A quote from that old thread from the DWG includes:
Data Working Group’s position on this is that the community - meaning
all who live and map there - need to come to an amicable resolution and
as long as they don’t, the node will either remain nameless, or it will
have both a Hebrew and Arab name combined in the “name” tag.
See also a later post in the same thread, but to be clear these discussions are from 2011 and in OSM terms ancient history.
It is now 2026 and there are widely-implemented ways of displaying names that don’t rely on just one name tag, although the local communities may prefer some name in there.
I’m actually more concerned about the other edits. Taking another example, the edit there is a revert to the previous status quo, but I am unaware of any reports around the previous mapper; until just now there has been no attempt to contact them and I am not aware of any DWG reports.
I’ll suggest to “ReviewOrRevert” that they discuss all their edits in this thread.
Over the years the idea that the dispute (and hence the resolution) is no longer relevant has surfaced several times, even by DWG members, for example here. (I am pretty sure there were several discussions but couldn’t find all links). However, it seems there was no modification to the “official” 2011 resolution. This created the present situation where the 2011 resolution is de-jure only, and the node has had a name tag for most of its lifetime.
Regarding the specific Kfar Kanna edit: The name should be in Arabic according to the Israel name tag guidelines: Israel - OpenStreetMap Wiki - so I agree in principle with the revert, but contacting the mapper is the better thing to do to avoid misunderstandings and edit wars.
The name=* tag should be used as the primary name, given in a single language selected like this:
If there is signage with only one language, or one language more prominent than others (e.g. a shop’s sign or a street name sign), use that language. This is the normal rule for name=*.
Otherwise, use the language most commonly spoken in the area (usually Hebrew or Arabic).
If two or more languages are equally common in the area, use your judgement or use the same language as nearby objects.
Deviation from the priorities listed here is sometimes justified, for example if the local population prefers a different language from the signed one. In those cases, the reason for the selected language should be documented in note:name=* to inform other mappers.
Looking at some more edits by Ocd_mapper961 - it does appear they deviated from the IL naming guidelines on several occasions, changing the name to Hebrew in some Arabic-majority areas.