Talk:Shishapangma/Archive 3

1034:

believe that this is a straw man argument rather than a misquote, I will nevertheless offer the following advice: To avoid misquoting people, I sometimes find the phrases “it looks like you are saying”, and “saying in effect” to be helpful. For example, it looks like Yu Hai is saying “Pseudois, you fool! You fell right into my trap! Muahhahahahahaha!!!!!” Because I used the phrase, “it looks Like”, (and the 5 exclamation points at the end) no one would think that I am quoting Yu Hai directly. Someone could then respond: “Wikimedes, your attempt at humor is unhelpful (and unfunny). Deciding how to spell ཤི་ཤ་སྦང་མ is serious business, and you are in effect saying that we should not take ourselves so seriously.“ And so on.--

432:- Thanks for your efforts, Wikimedes. To summarize my position: 1) When Wikimedes and I first discovered Yu Hai's bold and undiscussed move to Xixabangma we immediately tried to move the page back to Shishapangma (like we did with several of other moves at the time), but were unable to do so in this case, due to techinical issues. 2} A formal discussion was initiated, proposing to move the page back to Shishapangma. 3) What should have happened, and I have raised this point several times, is that we should have moved the page back to Shishapangma 860: 31: 1242:" amongst the English speaking world (I use myself Tibetan and Chinese Pinyin for many Tibetan locations), and that the naming will need to be reassessed periodically to reflect the most common usage. But for Shishapangma this use is still extremely low, at least amongst the WP readership. Looking at the statistics for the whole year 2010: 3,182 page views were made entering the name "Xigaze" or "Xigazê", while only 380 page views were made entering the name "Xixabangma".Cheers,-- 857: 1830:. I wondered why you create the page "Shisha pangma" a few days ago, now it seems it was in prevision of doing such move. Please do note that NOBODY is using the word "Shisha pangma" (with small "p"), the common spelling being either "Shishapangma" or "Shisha Pangma". Please consider these explanations as a justification to revert your recent edits.-- 1006:(Tip): So Pseudois, when making arguments don't stack yourself in. You intended to weaken my argument by making me self-contradict, but eventually it's my turn to say "not that I would consider this as a decisive argument, but if you agree Xinhua may be an ultimate reference for broad usage within the English speaking world, then I'm happy!" –– 215: 295:–thanks Pseudois). (Shishapangma statistics are skewed by the fact that it was the article’s title?) There was no naming controversy at that time so it is unlikely that anyone conducted searches for the purpose of affecting these results. (See 11.3 on the talk page - I can't get this link to work either.) 1807:

One more addition to your perfect and concise little report here. Early this year I've been involved in the correction process for Bernadette McDonald's book "Freedom Climbers". At the end of the book an index was added with the ascents that have been made by the Polish climbers listed in the book.

436:

starting the requested move discussion. This did not happen because it was in fact impossible to do so by a non-admin and my request early on to an admin to do precisely this was ignored. 4) The discussion took place and a "no-consensus" was reached, but because the article wound up at Xixabangma the

387:

Although there is some evidence in support of Xixabangma, I believe that in balance the evidence favors Shishapangma/Shisha Pangma, and there is definitely not sufficient reason for the move to Xixabangma. (The above summary of evidence is my own. I do not claim that it is the consensus view of the

284:

The BBC has used Shisha Pangma exclusively since 2001. The New York Times uses either Shishapangma or Shisha Pangma, depending on the article, further support for grouping them together. (One of the NYT articles that uses Shisha Pangma mentions that Gosainthan is an alternate name.) (Searching the

1224:

and other naming conventions which foresee to use the conventional spelling most familiar to English-language readers instead of the Pinyin when a place is sufficiently known. I made a random check for the following WP pages which use the traditional non-Pinyin spelling, and found the following page

326:

under the various names yields 2 books that use Shishapangma and 1 that uses Xixabangma (post 1993, English Language). (Xixiabangma yields a book that appears to be in Pinyin and Gosainthan comes up empty.) I am a bit puzzled why the Library of Congress, which was long reputed to have the largest

1193:

which is where the mountain is located. I personally prefer Shisha Pangma or Shishapangma as this has been the common name of the mountain in English for many years, but Xixabangma is inexorably gaining ground, and Shisha Pangma cannot be considered well known enough amongst the general readership

782:

However, that's your original researches. No Knowledge guideline says Chinese people do not dictate what English speakers do, and the statement "no Chinese people are English speakers" is simply wrong (As far as I know, CCTV9 broadcasters are excellent English speakers and they pronounce Xixabangma

766:

Precisely. The Chinese do not dictate what English speakers do, they can express their opinions and preferences, which may be followed, or not. The reason I cited to the BBC and the NYT is that these two news outlets also tend to be the most highly respected arbiters of what the most correct forms

751:

That would be BBC. It is possible to select other "most reputable English Language newspapers" - LA Times, Chicago Tribune, Wall Street Journal, The Guardian, Christian Science Monitor come to mind, but the NYTimes and Wash Post are the newspapers of record in the USA, and the BBC in the UK. XNA is

2144:

While I do understand your preference for a "first hand" account, at times this is impossible, or it takes a lot of checking to find out. I tend to follow Yakushi as there's a great number of books that have not been written by first ascenders, so the publications that deal with the topic of the

1965:

Continue the discussion as if nothing happen? To discuss about what? Please note that the talk page (including archive) was already about 30,000 words long! Now the archived talks are gone or at last not accessible for the average editor. I don't think this is very respectful to ask for further

1033:

I think that if you examine Psuedois’statement, you will see that he is not advocating using Xinhua. Pseudois is an active participant and it is easy enough to ask him what he meant. I think you will also find that no one made the statement, “no Chinese people are English speakers.” Though I

674:

The wiki guideline you cite SPECIFICALLY says the options are not listed in order of importance, therefore PART of your argument is not supported by the source: 'A name can be considered as widely accepted if a neutral and reliable source states: "X is the name most often used for this entity".

1490:

that traces the use of Shishapangma, Shisha Pangma, Xixabangma, and Xixiabangma from 1950 (before which there are almost no hits) to 2008 (the latest possible end date for all ngrams). Taken on its own, this ngram would seem to support "Shishapangma," but I know this kind of search needs some

1607:

This page is about the mountain and the aspects related to mountaineering. It's not about linguistics, so IMHO the title of the page ought to be reverted to Shishapangma and maybe in the lead you could mention the fact that there are several alternative ways of spelling for it.

441:

at Xixabangma. 5) I think both names are fine for the article, but my problem was primarily the way the current name was decided. The disussion should have started at Shishapangma, the stable name for years, and then with a "no-consensus" the default action would have been

318:

gives almost identical results. IMHO, neither of these differences is significant. A detailed look at the entries may break this tie, however such an analysis will necessarily be long and involved, and I prefer not to introduce it here unless consensus depends on the

327:

book collection in the world, should have so few books on the mountain (at least in its digital catalog) when Google Books clearly indicates that many more books exist. But based on the available information, I have to classify the Library of Congress as neutral.

1334:. I don't think there's a solution that is genuinely politically neutral. That said, the political issue does seem less pressing considering that the place in question is neither a person nor a populated place, so it doesn't really have a "native name" per se.— 1676:

It would seem from the above poll results that a move back to Shishapangma has the greatest consensus. Does anyone disagree with the numerical summary above? (not the conclusion, but merely the numbers). Before this poll is closed, lets all agree on the raw

515:

of "Shishapangma" does correspond fairly accurately to the original Tibetan name for the average English reader, while "Xixabangma" doesn't and can only be correctly pronouced by Pinyin readers. A last point in favor of "Sishapangma/Shisha Pangma" regards the

1417:

I don't think that's really a serious controversy, but I would agree that there is no objective standard to determine which controversy is serious and which is not. The conclusion I draw from this is that "official names" generally should not be taken very

2050:

Does anyone know if there is a first hand account of the first ascent of Shishapangma? I’ve found them for all the other 8000ers except Shishapangma and Manaslu, and if they exist I would like to add them to the bibliography sections of these mountains’

1826:. Your strange insistance to link "Shishapangma" with mountaineering only and your very personal conclusions do also not reflect the discussions above, and your recent edits are once again highly disruptive and bordering vandalism. Please have a look at 1099:- in addition I think the Google Scholar results may be slightly over representing the number of PRC abstracts of Chinese-language papers, do absracts count as same weight as hits of papers wholly in English? But the clincher is the confusion between 490:--- I think Wikimedes summarized the data well: while there is scholarly support for Xixabangma, I think that the majority of the usage data supports Shishapangma. There is not enough compelling evidence to support the move away from Shishapangma. — 476:, supported by the New York Times and BBC samples above, it is clear that Shishapangma/Shisha pangma is the historic and preferred name by native speakers of English, and I also support a Tibetan naming style over a Chinese one in this situation. 1808:

Where Bernadette are used to the name 'Shishapangma', the Polish contributor to the index preferred to use his East European way of referring to the mountain as 'Shisha Pangma', i.e. the usual spelling also depends on where you originate from.

675:

Without such an assertion, the following methods (not listed in any particular order) may be helpful in establishing a widely accepted name (period will be the modern era for current names; the relevant historical period for historical names):'

2117:

Thanks. I added #3 to the bibliography, since the pictures of the first ascent must have been by the first ascenders. I don't see Guozi Shuddian on the list of summiters and I can't tell if he was on the expedition (or is a publisher?).

342: 152:

favor Shishapangma or Shisha Pangma and all sources referenced in the article use either Shishapangma or Shisha Pangma. Details follow: (Many of the links to the talk page are not working in my sandbox; see the web address for the

1231:

Shishapangma gets 1.4x more page views than Shigatse, 3.2x more than Tashilumpo and 6.6x more than Lhatse. Shigatse if for example mentioned in the naming convention as an example where to use the primary romanization (traditional

1551:

So should we conclude Shishapangma is the widely-accepted name in mountaineering field (see BBC, etc.) while Xixabangma is the widely-accepted name in geographic and linguistics (see those altas and Google Scholar, etc.)?

2140:

I've made a small correction to this, as Guozi Shuddian is listed in the Yakushi as "distributor", whatever that may be; a person, a company or a ministry. (Funny to see you add a link to Greg's site ;-) I'll check that

1891:

Mike Cline seems to be very unhappy about my move (though till now I dont know why). I think I should temporarily move it back to Xixabangma and leave the discussion to the end and let Mike deal with it (shouldn't I?).

1865:

is the only available target to be moved to, and thought they're the same since Google News, Books, and Scholar result does not distinguish between them even with the quotation mark added. I apologize for my hastiness.

538:

Wikimedes' argument made sense, but this argument didn't made any sense to me - Xixabangma also fairly accurately to the original Tibetan name for the average English reader - see words what English speakers made -

450:

this sense would I support Shishapangma, but since this is only due to my objections to the procedure, it has nothing to do with my actual naming preference. 7) For the purposes of this poll, my preference remains

323: 1235:

If Xixabangma is preferred to Shishapangma, then almost all name places within Tibet using the traditional English spelling in WP should also be renamed under the same argument as not being well known enough.

1487: 1308:

points 1 and 2 (section 12.1 on this page). Also, it's probably better to make decisions based on what the current usage is, rather than on what the future usage may be, which is difficult to predict.--

818:

as the ultimate reference for broad usage within the English speaking world, then please do it consequently: Xinhua English has a total of three articles referring to Sishapangma, the oldest one from

79: 1107:

standard pinyin (hence the division of Chinese-English sources). Given that the article title as it stands isn't the official pinyin naming anyway, going back to the "Western" BBC one makes sense.

1577: 1428: 2126:. That the book be by a first ascender is just my own criteria for the particular mission I'm on at the moment; someone else may decide that #s 1 and 2 should be added to the article.-- 1523: 511:), as the evidences in favor or Shishapangma/Shisha Pangma outweight the reasons that could have justified a move to Xixabangma. In addition to the arguments developed by Wikimedes, the 349:

Shishapangma, Shisha pangma, or Xixiabangma (thanks Hike395). IMHO, Xixabangma and Xixabangma Feng both support Xixabangma, and this is the strongest evidence in favor of Xixabangma.

180:

than hits for Xixabangma or Xixiabangma and each more than 2.8x more prevalent than hits for Gosainthan (thanks Hike395). (See 3.1 Broader Google test - I can't get the link to work.)

2169:

When adding ascents, please provide a citation. Also, a route. Every ascent is not notable, so please do not be offended if your favorite ascent is deleted as non-notable. Thanks.

1279:

However, to me, I've given up the "not well known enough" argument (17:58, 18 November 2011 (UTC)) ever since I saw Xixabangma a "top-importance" Mountain in the importance scale. ––

126:

from Shishapangma to Xixabangma without discussion. Due to technical difficulties, it could not be moved back (without administrator assistance) to Shishapangma as per the normal

2097: 2085: 2072: 724:

Why Washington Post, NYTimes, and BBC are the “3 of the most reputable English Language newspapers”? Is there any guideline that we should use them? I argue that we should use

1256:

I have to say that this argument is the best argument Pseudois ever made (previously Pseudois's comment never give me any sense). But may I ask you how to check page views? ––

292: 1739:

However, there's something to be discussed - should we mention the mountain solely as Shisha pangma? Or do it like “Burma (Myanmar)” and “Myanmar (Burma)” In my opinion (see

1194:

to justify favouring it over the official name in the country where the mountain is located. NB I support Xixabangma as it is a transcription of the Tibetan ཤི་ཤ་སྦང་མ, but

379: 615:

IMHO, the third and fourth arguments of pro-Shishapangma should be removed since Knowledge itself is personal-published (thus not a reliable source) and this argument is a

1528:

Seeing that supporter of Shishapangma do not give any substantial argument than Wikimedes' list of evidence in support of Shishapangma, I venture to state a phenomenon:

364:

It apparently does not actually have an entry for Xixabangma Feng, but searches for other spelling variants come up empty, so I consider this weak support for Xixabangma.

2018:

An uninvolved admin has moved this article to Shishapangma at my request and the article is move protected for 30 days. Lets all go find something productive to do. --

1024: 472:

This poll is poorly worded, the current name appears to be Xixabangma, the former name was Shishapangma. The "support/oppose" is a bit confusing. Either way, per

1827: 355:

uses Xixabangma (thanks Hike395). IMHO, the fact that it lists “Shisha Pangma” as the Tibetan name for the mountain does not diminish its support for XIxabangma.

1732:. I do not oppose to do that, unless the mover claim it's a consensus moving. Indeed I think this will be a democracy moving, leaving consensus to be reached. 1638: 1966:

discussions when everything has been explained over and over, and is not any more accessible on this talk page due to, I presume, your latest hasty move.--

1048:

Well I didn't mean that. But thank you! The “it looks like”-structure is good and useful. I think I'll use it, instead of saying “You intended to”, etc. ––

367: 322:

The Library of Congress has Xixabangma Peak as its subject heading for the mountain with several alternate names listed (thanks again Hike395). However,

314:

Shisha Pangma over any other spelling. The sum of Xixabangma and Xixiabangma hits is slightly larger than the sum of Shishapangma and Shisha Pangma, and

2164: 926:

Your link doesn't work, at least in my location. Why don't you go directly to Xinhua website, which is only listing three article as I mentioned above?--

604:

Wikimedes' summary is relatively neutral and well-presented, nevertheless in the third argument of pro-Xixabangma he used concession clauses. The claim

2178: 333:

on the mountain is titled Xixabangma Feng (thanks racerx11), but the descriptive text uses Shisha Pangma, not Xixabangma. This makes it neutral IMHO.

2060: 2045: 446:

at Shishapangma. This would have happened had it not been for the technical problem of our inability to move the page where we wanted it. 6) In

159: 1338: 1317: 162:

of each other, and that they are significantly closer to each other than to other spelling variations (e.g. Xixabangma or Xixiabangma). (see

1251: 684: 482: 424: 397: 529: 464: 499: 315: 299: 167: 163: 1154: 1116: 1701: 1103:(impossible in pinyin, even though I realise that it probably is correct in Chinese romanization for Tibetan if such a thing exists) and 359: 2154: 2135: 2112: 1628: 1856: 1839: 1796: 1449: 1422: 1396: 1369: 1207: 2084:

3) "Photographic record of the Mount Shisha Pangma Scientific Expedition", Science Press Peking 1966, distributed by Guozi Shuddian. (

1478: 1066: 1043: 805: 773: 761: 746: 715: 1999: 1975: 1884: 1500: 1330:

I would even argue that the question of "official spelling" should not be taken into account for Tibetan names at all due to serious

1297: 1274: 987: 935: 921: 888: 839: 581: 183:

Looking at 3 of the most reputable English Language newspapers, all have predominantly used Shishapangma or Shisha Pangma since 1993:

1845:

Addition: I just noticed that the edits have been reverted meanwhile by another editor, so I haven't made any revert myself. Thanks.

1091: 123: 1960: 1933: 1910: 1817: 1617: 1517: 1125: 1598: 1221: 1177: 1570: 1198:

as this is a transcription of the Chinese 希夏幫馬 (which is a phonetic approximation of the Tibetan name in Chinese characters).

1622:

I agree, and it is always appropriate to provide the additional names in the lead and as redirects in a case like this one.

2036:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

1375: 1305: 2027: 1686: 291:

3. Knowledge searches for Shisha Pangma in 2010 outnumbered Knowledge searches for Xixabangma by a ratio of ~16:1 (see

520:

with other Knowledge articles, with 65 internal references to Shishapangma, 43 to Shisha Pangma, and 5 to Xixabangma.--

1344: 237: 135: 1725: 608:

is completely ORIGINAL RESEARCH (I think he used Google preview of that book, but Google preview does not cover

1486:. I don't have time to read the entire discussion, so I will neither support nor oppose, but let me submit 899:), note that XinhuaNews on Xixabangma not covered by Google search was not counted in Google Search (e.g. 64: 59: 901:

Bilingual Xinhua Photo News: Researchers explores on the mount Xixabangma in China’s Tibet Autonomous...

1331: 38: 1159:

However, at least in one point you are correct: Shisha Pangma seems to be better than Shishapangma. ––

623: 149: 311: 177: 952: 827: 288:

reveals no hits for any of the four spelling variations or Gosainthan in its 2 year search history.)

1980:

I mean, revert the last move and continue the discussion about the poll as if no "Xixabangma -: -->

962: 947: 896: 823: 819: 2081:

2) Zhou Zeng & Liu Zhenkai: "Footprints on the peaks: Mountaineering in China", Cloudcap 1995.

957: 1228:

Lhatse: 5,227 views, Tashilumpo: 10,608 views, Shigatse: 24,691 views, Shishapangma: 34,269 views

1112: 358:

Merriam-Webster’s Geographical Dictionary has “see Xixabangma Feng” (and nothing else) under the

176:

Google Books and Google News Archive hits for Shishapangma and Shisha Pangma are each more than

131: 1993: 1954: 1927: 1904: 1878: 1790: 1592: 1564: 1443: 1390: 1363: 1291: 1268: 1171: 1148: 1060: 1018: 981: 915: 882: 799: 740: 709: 575: 346: 895:

Given the fact that you mentioned an XinhuaNews on Shishapangma not covered by Google Search (

352: 286: 2023: 1682: 1203: 900: 830:

use the spelling "Shishapangma". I hope this may help you to join the emerging consensus.--

145: 1822:@虞海: I think your hasty move is giving little consideration for the procedure proposed by 8: 2174: 2131: 2056: 1474: 1429:

Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(geographic_names)#Should_we_respect_official_spelling?

1313: 1039: 757: 680: 420: 412: 393: 375: 1191:

official transcription system for the Tibetan language in the People's Republic of China

814:@虞海: not that I would consider this as a decisive argument, but if you want to consider 752:

the house mouthpiece of the Chinese government, not a reputable English-language paper.

1971: 1852: 1835: 1496: 1247: 1108: 931: 835: 525: 460: 259: 963:

2008-04-09 Xinhua News: Feature: Shakespeare in a robe: a Tibetan's ardor in folk arts

958:

2002-08-19 3 Xinhua News: missing students' bodies found in 6700-meter high snow field

1647:

positions in the above poll. Alternative and vague position comments not considered.

1087: 495: 473: 119:

This poll may be closed after 14 days of being opened, if consensus has been reached.

47: 17: 1124:'s Google Scholar Search is restricted to English by editing "Scholar Preferences" ( 2123: 1218:

Shisha Pangma cannot be considered well known enough amongst the general readership

2019: 1982: 1943: 1916: 1893: 1867: 1823: 1779: 1678: 1581: 1553: 1432: 1419: 1379: 1352: 1335: 1280: 1257: 1199: 1160: 1137: 1049: 1007: 970: 904: 871: 788: 729: 698: 666: 564: 330: 138:), do you support or oppose moving the article from Shishapangma to Xixabangma? 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

2170: 2150: 2127: 2108: 2052: 1942:

and continue the discussion, as if nothing happen? Does that really matters? ––

1813: 1697: 1623: 1613: 1543: 1536: 1513: 1470: 1309: 1190: 1035: 862:, 2009). Now it's clear that Xinhua usage of Shishapangma was not different to 768: 753: 676: 616: 477: 416: 408: 389: 371: 863: 697:

gets only 1.5 criterions (in fact I don't know what people are doing here). ––

1967: 1862: 1848: 1831: 1729: 1492: 1243: 927: 831: 521: 456: 127: 1378:

in 17:27, 29 October 2011 (UTC) - #2. This would also be my reply to him. ––

1533: 1348: 1121: 1083: 491: 1216:

I perfectly understand your points, but I would only disagree regarding "

1347:

of Dakota. Will you also take that into consideration? If so, the name "

1939: 1540: 848:

Initially I didn't really want to use Xinhua as an ultimate reference.

366:

The lack of a Xixabangma entry appears to be an artifact of the search

2146: 2104: 1809: 1693: 1609: 1509: 111:

This article has been moved to Shishapangma by an uninvolved admin...

1506:

Oppose move to Xixabangma (=Support Shishapangma or Shisha Pangma).

1491:

contextualizing. I'll let other editors take care of that. Cheers,

606:"It apparently does not actually have an entry for Xixabangma Feng" 302:

referenced in the article use either Shishapangma or Shisha Pangma.

143:

Oppose move to Xixabangma (=Support Shishapangma or Shisha Pangma).

80:

Poll to determine support for move from Shishapangma to Xixabangma

822:

uses the spelling "Xixabangma", while the two most recent from

540: 867: 767:

of written English are for each dialect (UK and US English).

2100:

entry are the ones that are listed as "firsts" in the index.

2071:

1) "Mountaineering in China", Foreign Language Press 1965 (

1539:

one is working on mountaineering field, whild one support

815: 725: 850:

But since you told me it's ok, then I think it's ok, too.

158:

First, I believe that Shishapangma and Shisha Pangma are

1828:

Knowledge:Do not disrupt Knowledge to illustrate a point

1546:

one is working on other field (such as linguistic, etc.)

859:, 2005, 2009, 2002, 2008) while one about Shishapangma ( 1915:

Locked, now I'm even unable to revert my own edits. ––

1097:

Support Shisha Pangma per BBC (Shishapangma 2nd pref)

953:

2009-06-16 Xinhua News: Summit of Chinese adventurers

543:, this is the evidence that average English speakers 104:

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

1132:. So you do not need to worry that, and Xixabangma 173:Evidence in support of Shishapangma/Shisha Pangma: 689:Ok. Get it. So what do you think of other parts? 2066:In English the following sources are available; 1743:), a divide-and-counqer should be induced, i.e. 1740: 1692:The summary is correct, as far as I can tell. 310:A Google Scholar search (thanks again hike395) 1238:I agree with you that the Pinyin spelling is " 2145:"first ascent" fit my definition well enough. 622:I'd like to point out one argument, that is, 107:A summary of the conclusions reached follows. 634:Consult Google Scholar and Google Books hits 437:result of the "no-consensus" was to default 130:cycle. Now that there has been discussion ( 2165:Climbing ascents - please provide citations 948:2005-08-29 Xinhua News: Superlative Tibet 415:) 01:15, 26 November 2011 (UTC) (update) 2096:The two sources that I've marked with a 2046:First-hand account of the first ascent? 1750:When talking about mounterneering, use 1306:Disposing of 3 arguments for Xixabangma 1080:Support Shishapangma (or Shisha Pangma) 470:Support Shishapangma (or Shisha pangma) 405:Support Shishapangma (or Shisha pangma) 14: 1712:do not have an explicit favor between 1708:As far as I know, the 8 supporters of 1222:Knowledge:Naming conventions (Tibetan) 630:Consult English-language encyclopedias 345:use Xixabangma or Xixabangma Feng and 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 509:Support Shishapangma or Shisha pangma 316:running the search with grouped terms 122:On October 26 2011, this article was 1756:When talking about linguistics, use 1343:Dear friend, there's also a serious 1220:". I guess you are referring to the 856:have four article about Xixabangma ( 624:Knowledge:PLACE#Widely_accepted_name 150:Knowledge:PLACE#Widely_accepted_name 98:The following discussion is closed. 25: 1726:we count the consensus by numbering 1189:as this is the correct name in the 640:being the 2nd and 4th important. So 23: 1981:Shisha pangma" move happened... –– 1762:When talking about geography, use 1130:no Chinese-language paper included 338:Evidence in Support of Xixabangma 24: 2189: 1728:, the article should be moved to 1576:Perhaps we may compare this with 1304:Along the same lines, please see 669:— continues after insertion below 2032:The discussion above is closed. 1768:When talking about geology, use 1351:" will be no longer official. –– 632:is the most important one while 29: 597:or Xixiabangma since the lump). 1983: 1944: 1917: 1894: 1868: 1780: 1582: 1554: 1433: 1380: 1353: 1281: 1258: 1161: 1138: 1050: 1008: 971: 905: 872: 789: 730: 699: 565: 13: 1: 2179:21:29, 29 February 2012 (UTC) 2155:06:58, 19 December 2011 (UTC) 2136:22:06, 18 December 2011 (UTC) 2113:09:17, 18 December 2011 (UTC) 2061:04:52, 18 December 2011 (UTC) 1501:03:51, 28 November 2011 (UTC) 1479:14:44, 27 November 2011 (UTC) 1397:05:09, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 1370:05:06, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 1339:23:42, 29 November 2011 (UTC) 1318:16:57, 27 November 2011 (UTC) 1298:16:34, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 1275:16:28, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 1252:15:22, 27 November 2011 (UTC) 1208:13:40, 27 November 2011 (UTC) 1178:16:36, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 1155:13:48, 29 November 2011 (UTC) 1117:05:19, 27 November 2011 (UTC) 1092:11:32, 26 November 2011 (UTC) 1044:23:42, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 1025:16:24, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 988:13:19, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 936:13:13, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 922:13:07, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 889:13:13, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 840:14:24, 29 November 2011 (UTC) 806:13:31, 29 November 2011 (UTC) 774:01:18, 27 November 2011 (UTC) 762:20:23, 26 November 2011 (UTC) 747:08:24, 26 November 2011 (UTC) 716:18:00, 26 November 2011 (UTC) 693:gets 2 criterions here while 685:16:49, 26 November 2011 (UTC) 530:07:27, 26 November 2011 (UTC) 500:06:14, 26 November 2011 (UTC) 483:02:32, 26 November 2011 (UTC) 465:02:26, 26 November 2011 (UTC) 425:04:51, 26 November 2011 (UTC) 398:20:51, 25 November 2011 (UTC) 380:07:09, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 2028:17:22, 9 December 2011 (UTC) 2000:16:25, 9 December 2011 (UTC) 1976:15:42, 9 December 2011 (UTC) 1961:15:02, 9 December 2011 (UTC) 1934:14:54, 9 December 2011 (UTC) 1911:14:51, 9 December 2011 (UTC) 1885:15:00, 9 December 2011 (UTC) 1857:14:46, 9 December 2011 (UTC) 1840:14:41, 9 December 2011 (UTC) 1818:10:21, 9 December 2011 (UTC) 1797:09:09, 9 December 2011 (UTC) 1702:06:00, 9 December 2011 (UTC) 1687:03:02, 9 December 2011 (UTC) 1629:23:24, 8 December 2011 (UTC) 1618:08:57, 8 December 2011 (UTC) 1599:19:43, 7 December 2011 (UTC) 1571:17:54, 7 December 2011 (UTC) 1518:14:42, 6 December 2011 (UTC) 1450:19:37, 7 December 2011 (UTC) 1423:05:20, 1 December 2011 (UTC) 1067:17:37, 7 December 2011 (UTC) 582:17:42, 7 December 2011 (UTC) 7: 2103:Hope this is of any help. 1741:#Differences between fields 1720:; while 1 supporter prefer 188: 10: 2194: 1938:Why don't we revert it to 1524:Differences between fields 864:Vietnamese usage of Sàigòn 638:Consult major news sources 559:sounds more accurate than 551:sounds more accurate than 407:- Good summary Wikimedes. 88:This discussion is closed 1508:As per all of the above. 505:Oppose move to Xixabangma 208: 205: 202: 199: 196: 194: 190:Newspaper search results 160:minor spelling variations 2122:looks like it is also a 2034:Please do not modify it. 654:remains disputed, while 547:process x as sh, and as 388:previous discussions.)-- 331:Peakbagger.com’s webpage 324:searching in the catalog 101:Please do not modify it. 2120:Mountaineering in China 1345:political controversies 1332:political controversies 353:Encyclopedia Britannica 343:this Google Book search 1488:a Google Books "ngram" 662:support Shishapangma. 1643:I find the following 1532:It seems one support 650:supports Xixabangma, 42:of past discussions. 2124:photographic account 1467:Support Shishapangma 866:and Korean usage of 852:In the past, Xinhua 488:Support Shishapangma 341:28 of 28 Atlases in 285:Wall Street Journal 146:Knowledge:COMMONNAME 1376:raised by Wikimedes 940:Hope this may help: 591:Oppose Shishapangma 191: 1225:views during 2010: 1196:oppose Xixiabangma 1187:Support Xixabangma 626:favors Xixabangma 595:Support Xixabangma 362:(thanks Yu hai). 307:Neutral Evidence: 189: 2042: 2041: 1374:Your concern was 785:shee-sha-bang′-ma 671: 279: 278: 178:3x more prevalent 77: 76: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 18:Talk:Shishapangma 2185: 1996: 1989: 1985: 1957: 1950: 1946: 1930: 1923: 1919: 1907: 1900: 1896: 1881: 1874: 1870: 1793: 1786: 1782: 1626: 1595: 1588: 1584: 1567: 1560: 1556: 1446: 1439: 1435: 1393: 1386: 1382: 1366: 1359: 1355: 1294: 1287: 1283: 1271: 1264: 1260: 1174: 1167: 1163: 1151: 1144: 1140: 1136:western name. –– 1063: 1056: 1052: 1021: 1014: 1010: 984: 977: 973: 918: 911: 907: 885: 878: 874: 802: 795: 791: 771: 743: 736: 732: 712: 705: 701: 695:pro-Shishapangma 670: 663: 610:page 1321 ~ 1323 578: 571: 567: 480: 360:Gosainthan entry 192: 103: 85: 84: 73: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 2193: 2192: 2188: 2187: 2186: 2184: 2183: 2182: 2167: 2048: 2043: 2038: 2037: 2016:Closing Comment 1998: 1994: 1987: 1959: 1955: 1948: 1932: 1928: 1921: 1909: 1905: 1898: 1883: 1879: 1872: 1861:I simply found 1795: 1791: 1784: 1641: 1624: 1597: 1593: 1586: 1569: 1565: 1558: 1526: 1448: 1444: 1437: 1395: 1391: 1384: 1368: 1364: 1357: 1296: 1292: 1285: 1273: 1269: 1262: 1176: 1172: 1165: 1153: 1149: 1142: 1126:see it yourself 1065: 1061: 1054: 1023: 1019: 1012: 986: 982: 975: 920: 916: 909: 887: 883: 876: 804: 800: 793: 769: 745: 741: 734: 714: 710: 703: 664: 580: 576: 569: 478: 365: 312:slightly favors 214:Washington Post 117: 99: 82: 69: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 2191: 2166: 2163: 2162: 2161: 2160: 2159: 2158: 2157: 2142: 2101: 2093: 2092: 2082: 2079: 2068: 2067: 2047: 2044: 2040: 2039: 2031: 2013: 2012: 2011: 2010: 2009: 2008: 2007: 2006: 2005: 2004: 2003: 2002: 1992: 1953: 1936: 1926: 1913: 1903: 1889: 1888: 1887: 1877: 1842: 1800: 1799: 1789: 1776: 1775: 1774: 1773: 1772: 1766: 1760: 1754: 1745: 1744: 1734: 1733: 1705: 1704: 1674: 1673: 1667: 1666:- 2 supporters 1661: 1655: 1654:- 8 supporters 1640: 1637: 1636: 1635: 1634: 1633: 1632: 1631: 1602: 1601: 1591: 1563: 1549: 1548: 1547: 1544:if and only if 1537:if and only if 1525: 1522: 1521: 1520: 1503: 1481: 1463: 1462: 1461: 1460: 1459: 1458: 1457: 1456: 1455: 1454: 1453: 1452: 1442: 1406: 1405: 1404: 1403: 1402: 1401: 1400: 1399: 1389: 1372: 1362: 1323: 1322: 1321: 1320: 1302: 1301: 1300: 1290: 1277: 1267: 1240:gaining ground 1236: 1233: 1229: 1226: 1211: 1210: 1184: 1183: 1182: 1181: 1180: 1170: 1147: 1094: 1076: 1075: 1074: 1073: 1072: 1071: 1070: 1069: 1059: 1017: 1005: 1004: 1003: 1002: 1001: 1000: 999: 998: 997: 996: 995: 994: 993: 992: 991: 990: 980: 967: 966: 965: 960: 955: 950: 942: 941: 914: 892: 891: 881: 843: 842: 809: 808: 798: 777: 776: 764: 739: 722: 721: 720: 719: 718: 708: 691:pro-Xixabangma 620: 617:self-reference 613: 612:of that book). 599: 598: 587: 586: 585: 584: 574: 533: 532: 502: 485: 467: 427: 401: 400: 385: 384: 383: 382: 363: 356: 350: 336: 335: 334: 328: 320: 305: 304: 303: 296: 289: 277: 276: 273: 270: 267: 264: 261: 255: 254: 251: 248: 245: 242: 239: 236:New York Times 233: 232: 229: 226: 223: 220: 217: 211: 210: 207: 204: 201: 200:Shisha Pangma 198: 195: 187: 186: 185: 184: 181: 171: 155: 154: 121: 120: 116: 115: 114: 113: 112: 94: 93: 90: 89: 83: 81: 78: 75: 74: 67: 62: 52: 51: 34: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2190: 2181: 2180: 2176: 2172: 2156: 2152: 2148: 2143: 2139: 2138: 2137: 2133: 2129: 2125: 2121: 2116: 2115: 2114: 2110: 2106: 2102: 2099: 2095: 2094: 2090: 2087: 2083: 2080: 2077: 2074: 2070: 2069: 2065: 2064: 2063: 2062: 2058: 2054: 2035: 2030: 2029: 2025: 2021: 2017: 2001: 1997: 1991: 1979: 1978: 1977: 1973: 1969: 1964: 1963: 1962: 1958: 1952: 1941: 1937: 1935: 1931: 1925: 1914: 1912: 1908: 1902: 1890: 1886: 1882: 1876: 1864: 1863:Shisha pangma 1860: 1859: 1858: 1854: 1850: 1846: 1843: 1841: 1837: 1833: 1829: 1825: 1821: 1820: 1819: 1815: 1811: 1806: 1805: 1804: 1803: 1802: 1801: 1798: 1794: 1788: 1777: 1771: 1770:Shisha pangma 1767: 1765: 1761: 1759: 1755: 1753: 1749: 1748: 1747: 1746: 1742: 1738: 1737: 1736: 1735: 1731: 1730:Shisha pangma 1727: 1723: 1722:Shisha pangma 1719: 1718:Shisha pangma 1715: 1711: 1707: 1706: 1703: 1699: 1695: 1691: 1690: 1689: 1688: 1684: 1680: 1671: 1668: 1665: 1662: 1660:- 1 supporter 1659: 1658:Shisha Pangma 1656: 1653: 1650: 1649: 1648: 1646: 1630: 1627: 1621: 1620: 1619: 1615: 1611: 1606: 1605: 1604: 1603: 1600: 1596: 1590: 1579: 1575: 1574: 1573: 1572: 1568: 1562: 1545: 1542: 1538: 1535: 1531: 1530: 1529: 1519: 1515: 1511: 1507: 1504: 1502: 1498: 1494: 1489: 1485: 1482: 1480: 1476: 1472: 1468: 1465: 1464: 1451: 1447: 1441: 1430: 1426: 1425: 1424: 1421: 1416: 1415: 1414: 1413: 1412: 1411: 1410: 1409: 1408: 1407: 1398: 1394: 1388: 1377: 1373: 1371: 1367: 1361: 1350: 1346: 1342: 1341: 1340: 1337: 1333: 1329: 1328: 1327: 1326: 1325: 1324: 1319: 1315: 1311: 1307: 1303: 1299: 1295: 1289: 1278: 1276: 1272: 1266: 1255: 1254: 1253: 1249: 1245: 1241: 1237: 1234: 1230: 1227: 1223: 1219: 1215: 1214: 1213: 1212: 1209: 1205: 1201: 1197: 1192: 1188: 1185: 1179: 1175: 1169: 1158: 1157: 1156: 1152: 1146: 1135: 1131: 1127: 1123: 1120: 1119: 1118: 1114: 1110: 1109:In ictu oculi 1106: 1102: 1098: 1095: 1093: 1089: 1085: 1081: 1078: 1077: 1068: 1064: 1058: 1047: 1046: 1045: 1041: 1037: 1032: 1031: 1030: 1029: 1028: 1027: 1026: 1022: 1016: 989: 985: 979: 968: 964: 961: 959: 956: 954: 951: 949: 946: 945: 944: 943: 939: 938: 937: 933: 929: 925: 924: 923: 919: 913: 902: 898: 894: 893: 890: 886: 880: 869: 865: 861: 858: 855: 851: 847: 846: 845: 844: 841: 837: 833: 829: 825: 821: 817: 813: 812: 811: 810: 807: 803: 797: 786: 781: 780: 779: 778: 775: 772: 765: 763: 759: 755: 750: 749: 748: 744: 738: 727: 723: 717: 713: 707: 696: 692: 688: 687: 686: 682: 678: 673: 672: 668: 661: 657: 653: 652:#WAN2-Scholar 649: 645: 641: 639: 635: 631: 625: 621: 618: 614: 611: 607: 603: 602: 601: 600: 596: 592: 589: 588: 583: 579: 573: 562: 558: 554: 550: 546: 542: 537: 536: 535: 534: 531: 527: 523: 519: 514: 510: 506: 503: 501: 497: 493: 489: 486: 484: 481: 475: 471: 468: 466: 462: 458: 454: 449: 445: 440: 435: 431: 428: 426: 422: 418: 414: 410: 406: 403: 402: 399: 395: 391: 386: 381: 377: 373: 369: 361: 357: 354: 351: 348: 344: 340: 339: 337: 332: 329: 325: 321: 317: 313: 309: 308: 306: 301: 297: 294: 290: 287: 283: 282: 281: 280: 274: 271: 268: 265: 262: 260: 257: 256: 252: 249: 246: 243: 240: 238: 235: 234: 230: 227: 224: 221: 218: 216: 213: 212: 197:Shishapangma 193: 182: 179: 175: 174: 172: 169: 165: 161: 157: 156: 151: 147: 144: 141: 140: 139: 137: 133: 129: 125: 110: 109: 108: 105: 102: 96: 95: 92: 91: 87: 86: 72: 68: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 2168: 2119: 2088: 2075: 2049: 2033: 2015: 2014: 1844: 1769: 1763: 1757: 1752:Shishapangma 1751: 1721: 1717: 1714:Shishapangma 1713: 1710:Shishapangma 1709: 1675: 1669: 1663: 1657: 1652:Shishapangma 1651: 1644: 1642: 1639:Poll summary 1578:Khalkhyn Gol 1550: 1534:Shishapangma 1527: 1505: 1483: 1466: 1349:Great Plains 1239: 1217: 1195: 1186: 1133: 1129: 1122:User:Hike395 1104: 1100: 1096: 1079: 853: 849: 784: 694: 690: 659: 655: 651: 647: 643: 637: 633: 629: 627: 609: 605: 594: 590: 561:Shishapangma 560: 556: 553:Shishapangma 552: 549:Shishabangma 548: 544: 517: 513:pronuciation 512: 508: 504: 487: 469: 452: 447: 443: 438: 433: 429: 404: 206:Xixiabangma 142: 118: 106: 100: 97: 70: 43: 37: 2051:articles.-- 1418:seriously.— 656:#WAN2-Books 518:consistency 300:All sources 209:Gosainthan 203:Xixabangma 36:This is an 2020:Mike Cline 1940:Xixabangma 1824:Mike Cline 1764:Xixabangma 1758:Xixabangma 1679:Mike Cline 1677:results.-- 1664:Xixabangma 1541:Xixabangma 1420:Nat Krause 1336:Nat Krause 1200:BabelStone 557:Xixabangma 474:WP:ENGLISH 153:location.) 124:Bold moved 2171:Ratagonia 2128:Wikimedes 2053:Wikimedes 1625:Montanabw 1471:Ericoides 1310:Wikimedes 1232:English). 1036:Wikimedes 770:Montanabw 754:Ratagonia 677:Ratagonia 563:, too. –– 479:Montanabw 417:Ratagonia 409:Ratagonia 390:Wikimedes 372:Wikimedes 71:Archive 3 65:Archive 2 60:Archive 1 1968:Pseudois 1849:Pseudois 1832:Pseudois 1724:. So if 1645:explicit 1493:Madalibi 1244:Pseudois 928:Pseudois 832:Pseudois 628:in that 522:Pseudois 457:Racerx11 368:see here 347:none use 319:results. 2141:later.) 2098:Yakushi 2086:Yakushi 2073:Yakushi 1670:Neutral 1484:Comment 1128:), and 1084:PietJay 854:English 492:hike395 455:. -- 453:neutral 430:Neutral 293:point 3 168:#3 here 39:archive 1988:Yú Hǎi 1949:Yú Hǎi 1922:Yú Hǎi 1899:Yú Hǎi 1873:Yú Hǎi 1785:Yú Hǎi 1587:Yú Hǎi 1559:Yú Hǎi 1438:Yú Hǎi 1385:Yú Hǎi 1358:Yú Hǎi 1286:Yú Hǎi 1263:Yú Hǎi 1166:Yú Hǎi 1143:Yú Hǎi 1055:Yú Hǎi 1013:Yú Hǎi 976:Yú Hǎi 910:Yú Hǎi 877:Yú Hǎi 794:Yú Hǎi 735:Yú Hǎi 704:Yú Hǎi 570:Yú Hǎi 541:Xanadu 434:before 903:). –– 787:). –– 660:#WAN4 648:#WAN6 644:#WAN1 642:PLACE 16:< 2175:talk 2151:talk 2147:Qwrk 2132:talk 2109:talk 2105:Qwrk 2089:C189 2076:jT93 2057:talk 2024:talk 1972:talk 1853:talk 1836:talk 1814:talk 1810:Qwrk 1716:and 1698:talk 1694:Qwrk 1683:talk 1614:talk 1610:Qwrk 1580:. –– 1514:talk 1510:Qwrk 1497:talk 1475:talk 1427:See 1314:talk 1248:talk 1204:talk 1113:talk 1088:talk 1040:talk 932:talk 897:2007 870:. –– 868:Sŏul 836:talk 828:2009 826:and 824:2007 820:2005 758:talk 728:. –– 681:talk 658:and 646:and 636:and 526:talk 496:talk 461:talk 448:only 444:keep 439:keep 421:talk 413:talk 394:talk 376:talk 298:4. 164:here 148:and 136:here 132:here 1672:- 2 1105:xia 816:XNA 783:as 726:XNA 545:may 370:.-- 258:BBC 166:or 134:to 128:BRD 2177:) 2153:) 2134:) 2111:) 2059:) 2026:) 1984:虞海 1974:) 1945:虞海 1918:虞海 1895:虞海 1892:–– 1869:虞海 1866:–– 1855:) 1847:-- 1838:) 1816:) 1781:虞海 1778:–– 1700:) 1685:) 1616:) 1583:虞海 1555:虞海 1552:–– 1516:) 1499:) 1477:) 1469:. 1434:虞海 1431:–– 1381:虞海 1354:虞海 1316:) 1282:虞海 1259:虞海 1250:) 1206:) 1162:虞海 1139:虞海 1134:is 1115:) 1101:xa 1090:) 1082:-- 1051:虞海 1042:) 1009:虞海 972:虞海 969:–– 934:) 906:虞海 873:虞海 838:) 790:虞海 760:) 731:虞海 700:虞海 683:) 667:虞海 665:— 593:(= 566:虞海 555:, 528:) 507:(= 498:) 463:) 423:) 396:) 378:) 275:0 253:* 231:0 170:.) 2173:( 2149:( 2130:( 2107:( 2091:) 2078:) 2055:( 2022:( 1995:✍ 1990:) 1986:( 1970:( 1956:✍ 1951:) 1947:( 1929:✍ 1924:) 1920:( 1906:✍ 1901:) 1897:( 1880:✍ 1875:) 1871:( 1851:( 1834:( 1812:( 1792:✍ 1787:) 1783:( 1696:( 1681:( 1612:( 1594:✍ 1589:) 1585:( 1566:✍ 1561:) 1557:( 1512:( 1495:( 1473:( 1445:✍ 1440:) 1436:( 1392:✍ 1387:) 1383:( 1365:✍ 1360:) 1356:( 1312:( 1293:✍ 1288:) 1284:( 1270:✍ 1265:) 1261:( 1246:( 1202:( 1173:✍ 1168:) 1164:( 1150:✍ 1145:) 1141:( 1111:( 1086:( 1062:✍ 1057:) 1053:( 1038:( 1020:✍ 1015:) 1011:( 983:✍ 978:) 974:( 930:( 917:✍ 912:) 908:( 884:✍ 879:) 875:( 834:( 801:✍ 796:) 792:( 756:( 742:✍ 737:) 733:( 711:✍ 706:) 702:( 679:( 619:. 577:✍ 572:) 568:( 524:( 494:( 459:( 419:( 411:( 392:( 374:( 272:0 269:1 266:4 263:1 250:0 247:0 244:4 241:4 228:0 225:0 222:0 219:2 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index