The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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 proposal was no consensus to move. Parsecboy (talk) 15:46, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Oppose. The town lies in Russia now, thus it does not matter that the name is Finnish and Russified. - Darwinek (talk) 18:44, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Oppose. I have just put back the cat 'former municipalities of Finland', the deletion of which I do not understand at all. But the article must stay where it is. This is a small place, so it is almost impossible that the Finnish name ever became a household one in the English language. Basically, that is why we have Kiev, but Kharkiv - if there is no established usage in English, we keep the local name. Note that the text uses the Finnish name to refer to the historical event, just like we would do with historical events like battles in and around Kharkov/Kharkiv. --Paul Pieniezny (talk) 19:39, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
It's not Russian name, Suoyarvi = Suojärvi, but it seems ugly. --<Flrntalk> 04:48, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
"Suojärvi", of course, is not a Russian name, but "Суойярви" is. Equally importantly, it is a name of a place that's located in Russia, and this is where WP:RUS applies. "Ugly" is not an argument. You may also be interested in reading this discussion (especiall its "Update" subsection). While it took place before WP:RUS was amended to its present form, is still of some interest as it deals with English usage.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:31, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
You are saying that these place names should be at their Finnish version, because they are etymologically Finnish and the Romanization from Russian looks ugly? In defence of the Russian places rule on English wikipedia: let us have a look at a similar case with other place names. About one third of the names in the Category:Communes of Nord are etymologically Flemish/Dutch - shall I go through all these pages and replace the "ugly" ones with their pre-1700 Dutch version? Unfortunately (for the renaming argument, I am not posing as a Flemish nationalist), today everybody there speaks French. The main point is that these communes are in France, "Estaires" is the official French name, not the Dutch "Stegers" which English speakers may find much easier to pronounce, there is no established English name for most of these places (Dunkirk being the exception), so we use the French names. There is no basic difference with what is happening here - except that we have the additional need for Romanization. Ugliness is in the eye of the beholder. There is not much to choose between Bavinchove and Bavinkhove - in both cases people will be tempted to erroneously pronounce a Russian "x" or German "ch" in the middle of the name. The typical American English pronunciation of Suoyarvi will probably be rather close to the Finnish rendering, closer than the Finnish version even because people may misinterpret the "j". Taking into account that "j", the etymological argument is rather dangerous, even in this case: I think that the old name Шуезерский (found in Moj Gorod) is a bit too close to Suoyarvi to be sure that there is no connection.--Paul Pieniezny (talk) 16:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Oppose per the above; we don't still use Stettin to refer to Szczecin; even though the city was in Germany for quite some time. The current name should be used in this case. Parsecboy (talk) 15:33, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.