Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Addition to WP:MODERNPLACENAME

Could we get a section addressing users adding Türkiye or replacing Turkey with Türkiye? I usually revert those edits and point to wp:commonname or another MOS-related guideline, but it would be helpful to point here. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 05:54, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

:Probably easier to have a generic “use the main articles title”; we may eventually move the article to Türkiye, and even we do we will have the problem in the opposite direction. BilledMammal (talk) 06:13, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

A discussion at Talk:Sněžka#Requested move 17 July 2024, regarding a mountain on the Polish—Czech border, may be of interest. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 17:44, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

How should we decide the primary topics of "{{xt|Placename, Country}}", "{{xt|Placename (city)}}", "{{xt|Placename (town)}}", etc., especially for some countries (like the United States) whose cities cannot have articles named {{xt|Placename, Country}}? The existing rules applied to Canada may be useful references. John Smith Ri (talk) 15:20, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

:{{ping|John Smith Ri}} There is a difference between naming conventions and eligibility as a primary topic, i.e. a page name does not need to be eligible to be the preferred title of an article in order to be in contention for primary topic; it is sufficient for the page name to be eligible either for preferred title or redirect. For example, Barack Obama is the primary topic of Obama even though the latter would never be allowed as the title of the article. And so Birmingham, United States is a primary redirect to Birmingham, Alabama even though other Birminghams exist in the US. (Note that Birmingham, England, is not in contention for primary topic since Birmingham, United States is neither a valid title nor redirect to that topic.) -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:58, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

::However, Birmingham, England is the primary article for “Birmingham”. Blueboar (talk) 17:34, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

A discussion at Talk:Sněžka#Requested move 30 January 2025, regarding a mountain on the Polish—Czech border, may be of interest. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 00:57, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

File:Symbol watching blue lashes high contrast.svg You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) § Testing the waters: Overturning USPLACE. jlwoodwa (talk) 22:48, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

:Reminder that you should be posting announcements at WP:USCITY too. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 00:43, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

::I notified the talk page of the guideline that was being discussed. If you want to notify a WikiProject, feel free. jlwoodwa (talk) 02:12, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello! I'd like to clarify how this sentence should be interpreted: {{tq|"Older names should be used in appropriate historical contexts when a substantial majority of reliable modern sources do the same"}}

Am I understanding this correctly that when we decide which name to use in a historical context, we should do so based on what current sources say when referring to that historical period, not what contemporary sources from that historical period say?

What brought me here is that on the Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Olena Zelenska articles, some editors have changed the spelling of their birthplace from Kryvyi Rih to Krivoy Rog in the infobox, on the grounds that Russian spellings were used in the Soviet Union in 1978 when they were both born. I understand this argument; however, if I'm understanding WP:MPN correctly, what matters is not what English romanisation was used when they were born, but what romanisation is currently used today to refer to Kryvyi Rih in 1978. Is this understanding correct?

Thanks! Helpful Cat🐈(talk) 14:56, 22 May 2025 (UTC)