In comments on a question about whether to use historical or modern place names, @LennartRegebro raised the interesting question of spelling reform, and whether it was fine to use reformed spelling for place names in languages that experienced such reform (e.g., Swedish, German, Russian).

It occurred to me that while at first glance the answer seems inconsequential (it probably does it matter if you use ß or ss in German), in some cases the answer may not be so obvious. For example, what is the correct way to handle to romanized Chinese names (as rendered in English)? Is it appropriate to use the modern spelling standard called Pinyin, introduced in 1956, for names associated with events that occurred prior to 1956, when the Wade-Giles romanization was the dominant standard?

In comments on a question about whether to use historical or modern place names, @LennartRegebro raised the interesting question of spelling reform, and whether it was fine to use reformed spelling for place names in languages that experienced such reform (e.g., Swedish, German, Russian).

It occurred to me that while at first glance the answer seems inconsequential (it probably does it matter if you use ß or ss in German), in some cases the answer may not be so obvious. For example, what is the correct way to handle to romanized Chinese names (as rendered in English)? Is it appropriate to use the modern spelling standard called Pinyin, introduced in 1956, for names associated with events that occurred prior to 1956, when the Wade-Giles romanization was the dominant standard?