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: moved to 2024 leak of U.S. intelligence on Israeli strike plans. This close is essentially a WP:NOTCURRENTTITLE case: participants unanimously agreed that the previous title should be changed, and there was also wide support for a more detailed title than was originally proposed. The ensuing discussion was relatively open-ended, with a number of titles being proposed. The primary concerns at play in the discussion were around WP:PRECISION; participants aimed to strike a balance of clearly indicating the article's topic (involving the leak of US intelligence about Israeli strike plans) without verging into unnecessary detail. Several of the proposed titles appear to have met this standard. Among the proposed titles, I believe that 2024 leak of U.S. intelligence on Israeli strike plans received the greatest amount of numerical support and was identified as one of the best titles (though not the unambiguous winner) along the WP:PRECISION metric. However, as WP:NOTCURRENTTITLE closes do not imply an affirmative consensus for the final title, participants should feel free to discuss the topic further or open a new RM if they believe further improvement is possible. (closed by non-admin page mover) ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 17:44, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Israeli retaliation leak → 2024 U.S. intelligence leak – Current title makes no sense, as the intelligence wasn't even Israeli and the Israelis didn't leak it. The leak is about the U.S. Proposed title is WP:CONSISTENT with other similar page topics, such as 2022–2023 Pentagon document leaks, United States diplomatic cables leak, 2017 Macron e-mail leaks, United States government group chat leaks, Stratfor email leak. Longhornsg (talk) 16:53, 28 May 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Iffy★Chat -- 17:17, 17 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. CoconutOctopus talk 17:41, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Although a red link, the suggested title seems rather vague. It seems likely there are several leaks of U.S. intelligence in any given year. Adding some hint about the subject of the leaked intelligence might be an improvement. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:46, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  This is the only such leak with a Wikipedia article in 2024. Longhornsg (talk) 01:45, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I still think it would be better to have some mention of the subject of the leaked intelligence in the title. Without that, it doesn't seem like a natural way to describe the topic. I suggest 2024 U.S. leak of Israeli strike preparation intelligence. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 02:19, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I agree with BarrelProof. The title should mention the subject of the leaked intelligence in order to clearly identify the topic of the article. I suggest 2024 leak of U.S. intelligence on Israeli strike plans, which is easier to parse and avoids the potential misinterpretation as "U.S. leak of Israeli intelligence". Most sources use this "on" construction. I don't feel strongly about documents/information/intelligence, strike/attack, or plans/preparation. Jruderman (talk) 03:11, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  That's better than my suggestion, so I struck through mine. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 03:25, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  What about United States–Israeli intelligence leak as more concise and encompassing? It was U.S. intel that leaked Israeli intel if not mistaken, and wasn't limited to strike plans either. Otherwise U.S. intelligence leak of Israeli strike plans, as no need for year disambig nor "leak of" wordiness. I otherwise support consensus for WP:NOTCURRENT. CNC (talk) 15:59, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I like U.S. intelligence leak of Israeli strike plans, as it's slightly shorter and slightly clearer than my suggestion. You might be correct that it's specific enough to not need a year as well. Jruderman (talk) 01:50, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting comment: Final relist, to see if stronger consensus can be achieved before closing CoconutOctopus talk 17:41, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Support move to 2024 leak of U.S. intelligence on Israeli strike plans. Alternatives that do not mention the year are too vague and broad, given that this is about a single incident. I am pretty sure that there have been, and will continue to be, other US leaks of Israeli strike plans. JBchrch talk 11:06, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]