Talk:Bangalore

Demographics

Changing from opinion to actual statement based on the reference. Aligning to the demographics data as presented by the reference no 85.

Adding the timestamp, so that the post may be archived. Vanjagenije (talk) 01:37, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Requested move [5] 18 October 2014

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: consensus not to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 18:58, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

---

Bangalore → Bengaluru – Government of India on 17-Oct-2014 cleared renaming 12 cities and towns of the Karnataka state, eight years after receiving a proposal from Karnataka government, Bangalore as Bengaluru. varma (talk) 11:50, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

• Oppose WP:COMMONNAME. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 18:59, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose Not the commonly recognised name in India or, importantly for a global city, abroad. We don't always use official names in article titles. —innotata 22:45, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose WP:COMMONNAME in India is still Bangalore. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:11, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:55, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose as per everyone else rightly quoting WP:COMMONNAME. If the majority of reliable sources start using the name Bengaluru then that's when this should be moved. Zarcadia (talk) 17:17, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

- varma (talk) 11:50, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

• Last formal Requested Move discussion at [1].

References

Still hesitating!

I wonder why are we still hesitating to change the name of the article from Bangalore to Bengaluru. The city is Bengaluru, formerly known as Bangalore. Kanchanamala (talk) 21:33, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

• A name change here is not going to happen for some time. For a further comment, see [2]. Instead of spending time proposing a name change here there are more useful exercises that could be carried out. For instance to ensure that the state and local governments always use Kannada for its communication its citizens rather than English (see most Karnataka district websites, town corporation websites). Or to help make the weak Kannada wikipedia more authoritative and useful. If Kannada usage is confident and well established, it will not matter that other languages use a different pronunciation mediated through their own speech patterns. Imc (talk) 08:59, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

• Name changes become part of common lingo over time. Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata, Pune are now common names. Let time lapse. In all the "new" names, Bengaluru is already catching up in English sources like Lonely Planet, Frommers, Google maps noting it. However, still majority of Indian newspapers and other sources use Bangalore. Till we see a change of policy in these sources, we need to retain Bangalore and other 11 names, even though they are officially changed.--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 10:00, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested Move 6

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Consensus to not move. The previous proposal was closed with consensus to not move just a few days ago. Nothing new here. Give it a rest. Speedy close per WP:SNOW. Establish a semblance of consensus favoring a move on the talk page before making another disruptive proposal. (non-admin closure) В²C ☎ 22:40, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

---

Bangalore → Bengaluru – As the GOI accepted to change the official name of the city, I am proposing this move. I very much know that this request might go down the drain just like the previous request that was raised a few days ago. One of the editor who opposed the move said "Name changes become part of common lingo over time". I don't agree. May be the editor should have cared to check the date when Archbishop Bergoglio or the other variants were moved to Pope Francis, that move did not take a lot of time. So the article of a head of religious sect is moved very quickly but article about Indian city cannot be moved after the official change in name, lets talk about Hippocracy here (Please don't use OSE, it is the case of moving the article to a new name and that is what is being requested here). Also I don't think it is of any business of other editors to advice the fellow editors what social cause one should pursue (asking others to ensure that the governments use Kannada Language, ppl are here to edit Wikipedia. Those advices can be used on some other forums) Thanks sarvajna (talk) 19:55, 31 October 2014 (UTC) .

• Oppose per all the reasons listed in the move discussion closed just a week ago. sarvajna, what made you think this was a good idea? Bergoglio was moved quickly because basically every source in the world started to refer to this previously fairly obscure person as Pope Francis --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:12, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

NeilN so your point is that we can rename the article when sources start using Bengaluru? Well I will get back with the sources from/after Nov 1 (It is 2 AM so not many updates in the news sources can be expected) -sarvajna (talk) 20:39, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

No, not when they start. It's when sources use it enough that the average English speaker will recognize it as the preferred name. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:46, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) How will you determine "when sources use it enough that the average English speaker will recognize it as the preferred name" ? -sarvajna (talk) 20:51, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Why the hurry? The name of the capital of Denmark is København in Danish, yet the articles about that city are named Copenhagen on the English WP, Kopenhagen on the German WP, Copenhague on the French WP and Köpenhamn on the Swedish WP, just to give a few examples for Copenhagen. And to give a few examples for other cities the capital of the UK, London, is named Londres on the French WP and Londra on the Italian WP, and the Italian city of Milano is named Milan on the English WP and Mailand on the German WP. A multitude of different names in different languages (and there are hundreds of cities all over Europe that have different names in different languages), yet the people living in those cities don't feel the least bothered by it, so why should you feel bothered by having an article named Bangalore, the common name in English, about the city you know as Bengaluru? Thomas.W ^talk 21:08, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Prevalence of Bengaluru over Bangalore in published sources worldwide without having to tack on (formerly Bangalore) every time. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:10, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. Thomas.W ^talk 20:49, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Move requested: Consensus needs to be determined

The name of the city has been changed,[3] the previous move discussion was aborted, the English name of the city has been changed not the Kannada name, so comparison with Copenhagen/ and it's native name are fatuous. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 03:59, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Cologne/ London etc are inappropriate examples, better comparison would be Orissa x Odisha. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 04:10, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

• The English name has not been changed in common use, which is what matters per WP:COMMONNAME. Thomas.W ^talk 08:28, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
  • See 6.2 in COMMONNAME: "The title of an article on a topic that has strong ties to a particular English-speaking nation should use the variety of English appropriate for that nation..." Like Guangzhou as against the more common Canton.
  • Anyhow what is the measure of common use? TOI, the world's largest English language daily uses the new name in its dateline line. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 10:01, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
    • The measure of most common use is subjective - but a consensus of WP editors looking at usage in reliable sources (WP:SOURCES) needs to agree that common usage has shifted, and this needs to be verified in a formal RM after there is evidence that a significant number of WP editors are holding that opinion about usage. What is this "world's largest English language daily"? The Times of India? No. It has to be adopted by the main sources in England, US, Australia - where the primary language is English. Usage in the Times of India is biased by usage in other languages there. --В²C ☎ 00:02, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
      • If the Times of India isn't the world's largest circulation English daily then what is?
        English is the primary language in India, though serving as a lingua franca. Indian English is a recognised variant and English usage in India is all that matters per WP:ENGVAR. Timrollpickering (talk) 10:21, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
• Move page. Comments by Thomas.W, NeilN and others about COMMONNAME and using Cologne or København are very valid. However, this is not what has happened in the past to other Indian cities. Calcutta is now Kolkata (2001). Bombay is now Mumbai (1995). Madras is now Chennai (1996). Orissa is now Odisha (2011).

• Odisha was the most recent city to change names before yesterday's changes.
• On the Odisha's talk page, COMMONNAME was used for oppose.
• WP:ENGVAR was the main support point. Specifically, MOS:TIES, which states. An article on a topic that has strong ties to a particular English-speaking nation should use the English of that nation. ... Taj Mahal (Indian English). The Taj Mahal example has since been removed.

• Article should be moved to its new name based on (1) past history that all other name changes of cities in India now have the page title by their new name and (2) India is an English speaking nation, thus per WP:ENGVAR, cities should be known by the their new English name. Better ping an actual Indian @Titodutta: and one who thinks he is @Sitush: to get info from an Indian perspective. Bgwhite (talk) 07:15, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
  • As a counterpoint, I refer you to the discussion on Talk:Ganges, which has not been renamed Ganga. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 07:24, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
    • It is a river and not a city. I'm specifically referring to cities because every city that has been renamed is now known by their new name, atleast according to Renaming of cities in India. Bgwhite (talk) 07:40, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
      • According to that article, past renamings happened quite a while ago. I looked at some of the 2014 renamings - all the move proposals were rejected. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 08:26, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
        • I think the last general renaming was in 2011. There were 11 cities renamed on November 1, 2014. The talk pages I looked at were discussed on October 18, 2014, before the official name change. All had the same few people saying oppose. All used COMMONNAME as the reason to oppose. None of the discussions talked about what happened in the past. None brought up ENGVAR. All the past moves were done because of ENGVAR.

There is also Manual of Style/India-related articles that says, Use only Indian English spellings as per the guidelines for India related pages.. Indian English is now Bengaluru. Bgwhite (talk) 09:23, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

@Bgwhite:

• Indian English spellings refers to spellings of words (such as those ending in -our, ise etc) where Indian English differs from American English (and, matches British English). IMO it is not relevant to this case (of course usage in India will contribute to determination of common name; it just won't override overall usage in English). Update: I see from this discussion that you pointed to, that not everyone agrees with my, obviously correct, reading :)
• Bengaluru is certainly the official name of the city from Nov 1st. But usage of the name (even in India, and esp. within the city itself where people are most acclimated to the non-official name) can take years to catch up; for example, Indian Express still has a "Bangalore section" with all news items refering to the city as Bangalore, even though the lead item is "Bangalore is now Bengaluru".
• Personal observation: Howrah Bridge is still known by that name almost 50 years after its official name was changed to Rabindra Setu; it took almost a decade for usage of the name Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus to overtake Victoria Terminus. However newer city names do tend to be adopted more quickly, perhaps because a significant segment of the population favours the newer name in any case.
• Personally I am indifferent to which name to use as the article title, since a redirect will send the reader to the right place anyway, and the lede sentence will inform them of the alternate names. However, if we are to move this page to Bengaluru, it would be best to start a formal, well-advertised, move request. It may also make sense to start a single move request for the 11-newly named cities at WT:INB since the arguments are likely to be similar.

Abecedare (talk) 17:30, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

• YES PLEASE Move the page. I was discussing it a long ago. 1 --Tito☸Dutta 10:13, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
• Bengaluru. It is supported in published sources and common "enough", we need not wait for the search result # in Google to be numerically greter. A significant search result is a good indicator that the new name has caught up. --AmritasyaPutra^T 05:17, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Comment:@Bgwhite:@Born2cycle:@Abecedare: @All: (1)It is not important what Howrah bridge is called in street lingua, while discussing to an article title change , as there are established conventions on how to effect the change. (2)There is a supplement called "Bombay Times" decades after Bombay was renamed as Mumbai, the "Bangalore Section" doesn't come in the way of renaming the title of this article from Bangalore to the new one. (3) I oppose a wholesale move in principal, as the process for renaming Bangalore has beeb initiated by the state government in 2007, whereas for the other cities it started much later, and thus the merits for Bangalore would be different from the merits for other article titles. (4) The name has not to be adopted in USA/ or UK or Australia, it is adequate that it be adopted in the English of the subject area, for the variation to be adopted by Wikipedia. (5) The Cologne or København argument isn't valid as the spelling for the change from Bangalore has been in English and not in Kannada. (6) I see that the consensus is for a formal move proposal. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 05:43, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

• Move page move the page , I do not see why multiple discussion have to be closed, It would be like wikipedia depecting wrong information Shrikanthv (talk) 08:30, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
• Move Page When it is officially changed by the Indian Government itself I don't see any reason to oppose it.--Pratyya ^(Hello!) 14:21, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

I still wonder why are we still hesitating to change the name of the article from Bangalore to Bengaluru. The city is Bengaluru, formerly known as Bangalore. Kanchanamala (talk) 22:58, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

RFC on recent renaming of 11 Indian cities

Discussion can be found here. Bgwhite (talk) 08:20, 3 November 2014 (UTC)