![](/static/61a827a1/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/13c64711-f6bb-429b-a54a-4e65e4e37046.png)
Glad you already learned this is probably nonsense. The wrong reasoning is very similar to much thought about overpopulation. The amount of people that makes for a place to be overpopulated is a function of how societies work and the technologies they have at hand. One extra issue there is that improvements in technology usually lead to population growth, so much progress gets cancelled out.
OpenStreetMap also needs to deal with this kind of thing. In this case, several people already tried to add it to the map in some form of other, but generally not as something to actually be shown. There is a looong discussion about it here https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/gulf-of-america-gulf-of-mexico/124571 . General opinion is that it is (or will be) “the official name that the US says it has”. In OSM you can invent tags for anything, so an object can have many names. Done like this, anyone using the data can still choose to give precedence to any “official US names that are not in common use yet”. Later it may be upgraded ased on if it becomes a common alternative name, just in the US, or maybe beyond. All those options can have their own special tag. And only very motivated data users will ever show it to map users. But if you do a search for Gulf of America, you will be able to find it.