True, but that is beside the point.

I didn't say that what matters is how the data is rendered. I said that what matters is that the data CAN be rendered. If it's been deleted, many possible renderings are made impossible. If it's tagged accurately with "razed", then it could be rendered as razed.

Deleting something that someone thought valuable doesn't improve the map. Tagging it accurately does.

Many people disagree with that claim.

Tracks in the pavement 200' to the south, the shape of the building, and the obvious railbed going north eventually joining to active tracks.

Data accuracy? Can we talk about coastlines, then? Or road alignment on a foot by foot basis?

There's accuracy and there's penny-ante changes. What matters is value to the end-user, and that can only be judged by the end-user. Of how much value is it to anyone to delete something whose absence can be inferred from its remains?

That's why this is a controversial topic, best resolved by not deleting something that a mapper felt was important to add.

Given rails poking through the pavement 300' to the north and 100' to the south, you'd think it would be obvious that this is an abandoned railway. It was obvious to me when I was there. Do I need to post photos?

I already marked it as razed. Yes, it is likely to be a malicious note. I expect it was CurlingMan13 since I noted that he deleted something crossing the thruway which I have seen every time I drive that section of the thruway. He deletes things and claims he can't see them even if they're plainly visible on aerials and clearly present on the ground.

If a railbed is visible to the north and south of a road, I'm not going to mark it razed just where it crosses the road. There is no value to any map user.

Sure, and the building aligned, and parking lanes added to its parking lot. I see zero value in deleting things when there are so many things that remain to be added.

Some editors enjoy chopping up abandoned railroads when they can't see tracks crossing a road. I don't see the point, since abandoned rails only get rendered on specialty maps where you want to see these things.

It's more visible when the leaves are down than you can see on the Google Streetview or if you drive past it.

Right here: https://maps.app.goo.gl/PMQAA9Sq44pfkXH78

I am guessing that you have never driven that part of the NYS Thruway, because even if you didn't already know there was a crossing there, it's extremely obvious.

Don't believe me, though: https://www.facebook.com/groups/120835437949980/

That's the challenge with unfinished railroads -- they are rarely mapped, and were built in pieces by different crews or even different companies.

Thanks for finding this bit. You may enjoy http://russnelson.com/unfinished-railroads.html

Have you found any other bits of the Rochester, Hornellsville and Pine Creek Railroad? I did some field work and added what I could verify.

Why did you delete abandoned rails (the Falls Road) which have an obvious railbed? Why did you delete rails which still exist (e.g. the spur between Lee Road and the Canalway Trail?)

Mateusz: For whatever reason, yes, the library was built over the canal, which got converted into the subway.

gpserror: It should be easier to move something to OHM than delete it. Unfortunately that's not the case. I proposed a solution earlier, ("OHM=yes") which you have not commented on. Deleting items that you think are historical is not the answer. Deleting TIGER crap, well, that is. They are not the same things.

It's not on the surface, but I don't know the extent of the remaining tunnel.

If you want to move something to OHM, I'm not going to argue against that.

Here, let's pick just one part: way/594359980#map=18/43.15392/-77.60702

The rails are still there. Crappy photo, I know, but that's because it's dark.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/QULogDEpiU2hC39Z9

You are dismissing a serious problem. In this particular case, the previous editor deleted things that I KNOW exist because I SAW them. Field work >> aerial photos. This has *always* been the case here at OSM.

Thus, I frankly couldn't be bothered to sort through his or her changeset to see what might be deleted and what should be retained because it was an unreliable edit.