Overall, there probably wouldn't be a problem with naming ships after geographical locations. Looking at a list of active British Navy ships, there are ships named after rivers (H.M.S. Tyne), and dukedoms which are now more popularly known in modern culture as cities (H.M.S. Lancaster or (H.M.S. Richmond). Chinese naval vessels are almost all named after cities or landmarks.
What they would probably not be named after, however, are places and events that have negative connotations. Sailing culture in general is very superstition, possibly due to being stuck aboard a tiny vessel where even a slight mistake can mean potential death for a long period of time, and its possible to assume for this reason the same might apply to starships. This is the reason you don't see any ships today named Titanic, aside from those looking for shock value. Such a name would be seen as tempting fate. If the purpose is to honor the memories of Earth, it is likely they would choose names that have positive connotations as well.
From a writing perspective, such a name is also a massive red flag that something is going to go wrong, to the point that Doctor Who and Futurama used it for comedic irony because it would seem so obvious to the audience and the writers couldn't make the joke with a straight face.
Schlock Mercenary has its battleships (battleplates) named after meteor impacts (Chicxulub, Manicougan, etc.), but in this case the name has a different purpose. For one, it is basically advertising "our battleship is as strong as the meteor that did this massive impact" and also ties to the primary in-universe function of battleplates as deflecting meteor strikes rather than any truly military function (prior to the plot they were mostly static defense because they couldn't fit through the gate network). And on top of that the ships are named after the impactor not the impactee (contra something like ICP/USS Pompeii).
In other words, ICP/USS Rome or ICP/USS Vesuvius are likely, ICP/USS Pompeii or ICP/USS Herculaneum are not.