The fact is it probably does not conflict with any OSM rules, but purpose of any map is to inform the users not mislead them. I gave you an example, which is the only reason I'm here and I can repeat it if you wish - this name appears on many maps that uses OSM data, for example in Riga city geoportal georiga.eu basemap layer in many apps is OSM and this square name appears (currently it's updated to not include it) on them where the label is formated in such a way that it seems to be of the same status and importance as any other square in Riga, which is misleading the user. E.g. the same as "Akadēmijas laukums", "Doma laukums" etc (which are actual adresses, like Doma laukums 1). To elaborate, multiple collegues at Riga City Developement department, especially those working with Historic Center of Riga and spatial planning have expressed concerns with this name, that's why I'm here trying to resolve this somehow. Now looking at the map and not having technical knowledge of OSM I would say that all the square names proposed by Rīgas Nami could be formatted similarily to how pavilions are formatted, since they are part of the market and map users clearly differentiate that these are part of the market and not squares/adresses like other "laukumi" in Riga.

Thanks for the detailed reply, but you completely ignored/missed my whole point. I just tried to clarify how a square is officially named in Riga city, because you wrote "so for all intents, it is the official name", when it's clearly not. I understand how OSM can include whatever names users submit official or not. My point is that in this particular case this name is in conflict with Riga historic center spatial plan and the way it appears on this map it misleads users that it is infact official name/adress of this square. Solution could be finding a technical way to format the label differently from other squares as i said, but i'm not sure if that is possible in OSM. To keep it short just one more point, I'm not gona reply to all techical details, they are irrelevant to the discusion in my opinion - the name is not widely used, it's just a possible/proposed name mentioned in markets spatial developement conception with a single other mention found outside of that. I think you way overstate the importance of this name, while you probably think I'm overstating the issue here or missing it completely so I'm honestly not sure how to resolve this.

Hey, thanks for the reply. Yes, i'm aware of the fact that Rīgas nami, which is a SIA under Riga city municipality, has named this place like this in their spatial developement conception last year and even found they organised one event in this space under this name ("Lietuviešu tirgus" in may 2025). Adjacent street name was also changed to Emīlijas Benjamiņas street last year. But that doesn't change the fact, that acording to rules by Cabinet of Ministers Nr. 455 "Adresācijas noteikumi" street and square names in cities are given by local municipality council. In Riga city there is a special commission of placenames "Rīgas vietvārdu un pilsētvides objektu nosaukumu komisija" which evaluates propositions of giving or changing street and square names and then drafts a resolution for city council to vote on, so the final decision is made by the council. It is unlikely that this commission or council would approve of naming this square like this when there is already a street named similarily adjacent to it and Emīlija Benjamiņa has no direct historical connection to this place, or market in general which makes it even more unlikely to become the official name for this possible square. I will give you one example how this named space already appears on maps circumventing the existing order of things is already misleading map users - in Riga city geoportal georiga.eu basemap layer in many apps is OSM and this square name appears on them where the label is formated in such a way that it seems to be of the same status and importance as any other square in Riga, which is misleading the user. E.g. the same as "Akadēmijas laukums", "Doma laukums" etc. In addition it is important to underline that Riga city historic center (RVC) is a place of special importance as a UNESCO heritage site and even seemingly trivial things like squares are strictly defined in spatial plan of RVC, for example adjacent "Nēģu laukums" appears on the spatial plan. Taking this all in consideration even if it seems trivial it is important that this square does not appear of OSM maps or at the minimum uses a different label formating than other official squares to not mislead the map user.