William Hamblin and Daniel Peterson, writing for the Deseret News, Friday, Aug. 5, 2016;  

Ffty emblem glyphs are our only source of place names (toponyms) for Book of Mormon times.  This compares with thousands of toponyms found in ancient Near Eastern sources.

Given the extraordinarily sparse and ambiguous data we do possess, it would be difficult if not impossible to identify Book of Mormon place names in inscriptional Maya emblem glyphs — our only source of contemporary data. Critics of the Book of Mormon often maintain that this fact somehow constitutes evidence against the historicity of the Book of Mormon. It doesn’t. Rather, the lack of data simply means that no significant conclusion can be drawn regarding Book of Mormon place and personal names.

Because of the absence of ancient Maya data, attempts to correlate Book of Mormon place names cannot be evidentially significant. In other words, without sufficient data, the question cannot be examined or answered in any meaningful way. The Book of Mormon doesn’t fail the test, because there’s insufficient evidence to undertake a test at all. 

 If we had hundreds or, better, thousands of Preclassic Mesoamerican toponyms, a significant examination of their relationship (or lack thereof) to Book of Mormon proper names could be undertaken. But we don’t.