Bug 1070001 reorg wikiedit

Renamed classes to make them more modular:
- documents -> document-list
- deleted move-decendatnts-list and changed elements to use document-list
- move-lookup-link -> parent-suggest-link
- contributor-sub -> contributors->sub
- choice-list -> revision-list-head
- revision-list -> revision-list-contain
- compare -> revision-list-controls
- various changes to more granualr class names inside revision-list
- action -> title-prefix
- kumascript-errors -> kserrors
- kumascript-details -> kserrors-details
- kumascript-detail-toggle -> kserrors-details-toggle

Move Page:
- changed title to match style of create/edit/translate pages
- removed move-decendatnts-list and changed occurances to document-list

Everything else was done to decrease specificity and redundancy, or move declarations into their own files for maintainability.

Wasn't sure what to do with the broadly defined elements declared at the beginning of wiki-edit so they're just hanging out there for now.
I just copied the way it's being done on the editing and creating pages, so we'd have to change it in all three places. I'm not against that, it should be easy. 

I think cite would be out of place in a title. A citation is generally a reference to a separate document to provide context to the current document.

I'm not sure the semantics are clear here. What we really need is <hgroup> but they removed that from the spec >:( 

Looking at the two pieces of the title I go back and fourth over which we want to provide emphasis on. Is it more important that we are moving the page or is the name of the page more important? Or maybe they are both important and this is a stylistic difference? I'm not sure it really matters :P But it's a fun mental exercise...

I think a screen reader user should experience the page name the same way they would on any other page (just like our sighted users do) and it also makes sense to me to emphasize the difference between reading the page and Moving/Editing/etc it which means it falls to us to markup the *prefix* differently, not the name of the article.

I like this [HTML5 Doctor article explaining the difference between i, b, em, and strong](http://html5doctor.com/i-b-em-strong-element/). I figure either i or em is appropriate here. I suspect the screen readers will treat both identically regardless of the semantic meaning. So, I'd probably pick em to avoid having to justify using i to people who don't know it's valid HTML5 ;) 

Make sense?