Merger proposalEdit

No consensus for merging. Vanjagenije (talk) 16:53, 20 March 2019 (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.

I propose to merge Nurzhol Boulevard into Astana. I think that the content in the Nurzhol Boulevard article can easily be explained in the context of Astana, and that this shouldn't cause any serious article size concerns. PepperBeast (talk) 19:41, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Strong oppose. That's like merging Unter den Linden into the Berlin article. J 1982 (talk) 15:08, 20 March 2019 (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.

Merger proposal 2Edit

No consensus for merging. Vanjagenije (talk) 16:55, 20 March 2019 (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.

I propose to merge Independence Square, Astana into Astana. I think that the content in the Independence Square article can easily be explained in the context of Astana, and that this shouldn't cause any serious article size concerns. PepperBeast (talk) 19:41, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Strong oppose. That's like merging Trafalgar Square into the London article. J 1982 (talk) 15:07, 20 March 2019 (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.

Requested move 20 March 2019Edit

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 section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus. From the discussion below, it is clear that there aren't enough sources yet to make a definitive determination that WP:NAMECHANGES applies, and the new name is now common in reliable sources. I therefore suggest we wait for some months until enough new English sources that aren't just covering the name change are available.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:57, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

AstanaNur-Sultan – Earlier today, the parliament of Kazakhstan officially voted to rename the capital Astana to Nursultan Nur-Sultan. Sources: KazInform, Associated Press, Deutsche Welle AFP, BBC Johndavies837 (talk) 12:02, 20 March 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. King of ♠ 03:32, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

I've updated the article to reflect the new name, but other pages and categories should be changed as well. For example Sport in Astana, Independence Square, Astana, Mayor of Astana, List of people from Astana, etc. Johndavies837 (talk) 12:31, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
27 MARCH UPDATE: When I posted this request, reliable sources said the new name was Nursultan, but after the president signed a decree we now know the name is Nur-Sultan. I propose Nur-Sultan as the new page title. Because some of you raised WP:COMMONNAME, I looked at a number of sources today and found that international media have stopped calling the capital by its old name. Unfortunately, there isn't a lot of news coverage about Kazakhstan, but I was able to make a list of examples: All of them are stories which are unrelated to the name change itself. I should add that Astana, the old name, simply means "capital" in Kazakh, so it would not be surprising if people in Kazakhstan continue to use it:
- Pinging editors who were previously opposed due to WP:COMMONNAME or lack of sources: Last1in, Cordyceps-Zombie, Jonathunder, Otebig, Selerian, Fylindfotberserk, Aotearoa, George6996, Rxtreme, ChelseaFunNumberOne, hoising, ·maunus, My very best wishes, Hzh, Patrick, Ymblanter, Kudzu1, Gazamp, Fixer88, ·maunus, Inter&anthro,  pythoncoder , Daß, Rsrikanth05
Johndavies837 (talk) 00:59, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
I stand with my Strong Oppose. I agree that we are starting to see the new name floated in certain sources, but some of the source themselves seem to be cautious over whether the new name is likely to 'stick'. Sorry, but still WP:TOOSOON. Further, what could possibly be the rush here? I just don't see a high probability that people will be confused by the name that appears on printed maps? At most, a redir of Nur-Sultan to the current article title makes far more sense. Perhaps TOOSOON is not specific enough. Try WP:CHILL; as an encyclopaedia, we have the luxury of waiting to see if this becomes the common name or ends up as a new Google, Kansas. Last1in (talk) 11:56, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
May end being just a PR stunt, for Nursultan Nazarbayev himself (he rejected [1] such initiatives previously), to step in and "scold" his supporters for bringing the worship too far, and as such establish himself as a "wise father of nation" type of figure. Nitekatt (talk) 14:06, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
The article you linked to is from 2016 when a name change was proposed, not approved. Here is a quote from today's BBC article: "Mr Tokayev then proposed changing Astana's name in honour of the first president and, shortly afterwards, parliament adopted a law making the renaming official." Johndavies837 (talk) 14:40, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment: The article "Nursultan" is a disambiguation for a given name and lists some notable Kazakh people who use this given name, including the first President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev. However, the article "Astana" mainly talks about the capital of Kazakhstan from 1997. Thus, if the article "Astana" 's title can be changed to "Nursultan (city)", it is most likely to win most supports for this page move request. ~~2409:8900:1B12:2CBD:DB86:B10:2E78:9C42 ~~12:52, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Using "Nursultan (city)" would be fine with me, but I don't think it's necessary. There are only 3 people listed on the current page for Nursultan, one of whom is the former president and the other two are relatively minor sport figures. Your concern could be addressed by moving Nursultan to "Nursultan (given name)" or "Nursultan (disambiguation)". A note could then be added at the top of Nursultan. Johndavies837 (talk) 13:03, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
It is undoubted and unchanged that "Nursultan" is a primary topic for a given name used by some Kazakh people. Thus, it is unnecessary to move the article "Nursultan". However, as a new name for "Astana" from March 2019, "Nursultan" is only a memorial to the first President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev. Thus, if it is necessary to move the article "Astana", "Nursultan (city)" is the best title. 13:32, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
For English speakers, the city formerly known as Astana will be the primary topic. I suggest that "Nursultan" is about the city, and that the old article becomes "Nursultan (disambiguation)" --RockyMM (talk) 14:01, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Wait for sources. We shouldn't be moving the page until we have a good grasp on how reliable sources refer to the city. A few hours isn't enough to make that determination. ONR (talk) 12:58, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Exactly. Would suggest that at the most at the end of 7 days Nursultan (disambiguation) be moved out and Nursultan become WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT to Astana for the next couple of months while sources settle. But we can't move the capital at the drop of a hat. Not happening, even if IPs and new users pile on. "On 6 May 1998 it was renamed Astana, which means "capital city" in Kazakh." In ictu oculi (talk) 12:58, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
I concur. It's too early to make this move, especially since as mentioned above this may not be a permanent name change. (talk) 15:08, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment: Capital will be renamed to Nur-Sultan
  • Weak Oppose I'd say wait a bit for more sources, but in the end, I would support such a move.
I have changed my stance just a bit and am calling this WP:TOOSOON. Certainly once sources appear then definitely get my absolute support, but it's too soon for this. James-the-Charizard (talk) 15:17, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Weak Support as the sources above have convinced me to change my opinion to support. However, it might still be a bit premature to move it quickly, I would wait some more time if possible. James-the-Charizard (talk) 17:28, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Support: This name change is well sourced and official, however, I believe that this change should be delayed until the English spelling is official and it is clear that this is not a short-term change. Aelimian21 (talk) 15:22, 20 March 2019 (UTC)


  • Support: The name Astana has been changed officially as it was approved today by both houses of Kazakh parliament, I am of the opinion that the pages should not be separate in order to avoid confusion for readers and the info all merged into Nursultan page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnqazaqstan (talkcontribs) 16:04, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Strong Oppose: WP:TOOSOON and WP:COMMONNAME are pretty much all we need at this point, with special deference to the fact that the community "generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources)." It's why we have an article title of the Soviet Union instead of Soyuz Sovetskikh Sotsialisticheskikh Respublik, and why I don't have to remember to look for 's-⁠Gravenhage when I'm thinking of The Hague. I am simply not seeing any metric (google refs, cite-sources, etc.) that the new name has caught on at all, much less become "commonly used" in English-language media and reference materials. When it becomes the 'default' name of the city in common sources, then I will wholeheartedly support this change. Last1in (talk) 16:47, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
    With all due respect, that comparison to the Soviet Union was simply bad. In their own language, they commonly called it the "Советский Союз" - literally "Soviet Union." The common name in English was not different, and the name of the country was simply a translatable adjective and noun (like "United Kingdom", "United States", etc can be translated on other language Wikipedias). That comparison truly had no relevance to this discussion. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ 22:29, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
    @BrendonTheWizard: You are 100% correct and I was wrong. I retract that part of my response. It was flippant and (even worse on my personal sin-scale) poorly reasoned. My sincere apologies. I will, however, stick by WP:TOOSOON and (as noted in a response to another thread) WP:CHILL. I think it is possible (perhaps likely) that normal users will be searching for Nur-Sultan at some point, but we have the luxury of waiting to see if this change sticks. It can get ridiculous, as with the years-long and inexplicably fierce battle to keep the Myanmar article under the colonial name of Burma, but I don't think we're there yet. I'd say we should revisit this when we see printed road maps using the new name. People might change "soft" sources, but let's see if anyone is willing to pay to put it on paper. On the snarky side, I note that the city itself is still using Maybe we at least wait until City Hall feels the change is so ingrained that they need to update their own URLs? Regardless, 'wait' implies a quick resolution is in the offing; in this case, I'd expect a much longer pause, so 'oppose' seems more appropriate.Last1in (talk) 20:50, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose - If Wikipedia does not allow the renaming of a district in India from "Allahabad District", its defunct name, to "Prayagraj District", its current legal name, on the grounds that the former remains in more common usage (COMMONNAME), then by the same logic, people must oppose renaming "Astana" to "Nursultan" as the former name is in more common usage and thus its COMMONNAME. Cordyceps-Zombie (talk) 17:05, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose and wait - Per WP:TOOSOON and WP:COMMONNAME, let's wait a couple months before publications adopt this new name (if they do). Note that we still have Cabo Verde as Cape Verde despite being renamed over five years ago. Nice4What (talk) 17:41, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Strong support Why hasn't this been done already? There is no justification for not doing this, making ourselves a laughing stock. If the country decides to change its capital city's name who are we to say "wait a couple of months?" ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 18:25, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose at this time: wait for sources. Jonathunder (talk) 19:15, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Strong Support WP:DETERMINEPRIMARY - Simply move the Disambiguation page to "Nursultan (disambiguation)" - the capital city with over a million people in it is more relevant than two hockey players with the same first name, and "Nazarbayev" already redirects to Nursultan Nazarbayev. We renamed the republic of Macedonia article to North Macedonia almost instantly once it became official. Considering that this is the capital city, and world maps will have to be swiftly updated, I fail to see what makes this WP:TOOSOON. This isn't comparable to Cabo/Cape Verde, Czech/Czechia, or Swaziland/Eswatini (though note that the lattermost actually was moved) - all of the examples where TOOSOON was invoked were solely because there existed a different English language name which was prevalent; that's just not applicable here. As one last point, third party sources have certainly noticed the change: [2][3][4][5] Brendon the Wizard ✉️ 20:03, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Historically, there is no Anglicized version of this city's name. WP:COMMONNAME is more for cases where there is a clear shorthand or Anglicized name, such as Moscow instead of Moskva. This city has been renamed on three previous occasions (Akmolinsk to Tselinograd to Aqmola to Astana), and each time the new official local-language name was also quickly the name adopted in English-language sources, occasionally with minor spelling deviations due to transliteration. Since this is yet another official change which has been signed into law, and since we're already seeing reputable third-party English-language sources use the new name (as was the trend with the other instances), it makes sense to change it. Otebig (talk) 20:54, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
    • Wait Per some of the points made below, and reading various news articles, there seems to still be some uncertainty over whether the name is written Нұрсұлтан or Нұр-Сұлтан (Nursultan or Nur-Sultan). Based on that, I'm shifting to agree with the comments below that we should wait until section 2 of the Kazakhstan Constitution is updated with the new name, and then update the article's name based on how it is written there. Otebig (talk) 00:08, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose per WP:TOOSOON, although User:Otebig is right in that WP:COMMONNAME doesn't apply too much in this case (this city is not particularly on the radar for most Anglophones under any name, though I doubt such an observation is appropriate here), although in that vein it's noteworthy that we still have Ivory Coast despite the fact that the government has insisted on its French name since the 1960s. -John M Wolfson (talk) 21:40, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Comment: I'm surprised nobody's brought up WP:MPN in this discussion. I do think that if the renaming "sticks" and isn't some PR stunt then a move is warranted per it, though we'll have to wait a bit on that. -John M Wolfson (talk) 21:50, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Wait for sources. Let's not rush this. I am following the news, and it looks like the new name may be written as Nur-Sultan rather than Nursultan. We should wait until authoritative English sources are available with the established new spelling. Selerian (talk) 05:55, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment See also this related discussion. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 06:16, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Support as per User:Otebig and User:RichardWeiss.--Jack Upland (talk) 07:09, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose as per WP:TOOSOON and WP:COMMONNAME. Should wait for the new name to be more "widely known". - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:56, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose as per WP:TOOSOON and WP:COMMONNAME. Moreover we don't know when the change will come in force, and even haw the new name is spelling – some sources noted spelling Нұр-Сұлтан (Nur-Sultan) rather than Нұрсұлтан (Nursultan). Aotearoa (talk) 10:28, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose as per WP:TOOSOON. There are still internal discussions regarding the legality of passed law and other details. The decision might be repelled or amended in the near future. (George6996 12:13, 21 March 2019 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by George6996 (talkcontribs)
  • Comment: You do not need any guidelines here, the common sense is sufficient: it is just to soon. Yes, the decision has been made, but it also has to become a part of the Constitution and it takes time (a week, a month or several months – it does not matter). Changing the name of an article is a five-seconds job anyway. – KWiki (talk) 12:47, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment (Update - editors have provided sufficient sources in all relevant languages to clearly show that it is in fact Nur-Sultan) Would the editors that suggested the name might be "Nur-Sultan" and not "Nursultan" please provide the sources they are referring to? I've not seen any that say "Nur-Sultan" as of yet. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ 14:54, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
I am following Russian-language media on this closely, and there are plenty of Russian sources mentioning "Nur-Sultan" including the website of Astana city hall itself, however there is only one English source that I found ( We have to keep in mind that Kazakhstan is not an English speaking nor a very well-known country, so new information filters into the English media rather slowly. Which is another reason not to rush with Wikipedia updates. Selerian (talk) 18:58, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
I can't find any Kazakh government sources that say Нұр-Сұлтан (or Kazakh language outlets for that matter). The government websites for Kazakhstan and Astana themselves, at least as of right now, never use a hyphen (and as Firespeaker points out below, Kazakh media is using Nursultan). So the only English source that says Nur-Sultan is the English version of a Russian-language outlet? That would mean that it's fair to say there's a unanimous consensus among English sources that it's "Nursultan" and so far government sources have not said otherwise. We need not panic yet. At this time, it's very fair for us to conclude that we should be using Nursultan without a hyphen. This could very well be subject to change as more Kazakh sources become available, but per WP:CRYSTAL we can't assume that it will become closer to 50/50 or that Nur-Sultan will later become the more used version; there's currently unanimity for Nursultan. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ 19:42, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Here is a Kazakh government source that says Нұр-Сұлтан, this is the announcement on the Astana city hall website:
Also a couple of New York Times articles (in English) have just come out showing the spelling Nur-Sultan. Like I said, we should be patient - information is trickling out into English sources but slowly.
Selerian (talk) 20:05, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Selerian Your source uses Нұрcұлтан. --Schwiiz (talk) 20:09, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
No it doesn't. If you can read Kazakh, the announcement mentions Нұрcұлтан to refer to the former President of Kazakhstan, because that was his given name. But the new name for the city of Astana is shown as Нұр-Сұлтан. If you want to dispute further, please paste a specific quote from my source to support your claim. Selerian (talk) 20:16, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Support (perhaps weak) per User:Otebig, though I do understand the argument that it hasn't "caught on" yet in English language sources. Perhaps moving it and having text like "also still colloquially known by its former official name, Astana" in the first sentence might make sense. What does "catching on" mean for English-language sources that rarely talk about the place to start with? Even if it is a "PR stunt" or other temporary change as User:Nitekatt suggests, then it must be taken into consideration that it is an official and legal change—if it changes again, then the page name can change again, no? One note: calling Kazakhstan not "a very well-known country" without qualifying that could be taken as demeaning. Another note: the media in Kazakhstan is calling it "Нұрсұлтан", not "Нур-Султан" like the media in Russia. —Firespeaker (talk) 19:30, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Common name has no point here. This is a city that has changed its name several times. This is backed up by plenty of sources. The city has been voted on and came back as Nursultan. This also cannot be Too soon as it already has been voted on and is official. The city is Nursultan. I also think temporarily there should be a protection on it to preemptively stop the edit war that is going to ensue between those who put Astana and those who put Nursultan. I agree with User:BrendonTheWizard's points. Glowing regards, --Schwiiz (talk) 19:35, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Wait The Constitution still reads "The capital of Kazakhstan is Astana." (Қазақстанның елордасы Астана қаласы болып табылады.) Once the constitution has been updated, then change the article name immediately. Orthorhombic, 20:37, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Wait As previously mentioned by User:Orthorhombic, the constitution has yet to be updated. Once it is updated, then change the name from Astana to Nursultan. —SveikasVienas, 22:31, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

The constitution does not need to be updated for this to happen. The city was renamed today after the president signed a decree on this. The official decree has been published on the president's website (unfortunately only in Russian so far): YantarCoast (talk) 13:23, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Also, the official news agency of Kazakhstan has started using Nursultan: YantarCoast (talk) 13:14, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

  • Comment This is not an additional !vote on top of my existing support !vote, but I would like to add that I have no objections to using Nur-Sultan. I was initially concerned that it may only be a Russian variant (as only Russian sources seemed to use it), but now Kazakh official sources are using it as well. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ 13:39, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
  • wait. ·maunus · snunɐɯ· 13:41, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose. WP:COMMONNAME. Wait until the common usage changes and then rename. Informally speaking, it can be renamed soon again when someone else becomes new president. My very best wishes (talk) 14:32, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose for now. Sources can't even agree on the name - Nur-Sultan [6][7][8] or Nursultan - [9][10]. It's too soon to change, wait and see what happens first. Hzh (talk) 17:29, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose I have a strong preference for common names, I think we'll see in 3-6 months whether both national and major international sources (AP, AFP, Xinhua, etc) have adjusted their protocol.-- Patrick, oѺ 18:46, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Support move when it officially enters into force.--Twofortnights (talk) 19:50, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose, the Kazakhstan government is not in a position to determine what is the most common name in English. The arguments must be made that the common usage has significantly changed in the English-language media.--Ymblanter (talk) 23:47, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose for now per WP:COMMONNAME. Obviously, the infobox should be updated to note the official name, but I wouldn't support an article move until Nursultan/Nur-Sultan becomes the dominant name used in English-language media. -Kudzu1 (talk) 08:11, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Wait as per several above. There seems to be differences in spelling between sources: Aljazeera and The Guardian are opting for 'Nur-Sultan' but the Economist and the Daily Sabah go for 'Nursultan'. The page should only be moved when the official name for the city is clear. Gazamp (talk) 11:52, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Support The Reuters reported for the city's name changed to 'Nur-Sultan' hence I support the change. 'Nur-Sultan' should be the actual name and 'Nursultan' should be a redirect name or vice-versa. Its already decided to change the name by the President and the Parliament of Kazakstan and we should do that. Also I agree with User:BrendonTheWizard's point. --Sufyanxtreme (talk) 15:53, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Wait per In ictu oculi and others. There is obviously no WP:COMMONNAME consensus in RS at the moment if they can't agree on whether it's written with a hyphen or not. I'll support in several weeks or months if the new name catches on and if the spelling is agreed upon. DaßWölf 19:30, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Strong support but wait until it is agreed on whether to call it Nursultan or Nur-Sultan. I'm not sure which one it is currently. ― Дрейгорич / Dreigorich Talk 23:19, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Strong oppose Case of WP:TOOSOON and also the fact that Astana is the more common name. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 12:06, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. I would solely refer this city as Astana no matter what because I feel comfortable with that. Fixer88 (talk) 15:28, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose for now - largely I agree with the WP:TOOSOON argument, plus there is some confusion on whether the offical name is Nursultan or Nur-Sultan. We should wait for citations to come up and then act accordingly. Inter&anthro (talk) 13:56, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Wait until we see whether English sources go with Nursultan of Nur-Sultan, or stick with Astana. — pythoncoder  (talk | contribs) 16:29, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose as per WP:TOOSOON and WP:COMMONNAME. The Nominator is presuming that Nursultan will become the common name, well we dont work that way, that is pure WP:CRYSTALGAZING, let that happen first. Once it happens collect strong evidence to suggest the common name is Nursultan and then make a rename request here with the evidence. --DBigXray 08:39, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose Strong oppose, similar to other responses. The fact that the proposed move had to be edited to a new title so soon after it was made should be a clear indicator of how excessively premature this move request is. CMD (talk) 12:22, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Support as there's enough information and references. Cypp0847 (talk) 07:01, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Support just like Cypp0847 said above me, also the point has been made that Macedonia was renamed to North Macedonia really quickly, same with Swaziland → Eswatini. The name change has been officialy approved by the Kazakhstani government, also it's really unlikely for the English version to become "Nursultan" (i.e. without hyphen), there would be no point for writing it without hyphen, when the official Kazakh name contains it.Ondrusj (talk) 18:51, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Support since Google Maps and Yandex Maps had already changed the name of Astana to Nur-Sultan. I think the wait is over and now should be the time to change. - Josephua (talk) 04:39, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The official name means little, nor do the many primary sources cited above. Redirects should exist for the various spellings of the new name, and do. If and when secondary English sources take up one of these, then there will be a case. But not until then. Andrewa (talk) 11:13, 3 April 2019 (UTC)


  • Relisting comment: While there is certainly enough discussion to determine the present consensus (or lack thereof) right now, currently there is a dearth of post-change sources which mention the name of the city organically; almost all of the coverage right now is on the name change, which is not helpful for determining common usage. Another week may give time for actual sources that are not about the name change to come out. -- King of ♠ 03:32, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
  • I would support waiting for a while and re-listing later (a week, a month, or whenever someone decides to re-list). A significant portion of the discussion occurred when sources were exclusively talking about the change from Astana to Nur-Sultan. Though enough time has passed since the name change that official sources have switched to using Nur-Sultan, the concerns raised by oppose !votes can only be satisfied by seeing how the city will be described in the future, and the only way to know is to wait. Though I personally maintain my original !vote rationale that there is no English name for the city (unlike Czech Republic / Czechia, Cape Verde / Cabo Verde, Ivory Coast / Côte d'Ivoire, Swaziland / Eswatini), it is very clear that at this time there is no solid consensus to move the article. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ 16:34, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
  • We've waited.--Jack Upland (talk) 09:40, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
  • No we haven't. We both supported the article being moved, but we won't get a consensus until we have new sources. When I type "Astana" or "Nur-Sultan city" into News, literally all of the results are about the name change. There is nothing to support the belief that Astana is the COMMONNAME, just as there is nothing to support that Nur-Sultan has fully replaced it. Your comment came the day after King of Hearts posted their recommendation that the discussion is revisited in "another week" to give time for actual sources. I'm not seeing how your comment relates to their suggestion. In the case of Eswatini, which ultimately was moved as there was clear an abundance of sources demonstrating that English language media outlets had begun to use the name, it took at least a few months. I don't expect Astana->Nur-Sultan to be nearly as difficult of a transition (there is no English name), but we've hardly waited for anything to happen in the city's news cycle other than the fact that the city changed its name. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ 19:20, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Exactly. It's a call between wp:NAMECHANGES which supports preferring recent sources, and wp:PRIMARY which says discount sources based on press releases and the like. What we need are sources that discuss the place for some other reason than the rename itself, and which use the new name (one spelling or the other). The above discussion is so cluttered with !votes that show no understanding that we should let this RM lapse, and start a new one (if and) when we accumulate valid evidence in terms of the article name policy. Andrewa (talk) 19:29, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Relisting at a later date. My recommendation would be to wait at least until the SNR resolves; too many of the source articles are about the name change, not the city per se. In other words, a story about changing the name to Nur-Sultan must have 'Nur-Sultan' in the article. Let's wait until sources talking about governance, sport and tourism start to say things like, " Nur-Sultan, the capital of Kazakhstan..." As long as they're still saying things like, "Astana, recently renamed as Nur-Sultan..." or "Nur-Sultan, until recently called Astana..." the tension between WP:NAMECHANGES (et al) and WP:CHILL (et al) cannot be rationally resolved imho. Last1in (talk) 21:15, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Very well said. Andrewa (talk) 22:35, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
I must agree, as much as I don't want to. This is a fairly recent change, with many of the opposition voting against on grounds of "too soon" and "not the common name". I think this move request was initiated before the change even officially happened, hence the varied and inconsistent answers on what to do. The counting of the votes either way needs to take this into consideration. We should wait (not relist necessarily and it will lead to even more confusion, but start a separate discussion) and try again. ― Дрейгорич / Dreigorich Talk 03:34, 4 April 2019 (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.

Nursultan = trueEdit

Swedish SVT Tele-text stated today that Astana has changed name to Nursultan. It's the name of the former president. Boeing720 (talk) 12:53, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

COMMONNAME !!! Cordyceps-Zombie (talk) 17:14, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't follow you. Anyways, Kazaksthan has formally changed the name of their Capital. Doubt Astana is "English enough" - if that is what you refer to. The city was next to unknown before, as Alma-Ata was Capital City until the 1990's I believe. Boeing720 (talk) 14:45, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 March 2019Edit

Johnqazaqstan (talk) 13:29, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
it would be better to write the president stepped down in place of resigning
  Not done: It would be better to use consistent terminology and other articles on this matter use the word "resign". —KuyaBriBriTalk 13:37, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Nursultan new nameEdit

You should add changes to these pages [[11]] [[12]] Baratiiman (talk) 16:54, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

COMMONNAME !!! Cordyceps-Zombie (talk) 17:15, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Like in the case of Eswatini, probably best if we keep it as Astana until sources stop referring to the city as "Astana, changed recently to Nursultan" and instead refer to it as just Nursultan. Juxlos (talk) 00:01, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Let's not rush this. I am following the news, and it looks like the new name may be written as Nur-Sultan rather than Nursultan. We should wait until authoritative English sources are available with the established new spelling. Selerian (talk) 05:58, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Are you certain there really is any doubts on the spelling ? And is a hyphen or not a reason to avoid mentioning the name change ? (tuelly meant as questions, nothing else).
I found this on British news agency Reuters - [13]. Based on that, I think it's quite clear that Astana officially will be renamed - to either "Nur-Sultan" or "Nursultan". Hence I propose we either change the article's name already, or at least explain that Astana will be renamed next month. Even though some appear to disapprove. Anyone from Kazakhstan that expects huge troubles over this ? (Then I might well change opinion)
I have not taken any English language considerations, but first even "Astana" is rather new as capital city. Until 1997 Alma-Ata (now renamed "Almaty") was the capital city. And we have updated that name. I also doubt "Astana" from an English-linguistic point of view can be compared to for instance "Rome" ("Roma" in Italian), "Prague" ("Praha" in Chech), "Copenhagen" ("København" in Danish), "Warsaw" ("Warszawa" in Polish) or "Lisbon" ("Lisboa" in Portuguese) etc, cites with local names that not quite suit the English language, but that has been well known to the British for many centuries.
Personally I'm kind of against renaming foreign names solely based on new local names. But that goes mainly for famous names. Like "Mumbai" or "Beijing" instead of "Bombay" and "Peking". But in this case I strongly doubt there is an English-linguistic call for keeping "Astana". Weather to use a hyphen or not can be adjusted later. I think we should use Reuter's info for the time being, or at least point out that "Astana will be changed to Nursultan or Nur-Sultan as of <the date Reuters uses in the provided source, April 20th I think >"). Boeing720 (talk) 15:53, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 March 2019Edit (talk) 11:28, 21 March 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. You can reactivate the edit request by changing answered=yes to answered=no. User:GKFXtalk 11:45, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Agree. And to make such a request without logging in isn't really appropriate, I think. Boeing720 (talk) 15:58, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Nursultan - AstanaEdit

I changed all the names to reflect Nursultan, and someone changed it all back. The city is Nursultan. I suggest reverting the edits back to my last edit, as the city is named Nursultan, and it is officially Nursultan. --Schwiiz (talk) 14:56, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

I agree that editors, regardless of the title of the page, should not insist on making the article say that the name of the city is Astana. To do that is factually incorrect, and not dependent on the results of a request for comment. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ 14:59, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
IDK, it seems pretty confusing having a name in the title and another one in the article. Omar Elrefaei (talk) 09:17, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia has an established policy for what happens when a settlement changes its name. The consensus is that the name is only changed once it enters popular usage as the most widely used name for the settlement in question. A similar example of this is the case of "Allahabad" in India which was renamed "Prayagraj" in October 2018. The article still retains the former common name but explains that the city is officially now known as "Prayagraj". The same applies here, Nursultan might indeed be the legal name of the settlement but in common international usage, the city remains Astana. See WP:COMMONNAME for a more detailed explanation. Cordyceps-Zombie (talk) 11:00, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
I agree, no reason to move quicker than the rest of the world on something like this. New City name signs aren't even up in Kazakhstan yet, I bet.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 13:34, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
  • It's seem that the name of Astana is still officially used. For example the recent news of Kazinform (official Kazakh news agency) are from Astana not Nursultan [14], [15], [16]. Is there any official documents that states that the new name has come in force already? Because news from agencies are not reliable sources, and they usually don’t look for such a detail as end of legal procedure or a date of entering into force. Aotearoa (talk) 13:55, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello. It came into force today. See the official site of the Kazakh president: Western media has reported on this, too: Also, KazInform has started using Nursultan: YantarCoast (talk) 13:26, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 March 2019Edit

The name of the capital of Kazakhstan is officially changed to 'Nursultan' so the heading of this article must be changed to Nursultan from Astana. Hardik mait (talk) 10:01, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

  Declined procedurally, but you can join the discussion to make it happen. Because this would be a very major change, it requires a consensus among editors to carry out. We are currently discussing this, and you are welcomed to add your comments to said discussion. If the consensus among editors is that the article should be renamed, then it will be done, but if a consensus among editors is that it should not at this time be renamed, then it will remain for the time being. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ 13:31, 23 March 2019 (UTC)


Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic of Kazakhstan: In accordance with the Decree signed by the Head of State Tokayev, the capital of Kazakhstan Astana has been renamed as Nur-Sultan, reports the Press service of the President

(Kazakh Нұр-Сұлтан Russian: Нур-Султан) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:53, 23 March 2019 (UTC)Нур-Султан — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:08, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

That's very helpful, thank you! If the Kazakh Ministry of Foreign Affairs is using a hyphen, then that demonstrates that it's not only Russian outlets that are using it. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ 13:27, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Press service of the Prime Minister of the Republic of Kazakhstan: To rename the city of Astana – the capital of the Republic of Kazakhstan to the city of Nur-Sultan – the capital of the Republic of Kazakhstan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:01, 23 March 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:18, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Kazakh: Нұр-Сұлтан Official capital website: — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:35, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Kazakh: Нұрlight, СұлтанrulerНұрсұлтан — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:52, 23 March 2019 (UTC)НұрСұлтан — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:58, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Officially Nur-SultanEdit

Kazakh government websites are now using Nur-sultan officially, as can be seen in sections above. I believe that all instances where Astana is used to refer to the city as it in on the current day (24. March 2019) should be changed to read Nur-sultan. In regards to changing the page (a redirect), It's up to the vote above. --Schwiiz (talk) 21:06, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Nursultan or Nur-Sultan?Edit

We need some sort of agreement here in case the name is changed. ― Дрейгорич / Dreigorich Talk 23:17, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Kazakh governmental sources are using Nur-sultan, so I'm leaning to the side of Nur-sultan, though I'll likely leave out the dash as it's easier to write (those milliseconds matter) ----Schwiiz (talk) 01:21, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Embassy of the Republic of Kazakhstan in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Official site: — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:34, 25 March 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:41, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

  • Nur-Sultan - I originally leaned in favor of Nursultan because all of the earliest sources used it. Now all official Kazakh sources say Nur-Sultan, and Nur-Sultan has already replaced Nursultan in English language sources. Now no new sources, whether English, Russian, or Kazakh, use the non-hyphenated Nursultan. There was some ambiguity within the first few days, but I think it's been sufficiently clarified. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ 19:24, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
    • It must be changed to Nur-Sultan. That is the official name now, and it even appears on CIA World Factbook and Google Maps.   Spartan7W §   18:35, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Nur-Sultan Per official sources, please move to new name. --Patriccck (talk) 17:40, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Nur-Sultan is now even on Google Maps (with kyrillic letters as well) (it should also be noted that google has not changed the name of Swaziland and FYROM but has changed the name of the city to its new name). Why should Wikipedia stick to the old name just because it is more known under the old name? How will the new name be known if something that wants to be an encyclopedia continues to call it by its old name? Bobjork (talk) 04:07, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Because of Wikipedia policy. CMD (talk) 04:42, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
So Wikipedia Policy is that you should not have the official name if something has had another name in the past? So, Jugoslavia instead of North Macedonia then? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobjork (talkcontribs) 14:26, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
No, that is precisely what is not being said. @Cordyceps-Zombie gave a great and succinct explanation above: Wikipedia has an established policy for what happens when a settlement changes its name. The consensus is that the name is only changed once it enters popular usage as the most widely used name for the settlement in question. The policy is really quite simple: An article should be named with the commonly-used term for the subject. We don't have an article for C6H8O7. It's Citric Acid. The Allahabad example from Cordyceps-Zombie is probably the clearest current example. I have little doubt that article will be named Prayagraj once that is the common usage in English-language sources, just as this one will be Nursultan/Nur Sultan/Nur-Sultan. Until then, the more-common name is the article title and the other names redirect to it. Last1in (talk) 21:11, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 4 April 2019Edit

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 section.

The result of the move request was: Procedural close. I only just closed an identical RM because there was no consensus amongst the participants on the grounds that there's not enough evidence yet to satisfy WP:NAMECHANGES. A new RM should only be started when sufficient time has passed to judge whether English sources have changed usage. Suggest at least three months.  — Amakuru (talk) 19:05, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

AstanaNur-Sultan – Per talk page up. Patriccck (talk) 17:45, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

  • Oppose move for now. It's only been a few days since the last one closed, and though we now have a consistent spelling for the new name, reliable sources continue to use the old name. ONR (talk) 16:26, 5 April 2019 (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.
Return to "Astana" page.