@SomeoneElse, They do, I've been in the UAE for business trips many times, and I've met locals from Sharjah and Ras al-Khaimah alongside locals from Abu Musa in Dubai and they all do say "it is an invaded island" and they are part of their homeland.
Anyway, I removed the disputed relations from the administrative boundaries. Will discuss this later in mailing list when I have time.

Why did you removed the Arabic names?

Why did you remove the Arabic name?

What is the difference between this and changeset/123963311 ?

Read my comments again.
Regards.

Hi

> Don't assume things simple. Iran has many Arabs that are Iranian and love their country...
- So they love Iran so much that they say we are not part of Iran and fly the UAE flag? https://www.albayan.ae/across-the-uae/news-and-reports/2017-11-03-1.3088371

> Please leave it in peace as it was with my last edit on it, and don't impose claims into the map.
- OSM is open data not your own, and the DWG previously stated that
"it's actually quite useful to have a way of representing different border disputes in an area (there are many places where two countries claim the same territory, Having a disputed boundaries won't affect how existing "boundary=administrative" relations are processed."

> General rule in OSM is on the ground rule or physical control...
- And still, Crimea is part of the administrative boundaries of Ukraine, how can you explain this?
See relation/60199
I will discuss this in the mailing list later because there is zero difference between Russian annexing Crimea with military power and Iran annexing the 3 islands also with military power, same invasion, different year.

> My problem isn't existence of claims, but turning claims into realities on the map.
- These "claims" as you described them, exist in the reality, see the first link and the previous sources I sent you.

Currently, the countries do not overlap with each other, the only complaint from the DWG was about relation/307763 and relation/304938 overlaps and that was fixed.
Lastly, if you want to edit the boundaries of Sharjah, and Ras al-Khaimah, please discuss this with the local community and tell them that you're about to edit their boundaries and remove the islands.

Regards.

Why did you delete the houses?

Why did you delete the name:ar tag?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123914030

Why did you delete this building?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123914936

Why did you delete the name:ar tag?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123949083

Why did you delete the name:ar tag?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123951144

again why did you delete the name:ar?
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123951851

again why did you delete the name:ar?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123951851

Why are you deleting the name:ar tags?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123951349

Hello ڕاستی, Why did you changed lots of the names and removed Arabic names like way/366321082 ?

Hello ڕاستی,
Why did you delete the Arabic names from node/4735129987 and way/860516298?
You also changed other names, please explain what you did here.

>did you make any discussion with the community, specially Iranians
- The locals are Arabs and they stated that they are part of the UAE, so when we map, we map based on the locals. Also, I did not remove anything from iran just added disputed borders.
>What actually deserve a discussion, are claims.
-No, imagine discussing Crimea with the Russians, they will deny the disputed borders and say it's part of Russia only, just like you when you deleted the disputed borders from OSM in changeset/123506738 and the Wiki in osm.wiki/w/index.php?title=Disputed_territories&type=revision&diff=2355906&oldid=2355373
>I didn't referred to those points of myself when I .... but I referred to your words
-I did not say to do what you did here. They only mention the overlapping from the DWG was between relation/307763 and relation/304938 only, so I fixed that overlapping for now.
Regards.

*It was incorrect before and correct now.

It is correct, zarih (Mausoleum) is only a cover of the grave, the grave is the main feature.
For example the Pyramids considered as zarih in Arabic, see Wikipedia link above, and we can not say "ضريح فلان" but we say "هرم كذا".

>Thanks. And what about the node? Same rule applies on it? It seems different.
the node indicate the location of the grave (قبر) inside the Mausoleum (ضريح).
You can learn more about this word in Arabic here:
https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/ضريح