Shouldn't this be called the 1509 Constantinople Earthquake. The Ottoman's didn't rename the city. The name changed to Instanbul in the early 1920s with the creation of the Turkish republic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.170.137.158 (talk) 05:57, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
The naming of this article follows the available sources. Try searching on Google for "1509 Constantinople earthquake" and you get just two hits, whereas searching on the existing title on GoogleScholar gives six hits. It's also called the "lesser judgement day" and the "1509 Sea of Marmara earthquake", but these are less commonly used than the existing title. Mikenorton (talk) 07:08, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
Indeed. Plus the established usage in WP is that for the city's history after 1452, "Istanbul" is to be used, except in an international (read: European) context, e.g. various Treaties of Constantinople, Occupation of Constantinople etc. Constantine ✍ 16:11, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
Can we at least have some consistency? I'm not sure about the context of those two guys in their little edit war but at least keep the article from contradicting itself. If it refers to it as Istanbul in the title, it should do the same in the article body. If it refers to it as Constantinople in the title, it should likewise do so in the article body. 8ty3hree (talk) 02:30, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
I have proceeded to do this myself. Within the contexts of Template:Earthquakes in Turkey and List of earthquakes in Turkey, it's referred to as Istanbul. Although I don't necessarily like the sound of "Istanbul", within the context of the article and its closest links, that's what it's called. Like I just said, the factual accuracy behind naming the article text Constantinople is irrelevant as the article needs to agree with itself. 8ty3hree (talk) 02:55, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
