2026-12379-67 (talk) 08:16, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

Please see this edit. I don't know what the local standards are for RMs, but either this is how we want things to work (and therefore this should be documented somewhere) or someone's making up non-existent (but not entirely unreasonable) rules and should be gently encouraged to stop it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:04, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

It's more like the nomination is a vote, and the nominator adding a bolded vote in the discussion is the equivalent of voting twice. That's how I read the discussions as an admin when closing them, and how I understand them to work when I make a move request. BD2412 T 21:08, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I understand that. But in most discussions, we assume that (a) the result isn't based on a vote count, and (b) the closer will not double-count the nom anyway. The action here indicates that this is actually disallowed. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:19, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

Same as what BD2412 said, but I don't think the vote should be struck - that doesn't usually happen in RMs and implies that the striker has some sort of authority over the RM process. HurricaneZeta^C 21:47, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

In RMs the nomination is non-neutral, unlike other types of formal discussions. As a non-neutral argument, the nomination is all that is needed. WP:RMCOMMENT makes this clear. Experienced RM closers know this and take it for granted; however, even an experienced editor can be thrown by an added support bullet made by the nom. There is simply no need for a confusing second rationale in the survey area unless it is written to add more detail to the nomination. When that happens the editor can make a bulleted comment in the survey, but not specifically a bulleted support. To correct this is not seen as authoritative; it's just simply cleanup. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 22:37, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

Hey folks,

I've just been thinking of making the RM relist template match the style of the other relist, xfd. Any thoughts on this would be appreciated.

Please discuss on Template talk:RM relist.

Thanks, Jacksonvil (talk|contribs) 10:31, 18 March 2026 (UTC)