Talk:Runchorelal baronets

Requested move 2 December 2023

 * 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: no consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 10:14, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Runchorelal baronets → Ranchhodlal baronets – As per WP:COMMMONNAME.&#32;— Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 05:17, 1 December 2023 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 16:34, 2 December 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Lightoil (talk) 01:00, 10 December 2023 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * I am not personally contesting the move—it's just that this is clearly a WP:PCM and not a mere technical request. Nom has already boldly moved the article as proposed and was reverted. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 16:34, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose - (thanks for for the reopen, I had initially reverted this move as contested a couple of weeks ago). The London gazette of 23 May 1913, which is mentioned and cited in the first line of the article, clearly gives the name of this baronetcy as "Runchorelal", not as any other spelling. So while the modern members of the family may use a different name for day-to-day purposes, the name of the title appears to be Runchorelal, unless it was explicitly changed at some point. Cheers  &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 16:00, 10 December 2023 (UTC)