Talk:Gyeongseong

Suggestion for merge

Les talk about it at Talk:Names of Seoul --Appletrees (talk) 13:36, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why not Keijo?

It was Japanese city, so it should be called in Japanese way.Elmor_rus (talk) 12:16, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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 merge to Names of Seoul. This can be accomplished by any interested editor. See also Talk:Names of Seoul, where this has already been discussed. Aervanath (talk) 07:31, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gyeongseong → Keijo — Relisting to gain more input. Jafeluv (talk) 06:42, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I said before, this article is about the time then Korea was a part of Japan, so it seems to be more natural to call the city in Japanese way. Also, according to Google, "Keijo" is used 10 times more often than "Gyeongseong" and old maps, such as this one use the name "Keijo". Elmor_rus (talk) 17:51, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merge it to Names of Seoul instead. 70.29.208.69 (talk) 21:17, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't oppose a move but prefer a merge to Names of Seoul with both names redirecting there (rather than Seoul or somewhere else). The nominator is right that "Keijo" is far more likely to be an English search term than "Gyeongseong." — AjaxSmack 03:10, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. As I'm sure you'll notice when looking at the results, your Google search for "keijo korea" brings up a lot of unrelated hits. Keijo is a common first name in Finland. Incidentally, "korea" is also a Finnish word for "pretty". Jafeluv (talk) 08:00, 5 July 2009 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.