Talk:Lake Khövsgöl

Mongols High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mongols, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mongol culture, history, language, and related articles 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.MongolsWikipedia:WikiProject MongolsTemplate:WikiProject MongolsMongols articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

East Asia (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Asia, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.East AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject East AsiaTemplate:WikiProject East AsiaEast Asia articles

Lakes Low‑importance

	Lakes portal Lake Khövsgöl is within the scope of WikiProject Lakes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of lake-related articles on Wikipedia, using the tools on the project page. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LakesWikipedia:WikiProject LakesTemplate:WikiProject LakesLakes articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Protected areas Low‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Protected areas, a WikiProject related to national parks and other protected natural or ecological areas worldwide.Protected areasWikipedia:WikiProject Protected areasTemplate:WikiProject Protected areasProtected areas articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

i doubt the dry-up of that trade route to irkutsk. afaik, there was quite a lot of small-scale trade during the 90s. not exactly sure what the situation is like today, though.

Islands

Where are Modot tolgoi, Baga khüi islands (listed in infobox)? These islands are absent on 1:200 000 Soviet maps and 1:200 000 Mongolian maps. They appeared or dissolved? And mb it will be better not khüi but khui, like Modon khui and Khadan khui in Mongolian atlas (Авто Замын Атлас).Bogomolov.PL 16:02, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

misnomer

The WP article on misnomer sais that a misnomer "is a term which suggests an interpretation that is known to be untrue." Lake Khövsgöl is a lake, so I don't see what untrue interpretation could be suggested by calling the lake either Lake Khövsgöl, or Khövsgöl nuur, or even Khövsgöl nuur lake.

Given that the name of the lake is just an artifact which none‹The template Talkfact is being considered for merging.› ^{[citation needed]} of the people around the lake understand, I say it is not even a pleonasm.

In fact, the WP articles on the Elbe, Danube and Don rivers, or the one on Lake Baikal, do not inform their readers that anyone who writes, say, Elbe river, is actually getting something wrong. Nonetheless it would be nice to explain the actual etymology of the name, rather than just of one syllabe. Yaan (talk) 17:18, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I read somewhere Köbsögöl (name of the in the traditional Mongolian script) is basically Blue + Water + Lake in the traditional script. Now we only need a source to back this up. Yaan (talk) 18:55, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with most points. Just because the name has historically developed out of a turkic word for river doesn't make it a misnomer. If we can find reliable sources for the claim that "Khövsgöl Nuur" technically is a pleonasm, then that should of course be mentioned in a separate section about its etymology. The pleonasm "Khövsgöl Nuur Lake" doesn't need to be mentioned at all (unless we can show that it is extremely common). We don't denounce all other possible misspellings either. It's good enough to just show ho it's done right. --Latebird (talk) 19:15, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, please be advised that wikipedia is not a reliable source. Misnomer is a misnomer is a misnomer which is "an error in naming a person or place". And the wikipedia's article is a one huge classical case of original research no, one bothers to fix.

And just because the name was historically developed from some foreign meaning most other speakers unaware of is recognized as a common source of misnomers. And yes wikipedia must warn that it is a misnomer to warn against incorrect usage. And yes some misnomers over the time have become "true correct" names. My favorite example is Chusovaya River it was gradually "stacked" from "chu", "su", "va" all meaning "river" during migration waves in the area: chu->chusu->chusuva->(Russians got false etymology for "-va" as a shortened form of adjectival suffix and made it into "full suffix "vaya") So what we got is "River-river-river-ish River". And no "misnomer" is not an insult or something.

So yes, today Khövsgöl has historically become the proper name of the lake because "gol" means nothing for Mongols for millenia now. And people must be warned that Khövsgöl Nuur is not the proper name for the lake. And Khövsgöl Nuur lake deserves mention because it is a curiosity, even if it were uncommon. But 800 google hits (same construct, slightly different spellings) for a lake no one cares in Anglosphere ("Khövsgöl Nuur" is but 1,720 hits) is surely of note.

And no it is not pleonasm, although it has superficial similarity. Pleonasm is redundancy recognizable within the language itself. Our case is a translation/borrowing issue. `'Míkka >t 19:43, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

misnomer is an inappropriate or wrong or misleading name/designation according to merriam webster and Oxford english dictionary. I fail to see how Khövsgöl nuur is any of the three. Do you earnestly propose we warn people not to use Don river, or Elbe river, or Donau river, or Lake Baikal? Yaan (talk) 19:49, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read what I wrote or you just want to bicker with me, just like you reverted my whole contrib because you didnt like a single word? `'Míkka >t 19:52, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Care to answer my question? Of course I read what you wrote, I just don't see the point. Khövsgöl nuur is entirely correct in Mongolian, and Lake Khövsgöl is the english translation. Just because a specialist can detect some kind of duplication does not mean a proper name is wrong. Or are you going to tell me Hans-Ivan is a misnomer too? Yaan (talk) 19:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. A quick, but incomplete google search somehow failed to turn up pages that identify designations like "Elbe river", "Don river" or "Lake Baikal" as misnomers. Would it be possible to provide some sources indicating that calling such designations "misnomers" is not just your personal opinion? Yaan (talk) 21:05, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All your questions are not relevant to what I wrote, because they are assuming something that I did not write. Please learn to think clearly and understand what other people say. No I do not say DOn river is wrong. Just the opposite. PLease, once again, read carefully what other people say. No I don't say that "Just because a specialist can detect some kind of duplication means a proper name is wrong." No I have no idea what Hans-Ivan is supposed to mean. In the future please discuss what is exactly written by your opponent, not your ideas what your opponent meant. If you don't understand some sentence, please quote it and ask for clarification. Yes "entirely correct" terms may still be misnomers. The most widely cited example is "pencil lead".Once again, the word "misnomer" is not an insult, it is an indication of some kind of illogical word/phrase formation. It is commonly known that natural languages quite often defy logic. For the third time, insultingly sounding words "corruption, bastardization, misnomer" and some others are normal linguistical terms for ways of word formation. `'Míkka >t 22:01, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, trying again: Do you earnestly propose we need to warn people that Don river, or Elbe river, or Donau river, or Lake Baikal are not the proper names for these rivers and the lake? Can you back up your (implicit) claim that such names are misnomers by some kind of reliable source?

Btw. I know that pencil leads do not contain lead, but I also know that Lake Khövsgöl is really a lake. I think you need to come up with a better example. I don't care whether it is an insult or not, I only wonder by what standard you think this kind of unsourced trivia (some people think "Khövsgöl nuur" qualifies as misnomer) is worth including in the article. Yaan (talk) 22:18, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Sticking to the already mentioned third-party definitions of "misnomer" here and here, I wonder how Lake Khövsgöl is either inappropriate, misleading, inaccurate or wrong. It's a bit tautologic, that's all. Yaan (talk) 22:29, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mikka, can you point to a reliable source stating that Kkövsgöl Nuur is a) "a misnomer" and/or b) "not the proper name"? Because otherwise, the statements you added to the article would mostly amount to original research (more specifically, just your personal opinion). --Latebird (talk) 07:03, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can we decide about the correct name of Mongolian lake? It can be only one option: how this lake was named at relevant English maps. If somebody could find a map with Khövsgöl without göl and this map will be a relevant source - may be the question can be discussed. Just now we have curious fact that göl is lake in turkic and so Mongolian name with nuur means lake+lake. This curious fact does not decide about quality of this lake name, but discovers its ancient nature, not less not more. Bogomolov.PL (talk) 14:01, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

moved back to Lake Khövsgöl

I moved the article back per google books count : "lake hovsgol", "hovsgol lake", "hovsgol nuur". I don't think the situation with other transcription variants is much different, if it is, feel free to change again. Yaan (talk) 20:07, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Khövsgöl Nuur. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:37, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used in this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The file Lake Hubsugul in winter time.jpg on Wikimedia Commons has been nominated for speedy deletion. View the deletion reason at the Commons file description page. Community Tech bot (talk) 03:51, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]