Since English "Columbia" has the same
meaning as Spanish "Colombia" (namely something like "Columbian (land)"/"(land) of Columbus"), I'm curious why the former didn't ultimately end up being considered "the English version" of the latter. In some other cases we have English names that are considered correct ways to refer to foreign locations (e.g. Deutschland → Germany, Köln → Cologne, Roma → Rome, Warszawa → Warsaw, Italia → Italy, España → Spain, Lisboa → Lisbon, México → Mexico, Perú → Peru, Brasil → Brazil), which are considered perfectly normal, although some are contested (Türkiye → Turkey, Côte d'Ivoire → Ivory Coast).
I agree that this didn't happen in the case of the English name of Colombia, and that the English name of Colombia is "Colombia", not "Columbia", but again I wonder why this didn't end up being regarded as a "translation" of the country's name.