Talk:Light rail

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Light rail article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3: 150 days

Light rail was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 25, 2006	Good article nominee	Not listed

Trains: Rapid transit High‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Rapid transit (assessed as Top-importance).

Cleveland?

In Cleveland, we have two rail systems, referred to as heavy and light. The former is post-war construction; the latter is 1920s construction to support real estate developers (who incidentally bought a controlling interest in the Nickel Plate RR to support their efforts).

Does that qualify? Is it not listed because it's nearly a century old on a fifty year old concept, or just because nobody has bothered? Snile (talk) 11:49, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Added it to the appropriate passage; don't know why it was left off, but Cleveland's Green and Blue Lines totally fit the description of pre-World War II streetcars that were upgraded to modern standards over the years. oknazevad (talk) 14:35, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

[…] tram […] is a form of tramway […] that constitutes a form of tram.

Perhaps we could find a better way to phrase that? Cheers ⌘ _hugarheimur 18:32, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That terrible wording crept in through some bad rewrites in September that plainly ignore that tram (aka streetcar or trolley) has a separate article. I restored the older version of the lead. oknazevad (talk) 21:03, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tyne & Wear Metro

I think the Tyne and Wear Metro Should not be include in Light Rail & instead Commuter rail because it better follows the requirement's to be a commuter rail instead of Light Rail. Also the Tyne & Wear Metro only has level crossing which are at about Right Angles to the Road. Also the Tyne & Wear Metro get's some quite heavy freight trains heading to/from Drax Power Station & Tyne Dock running on the same track as the Tyne & Wear Metro. I Like The british Rail Class 483 (talk) 16:49, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be right, especially after the old stock (based on type B trams/LRVs) will be phased out by 2025. KatVanHuis (talk) 18:39, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

'Light rail' versus 'light rail transit'

The most WP:COMMON NAME is 'light rail'. I am happy for 'light rail transit' to be mentioned too, but it must be afterwards. Will Thorpe (talk) 13:25, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

I propose merging Semi-metro into Light rail. The distinction between semi-metro and light rail systems is often minimal and can significantly overlap.

Consolidating both topics under one article would enhance clarity and streamline information for readers interested in urban transit systems.

Rationale

Minimal Distinction: Semi-metro systems, characterized by sections of independent right-of-way, are a significant aspect of light rail networks globally. This integration reflects a widespread practice across many light rail systems, making it practical to discuss these systems together.
Merging Semi-metro into Light rail will provide readers with a comprehensive overview of all aspects of light rail systems, including those with semi-metro characteristics. This approach avoids redundancy and provides a unified resource for understanding urban transit.
Maintaining separate articles for semi-metro and light rail can lead to confusion due to their similar operational and infrastructural features. Consolidation will clarify terminology and improve the coherence of information presented.
A single, consolidated article reduces maintenance overhead and ensures that updates and improvements are applied uniformly. It also avoids duplication of effort across related topics.
Readers interested in semi-metro systems could find a dedicated section within the Light rail article, if necessary, for accessibility and usability without the need to navigate between multiple articles.
Language Pages: The language pages linked to Semi-metro often cover different topics or were created by the initial same user, suggesting redundancy or a personal drive for the page to exist.
The term 'semi-metro' is not widely recognized in major dictionaries and has limited search engine results beyond this Wikipedia page, indicating its specialized usage within transit terminology.

Do please share your thoughts on this proposal. Lea 4545 (talk) 14:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It may be no surprise that I oppose; but thanks for the invite to share my thoughts.

1. The distinction between light rail and semi-metro is that both have different definitions; light rail being the broader one. Light rail expert Vuchic describes three levels of right of way:

A. street running

B. separate right of way (not independent/with level road-crossings)

C. independent right of way (conflict free/without level road-crossings)

Having category A defines tram. Having also category B defines light rail. Having also category C defines semi-metro (as part of light trail).

2. We could also merge light rail with public transport to create an even more comprehensive article. But that would make it too long, right? In this case, the semi-metro article isn't finished yet. Especially the history section needs to be expanded, but also a few others.

3. Their operation is indeed similar; being tram-like vehicles. But their infrastructure in different; semi-metro uses tunnels and viaducts just like a metro.

4. Currently I don't see much duplication.

5. Isn't it a big pro of Wikipedia over paper encyclopedias to have easy navigation by clicking only once, instead of turning many pages?

6. As far as I can tell all the language pages cover the same phenomenon. Besides that: I have only created one other language page, which is not even the most extensive language version.

7. Most importantly: the semi-metro article uses reliable and independent sources. Even if semi-metro might be specialised transit terminology, many Wikipedia articles focus on either mathematical, biological or astronomical terms not found in a dictionary. I think it's a good custom to include specialised terms. KatVanHuis (talk) 21:34, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

I would like to support the proposal to merge the Semi-metro article into the Light rail article. There is no distinct need to have this page when there are already pages for Premetro and light rail.

Overlap: “Semi-metro” describes a type of light rail system with both dedicated and shared tracks, making it a term within the light rail category rather than a distinct type. Merging the articles will better place this information under light rail.
Better Information: Combining the Semi-metro article with Light rail will provide a single, comprehensive resource for light rail systems, including those termed with 'semi-metro' features.
Terminology: “Semi-metro” seems to be a specific term used in some papers for describing light rail systems with certain characteristics, but not a separate category from Light rail. It seems to be a term that has emerged from particular contributors who are trying to use Wikipedia to broaden its popularity, rather than a widely recognized and distinct classification.
Language Pages: Some of the linked language pages discuss trams in tunnels but don’t mention “semi-metro,” in any form at all.

Propose:

Merge the relevant content from the Semi-metro article into the Light rail article. Perhaps by establishing a new section within Light rail, or by including the 'three levels of right of way' as mentioned above. Detail how some light rail systems incorporate features typically associated with the term “semi-metro,” such as tunnels and viaducts. This approach will provide readers with a more unified understanding of how these systems fit into the light rail category. The proposal to merge of light rail with public transport to create an 'even more comprehensive article' seems facetious.

Key Information: Any unique and valuable information from the 'semi-metro' page, such as significant historical details and notable examples should be preserved in the merged article. The reliable and independent sources from the semi-metro article should, of course, be retained in the merge to Light rail.

Terminology: The Light rail article could be updated to reflect that “semi-metro” is a term sometimes used to describe specific configurations within light rail systems. This update will clarify that the term denotes certain characteristics of light rail rather than a distinct type of transit.

Document the Merge: The rationale and details of the merge should be documented on the talk pages. KatVanHuis, with their expertise, could be well placed to ensure accurate integration of content.

Qpwoeizmxn (talk) 10:30, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]