HI please don't do this. The practice is to put them at the center of activity. This is something to be considered by a map renderer, and doing so is seen as editing for the renderer osm.wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer

Dragged node, irrelevant content
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/93338764

Sorry, I meant that you should check other portions when splitting.

The convention here is to classify `_link` by the higher rank road as well.

There's no need to add a turning restriction when the connecting road is already constrained by a legal access restriction, not to mention it doesn't considered the `access=private` element.

Please keep top level tags to a single value
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/93296653

This is not correct. There's no physical separation. It's already properly set up with turning restriction, `change:lanes=` and `turn:lanes=`
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/93295618

way/444180322/ this is a combined soccer and basketball area. Something else should be done about it.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/93234484

Please don't remove `is_in:*=`. It's only deprecated when there are `boundary=administrative`.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/93234484

Please don't remove `highway=traffic_signals` with `ref=`, at least until the junction/crossing is modeled; and it can be coverted into a `man_made=street_cabinet` or junction area.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/93231923

I agree with the left turn, but what about the right turn? It's noticeably curved, not a standard intersection.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/93201266

Physically this isn't the best solution. The split is moved closer to the actual point here https://osmcha.org/changesets/93191048
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/93189536

https://osmcha.org/changesets/93190353
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/93131540

Please split up the road to not make the restriction over-extend.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/93131540

Can you explain changing `=unclassified` to `=residential`?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/93125409

You need to change `name:en=` as well. https://osmcha.org/changesets/93114688
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/93107131

Can pedestrians pass through?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/93051916

`place=village` is only used for larger settlements. https://osmcha.org/changesets/93042445
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/93035880

2. Yet again, it's a matter of degree and considerations. Rail-side-wise, Airport Express is obviously in the same "network"; PT-service-wise, your raised a good question, but yet again I don't find partial integration to be an issue denying consideration as one "network".

1. That's what the `brand=` could be for.