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: not moved (non-admin closure) Mdaniels5757 (talk) 22:52, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shooting of Oscar Grant → Killing of Oscar Grant – The officer in this case was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter. At the very least that means Oscar Grant was killed. The title should indicate that. The fact that he was killed is the most notable fact and should be favored since COMMONNAME is a tie. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 17:37, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose: As far as I know, Wikipedia consistently uses "Shooting of" for articles about non-murder deaths by shooting, and the vast majority of the people discussed in the "Shooting of" articles were killed. Note that there are no uses of "Killing of" in Category:People shot dead by law enforcement officers in the United States. —BarrelProof (talk) 20:40, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support: per nom. The fact that he died, and the circumstances of his death are the reason the article exists. The title should reflect what happened: he was killed. If the only argument against is the existing consistency of other articles, that consistency can be maintained by changing all of them (except those in which the victim didn't die). ThunderBacon (talk) 09:51, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per BarrelProof and per WP:CONSISTENT. There are 266 entries under Category:People shot dead by law enforcement officers in the United States and, unless there is a mass renaming of all such entries to "Killing of..." or "Fatal shooting of...", it would not be useful to single out individual article main title headers for renaming while hundreds of analogous headers remain unchanged. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 06:24, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose, mostly per the above. I think, given the large amount of "shooting of" articles, this is probably more suited to an RfC than standalone RMs, which is bound to create exceptions. Nohomersryan (talk) 05:03, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, primarily because the officer was acquitted. There was not enough evidence it was an intentional killing. Core2012 14:01, 9 June 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Core2012 (talk • contribs)