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

The result of the move request was: not moved due to a consensus being made. I suggest if waiting 1-2 months for it to become common usage before doing this again Globetrotter30 (talk) 18:57, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Aurangabad → Chhatrapati SambhajinagarChhatrapati Sambhajinagar – Please place your rationale for the proposed move here. iamjaydatt (talk) 13:04, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, the official renaming of Aurangabad to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar has been completed through due legal process, including approval by the Union Ministry of Home Affairs and validation by the Bombay High Court. However, I understand that Wikipedia is not a government publication and is not legally bound to adopt official names immediately.

Wikipedia’s article titles are governed by WP:COMMONNAME, which prioritizes the name most commonly used in reliable, independent English-language sources, rather than official or legal status alone. For this reason, I am not asserting that Wikipedia is required to rename the article at this time, nor that it would be violating any law by retaining the title “Aurangabad”.

My intention in raising this discussion is to:

• Ensure the lead section accurately reflects the current official and legal name
• Present verifiable information supported by high-quality secondary sources
• Allow community consensus to determine whether and when a page move would be appropriate, based on evolving common usage

I fully respect that a page move should only occur if consensus supports it under WP:COMMONNAME, and I am open to waiting until usage in reliable English-language sources more clearly favors “Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar”.

Thank you for the constructive discussion. iamjaydatt (talk) 13:11, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agree I suggest a bar change to Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar would be fitting. Also because now it is official by the Govt of Maharashtra, it is being used in Govt websites and is being used by Govt of India. I just suggest putting Aurangabad in brackets. That’s all Globetrotter30 (talk) 17:51, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Pigsonthewing sir, this topic concerns the renaming of Aurangabad to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar (CS). The change was made to honour Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj and to reflect the city’s historical and cultural association with Maratha heritage. The name Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar is now widely used and recognised in common usage and reliable references. Kindly review the discussion above and consider the points shared here while participating further in this topic. iamjaydatt (talk) 12:02, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need to call em sir, but why have you pinged me? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:44, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - The current name of the article "Aurangabad" is still heavily used in English reliable news media. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 20:00, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I understand that, it’s like changing the name of Bombay to Mumbai, Calcutta to Kolkata, Madras to Chennai. I suggest Wikipedia follow the same steps as they did on the Prayagraj article on the name change from Allahabad Globetrotter30 (talk) 20:59, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Hey, What's your problem now Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar is Common Name of Aurangabad, As WP:COMMONNAME Terms WikiPedia always follow COMMON Name so the article should be need to update or move to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar WikiPedia. iamjaydatt (talk) 07:50, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  Yeah, I agree completely with @iamjaydatt as Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar is now used more than Aurangabad. I suggest, following the lead on the Praygraj article where after discussion and deliberation, Prayagraj was now used, instead of Allahabad. In the arrival editors wrote, Prayagraj known formerly and colloquially as Allahabad, and we can replicate that, by saying Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar known formerly and colloquially as Aurangabad. The only issue now with me is whether we should split it up into three separate words? Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar or Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar? Globetrotter30 (talk) 09:09, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

	This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
*::::@Globetrotter30 “Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar” is correct because it is the commonly accepted and consistently used form of the name in public usage. It follows the established naming pattern where the honorific name and the place name are written together as a single proper noun. This form is widely seen in references, media usage, and general written communication, making Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar the standard and recognizable name, while spaced versions are considered informal variations. iamjaydatt (talk) 11:30, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• @Jay10092006, Refrain from making personal attacks lest you want to end up at WP:ANI. Wikipedia is a collaborative project, hence you shouldn't expect everyone to support your perspective. Now coming to my stance, go through WP:NAMECHANGES (the subsection within WP:COMMONAME). It clearly states : If, on the other hand, reliable sources written after the name change is announced continue to use the established name when discussing the article topic in the present day, Wikipedia should continue to do so as well, as described above at § Use commonly recognizable names.. As I said, the term 'Aurangabad' is still heavily used in reliable media. Below are a few reliable sources (within the last few months) which use the 'Aurangabad':

• Govt to set up skill centre at Aurangabad industrial area in Maharashtra (Economic Times)
• Blinded by love for uncle, woman gets her husband killed 45 days after wedding (India Today)
• 20,000 sq ft Skill Development Centre to be set in Aurangabad Industrial City in partnership with CII; MoU next week (ANI)
• ‘I survived because I wasn’t in the rear’: 1993 Aurangabad air crash survivor recalls fiery tragedy (New Indian Express)
• Hotel Review: Dhyaana Farms, Maharashtra (Outlook)
• Disturbed, shocked: Court anguished after 9 girls go missing from children's home (India Today)
• Aurangabad (Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar) Election Results 2025: Mahayuti alliance leads (India TV News)
• Even Maharahstra Government sites have links like these - Shantishwar Multistate Co-op Credit Society Ltd., Aurangabad – Election Schedule ; use the term.

Also new users who are nowhere to be found editing in the topic area all of sudden proposing a move is suspect, not to mention someone like User:Globetrotter30, who's first edit is to "agree" to this move. What are the odds that the these IDs are not socks/meats? Ping @RegentsPark, EarthDude, Arjayay, Vanamonde93, Black Kite, Fowler&fowler, Newslinger, C.Fred, Kautilya3, and UnpetitproleX: - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:42, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm on wikivoyage and this is also a valid matter by Wikivoyage as well. I don't have a sock/meat ID. @Fylindfotberserk

https://www.britannica.com/place/Chhatrapati-Sambhajinagar

https://www.sahapedia.org/my-city-my-heritage/celebrating-chhatrapati-sambhajinagar

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/aurangabad/chhatrapati-sambhajinagar-city-pipeline-suffers-another-breach-water-supply-schedule-to-be-affected/articleshow/122588616.cms

https://www.freepressjournal.in/pune/chhatrapati-sambhajinagar-cyber-expert-dr-dhananjay-deshpande-urges-citizens-to-stay-alert-against-frauds

https://www.rediff.com/news/report/bjp-sena-together-in-mumbai-divided-in-pune-sambhajinagar/20251230.htm

https://www.devdiscourse.com/article/politics/3744992-turbulence-in-mahayuti-bjp-and-shiv-sena-go-solo-in-upcoming-civic-polls

However, maybe a compromise could be made

Aurangabad/Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar on the title of the page Globetrotter30 (talk) 10:53, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

We do not name articles as ABC/XYZ. That kind of thing is possible in the lead sentences or article bodies. We already have such an arrangement in this article. The Britannica, Shapedia and Devdiscourse links are not reliable. Britannica is WP:TERTIARY while the rest are blog like sources. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:25, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk The sources you have provided are not directly related to the topic being discussed on this talk page. They do not address the specific subject under consideration.

Using these sources is similar to linking information about the Moon when the discussion is about planets—while they may be broadly related, they do not provide relevant or meaningful support for the point being made. iamjaydatt (talk) 11:20, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Last time I checked, moons and planets do not share names. The links I've provided are relevant. The name 'Aurangabad' (pertaining to the location) is clearly mentioned. Even the official Maharashtra government link above clearly mentions it. On the other hand, the sources you provided are about the 'renaming', obviously there would be a bias since both terms would show up in those articles. We can argue both for and against the move citing those articles. Not a good strategy to look for common names. We should be focussing on unrelated cases (not about renaming) to adequately gauge the actual level of usage of the terms . Besides, my point is about the term 'Aurangabad' being 'still heavily used', for which I've provided multiple RS unrelaed to 'renaming'. WP:NAMECHANGES dictates that Wikipedia should continue to established names (Aurangabad) in such cases, not to mention it is the 'commonly recognizable name' on a global level. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:25, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose No evidence that the proposed name is the common name. FWIW, out of curiosity, I visited Indigo's booking site and was unable to find flights to either Chhatrapati Shambajinagar or just plain Shambajinagar. Plenty of flights were available to Aurangabad. If the town's name has been officially changed, perhaps a bit of patience while the new name catches on is warranted? RegentsPark (comment) 16:57, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

	This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
*:Thank you for the example. Airline booking systems are not, by themselves, reliable indicators of article naming under Wikipedia policy. Commercial platforms often lag behind official changes due to internal coding, IATA/ICAO databases, and legacy system constraints, and they frequently retain former names long after official renamings. Under WP:COMMONNAME, the relevant measure is usage in reliable, independent sources, not operational convenience in third-party booking tools. Since the official renaming, major national and regional newspapers, government notifications, and court reporting consistently use “Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar” as the current name, with Aurangabad treated as the former or historical name. Wikipedia does not require that all commercial or technical systems adopt a new name before recognizing it. Many renamed cities worldwide continued to appear under legacy names in ticketing and logistics systems for extended periods while Wikipedia reflected the legally established name. That said, transitional clarity is important. Retaining Aurangabad prominently as the former name in the lead and throughout the article addresses reader familiarity while remaining consistent with current, verifiable usage. If editors have recent, high-quality sources demonstrating that authoritative publications predominantly continue to use Aurangabad after the official renaming and judicial affirmation, those sources would be useful to review. Absent that, policy favors reflecting the current official name supported by reliable sources, rather than waiting for all legacy systems to update. iamjaydatt (talk) 17:53, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose, until common usage has caught up to the legal change. Wikipedia follows other sources in such matters; we do not lead the trend. When Bangalore was renamed to Bengaluru, we did not move our article; that happened ten years later. I imagine at some point popular usage will shift, and we can reassess this, but as Fylindfotberserk shows above the older name remains the common one. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:39, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

	This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
*:Thank you for raising the Bengaluru comparison. It is worth noting that Wikipedia’s handling of renamings has evolved, and the Bengaluru move reflects older consensus practices rather than a binding precedent. More recent moves (for example, Prayagraj, Ayodhya district, and Dharashiv) were evaluated based on current reliable-source usage, not a fixed waiting period. WP:COMMONNAME does not require a name to dominate informal speech or commercial legacy systems; it asks which name is most commonly used in authoritative, independent, reliable sources at present. Since the renaming, major national newspapers, state communications, and court reporting consistently use “Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar” as the current name, with Aurangabad identified as the former name. The airline and booking-system examples illustrate lag in technical databases rather than prevailing encyclopedic usage. Wikipedia has generally treated such platforms as poor indicators of common name, given their well-documented delays in updating official changes. Reader familiarity can be fully addressed by retaining Aurangabad prominently in the lead and throughout the article as the former name. That approach balances accessibility with accuracy, without requiring Wikipedia to wait for all legacy usage to converge. If there are recent, high-quality sources demonstrating that Aurangabad remains the dominant term in authoritative coverage after the official renaming and judicial affirmation, those would be valuable to review. Otherwise, current policy and recent precedent support reflecting the name most used by reliable sources today. iamjaydatt (talk) 17:54, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - I see little evidence that common usage has changed significantly at this point. The proposer -- or more accurately, the LLM they are clearly using to inappropriately speak for them -- continually asserts that it has, without any real concrete evidence provided. As such, I see no reason to change things up at this time, though obviously that can change in the future. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 18:05, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  I believe a consensus is made, to oppose? So then, the name change will not pass. And therefore I will close this attempted move Globetrotter30 (talk) 18:53, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  I am tring my best to do this but following editors are not from Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar that's reason they can't understand us. iamjaydatt (talk) 18:57, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]