gzotti
commented
3 years ago IAU did not care for star names before 2014 or so, therefore the original name lists came from 20th-century literature, but yes, using the IAU list as base reference is "officially required".
Phad is a frequently found name (spelling version) for Phecda. Alkaphrah may have been rarely used (and used for both kappa and chi UMa), so IAU decided to use it for kappa only. However, the newly adopted name of Chinese origin was not in common use (outside traditional Chinese astronomy) either, and it does not fit to the figure from European antiquity. The IAU list now tries to introduce "global diversity" of star names but IMHO breaks the links between star names and their respective place in the constellation (i.e., IAU constellation of western-only origin). But this seems of no concern to the people involved.
You can be sure the star names topic will be evolving over the next few years.
xalioth
1) δ Boo is given as "Printseps", which is not known to Wikipedia (en, de), Google and Sesame (http://cds.u-strasbg.fr/cgi-bin/Sesame). "Princeps" though is known to Wikipedia (en) and Google, but it seems not to be in use in the professional astronomer community though, as it's similarly not listed in Sesame. BTW a lot of the hits in Google refer to astrology websites.
2) In UMa Phecda (IAU) is given as Phad, Phecda is not found by the search.
3) χ UMa is given as Alkaphrah, which is listed by IAU as κ UMa, the official IAU name Taiyangshou is not known.
4) 1+2+3 are also true for the IOS App "Stellarium"
5) Stellarium does not have these issues.
This is western star culture.
Please rectify as it greatly diminishes the usefulness of these Stellarium offers.