Wikipedia

Talk:Prayagraj/Archive 1

< Talk:Prayagraj
(Redirected from Talk:Allahabad/Archive 1)
Latest comment: 5 years ago by Ms Sarah Welch in topic Ancient/Medieval history
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

Latest comment: 17 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

This Allahabad at a Glance Section in the page, shouldn't it be merged with the main Allahabad page? There seem to be several articles which have been turned into different pages internally linked to the main Allahabad page instead of being included in the Allahabad Page itself Hmmm its me 11:47, 27 April 2007 (UTC) IIIT - is also situated there.

On one of the maps the position of Allahabad is wrong (on the second map). Same in german Wikipedia. I agree. Allahabad is east of Kanpur.

I removed the image from this page. Vivek 16:49, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

What is the source of the population and geographic area data. AFAIK, the geographical info is quite outdated, going to 1960's. The city as expanded much so someone knowledgeable should update it.

Appriciate your effort in pointing out the data. I have updated the population info. Source: http://www.upgov.nic.in/ , http://www.upgov.nic.in/upinfo/census01/cen01-7.htm Vivek 16:49, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Plus there was no Aryan invasion. Aryan is a title ..hence the article is politically wrong.

I agree. Topic needs discussion. Vivek 16:49, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Postal code need not be there is the info box. a city has hundreds of postal region and there is no point in giving one of them. Same for the leader. There are more than one parliamentry seats in the city thus there are many MP's so why give a name of one (the most prestigious one). So I have deleted the details. Vivek 16:49, 14 April 2006 (UTC) ANIL KUMAR

Infobox Data

Latest comment: 16 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion

Please stop vandalizing this page. I have put population data as per 2001 census report. Copy available here http://www.upgov.nic.in/upinfo/census01/cen01-7.htm I have copied the population density as well. The area of the district was written as ~69 sq.km. Are you kidding me? This is one of the biggest district in Uttar Pradesh and you are writing it's area as 69 sq.km. Check pages of other cities viz, Lucknow, Kanpur, Varanasi. You will note that I am adhering to the norms already set by other editors. Before you change those data, make a valid argument here and put your sources first. Vivek 11:49, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Postal areas are not divided according to administrative divisions. I've put more generic information rather than creating confusion. YoursvivekTalk!! 19:02, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Even writing 211 xxx as postal code does not provide any useful information instead it should be written 211 001 as it is the postal code of Allahabad head post office from where all the posts are distributed to respective sub and branch post offices falling under Allahabad postal district. And postal code ranges for all the postal areas in Allahabad ranges between 211 001 and 211 016 (211 001 for Allahabad main post office in Civil lines area and 211 016 for GTB Nagar/Kareli postal areas). All the 16 postal areas are in Allahabad city limits. Rohit Saxena (talk) 17:28, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I correct myself here..there is no postal area with code 211 015...but postal code range 211 001 to 211 019 falls under Allahabad city area (excluding 211 013- Phaphamau). This can be verified at http://www.indiapost.gov.in/test/Pinsearch.aspx by typing 211 as search string in the search box.Rohit Saxena (talk) 17:45, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, no. Jhusi Area has regions that are not counted in urban area but postal area distribution keeps it along with the rest. So, what is PINCODE ?

Postal Index Number (PIN) is a 6 digit code.There are 8 PIN regions in the country. The first digit indicates one of the regions. The first 2 digits together indicate the sub region or one of the postal circles. The first 3 digits together indicate a sorting / revenue district. The last 3 digits refer to the delivery Post Office.

About keeping things under one post-office 211001 is also wrong because Allahabad Kutcherry HO is also a Head Office. So in all there are two Head Offices, Civil Lines and Kutcherry. So all things sum up that this is a better way of writing things. 210.212.55.3 (talk) 14:13, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

But the sorting head post office is always one in a revenue district, and in case of Allahabad it is the one with 211001 PIN code. And first three digits no more belong to a single district and/or one district can not have two distinct first three digits, the best example of it is Agra and Firozabad districts. Agra has postal codes with 282 as well as 283 first three digits and all those postal areas are managed/controlled by the post office with 282 001 PIN code and Firozabad head post office has PIN code 283 001 and it doesn't control/manage all the postal areas which starts with 283, it only manages the areas which falls under the revenue district of Firozabad. Rohit Saxena (talk) 11:59, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

The main purpose of wikipedia is to provide information of use and by giving the information that the postal code range for Allahabad is 211 001 - 211 018 or main sorting post office is 211 001 it is clear that the city area is reachable through post by mentioning 211 001 PIN code and/or the postal code range mentioned lies within or very close to the city area. Rohit Saxena (talk) 12:04, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

"English name"

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The article's first line: "Allahabad (Hindi: इलाहाबाद; Urdu: الہ آباد Ilāhābād) is the English name of a city in the north Indian state of Uttar Pradesh." "The English name of a city"?!? And I thought I was on the English-language Wikipedia... If this is the result of a truncated edition, please correct it. If by any chance it is due to "toponymical nationalism", it clearly went too far. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.140.164.165 (talk) 23:42, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

"Notable people from Allahabad"

List is growing. I think we should make it a stub article and provide its link in "See Also" section. We should keep in mind that information being provided on page are accurate, complete and neutral in nature.

WikiProject Hinduism reassessment: C

Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Fails B- criteria

  • The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations where necessary.
Tags.Redtigerxyz (talk) 11:14, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

"Allahabad or Prayagraj is a historian's paradise. History lies embedded everywhere, in its fields, forests and settlements." It's very subjective and does not read like with the proper encyclopedic tone. Article needs editing. 64.105.163.162 (talk) 07:00, 21 July 2008 (UTC)philosopher2king

The position of Allahabad in the map is not correct

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The original/ main Allahabad district, and the actual city of Allahabad is a lot more westwards, inside the Ganga Yamuna Doab, while in the map it is placed wrongly towards the south east. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.180.176.215 (talk) 07:27, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

The claim that Allahabad is the second oldest city in India.

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I would like to bring to notice that in the second line of the article it has been claimed that Allahabad is the second oldest city of India. Is there any source for this claim if any please put among thee citations. The idea of oldest cities in itself is arguable thus is putting such a claim doing any good to the information we are providing through this page about thee city? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rairanjanrohit (talk • contribs) 15:55, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Iiit allahabad building.jpg Nominated for Deletion

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
  An image used in this article, File:Iiit allahabad building.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests June 2011
What should I do?
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:37, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Gandhi Patel 1940.jpg Nominated for Deletion

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
  An image used in this article, File:Gandhi Patel 1940.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 18 November 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:52, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Malls and multiplexes

Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

I do not see how the list of "Malls and multiplexes" assists the article, and propose to delete it. Comments? -- Hoary (talk) 03:17, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm about to delete it. -- Hoary (talk) 00:36, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

copyedit and questions

Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello all! User:25_Cents_FC has asked for help copyediting the article, so here I am. I made some changes just now and can do more. But I want to make sure I'm not making negative changes—I am fairly ignorant about Allahabad and about India in general. So let me know if anything I'm doing seems totally out of line.

Here are some thing that came up during my first go-through:

  • Clarify significance of the name 'Prayag' in relation to the three rivers. (Sounds like Pittsburgh! :-) )
  • This sentence is confusing: "While the city area is governed by several municipalities, a large portion of Allahabad District is governed by the Allahabad City Council." Is the city governed by several governments, and the outside suburbs governed by one? Or is it the other way around?
  • "Although Allahabad's economy was built on tourism, its main revenue now comes from real estate and financial services, similar to that of Western countries." I took out the Western World link, because this really isn't generally true in the West. (In fact, many cities and towns are increasingly reliant on the tourism industry.) Also, surely the economy was based on other things before tourism?
  • I replaced "inter alia" with "inter alii," which in Latin would be the correct reference for people instead of things. However, I am not sure if this is understandable, and maybe it would be simpler to use something else entirely.
  • After dividing up the 'history' section, I saw that it was quite short on the Muslim rule period, and completely lacking in recent history. (The main article on History of Allahabad also contains very little recent history.)
  • Is this correct? : "the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly: the state secretariat, which is housed in the Allahabad High Court." Need clarity.
  • GDP and income need clarification. Is the GDP of Kampur greater or lesser?

All-in-all, it's already a pretty good and comprehensive article!

love, groupuscule (talk) 01:12, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

  • first of all thanks for your attention. I would like to clarify all your doubts.
  • Prayag is the Allahabad's ancient name.Where three main rivers of the India i.e Ganges, Yamuna and Saraswati join, that particular place is called Prayag also means "Place of sacrifice".
  • City and its suburban parts are governed by municipalities.Allahabad District contains several villages,blocks and Tehsils those are governed by the district Council.
  • GDP of Kanpur is greater.
  • the economy was based on agriculture also.
  • Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly is the Uttar Pradesh's secretariat,which is situated in Allahabad High Court.
  • Western countries means the revolutionary development occurring in cities like Dubai and other cities.
  • Someone has divided history section ,there's no need of it.In history,only summary(short knowledge) of the Muslim rule has been given for detailed, need to refer main article.

I hope this much helps.Though i wouldnt be able to reply your queries eternally.(I'm out of my place) Please ask other things you want Thank You. --25 CENTS VICTORIOUS☣ 10:18, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

situated in Allahabad High Court?????

Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

situated in Allahabad High Court or situated in the premises of Allahabad High Court?????--Adamstraw99 (talk) 09:39, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Clarification needed for "The City of Prime Ministers"

Latest comment: 12 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Above the image in intro section, it is written "The City of Prime Ministers" but there is no further mention or clarification of this term in the entire article...... can Someone explain the use of this term on top please ?? --Adamstraw99 (talk) 09:32, 14 August 2012 (UTC)


not done...... kindly source this reference with the prime ministers' mention in the start of the article..... its not there anywhere...thanks--Adamstraw99 (talk) 02:52, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Finally I've done this..... If a city has this achievement then why shouldn't the world know this?--Adamstraw99 (talk) 03:05, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Prayag

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I think the on the city's other name section its sufficient to mention only "city of prime ministers".25 CENTS VICTORIOUS☣ 15:02, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

GA

Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Will nominate this article in next few days.Any suggestion,please leave a message --25 CENTS VICTORIOUS☣ 08:44, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Nominate for what??? deletion??? OH, why????????????????????????? don't do that--Adamstraw99 (talk) 02:14, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

You are mistaken i think my friend. 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS☣ 07:53, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

Latest comment: 11 years ago13 comments3 people in discussion
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Allahabad/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk · contribs) 19:57, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Initial comments

I'm sorry for the delay in getting my comments down "in print" here, I got delayed elsewhere in wikipedia. I've done a very quick read of the article and on that basis, I will not be "quick failing" this nomination. It appears to be at or about GA-level, but I've not checked any of the references/citations nor the copyright status of the images.

I'm now going to work my way through the article starting at the Etymology section, going thorough to the end and then returning to look at the WP:Lead. This will take a few days, but if everything go well this article could be a GA before the end of this week. We will have to see! Pyrotec (talk) 20:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Etymology -
  • See first comment below.
  • History -
  • I need to return, first, to the WP:Lead. The Lead appears to contain material that does not appear to be in the body of the article, so the Lead is non-compliant with WP:Lead:
    • In particular the Lead contains the statement: "The city's original name—Prayaga, or "place of sacrifice"—comes from its position at the sacred union of the rivers Ganges, Yamuna and Saraswati2" and the first paragraph of History starts off with: "The city was known earlier as Prayāga - a name that is still commonly used.[6] Its age is illustrated by Vedic references to Prayag, where Brahma, the Creator of the Universe, is believed to have attended a sacrificial ritual.[7] .....". The material I've referenced above in the Lead either needs to appear in the Etymology or History sections as well as appearing in the Lead.
  • The first paragraph states: "Its age is illustrated by Vedic references to Prayag, where Brahma, the Creator of the Universe, is believed to have attended a sacrificial ritual.[7]". The paragraph is certainly verifiable but it does not tell me anything about its age. When did this sacrificial ritual take place?  Y Pyrotec (talk) 20:47, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
The sentence is now changed to "Prayāga existed during the Vedic period, and is mentioned in the Veda as the location where Brahma, the Creator of the Universe, attended a sacrificial ritual." Thus it says that Prayag existed during the Vedic period, a specific time period. --Dwaipayan (talk) 19:19, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
  • It states: "Excavations have revealed Northern Black Polished Ware objects in Prayag, further corroborating the conjecture that Prayag existed as a town as early as 600 B.C.". As far as I can see this is the first conjecture that Prayag existed as a town as early as 600 B.C., so why/what is the further corroborating statement about?  Y Pyrotec (talk) 20:47, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Removed those further corroboration etc. The sentence now reads, "Excavations have revealed Northern Black Polished Ware that dates to 600–700 BCE.".--Dwaipayan (talk) 19:19, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
  • The same paragraph states: The Puranas record that Yayati left Prayag and conquered the region of Saptha Sindhu without any explanation about Yayati, for example the dates that he arrived and when he left?
  • The second paragraph gives no indication of dates or time frame.
  • The third paragraph seems to have a stray sentence "It is also known as the "Prime minister Capital of the India," the importance of the government to the city has led seven out of fourteen Prime Ministers of India.[1]" inserted between a discussion of the 1765 British establishment of a garrison at Allahabad fort and the town being annexed by Mohammad Ghori in A.D. 1193. It seems to be in the wrong place and time.
  • The third paragraph seems to have been put together in a random fashion. It starts off in the 15th century and runs in date sequence and then goes back to 1193 starts and finished with Allahabad fort in 1575, but the fort was mentioned earlier in the paragraph in 1765.
  • The fourth paragraph covers some of the material in the third paragraph. The establishment of the fort is mentioned again in 1765.
  • The fifth paragraph starts off by discussing the 1857 mutiny again, which already appears in the forth paragraph, and then moves on to cover unrelated material. The 1857 mutiny material should be moved out of the fifth paragraph and placed in the forth, where it really belongs. This paragraph should really begin with: After the Mutiny was quelled, the British established the ......
  • The final sentence of the fourth paragraph states that Allahabad served as the capital of United Provinces until 1920, and its referenced, and later in the Culture Allahabad is described as the former capital of the United Provinces, but there is no explanation of why Allahabad lost this role. Since this is a very short sentence, there is room for a brief explanation.
  • Geography -

....stopping for now. To be continued. Pyrotec (talk) 20:44, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

    • Untitled subsection -
  • Looks OK.
    • Climate -
  • Ref 44 leads to Tourismallahabad.org and a series of advertisements here, it does not provide any verification of "typical seasons".
    • Biodiversity -
  • Looks OK.
  • Demographics & Civic administration -
  • These two sections look OK.
  • Culture -
  • In the second paragraph various authors, Mahadevi Varma, Sumitranandan Pant, Suryakant Tripathi 'Nirala', Harivansh Rai Bachchan, Raghupati Sahay/Firaq Gorakhpuri are mentioned but no indication of their relationship to Allahabad is given. Note, later it states that Akbar Allahabadi and other named individuals were from the city.
  • The first three sentence state (I've added the boldness its not present in the text in the article): During the 19th and 20th centuries, Hindi literature was modernised through the works of authors such as Mahadevi Varma, Sumitranandan Pant, Suryakant Tripathi 'Nirala', Harivansh Rai Bachchan.[77] Another noteworthy poet was Raghupati Sahay who was more famous by the name of Firaq Gorakhpuri.[78] Firaq Gorakhpuri and Mahadevi Varma were awarded the Jnanpith Award.[79][80][81] , but this article is about Allahabad so it should be made clear in the article why there is a connection (or connections) between Hindi literature, poetry, the Jnanpith Award, the named people and Allahabad. The answer that is given here is that those named people were born in Allahabad: so that aught to be in the article. Pyrotec (talk) 19:06, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Kumbh Mela -
  • Looks OK.
  • Sports & Transportation -

...stopping for now. To be continued. Pyrotec (talk) 16:48, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

  • These two sections look OK.
  • Education
  • Looks OK.
  • Industries -
  • Ref 117 is used to support the claim that The main industries of Allahabad are tourism, fishing and agriculture., but ref 117 leads here to the ALLAHABAD AGRICULTURAL INSTITUTE's web site "about us". It is does not appear to provide verification of the statement.  Done
  • Ref 118 seams to lead to the wrong page. It is being used to verify the statement Allahabad city is the largest commercial centers in the state; it also has the second-highest per capita income and the third greatest GDP in the state (following Kanpur) but it leads to here which is Empowering women means making nation strong. It should lead to GDP & per capita income of Allahabad.  Done
  • The statements The growth of IT has presented the city with unique challenges. Ideological clashes sometimes occur between the city's IT moguls, who demand an improvement in the city's infrastructure, and the state government, whose electoral base is primarily the people in city are unreferenced.  Done
  • The final two sentences are cited by ref 125, which provides a list of company names. However, the first sentence describes some companies as popular and the last sentence describes some renowned institutions. These appear to be value judgements that are not supported by references. It would be best if "popular" was removed from the first sentence and "renowned" removed from the second sentence, otherwise citations are needed to allow verification that they are popular or renowned.  Done
  • Lead -
  • This is required to comply with WP:Lead and it should provide both an introduction to the topic and summary of the main points, respecting relative emphasis.
  • The first paragraph appears to give undue relevance to the "city of prime ministers" and the naming of the 13 prime ministers. This topic occupies almost half of the first paragraph and perhaps one-sixth of the lead, and the statement is repeated again in the body of the, without much expansion - I's not too convinced that one sixth of the article is devoted to this topic. OK you regard it as important, so mention in the the lead, but it needs to appear in summary form, not reproduced in full.
  • The information given in the History, Geography and Culture sections appears to be mostly summarised in the Lead in the second and third paragraphs.
  • Perhaps the "city of prime ministers" information could be taken out of the first paragraph and moved into an new paragraph, summarised a bit more "tightly" and a small summary of some of the names from the Culture section added to this new section?

At this point I'm putting the review On Hold so that these points can be addressed. Pyrotec (talk) 12:24, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Can the editor of this page help me in improving my article --- New R. S. J. Public School--Pratham 17:02, 17 January 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prathamprakash29 (talk • contribs)

GA Review

Latest comment: 10 years ago4 comments1 person in discussion
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Allahabad/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Vensatry (talk · contribs) 13:12, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Lead

  • "Allahabad is the seventh most populous city in the state and the thirty-sixth most populous city in India" needs "As of ..."
  • "In 2011, it was ranked the world's 130th fastest growing city" – unsourced
  • Page nos. needed for ref #8
  • "The city's original name – Prayaga, or "place of offerings" – comes from its position at the sacred union of the rivers Ganges, Yamuna and Saraswati": Sentence is unclear. How do you correlate "place of offerings" with "sacred union".
  • The fact that Allahabad is the second-oldest city in India is unsourced and present only at the lead
  • I'm not sure what you mean by "plays a central role in the Hindu scriptures"
  • Link Doab
  • Area of 63.07 km2 is not mentioned anywhere in the article except lead
  • Allahabad City Council – ditto
  • You say that the city is the second-oldest in India while infobox mentions that it was founded in 1583 AD
  • Area of metropolitan city equals 5,424 km2 – not true, it's the area of the district

Etymology

  • The section is too small. Perhaps consider merging it with History if it can't be expanded further

Demographics

  • "Provisional data suggest a density of 1,087 people per km2 in 2011, compared to 901 in 2001" pertains to district data
  • The following sentences are either unsourced or incorrectly sourced
  • The last para of the section is sourced to "Provisional Population Totals, Census of India 2011; Urban Agglomerations/Cities having population 1 lakh and above" which no way conveys the information presented in the article.
    • I've not fully read the article. After going through a few sections, it feels like criterion 1 and 2 are not met. The prose is weak in many places, and many facts need to satisfy WP:V. The article needs to have a thorough copy-edit by a GOCE member. For now, I'm stopping my review and will have a look at it tomorrow. —Vensatry (Ping) 12:35, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
  • It's been close to a week since I started the review. The nominator is yet to respond even after knowing that the review has started. Therefore, I'm 'failing this review. —Vensatry (Ping) 08:26, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Allahabad. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:57, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Merger proposal

Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I propose to merge Allahabad Smart City Project into this article, since they both talk about the same city. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 11:41, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Agreed and   Done Klbrain (talk) 16:14, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Allahabad. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:36, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Allahabad. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:51, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Allahabad. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:31, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on Allahabad. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:37, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Allahabad. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:46, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

GA discussion

The following is an archived discussion of a Allahabad. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.

GA Review

Latest comment: 10 years ago23 comments2 people in discussion
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Allahabad/GA3. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Miniapolis (talk · contribs) 23:47, 14 August 2014 (UTC)


Repaired all the dead links. Added working reference to both nicknames. As far as prose is concern, please assist. I'm very bad in it.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣ 07:44, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
The prose isn't too bad, but I'm giving it a once-over to bring it up to GA quality. That was how I discovered the "City of PMs" sourcing problem; the sentence was unclear and didn't seem to belong in History, and I tried to check the sources to clarify. Miniapolis 14:35, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Article got failed once because I wasn't able to cover issues raised by reviewer, within given time. But this time I'm very conscious and taking everything very seriously. --25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣ 08:01, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • In the Climate section, there are contradicting average precipitation (rainfall) totals for August. The driest-month-is-April part of the sentence is unclear; is the 5 mm figure a daily average, or the total for the month? Miniapolis 14:01, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  Done Have added correct figure for precipitation (333mm) for the month of August. Meanwhile removed "The driest and wettest month is..." sentence, because it was mentioned already (I did not notice before).--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣ 15:15, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Except for three sentences, the Biodiversity section deals not with Allahabad but with UP or India as a whole; it should probably be trimmed or tweaked to reflect the city. While the peacock image is very nice, the file page doesn't mention any connection with Allahabad. Miniapolis 17:29, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Made significant changes. As far as images is concern there's no other file available. I tried to search but it feels like City hardly has any zoo or zoological garden. The bird found in city, so thought it would be good idea to put it. Let me know if you have some idea regarding this.
  • In Demographics, when I tried to reconcile the graph and the text I saw that the text cites 2011 census data matching the All India Radio source for the graph (which uses 2001 data). The religion figures should be the most recent, accurate data and the bar graph with 2001 data is confusing. Miniapolis 19:23, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  Done Section contains 2011 (latest census) data. Corrected religion figures. Replaced district data with Allahabad metropolitan data.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣ 18:12, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Administrative divisions is confusing. Some text refers to the city (therefore belonging in the article), other text to the district (and belongs in Allahabad district rather than here) and other text to the division. The beginning of the section refers in passing to eight tehsils (although one source cites only seven tehsils in the district), and at the end there's a list of eight place names which seem to be towns outside the city. Miniapolis 16:08, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Actually, I have used Administrative divisions just to increase length of the Civic administration section. Basically city itself comes under divisions. Please suggest whether to keep it or not.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣ 16:32, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
The parts of "Administrative divisions" relevant to the city (if there are any) can be merged into "Civic administration". How (if at all) is the city itself divided? The same issue exists in Economy; too much text is about the district, not the city. Miniapolis 16:43, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
It's divided into two parts Allahabad district and Allahabad metropolitan. Since corporate's manufacturing units are situated in Phulpur or Naini but their headquarters are in city. That's the reason I have mentioned it. I maybe sound so confusing.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣ 18:09, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
  Done--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣ 18:09, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
  Done Ref #93.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣ 07:41, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
I have merge Tourism (which contains only 2-3 sentences) with Culture section.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣ 17:58, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for taking over the review.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣ 07:11, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Name change procedure

Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I believe that the UP government's name change still needs central government approval and a gazette notification before it becomes official. From an article on the renaming of Gurgaon: However, the proposal would now be forwarded to the Government of India for its approval and come into force only after a Gazette Notification. See also: West Bengal to Bangla. IOW, I don't believe it's official yet. In any event, editors who are going gung ho with renaming edits, please acquaint yourselves with WP:COMMONNAME.—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 08:47, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

An India Today report notes, In Allahabad's case, the change isn't official just yet. States initiate the procedure to rename a city. The proposal is then sent to the Centre, which -- if it deems fit to do so -- approves and forwards it to the concerned state governor. The state government then issues a gazette notification renaming the city. Prayagraj is not official yet.—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 09:29, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
Can we please have semi-protection? It's wasting everyone's time to force people to review pending changes. Also, pending changes doesn't get flagged as such on Huggle. Dark-World25 (talk) 09:37, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

The central government has now approved Praygaraj as the official name.[1]-3 January 2019

References

  1. ^ https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/centre-approves-renaming-of-allahabad-as-prayagraj/articleshow/67336486.cms

Semi-protected edit request on 16 October 2018

Latest comment: 6 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

name of Allahbad is Changed today new name is PARAYAGRAJ Ankitthakker (talk) 11:05, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

@Ankitthakker: It is not official yet. See the section above (as well as the Etymology section in the article).—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 12:00, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
@Cpt.a.haddock: Thanks for correcting my edit. I got a bit overzealous. Kevin Selva Prasanna V (talk) 12:59, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Hello team wikipedia,after getting nod from governer Ram naik,Allahabad is now known as Prayagraj.kindly update the name of Allahabad to Prayagraj.Thank you Ankit Singh dhannu (talk) 19:27, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 October 2018

Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Allahabad is changed to Prayagraj so that you have also changed it here. 157.33.229.212 (talk) 11:02, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 October 2018

Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The name of Allahabad has been official changed to Prayagraj. Please do the same. 49.206.4.154 (talk) 07:29, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

  Not done See the dicussions further above.—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 07:36, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Do you believe that the name has been changed?

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Anyone who believes that the name has been changed and makes an "edit request" so that the title, etc, of this article will reflect the changed name must provide reliable evidence that the name has been changed. It isn't enough to supply unreliable evidence that it has been changed. It isn't enough to supply reliable evidence that the name will be changed, probably will be changed, or definitely is about to be changed. You need to supply reliable evidence for a change that has already been made. -- Hoary (talk) 10:13, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 October 2018

Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

City of Allahabad has been renamed to its old and ancient name as Prayagraj by the state Government of Uttar Pradesh and Approved by Government of India, so i kindly please request to edit the names wherever applicable Abhishekushrivastav (talk) 18:02, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

  Not done, see and click this link for explanation Talk:Allahabad#Official Name Prayagraj but Common Name is still Allahabad--DBigXrayᗙ 18:04, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Question on edit restoration

Latest comment: 6 years ago10 comments2 people in discussion
DBigXray, that is all fine and dandy, but, at least my edits should be restored, no? Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 19:44, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
SshibumXZ can u point the diff for the edit you are referring to ?, I am not following the discussion --DBigXrayᗙ 19:50, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
DBigXray, oh you should, it's very entertaining. Here is the diff, by the way: [1]. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 19:57, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
UP Governor has passed the notification today Once it comes in a gazette notification we can claim it as official e.g. Gurugram see the timelines for Haryana governor approval and final notification. There is a reason why BJP and Media are jumping the gun (vote bank politics for Kumbh) So if I were you I would just relax and wait. but thats me. regards. --DBigXrayᗙ 20:10, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
DBigXray, whilst you are correct in saying that political parties and the media jumping the gun for the sake of their respective audiences, I believe this is a bit different from the Gurgaon situation, in that, the government has already passed a notification after/before the governor's okay and Allahabad is now Prayagraj for all official intents and purposes. Vide: [2] and [3]. This is just my view, though and apparently not a very popular one at that. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 20:17, 20 October 2018 (UTC); edited 20:29, 20 October 2018 (UTC).
Your 2 links are simply repeating BJP's line. I dont have the estimate on when the gazette notification will be published. Until that happens I will not claim official name, even though UP CM claims so. That's my position. --DBigXrayᗙ 20:26, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
DBigXray, no no, if I am inferring what is being said in the links correctly, the notification has already been issued. The notification—citing the powers conferred to the governor (read: government) by the U. P. Revenue Code, 2006—changes the name of Allahabad district to Prayagraj district, whereas, the district magistrate and collector, Suhas L. Y., said that the name Prayagraj would used for all intents and purposes henceforth. I am pretty sure that means the official name has change, else the government and the officers have gone ultra vires by notifying a name change. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 20:34, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
The way I see it, Constitution of India is the same for both Haryana and UP. So I said, let's wait for Gazette. You are taking the UP CMs line, which "may" be correct, but I will not get into that debate, simply because I am not aware of the exact process that is followed for renames. And I am not even interested to get into that cuz as far as Wikipedia is concerned official name doesnt matter, other than the one infobox slot that you are fighting over, which I dont really care. (And thats the reason why I abandoned the discussion.) --DBigXrayᗙ 20:42, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
DBigXray, don't say that. From what I have read, in ancient times people would died for that little infobox space you don't care about. We have got it good as far as infoboxes go.SBDB! Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 20:49, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
Bon Courage ! --DBigXrayᗙ 20:52, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Official Name Prayagraj but Common Name is still Allahabad

Latest comment: 6 years ago32 comments6 people in discussion
IN FAVOUR OF THE STATUS QUO
After a good amount of deliberation and back-and-forth, it's time to close this discussion. The consensus is clear; experienced editors want to hold out for a gazette notification before going about adding Prayagraj in the infobox. Whilst I certainly do not agree with the lot of them, i respect their stand and would not add |official_name to the article's infobox myself. I would also like to apologise to both Cpt.a.haddock and Thomas.W for—through no fault of their own—kind of ruthlessly attacking them in the heat of the moment throughout the discussion. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 21:17, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hi All, as reported in the news media, The UP government, has changed the "official" name of Allahabad to "Prayagraj" but this does not mean we have to start a rename campaign to replace all the titles of Allahabad into Prayag. Wikipedia titles are based on WP:COMMONNAME and not just Official name. So the name that is widely used in media will be the title. Hence for now the article should remain at the title of Allahabad, and Prayagraj is a redirect to Allahabad. --DBigXrayᗙ 17:08, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

@DBigXray: See above. It is not yet the official name either.—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 18:11, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
Cpt.a.haddock I think the news source I pointed above clearly states that the official name has been changed, here is another [4]--DBigXrayᗙ 18:26, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
@DBigXray: And the news source I've pointed to clearly states that it hasn't. Most articles only state that the cabinet has cleared the move or plan for the move. Look up how the recent move changes proceeded for Gurgaon, Mewat, Mughalsarai Junction etc. There's nothing official about this. Yet. Await a gazette notification.—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 18:49, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
Cpt.a.haddock Yes, You failed to point the section title and the immediate above section did not had any links, so I was wondering which links you are talking about. Now that I have read the section Talk:Allahabad#Name_change_procedure I do understand your points and agree that the gazette notification is pending, but Cabinet decision is being termed as official name change by media. --DBigXrayᗙ 18:56, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
Nothing should be changed unless and until there is a change in this website -->> https://allahabad.nic.in/ --Adamstraw99 (talk) 18:16, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
And not even then, since we go by what WP:COMMONNAME says, and don't change until a clear majority of English language reliable sources have switched to using the new name. Which took 10 years when Bombay switched to Mumbai, and hasn't happened yet with Bangalore/Bengaluru. - Tom | Thomas.W talk
(edit conflict),Adamstraw99 that site may probably be changed in a few days, but even then this article should remain as per the COMMONNAME, till the media usage of Prayag overtakes the usage of the word Allahabad, and it will take some time. (months/years). WP:COMMONNAME and not official name, thats how we decide titles. regards. (agree with User:Thomas.W) --DBigXrayᗙ 18:26, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
  • DBigXray, exactly, no change is in order as far as the article's title goes for some time, however, notwithstanding that we can always add the |official name for the time being. In addition, much akin to other things, I have changed the lede a bit to better reflect the division/district/city's change in name, apparently, even this much common sense is hard to find around these corners. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 19:20, 17 October 2018 (UTC); edited 19:37, 17 October 2018 (UTC).
As with Bangalore and Mysore, the lead sentence should start with the article title per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section#First sentence. I have revised the article accordingly. --Joshua Issac (talk) 19:38, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Joshua Issac, thank you! I will keep that in mind when reorganising the ledes of other articles. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 20:26, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Further, I would like on the official name of Allahabad division, Allahabad district and Allahabad city that UP council of ministers resolution has already been passed, all that is left is the Government of India's agreement (in case of district, city and division are purely under state government), governor's okay (ceremonial okay; governors are figureheads) and then a government notification (or shashanadesh). SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 20:25, 17 October 2018 (UTC); edited 20:49, 17 October 2018 (UTC).
@SshibumXZ: This is not (just) about the article's title. As noted on your talk page, in the article, and in the discussions above, the move is not official yet. Even if it were, this lede would be incorrect.—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 20:29, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
I couldn't stop myself from making this edit.. I dunno nothing now... I Am going off wikipedia for next six months... you guys decide what to do now... bye bye.. sorry --Adamstraw99 (talk) 20:41, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Adamstraw99, I mean you could've reverted that edit as a whole, as, only the lede and the infobox are the contentious parts of my edits. Happy wikibreak, though! 20:50, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Cpt.a.haddock, these reports from The Indian Express, The Times of India, Times Now, India Today et al. suggest otherwise: [5]; [6]; [7]; [8]; [9]; [10]; [11]; and [12]. Now, please self-revert, I would revert your edits myself but that would lead to violating WP:3RR.
Oh that reminds me, please apologise for your uglification of my talk page and strike your rather ugly warning. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 20:48, 17 October 2018 (UTC); edited 20:48, 17 October 2018 (UTC) and 20:49, 17 October 2018 (UTC).
Those notwithstanding, as noted in discussions and reports above, there is plenty of precedent to support the need for Central approval via the governor and a gazette notification. This confusion re:other reports calling it official is noted here.—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 20:59, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Cpt.a.haddock, central approval is probably only needed for renaming the district (basic unit of administration in India), and, as this article clearly demonstrates, this article is about the city rather than the district. Also, would you just please self-revert and then re-add your lede stuff if you so will, that copyedit was for all parts of the article and doing it again would be a lot of wiki-work. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 21:05, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
It was recently needed for Gurgaon in Haryana (which is also BJP governed). Going by this report, the process took around 6 months (April to September) in 2016. That's probably how long it'll take this time too keeping the elections in mind.—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 21:16, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
@SshibumXZ: In addition to what Thomas.W has said below, from here on in, please break up edits such as this one into smaller chunks with appropriate summaries so that the changes are easier for other editors to follow. Your summary: Copyediting. Updating. Removing non-notables. Adding Prayagraj. Edit conflict. Removed other names, feel free to add them back if you so please. offers no explanation as to why you've removed the section on languages from the infobox. Thanks.—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 21:23, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Cpt.a.haddock, because cities and districts (or any other non-top level subdivision for that matter) don't have official languages in India. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 21:28, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  • The name change isn't official until it has been confirmed by the Indian Government (the name changes in Karnataka, such as Belgaum -> Belagavi, needed AFAIK to be approved by the central government), and posted in the Indian Gazette (which can take several years). Until then it's just a proposal. And editors who mix constructive changes with clearly disruptive/uninformed changes in the same edit shouldn't complain about it if the edit is reverted, because it's not up to other editors to sift through it all to see what is constructive and what isn't, especially not on a day like today when not only this article but also all other articles mentioning Allahabad are being repeatedly hit by swarms of IPs and editors repeatedly changing names, and making undiscussed moves of the articles. And edit-warring over it, making both the constructive and the unconstructive edits over and over again, is even more disruptive. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 21:14, 17 October 2018 (UTC
Thomas.W, nope, The Gazette of India doesn't publish notifications for name changes; vide: notification No.2111-R-4-2016 in Haryana Government Gazette by the Haryana government's additional chief secretary in charge of its Department of Revenue and Disaster Management and state financial commissioner, Keshni Anand Arora ([13]). Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 21:31, 17 October 2018 (UTC); edited 21:34, 17 October 2018 (UTC) and 21:34, 17 October 2018 (UTC).
I'm not sure about the Gazette, but the name changes in Karnataka needed the approval of the Union Home Minister before becoming official (an approval that took eight years to get, from 2006 to 2014...). - Tom | Thomas.W talk 21:54, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Thomas.W and Cpt.a.haddock, I do not know about Bengaluru, but, Allahabad's name has been officially changed through a shashanadesh (government order) by the Department of Revenue, Government of Uttar Pradesh. Its principal secretary (senior civil servant of the department; IAS officer), Suresh Chandra, on 19 October 2018, issued a government order and changed the name of Allahabad. Vide [14] (in Hindi) and [15] (in Hindi).
The name of Allahabad division, however, has not been changed, as, it requires another cabinet resolution.
Also, please, can the both of you strike your rather repugnant comments from my talk page, I would be much obliged. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SshibumXZ (talk • contribs) 19:20, 19 October 2018 (UTC); edited 19:28, 19 October 2018 (UTC).
According to this source, and similar name changes in Karnataka, changing the name of cities in India requires the approval of the Central Government. So until then it's still Allahabad. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 19:41, 19 October 2018 (UTC) (And no, I do not intend to strike the almost undeservedly polite message I posted on your talk page...)
This source also says the name change requires Central Government approval ("The proposal will now go to the Centre before the city is officially renamed even though an Uttar Pradesh minister seemed to suggest the change has already come into effect"). - Tom | Thomas.W talk 19:48, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Thomas.W, yeah, that seems a reliable source, even more reliable than a daily. I mean what do you want? The Government of Uttar Pradesh has already notified a name change, do you want either of Uttar Pradesh chief minister or the Indian prime minister to come to your house and tell you that the name of Allahabad has changed, officially at least. This is getting on my nerves a bit too much, several sources say the name has changed (including British dailies, if that's worth anything), the Uttar Pradesh government has notified a name changed, but, still, here you are, adamant that no, the name has not changed. As this does not matter much to me (fine with either name, to be perfectly honest), I will just leave it for the likes of you to adjudicate as to whether the official name has officially changed or is some official clearance still needed from some official authority to officially change the official name. Official.
Do note however, that I am still planning to copyedit the article a bit. I bid you a very good night (or day, or evening, or morning, or afternoon, or official name). SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 19:53, 19 October 2018 (UTC); edited 20:07, 19 October 2018 (UTC).
  • I don't care if it "gets on your nerve", and what do you mean by "Economic Times/India Times" not being a reliable source? We don't add claims about a name being official until it really is official, which, based on what was required in Karnataka and what reliable sources say, requires approval by the Government of India. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 19:57, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Thomas.W, I was talking about the magnificent source that is https://www.youngernation.com/, not The Economic Times. Let's see: we have India Today, The Guardian, The Indian Express, The New Indian Express, Dainik Jagran and Amar Ujala on one side and the Bengaluru precedent (original synthesis), youngernation.com and The Economic Times report on the on Bengaluru precedent before govt. notification on the other. Yeah, this is contentious. I mean, mate seriously? Indian is a quasi-federal nation, if the Government of Uttar Pradesh has issued a notification pronouncing that the name of Allahabad has changed, that means that the name of Allahabad has changed, not that we will have a midget rodeo in Allahabad with tall people. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 20:07, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Do you really expect to be taken seriously with comments like that? - Tom | Thomas.W talk 20:35, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Thomas.W, apparently serious comments fall to deaf ears over here.
I have but one thing to ask of you, why are you so set in your ways? Your reasoning that Bengaluru and Mysuru (I cringe when I type that) required the Indian government's approval, so, Prayagraj should as well does not really hold up, especially considering that now that the name change has been NOTIFIED (emphasis mine). Not to mention, your line of thinking is original research. But, meh, you're the boss around these parts, so, who am I to question you? Do what you will, I have made my points (which of course have been duly pushed aside in favour of youngernation.com) and have nothing further to add, or scream. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 21:11, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Thomas.W, are these reports from the Financial Express and the news agency ANI proof enough for you: [16] and [17], or, do you still plan on sticking with your original synthesis? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SshibumXZ (talk • contribs) 19:48, 20 October 2018 (UTC); edited 20:19, 20 October 2018 (UTC).
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 21 October 2018

Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

CHANGE Allahbad to Prayagraj 171.61.136.171 (talk) 16:11, 21 October 2018 (UTC) The name has recently changed

  Not done: page move requests should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Danski454 (talk) 16:58, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
  •   Not done Per WP:COMMONNAME we use the name that is in common use in English laguage reliable sources, which still, and for the foreseeable future, is Allahabad. The name change also doesn't become official until approved by the Government of India. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 17:12, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 October 2018

Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Name of the city has got changed to Prayagraj but the article still shows name is Allahabad. Kapil.de6 (talk) 12:22, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

  Not done: see above Danski454 (talk) 12:33, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Is the name change now official ?

Latest comment: 6 years ago10 comments3 people in discussion

(Here's yet another thread since the other one has been closed.) So, as others have noted, there was a PTI report stating that the governor, the representative of the central government, had approved the name change on Friday. However, an ANI report (correctly) notes that the notification restricts itself to the renaming of the district in particular. But a TOI report from earlier today notes that signage and letterheads are being updated with the city's new name. While the process has been irregular, I think it's done. Prayagraj is now Allahabad's official name. Consensus?—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 09:44, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

User:Thomas.W is waiting for the gazette. Anyway this will only update the official name field in the infobox. not the article title or the usage of the keyword Allahabad throughout the article. --DBigXrayᗙ 13:30, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
DBigXray, uhm, this is awkward, but, the notification has already been issued. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 13:41, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
Cpt.a.haddock, well, district encompasses the city and district-level officials are directly concerned with the management of the city (districts are the basic administrative units in India; Allahabad city doesn't have an official website, allahabad.nic.in is the district's website), so, a name change at the district level would trickle down to the city level as well. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 13:38, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. But the notification itself is rather irregular. What about the division now? Anyhow, I'm OK with noting that the change is now official and, I'm guessing, you and DBigXray are as well. We'll wait a bit to see if Thomas.W has any issues with this and proceed.—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 16:39, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
yes cpt, you guessed it right, I am ok for both. (in fact this is all pointless waste of taxpayer money and wikipedia volunteer editors time, by people who aren't even fit to rule a cowshed)--DBigXrayᗙ 16:49, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
Ugh. I hadn't heard about most of these name changes. I've also seen reports about renaming Faizabad to "Sri Ayodhya" and Shimla to "Shyamala" :|—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 17:35, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
Cpt.a.haddock, this is common business by all parties (and governments) around these corners, if it's not places, then it's monuments, if not that, then, it's government programmes. All parties engage in this type of weird and useless rechristening much akin to Ancient Egyptian Pharaohs, the big difference being the former existed over 3,000 years ago. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 09:54, 24 October 2018 (UTC); edited 09:56, 24 October 2018 (UTC).
 
One name changed, long list of renames to be done.
 
The list is a long one.

Since Thomas.W has also voiced his support (in the thread below), I've gone ahead with the "official" edit. Congratulations, everyone :|—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 11:03, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Enjoy --DBigXrayᗙ 11:29, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

But Official name is Prayagraj

Latest comment: 6 years ago39 comments5 people in discussion

Wiki Bias at its height

Few far too opinated users here seem to be hell bent on proving the official name as non official. First they needed reputed publications for proof it was given, then they created excuse of (allahabad.nic.in) of not changing the name but now even that has changed they have created filmsy excuse of notification from central government. Even after that they will probably ask for personal invitation from official government for proof. Then they will probably ask if goverment is legitimate as per their requirement. Enough with this official not official nonsense. The official government website (allahabad.nic.in/municipal-corporation-town-area/) has been changed to Prayagraj and that is enough proof too state in header that Pyagraj is official name. Some users are so hung up on WP:COMMONNAME that they refuse to believe official government statement and official website professing so. Prayagraj is official name whether people like it or not. And not writing it on wikipedia will not make it unofficial. Instead wikipedia is looking like joke when official government websites have already changed its name but few users here are so sure that it's not. JayB91 (talk) 09:48, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

You are making false allegations here. anyway, understand that Wikipedia is not owned by the Government of India and Wikipedia is not bound to use official names in its articles. we have our own policy of WP:COMMONNAME, you have to follow that or stay away from this article. --DBigXrayᗙ 09:55, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
DBigXray, I think Jay meant that we should add the official name in the article's infobox and I agree with him or her fully in that regard. Additionally, I think we have a consensus here, so, modifying the infobox would be no big deal, right? Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 09:58, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
No, he just posted his rant which i believe is for the article title. not the infobox. and no dont jump the gun, there is no hurry, let User:Thomas.W reply here, we can wait for the WP:CONSENSUS here. you will be seen as edit warring, if you revert again. --DBigXrayᗙ 10:00, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
DBigXray, I was not going to revert anyway; don't worry, edit-warring is not on my to-do list for today, check with me tomorrow.SBDB! Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 10:04, 24 October 2018 (UTC); edited 10:06, 24 October 2018 (UTC).
False allegations ? All I'm saying that in first line it should be mentioned that "Allahabad (officially known as Prayagraj)" should be retained as editors are constantly removing the official word. Places in particular country is offically named by government not Wikipedians and we are BOUND to respect that not ignore laws. Again I am saying I am not asking to move the page immediately but mentioning Prayagraj as official in suffix is important but is being constantly trashed. Even Google maps have updated the name of the city.JayB91 (talk) 10:09, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
JayB91 you have to read the threads above to really understand why. Stop making unfounded allegations. and No wiki editor is BOUND to follow official name. there is a process that needs to be completed before claiming an official name. see my example of Gurgaon above. Just because BJP or UP govt. says its official does not mean it is official. --DBigXrayᗙ 10:16, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
The official website (allahabad.nic.in) clearly says that official name is Prayagraj. The site is owned by Goverment of India. We are BOUND to state what official name of the city is even if the title stays the common name. Are we wikipedians the new government of Allahabad that the city needs our approval?JayB91 (talk) 11:20, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
Wait, you're claiming bias despite never actually participating in the above discussion? Until a different consensus has been reached I see no reason for me to stop reverting such edits. If you wish you could start another RFC to reach a consensus (BTW, not attacking you, but I'm just following consensus). Dark-World25 (talk) 10:38, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
  • OK, here's my take on it, as a total outsider (European born and bred, and living in Europe), since I have been pinged here: According to the constitution of India name changes like the one for Allahabad/Prayagraj, must be approved by the central government of India before becoming official (or to be precise, approved by the Home Minister after all relevant central government departments and divisions have had their say), but, the central government of India is led by the BJP (a party that has over and over again shown that it's willing to bend any and all rules if it can get them a few extra votes...), just like the government of Uttar Pradesh, and the name change has been pushed through by BJP in UP, against the wish of a large part of the population, and express opposition by all other parties, in order to get more Hindu votes in an upcoming election, so the central BJP government is not going to slap the wrist of the UP BJP government, and force them to comply with normal rules and regulations. Meaning that even though the name change from a legal standpoint isn't official, no one is going to overrule the decision. So I won't be opposed to mentioning Prayagraj as new official name of Allahabad, but I will not under any cirumstances other than a change of common name in worldwide English language reliable sources (see WP:COMMONNAME) accept a move of the article to Prayagraj, or a change of all instances in this article or any other article realated to, or mentioning, Allahabad to Prayagraj, before a clear consensus in a formal RfC supports such a move/change. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 10:22, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
Thomas.W, yeah, I agree that there is no chance that the article's title changes for at least a year or thousand.. But, I would like to just point because I am a little bit of a finicky person, the Constitution of India—extremely overscrupulous as it is—does not lay out a procedure for changing names. And as far as Uttar Pradesh goes, the U. P. Revenue Code, 2006 vests the power of changing names of divisions and districts to the governor (read: the government). Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 10:29, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
The constitution of India applies to all states, making no exception for states ruled by the BJP, and state constitutions do not overrule the constitution of India. So since name changes in other states have required central government approval before becoming official, the same should also apply to name changes in UP. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 10:34, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Thomas.W, no, no, I did not mean like that, what I said was that the Constitution of India does not lay out a procedure for changing names, it talks about a lot of stuff, but, changing names is not one of them. State and union territory names are changed through constitutional amendments and statutory acts, but, as far as I know, there is no procedure laid out anywhere on the national level to elucidate as to how names of divisions and districts should be changed.
One more thing, we in India do not have state constitutions (a borrowed feature from the UK), the Constitution of India serves as the be all and end all as far as constitutions go (part of the reason why it's so long) and any state or union law that is in contravention with the constitution is considered void ab initio (heck, even constitutional amendments can be struck down by the supreme court if they don't conform with the basic structure of the constitution; vide: basic structure doctrine).
So, whilst I agree that if one name change requires confirmation from the Government of India, others should as well, but, that can be down to discrepancies in state laws. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 10:41, 24 October 2018 (UTC); edited 10:44, 24 October 2018 (UTC).
SshibumXZ, Names of places Need Central government of India and home ministry intervention. how do you explain Gurugram ? why had they to wait for a gazette ? I mostly agree with User:Thomas.W here. --DBigXrayᗙ 10:35, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
DBigXray, refer to my comment above. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 10:43, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
SshibumXZ it is clear to me that you are not aware of the Procedure for name change and are only making assumptions here. how do you explain all these locals spamming Home Ministry instead of their MLA and state assembly ? --DBigXrayᗙ 10:51, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
DBigXray, seriously? You are asking me that? People are ignorant, they do weird stuff, almost everyone in the nation believes that Feroze Gandhi was Muslim (he was a Parsi). If you want me to explain how the names of villages and other subdivisions are changed in India, I will do that. The Ministry of Home Affairs does not have as much power as people think it does, it does not control state police forces (police and public order are enumerated in the State List), it does not control state governments anymore. Again, seriously?
SshibumXZ MHA controls the Delhi Police and Paramilitary police forces in India. other state Police are under the respective state governments. And looks like you did not read the article[18] If MHA does not have powers for rename, how is it approving these rename requests as the article mentions. People aren't really that ignorant, as you claim. --DBigXrayᗙ 11:06, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
DBigXray, man, seriously? Delhi Police is a convoluted mess and is empowered by a special Act of the parliament (Delhi Police Act, 1978). Central Armed Police Forces are—like you said—paramilitary forces, not police forces. See: the Railway Protection Force for example, it is a clustefuck, not having full powers of a police force (state railway forces are responsible for that). Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 12:07, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
SshibumXZ what seriously ? Are you saying Delhi Police is not under MHA ? and why aren't you answering me Q above ? --DBigXrayᗙ 12:11, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
DBigXray, no, it does not directly come under the Ministry of Home Affairs; refer to the Delhi Police Act, 1978
I quote,
the Delhi police shall consist of such number in the several ranks and have such organisation and such powers, functions and duties as the Administrator may, by general or special order, determine; copied from the Act; all credit to the respective authors, whomsoever they may be.
It comes the administrator of Delhi, which is the lieutenant governor of Delhi.
Believe it or not, Delhi Home Department is actually involved in the functioning of Delhi Police. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 12:15, 24 October 2018 (UTC); edited 12:41, 24 October 2018 (UTC) and 12:48, 24 October 2018 (UTC).
Thomas.W, railway stations come under the Ministry of Railways and are union lands fully union jurisdiction. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 12:00, 24 October 2018 (UTC); edited 12:07, 24 October 2018 (UTC).
And this source, an article about the Allahabad/Prayagraj name change, clearly states that "The government in a state is not empowered to rename a city, a village or a railway station. There is a procedure for the same. It can, of course, take a decision in this regard. But it is the Centre which has the final say in the matter.". - Tom | Thomas.W talk 11:29, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
Thomas.W Indeed MHA approval is mandatory. Although this is not a reliable source, this blog does try to answer the procedure. --DBigXrayᗙ 11:31, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
DBigXray, please read that blog again, it clearly states that states are empowered to change names within their jurisdiction. Please. Also, you remember the renaming of the Race Course Road, yeah, that didn't require central intervention, the New Delhi Municipal Council did it unilaterally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SshibumXZ (talk • contribs) 13:11, 24 October 2018 (UTC); edited 12:45, 24 October 2018 (UTC). (UTC)

User:DBigXray and Thomas.W I will requst you to see (https://allahabad.nic.in) and (https://allahabad.nic.in/municipal-corporation-town-area/) again which is directly under jurisdiction of National Informatics Centre, Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, Government Of India. The arguement regarding notification is Irrelevant when the central government thorough NIC has declared it as Prayagraj on the website. Opposing such move is like declaring Government of India illegitimate JayB91 (talk) 11:33, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

@JayB91: See WP:COMMONNAME. Wikipedia is an international English language encyclopaedia, registered and headquartered in the United States, not an Indian English language encyclopaedia, and thus not bound by Indian laws and government decrees. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 11:37, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
But we are bound to state correct information of an article which is about an Indian city under the jursidcation of Government of India. We at wikipedia do not make laws for the Indian city names or any city name in the world. We just state what is factually correct. Here the Indian city's name is Prayagraj as stated by government of India. We should state it such even if page name remains WP:COMMONNAME Allahabad. My original request was to mention that Prayagraj is a official name in header.JayB91 (talk) 11:46, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
@JayB91: It already is... - Tom | Thomas.W talk 11:50, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
Yes thanks for that. But this debate whether or not it is YET official makes no sense when the Central govt of India website has stated it such. Thats all I wanted to resolve. JayB91 (talk) 11:57, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
JayB91 No one is denying that UP gov. is "claiming" that as the official name. The point here, (if you would have read the thread above you could have understood but for some reasons you have decided not to read the above discussions and carry on with your own unfounded allegations against some of the editors on this page. The official name is done once the official name change procedure is completed. Not when the rename procedure is started, and not when the CM makes a statement, and Not when the government website changes its name. See this example of Gurugram, notice the date when the governor claimed the name change, but even after that it took too many days for the name to be claimed as official. appreciate if you can read the Haryana example and explain to me why it wasnt claimed as official name once the CM and the governor claimed as such ? --DBigXrayᗙ 12:00, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
So you are saying that Central Government of India's official website has less weight that Hindustan Times newspaper which publishes Bollywood gossips and scandals?JayB91 (talk) 12:11, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
No, you have to read what I said and understand instead of making ridiculous comparisons and misrepresentations of statement from others. If there is something in my statement that you have trouble properly understanding, let me know and I will be glad to rephrase it and explain it in a much more greater detail. --DBigXrayᗙ 12:16, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
The discussion is now about what the normal procedures are. But not surprisingly (see my post starting with "OK" a bit further up in this discussion) the BJP seems to have, once again, bent the rules in order to get a few extra Hindu votes in the upcoming election in UP... - Tom | Thomas.W talk 12:04, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
User:Thomas.W I dont think the BJP has bent rules, They have ignored the due procedure to be completed first, before claiming a rename. And they just went ahead while the rename procedure is ongoing and pre-maturely claimed "Lo, name is changed" and media reported their claim. --DBigXrayᗙ 12:14, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
(edit conflict) The impression I get is that they have indeed bent the rules. The normal procedure would be for the state government to send a request to the Ministry of Home Affairs, i.e. the central government, who after approving it would send it to the state governor for his signature, as final confirmation, but in this case the state government of UP seem to have sent it straight to the governor, bypassing the MHA, who then signed it without any prior formal approval by the MHA (but the silent approval of Mr Modi's government). Which is a classical example of bending the rules. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 12:26, 24 October 2018 (UTC
Whatever they did, We wikipedians are not here to judge them. We are here to state factually correct data. And the official name of a city as per their official central government website is such, then we will state as such. We are not under any obligation or authority to reprimand them just because "they did not follow the usual procedure". JayB91 (talk) 12:19, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
We're not reprimanding them, but we are of course free to comment on it, and call it what it is, i.e. bending the rules in order to get a few extra votes. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 12:31, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
Thomas.W, is it a move to woo voters? Yes, sure. Is it bending the rules? Hardly. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 12:46, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Chapter II
Revenue Divisions
5. Division of State into revenue areas. - For the purposes of this Code, [the State shall be divided into revenue areas comprising of divisions which may consist of two or more districts, and each district may consist of two or more Tahsils and each Tahsil may consist of one or more parganas, and each pargana may consist of two or more villages.]
6. Constitution of revenue areas. -
(1) The State Government may, by notification, specify -
(i) the districts which constitute a division;
(ii) the tahsils which constitute a district;
(iii) the villages which constitute a tahsil.
(2) The State Government may, by notification, alter the limits of any revenue area referred to in sub-section (1) by amalgamation, re-adjustment, division or in any other manner whatsoever, or abolish any such revenue area and may name and alter the name of any such revenue area, and in any case where any area is renamed, then all reference in any law or instrument or other document to the area under its original name shall be deemed to be references to the area as renamed unless expressly provided otherwise : Provided that before passing any order under this sub-section on any proposal to alter the limits of any revenue area, the State Government shall publish, in the prescribed manner, such proposals for inviting objections, and shall take into consideration any objections to such proposals.
(3) The Collector may, by an order, published in the prescribed manner, arrange the villages in a tahsil into Lekhpal circles and the Lekhpal circles into Revenue Inspector circles and specify also the headquarters of each Revenue Inspector within his Circle.
(4) The divisions, districts, tahsil, pargana, Revenue Inspector circles, Lekhpal circles and villages, as existing at the commencement of this Code shall, until altered under the preceding sub-sections, be deemed to be the revenue areas specified under this section.

copied from the Code; all credit to the respective authors, whomsoever they may be.
The government, ever so clearly, has the power to do as it pleases with divisions and districts. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 12:23, 24 October 2018 (UTC); edited 12:27, 24 October 2018 (UTC), 12:29, 24 October 2018 (UTC), 12:33, 24 October 2018 (UTC), 12:41, 24 October 2018 (UTC) and 12:48, 24 October 2018 (UTC).

Serious concern

Latest comment: 6 years ago16 comments5 people in discussion

Alas, the name change is accepted but I'm seriously concerned about Indian editors here who had to wait for some european editor's consensus/opinion for a change in an article involving Indian matters, those who only see what international media shows them about India and have little to no valid knowledge of local matters. Somehow it reminds me of colonial times.

I urge every Indian editor here to please be responsible and sane enough to take valid decisions the next time. I don't think Jimmy Wales started this so that one group of people should control what everyone does. Thank You. Wikiboy2364 (talk) 14:36, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

  • @Wikiboy2364: You seem to have totally misunderstood how things work here. The titles of articles (that is the name of pages) should, per WP:COMMONNAME, a rule that applies to all editors, regardless of nationality, be whatever name is in common use in the English language, and thus commonly understood, world wide, not just in India (the vast majority of readers of the English language Wikipedia live far away from India...). And the common name we go by is whatever name is most prevalent in English language reliable sources, world wide (although with a slight lean towards usage in the country a city or whatever is located in). And that same rule of course also applies to cities and what-have-you in other parts of the world (see the long discussions at Talk:Kiev/naming...), so this most definitely has nothing to do with "colonial times". If you want articles about India that are controlled by people in India only, with no "colonial influence", you are of course free to create your own Wiki, but you will definitely not get what you want on Wikipedia. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 16:16, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
    Thomas.W, again, whilst I don't fully agree with Wikiboy, I don't think he was talking about the article title here. He seems to have raised an issue regarding the amount of bureaucracy involved in implementing a change as simple as adding a parameter in the infobox, especially considering that the change is relatively uncontroversial and is backed reliable sources, government notifications and not-so-reliable sources. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 16:35, 24 October 2018 (UTC); edited 16:39, 24 October 2018 (UTC).
    Thomas.W Hey Thomas, i totally apologize if the colonial term may have offended you or made you upset in any way. My intentions were totally different and i should have expressed myself in a more sensible way. I was concerned about people here HAVING EVERY FACT AND NEWS present before them, but not ready to act up on it just because it is not validated by a third person, if you can understand what i mean. How many foreign authors on an average do you call up on when you have to edit something on an article about a local thing when you have every source and citation ready with you? Again, just an honest and kind-hearted question( which you dont even need to answer) and not trying to sound like a racist as DBigXray implied me to be. I don't have any qualms or problems with you, it's just me and the other authors here read the local news in our respective language, watch news channels, browse internet and when every fact is ready, still wait and procrastinate the task for some third person(can be anyone, any nationality) to come and comment on. Hope i was clear on my concerns. Do comment if something bothers you. Thank You for your cooperation. Wikiboy2364 (talk) 04:31, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Wikiboy2364, Wikipedia is a collaborative project and as a result, even on India-related topics, non-Indians are bound to appear, and that's a good thing. One of the pros of globalisation, in my opinion, is that it promotes collaboration. In fact, some of the better India-related Wikipedians have been non-Indians (Sitush, Fowler&fowler et al.), so, having non-Indians is definitely a plus.
What I am annoyed about, though, is the sheer rigidity shown by some Wikipedians—Indians and non-Indians alike—on this thread/page to admit that the name change is officially official. Even after the notification people were waiting for some kind of approval from the Government of India, when the U. P. Revenue Code, 2006 clearly empowers the state to rename, abolish and establish revenue (read: administrative) subdivisions as it wills. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 16:30, 24 October 2018 (UTC); edited 16:30, 24 October 2018 (UTC), 16:33, 24 October 2018 (UTC) and 16:41, 24 October 2018 (UTC).
DBigXray, that is all well and good, but, if your comment isn't aimed to be a reply to mine above, please put this comment below my comment, well, below. I agree with the rest of your, by the way. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 17:03, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
  • @Wikiboy2364: I know you were talking perfectly sensible and accurate, the only reason I did not participate and act for the fear of blocking myself for edit war. I think, it is the time that India Wikiepdia editers should take a lead and take decisions. I think, India wikipedia chapter is equally knowledgeable and responsible. If we are getting so mush issues for just correcting one name, imagine how much efforts we would require to change the name from India to Bharat, Indus to Sindhu and Ganges to Ganga worldwide. No other country and rivers have such duel names world wide. Such changes needs to be done not only in Wikepdia but also at govt. levels and finally world wide. While I am still waiting to change the article name to Prayagraj.... Kautuk1 (talk) 17:12, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
  • I am not sure what makes you think that Indian editors dont take the lead, I mean, you need to come out of your well and see. regarding the renames, Please read WP:GREATWRONG, which is a nice route for a specific outcome.--DBigXrayᗙ 17:18, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
@Kautuk1: You're so wrong it's almost funny. The native name for Germany is Deutschland, but no other language uses that name, in the Scandinavian countries it's called Tyskland, in France and other French speaking countries Allemagne and in Spanish-speaking countries Allemania, just to give a few examples of names for Germany in other countries, while the native name for Hungary is Magyar Rorszag and the native name for Sweden is Sverige (and I could list many more), and, just to give you a couple of examples, the native name for the city of Copenhagen (Denmark) is København and the native name for the city of Venice (Italy) is Venezia. And I could list hundreds of other examples of the native name being different from the name in English (and many other languages). That's just the way it is, all over the world. Even within India, since there are hundreds, if not thousands, of places, rivers and what-have-you that have different names in different (Indian) languages... - Tom | Thomas.W talk 19:47, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
Just to point out that England is on the "receiving end" of it too, the names used in France, just across the English Channel (which is called La Manche in French and Ärmelkanal in German...), for England, Scotland, Wales and London, respectively, are Angleterre, Écosse, Pays de Galles and Londres, with the first three being totally different from the names in English... - Tom | Thomas.W talk 20:58, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
  • @SshibumXZ: thanks for acknowledging what I REALLY wanted to say. I was only talking about the amount of bureaucracy and tomfoolery going on here just for a name change, that too an official one. There were no racist undertones (*@DBigXray: should really hold his horses here, there is no dictatorship here and I was just voicing my concerns without taking any names). I know this situation because I have faced this before by some british author whom I asked to copyedit an article of mine and he started being overly nosy about petty things. Not passing an article just because he didn't liked 'commas' and 'full stops' in a paragraph, and failed a GA nomination, denying to work on it further. Everybody is free and in my opinion, welcome to voice opinions and edit, it's just we really have to work on segregating out those who WANT to do this, and not trolling here trying to omit facts and delay things just because it doesn't comply with their personal agenda. Been on Wikipedia for 7 yrs, trust me, seen everything. Thanks to everyone anyways. Wikiboy2364 (talk) 04:01, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Wikiboy2364 it is fairly clear to me, based on your replies above, why you are unable to get along with the editors here on Wikipedia. You have been called out on exactly what you were doing here. Good luck with your POV mission --DBigXrayᗙ 10:37, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
  • DBigXray I don't think i can agree to a single bit of what you said because it's not really a 'POV mision' if you have your facts right with you. Also, i don't need to 'get along' with anyone here, my work is to provide right information to readers and that's what i was trying to do and will do again in future. Maybe my information and edits triggered you or your political agendas or something but i don't really care because the truth prevailed in the end. Thank you for your wishes but my only mission is an unbiased, ACCURATE Wikipedia for which i can happily face a thousand banters like this. What's even wonderful is i don't need or wish to require any outside help in my tasks. Good luck with your sixth sense of judging people and cheers!!! Wikiboy2364 (talk) 11:18, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
Pinging people whose comments I refactored: DBigXray and Wikiboy2364. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 15:57, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Name of the place, and value of the discussion above

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I reverted a set of pending changes to this article, because taken as a whole they ignored this edit of mine and the long discussion in blue above, whereupon Pdp511 (contributions) ignored the long discussion and made the changes.

Ignoring my edit? Well, I have a thick skin. I have an opinion on which name the article should be primarily using, but this opinion isn't particularly strong. I have a stronger opinion on the unilateral flouting of agreement. Comments? (Pdp511?) -- Hoary (talk) 06:36, 1 November 2018 (UTC) slightly reworded Hoary (talk) 22:39, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

"a metropolitan city"

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The article tells us that Allahabad "is a metropolitan city". How does this differ from a "metropolis"?

(What with Sado and the like being dubbed "cities", I do realize that "city" has now been bleached of meaning.) -- Hoary (talk) 22:39, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

The name "Prayag"

Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

There is no history for the name prayag.purana is epic stories not history,just election tactics.not official.so remove it from history page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.201.6.175 (talk) 08:59, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Is the name "Prayag" used to a significant extent? If it is, then it should be mentioned. If its use is the result of misunderstanding, myth, or falsification, then this probably should be mentioned as well. Are you saying that the name is a politically-motivated invention? Whatever the claim is that you're making, do you have reliable, independent sources for it? -- Hoary (talk) 01:04, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Cabinet approval for name Prayagraj

Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

UP cabinet approves renaming of Faizabad as Ayodhya, Allahabad as Prayagraj. Here is the link. This is the name which would be used next many centuries. Can we now rename article name to Prayagraj? Kautuk1 (talk) 11:38, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

No, because you have to prove that the proposed new title is the WP:COMMONNAME. Vanjagenije (talk) 19:31, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Rename of Allahabad to Prayagraj is still not official

Latest comment: 6 years ago15 comments4 people in discussion

Hi there.The renaming has been made official in all government websites and offices here in India.Hence request the administrator to move the page to the title Prayagraj to avoid confusion and unnecessary conflicts with other users.The name Allahabad shall be used as a redirect to the newly formed page Prayagraj.Thanks --Hari147 (talk) 02:04, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Hari147, hi! See: WP:COMMONNAME, which dictates that common names should be used when titling articles, for example, Kiev's official name is Kyiv, but, the former is used on Wikipedia, similarly to give a more regional example of India, Bangalore's official name—as you probably know already—is Bengaluru, but, Bangalore is used on Wikipedia, as, it is more common of the two. Do note, though, that the common name has to be, well, common in English-language sources and not sources of other languages.
See also: the sections above, namely, #Official Name Prayagraj but Common Name is still Allahabad, #Question on edit restoration, #Is the name change now official ?, #But Official name is Prayagraj and #Serious concern. Therein, people argued that even the name change is not even officially official, but, that—partly because of my efforts, one would like to think—has been solved at least. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 02:27, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
FYI, According to officials, the proposals to change the names of Allahabad to Prayagraj and Faizabad to Ayodhya are yet to be received by the ministry from the Uttar Pradesh government. So, even the official status still remains cloudy as the UP government appears to be playing fast and loose.—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 06:54, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
I was about to post the same here. User:SshibumXZ User:Thomas.W User:Wikiboy2364 User:JayB91 FYI check this out. --DBigXrayᗙ 09:23, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
Cpt.a.haddock and DBigXray, I have nothing to add here; I have already said what I needed to say by citing relevant statutes, rules and other things. I can't find any mention of a manual of procedure for going about changing sub-divisions in either the Constitution of India or any union law. Revenue sub-divisions are administrative sub-divisions in India and as 'land revenue' finds itself mentioned in the State List (number 45), common sense would dictate that in a federal union like India, states would have the right to make and rename revenue sub-divisions (read: administrative sub-divisions) as they please, but, clearly a lot of semi-reliable-to-reliable sources say that central approval is necessary and as I am not well-versed with all the statues of India and its top-level subdivisions, I would not contest any sound reasoning any further. Good luck to you people in deciphering what involves renaming divisions, districts, cities, villages et al. in India. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 09:59, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
Shibum, credits where it is due. This article just proved that User:Thomas.W was right all along and you were endlessly debating him over this drama staged by the UP CM. Good to see the facts coming out now. --DBigXrayᗙ 10:02, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
DBigXray, to clarify here, some semi-reliable-to-reliable sources have indeed said that Allahabad is now Prayagraj; vide: [19] (The Times of India), [20] (NDTV; Press Trust of India wire), [21] (Republic World/TV, I know it's a partisan source, but a staff writer wrote the linked piece from Mumbai) et al. There's clearly a conflict here and we can't just selectively enforce what he see fit here. The laws, coupled with the news reports, make it clear that the name-change is contested at worst and official at best.
Also, it seemed to me that you were doubting my intentions, so, I would like some clarification here. I am sorry if doubting me wasn't your attention, though! Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 10:16, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
you should ponder over the quality of the sources next time. Specially when these politicians of a particular political party are umm "playing fast and loose" (as cpt puts it), so be very careful when you come accross tall claims by them in ToI, Republic, TimesNow and other media houses that serve as government mouthpieces. And most importantly you should ponder over the lost time for yourself and for other volunteers on this talk page by engaging in endless debates. We cannot change the past but learn from it so as to not repeat the same in future. --DBigXrayᗙ 10:34, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
DBigXray, well, The New Indian Express is not the best of sources either, is it? Again, we are wasting our time here; I am of the view that Allahabad's name-change is, at extreme, disputed (if you consider The New Indian Express source, that is) and as I have—repeatedly—put my points forth over multiple threads on this page, I don't think it'd be the most productive exercise to reiterate my points again. All the best to the people involved in this discussion (and prior discussions) in their endeavours! Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 10:51, 12 November 2018 (UTC); edited 12:16, 12 November 2018 (UTC).
SshibumXZ grasping for straws ? This was a PTI story, also reported by NDTV. Nobody is doubting that the UP CM has started a name change process. But There is clear evidence that this process is not completed. UP CM wants everyone to believe, that since he has started the process, the name is already changed, but that is not what the laid down procedures mean. It is quite obvious why(votes) the UP CM is "playing fast and loose". If you see above, I was engaging in the discussion but soon understood the futility and disengaged, while you continued. I don't think anyone else is going to engage on this again. I am just saying, we should be open to listening other thoughts and don't engage in endless debates for things whose clarity is disputed because it is a timesink. cheers.--DBigXrayᗙ 11:58, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

DBigXray, right, let me just elucidate on my points further.

  1. I cited the U. P. Revenue Code, 2006 and said that the Government of Uttar Pradesh has the authority over its sub-divisions. At the same time, no constitutional or statutory provision at the parliamentary level lays out a procedure for changing names of subdivisions. There is also the blog that you cited which says that a state government can change the name of its sub-divisions as it sees fit. In addition, I cited the example of the Race Course Road, whose name was changed to Lok Kalyan Marg—almost unilaterally—by the New Delhi Municipal Council without any central intervention, if I recall correctly, that is.
  2. I also cited a number of links, of which included a PTI story, which said that the official name of Allahabad has changed to Prayagraj.
  3. I suggest that you reread the discussion, then. The discussion centred around the validity of the name change and questioned whether or not Allahabad's name had been changed to Prayagraj, officially at least.

All in all, I have been citing laws and stories [from reliable sources] which have been countered by you citing stories [from reliable sources], so, I don't think it's up to me [or you] to interpret this matter to its fullest. Let's wait till a well-read and neutral party (that is to say, a party that has not engaged in this discussion) has his or her say on the matter, shall we?
Good luck! Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 12:12, 12 November 2018 (UTC); edited 12:16, 12 November 2018 (UTC).

SshibumXZ instead of going around I am going to hit the jugular vein of this issue. AFAIK, revenue code only elucidates the STEP 1 ( initiation by the state for rename) it does not mention that it is the final authority. you were/are claiming that this revenue code trumps the Nome ministry/Central Laws which is simply unfounded and the basic mistake you have been committing. --DBigXrayᗙ 12:48, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
DBigXray, okay, we have had this discussion for a small amount of time. See: I can't find any union law which lays out any type of guideline for changing names of sub-divisions, I am sure that there is something at the central level which mandates for getting an approval from the Ministry of Home Affairs before a name-change is processed or implemented, but, I am afraid I haven't been able to find it, so, if you want to find it, be my guest. As far as the revenue code goes, I am afraid I would have to go back to the basics here; see: India is a federation, that is to say that the Constitution of India divides power between the union and the states, state legislatures have the exclusive right to legislate over certain items (see: the State List); conversely, the Parliament of India has the exclusive right to legislate over certain items (see: the Union List); the only thing where both the parliament and the state legislatures are involved is for any item on the Concurrent List, items enumerated wherein can be legislated by both the parliament and the state legislatures and in case of a conflict between the two, the parliament has the supremacy over the state legislatures. Further, any union or state law in contravention with the Constitution of India is considered void ab initio. So, if the the U. P. Revenue Code, 2006 is subservient to some central law (which itself is highly improbable might I add, considering 'Land Revenue' is mentioned in the State List) and contravenes the said law, it should have been struck down by either the Supreme Court of India or the Allahabad High Court by now, which clearly has not happened yet, so, I don't think the U. P. Revenue Code, 2006 is the problem here.
P. S. — The parliament does have the power to legislate on state topics in the case of an emergency, if I recall correctly the relevant article of the Constitution of India, but, to the best of my knowledge, that power has never been used. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SshibumXZ (talk • contribs) 13:23, 12 November 2018 (UTC); edited 08:29, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Besides the Indian Express report I cited above, there's also a PTI report being syndicated by multiple papers which effectively states the same thing. Also of interest in the IE report:

The home ministry considers renaming proposals as per the laid down guidelines, this after consultations and consent from the Ministry of Railways, Department of Posts and Survey of India. The concerned ministries provide a no-objection confirming that no such town or village is named the same in the records. Presumably, this also includes cities, districts, and such, and is at least one of the reasons why the change goes to the centre for approval. I have no idea what these "laid down guidelines" are and see nothing in the mha.nic.in website about it.—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 14:16, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Cpt.a.haddock, my point was that reports from reliable sources (even the ones reported by the same organisation) conflict each other and like you said, I don't think any Government of India website mentions anything regarding name-change of a sub-division of a state or union territory. Anyway, like I said, we should proceed as how we see best, after inferring reliable and primary sources correctly and truthfully of course, no two ways about that process I hope. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 08:29, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 December 2018

Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
106.206.96.140 (talk) 23:03, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  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. DannyS712 (talk) 23:21, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Wrong ICAO ident for airport

Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The ICAO ident for the airport has been changed quite some time ago from "VIAL" to "VEAB". All publications for this airport (e.g. Jeppesen charts) state VEAB as ICAO ident. The Airport location has changed from "Allahabad" to "Prayagraj" per NOTAM ID1121/18 from Indian Aviation Authorities. Please change ICAO ident accordingly. Thanks!169.143.244.115 (talk) 05:07, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Please provide supporting sources for your changes. Thanks.—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 12:27, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 January 2019

Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
2405:204:640C:BDE5:C4B3:DCB:8510:7725 (talk) 13:11, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
  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. DBigXrayᗙ 13:16, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Why this article is imposing "Allahabad" instead of "Prayagraj"?

Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

As per the new rule, it is "Prayagraj High Court" not "Allahabad High Court" and so on for other things. Everything has been renamed, why this article is so obsessed with the old Islamic name? Please update the article as soon as possible. The people talking about this issue above previously are so uneducated and ignorant of the fact that there is nothing left to force people to use "Allahabad". The job is done and the new name is Prayagraj, Wikipedia editors are no one to dictate rules to the Hindus and other Indians. talk —Preceding undated comment added 07:03, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Due to Wikipedia's WP:COMMONNAME policy. --DBigXrayᗙ 13:17, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Clearing doubts about 'official' status once and for all

Latest comment: 5 years ago8 comments4 people in discussion

So, I was doing a bit of reading as I am planning to expand the article on the Government of Uttar Pradesh in the near future and incidentally finally found a mention of how sub-divisions are changed in an Act of Parliament of India; see: the Uttar Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2000 (PDF; p. 6), the Act's sixth section in its second part titled "Saving powers of State Governments" clearly states:

Nothing in the foregoing provisions of this Part shall be deemed to affect the power of the Government of Uttar Pradesh or Uttaranchal to alter, after the appointed day, the name, area or boundaries of any district or other territorial division in the State.


copied from the Act; all credit to the respective authors, whomsoever they may be.

One can clearly infer from the above that the state governments act fully in their power when they change a district's name. Hence, this coupled with the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 passed by the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly and the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Council, which I have already cited above, makes me think that the name change of Allahabad is fully official and the Government of Uttar Pradesh was not ultra vires when changing the name of Allahabad.

So, this made me search for 'Prayagraj' in Government of India notifications and just a minute or two in my research, I found this Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions notification as an example of the Government of India using 'Prayagraj': [22] (page 8).

I wanted to point to all this out as, if rumours are to believed, state governments are preparing to change names of a good-ton of cities and districts to 'Indianise' them, so far, I think I have heard rumours about Shimla, Ahmedabad, Hyderabad, Trichy et al. and as, unless the said pages are on my watchlist, will not indulge in discussions regarding the official name of said cities and/or districts, I would like to point this all so that there's some precedent at least regarding how names of second and third level sub-divisions are changed in India and how go about changing official names on Wikipedia articles. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 13:18, 12 January 2019 (UTC); edited 13:19, 12 January 2019 (UTC).

  • Thanks for the ping , SshibumXZ, indeed @Renamed user ExPsittacine: (formerly Cpt.a.haddock) was a terrific editor, I only recall interacting with him on these 2 pages, losing such an experienced editor over such a trivial reason is really sad. Big loss for wikipedia as a whole and WP:India in particular. Hope he reads this and returns back someday.
  • Regarding the topic some individual ministries might have already started using Prayagraj, but until it is notified by a gazette that is the main central govt doc, this process is not completed. one can say that the work from the state government side is over as per their rights and requirements, so as far as UP govt is concerned they might have nothing more to do here, so they may claim over, but unless the central govt, notification that is passed on to all the states and Post, railways, army etc one cannot claim the process to be completed. These are nuances, and not something worth arguing especially since the legal docs aren't very clear about it and I presume neither of us is a lawyer --DBigXrayᗙ 13:32, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
DBigXray, yeah, that's true. The Government of India has to do stuff as well, as, the central government ministries have their own regional offices in districts, especially the Ministry of Railways, the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology (Posts) and the Ministry of Defence (defence commands and others), but, insofar as the Government of Uttar Pradesh goes, one would believe that their job here is done.
Also, of course, this is not worth arguing over in the least, I just pointed this as a 'in a nutshell' so people have some precedence when other districts, divisions or cities get renamed. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 13:48, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
Thank you SshibumXZ, appreciate the kind gesture of sharing the info. --DBigXrayᗙ 13:53, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping, SshibumXZ... but I Am afraid I Might not be actively editing the topic for next few weeks... Adamstraw99 (talk) 15:52, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
Adamstraw99, no problem. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 09:19, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks for pinging me, SshibumXZ. I concur with DBigXray above. I would lean towards waiting until the notification is sent by the Union Government before saying that the new name is official. The issue is that many newspaper articles can be very careless about these things and will declare name changes to be complete long before they actually are. Either way, it does not stop us from noting that the renaming process has begun, and the specific steps taken up until that point towards completing it. --Joshua Issac (talk) 23:38, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Three or two rivers?

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

"Confluence of the Ganga, Yamuna and Sarasvati rivers" might not be the best secular description of Prayag, because the Sarasvati river is invisible / dried up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.222.148.189 (talk) 12:39, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Rename to Prayagraj

Latest comment: 5 years ago8 comments3 people in discussion

Please change the name of the page as Prayagraj is now it's official name. Includents.h (talk) 07:00, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Includents.h Wikipedia does not keep article title as official name. we follow WP:COMMONNAME, for example, see Bangalore and not (Bengaluru)--DBigXrayᗙ 07:05, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Hmm so wait for it's station to be painted as Prayagraj and University Baord change to Prayagraj. at least 1 year then you can change it to Prayagraj as most people are speaking Prayagraj instead of Allahabad. Includents.h (talk) 07:09, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Includents.h please follow WP:INDENT. not just station to be painted but everywhere the name should be changed and everyone, public, media third party sources, books, scholars, etc etc start using the new name such that the usage of new name exceeds the usage of old name. it may take a year or even a decade. The Bengaluru case for example happened many years back, but sources still use old name Bangalore. we cannot predict the future. what we know right now is that usage of Allahabad is much more than the minuscule usage of new name. --DBigXrayᗙ 07:28, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
It is strange that every Hindi News channel of Uttar Pradesh and National News Channels of India refers to Prayagraj as Prayagraj.. If you have access to Indian Television Channels go and watch.. and My grandmother today went to Prayagraj for the holy mela of Kumbh she also referred to it as Prayag.. I think its main name should be Prayagraj and then Allahabad in brackets. I am saying on the basic of factsIncludents.h (talk) 15:37, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
Live updates: Protests in Lucknow, Allahabad after Akhilesh Yadav stopped at airport See this article from Times of India. it is 2 hrs ago. MEdia are still using Allahabad, So unless you can prove that Prayagraj is the common name, the rename is not going to happen. cheers. --DBigXrayᗙ 15:47, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
@Includents.h:Try to understand that the English Wikipedia works on a global platform and has its own set of rules. It needs substantial amount of time to change an article name as per WP:COMMONAME. Notice that the article on Bengaluru is still named as "Bangalore" despite the name change happened in 2014. Wait for some time when the word "Prayag" becomes more common in the media. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:55, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
ya that's right many are using new name.. some are still using old name..Includents.h (talk) 16:07, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 February 2019

Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The entomology for Parayagraj has been found correctly and with source. I would like to undo the mistake.. let me edit. Source is at https://livehindustan.com/astrology/story-allahabad-named-prayagraj-know-its-meaning-and-astrology-importance-2224804.amp.html

Prayagraj means The land where first Yag was performed. Pra = first yag means ritual. and please post this entomology before the entomology for word Allahabad Includents.h (talk) 10:04, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

  Already done DBigXrayᗙ 21:02, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 February 2019

Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

ENGLISH AS AN OFFICAL LANGUAGE Base864 (talk) 11:11, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

You don't provide any evidence for your claim. Therefore I turn down your request. -- Hoary (talk) 11:59, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

New Name

Latest comment: 5 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Looks like Central Govt order was not necessary and a State Law was passed. I can't wrap my head around why it's taking so long to change title name. The last thing we want is Wikipedia being biased.

External News Source page with official Uttar Pradesh state govt circular transcripts.

This news source has transcripts of Official State Government circulars ordering for the new name. Wikiboy2364 (talk) 17:30, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Wikiboy2364, Please read WP:COMMONNAME and then explain it to me why this article should be renamed. --DBigXrayᗙ 18:01, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Now Allahabad is not present on earth. Please correct information give to all. Before 1664 Prayagraj Present and still present. Govt of India and Govt of UP announced that use of the Name Allahabad is fully illegal. Please correct it and check on https://india.gov.in and Govt of UP website S.P.Verma (talk) 19:34, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 April 2019

Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Please change the name from Allahabad to Prayagraj so that people can easily identify the name 103.5.135.102 (talk) 06:35, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Please provide concrete reasons why the current name is not easily identifiable. – Ammarpad (talk) 07:26, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Wrong Information: Yamuna Bridge is not India's longest cable stayed bridge

Latest comment: 5 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion

Transport section mentions "India's longest cable-stayed bridge, the New Yamuna Bridge (built 2001–04), is in Allahabad and connects the city to the suburb of Naini across the Yamuna." This information is wrong, Vidyasagar Setu in Kolkata currently holds the record for being the longest cable-stayed bridge in India. Yamuna bridge stands at 3rd position. Refer Wikipedia article: List of bridges in India Correction is required. @DBigXray: if you can do so. AutoRectify (talk) 12:43, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

AutoRectify Can you please provide a reliable source stating that it is the longest, I did a quick google search and found that a new one in Gujarat is claimed to be the longest. looking at the length of the bridge this Yamuna bridge looks longer than the VS Setu. --DBigXrayᗙ 05:38, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
@DBigXray: It's currently not clear which bridge in India is the longest, due to lack of any media research. But one thing is for sure that Vidyasagar's bridge length is longer than that Allahabad's Yamuna bridge, if we are talking about the cable-stayed bridges. Length of cable-stayed bridges is determined by the portion of bridge that hangs on cables and excludes approach roads and miscellaneous portions. In other words, comparison can be done directly considering the length of their longest span, provided the bridges under consideration have equal number of supporting pillars for cables. Both these bridges have two main pillars for cables to support the bridges, but Vidyasagar's span length is longer than that of Yamuna Bridge's in Allahabad. (457 m and 260 m respectively). AutoRectify (talk) 06:15, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
User:AutoRectify Thanks for the explanation, though you may be correct but we will still need a reliable source stating the same and claiming the same. Nevertheless as you requested here, I have now removed all mentions of longest cable stayed bridge per WP:V since no reliable source claiming the same for Allahabad bridge was provided. Please let me know if I missed any.--DBigXrayᗙ 06:30, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
@DBigXray: Yes, we can't support a self-calculated conclusion. Unless we get a source with verification, we should just not use the adjective "Longest" in the article. That would do...AutoRectify (talk) 17:07, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
If this 3rd Narmada Bridge is relevant, please see.-Nizil (talk) 07:03, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2019

Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Change "Allahabad officially known as Prayagraj" to "Prayagraj formerly known as Allahabad" 203.110.242.25 (talk) 05:10, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

  Not done: See above. – Ammarpad (talk) 06:24, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Astana became Nur-Sultan

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

If the same rules are to be applied to all Wikipedia articles then why was the change of name for the Capital of Kazakhstan possible but not for Prayagraj?

When you type "Allahabad" on Google Maps, it sends you to Prayagraj [1]

The official website of the district is called "Prayagraj District" by the state government.[2]

Manish2542 (talk) 12:15, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2019

Latest comment: 5 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

There is no city by the name of Allahabad. Its name has been formally changed to Prayag. Therefore, the page should be renamed to Prayag and Allahabad should direct to this page. Deepakkosmos (talk) 09:00, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

  Not done: page move requests should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves. That said, please see WP:COMMONNAME: "Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's 'official' name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources)." ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 14:08, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Google Map now identifies only Prayagraj even when you type in Allahabad. [3] Manish2542 (talk) 12:22, 4 May 2019 (UTC)


It is strange that every Hindi News channel of Uttar Pradesh and National News Channels of India refers to Prayagraj as Prayagraj.. If you have access to Indian Television Channels go and watch.. and My grandmother today went to Prayagraj for the holy mela of Kumbh she also referred to it as Prayag.. I think its main name should be Prayagraj and then Allahabad in brackets. I am saying on the basic of facts.Includents.h (talk) 15:38, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 July 2019

Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The name of this city has officially been changed. So, I was wondering why the title of the article is the old name of the city. I would like a scholar to make appropriate changes to the article. Thanks Vshl33 (talk) 02:36, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

  Not done:This request merely repeats others that have been made above. Before repeating it yet again, please read "Time to revisit name?" (currently above), and persuasively point out how this discussion is outdated or otherwise defective. -- Hoary (talk) 03:26, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Blue

Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Just curious, but why is the text of Talk:Allahabad/Archive 1 blue? DeluxeVegan (talk) 06:56, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

DeluxeVegan, I have fixed the faulty sign of User:Yoursvivek here diff--DBigXrayᗙ 07:39, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Regarding the name.

Latest comment: 5 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Rant by SPA about new name

The official name was changed, all modern maps use the new name, and most Indian media uses the new name. By requiring that western media use the new name for it to be considered for a wiki name change, you are denying an entire country its autonomy. Is the Indian government beholden to US media? No? Then they have no control over the name. Don't try to use the language argument either, as most Indian media in the English language uses the new name.

Besides, is Wikipedia a website for everyone, or only Americans? I was under the impression that Wikipedia was intended to be a knowledge database, an encyclopedia, that would cater to anyone looking for information, without political or national bias. This includes Indians. I think the resistance to this change is based on many wikipedia users holding a western-centric viewpoint that ignores the stance of everyone else, and that's not desirable if this website is intended to be used by everyone. I don't meant any disrespect to anyone but I will call out bias where I see it.

Thank you for your time. --Usernamehere1234 (talk) 22:41, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Usernamehere1234, Thanks for your comnment. This is not about Western bias, or any kind of bias. It is about following the name commonly in use, and not the official name. You could make an argument here based on your previous comment that "most Indian media in the English language uses the new name"; is that true? Do you have some evidence to back up that claim? If so, by all means present it. We rely on evidence from reliable sources, and not on our own, impressionistic views. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 09:38, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Collapsing. The OP is an WP:SPA who apparently registered solely in order to leave this, their only contribution to Wikipedia. Mathglot (talk) 04:59, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Ancient/Medieval history

Latest comment: 5 years ago8 comments3 people in discussion

In the last stable (Sept 30 2019) version of this article, the following is odd (paragraph breaks removed for compactness here), "The Puranas record that Yayati left Allahabad and conquered the region of Saptha Sindhu.[41] His five sons (Yadu, Druhyu, Puru, Anu and Turvashu) founded the main tribes of the Rigveda.[42] Lord Rama, the protagonist of the Ramayana, spent time at the Ashram of Sage Bharadwaj before travelling to nearby Chitrakoot.[43] When people first settled in what they called the Āryāvarta (or Madhyadesha), Allahabad (then Kaushambi) was an important part of their territory.[44] The Kurus, rulers of Hastinapur (near present-day Delhi), established the town of Kaushambi near Allahabad.[45] They shifted their capital to Kaushambi when Hastinapur was destroyed by floods.[44] The Doab region, which includes Allahabad, was controlled by a succession of empires and dynasties.[46] The area became part of the Maurya and Gupta Empires from the east and the Kushan Empire from the west before being governed by Kannauj during the 15th century.[44] The city was the site of Maratha incursions before India was colonised.[46]"

It is odd, in part because the relevance to the topic is unclear / tangential. The sourcing is weak too, and some references such as [44] above (Smith) state the opposite of what our article states. Smith, on page 169 (second para), is clearly saying Kanauj and Prayag were different places. Suggest trimming/rewriting this part from this GA-level article. I await comments/objections. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 15:49, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

@Ms Sarah Welch: Hi, I see an undefined ref name. Are you going to fill it or it is something not intended for this article, got here by mistake? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:05, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
I will fix it in the next few minutes. Thanks, Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 16:13, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
(unrelated, ps) On Allahabad vs Prayag. If the historical text/source uses Prayag, Alhabas, Ilahabas, Ilahabad, or Allahabad, we should mention that term. We should not imply that an ancient Buddhist text/memoir or Hindu text used the term Allahabad. Similarly, we should not imply a post-Akbar era Muslim text used the term Prayag, if it did not (the Ain-i-Akbari uses both, in such cases both are worth mentioning). Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 16:13, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
The "History" and the "Etymology" sections are exempt from this WP:COMMONAME, but everything else is, IMO. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:21, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
Indeed. I will trim it down, heavily. If additional persuasive comments are forthcoming, we can always add some or all of it back. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 01:24, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
  • @Ms Sarah Welch: MSW, the antiquity section needs some more work. Much of the material is drawn from mythological sources but is presented as historical facts (unless I'm misunderstanding what is or is not mythology). For example, Excavations have revealed Northern Black Polished Ware dating to 600–700 BCE.[38] The Puranas record that Yayati left Allahabad and conquered the region of Saptha Sindhu.[41] His five sons (Yadu, Druhyu, Puru, Anu and Turvashu) founded the main tribes of the Rigveda.[42] Lord Rama, the protagonist of the Ramayana, spent time at the Ashram of Sage Bharadwaj before travelling to nearby Chitrakoot.[43] conflates archeological findings (presumably factual) with material from the Puranas (I assume mythological). It also gives the impression that Rama was a historical figure. Similarly, much of the previous two paragraphs doesn't clearly separate mythology from history, at least as far as I can see. It would be helpful if the line between mythology and history was made clearer in the text. --regentspark (comment) 01:35, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
Indeed, RegentsPark. I have taken it all out for now, clarified it is the epic and a legend. I feel that the whole History section is big, too big. I would prefer we trim the whole section (by 50%?) – including the parts I have added in last day or two – down to a more clear, concise form. 01:59, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I am leaving in "Excavations have revealed Northern Black Polished Ware dating to 600–700 BCE" part, for now, per WP:AGF. I have not finished reading Dubey's publication and context etc, but Dubey is cited by Kama Maclean and other scholars. If someone else has looked into it, please feel free to add/revise/remove. Everyone's collaborative participation is most welcome, Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 02:07, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
  1. ^ https://www.google.com/maps/place/Prayagraj,+Uttar+Pradesh,+India/@25.4025075,81.6614967,11z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x398534c9b20bd49f:0xa2237856ad4041a!8m2!3d25.4358011!4d81.846311
  2. ^ https://prayagraj.nic.in/
  3. ^ https://www.google.com/maps/place/Prayagraj,+Uttar+Pradesh,+India/@25.4025075,81.6614967,11z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x398534c9b20bd49f:0xa2237856ad4041a!8m2!3d25.4358011!4d81.846311
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Prayagraj/Archive_1&oldid=1151534333"