The name tag is explicitly not for “descriptive” purposes. So reflecting the tag/type of element into the name tag is most likely name tag abuse and redundant.
I typically change stuff like this to be in “description” which is a lot more appropriate as name.
Flo
Problematic it becomes when many tobacconists here are just simply light signed with a nation uniform T like black field, white T and the name on the façade of Tabaccheria, more often though just Tabacchi. The operator with effort can be found out but what to fill in when prompted for a name of the shop? Otherwise anything of a ‘name’ that tells what it is rather than being area unique and people knowing 3 blocks away which one you’re talking about better is de-named.
We also have loads of street names and path names which are descriptive. E.g. many church paths are named “Kerkepad”, which is Dutch for church path. These paths were, and sometimes are still, used to go through the fields to the church. “Zuidelijke parallelweg” for the accompanying road at the south side of a motorway. “Jaagpad” for a tow path. “Eikenlaan” for a road lined by oaks. Descriptive, turned into names.
(I worry a lot more about route relation names, I feel that more can be accomplished there. )
You could turn it into a worldwide MR challenge?
there is difference between “name based on some characteristics”
in case of road I have seen and removed cases (after verification) like
name=My favourite trail for dog walking
name=Unnamed service road
name=2m wide cycleway
name=Yellow trail goes here
I think the point is that it’ll actually need on-the-ground (or photo) validation - an automatic edit or even a MapRoulette task wouldn’t work. There are lots of them - here’s another (just) in the Netherlands (which looked fairly silly when I was there a while back, when there was no visible border), and nearer to home for me, here.
Not everything on a sign is a name. Many signs are descriptive, rather than displays of names. I think “Toilet” counts as such. No one would ever say: “I was at Toilet.” No, people say: “I was at the toilet.” Toilet is a noun, not a name.
So name=Toilet on amenity=toilets is pollution of the map and should be removed.
I thought that would be a simple thing to edit, but the Germans got me blocked for fixing that: Automatisierter/Mechanischer Edit... Bolzplatz: name->description. Some of them have difficulties with distinguishing names and nouns.
I wonder if there could a be some room for a middle ground tag between description and name for generic signs like these. description could be a whole sentence (example from the wiki - This is where the first colonial settlement fleet to Australia landed in 1741), but generic signs for a business or amenity like “Tabaccheria” or “Playground” are generally just a few words at most. Perhaps a different tag like generic_label or generic_sign might be more appropriate for this sort of thing than either name or description.
Ahem - you might want to rethink exactly how you’re saying what you’re trying to say 
For completeness, the relevant user block is here.
In Nederland, all street names get the article. You say “Ik liep op het Kerkepad” (I was walking on the Church path".
I used inscription in similar cases
What if it has sign “entry 1 euro” ? Is it name=entry 1 euro ?
Remember the hotel. If the guest rooms have names on name signs, and the toilet has “Toilet” on it in the same style on exactly such a sign (been there, seen that), you could argue that that is the name of that room. I’m pretty sure “entry 1 euro” would not be on such a name plate. Moving that to a description tag wouldn’t be right anyway, I think.
That’s because these descriptive names have been formalised into actual names. This is super common for (European) streets. I doubt this practice applies to toilets and playgrounds, though.
Well it seems to be now, to flush or not to flush, that’s the question, for what’s in the name.
Even if you remove the “Toilet” or “Playground” as being a description added in the name tag, what would be the value for “name” then? Many of those places don’t have a designated name or not a sign at all denoting such.
it is perfectly fine to have no name tag, for example many natural=tree or barrier=bollard or leisure=playground have no name and no name tag
Now I expect someone to suggest noname=yes for toilets… 
noname=no
landcover=toilet
name=Toilet
amenity:hinged=door
yesname=yes
In English, there’s a very large gray area between formal and attributive names (what we tend to call “descriptive names” in OSM). Some kinds of features are routinely named systematically, such as railway stations and buildings. In general, I draw the line at a name that duplicates the local language’s predominant term for the feature type, but I’ve been defining “feature type” based on intuition to some extent:
building=yes name=Building 
amenity=parking name=Parking Lot amenity=parking access=customers name=Customer Parking Lot 
(because a lot is only called this if there’s a corresponding non-customer parking lot)In other words, how confident am I that a geocoder would come up with a reasonable label for the feature given its tags? (Not that any geocoder tries very hard to do so at the moment.)
In the U.S., we normally wouldn’t call amenity=toilet a “toilet”, but we make an exception for “public toilets”. This public toilet has a less prominently signposted name based on the park it’s in, but if that name weren’t signposted at all, I wouldn’t have added a name tag just because it says “Toilet” on it:
POIs can be inconsistent because of the public’s expectations about what they’re called. Based on common usage, I normally include a place name in the name of a community anchor institution, such as “Springfield Post Office” and “Springfield City Hall”, even if the sign only says “Post Office” or “City Hall”, because these POIs are so strongly associated with a place. On the other hand, I often tag a name on a convenience store or car wash that matches the gas station it’s attached to, without any additional qualifiers, knowing that people will correctly interpret a Nominatim result for “Car Wash Hy-Vee Gas” or a map icon for “
Hy-Vee Gas” as a car wash, not a gas station.
We have to be careful because sometimes the big sign is just an advertisement for the services or products offered, not the name of the business per se. For example, this gas station has a big “Gas Gas Gas” sign visible from the highway, but its name is actually “Marathon”, based on the brand name. This restaurant has a descriptive sign, but naming it after the hotel it’s attached to is more helpful to users. Many strip malls in suburban America have signs for “Chinese Restaurant” and “Hair & Nails” that are nearly identical to the signs for “Starbucks Coffee” and “The UPS Store”, but if you patronize one of these shops, you can get a receipt that says the real name on it. And sometimes the name really is generic or we just don’t know, so we cope with the information we do have.
It was only in the 1980s or so that American newspapers standardized on always writing the road type suffix as part of the road’s proper name in prose, e.g., “Loveland–Madeira Road” rather than “Loveland–Madeira road” for a road that connects Loveland to Madeira. Even before then, a “River road” would’ve at least had “River” as its proper name, because there are plenty of roads along rivers that don’t have that name.
(Indeed, in some other languages, the road type is still treated as an optional qualifier rather than part of the road name proper. This has been a source of some apparent disagreement between HOT and Kaart in Vietnamese, mucking up turn-by-turn guidance instructions depending on whether the routing engine includes or excludes the road type in its own sentence structures.)
for road names? definitely manual review with knowledge of naming in a given area, often also on the ground survey is needed.
But leisure=playground name=Playground with no further tags (or leisure=playground name=Plac zabaw) seem entirely safe to me to edit remotely.
Or amenity=drinking_water name=Drinking water
Or waterway=waterfall name=waterfall
Or leisure=firepit name=firepit
+1 and the same applies to
amenity=toilets with name= toilet or Toilet or toilets or Toilets or public toilet, Public Toilet, Public toilet, public toilets, Public toilets, Public Toilets etc. etc. …