सम्भाषणम्:उत्तराखण्डराज्यम्

I suggest moving text to उत्तराखण्ड --Adroit09 १७:३०, १७ मेय् २०११ (UTC)

With due respect, I strongly oppose. My reasoning is that, the way it is written currently here is as you would pronounce it. Whereas in Hindi, even उत्तराखण्ड is pronounced as उत्तराखण्ड्, if it was Hindi, I would have agreed with you. So उत्तराखण्ड in Sanskrit is uttaraakhaNDa, whereas the actual pronunciation is uttaraakhaND. I hope I have explained it clearly. - रामप्रियः १७:५३, १७ मेय् २०११ (UTC)

thanks रामप्रियः ... I am still not sure because the 'khand/khanda' portion in Sanskrit is same as खण्ड and खण्ड् won't be considered a word as such ... As far as I think खण्ड् doesn't make sense though खण्ड or खण्डम् would ... hence I still stand by my request. --Adroit09 १९:००, १९ मेय् २०११ (UTC)

I beg to differ. We are not talking about translating the word here but transliterating it as it is a pronoun. Of course खण्ड् is no word in Sanskrit, but it is not generally pronounced as खण्ड. If we were translating it, then I would agree with you. Btw, this topic now has been raised in Village pump. - रामप्रियः ^{सम्भाषणम्} १७:३३, २६ मेय् २०११ (UTC)

As far as possible, we should maintain the original names. That is, I suggest that Uttarakhand be written as उत्तराखण्ड्. Writing it as उत्तराखण्ड or उत्तराखण्डम् would deviate from the actual name. Rao7 •^Talk ०७:४३, २७ मेय् २०११ (UTC)