This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
As the lede says, "All place names in this article use the spelling in the book." But they have just been changed and simplified, so instead of "Maclean went to Lenkoran (Lankaran, Azerbaijan)" it was stripped down to "Maclean went to Lankaran". Surely it is better to keep the spelling of the book, which is the subject of the article? The relevant policy would appear to be Wikipedia:Proper_names:
This is an English-language encyclopedia, so established English names are preferred if they exist, and foreign names should always be transcribed into the Roman alphabet. In general, refer to places by the names which are used for the articles on those places, according to the rules described at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names). If a different name is appropriate in a given historical or other context, then that may be used instead, although it is normal to follow the first occurrence of such a name with the standard modern name in parentheses.
There are almost no appropriate sources for the book itself. Rather, it is a delightful source for the author's life. I suggest that we should a) merge into his article all the useful information here and then b) make this article a redirect. What are your opinions? Richard Keatinge (talk) 12:11, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]