Please use more descriptive changeset comments. It is difficult to determine what the intent of your edit is otherwise.

It is likely to be a footbridge, if not a ford. It is possible, though rare, for there to be a culvert instead.

If you don't know, it is best to leave it as an issue and wait for someone with the right knowledge to fix it.

Personal info needs to be redacted by the DWG. Those are not proper names for the houses. Not everything has a name.

It's now on the The Oaks North No. 10 plat.

Please use more descriptive changeset comments.

Usually we don't put names on sidewalks the same as the road they line unless the sidewalk is also signposted with a name.

It was intentional. Just an uninformed property owner. Reverted.

This is not a real business. This is an office operated from someone's home. It does not belong on OpenStreetMap.

A place does not become a parking lot because people park there. That is not what "on the ground" means. That is ridiculous.

Fixed in changeset/124326991

Worse, it's only one building. All the buildings are very low quality. Are we really dumping this stuff on other impoverished countries? HOTOSM needs to teach users to draw buildings properly.

Why are there so many with this particular and completely incorrect formatting?

It looks like a real entry, just not tagged appropriately.

Check node/9693388114. Just a quarter of a mile from a peak with over 3000 feet high difference?

Yes, "local knowledge" is a very common source tag. It was probably just another user that gave you that info. Every edit has a source. Technically you don't have to tag it, but then people can question you about it. Also, people will not treat "local knowledge" as unquestionable. If other sources seem to make it improbable people will want to verify.

Yes, many businesses are missing. OpenStreetMap is reliant on surprisingly few contributors, at least in the US. It got its start in the UK and is most popular in Germany.

It was probably the editor then. I readded the tag for you.

I am not a moderator. I don't believe any moderators have talked to you, just other contributors. This is a very decentralized effort and so you can't guarantee that everyone has infinite patience. If people are being abusive you can use the site's report feature, of course.

No tags are permissible. OpenStreetMap is for what exists on the ground. I couldn't find any evidence that this is considered historic by any actual authority. There is seemingly no on-the-ground presence (others have said you need to be invited in for it to be appropriate), so it should not be marked. We are not Google Maps or any other site. Just because they mark it one way doesn't mean we do. If I found out my home was once used for filming an old TV show I would not let it be marked because I would not let people tour it and wouldn't want them to come visit.

If the residence is no longer in use and has been turned into a tourist attraction, then it would be appropriate. If it is considered historic by the government, that is also acceptable. But if a bunch of people wanted to check out your home even though you didn't want them to and it's only set up for you to live in, it would not be okay to tag. It is not okay for whomever lives here now.

You changed Classic's Burgers to building=yes from building=commercial. Maybe the editor did it for you (and it can be unintuitive), but you need to make sure to check those things. I switched it back, though.

Yes, but you should be tagging your changeset with your sources, rather than waiting for questions. It would be great to link to that. Of course
you cannot copy from other platforms that don't explicitly permit OSM usage. It is copyright infringement.