Talk:Key Monastery

Tibet High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tibet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Tibet 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.TibetWikipedia:WikiProject TibetTemplate:WikiProject TibetTibet articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Buddhism Mid‑importance

	This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Buddhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Buddhism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page for more details on the projects.BuddhismWikipedia:WikiProject BuddhismTemplate:WikiProject BuddhismBuddhism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

India Mid‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The correct name?[edit]

I think it should probably be Ki - that seemed to be how it was generally referred to in the region, and is by far the most popular term on google:

"ki monastery" spiti - 1980 hits on google

"kee monastery" spiti - 896 hits on google

"kye monastery" spiti - 759 hits on google

"key monastery" spiti - 574 hits on google

Tomtefarbror (talk) 11:06, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for bringing this up. I was travelling there a few years ago and both English spellings were used. "Key" was very common and used on signs at the monastery itself, though other places had the form "Ki". I will add a photo of the dedication stone for a new Prayer Hall which uses the form "Key Monastery" to the article. I think we should retain things as they are now with redirects from Ki Monastery. Hope this is satisfactory. John Hill (talk) 11:17, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds fine - as long as all the variants are listed and redirected. Thanks for the quick reply. Tomtefarbror (talk) 11:25, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@Tomtefarbror and John Hill: Hi! I think I'm joining this discussion a 'little' late! but better late than never. Please refer to Official Website of Lahaul-Spiti District Administartion. Here the name is mentioned as KYE. So, In my view, official name should be primarily used.--Manoj Khurana (talk) 05:33, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Manoj Khurana. Thanks for your comment. I have been prompted by you to consider the subject again and then noticed we don't have the name of the monastery either in Tibetan or any of the other local languages. Presumably the forms in the English alphabet just represent different attempts to Anglicize a foreign name. I have just added a note pointing out that the locals pronounce the name like 'key' in English. I don't know how to decide whether one should accept the Lahaul-Spiti District Administration's use as "official" rather than the form used on the signs at the monastery and by the Dalai Lama's office. Many Anglicized names in India are spelled in a number of different ways - especially for smaller places - sometimes differing from one government department to another. It does not mean one is correct and the others are wrong. To my mind it does not matter so much which one of these Anglicized variants is used in the title of the article, so long as there are proper redirects from other ways of spelling the name in Roman characters. But that is just my opinion. It would be very good, though, if we could find the Tibetan and/or Ladakhi, and other forms of the name from other languages such as Hindi. Cheers, John Hill (talk) 06:36, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

While I agree that there can be more than one correct way to transliterate into the Latin script, the approach that's been taken here is to use an English word that sounds the same. This is an extremely unmethodical way of doing things, and as such makes the pronunciation unclear. (On seeing it for the first time I would expect it has a diphthong) While I don't doubt that this spelling is used on some signs or in other official contexts, it is not the only official spelling. it is also my memory that "Ki" was the most commonly used spelling. As per above, "Key" is the *least* common spelling of google hits. I would like to change the article name to "Ki Monastery". As that spelling is both more common, it follows transliteration conventions more consistently. --Keithonearth (talk) 18:59, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Key Monastery. 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/20090804153919/http://www.surfindia.com/travel/himachal-pradesh/kye-monastery.html to http://www.surfindia.com/travel/himachal-pradesh/kye-monastery.html

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 13:20, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]