Finished reverting Nebraska, and worth noting: there IS a relation for Heartland Expwy already in place.

Building on what SD Mapman said, keep in mind that what we see on OSM and what providers use are often different. If I type "10036 Highway 79" as my destination address into an OSM-based router, the router is going to look for an address with name=Highway 79. If that doesn't exist, the router is going to struggle to route correctly.

Does that make sense?

I haven't heard from you and you haven't reverted this changeset, so I am going to submit this to be reverted.

I'm suggesting to you to add it as alt_name, not that alt_name already existed. To my knowledge, no one actually has an address of Heartland Expwy; it's always something like Highway 385. The name Heartland Expwy is more of a generic name, like the Grand Army of the Republic Highway. No one actually uses it as an address.

If it actually appears on a blade, it should absolutely be included!

I appreciate what you are trying to do, but we have to make sure everything is compliant with OSM standards. Please refer to this page: osm.wiki/Names On-the-ground always gets priority. This can be especially important when it comes to things like addresses, because to my knowledge there is nowhere that has the address of Heartland Expwy, and certainly not the entire length.

In this case, the name= should be the name that appears on the blades. In most if not all cases, Heartland Expwy does not appear on signage, but other names do.

I would revert this edit. Heartland Expwy can then be added as a alt_name tag and/or as a relation.
I'd be more inclined to the latter (I thought it already was at one point, but maybe I'm mistaken).