Talk:Key:ruins
I'd like to propose also ruins=remnants instead of ruins=yes in case there is not much visible. It is suggested to use historic=archaeological_site in this case but it loses the information of the original building. The site_type proposal is not suitable, IMO. I'm interested in castles - usually, there are typical remnants of fortification, and calling one object historic=castle ruins=yes and another, which looks very similar at the first sight, but the walls already covered by soil, "archaeologic_site", seems to me a bit ... weird. Especially in the Czech Republic, where the hiking maps use the same symbol for both. --Kavol 22:23, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Moved discussion here
I have transferred the following discussions here, in order to document actual usage
There is no wide consensus on using this tag, feel free to discuss on the page Proposed features/ruins for tagging ruins.
This was suggested on Proposed features/ruins#First solution
Usage
Instead of using the deprecated historic=ruins we (who is "we" ? not me at least !) encourage everyone to add ruins=yes in addition to an already existing tag (such as historic=castle)
See the the proposal and related discussion: Talk:Proposed features/ruins
Structures that have no historic importance
Not sure what the current state of art is, but this wiki page says:
For ruined structures that have no historic importance ... it's better to use building=ruins and abandoned:building=yes in this case.
However, Key:building page says on building=ruins the following:
...should be used for building constructed as ruins (for example sham ruins in an English landscape garden). Frequently used incorrectly, for house, a village or other building abandoned...
So this might be a bit confusing I guess. --AlesKubr (talk) 05:36, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, I agree. I see that the tag building=ruins has different meanings and maybe in the future, it should only be used for those buildings which were constructed to look line ruins. But I'm not sure whether it would be so "easy" to change the meaning of that tag. But maybe we should change the text concerning building=ruins on this page to say that building=ruins should not get the meaning to mark abandoned buildings anymore? My opinion is that buildings stay on the same value, even when they get disused and abandoned, so an abandoned house stays a building=house, and then additional tags like ruins=yes should be used to mark that it is a ruin. The type of building does not change when the building's condition changes. --Lukas458 (talk) 21:11, 28 April 2020 (UTC)