Talk:Key:old name

Untitled

What is the meaning of "old_name:1921-1932"? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 19:06, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

It means that the tagged object, typically a street, place or building, that still exists today, had the specified name from year 1921 until 1932. See also Date_namespace --Polarbear w (talk) 22:01, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

This is inconsistent and conflicting with the meaning of date suffix. old_name:1921-1932=* would mean the relevant old_name=* from 1921 to 1932. old_name=* is not needed, as the year is specified. Simply name:1921-1932=* . The proposal linked already explained. —— Kovposch (talk) 08:27, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

I agree with Kovposch, it doesn't make semantic sense to suggest "old_name:1921-1932" to mean the name in these years, it would be the old name in these years. Let's fix it in the wiki. Also see here for an example in the data. --Dieterdreist (talk) 07:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

old_name is a temporary tag to stop people naming shops/pubs back again

In the UK, old_name is used for when a shop or pub changes its name and we want to remind people what it used to be. It is only intended as a temporary measure. Can probably be replaced by disused:name.

I highly agree that disused:name should be used instead. This building is tagged with old_name and disused:denomination, and it would be much more clear that they together describe the historic status if they were in a common namespace: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/663027892 --Xerus (talk) 07:57, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

All this date namespace stuff is historical information, and a proposal at most. I don't believe that it belongs in OSM. Jnicho02 (talk) 18:53, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Not only. For example street names may change (often for political reasons), with old street name qualifying neither to name=* nor official_name=* but still in an active use especially among old people. (at least that is how it works in Poland where we have large wave of removing road names glorifying communist regime) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 20:55, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

I agree with Mateusz. Other than razed railways or demolished buildings, name tags do not pollute the geo-space and are valuable, as you mentioned useful for shops (telling me that I cannot find the shoemaker because it turned into an insurance office now), and for streets, as said above. --Polarbear w (talk) 22:04, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

But not "this is what it was called in the 1920s". Recent changes, and only for a temporary period in order to avoid mapper edit wars. I still call a Snickers bar a 'Marathon' in the UK despite it being renamed 20 years ago, but I don't expect shops to label them with the old name just because i'm too stubborn to use the new name Jnicho02 (talk) 08:42, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

I agree that old, no longer used names should be removed. But old names still in use - even ones not signposted - can be mapped. In the same way as many objects are not signposted with names, but names are used so can be tagged Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:03, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

In my area, somebody is routinely adding old_name for cities, often with names that were used centuries ago. I believe this practice should be discouraged; old_name=* is okay for objects that changed name recently (typically they were already in OSM when the change occurred). Bxl-forever (talk) 20:41, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

No, as long as the object itself exists, I see no harm in having old_name describe the naming history. It can be quite helpful e.g. when you visit a place where you lived decades ago. Quite recently I had a case while surveying, that somebody had privately mounted the old original street sign decoratively above the new official one on his corner house facade. old_name has the advantage of being found by Nominatim. --Polarbear w (talk) 09:27, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

decades ago is perfectly fine. Unused for centuries or millennia? I am really dubious. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:36, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

It is old_name, not dead_name and this practice looks incorrect to me. Have you tried discussing with your local community or this specific mapper? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:36, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

"Names that were in use in the 20th and 21st century" (i.e. since 1900) would be a good compromise for me, that means there are people alive who remember the old_name. --Polarbear w (talk) 11:32, 10 October 2020 (UTC)