"=Future moves to be by request=== 
 I had responded to a request and pointed a handful of broken redirects to Shepherd's pie after some poor edits. It looked fine to me - Cottage pie and Shepherd's pie being largely synonymous. The article has now been changed to Cottage pie. So I have again updated the redirects. That was thirteen redirects which had to be updated to point to Cottage pie. Any change now should go through Wikipedia:Requested moves linking to this discussion so that an Admin is aware that there has been prior discussion on this matter, and that there are multiple redirects involved. As the person who approached me said, it really doesn't matter which way round the title is as both forms need to be discussed within the article. Frankly this sort of petty renaming is time-consuming, damaging, disruptive and pointless. When there are two equal terms for a topic, and one has been in place for a long time with an article structured around the existing term, including multiple redirects then the common sense approach is to leave things alone. It's all a learning process, and we've all been there and done similar things! Take from this experience that it's always worth considering the potential disruption involved in a move - especially when there is no real net gain. '''''' *  

 =="