adm1 Libya has some possibly mixed-up subdivision names, ISO 3166-2 codes, HASC codes

[MLWorley]

For Libya's subdivisions, the boundaries look all right for ne_10m_admin_1_states_provinces, but some of the names and ISO 3166-2 codes don't seem to completely match what I understand they ought to be; there are a few invalid ISO 3166-2 codes in use there.

(For comparison, see https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:code:3166:LY and https://gadm.org/maps/LBY_1.html).

• adm1_code = LBY-2882, name = 'Ghadamis', iso_3166_2 = 'LY-GD', hasc_code = 'LY.GD' should have name = 'Nalut', iso_3166_2 = 'LY-NL', hasc_code = 'LY.NT'
• adm1_code = LBY-2976, name = 'Mizdah', iso_3166_2 = 'LY-MZ', hasc_code = 'LY.MZ' should have name = 'Al Jabal al Gharbi', iso_3166_2='LY-JG', hasc_code = 'LY.JG'
• adm1_code = LBY-2978, name = 'Tajura' wa an Nawahi al Arba', iso_3166_2 = 'LY-TN', hasc_code = 'LY.TN' should have name = 'Tripoli', iso_3166_2='LY-TB', hasc_code='LY.TR'
• adm1_code = LBY-2983, name = 'Aldabiya', iso_3166_2 = 'LY-AJ', hasc_code = 'LY.AJ' should have name = 'Al Wahat', iso_3166_2='LY-WA', hasc_code = 'LY.AW'
• adm1_code = LBY-2986, name = 'Al Qubbah', iso_3166_2 = 'LY-QB', hasc_code = 'LY.QB' should have name = 'Darnah', iso_3166_2='LY-DR', hasc_code = 'LY.DA'

There are some cases where the iso_3166_2 seems OK but the hasc_code isn't:

• adm1_code = LBY-5488, name = 'Wadi al Hayaa', iso_3166_2='LY-WD', hasc_code = 'LY.GT' but should be 'LY.WH'
• adm1_code = LBY-2967, name = 'Ash Shati'', name_alt = 'Wadi Ash Shati'', iso_3166_2 = 'LY-WS', the hasc_code = 'LY.SH' but should be 'LY.WS'. This might be clearer if the name were set to the value of the name_alt field instead, perhaps?