Talk:Tag:historic=monastery

Current monasteries

If I want to tag monasteries which are still used as such, do I have to tag it with building=monastery? Mathbau 20:19, 28 August 2010 (BST)

Personally I think that the tagging this proposal suggests leads to inconsistencies and is not to be used. I'd use building=monastery for any building that was built as a monastery regardless the actual use. Please have a look at this proposal as well: Proposed_features/monastery —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dieterdreist (talk • contribs) 11:40, 3 June 2011

Active and historic

Shall an active monastery, that is also of historic value, get both tags (amenity and historic)? Taking the definition literally, one had to choose one of them. --GerdHH (talk) 13:50, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

I tried to use "Building/place that is a historically significant monastery." - is it a better definition? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 13:48, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Yes, far better. I only would avoid the double "but" (maybe "while traces ... remain"?) --GerdHH (talk) 11:54, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

building=monastery

The definition recommends to use building=monastery, but building=* lacks such a definition. The proposal had suggested more specific building types inside a monastery, as church, cloister, dormitory, refectory – which aren't yet defined either. --GerdHH (talk) 14:01, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Tag:building=monastery has it. I am not fan of it and was documenting de facto use of it when I created that page Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 13:49, 19 January 2021 (UTC)