Talk:Prayagraj/Archive 4

Allahabad name change
Please change Allahabad to Prayagraj because its name is changed officially. 839930jkddkls (talk) 16:16, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Please read the contents of this talk page first. OhNo itsJamie Talk 16:18, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * You can start the discussion on/after 4 April 2023, not before - Arjayay (talk) 16:21, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Absolutely Inappropriate that you haven't changed this name yet to Prayagraj
It is beyond offensive to the Hindu community that you are not changing Allahabad to the official name Prayagraj. Please change the name. 2600:1009:B0E7:E8F6:2D68:8F54:FC22:8751 (talk) 22:18, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh no it is not Smiley.svg -- Toddy1 (talk) 23:14, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Beyond what is it to the Hindu community of your representation that the Allahabad High Court&mdash;smack in the middle of Prayagraj&mdash;has not changed its name? Beyond justice, injustice, legality or illegality? In other words, just as the Allahabad High Court has its own conventions for changing names or for not, so does Wikipedia.  Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's conventions.  Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  00:43, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
 * The Offended Generation, here too? — kashmīrī  TALK  13:21, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Name change
Although asking for a name change would be beating my head against the wall. However, what perplexes me is how city of Astana's name change to Nur-Sultan was done yet Allahabad to Prayagraj(which actually happened a year ago to Astana's name change) is facing so much opposition. What is the rationale or logic behind this?  R o o k 6  Let's Talk 10:00, 3 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Maybe the sheer number of sources referencing the old names? The two cities are sort of, uhm, different age. — kashmīrī  TALK  10:40, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * (1) Lots of people in India can read and write in English. (2) There is also a large Indian diaspora, many of whom can also read and write in English. (3) The British liberated India in the 18th and 19th centuries, so British people also take an interest. None of this is true of Kazakhstan.  So what happens in India matters to more people on English-language Wikipedia than what happens in Kazakhstan. -- Toddy1 (talk) 12:23, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I still wonder why everyone is fixated on Astana->Nur-Sultan 🧐 — DaxServer (talk) 12:24, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Dear, I think the main reason for not moving this article is religious. The references are just the weapon used to avoid the move. As you mentioned, Astana is a good example of why not moving this article is so biased--Lambrusquiño (talk) 19:39, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The vast majority of Indians do not care and do not even use these new names. I remember once asking which stop to get off for Varanasi. Blank stares. "Va-ra-na-asi". Nope. "Benares?" "Oh, next stop, sir!"! Dāsānudāsa (talk) 09:29, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Looking at the developments in Kazakhstan, it won't be long before editors will spend long hours restoring Astana across Wikipedia. — kashmīrī  TALK  03:02, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Let's face it.. Like everywhere.. Wikipedia has a political issue.

Article's names are not always named like their usage in that respective Wikipedia language tells them too, which should be applied according to Wikipedia's naming conventions, but some article's are renamed swiftly without the usage of the new name being that high.

Still, the article will be renamed Prayagraj eventually, this is obvious.

English Wikipedia is simply the most backwarded. And yes, it is totally offensive to Hindus not moving the article's name, since the name Allahabad was created under occupation. Somebody, who hasn't lived under occupation would not understand. German Wikipedia has a guideline: to name places like they are named in their native.

Maybe English Wikipedia will one day come to that if they want to improve, it makes things much easier and is simply fair to the people's of the world. --Tecumseh*1301 (talk) 07:42, 20 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes, we are the most backwarded people in the entire multiverse. Happy now? Unless you have anything that is remotely useful for the article which is not a name change, please do not post here. We all had enough of your bickering already. Please also see User talk:Tecumseh*1301 § Discretionary sanctions alert 2 — DaxServer (talk · contribs) 11:37, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * You are arguing the wrong way. A few regions of the Subcontinent were ruled by foreign (mostly Turkish) dynasties sometime in history; most remained ruled by various local rajas. FYI, Queen Elizabeth II is also of German origin (of the Saxe-Coburg and Gotha dynasty), yet it would be insane to claim that this amounts to "German occupation of the UK". So, stop that nonsense please. We're talking here about a 21st century city and how people call it today, not about righting the great wrongs of the 15th century. — kashmīrī  TALK  14:00, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Moreover, your point about the German Wikipedia clearly isn't true. The United Kingdom isn't called "Vereinigtes Königreich" in the "englische Sprache", nor indeed any of its other native languages. Dāsānudāsa (talk) 14:28, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Interwiki links: de:Vereinigtes Königreich produces de:Vereinigtes Königreich. See Help:Interwiki linking -- Toddy1 (talk) 14:37, 20 January 2022 (UTC)


 * {| class="wikitable"

!colspan=4| European city names in different European languages !| English !| Italian !| French !| German
 * -valign=top
 * -valign=top
 * -valign=top
 * Antwerp || Anversa || Anvers || Antwerpen
 * -valign=top
 * Cologne || Colonia || Cologne || Köln
 * -valign=top
 * The Hague || L'Aia || La Haye || Den Haag
 * -valign=top
 * Geneva || Ginevra || Genève || Genf
 * -valign=top
 * Genoa || Genova || Gênes || Genua
 * -valign=top
 * Lviv || Leopoli || Lviv || Lwiw
 * -valign=top
 * Munich || Monaco di Baviera || Munich || München
 * -valign=top
 * Moscow || Mosca || Moscou || Moskau
 * -valign=top
 * Naples || Napoli || Naples || Neapel
 * -valign=top
 * Prague || Praga || Prague || Prag
 * -valign=top
 * Rome || Roma || Rome || Rom
 * -valign=top
 * Vienna || Vienna || Vienne || Wien
 * -valign=top
 * Warsaw || Varsavia || Varsovie || Warschau
 * }
 * -- Toddy1 (talk) 20:11, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry, what's your point? To show similarities or to show differences? If the latter, Aachen is a sufficient example. — kashmīrī  TALK  20:32, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry, what's your point? To show similarities or to show differences? If the latter, Aachen is a sufficient example. — kashmīrī  TALK  20:32, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Vereinigtes Königreich means United Kingdom, it is only in German and was used for a long time. Maybe even this will change in the future, and we will call it "United Kingdom".. I would have no problem with that.

--Tecumseh*1301 (talk) 20:47, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I would, because it would be ridiculous, considering neither "United" nor "Kingdom" are words in German. Why are some people so adamantly opposed to the concept of exonyms? Dāsānudāsa (talk) 21:03, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * By the way, I take it you're also pushing this hard for the article de:Indien to be renamed "Bhārat" (or at least "India")? Dāsānudāsa (talk) 21:06, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

As I said, Bharat would sound just fine to me, if the people show that they want it with a referendum maybe..

Kashmiri writes, that it is not important to right the wrongs, if they are long ago.. I beg to differ...

We now live in a different world (most of us) thank God.. so we now are responsible to clean up some of the mess, that has been done some time ago. And renaming city's under occupation is belonging to this, and people do care as though it was long ago, which only shows, how important this issue is and always will be. Within days sometimes another one writes, when the article is finally going to be renamed „Prayagraj“.. people, who don't usually write on Wikipedia and don't know, what else to do, but nothing helps, the city is still named Allahabad. Tecumseh*1301 (talk) 08:15, 24 January 2022 (UTC)


 * You are getting WP:TEDIOUS with all your bickering over the lost wars of the Middle Ages. — kashmīrī  TALK  14:32, 24 January 2022 (UTC)


 * The foremost requirement to be a wikipedia editor is to be neutral in nature, but looks like it is not at all followed (those who are biased will definitely feel offended with this statement). I am not writing here in support of name change or in support to retain the name, but just want to put forward a general point, Wikipedia is not a place where people come and perform searches (users do search within it but mostly reach here through google search), and wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia where one has to manually search an entry by going through indexes or pages so it becomes important that only the popularly known name should be indexed. For instance, if I search Astana or Nur-Sultan, I will always end up getting the same page. It is practically redundant to use a name which is not current official name of a place. The purpose of any encyclopedia is to provide upto-date information to its readers. It is high time that wikipedia updates its WP:COMMONNAME policy. Ideally, we should create pages with all those names which people know across the world but should be re-directed to a page which is its current official name. We have to come out of herd mentality that, what majority says is always right. If majority of English speaking population doesn't know that Astana is now known as Nur-Sultan then they need to be made aware of it through projects like Wikipedia. Let them search Astana and reach to the page Nur-Sultan, the opening line of the article should mention that Nur-Sultan was formerly known as Astana. Keeping the old name as article name is more of a conservative approach. Even constitutions of nations are amended with evolution of society, then why should wikipedia stick to a policy which is no more relevant in the era of advanced internet technologies?. Please don't ask me to initiate that? I am not aware of the process to amend any policies, or if even I am eligible to initiate that discussion. Rohit klar (talk) 17:23, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I completely disagree. Maybe you should follow the news more closely: Officials, including President Tokayev, have likewise ceased referring to the capital city as Nur-Sultan, preferring instead to call it just “the capital city.”eurasianet 20 Jan 2022 -- Toddy1 (talk) 21:03, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Had we gone strictly by official names, we'd not only have Baile Átha Cliath instead of Dublin or Droichead Nua instead of Newport but bump into problems when a place has a number of official names in different official languages (e.g., Genève/Genf/Ginevra, all of them official names for Geneva). So, we have WP:COMMONNAME and we intend to stick to it also for Indian cities as far as I can judge the consensus. — kashmīrī  TALK  17:30, 25 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Looking right above this, there's an agreement that we should wait 18 months and then readdress this issue to give time for sources to shift. This really should be closed per that consensus.  Ravensfire  (talk) 21:40, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Biodiversity section
The article has a paragraph:
 * The most common birds found in the city are doves, peacocks, junglefowl, black partridge, house sparrows, songbirds, blue jays, parakeets, quails, bulbuls, and comb ducks. Large numbers of Deer are found in the Trans Yamuna area of Allahabad. India's first conservation reserve for blackbuck is being created in Allahabad's Meja Forest Division. Other animals in the state include reptiles such as lizards, cobras, kraits, and gharials. During winter, large numbers of Siberian birds are reported in the sangam and nearby wetlands.

-- Toddy1 (talk) 08:57, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I do not see how page 61 of source [1] supports the statement it is cited for. I did searches for Allahabad and Prayagraj in the book, but found nothing.
 * The second sentence appears to refer to Allahabad district. The third sentence refers to Uttar Pradesh.
 * The third sentence is supported by source that refers to "Sangam and nearby wetlands."  So I suppose it does refer to part of Allahabad as well as Allahabad district.

Add a few lines under the heading Entertainment and recreation
The Magh Mela is an annual gathering of Hindu pilgrims in Prayag, on the banks of Triveni Sangam (the confluence of Ganga, Yamuna and Saraswati). This Mela is held every year during the Hindu month of Magh (corresponding from mid January – mid February) and the important bathing dates are spread over a period of 45 days. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhigya Pandey (talk • contribs) 08:53, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 April 2022
Add a fews lines under the heading Entertainment and recreation-The Magh Mela is an annual gathering of Hindu pilgrims in Prayag, on the banks of Triveni Sangam (the confluence of Ganga, Yamuna and Saraswati). This Mela is held every year during the Hindu month of Magh (corresponding from mid January – mid February) and the important bathing dates are spread over a period of 45 days. Abhigya Pandey (talk) 07:59, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:02, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
 * https://prayagraj.nic.in/culture-heritage/  Under the heading: Traditional Fairs & Festival(Annual Magh Mela) Abhigya Pandey (talk) 09:57, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @ScottishFinnishRadish Is my source is not correct? Abhigya Pandey (talk) 17:01, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
 * This request is made under a project named Edit Request Wizard https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T300454 Abhigya Pandey (talk) 06:57, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I have reset the request to try to get editors to respond. -Roxy the grumpy dog . wooF 16:47, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅, confirmed and referenced. &#8212;CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • C • L) 15:39, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank You! Abhigya Pandey (talk) 14:48, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 April 2022
Sir since the old name of the given city was allahabad which was changed to Prayagraj by our respected government so in order to promote the new name it would be helpful if you remove the name of the city as Allahabad and change it to Prayagraj.You can mention the old name (Allahabad) in the article just for the extra  knowledge but since you are entitling the whole page as Allahabad  also using the name Allahabad at all places name of the city is required it might be misleading also isn't the right the right identity of the city. Therefore i request you to take my concern serious and change the required names at all places from Allahabad to Prayagraj so as to promote right information to people all around the globe which is the primary use of Wikipedia THE AYT (talk) 17:22, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
 * ❌ - Please read the big blue box above which explains that we will not even start another discussion on a name change until 4 April 2023 - please come back then - Arjayay (talk) 17:28, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 April 2022
I have seen that Wikipedia uses official names of cities in case of creating article, e.g. istanbul which was named Constantinople at one time, or Kolkata which was name calcutta at one time. Simillar way the official name is prayagraj which should be the heading of article not allahabad. Nketkar007 (talk) 02:50, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Please see the previous discussions around changing the name.   Ravensfire  (talk) 03:03, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
 * closing edit request &#128156; melecie   talk  - 04:28, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 May 2022
Since Allahabad has officially and correctly been restored to its original name Prayagraj, I would request to change the title to Prayagraj as well... Kool123Blue (talk) 17:08, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
 * See Talk:Allahabad. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:10, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 June 2022
Please change the city name to "Prayagraj" official name including page title/heading. This will avoid confusion on the information and search. It is necessary that wikipedia keeps latest, truthful, non-biased and official information. Sidpatil3 (talk) 07:26, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
 * See Talk:Allahabad. -Roxy the grumpy dog . wooF 07:27, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

@User:Roxy the dog where is the discussion on the talk page? Wikiwizardinho (talk) 08:04, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * In archive 4. -Roxy the grumpy dog . wooF 08:17, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 March 2022
"change ALLAHABAD to PRAYAGRAJ" 2409:4040:D97:4D93:1857:F54C:8DE:6DBA (talk) 14:26, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. AwfulReader (talk) 14:36, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Please also read the big blue box above which explains that we will not even start another discussion on a name change until 4 April 2023 - please come back then - Arjayay (talk) 14:47, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree, The City Name Officially is "Prayaggraj". MUST be Change and reflect Official Name even in search engine. Sidpatil3 (talk) 07:22, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

English-language news media can also be very reliable sources. Due caution must be given to the possibility of bias in some, such as for nationalistic, religious or political reasons. However, major global sources are generally reliable, such as major authoritative English-language newspapers (examples: The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Times of London) or wire services (examples: Reuters, Associated Press). Google News and Lexis-Nexis search results can provide a quick guide to the relative predominance of alternative names across the media as a whole, provided the search parameters are properly set, but as with all raw search numbers, they should be used with caution.Thus in various news channel such as The Washington Post( here is the link https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/06/india-social-media-covid-19/ ) and the BBC News too is addressing this city as Prayagraj.So its should be like Prayagraj, formally known as Allahabad Curious man123 (talk) 17:36, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 July 2022
Change title of page from Allahabad to Pragyaraj. 82.6.39.2 (talk) 13:50, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: See above. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:53, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Prayagraj is the correct name of the city. It was alabad
Pls change and update the website Previous name of the city was alabad and correct name of the city is Prayagraj 150.129.151.187 (talk) 09:39, 13 July 2022 (UTC)


 * ❌ - as stated in the box at the top "no further move requests should be made before 4 April 2023." - Arjayay (talk) 09:49, 13 July 2022‎ (UTC)

This is mindblowing
If it wasn't true, noone would believe it. It is really astonishing, how it is is organized, that the name Allahabad will stay the article's name.

If there was democratic structures on this part of Wikipedia, the discussions on the topic would be held without a „discussion ban“ - the mere existence of such thing, like a ban of a discussion is pure anti-democracy.. And then every opinion ever made by any IP-adress should be counted. Then the English media usage of each term should be explored and other usage as well and then there would a picture emerge.

But to start a discussion, which is limited in time, and every opinion that was mentioned before or after that time span, is simply ignored, well that is just a dirty ruse, that should anyone from a democratic country make sick. How deep can one fall.

Lobbyists and anti-democrats surely take notes.

--Tecumseh*1301 (talk) 22:12, 20 July 2022 (UTC)


 * @Tecumseh*1301: You might read this with interest. — kashmīrī  TALK  22:34, 20 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Well, exactly there lies the problem. If Wikipedia theoretically is not a democracy, it is a dictatorship. While on the other hand, Wikipedia surely often in fact is a democracy, which gives hope.


 * But, well, everyone with just a little logical thinking knows, why Prayagraj is not named Prayagraj and what your intention is, kashmiri, by just looking at your name. You probably are a Muslim, as most of Kashmiris nowadays, who would be so offended, if the Muslim name of this city, would not be used anymore. For that you will fight.. fight against everyone and even against democracy. But you can't change the fact, that the city simply is called Prayagraj. I would accept if the same things happen the other way around, Muslims renaming Hindu cities. I have nothing against Muslims, love em, like i love every religion. But I surely despise anti-democratic structures and everyone should.. If a man wants to change his name, this shall be accepted, if someone wants to change religion, this shall be accepted, if a man wants to be a woman, this shall be accepted, if Prayagraj wants to be named Prayagraj, this shall be accepted. Tecumseh*1301 (talk) 07:47, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
 * None of this is relevant. There is not going to be a move discussion before 4 April 2023.  That was decided on democratically.  If you object, try Allahabad High Court. -- Toddy1 (talk) 08:49, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
 * The article has decided to use "Allahabad" over "Prayagraj" (to the extent that the grammar checker flags "Prayagraj" and not "Allahabad" despite them both being proper nouns) and you refer to the "Allahabad High Court" as justification for this policy. However, the city of Chennai is called by it's official name "Chennai" in it's article and not called it's historical name "Madras" despite the existence of the Madras High Court in the city. There is an inconsistency here. Either Wikipedia uses the official name of a city, or the historical name. 27.5.232.153 (talk) 15:39, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note that Chennai was renamed in 1996, well before Wikipedia came into existence. This is the first version of the article bearing the name Chennai, created on 26 March 2002. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:52, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 * @Tecumseh*1301: Yeah, and by looking at your name you're a Native American, long dead... — kashmīrī  TALK  09:32, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Change Article name from Allahabad to Prayagraj
Please i request Wiki Pedia or Article creator to change the title name from Allahabad to Prayagraj ! The city's name was changed by the Adityanath government in October 2018. The Supreme Court on Monday issued a notice to the Uttar Pradesh government seeking its response to a petition challenging the decision to change the name of Allahabad city to Prayagraj

I request all visitors to report the page if Article name is not changed from Allahabad to Prayagraj  Nikmenikit (talk) 07:07, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg There is a notice at the top of the page saying: no further move requests should be made before 4 April 2023 -- Toddy1 (talk) 07:30, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 August 2022
Change name to Prayagraj the article is outdated the last major update was in 2017 or earlier and needs to be updated to 2022 standards by fixing the  name 71.169.177.245 (talk) 10:23, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:29, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * As stated above "An RfC .... concluded that no further move requests should be made before 4 April 2023". Please come back then. - Arjayay (talk) 10:48, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

It's time
There is now a pretty clear consensus across all the various kinds of sources that they are now using Prayagraj as the name for the city that is the subject of the article. As per Wikipedia's policy on commonly used names, the sources that should be refered to are major international organizations, major English-language media outlets, quality encyclopedias, geographic name servers, major scientific bodies, and notable scientific journals.

Major International Organizations: Somewhat complicated, given that major organizations relatively rarely refer to the name of a city. Nonetheless, since the name change, the United Nations, the World Bank, UNESCOthe World Health Organization, and European Union have used Prayagraj in their reports or their datasets to refer to the city. That said, this is probably the most debatable category.

Major English-Language Media outlets: They have almost universally started using Prayagraj, regardless of whether they are based in the United States such as Reuters, New York Times, or Washington Post, the UK such as BBC or the Guardian, or in India such as the Indian Express or NDTV.

Quality Encyclopedia: Britannica Uses Prayagraj.

Geographic Name Servers: Google Maps, Bing Maps, and Apple Maps all use Prayagraj.

Major Science Bodies and Journals: Checking citations for Prayagraj vs Allahabad is complicated, because Allahabad is used as a name for a lot of things besides the city that is the subject of the article, such as other locations called Allahabad, a district court, a military hospital, a fort, a pillar, a kind of plant, and importantly multiple universites have Allahabad in their name. However, we can easily check which is more the common representation for the city that is the subject of this article by searching for "Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh" vs "Allahabad,Uttar Pradesh". Since 2022, Prayagraj is far more common, with 1800 results for Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh vs only 694 for Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh, which is pretty clear evidence that Prayagraj has become the common name in the scientific literature as well.

Waiting to change the name until the sources changes made sense, but now that they have, Wikipedia is going to seem ridiculously out of teach if we keep using the old name that is no longer the most commonly used one. 2601:1C0:6C00:2430:A510:5602:24D8:4F87 (talk) 00:53, 4 April 2023 (UTC)


 * I think we should continue to use the WP:COMMONNAME. The name is right there in the first sentence of the article anyway. - Roxy the dog 06:37, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Am I missing something? WP:COMMONNAME is where I read in determining the common name "it is useful to observe the usage of major international organizations, major English-language media outlets, quality encyclopedias, geographic name servers, major scientific bodies, and notable scientific journals", so I checked if those sources had switched to the new name. How else do we determine the common name except by checking the reliable sources? I'm a wikipedia newbie, so it is possible I missed something in the policy but I don't see it. It's not that we should take into account older sources, because WP:NAMECHANGES explicitly states "we give extra weight to independent, reliable English-language sources ("reliable sources") written after the name change". 2601:1C0:6C00:2430:A510:5602:24D8:4F87 (talk) 07:14, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * You are missing various things. For example, you chose a Google Scholar search that happened to give the result you wanted. Here are some more. The only one that shows Prayagraj as more common was the one you mentioned; but the others are just as valid.
 * {| class="wikitable"

!colspan=3|Google Scholar search results, since 2022 !| Scholar search term !|Allahabad !|Prayagraj
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:center;"
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:center;"
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|"Allahabad" "Prayagraj"
 * 10,900
 * 5,760
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|"Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh" "Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh"
 * 694
 * 1,800
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|"Allahabad, India" "Prayagraj, India"
 * 2,400
 * 1,700
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|"Allahabad, Region" "Prayagraj, Region"
 * 63
 * 50
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|"Allahabad city" "Prayagraj city"
 * 200
 * 171
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|"Allahabad division" "Prayagraj division"
 * 11
 * 4
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|"Allahabad district" "Prayagraj district"
 * 255
 * 198
 * }
 * -- Toddy1 (talk) 08:49, 4 April 2023 (UTC) rows for division and district added 10:42 (UTC)
 * That's because searches for Allahabad, India and just Allahabad include sources include references to things with Allahabad in their name that are not the city that is the subject of this article. For Example, on the top page for Allahabad, India you include the paper "An efficient tasks scheduling algorithm for batch processing heterogeneous cloud environment" which comes up because the authors are located at according to the paper Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology Allahabad, Prayagraj, 211004, Uttar Pradesh, India. Allahabad is part of the institute name, but the paper is calling the city that is of the subject of the article Prayagraj. Allahabad division and Allahahbad district refer to the district which is a separate article.
 * Region, City are better since they are usually clear references to the subject of the article, but adding up clear references to Allahahbad vs Prayagraj in "Uttar Pradesh", "City", and "Region", Prayagraj is still way more common.
 * And scientific results are just one of the categories of sources that we are supposed to consider according to the policy on Common Names. The biggest names like Reuters and Britannica have made the switch, which also should be given weight. 2601:1C0:6C00:2430:8454:CD65:F52C:9225 (talk) 14:38, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * If you want to exclude the other name in searches, you have to do it for both sides:
 * {| class="wikitable"
 * {| class="wikitable"

!colspan=3|Google Scholar search results, since 2022 !| Scholar search term !|Allahabad !|Prayagraj
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:center;"
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:center;"
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|"Allahabad" -Prayagraj "Prayagraj" -Allahabad
 * 8,350
 * 2,880
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|"Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh" -Prayagraj "Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh" -Allahabad
 * 541
 * 1,080
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|"Allahabad, India" -Prayagraj "Prayagraj, India" -Allahabad
 * 2,160
 * 622
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|"Allahabad, Region" -Prayagraj "Prayagraj, Region" -Allahabad
 * 60
 * 18
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|"Allahabad city" -Prayagraj "Prayagraj city" -Allahabad
 * 155
 * 124
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|"Allahabad division" -Prayagraj "Prayagraj division" -Allahabad
 * 10
 * 2
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|"Allahabad district" -Prayagraj "Prayagraj district" -Allahabad
 * 208
 * 75
 * }
 * -- Toddy1 (talk) 14:52, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I think you may have misunderstood me. I don't want to exclude the other name. What would that do? I want to exclude references to things that have Allahabad in their name that are not the subject of this article. 2601:1C0:6C00:2430:8454:CD65:F52C:9225 (talk) 14:57, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * They have Allahabad in their name because it is the common name for this city. -- Toddy1 (talk) 15:05, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:NAMECHANGES doesn't include anything about other organizations that had the old name as part of their name renaming themselves. We are supposed to be using reliable sources to determine whether they use the new name is used to refer to the subject of the article, which they do.
 * Going into whether institutes not changing their name reflects the common name of the city or a desire not to change the name of their institutes means looking to hearts of people, which I do think we as an online encyclopedia are in a position to do. WP:Verifiability, not Truth. 2601:1C0:6C00:2430:8454:CD65:F52C:9225 (talk) 15:27, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * do not think
 * 2601:1C0:6C00:2430:8454:CD65:F52C:9225 (talk) 15:27, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Just removing Prayagraj from Allahabad search is not enough. There has to be multiple other exclusions like "Allahabad" -Prayagraj -"Allahabad Safeda" -"Allahabad University" -"University of Allahabad" -"MNNIT Allahabad" -"Allahabad High Court" -"Allahabad Bank" -"Allahabad Agricultural Institute" -"Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology Allahabad" to name a few. With these exclusions the search count reduced to 6410 which is still not accurate. There are many citations of old articles/books containing word Allahabad and that also needs to be excluded. IIIT Allahabad also needs to be excluded which has 400+ pages. This reduces count to close to 5000. I am not able to add all these exclusions in single query on google webpage and I am not aware if there are any other ways to do it. This alone brings it to quite comparable counts approx 5000 for Allahabad and approx 2900 for Prayagraj. I am sure there will be multiple other instances which need exclusion like "Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture, Technology and Sciences, Allahabad,". If I add similar exclusions for complete internet search, the count of Allahabad city specific search reduces by 40% (approx 9600 million lifetime pages). We can't really have similar exclusions from Prayagraj search (approx 5600 million lifetime pages) criteria.
 * Though I support article name change, but at the same time I find it almost impossible that we could come to an agreement purely basis google search result. RohitSaxena (talk) 04:30, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Though I support article name change, but at the same time I find it almost impossible that we could come to an agreement purely basis google search result. RohitSaxena (talk) 04:30, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

I would like the 259 requests and comments over the course of almost 3 years pro a namechange to Prayagraj to be included in the discussion. I think, Wikipedia users should have a say as well.

And I would ask you this time, please don't rush the discussion like the last 2 times, which was very sus. Let everybody have a little time to get information and statistics on the topic or to prove them at least. --Tecumseh*1301 (talk) 16:39, 4 April 2023 (UTC)


 * I'm a newbie so I'm not sure what you are referring to happening the last couple times, but sure I'm happy to wait a bit for everyone to weigh in before starting a request for a move! 2601:1C0:6C00:2430:8454:CD65:F52C:9225 (talk) 17:02, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Change the name of Allahabad to Prayagraj
The city's name is Prayagraj not Allahabad,it was the original name of the city which was changed in Mughal period.The Government of Uttar Pradesh has reverted the name of the city to its original name, so you are misleading people by not allowing to change the name to Prayagraj.The official name is Prayagraj and if you don't allow to change it to its original name, it might result in mass outrage TheruralGuy (talk) 13:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Read sections above. — kashmīrī  TALK  13:59, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Move page name to Prayagraj
It has been around 5 years since the name of the city has been officially changed from Allahabad to Prayagraj. Most billboards, signboards have the new name on them. Events taking place in the city also use the name Prayagraj. Most articles on the web, news reports, Google Maps are now using the name Prayagraj instead of Allahabad. It is also evident that people of the city use the name Prayagraj in day to day conversation while referring to the city. This indicates that Prayagraj has also become a commonly used English Language name. TheOneRiding (talk) 16:25, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Read sections above, and WP:COMMONNAME - Roxy the dog 17:47, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't think people are disagreeing on whether we use should use WP:COMMONNAME, just on what the common name is. It might be easier to reach agreement if we would all share our sources. For example, what are some news sources that wikipedia views as generally reliable that exclusively use Allahabad these days. Then we can compare against the ones that use Prayagraj and then possibly agree on which to weigh more? That might be naive, but there is no way we are going to reach consensus without it. 2601:1C0:6C00:2430:816B:6F0:AE19:E05C (talk) 00:28, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Read the sections above. -- Toddy1 (talk) 07:10, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
 * So the argument that Allahabad is the common name boils down to institutions that have Allahabad in their name have not renamed themselves, and that should override all the other categories of sources that WP:COMMONNAME says we should consider like reliable media sources? I'll accept it, but I'll need a link to a Wikipedia policy that says we should consider institutions own names as an indicator of the common name of a place. After all, it's not like we care that it's still IIT Madras or Madras High Court, as long as the sources refer to the city itself as Chennai. 2601:1C0:6C00:2430:65BB:48C8:E0E1:4389 (talk) 18:29, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
 * If you need sources, here's an argument from another user.
 * Major International Organizations: Somewhat complicated, given that major organizations relatively rarely refer to the name of a city. Nonetheless, since the name change, the United Nations, the World Bank, UNESCOthe World Health Organization, and European Union have used Prayagraj in their reports or their datasets to refer to the city. That said, this is probably the most debatable category.
 * Major English-Language Media outlets: They have almost universally started using Prayagraj, regardless of whether they are based in the United States such as Reuters, New York Times, or Washington Post, the UK such as BBC or the Guardian, or in India such as the Indian Express or NDTV.
 * Quality Encyclopedia: Britannica Uses Prayagraj.
 * Geographic Name Servers: Google Maps, Bing Maps, and Apple Maps all use Prayagraj. TheOneRiding (talk) 09:36, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, he/she agrees with himself. It was from the same user. -- Toddy1 (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree with your assesment. The article's name should be changed to Prayagraj as it's the predominant name being used in the media and also the official name.Paleothorn (talk) 07:54, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm sure someone has posted this already but here's the Google Ngram for both names. Dāsānudāsa (talk) 11:32, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

What is the basis of the decision that Allahabad name won't be changed ?
This is saddening. This is not the ethics of Wikipedia.

And there is no information on it. If so please explain 202.164.139.16 (talk) 12:28, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Consensus is exactly "the ethics of Wikipedia" and the consensus is that the change can be discussed on/after 4 April 2023. As for "there is no information on it" please read the archives which record the multiple, and very long, discussions previously held. - Arjayay (talk) 12:35, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Why is it moved until 2023. I read it months ago. What is the reason, explain here 202.164.139.16 (talk) 12:43, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * my memory is right. I read it months ago and the discussion wasn't lengthy and there is no reason there ! None !
 * If so, please reply the reason 202.164.139.16 (talk) 12:45, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Here Dāsānudāsa (talk) 13:09, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Also see discussions on the archives Talk:Allahabad/Archive_4, Talk:Allahabad/Archive 3, Talk:Allahabad/Archive 2.  Ravensfire  (talk) 17:07, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * thank you 👍👍✌️🥰 202.164.139.16 (talk) 20:49, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * thank you 202.164.139.16 (talk) 20:48, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Name change
Change the to Prayagraj.period 184.88.244.244 (talk) 13:02, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
 * As stated above "An RfC .... concluded that no further move requests should be made before 4 April 2023". Please come back then. - Arjayay (talk) 13:10, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It’s past Apr 4 2023 and after reading yet another news article about Prayagraj, I came back here to see exactly what I expected. I went through the discussion and have yet to see one opposer of the move quantify what it means for “commonly used English name”. Though by any reasonable metric it would seem that Prayagraj usage outweighs Allahabad. Do better Wikipedia! 2600:1700:65A0:D2C0:8556:D666:2968:456F (talk) 14:34, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Why name will not be changed till April 2023
Please tell the reason 103.208.69.8 (talk) 07:44, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Because when a change of the article name was discussed in August 2020, the balance of evidence was that Allahabad was the commonly-used English-language name (see Talk:Allahabad/Archive 2). This had also been the case in previous discussions.  The move discussion in August 2020 also agreed that there should be a one-year moratorium on future move requests.  This moratorium worked really well.


 * There was another change of the article name discussion in September-October 2021, which showed that the balance of evidence was that Allahabad remained the commonly-used English-language name (see Talk:Allahabad/Archive 3). Since the previous moratorium worked so well, it was agreed to have another moratorium until April 2023 (see Talk:Allahabad/Archive 3).


 * It is pointless endlessly discussing the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over again. It is much better to revisit issues after there has been time for new evidence to accumulate. -- Toddy1 (talk) 08:22, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
 * @Toddy1 So according to your logic, Internet came 20 years ago and things started then. So Prayagraj should surpass the count of its word which can take 10 years. What a logic.! When the officially it's Prayagraj since almost 5 years i think. Rahil1610 (talk) 18:25, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

name change from allahabad to Prayagraj
Allahabad can be redirect to this page. it's available. Because Prayagraj is official name since last 5 years. name must be change to Prayagraj. Rahil1610 (talk) 18:31, 30 March 2023 (UTC)


 * ❌ - We use the Common names in English for our articles, not the "Official names", as changing the name breaks internal links to those articles, and is confusing to our readers: Bangalore was renamed Bengalūru, as the city's official name in 2006, but we still use Bangalore. As a longer standing example, Wien has been the official name of the capital of Österreich (another official name) for hundreds of years, but we won't be changing either name in the foreseeable future - Arjayay (talk) 19:32, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * But then what about kiev? The name has been changed to Kyiv. As per Common name guidelines of Wikipedia, Kiev has been used for half a decade. 49.36.177.161 (talk) 12:45, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
 * More than half a century.
 * 49.36.177.161 (talk) 12:45, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

When will the next discussion for consensus take place?
When I am right, it is about time.

When will it take place?

--Tecumseh*1301 (talk) Tecumseh*1301 (talk) 14:11, 1 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Consensus about what? - Roxy the dog 14:14, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 17 April 2023

 * 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. Hadal (talk) 17:05, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Allahabad → Prayagraj – WP:COMMONNAME, |Allahabad pageviews shows that even when the name change hasn't been done yet even then the pageviews of "prayagraj" is not very far behind "allahabad", also a simple google search with and without quotes, and also major news article the print, ndtv, bbc, the hindu2405:201:501A:E807:299A:BC06:A86D:3B7B (talk) 10:13, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Preliminary support To my knowledge it's only the places in India that attract voluminous and nasty streams of thought whenever a place is renamed. It's been nearly 5 years since the city was renamed and I can't think of other places that have waited this long to address the name change in the article title. This article's name is a proverbial can that's kicked down the road. Just the other day I saw it called Prayagraj in BBC News. I think it's time to address it for good already and wonder how much Wikipedia being conservative about the title contributes to Allahabad still floating around. --Killuminator (talk) 17:15, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
 * There was a recent discussion at Talk:Belgaum. Walt Yoder (talk) 21:39, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Strong Support To remind everyone of the key question at hand, as per WP:NAMECHANGES, "If the reliable sources written after the change is announced routinely use the new name, Wikipedia should follow suit and change relevant titles to match". That is the question we need to decide. Have reliable sources started using the new name? We not do need to decide which name is better, which name is older, which name is more political, etc. Importantly, we don't need to count which name has more total references. Instead, the policy states we give extra weight to independent, reliable English-language sources ("reliable sources") written after the name change. WP:COMMANNAME provides us with the kind of sources we should consider "In determining which of several alternative names is most frequently used, it is useful to observe the usage of major international organizations, major English-language media outlets, quality encyclopedias, geographic name servers, major scientific bodies, and notable scientific journals". On the article talk page, I have posted links showing that across all these categories, reliable sources had started using Prayagraj:
 * Major International Organizations: Somewhat complicated, given that major organizations relatively rarely refer to the name of a city. Nonetheless, since the name change, the United Nations, the World Bank, UNESCOthe World Health Organization, and European Union have used Prayagraj in their reports or their datasets to refer to the city.
 * Major English-Language Media outlets: They have almost universally started using Prayagraj, regardless of whether they are based in the United States such as Reuters, New York Times, or Washington Post, the UK such as BBC or the Guardian, or in India such as the Indian Express or NDTV.
 * Quality Encyclopedia: Britannica Uses Prayagraj.
 * Geographic Name Servers: Google Maps, Bing Maps, and Apple Maps all use Prayagraj.
 * Major Science Bodies and Journals: Checking citations for Prayagraj vs Allahabad is complicated, because Allahabad is used as a name for a lot of things besides the city that is the subject of the article, such as other locations called Allahabad, a district court, a military hospital, a fort, a pillar, a kind of plant, and importantly multiple universities have Allahabad in their name. However, I suggested we easily check which is more the common representation for the city that is the subject of this article by searching for only unambiguous references to the city which is the subject of this article, ie "Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh" vs "Allahabad,Uttar Pradesh". Since 2022, Prayagraj is far more common, with 1800 results for Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh vs only 694 for Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh, even before we take out references to older work. which to me is pretty clear evidence that Prayagraj has become the common name in the scientific literature as well. This was controversial, as another user challenged on the need to exclude references to other things named Allahabad which are not the subject of the article, arguing that universities with Allahabad in their name should count as evidence for the common name for the city. I disagreed, citing the lack of policy indicating that should be considered and also the counterexample of Chennai, where many institutions like Madras High Court and IIT Madras use the historical name Madras, but the city itself referred to as Chennai. However, even if we accept that scientific usage is ambiguous, that still leaves the other categories where reliable sources have switched to the contemporary name of the city.
 * The original question was have reliable sources started using the new name? Clearly, given sources as diverse as Encyclopedia Britannica, Reuters, and Google maps have done so, the answer is yes. 2601:1C0:6C00:2430:6373:5601:1522:AAF2 (talk) 11:41, 18 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose per the Ngram I posted above. We are not obliged to follow Britannica, etc., nor the UN, and Google Maps/search results are not reliable metrics. As a reminder, WP:COMMONNAME says that we follow the name used in the "significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources", which remains Allahabad. Dāsānudāsa (talk) 12:01, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
 * your ngram results are till 2019 only and we are living in 2023 that means your results are 4 years old and show only the trend of 1 year post official name change in 2018, so i request you to show some latest data
 * 2405:201:501A:E807:A55C:F514:1876:9255 (talk) 06:52, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Leaning support. As noted in the section above, the BBC, the Guardian, the Washington Post, the New York Times, and Reuters have all switched to the new name (although the AP Stylebook has not yet). That looks like common usage in the mainstream press to me. —C.Fred (talk) 12:03, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry for not being more thorough and including them in my original comment. Associated Press has also shifted to using Prayagraj. 2601:1C0:6C00:2430:6373:5601:1522:AAF2 (talk) 19:11, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I disagree that the major news outlets switched to the new name. Allahabad is still being used (within last 12 months) by The Guardian, New York Times, BBC etc. Even articles that use Prayagraj still also use Allahabad.VR talk 16:27, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
 * You may want to check the articles you've linked more closely. Two references to Allahabad are Getty image captions, not written by the outlet's own reporters, and the third is referring to Allahabad High Court, whose name hasn't changed and is still officially the Allahabad High Court, the same way the high court in Chennai is the Madras High Court. 2601:1C0:6C00:2430:6373:5601:1522:AAF2 (talk) 19:18, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
 * A swallow does not a summer make; conversely, a snowflake does not mean it's still winter. I have learned from a wise editor that metrics isn't everything and needs to be supplemented with qualitative data, but you should at least make an effort to provide some substantial quantitative evidence. Single attestations for this name or for that name are not enough. So we have links to indivdual artcles by major news outlets. But are they representative for the supposed switch? Are the counterexamples representative for a stable usage of the old name? Metrics, please. –Austronesier (talk) 19:36, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Certainly. It's only the BBC you can actually need to read the articles to determine usage, since they use the Praygraj, formerly Allahabad formulation when referring to the city, Everyone else you can just count references in the past year.
 * For reuters, searches for Praygraj in the past year vs for Allahabad. Prayagraj returns 5 pages of results, vs Allahabad which returns only 3 results, which actually is entirely the same picture taken in 2017 before the name change.
 * For the associated press, searches for Allahabad in the past year return absolutely nothing, vs for Prayagraj which returns 9 or 10 results.
 * For the Nytimes, searches for allahabad in the past year return 5 results even if we count getty images captions and stuff like Praygraj, formerly kmown as Allahabad, whereas Prayagraj returns multiple pages of results though some are duplicates.
 * For the Washington Post, we have three references to Allahabad, and five for Prayagraj. Of the three references to the old name, one is to the high court, not the city, one is a getty images caption, and one has actually been changed to Prayagraj if you read the article.
 * For the guardian, we get 15 results for Prayagraj in the past year, versus seven for Allahabad, including the usual getty images and high court references.
 * Point being, even when you include references to the stuff like the Court which are not the subject of this article, the outlets have switched to Prayagraj. 2601:1C0:6C00:2430:6373:5601:1522:AAF2 (talk) 22:11, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
 * {| class="wikitable"

!colspan=3|Search results, 1 Jan 2022 to 22 Apr 2023 !| !|Allahabad !|Prayagraj
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:center;"
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:center;"
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|Financial Times
 * 5
 * 0
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|The Daily Telegraph
 * 3
 * 2
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|The Times
 * 3
 * 5
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|Daily Mail
 * 2
 * 3
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|Daily Express
 * 2
 * 2
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|Morning Star (British newspaper)
 * 0
 * 0
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|The Economist
 * 2
 * 1
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|The New York Times
 * 5
 * 98
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|The Washington Post
 * 6
 * 6
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|Time (magazine)
 * 8
 * 1
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|The Wall Street Journal
 * 4
 * 3
 * -style="vertical-align:top; text-align:right;"
 * style="text-align:left;"|The Australian
 * 0
 * 1
 * }
 * Note that the search results for Prayagraj for the New York Times include many stories that do not contain the word. -- Toddy1 (talk) 23:08, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Google can be a bit wonky these days. Safest is to actually read a couple of the articles and see the references. 2601:1C0:6C00:2430:6373:5601:1522:AAF2 (talk) 00:17, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
 * For example, the WSJ has adopted the "Prayagraj, formerly Allahabad" formulation that some other outlets have and the extra reference is to the Allahabad Canning Company. 2601:1C0:6C00:2430:6373:5601:1522:AAF2 (talk) 00:53, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
 * For example, the WSJ has adopted the "Prayagraj, formerly Allahabad" formulation that some other outlets have and the extra reference is to the Allahabad Canning Company. 2601:1C0:6C00:2430:6373:5601:1522:AAF2 (talk) 00:53, 23 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Maybe too soon? Here are figures from the NOW Corpus (News on the Web):
 * {| class="wikitable" style="text-align: center;"

! !! "Allahabad" !! "Prayagraj" ! 2020 ! 2021 ! 2022 ! 2023 (YTD)
 * +caption | NOW Corpus (News on the Web)
 * 2683 || 881
 * 1902 || 979
 * 4880 || 2823
 * 1471 || 2148
 * }
 * Clearly, 2023 is the first year where "Prayagraj" outweighs "Allahabad". We still need to see a stable trend before we can talk about Prayagraj as fulfilling WP:COMMONNAME. But we have a stronger point than in the case of East Timor → Timor Leste, where a stable trend has been dismissed since it is not reflected in major news outlets yet. For Prayagraj, we do have major outlets using it. –Austronesier (talk) 20:32, 18 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Leaning support. While Allahabad will persist for years and perhaps decades in colloquial use, the fact that Prayagraj is the official name that is now used ubiquitously by the main news outlets, geographic systems, and official documents should be afforded a greater weight than colloquial usage. I'd say, we're in a similar situation as with Bombay/Mumbai: the former still prevails in colloquial usage in many regions, yet it would be absurd for Wikipedia to still have the city article at "Bombay". — kashmīrī  TALK  06:48, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Support Too much time has passed since name change. All major international maps, gps and publications including BBC use name Prayagraj. All official websites and stations/airport have changed name. 'Allahabad' has become too redundant to be used as primary name of a large modern metropolitan city anymore.—JayB91 (talk) 15:32, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Support the usage change is overwhelming. Walt Yoder (talk) 21:39, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Strong Support There have been over 200 requests and supportive comments (yes, I stopped counting the numbers eventually) pro a namechange toward Prayagraj, so finally. Yes, English-language media uses both names, but the tendency to media using the new name Prayagraj is rising. It has to be mentioned, that in similar cases like the renaming of eSwatini and Nur-Sultan as well as many Ukrainian cities after 2014, the usage didn't play a role at all, only the official name was important, where that Google used "Nur-Sultan" was the important argument for that namechange. Almost all Wikipedias use the name "Prayagraj". --Tecumseh*1301 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 10:15, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Support - switching to the official name due to the increase in its usage by publications and media outlets as noted above. The move makes sense.--NØ</b> 13:01, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Support - As noted, there's finally enough usage shown in reliable sources to make this happen.  Ravensfire  (talk) 15:16, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Strong Support - There are plenty of evidences, as mentioned by many users that Prayagraj has become a common name of usage for the city. I also strongly feel that the WP:COMMONNAME rule too need a change (please don't respond saying mentioning it here is not relevant). Earlier when it was difficult to search on internet then it was important to have common name policy, but now google/bing etc. search engines are way too smart so keep on using older name citing the reason of common name is of no use. Purpose of any encyclopedia is to provide correct and relevant information to its readers, and mentioning official name as article name makes more sense than using old name. This should apply to all places article and not limited to only this article. The article does mention about the old name and Wikipedia can still continue to have Allahabad article and redirecting that to Prayagraj, instead of having it other ways as it is currently--RohitSaxena (talk) 00:36, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Support per above बडा काजी (talk) 13:40, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Strong support - The evidence is that Prayagraj is the current and commonest name for this city as proven by the evidence showed by users above.--Kongsuaigela (talk) 13:13, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
 * — Kongsuaigela (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Support, there seems to be enough evidence and sources which proves that it is now the time to rename it in Wikipedia. Krishna Dahal (talk) 17:41, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

<div style="padding-left: 1.6em; font-style: italic; border-top: 1px solid #a2a9b1; margin: 0.5em 0; padding-top: 0.5em">The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Map of india
Please update the map of India from 'India' to 'India1' so that the correct map is displayed. Wikediter.fact (talk) 01:24, 4 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Please be more specific.
 * File:India location map.svg is the map of India displayed.
 * File:India1 location map.svg is a red link.
 * -- Toddy1 (talk) 05:07, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Toddy1 - India1 links to File:India location map 3.svg an inaccurate map "which also includes regions claimed by India (but not controlled): Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Gilgit-Baltistan, and Aksai Chin." Clearly we should be using an accurate map of the de facto borders, not a "fantasy" map. - Arjayay (talk) 08:53, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I understand by your tone and actions that you have certain biases against India that I don't want to get into, but if you look up the articles of major cities such as delhi and mumbai, you will find that the claimed territories are either shown completely in India or shown in a different colour. For the sake of tradition (and to some extent Indian law), atleast the articles of Indian cities should follow the same. Not doing so is like showing Russian controlled Ukrainian territories as parts of Russia and not Ukraine. Wikediter.fact (talk) 11:12, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I do not have "certain biases against India" as my editing history clearly shows. The only "bias" is that I want Wikipedia articles to show the actual facts, rather than jingoistic fantasies. - Arjayay (talk) 11:24, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I request you to visit the article of Ukraine where you will see that the areas that are not controlled by them are still shown as a part of their map, some without distinction while some in a different colour. If the map 'India1' seems too 'patriotic' to you, the map used in Delhi's article should be used ( which shows disputed areas in a lighter shade). Also I request you to not make edits in articles based on your opinion, without discussing on their respective talk pages ( relating to your previous edits). I hope we can work constructively, without prejudice, together and not try to forward our ideas by force. Wikediter.fact (talk) 11:40, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:OTHERCONTENT as to why your first comment is not how Wikipedia works. As for your request to discuss things before making changes, please explain why you did not do so yourself, when changing the map at Indore on 1 May in this edit - Arjayay (talk) 11:56, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 'because what you did is wrong, I will do it too' is usually not a strong argument. The reason why I did it there was because I saw it on the pages of other major cities of India, and thought of it as the standard for Indian cities. Also, the article for Indore is not protected (Unlike the articles where you made similar changes) and of comparitively very low visitor count, making the talk page inactive. Looking at your user page, you seem to be doing this (disruptive changes without discussion) every day for the last 16 years. I am still new here and learning, but you do this while knowing it's wrong. You have been rebuked in the past too for such actions (as per your talk page and archived conversation) but you still continue to do this, showing a certain obsession of passing your opinion as facts (particularly on Indian pages). regarding the article you told me to read, it 'suggests' to not make arguments comparing articles to each other solely because the reference articles could themselves be anomalies. Seeing other articles of countries (which are certainly vetted) such as the UK, Pakistan and Ukraine, it clearly shows that even claimed territories are shown as part of the respective countries ( sometimes in a different shade and sometimes not), which means not showing Indian claimed territories atleast in a lighter shade is just wrong. Sorry for the long answer, and I hope this clarifies your doubts regarding my previous answers. Wikediter.fact (talk) 13:07, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah sure. Do you also want Wikipedia to show all the Chinese claims across South and South East Asia on every map of a Chinese settlement? Shall we mark all of Arunachal Pradesh as Chinese claimed? If no, then let's end this discussion here. — kashmīrī  <sup style="color:#80f;font:'Candara';">TALK  13:13, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Your statement exudes much confidence in your single handed ability to change facts on Wikipedia. This is the problem. You forget Wikipedia is not run just by you. Wikipedia is a community project that involves the whole globe. You have no ability to make the changes you just mentioned, alone. Let this discussion be here, and if the community feels the map should be changed, it will be changed. Wikediter.fact (talk) 15:01, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * [yawn] — kashmīrī <sup style="color:#80f;font:'Candara';">TALK  16:04, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

There is a discussion that is relevant to the above at Templates for discussion/Log/2023 May 4. -- Toddy1 (talk) 07:10, 5 May 2023 (UTC)