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: page moved to Formerly Known as Witte de With Center for Contemporary Art. (Capital "K" in "Known".) (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 19:17, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Witte de With Center for Contemporary Art → Formerly known as Witte de With Center for Contemporary Art – I'm requesting a move for this page to the new name of the project, which is "Formerly known as Witte de With Center for Contemporary Art". Sounds odd, but they are currently consulting on a new name which will be set in January 2021. In the mean time the name has changed to "Formerly known as Witte de With Center for Contemporary Art". After years of complaints about the colonial basis on the name Witte de With, as can be read about in the article. This name change does not seem controversial to me but it was already reverted when another editor did it, so I'll give some reasons here. The centre itself uses the new name now (eg on facebook) and most importantly reliable secondary sources are already using it. This would include Dutch mainstream media such as Volkskrant and NL Times and cultural organisations such as Frieze, The Art Newspaper, Artnet and E-Flux Mujinga (talk) 17:31, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Honestly it seems crazy, but it looks like reliable sources like Artnet are using it as the actual name of the museum.--Yaksar (let's chat) 19:25, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. If the proposed title is to be treated as a proper name, the K needs to be capitalized, like Artnet and Frieze do. On the other hand, if it's just a description, like in The Art Newspaper, it may be better to stick to the more concise common name until a new name is announced. It may be worth noting that the organization on its FAQ page asks "Does the institution currently have a name?" and answers "No..." Station1 (talk) 22:42, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I deleted the redirect as R3 (Recently created, implausible redirect). I've restored it and one using the capital K. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 05:07, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Conditional support per Station1's comments. If the sources say Formerly Known as Witte de With Center for Contemporary Art, by all means go for it, but it's just a descriptor, best to leave at current. ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 06:51, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Hi - I am the one who had originally, and by breaking many rules as I was kindly made aware of, moved the site and updated its name. I do want to apologise for simply doing that without proper procedure. That being said, I stand by the urgent need to rename and move this page. The museum is without a name at the moment. It has decided to drop its old name. So, I do think, in the meantime, and to best reflect these decisions, that calling it FKA Witte de With Center for Contemporary Art is the right thing to do, not least, as has been pointed out, because reliable sources have started doing the same. It even can be found under the new name on the web (fkawdw.nl) - in other words, it would not direct people into dead end. I do not think that this is merely a descriptor. We are dealing here with an interim name that needs to fill the void that has been created by dropping the old name. Because this is what seems the most important: the institution has decided to no longer be named that way. It is as simple as that. And we should reflect that. Queenofprussia (talk) 08:41, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Queenofprussia you acted boldly to move the page and that's no bad thing, then since someone objected, here we are at a formal discussion of the page move. To respond to comments above, as proposer I'd be fine with it being changed to Formerly Known as Witte de With Center for Contemporary Art with a capitalised K if that suits the wikipedia house style better. The organisation itself uses Formerly known as Witte de With Center for Contemporary Art on Facebook and Twitter and also says here "we announce that as of 27 June 2020, we are withdrawing our thirty-year-old name 'Witte de With Center for Contemporary Art'" so it is clear the old name is no longer correct. It is a strange, rather unique situation, I'll gather the secondary sources here, they seem quite split on whether to capitalise the K or not. Only Art Newspaper is being descriptive, the rest are using it as a proper name. Mujinga (talk) 20:07, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dutch Times: "The museum may still be found on social media, but now under the name "Formerly known as Witte de With Center for Contemporary Art", and on the website fkawdw.nl"
  • Volkskrant: "FKA Witte de With, Rotterdam"
  • Artnet: "the artist is now in the midst of putting the final touches on her solo show at Formerly Known as Witte de With in Rotterdam, which opens in September"
  • e-flux: "Formerly known as Witte de With Center for Contemporary Art"
  • Art Newspaper "at Rotterdam’s former Witte de With Centre for Contemporary Art"
  • Frieze: "a two-channel video installation commissioned by Formerly Known as Witte de With"

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mujinga (talk • contribs) 20:06, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus. There is no consensus for the proposed move at this time. This may be revisited when sources have begun to reflect use of a new name for this subject. BD2412 T 21:20, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Formerly Known as Witte de With Center for Contemporary Art → Melly Center for Contemporary Art – The art centre announced replacing its name with Melly on 2 Octobelr. 45.132.154.121 (talk) 08:33, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Speedy not sure why this needs discussion blindlynx (talk) 14:26, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, since current name "Formerly..." was only ever intended (by the Center itself) as a holding name. @Blindlynx: it's potentially controversial per WP:RM § CM "there has been any past debate about the best title for the page". It was discussed here only a month ago. 84.236.27.182 (talk) 15:37, 2 October 2020 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 01:12, 12 October 2020 (UTC) [reply]
• Support change to correct name "Melly Art Institute". Theroadislong (talk) 15:44, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support if it indeed is the new official name. "Formerly Known as Witte de With Center for Contemporary Art" is a silly name anyway. JIP | Talk 15:50, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose The new name was published today (see “Henceforth, call us Kunstinstituut Melly”), but the English translation appears to have been chosen as well, and is Melly Art Institute^[1], not Melly Center for Contemporary Art. JeroenHoek (talk) 20:13, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I fully support moving it of course, but do use the correct name instead. JeroenHoek (talk) 20:15, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I just found that too (here on the English-language version of the page). So the English name of it is "Kunstinstituut Melly", and "Melly Art Institute" appears to be WP:OR in the sense it is User:JeroenHoek's translation (I assume) and not what the Institute calls itself in English. I would think it reasonable to use this Dutch name per WP:OFFICIALNAME since that's used in an English-language source; we don't anglicise, for example, the Rijksmuseum nor the Zuiderzee. 84.236.27.182 (talk) 20:27, 2 October 2020 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 01:12, 12 October 2020 (UTC) [reply]

That translation is not mine, it is literally what the institute published in parenthesis beneath the Dutch name. If you disagree with my edit and revert it, at least have the decency to fix the article and change the name to Kunstinstituut Melly instead of leaving it for others to do the work. JeroenHoek (talk) 07:20, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted to my edit, amended with the Dutch name for now. If you disagree, don't blindly revert to the version with the made-up translation of Melly Center for Contemporary Art (WP:OR!) but edit the article. JeroenHoek (talk) 07:27, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Oh wow. Viva Melly Shum! I thought the new name was being announced in Jan 2021, but it's announced now and will come into effect then. JeroenHoek is correct to say that the English name being used by the institution itself appears right now to be Melly Art Institute, as in the supplied link. We should perhaps wait on that to see what the common name emerges as being, but Melly Center for Contemporary Art does indeed appear to be original research right now. To take some English language secondary sources, Kunstinstituut Melly is right now being stated as the new name in Art Forum, Hyperallergic, NL Times, News1 (which says it is a translation of a paywalled NRC Handelsblad article) and Art Dependence. So right now we should be changing the name to Kunstinstituut Melly in my opinion, but I'm also fine with waiting to see what emerges as a common name. As a final point the insitution's own website is still https://www.fkawdw.nl ie "formerly known as". Mujinga (talk) 23:43, 2 October 2020 (UTC) Changing to Oppose in the light of what JeroenHoek says on talkpage below in "New name in English" section. Mujinga (talk) 16:10, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - The page should be moved at the moment the name takes effect in 2021. As of now, the name has been decided, but the institution's name has not been changed yet. It really is very simple. 89.14.144.157 (talk) 10:11, 5 October 2020 (UTC) Queenofprussia (talk) 10:12, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. No case to answer, and the change is unlikely to be reflected in sources when it is not even effective for some time yet. If anyone would like to read the article naming policy and provide some relevant arguments it might be different, but so far this is a complete waste of time. Andrewa (talk) 16:18, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.