Talk:Nara Burnu

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: not moved. With no prejudice to another request with sources. —usernamekiran(talk) 01:28, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nara Burnu → Nagara Point – It's the English name. Xx236 (talk) 13:42, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak oppose: It certainly was the usual English name, until circa the mid-20th century. Per usual modern practice for toponyms, settlements, etc, unless a term is overwhelmingly established, Wikipedia should use the native name, in this case, Nara Burnu. Given the importance of the Dardanelles Campaign, it is likely that Nagara Point will prevail in Anglophone literature, but if we rename Bombay to Mumbai, and Peking to Beijing, I find it hard to argue for Nagara over the actual Turkish name. Constantine ✍ 14:48, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose not the Encyclopedia of the 19th Century. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:18, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To be exact - the English source comes from the 1888. The page doesn't quote any modern English language source.Xx236 (talk) 06:54, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oceanography of the Turkish Straits - Volume 2, Issue 1 - Page 2-9, 1988. That is a modern English language source. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:15, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.