User:Lvhis/for WP:RM/CM

Requested move
Should use WP:RM/CM template|{subst:move-multi


 * current1 = Senkaku Islands


 * new1 = Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands


 * current2 = Senkaku Islands dispute


 * new2 = Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands dispute


 * current3 = 2010 Senkaku boat collision incident


 * new3 = 2010 Diaoyu/Senkaku boat collision incident


 * reason = The name/title "Senkaku Islands" currently used for this article and its related articles has been disputed for quite a long time even after the previous RfC. A number of editors have raised the concern and recently have basically reached a consensus in light of great and increasing numbers of reliable sources published in English lanuage, as discussed in the talk page sections, that a dual (hybrid) name such as "Diaoyu/Senkaku" or "Senkaku/Diaoyu" should be applied for the name/title of this articles and its related articles.  According to reliable sources, for the name of the islands, "Senkaku" is Romanized Japanese name and "Diaoyu" is Romanized Chinese name (or described like "called Diaoyu in China and Senkaku in Japan"), and "Pinnacle Islands" is the name from English language but less used in the moden time.              Many reliable sources in English language directly use a dual (hybrid) form "Diaoyu/Senkaku" or "Senkaku/Diaoyu"  making the two local names equally together and brief, and to keep these sources on independent neutral stand for this ownership disputed islands          . Using current single "Senkaku" for the name of this article and its related article has deviated far away from the main stream of reliable sources published in English language and is much less neutral than any independent English publications, so as to have damaged the merit and reliability of Wikipedia. According to  Five pillars particular WP:NPOV and WP:NOR, and other relevant policies including WP:V and WP:NCGN (in particular Multiple local names), now I request to move this article and its related articles under name "Diaoyu/Senkaku" as indicated above as soon as possible. Whether using "Diaoyu/Senkaku" or using "Senkaku/Diaoyu" should not become a critical issue preventing this move, as both of them have been used in many reliable sources published in English language, and both are relatively neutral. I tried to search them on Google Books or Google News Archive but it is almost impossible to clearly or completely separate them, i.e. one dual (hybrid) name search will always contain the other dual (hybrid) one, and the result of Google Books search gave an almost equal results for the two forms searches. After all we have to choose one from these two to request move, and I choose "Diaoyu/Senkaku" based on simple reasons: 1) the alphabetical order of English language, and 2 ) the historical order of names generated: "Diaoyu" generated as early as 1403 while "Senkaku" was generated around 1900.

Reliable Sources used in this request: }}