Talk:Tag:place=region

Deprecate?

Is usage of this tag recommended? If not then lets make that clear in the main text. Personally I think the that it should be. PeterIto 08:47, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

"Is usage of this tag recommended" AFAIK no, given that it is nit clearly defined and is rarely used Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 20:44, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Seeing the response from Mark in Tagging I was convinced that this tag is at present the most relevant tag to regions that are not administrative.--PangoSE (talk) 12:29, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

I would discourage using this tag. It's not clearly defined. In Indonesia it was used for regencies previously, but these are now properly mapped as admin_level=5 administrative boundaries (just below provinces). In some places it's been used for parts of a mountain range, like a part of the Alps, but these areas do not have a verifiable boundary. I don't think we should try to map un-official regions. --Jeisenbe (talk) 07:46, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Would this tag be acceptable to map a region that is no longer official (with no admin boundaries) but is still widely used socially, culturally and turisticly? One such example is Algarve, in Portugal. It was a province, which doesn't exist any more, but is known by everyone. How should that be tagged if not with place=region? Would it be sufficient to use a boundary type relation? --AntMadeira (talk) 18:29, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

I edited the page to clarify that the discouragement applies specifically to administrative regions (for which better tagging indeed exists). In the Kingdom of the Netherlands we also have various regions with clearly defined boundaries that are commonly known and used for e.g. statistics, but are not an administrative entity. --JeroenvanderGun (talk) 21:54, 4 August 2021 (UTC)