The key phrases are actually a bit longer: "route [and] other railroad right of way signs or infrastructure".

It does not only refer to an old track alignment that is still visible, but also an old route that is still visible - yes, this is a difference. Directly north & south of the road are physical traces visible, in a way where it is clear that the route/ROW crosses the road here at this exact location. This is why I think a railway=abandoned way crossing at this road is valid mapping.
But I don't oppose cutting out the road crossing either.
(Note that such "road crossing cuttings" have already existed at the northern end of the line at Grand River Drive, but those have been deleted too (see osmcha link below)).

Note that an embarkment is a very significant part of the infrastructure.

Only because there is a single road crossing where the railway=abandoned is not clearly visible dosen't justify deleting the entire line, especially if all other parts are still clearly visible.

Calling a changeset "unquestionably vandalism" because 4 out of 180 changes are not referring to the reasoning for the revert is veeeery doubtful. (yes, the small pier is the only thing unrelated to railways, see https://osmcha.org/changesets/148681678)

Somewhat offtopic: Why is there a bridge mapped at the road crossing in question? I'm pretty certain that there is no bridge, maybe a culvert.

I am seeing it clearly, both the mentioned 3DEP and recent aerial imagery.

Can you explain in own words what railway=abandoned means?

Deleting tags where you have obviously no clue what they mean and then refusing to engage in ANY discussion whatsoever - THIS is vandalism.

@woodpeck: I urge you to take a quick look at the "USGS 3D Elevation Program" layer in the ID-Editor. This confirmes the on-the-ground traces "railway=abandoned" refers to immediatly. (But so does also the way the vegetation is shaped and other things)

(To be clear, "non-existing" things can be deleted, but the things in question here are !clearly! existing)

railway=abandoned refers to an abandoned railroad right-of-way, which is still visible - and that is very clearly the case here. For example: the entire ROW can be seen on the USGS 3DEP, which means that ground traces exist.
Therefore I reverted this edit.

"this church"? Stop trolling, I was obviously referring to the deleted railway=abandoned ways which are clearly still existing - those make up more than 99% of the CS.

Reverted as this line is more than clearly still visible

What is the point of this & other massive quality reductions?

1182420396 does not go "through" buildings, it is next to the buildings, USGS topos are definitly verifiable sources.
1182420410 is next to the grain silo
1181526151 went into the building
167035610 doesn't go through buildings, and it it does, it is misaligned by a few meters, fix it then.
Examples where it is clearly visible that this is an abandoned RR right-of-way (as mentioned, de-facto everything):
1182142557
1182142564
1182142600
167035610
22030467
791413950
114854758
665388499
1199657583
24098898
157028323
5325158
1182420392
etc etc etc

There is no "OSMF guidance".
Please provide some significant examples where the course is *not* recognizable. Looking at https://osmcha.org/changesets/146500622/, like 95% is *clearly* visible from aerial imagery, and railway=abandoned is perfectly valid tagging there.

Stop mass-deleting features where you haven't even bothered to read the documentation.
railway=abandoned is for abandoned railway right-of-ways which are still visible.

Reverted this and similar changesets.

Hello,
the majority -if not all- of this railroad right-of-way stretch you deleted is still perfectly visible, both on aerial imagery and USGS 3D elevation profile.

Note that railway=abandoned is for an abandoned railroad right-of-way, (which is still visible, like here), while railway=disused is for "abandoned" out of service tracks.
railway=abandoned is the correct tagging here.

Therefore, I've restored the deleted way.

Hello,
this entire railroad right-of-way stretch you deleted is still perfectly visible, both on aerial imagery and USGS 3D elevation profile (=on the ground). railway=abandoned is correct tagging here.

Therefore, I've reverted this changeset.

why are you deleting so many access roads/driveways?
https://osmcha.org/changesets/144885459

No, I appreciate your hard work, the data is definitly welcome! It just has to fit to the other data, and since it does now, no problems anymore!

Hello, and thank you for your impressive work!
However, some things to note:
1) You added tags which belong on ways not only to the way, but also to every node the way consists of.
2) You used unknown tags, such as "title=*". Use either "name=*" or "title=*" for that in OSM.

I fixed both, but please make sure that this dosen't happen again.

forgot sources: Bing Imagery, PHMSA online, FERC eLibrary, HIFLD database

ele_derrick: elevation of the well drilling derrick above sea.
In the US, the standart of elevation is "ft", like the maxspeed standart is "maxspeed=X mph".
The depth values should probably get an "ft" added, I agree.
This import was documented in the wiki and discussed on the forum.

I fixed those four nodes you mentioned.

reverted per osm.wiki/United_States/2021_Highway_Classification_Guidance#Motorway
guideline

damn, forgot it once again.

But actually those lines added here don't rely on any external sources, except one "Fayetteville Gathering Company" operator tag based upon some company's SEC reports.

Common stuff like field compressor stations are obivious if you know how they look.

Those pipelines are almost all perfectly visible on the Bing and especially the 2011 Esri Clarity Imagery. (the pipeline right-of-ways, to be exact - by cuttings, ground color changes & aboveground valves/junctions etc)
The start_date 2009 is the date when the shale gas fracking boom took of in this area, and all lines which look like they've been constructed very recently on esri clarity got this tag.

usage=gathering is also obvious

Hope this helps, thanks for the remainder

those tags were automatically added at massive scale by the id-editor without it ever being properly discussed, so they can & should be removed in the same matter