I fully agree with @AnyFile
Use the archaic Italian name for old_name:it and the modern Slovene name for name:it in this case.
1 Like
As others have mentioned, unless the place has become unmentionable in the Italian language 
, it has an Italian name, but the name might be identical to the name in another language such as Slovenian. There’s no universal rule that says the name:* tag in a particular language must be derived a certain way. However, different languages have different levels of tolerance for foreign borrowings. Some languages like English and Latin tend to apply certain transformations to a name when borrowing, such as stripping diacritics. In some languages, maybe Italian, the level of tolerance for foreign borrowings may vary by the speaker’s background.
No, in modern italian maps and atlases usually languages which don’t need a transliteration remain written in the same way with their ž, č, and so on, so that’s not an issue (we even use letters that are not present in the “base” latin alphabet when transliterating russian for example). It’s different only for the macron in japanese and other languages, that usually falls (so Tōkyō becomes Tokyo).
1 Like
My changes (Node History: Poljubinj (1445112968) | OpenStreetMap) and those of many other users (Changeset: 140572889 | OpenStreetMap), that have pointed out that those names are not used anymore, have been reverted (most probably by the same user that originally inserted them) without any kind of discussion and with a rationale that seems, at least to me, in contrast with the general guidelines that regolate the tagging on OSM (we should use names that the people actually use, not latin names and so on…). What can I do?
Have you invited them in changeset comments to this thread?
Those were some of the few edits that I made before opening this thread as I noticed that the issue was involving a lot of places, so no. I made a reference to this thread only in the following edits.
Anyway the edit war is taking place since a lot of time ago in a lot of other places, see for example here Node History: Komen (286571767) | OpenStreetMap (places which I did not edit, I want to be clear about that, it’s happening between the user who reverted me and another user)
Oh, and if they ignore changeset comments and continue editing then I would contact DWG and complain about editor refusing to communicate (just about that: mail them changeset comment link, link to later edit).
Typical DWG action is 0-hour block that forces user to read message set by DWG.
1 Like
I certainly agree to use old_name:it as proposed instead of name:it for old, not more used italian names!