Ruben Cassar wrote:I know the history. I know that Kyiv is Ukrainian and Kiev is from Russian using the Latin alphabet.
First of all as you stated at that time Russian was used as Ukraine was just a republic of the USSR so it should be Kiev. Even you agree with that. So that should be enough to close this argument once and for all. It's historical accuracy that we are after and this is a World War II map.
Second in the anglophone world no one writes Kyiv when referring to Kiev. They always use Kiev. Check newspapers, TV stations, books, etc. So why should we use Kyiv? As for your link I trust much more the BBC for accuracy than the CIA Factbook. Proof of that is all the incorrect data they have on my own country.
On your link about Moscow. That's hardly reference, a link from a forum? Anyone could write what they want there. Anyway my point is that Москва is translated to Moskva using the Latin alphabet, however in English we use Moscow. I think even Qwert can confirm this as he uses the Cyrillic alphabet.
You are wrong. When you talk about modern, present days Ukraine, you must use Kyiv, anything else is wrong. And in all newspapers, which have a modern dictionary around, and stay up to date with current situation in Ukraine would use word "Kyiv". At least that is happening here, in Canada, where there are a lot of ties with Ukraine.
When you write Kiev for the modern Ukraine, it is just arrogance, and not respecting the will of the country.
As per Moscow discussion, I never said it should be Moskva. "Moscow" is that is how they like themselves to be called. That link would just give you some ideas, about the etymology of the word Moscow, and why is it different from Russian transliteration.
But I will close this argument, because for the sake of this map, I'd prefer all USSR cities to be written in Russian transliteration.
](./images/smilies/eusa_wall.gif "Brick wall"){kind=small}
LOL
highest score: 2157 (Major) / Verd ori'shya beskar'gam
