Talk:İzmir/Archive 3

Requested move 3

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: move. On pure numbers, people are quite split. However, I find the arguments of those opposing the move to be fairly weak. There are many articles on Wikipedia, many articles about cities -- Turkish or otherwise -- with diacritics, so the absence of the dotted I in English shouldn't mean case closed. Some of the sources (e.g. the U.S. embassy source) seem to just not use diacritics altogether, even for cities (e.g. Uşak) that have them on Wikipedia. And then other sources, of course, support the use of the dotted I here. The consistency argument seems quite convincing; one of the counter-examples (Iznik) was actually just moved [not by me] through an RM discussion. --  tariq abjotu  02:18, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Izmir → İzmir – per WP:CRITERIA "Consistency – The title is consistent with the pattern of similar articles' titles" with en.wp Turkish geo articles, e.g. İzmit. Lonely Planet Turkey 2010 "İzmir's synagogues - İzmir still has a sizeable Jewish population – although not nearly as large as it was in Ottoman times – and it is possible to take a tour of some of the city's beautiful old synagogues". In ictu oculi (talk) 10:31, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Strong support: Actually the original title was İzmir. But it was moved to Izmir on 17 October 2011 by Vegaswikian w/o any good reason. Since WP permits the capital İ character there is no reason to keep Izmir with undotted I character. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 11:16, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Strong support: İzmir is a major city in Turkey. Correct spelling is warranted. Cavann (talk) 17:55, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose The dotted capital "I" is a Turkish diacritic and does not exist in English. This is the English wikipedia. Athenean (talk) 20:20, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Athenean, FYI Lonely Planet is written in English. And yes this is the English Wikipedia (not the Greek Wikipedia) and in English Wikipedia we don't treat French, German, Portuguese, Spanish, Maltese, Polish, Czech, Slovak, Hungarian, Romanian, Slovenian, Serbian, Croatian, Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, Lithuanian, Latvian, Estonian, Finnish one way, and discriminate against Turkish ones. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:00, 23 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I think I'd support this as it is what I have seen elsewhere and a pretty standard spelling. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:06, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Support: No reason not to. -- Marek  . 69  talk 21:14, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Support. Wikipedia typically does not strip diacritics from placenames (e.g., Baħar Iċ-Ċagħaq, Însurăței) unless the name in question is an exonym (e.g., Munich for München and, of course, Istanbul).  Cf. other cities in Turkey.  —  AjaxSmack   03:26, 22 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose The English name is Izmir. As a large, well known city Izmir has a widely used common English name, just like Istanbul. --T*U (talk) 08:43, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * No, the English name is Smyrna. Were someone to propose a move to Smyrna, I would support it.  However, İzmir is a Turkish name and we should treat it like we treat other similar cases. —  AjaxSmack   01:06, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * As per AjaxSmack - not "just like Istanbul" since the UN Group on Geo names counts Istanbul uniquely in Turkey as an exonym, as does Lonely Planet English_exonyms, using Istanbul (exonym) and İzmir (endonym) in the same sentence. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:00, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, the United Nations Manual for the National Standardization of Geographical Names 2006, quoted in English exonyms and probably a more reliable source than Lonely Planet, does not regard Izmir as an exonym: "The omission of diacritical marks usually does not turn an endonym into an exonym"--Mhockey (talk) 21:10, 24 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose: The English name doesn't have a dot on "I". In fact, we should change non-English names (which were not a result of a discussion by the way) to English ones, like in the case of Ismit. Alexikoua (talk) 14:32, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment in WP please check city names such as Timișoara, Niš, Hafnarfjörður, České Budějovice, Borås and Poznań (all from different countries). Do we have ș š, ö, ð, é, å, ń in English alphabet ?  It is clear that non English characters are permitted in WP.  Thus the objection "English names don't have a dot on "I"" doesn't make sense. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 15:19, 22 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose Most sources in English use the undotted I - including the US Embassy, the UK FCO, Merriam-Webster, and the news sources cited in previous discussions.  The city is widely known in English as Izmir, as we use Istanbul, not İstanbul, Montreal not Montréal, in contrast with any number of smaller places where we use local spelling.  Izmir and Istanbul are not exonyms, they are the preferred forms in English.  Lonely Planet is very much in the minority.--Mhockey (talk) 19:56, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * There are some sources that can't type diacritics or have style manuals that prohibit diacritics. Wikipedia does not and, for those readers alarmed by unusual typography, the diacritics can be "read through". i.e., those unfamiliar with them can ignore the dot on the i. Wikipedia is an online, Unicode-based reference work that need be not be dumbed down to reflect archaic typographical limitations. —  AjaxSmack  01:06, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It's nothing to do with "dumbing down", and I am sure that the US state department and UK FCO can type diacritics. Montreal is not a dumbed-down form of Montréal, it's just the usual form in English.  So with Izmir.--Mhockey (talk) 21:10, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yet the government of Canada uses the correct spelling even in English pages. Cavann (talk) 21:20, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: There is a tiny minority of small and medium settlements which use non-English letters, but that's not an argument for a move. Well known metropolises avoid that (Istanbul for example). I've also can't find a German city with umlaut or sz here, or a Greek with diacritics.Alexikoua (talk) 20:17, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I guess you have not heard of Göttingen. And I'm sure your "assessment" of "tiny minority" is empirically based. Cavann (talk) 20:19, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Exactly what I've said, "small and medium settlements" (i.e. 100k inhabitants), not a big metropolis like this one.Alexikoua (talk) 22:00, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * As far as I can tell, Wikipedia always keeps diacritics except for exonyms whether a small or large city. Cities over 100,000 with diacritics in their titles include São Paulo, Bogotá, Kraków, Ciudad Juárez, Brasília, Cần Thơ, Łódź, São Gonçalo, Málaga, Biên Hòa, Parañaque, Timișoara, Las Piñas, Gdańsk, Iași, Córdoba, Chișinău, A Coruña, Düsseldorf, Białystok, Târgu Mureș, San José, Liège, Częstochowa, Reykjavík, Türkmenabat, Jyväskylä, Bălți, Forlì, Košice, Cap-Haïtien, Plzeň, Orléans, Agualva-Cacém, Västerås, Bærum, Örebro, and Durrës.  Several of those are national capitals.  In Turkey, there are 65 cities over 100,000.  Of those, over 25 have diacritics or dotless/dotted is in their titles.  Far from being hard to find, I can't find an example where Wikipedia strips a diacritic with maybe the exception of Zurich, Da Nang, Riga, and this article. —  AjaxSmack   01:06, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * User:Alexikoua "or a Greek with diacritics" - Greek, unlike Turkish, is not written in a Latin alphabet.


 * Strong support: "İ" doesn't exist in English just as (Î,š,ž,đ,ć,ă,ț,ế,Đ,ơ,ắ..) and cities in English Wikipedia → Île-de-France, Cần Thơ, Thừa Thiên–Huế, Książ Wielkopolski, Ærøskøbing, Päijänne Tavastia...etc. Also, İzmir is recognized with the official name by many institutions. NASA, BBC EXPO Maurice07 (talk) 23:18, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The BBC uses Izmir on its news pages - many examples here. NASA is inconsistent, e.g. here.  The EXPO page reads like a translation from the Turkish by a non-native English speaker.--Mhockey (talk) 21:10, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Mhockey, I'm curious. Your User page indicates you are learning Turkish. The reason en.wp (like Britannica, like Lonely Planet) spells Turkish names fully is to enable pronunciation. This article was at İzmir until 4 editors agreed to remove the dot. How does them removing the dot help you as learner know how to pronunce it İzmir, with a long-İ not Izmir with short-I from this title? (of course the correct name is still there in there in the first line, but how does the title help?) In ictu oculi (talk) 19:45, 26 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose per Athenean, Mhockey, and others. Whatever the status of the dotted capital "I", it is not part of the common name of anything or anywhere in the English language. If we follow the logic of this proposal, goodness only knows where we shall end up. Moonraker (talk) 23:44, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * We'll end up exactly where we are right now with 99% of the cities in question carrying diacritics and the 1% that are exonyms not. —  AjaxSmack  05:39, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Using a number of limited examples isn't engouh to justify such a move. It may be better to initiate a general discussion on that, since the majority of the large cities in Turkey, prefer the English form, like in Istanbul, Iznik.Alexikoua (talk) 20:03, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Limited? There are 581 cities in the List of cities in Turkey and almost all have articles.  I can only find Iznik and Izmir with the diacritics removed. —  AjaxSmack   03:03, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * what about Istanbul? No wonder the 1st and 3rd largest cities of the country ignore that criteria, not to take into account the smaller ones.Alexikoua (talk) 11:13, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * This question was asked before and answered before, Istanbul is specifically covered by UN conf, İzmir isn't. In ictu oculi (talk) 19:45, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Etymology of İzmir
The user Ithinkicahn has changed (14.08.2014) the etymology, noting that there is No source for etymology including the "to" verb, as this is a folk etymology; may as well be the Turkish language inclination to add a vowel to the beginning of words starting with two consonants. First of all, “to” or "is"( εις) is a proposition, not a verb. I also see no double consonant in the beginning of Nicaea (Iznik) or Polis (Istanbul), only in Sparta (Isparta). I don’ t have yet any reliable source (linguistics book, site, e.t.c.) but the examples of relative Turkish city names provide, I think,  a sufficient justification for the etymology “is Smirnin> Izmir” (which I introduced since Feb. 2011).

I first learned about this kind of etymology from a (Greek) tour guide, while visiting Istanbul for the first time, lots of years ago. It is true that it is a wide spread etymology, especially in Greece but that does not make it a "folk" or "fake" etymology. Especially, the cases of Istankoy and Istanbul can be analysed as: "is tin Ko > is-tan-Ko* > Istankoy" and "is tin Polin> is-tan-Bol*> Istanbul", in  a word-by-word translation: "to the Kos> to-the-Koy..." and "to the City > to-the-Bol...". In both ancient and modern Greek, preposition "is" (= to) is always accompanied by articles or names in accusative case-form (Greek: "aetiatiki" case). That is the case here, as "tin" (την) form of the feminine article "the" is used, instead of the main (nominative) form i (η), in front of “is” : Is-tan-koy, not Is-i-Koy*.("Tin" is then turned to "tan", in Turkish pronunciation). -Have in mind that most of city names in Greek are feminine (including all the above), accompanied by feminine articles.- The use of the article in the right form, in both these cases, as part of "to the.." cannot be a coincidence. A last remark: today, when referring to proper nouns in Greek, the article “the” (“o/ i / toh”) is always used. However, in older and ancient Greek, the article (here: tin) before names could be (not necessarily) omitted: “I go to Athens”, but also “I go to the Athens” (It sounds strange in English, I know). That is why “ is Nikaean > Iznik ” and “ is tin Ko > Istankoy”, are both possible etymologies. All the above prove the etymology in the form “ to+(the) + [City Name] ” right, or the most probable one, for Izmir and all the respective names.

P.S. I really don’ t see the reason behind such a long discussion- dispute about Izmir or İzmir. Even though I have a clear view on it, it is the same word, in the same (Latin) scripture! Needless to mention how many different transcriptions exist for a single Greek name, e.g. in Greek road signs. Routhramiotis/Ρουθραμιώτης (talk) 19:00, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


 * While there are many city names that are formed using "is" (εις), that is not the rule; in many cases the city names were borrowed directly, in the case of Konya, even the preceding i was dropped from Ικόνιον - Iconium. I think, the most likely explanation for the addition of i in İzmir's case was, well, it had to be added because the script didn't allow Smyrna to be written. If one tried to write Smyrna ("سميرنا"), then a reader would have read it something like "Samirna". That is why an 'i' was added at the beginning of all loanwords, like station → istasyon, statistique → istatistik. After the transition the Latin alphabet, however, it became possible to write such words, so words borrowed after 1929 didn't have the initial 'i': stade/stadium → stat/stadyum, statique → statik. They could have dropped the initial 'i's from the words already in Turkish, but since the new pronunciation dictated by the alphabet was already common, they were transferred into Latin script keeping the 'i'. If Turks were using Latin alphabet when they arrived Anatolia, in all likelihood Smyrna would remain as "Smirna".


 * An interesting exception seems to be Trabzon. An 'i' was not added, so "طربزون" would probably be pronounced Tarabzon back then. But with the new alphabet, it was transcribed as Trabzon.--Cfsenel (talk) 08:16, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Name
Why is this named İzmir while Istanbul isn't İstanbul? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antondimak (talk • contribs) 21:38, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on İzmir. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110304044123/http://bliss.mu.edu.tr:80/tezdb/51008.pdf to http://bliss.mu.edu.tr/tezdb/51008.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:35, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on İzmir. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://bliss.mu.edu.tr/tezdb/51008.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090211171111/http://www.rollsrein.de/izmir.html to http://www.rollsrein.de/izmir.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100214013326/http://www.gediz.edu.tr/ to http://www.gediz.edu.tr/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:04, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

"Ege Providence"
This article contains three redlinks to Ege Providence. This looks clearly wrong, and Ege province doesn't look any better. Should the links be to Ege Bölgesi? Thanks in advance for any help. Narky Blert (talk) 15:15, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:52, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Izmir skyline.jpg

The historical affiliation section
I think that in the historical affiliation section there is recorded history of Izmir/Smyrna prior to the Roman Empire period. Obviously, the city had history and a civilization long before the Romans took hold of it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.205.231.42 (talk) 11:27, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

On Map of Asia vs. Map of Europe
On the infobox, showing the city location on a whole map of Asia + West Pacific, where let alone Izmir, Turkey is barely visible, is incredibly useless. Just as how certain Greek islands which are few km from Turkish coastline are shown on a map of Europe instead of on map which includes Cambodia and Papua New Guinea, where it is more visible and easier to pinpoint and locate geographically, it also makes way more sense to show location of Izmir on a map of Europe, simply because it can at least be located geographically in a map of Europe, unlike when it's on a map of Asia + West Pacific. I have thus edited it relevantly. Please do not turn this into a political fight and refrain from edit wars. Discuss instead. Best. Berkaysnklf (talk) 18:21, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:53, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Göztepe view.jpg
 * İzmir.jpg

CLIMATE
What about the new record high temperature for May (2020/5/18)? 86.32.54.210 (talk) 11:43, 13 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Not sure what you mean. None of the stations active in the region (see    and ) seem to have measured any record-breaking temperatures. It was a hot day for sure, but not record-breaking. Uness232 (talk) 06:39, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

CLIMATE 2
Can someone explain why Izmir has so high amount of annual sunshine hours - almost 3 000, especially compared to more southern cities like Bodrum or Fethiye, which have around 2 700? 86.32.61.234 (talk) 18:37, 24 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Most likely due to the urban heat island effect, and the resulting lack of fog. Although please read WP:NOTFORUM, specifically:
 * (...) [B]ear in mind that article talk pages exist solely to discuss how to improve articles; they are not for general discussion about the subject of the article, nor are they a help desk for obtaining instructions or technical assistance. Uness232 (talk) 19:08, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Name
Izmir is widely used as Anglicized version of İzmir. A name change can be considered as in case Istanbul. — 07  ● 💬   14:24, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Agreed. No "İ" exists in the English script. Why write Izmir as İzmir in the Turkish script then? It looks awkward. 46.31.112.222 (talk) 06:01, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:24, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Izmir Metropolitan Municipality.png

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:37, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Flag of Izmir City.gif

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:51, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Flag of Izmir City.gif

Requested move 20 December 2022

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: no consensus. I do not think a relist will break the impasse that's apparent here. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 23:57, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

İzmir → Izmir – According to | Ngram Viewer, Izmir is a much more abundant spelling and aligns with the English alphabet. The spelling Izmir seems to have existed in the English language even before the creation of the Latin-based Turkish alphabet, so it has quite a bit of history. Ayıntaplı (talk) 17:41, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose we've been through this 13 years ago. Let's not waste time again. See Lonely Planet: "İZMIR'S SEPHARDIC SYNAGOGUES When the Jews were expelled from Spain and Portugal by King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella in 1492, many settled in cities of the Ottoman Empire, in particular Constantinople (İstanbul), ..." yes low-MOS sources don't have Turkish i, but en.wp does and we spell all Latin-font article titles correctly here. Take a brief look at Category:Populated coastal places in Turkey. The change to en.wp MOS that you are are proposing  would see the entire Turkish article corpus have to be moved per WP:CONSISTENCY. And why single out Turkey articles for low-Mos titles? Why not French or German or Spanish or Polish? We've been through this. We had a massive diacritics war a decade ago. And we don't need to restart it in with İzmir. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:59, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
 * oppose per In ictu oculi and the pile of other diacritic RMs—blindlynx 20:22, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Support The article uses both Izmir and İzmir (with a diacritic) which suggests that people freely use the form they're accustomed to. 13 years ago is a distant enough past to consider revisiting the question. It wouldn't be the first and certainly not the last bitter discussion but that's not an obstacle. Likewise, some other Wikipedia pages with Izmir in the title use the spelling without a diacritic (for example Izmir Marathon, Izmir International Fair, Izmir Ethnography Museum). This all suggests a waning prescriptive view and an expanding descriptive view. The article on Roxelana was moved to Hurrem Sultan (which WP does not some time ago (without diacritics) to reflect a rise in usage of the Turkish name but diacritics were dropped as they're not as prevalent in English language. --Killuminator (talk) 20:31, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Support This is the English WP, and we should be looking for the common name in English.  A simple Google search will throw up more examples of Izmir than İzmir, but often that may be because the source does not have the font necessary for the diacritic - or it maybe because Izmir is the preferred form.  Newspapers and news media seem to use Izmir.  .  An academic article here uses Izmir, even though the content shows that the source uses İzmir in citations, so the use of Izmir is a deliberate choice.  Government sources use Izmir, even when referring to the country as Türkiye (which WP does not).   We don't have a problem with Istanbul, and we should not have a problem with Izmir either.--Mhockey (talk) 22:36, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
 * "this is the English WP" yes we heard that infinite times from those trying to strip Lech Wałęsa of diacritics in the great en.wp diacritics war a decade ago. No one has ever denied that low-MOS sources are low-MOS. We all know this. The question is, do you intend to strip the entire article corpus of full fonts? Because if not why pick on this one article? What's particular to this article that means it needs to be treated differently from the rest the encyclopaedia? Because if you do this the war will restart over the entire encyclopedia. It won't stop here. In ictu oculi (talk) 22:54, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Best not to be too simplistic about this. Why Istanbul, not İstanbul?  And best not to treat CNN, or the US and UK governments, as "low-MOS".  Just try and apply WP:COMMONNAME.  It's not always easy. Mhockey (talk) 23:14, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Diacritic War II is not what's being launched here. The remark on Istanbul is very good as it's the most comparable situation. Two large and famous cities in Turkey but no one is pushing for or using İstanbul. Izmir could be seen as a common name just like Istanbul is.--Killuminator (talk) 07:46, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
 * The question remains, where does this initiative intend to stop? The methodology "this name appears without full fonts in English books without full fonts" could be applied to any article title with full fonts from Għaxaq to Emily Brontë. So another methodology than fonts has to be applied. This Turkish city name is not an exonym, the old English name was Smyrna. If we're going to use the endonym, then we spell it correctly. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:54, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Oppose, in this modern age just omitting diacritics or certain letters is just lazy.--Ortizesp (talk) 22:40, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Support. I did Google searches on both Izmir and İzmir of site:nytimes.com, washingtonpost.com , and bbc.com to get a sense what high-quality English language sources use.  All of them have a 100% rate of using "Izmir" unadorned.  It appears this is similar to Istanbul and Tokyo.  Example sources: , , , all from 2020 so not long ago.  (It's not just the earthquake story too, that was just the most recent one in the news.)  SnowFire (talk) 06:17, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose per In ictu oculi and blindlynx. There is no convincing argument for making İzmir an exception to the general rule for treating diacritics on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not alone in giving special treatment to Istanbul, but we would be alone in giving special treatment to Istanbul and İzmir. Libhye (talk) 16:10, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I just gave three example links of the NYT, the WaPo, and the BBC using "Izmir." There are many more available if you make the Google search I recommended of "site:your-favorite-English-news-site.com Izmir" / İzmir.  So no, Wikipedia would not be alone in using "Izmir".  (And COMMONNAME is not "special treatment", it's the standard.)  SnowFire (talk) 18:28, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 * What I meant is that Wikipedia would be alone in singling out Istanbul and İzmir as the only names with İ to be written with I. The sources you mention use I for all relevant names. There are other sources that spell Istanbul with I and all other relevant names with İ, but Wikipedia would be alone in spelling Istanbul and İzmir with I and all other relevant names with İ. There is an extremely long-standing and well-established consensus to disregard diacritics when establishing the commonname, and there is zero chance of it changing. This would be a random exception to that rule and as such special treatment for no good reason. Libhye (talk) 21:41, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Support Per WP:COMMONNAME. The spelling with the Turkish I appears only rarely in English. PatricKiwi (talk) 16:04, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Strong Oppose It is not clear what exactly the purpose is. One can not help but wonder about the motivation. Is there difficulty in finding it in Wikipedia? I tried, no, it makes no difference and it is after all the proper and correct spelling in Latin alphabet. Comparison to Istanbul is apt, and maybe Istanbul should be moved to its proper name. It seems like an unnecessary distraction, confusion and arguments that are in no way constructive or make this a better article or improve Wikipedia.