Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Ring Line

Ring Line[edit]

4 articles

I am nominating the Ring Line of the Oslo Metro as a good article topic because I feel it meets the criteria. The line consists of three stations, which are the only features along the line with articles. Self-nom by Arsenikk ^(talk) 19:12, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support - topic is complete—Chris! _ct 06:40, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I am not really familiar with train line articles on the Wiki but am slightly confused by {{Ring Line}}. What are all the other stops in that diagram and how do they relate to the Ring Line? rst20xx (talk) 16:36, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
...nevermind, I'm being silly. It seems that the 3 stations listed form the Ring Line and then the ring in the name is formed by the fact that the trains go on from there in a loop. Is it standard practice for templates like {{Ring Line}} to show other train lines? It might be worth stating at the top of the template what stops belong to what lines because as it stands I think the template is confusing. Anyway, support - rst20xx (talk) 16:42, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Although actually the articles for the other stations suggest further involvement in the Ring Line... I think some clarification is needed throughout, I'm somewhat confused - rst20xx (talk) 16:47, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ - sorry to flip-flop so much but I'm changing my vote because I think my concerns about the inconsistencies in the family of articles need addressing - rst20xx (talk) 23:37, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Part of this confusion may have arisen because the Ring Line only connects to branches (the Grorud and Sognsvann Lines), that together with the Common Tunnel create a ring. Only the actual 5 km connection is called the Ring Line (making up about a third of the full circle). I have now rearranged the maps, so the map in the infobox only shows the Ring Line, while the old map has been moved to the service section to show how the trains running on the Ring Line connect to the Common Tunnel and other lines. I have also copyedited some of the other station articles on the Songsvann and Grorud Line to make it clear that they are not part of the Ring Line. This misleading information was probably added by editors in good faith, beliving that any station that makes up the circle is on the Ring Line.

The Oslo Metro has a somewhat different naming scheme than many other metros: There are ten (named) lines, and each station is located only on one line. The Ring Line is by far the shortest and smallest of these. There are six services, 1 through 6, that operate on at least two lines plus the Common Tunnel. Therefore, a line is not the same as a service (unlike, for instance, the London Underground or the Paris Metro). Put another way, if all ten lines and all stations were brought up to GA, then each line could be a topic, and each station would be in only one topic, even though some stations are served by multiple services (train numbers). Arsenikk ^(talk) 10:06, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, that's very helpful, thanks, but what about Carl Berners plass and Ullevål stadion? These two stations appear to be at the end of the Ring Line, connecting it with other lines, and indeed Carl Berners plass currently states this to be the case - rst20xx (talk) 12:33, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ullevål stadion and Carl Berners plass are located on the Sognsvann and Grorud Line, respectively. In both cases, the lines split north of (i.e. after) the stations, and they are therefore only on the one line. On the Sognsvann Line, the split happens just before reaching Berg (the next station), while I don't know the length on the Grorud Line. For instance, there were no modifications of either station when the new line was built. I have made all the line maps like this, showing the final station that is not on the line (see for instance Kolsås Line which contains one closed plus the current first station on the Røa Line). If other people find this very confusing, I can change it, but I felt that it helps orient the reader (of course, I know all this stuff, so how am I to know what the reader thinks). Arsenikk ^(talk) 20:51, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK I think this change helps, it's somewhat clearer now. Support reinstated above, sorry to flip-flop so much - rst20xx (talk) 21:58, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
~~I would~~ support but I am getting confused by the two maps present in the main article. Why are all the other stations listed in the same way as the 3 stations if they are not part of the line? Can their relationship to the present line be made more clear in the present lead article templates??? Nergaal (talk) 04:51, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the important point here is that unlike in other metro systems, in the Oslo Metro, lines run into other lines. So in most networks you'll have one service on each line, here you have many services each travelling along multiple lines. I think the fact that the whole diagram forms a ring which is also the name of this one line (which is only part of the ring in the diagram) and also, the descriptions of the stations are interleaved, only further confuses matters. Anyway, I have inserted a small portion of text in the bottom of the second diagram which is the best I can do to explain things - rst20xx (talk) 16:34, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But why aren't the three stations bolded, or the rest italicised, or some different color to easily differentiate from the other lines? Nergaal (talk)

I just realised Arsenikk hasn't edited since May 24! Well I bolded the appropriate station names for him - rst20xx (talk) 21:03, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nergaal, does the bolding sufficiently address your concerns? I would like to promote this topic, in spite of Arsenikk's continued absense!, but want to make sure you're happy first - rst20xx (talk) 10:51, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, it looks ok now. Nergaal (talk) 04:49, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~Weak~~ Support. The improvment was done to which image? The "routemap" in the infobox iswas still confusing (i bolded the stations now). Other than that that these articles make up a distinct topic and are all good quality, so should be a GT.Yob Mod 11:29, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh sorry I bolded the stations in the second and not the first routemap. Good change - rst20xx (talk) 14:11, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Close with consensus to promote - rst20xx (talk) 14:29, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]