Below is the link to comments regarding naming mountains/peaks that do not have an official name. Curious to your thoughts.

https://www.summitpost.org/object_discu ... 114#506114

Below was my response to the question I posed here based on the question posed by a SPer on the link.

I would like and appreciate Scott's perspective and others on this site that have been instrumental on having such an impact on it's development. There are virtually thousands of mountains on this site where the authors have labeled the peak/mountain "Mount Bliss" and usually they add "point 11, 573 feet". All have the GPS coordinates as well, I'm not sure why there would be any confusion. I understand in a field of government business, but for this site.....I think it's all perfectly fine. Like I said, would be great to hear from others who have built this site up so extremely well.

Scott responded again with a more opinionated view, I agree.

Yeah, unofficial names are everywhere, and everybody uses them. Sometimes, once in a while, the USGS catches up to the hiking/climbing community and adds a name, but it usually takes decades (and/or political intervention, like for Denali). And of course there are other authorities in other countries...

No problem with using unofficial names on SummitPost, or even coining new ones, as long as the page makes clear where the name comes from.