Talk:Kaimganj

India: Uttar Pradesh / Geography Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Uttar Pradesh (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Indian geography workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).

Untitled

I formatted and wikified this article. I had to remove some of the wording because I could not understand it. Please add back anything I took out that you want to remain. If you need help you can contact me. KarenAnn 21:16, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Qaimganj is wrong name the correct name is KAIMGANJ

plz correct
--Dr.jagdish (talk) 05:28, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On 11 June 2009 Anupam moved this article from Kaimganj to Qaimganj, without giving any explanation. Subsequently the use of the name Qaimganj was criticised, and the article was moved back to Kaimganj by Gigs, but then returned to Qaimganj by Anupam, who gave no explanation here or in an edit summary, but posted a note on Gigs's talk page stating that "the correct name of the city is Qaimganj", and giving statements about the local form of the name to justify this. Wikipedia's policy on the naming of articles is that we should normally use the name most commonly used and recognised in English; also the guideline on place names says "When a widely accepted English name, in a modern context, exists for a place, we should use it. This often will be a local name, or one of them; but not always". (My emphasis.) My investigation indicates that "Kaimanj" is far more common in English than "Qaimanj": for example a Google search for pages in English containing "Qaimganj" produces 203 hits, while a similar search for "Kaimganj" produces 9650. (It does not, in fact, make much difference if we do not restrict the search to pages in English: the corresponding figures are respectively 234 and 10600.) Consequently the article's title should indeed be "Kaimganj". JamesBWatson (talk) 11:54, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This CSD nomination did not meet the criterion WP:G6, as it was not uncontroversial. However, I am convinced by this argument and the party moving in the other direction has not provided any verifyable arguments for their moves. I therefore performed the move. If there is any disagreement, please go through Wikipedia:Requested moves. — Sebastian 19:59, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]