Posted by Jock on June 26, 2006 at 12:39:14 from 81.76.86.2 user Jock.
In Reply to: Re: Kanchenjunga or Kangchenjunga posted by Adam Quinan on June 26, 2006 at 08:28:22:
I don't think John has offered any documentary evidence that "Kangchenjunga" was the only accepted and widely used spelling in 1930 and his statement that AR was wrong to use "Kanchenjunga" is unsupported by any evidence apart from the Wikipedia claims which I am disputing.
Absolutely right. Wikipedia is a very useful starting point for research, but it is hardly an authoratitive work of reference. Anyone can edit Wikipedia entries with the result that articles often reflect the fads and fancies of the last self-appointed editor.
For example, the Wikipedia entry on Net Neutrality looks as if it has been written by 'experts' working for the major USA telcos.
So where were we?
on Google (for what that is worth) Kanchenjunga is by far and away the most common
Kanchenjunga yields 273,000 Google entries and Kangchenjunga yields 197,000. Not only that but Britannica, Encarta and Answers.com spell it Kanchenjunga as does DarjeelingNews.Net, an international WWW community of Darjeeling enthusiasts and expats.
The use of 'Kangchenjunga' by the Royal Geographic Society or Wikipedia is a shibboleth. Neither have been given the powers by international treaty or long established convention to settle the correct spelling in the English language of geographical place names.