Маємо цікаву відповідь від DWG:
Just to be clear - as per Verifiability - OpenStreetMap Wiki , all data in OSM needs to be verifiable. There are a couple of examples around the world where one language has multiple ways of writing it (see Names - OpenStreetMap Wiki for examples).
However, generally speaking, transliteration and translation should be avoided. If there really is a sign in a certain language, or some other licence-compatible way of verifying that name, then it makes sense for a place to have multiple languages. If there isn’t, it doesn’t.
As an example, it wouldn’t surprise me if there was a verifiable Unkrainian name for Relation: Спасский район (1644131) | OpenStreetMap , but I’d be very surprised if all of the examples that were recently changed were verifiable.
That said, that doesn’t mean that the actual name:uk in this changeset are correct. The one used for OSM Deep History was the same as was added in Changeset: 135670474 | OpenStreetMap by someone whose work was (in the Ukrainian forum) notorious for its poor quality.
– Andy, from OSM’s Data Working Group
Changeset: 140296500 | OpenStreetMap
А особливо
However, generally speaking, transliteration and translation should be avoided. If there really is a sign in a certain language, or some other licence-compatible way of verifying that name, then it makes sense for a place to have multiple languages. If there isn’t, it doesn’t.
А значить що уся російська мова підлягає видаленню в Україні, оскільки її не існує на жодних покажчиках, документах і написах.