Talk:1 Line (Sound Transit)

United States: Washington / Seattle Unassessed Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington - Seattle.

Trains: Rapid transit / Passenger trains Start‑class

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

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Rapid transit.
	This article is supported by the Passenger trains task force.

It is requested that an a map be included in this article to improve its quality. Please work with the Maps task force to create and add a map to this article.

Beacon Hill Station Not Deepest

I removed the following statement:

At a depth of 165 feet, the project's Beacon Hill station will be the deepest and largest underground station in the US.

In actuality, according to the Washington Park (MAX station) article...

At 260 ft. (70m) below ground, Washington Park is the deepest transit station in North America, second-deepest in the world.

Even when the Beacon Hill station is completed, the Washington Park station will remain the deepest by about 100 ft. --Westonmr 06:06, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stations

Please do not delete or change the new stations list. I am in the process of revising it by Sunday (Pacific Time). Thank you.

                                                    - One Taiwan No China

Which Map?

Does anyone have an opinion on these two route designs? They each have their merits, but overall, which one works better? The top one (I couldn't figure out how to make them run side-by-side) that has the proposed extensions (University Segment; First Hill Streetcar) and some geographical features (the Ship Canal; Duwamish River), or the one that is more compact and shows arrival times from Tukwila, as well as being more directionally correct? Perhaps any suggestions for merging the two?

Template:BS4 Template:BS4 Template:BS4 Template:BS4 Template:BS4 Template:BS4 Template:BS4 Template:BS4 Template:BS4 Template:BS4 Template:BS4 Template:BS4 Template:BS4 Template:BS4 Template:BS4 Template:BS4 Template:BS4 Template:BS4 Template:BS4 Template:BS4 Template:BS4 Template:BS4

I created the more compact second one. My thoughts with that were that because the University Extension / University Link / North Link has its own page, that would be left off, at least for now. And because none of the other street cars are official yet, I don't think they should be listed in the map until they are truly approved. I had considered adding waterways, but it was getting too complicated with this layout. I hadn't thought to add the Waterfront SC as did, but it's looking unlikely that it will be in operation for another 10 years, if ever again. Finally, I left the Boeing Access Road station off because it's not on any drawing boards anymore for being built. Again, one of those 'maybe sometime WAY down the road' things. That's my two cents! Joshuadkelley (talk) 11:07, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How about just including some of the added features (Water bridge, connection to East Link) to the bottom one... the top one fails to show the monorail and commuter rail connections for example; and the extra white space between stops on the south end is unnecessary. Straightening the line could be a good idea, but don't remove content. Wlindley (talk) 12:58, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I vote add water bridges & East Link to second one, and remove travel times. They're confusing, nonstandard, and still only predicted (I for one am dubious of the 7min from Seatac to Tukwila International Blvd.). I would go add the East Link connection now, if I knew how. I am considering taking off the travel times too. YB3 ^T@lk/_contribs 06:18, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't put Eastlink in yet. I don't think they've decided on the route yet, have they? They say it'll join at the tunnel, so I'm not sure if that means at the SODO or Stadium stop. At least, not where it will split off from Central Link. The times are also probably fairly accurate, they've been running test trains along the track for months now. Well, obviously not the part all the way to SeaTac (Is there even tracks yet from the stop by 518 to the airport?), but the rest of the track they've been going up and down fairly frequently. It's amazing how fast one can go when there isn't any traffic.;)--Bobblehead ^(rants) 06:36, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see no mention of using times on Wikipedia:Route diagram template. Furthermore, I think it's cluttering and not very useful to have times to Tukwila on each station. I am working on a derivative of the second map, dropping times and generally cleaning it up and making it more compact, clearer, and more standards-compliant. I'll share it with you all when it is to better than either of the two currenty on here. YB3 ^T@lk/_contribs 07:18, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend we switch to this map I (YB3 ^T@lk/_contribs) created (Moved here on Feb. 03, 03:52:51 UTC , for newest version see User:YB3/Sandbox/CenLink):

Template:UKrail-header2 Template:BS-table/WithCollapsibles Template:BS3 Template:BS3 Template:BS3 Template:BS3 Template:BS3 Template:BS3 Template:BS3 Template:BS3 Template:BS3 Template:BS3 Template:BS3 Template:BS3 Template:BS3 Template:BS3 Template:BS3 Template:BS3 Template:BS3 Template:BS3 Template:BS3 Template:BS3 Template:BS3 Template:BS3

|}

I think this should become the new wikimap on the main Central Link page. YB3 ^T@lk/_contribs 03:55, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with YB3. This map is more accurate, includes more information, and takes up a smaller amount of space than either of the other ones above. Alexseattle (talk) 04:36, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I went ahead and moved my map to Template:Central Link map. YB3 (t) 05:20, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I like the latest map.

Suggestion: Ghost out the "East link" segment, as it is not even in planning phase yet. It is not even confirmed where the new line will connect. However, include the "Boeing access rd" station, it is deferred, but the rail plans have a definite location in the switching system for it.Ac7ss —Preceding undated comment added 03:30, 27 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Source Material

I work as a supervisor at Link Light Rail, what are the criteria for citations? I have the rail plans in hand (Full set of switching, single and double line.) And I have discussions with the other staff. For example we have recently changed the 'Live Date' to July 10th. but I have no citation for this. There is also some internal discussion on the length of one trip, it may be 40 minutes to International station (154/International blvd) instead of the original 30, but there is no confirmation on this. Ac7ss (talk) 03:48, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The verifiability policy and reliable source guideline will probably help you as far as what sources are allowable. But the short answer is that the sourcing has to be available to the public and must be from a reputable source. The Sound Transit website would probably be acceptable for "uncontroversial" things like the live date and time it takes to go end to end, but internal memos and discussions generally would not be acceptable. --Bobblehead ^(rants) 05:30, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another point made today in the office was that it will be on 7.5 minute headway. Once again, no public source. But next week I should be able to take photos of the Beacon hill station.Ac7ss (talk) 08:42, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

40 minutes? Ugh. I know that the time between cars will be less than that of the 194, but a 40 minute trip time means that it's really not going to save time over the 194. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.104.37.18 (talk) 20:16, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Remove Boeing Access Road?

Since it's not even up for consideration of being a station, maybe remove it from this article? But keep it under List of Link Light Rail stations

~ 98.247.241.149 (talk) 05:06, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, that would make sense. I talked to a Sound Transit employee and they said that no one's ever even talking about it. Alexseattle (talk) 07:42, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Recent Edits/overhaul

Before you go and revert my overhaul (I guess it's that since I spent a long time and there were quite a few edits), here's why I did a couple of things:

Reversed station list to reflect north/south. All maps, and even the one used on the page have Westlake at the top and SeaTac/Airport at the bottom, so the station list should be the same.
Removed central link banner in station list table because this is the central link article--no need to be repetitive.
Removed Boeing Access Road Station as discussed above.
Wikified station list table because this is a wiki, not a HTML page. Yes, it does get turned into HTML, but even though it's confusing at first I think the Wiki syntax is more suitable. Also it wasn't proper HTML since none of the <td> and <tr> tags were closed, and even though MediaWiki automatically took care of that, it keeps me awake at night worrying about unclosed tags.
Added fares Please double check to make sure I typed everything correctly
Added transfer information I hope I made it easy enough to understand. If you don't understand it, I cited my source so you can read that and update the article
Removed contradictory information on fares The Travel Times section stated that LINK would cost $2.75 between SeaTac/Airport and Westlake. This may have been left over from when it got edited to reflect the board's decision on fares.
Moved the Equipment section so that the article flows directly into travel times after fares, since the travel times section discusses fares some.
Fixed the 400 passenger typo that said that each car could hold 200 people. I think I may have been the one that introduced that error. But it's fixed now.
Board's decision not recent any more so I axed that.

~ Atomic Taco (talk) 06:06, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you should also change the order of the route description to match this. YB3 (t) 08:31, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will do! - Atomic Taco (talk) 04:53, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Time format

I agree with 67.171.44.250 that the time should stay in 24 hour format time. Just because you live in the US and don't use that format doesn't mean it doesn't exist. The phrase Railway time is rarely used in the US, but when used always describes a time in 24 hour format. Furthermore, 24 hour format time is used widely in situations where personnel perform duties around (or near) round the clock, for example: public safety (police, fire EMS), retail businesses that operate for all or most of the day (McDonald's employee schedules are usually posted in 24 hour format), medical care, or any place where it is necessary to definitively differentiate between morning and night. Lastly, if you listen to the operators of the train, they always refer to the time in 24 hour format.

Wikipedia is not set up to have every article listed in your preferred format. If you don't like the way it's listed here, don't read the article. Also see the Manual of Style. 75.92.135.196 (talk) 00:18, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with 67.171.44.250-- AlexSeattle is correct. The MoS says that context determines which format to use. First, it's an American topic, and second, bus and light rail schedules in the U.S. use the twelve hour format.

As a practical issue, Americans will be the main readers of this article and it's harder for us to understand the table with the 24-hour format. This is an encyclopedia article for the general public, and when police, McDonalds etc. deal with the general public, they use the 12 hour format. Diderot's dreams (talk) 18:57, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Like Diderot's dreams said, most people who will be trying to find out when Central Link runs will be Americans who can much more easily understand 12-hour time. In fact, the information is published on the Sound Transit website in 12-hour time (http://www.soundtransit.org/Riding-Sound-Transit/Schedules-and-Facilities/Central-Link-Light-Rail---coming-soon.xml). -- Alexseattle (talk) 00:24, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the 12-hour format, but I think it should read 5:00 - 6:00 pm instead of 5:00 am - 6:00 am. Note that the space between the time is a Hard Space   rather than a standard space, as per the MoS, and also that the MoS says to use "midnight" and "noon" rather than "12:00 midnight". YB3 (t) 00:59, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Although personally I prefer 24-hour format, I agree with the above comments that the 12-hour format for this article is appropriate in the context of the general public. Oranviri (talk) 04:53, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since I'm the one that originally added the headways table, I'll sound off. I put it in 24 hour format because that's what I hear the train operators and Link Control using while talking to each other. Also, Metro (who is operating Link) uses 24 hour format time for all of their other operations. ~ Atomic Taco (talk) 09:16, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First, thanks for adding the table. It's a good addition, regardless of which time format is used. On that less important issue, I have a question: Which format do you favor now? Diderot's dreams (talk) 19:12, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Metro does use 24 hour format for internal communication, but all of their published schedules are in 12 hour format. Since the Wikipedia article is mostly for prospective riders, it should be in the 12 hour format. -- Alexseattle (talk) 23:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@Diderot's dreams--I personally prefer 24 hour format, but the discussion above shows 12 hour is the preferred format for this article. ~ Atomic Taco (talk) 06:49, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tables

I'll admit that this table is ugly:

	Westlake	University Street	Pioneer Square	Int'l Dist	Stadium	SODO	Beacon Hill	Mt. Baker	Columbia City	Othello	Rainier Beach	Tukwila	SeaTac/ Airport
Westlake	--	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.50	$2.50
University St	$1.75	--	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.50	$2.50
Pioneer Sq	$1.75	$1.75	--	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.50	$2.50
Int'l Dist	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	--	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.50	$2.50
Stadium	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	--	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$2.00	$2.00	$2.25	$2.25
SODO	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	--	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$2.00	$2.00	$2.25	$2.25
Beacon Hill	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	--	$1.75	$1.75	$2.00	$2.00	$2.25	$2.25
Mt. Baker	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	--	$1.75	$1.75	$2.00	$2.25	$2.25
Columbia City	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	--	$1.75	$1.75	$2.00	$2.00
Othello	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$1.75	$1.75	--	$1.75	$2.00	$2.00
Rainier Beach	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$1.75	$1.75	--	$2.00	$2.00
Tukwila	$2.50	$2.50	$2.50	$2.50	$2.25	$2.25	$2.25	$2.25	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	--	$1.75
SeaTac/ Airport	$2.50	$2.50	$2.50	$2.50	$2.25	$2.25	$2.25	$2.25	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$1.75	--

But this table:

Westlake
University Street												$1.75
Pioneer Square											$1.75	$1.75
International District/Chinatown										$1.75	$1.75	$1.75
Stadium									$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75
SODO								$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75
Beacon Hill							$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75
Mount Baker						$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00
Columbia City					$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00
Othello				$1.75	$1.75	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00
Ranier Beach			$1.75	$1.75	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00
Tukwila International Blvd		$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.25	$2.25	$2.25	$2.25	$2.50	$2.50	$2.50	$2.50
SeaTac/Airport	$1.75	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.25	$2.25	$2.25	$2.25	$2.50	$2.50	$2.50	$2.50

Is very difficult to read due to its right aligned text.

Furthermore, the first table is more versatile, as it allows the user to use rows and columns in a way that suits them best. ~ Atomic Taco (talk) 21:18, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I find the original style much more awkward to use, as I have to look in different places for the start and end points of a trip. The style I introduced is especially easy to use for short trips, where the fare will always be close to the station names. I think the relationship between distance and fare is also a little more apparent. I also have concerns with the duplication of information in the original style; it's easy for accidental inconsistencies to be introduced if the information is updated.
I think a lot of it comes down to personal preference, but since one of your complaints is the right-alignment, maybe we could compromise with the following style? It also includes the station pictograms, which I was about to add, until I saw your revert. Klparrot (talk) 22:02, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Westlake
$1.75	University Street
$1.75	$1.75	Pioneer Square
$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	International District/Chinatown
$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	Stadium
$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	SODO
$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	Beacon Hill
$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	Mount Baker
$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	$1.75	Columbia City
$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$1.75	$1.75	Othello
$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$1.75	$1.75	Rainier Beach
$2.50	$2.50	$2.50	$2.50	$2.25	$2.25	$2.25	$2.25	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	Tukwila International Blvd
$2.50	$2.50	$2.50	$2.50	$2.25	$2.25	$2.25	$2.25	$2.00	$2.00	$2.00	$1.75	SeaTac/Airport

The second one is better, but very cramped. More opinions are needed. ~ Atomic Taco (talk) 23:30, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking personally, I find the stair-step versions easier to use than the square grid version. They don't look cramped to me. --Jfruh (talk) 01:06, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, a bot had a problem with the station pictograms being used on a talk page. Grr. I've removed the garbage left behind by the bot, and you can see what it looked like with the pictograms by checking the history. Klparrot (talk) 06:01, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stair step has less redundant info and is easier to read. Just add some padding to the cells for some white space. Oranviri (talk) 06:34, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]