Hi,
since the first example is located in the federal state Baden-Württemberg please consider Maps4BW und basemap.de.
The place was first mapped as landuse=residential, see Way: Maisenbachsiedlung (351800381) | OpenStreetMap and could be converted back and the name could be removed since there’s the place node with the name.
The landuse could have been mapped with the help of maps4bw, then a valid source. If you have a look at Kartenbasierte Suche - LEO-BW, based on the replacement that not can be used for mapping anymore it seems to be very similar to the mapped landuse. Some small changes that nobody had mapped until last years end of Maps4BW.
The split is along the stream, both parts have the same postal code.
That’s a diffeent story because we crossed the border to the federal state of Bavaria. No such nice sources as in Baden-Württemberg and other rules for the use of admin_levels: DE:Grenze - OpenStreetMap Wiki
Since Eßfeld is only part of Giebelstadt - Wikipedia it can’t have it’s own administrative border. The name key was once a place_name key and changed to name because of validator results.
If you look at the neighbouring Darstadt, part of Relation: Ochsenfurt (163052) | OpenStreetMap you will still see this old mapping style. I think this should best cleared by the consensus of the local mapping community.
By the way this topic here seems related to Where should name tags be added on administrative boundaries?