You actually provided only one reference in your move request to introduce a second reference here after the close is not relevant to if the closing of the move was appropriate As a community this name has stood uncontested since 2003 over 12 years ago You moved it without discussion or consensus on August and a month later it was brought up to have it moved back See WP BLD Like it or not the consensus at the time was to restore its original article title Your attempts to have it reverted back was not supported by anyone While I appreciate that you are striving for a better title it appears that no one supports you in this endeavor at least they haven t publicly posted as such It is not my place to perform the research into this because I m not voting or providing my position on this matter A closer s responsibility is to weigh the merits of the discussion Since there was no discussion and it was relisted twice in an attempt to gather more discussion it was closed Because this move is effectively contested because of a very recent successful move request the onus was on you to have more people participate in the discussion It would have been one matter if other editors supported your position but in this move request there was no support With regards to BDD while he wasn t sure what it should be he did not oppose the name change thus it leaves your argument without support That is why it was closed Since it was effectively contested by precedent it was closed as no consensus Realize this is very different from not moved which would state that there is consensus to not move Since that is the case you are more than welcome to open a new request to move however be prepared to gather other editors to comment on the new RM by contacting the appropriate projects article contributors or other people involved in the prior RMs just be sure to avoid inappropriate WP CANVASSING