Talk:Ismoil Somoni Peak

Samani or Somoni

The name of the peak is Ismail Samani or Ismail Somoni?

It depends how you transliterate Tajik 'o', typically it is transliterated 'o' in English, while the Iranian Persian name would be Ismail Samani or perhaps Ismāil Sāmāni - Francis Tyers · 15:56, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus, page not moved  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:55, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

---

Ismoil Somoni Peak → Ismail Samani Peak — The peak is named after Ismail Samani, and the article on him uses the Ismail Samani spelling, so why would the article on the peak use different spelling. Vanjagenije (talk) 10:21, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

• Many mountain names named after famous people are not translated into English (cf. Pico Cristóbal Colón, not Christopher Columbus Peak, Cerro San Miguel, not St Michael's Hill, and, also in Tajikistan, Ibn Sina Peak, not Avicenna Peak). The transliteration "Ismoil Somoni" is from Tajik, where "o" is used for /ɔ/ instead of the "a" used when transliterating Persian. What is the usual English usage for the mountain itself? — AjaxSmack 04:18, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, yes, but in the case of Pico Cristóbal Colón, the whole name is untranslated, while in Ismoil Somoni Peak, the word peak is translated to English. I don't say that we should translate the name to English, I just say that we should use the consistent spelling. If You think the name of the summit should be totally untranslated, than maybe we should move the article to Qullai Ismoili Somonī. And, by the way, Ibn Sina Peak is now moved to Lenin Peak. Vanjagenije (talk) 09:50, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

My argument is that we should follow general English usage. Typically, Tajik toponyms have been transliterated from Tajik of late. If there is a reason to use Persian/Arabic, it should be demonstrable. Changing a title merely for consistency with another Wikipedia article is original research.

A cursory look at Google (which should not be the only deciding factor but the article cites no reliable sources) show the current title used a bit more[1] than the proposed location.[2] — AjaxSmack 16:01, 21 March 2010 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.