Hello,
Is there a difference between Relation: Algarve (5404608) | OpenStreetMap
and Relation: Algarve (1253665) | OpenStreetMap ?
They look the same to me, same tags, same wikidata id. Is the boundary=historic one maybe no longer needed? Or does it need an end_date? I see the note:en tag “it is mapped because of its current usage by the general public.” but don’t understand who’d use it.
(I cycled the GR13 - Via Algarviana, beautiful region)
Thanks a lot
Hi, @mtmail.
In fact, the two boundaries have the same limits, but different boundary and border_type tags.
Besides the archipelagos of Madeira and Azores, it’s the only old province where the old boundaries coincide with the new. Mind you that the historic boundary corresponds to the old provinces of Portugal, something that is in the to do list of the Portuguese OSM community, since it’s the only one mapped correctly.
Glad you enjoyed the GR13. Portugal is a paradise for hikers and bikers alike. 
Regards.
I believe it would be appropriate to link the relation with boundary=historical to the Wikidata item Q15782399 (which represents the historical province of Algarve), and remove the NUTS tags from it, leaving them to the boundary=statistical relation.
In fact, one could even argue for splitting the latter into two items, one for the NUTS 2 region (Q76516549) and another for the NUTS 3 region (Q26831).
WDYT?
NUTS regions can have multiple codes. Liechtenstein for example is a level 0,1,2 and 3. Relation: Liechtenstein (1155955) | OpenStreetMap So splitting Algarve into two, which again have the same boundaries, shouldn’t be needed.
Ok, makes sense. What about the changes I proposed to the boundary=historical relation?