Regarding the position of the pipeline:
I assume that it always parallels the service road that is visible in the places that I mentioned?

I am not a local, so I won't contribute to the discussion. What I see now after your recent changes looks good to me.

Ah, OK, your cs comment said Esri World Imagery (Clarity) Beta, but you are right, Esri World Imagery shows the buildings with the current shapes.

OK, I give up. You want to establish a new tag here and up to now it seems that I am the only one who doesn't like it. Since you added access=no at least it should not any harm.

Ah, yes, it is OK to use junction=roundabout on a node for small roundabouts which are not mini-roundabouts.

My understanding of the wiki
junction=roundabout
is that the tag junction=roundabout should not be used on nodes at all.
Which routing apps do you mean?

Hi!
Please check typo highway=untrack
on way/593192830
I guess you wanted to change it from unclassified to track, but the northern end
is still a bridge with highway=tertiary which is connected to a highway=unclassified.
Please note that highway=track implies that the road is "mostly agricultural use".
In case of way/593192830 I would opt for unclassified, as well as for the bridge.

I also wonder why the shape of this building is so large:
way/638831279
All sat images show a much smaller building.
Same problem here:
way/638831350
Maybe sat images are out-aged?

Hi!
Why did you change highway=road to the unusual highway=unspecified?
It looks like a highway=residential to me, as well as way/92622380, which is tagged highway=unclassified (!?)

Hi!
Please don't invent new _link road types.
I think the correct tag here would be highway=residential .
See also osm.wiki/Highway_link

Hi!
I've fixed a few more issues at Isingiro Roundabout, see changeset/63968920
I think you should not use junction=roundabout on a node like here:
node/5612340183

Hi! You added highway=crossing to a boundary here, I've reverted this:changeset/63968626
You probably wanted to add this to a node instead?

Moin! Ich habe hier ein highway=crossing an einem landuse=residential entfernt:
changeset/63968545
Anscheinend hast Du in Go Map! das falsche Object ausgewählt?

Hi and welcome to OSM!
You created a lot of ways with the tag highway=crossing here. This tag should only be used on nodes, the ways are typically mapped with highway=footway + footway=crossing. See also highway=crossing
Hope this helps?

Hi and welcome to OSM!
I've noticied this changeset because you created new tags like highway=construction:tertiary here.
The normal way to tag this is to use two tags highway=construction + construction=tertiary.
The alternative would be to use the prefix construction: like this:
construction:highway=tertiary.
But for highways the 1st method is better established. See also osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix

Hi. sorry, I forgot to add the information where I saw this stretch of the pipeline:
node/65852866
My understanding is that the way should be split, but it is also often far away from the position shown in the sat images.
I think the above ground section starts at node/65852900 and it ends here:
69.518619501305, -148.56688142359258

Hi!
I just noticed that this pipeline way/253952219
has underground=yes .
I see long stretches which are not underground, so I wonder how to find the place where it is really underground?

Hi and welcome to OSM!
I've noticed this changeset because of the unusual tag highway=parking, please review my changes here:
changeset/63942391
See also amenity=parking
I also noticed that Bing has a large offset here, I think 16.42; -10.75 works quite well.
See osm.wiki/Using_Imagery

Yes, these roads are residential.

Hi again!
I see that you changed the highway type to another unusual value highway=cross_way on
way/637127079
I wonder why you don't map it as a normal zebra crossing?
You seem to concentrate on the bicycle traffic, but you still can use
highway=footway + footway=crossing + crossing_ref=zebra + bicycle=yes
You also added a few separate ways with highway=cycleway. These ways are not properly connected to the other roads, this will cause routing errors. Please check also if you cannot use the cycleway=* tag instead, that makes it much easier to avoid these problems, see highway=cycleway#When_not_to_use