Talk:List of metro systems

Removal of unsourced planned metro stystem and under construction

There are many unsourced and fantasist metro systems in these categories. I suggest removal of all the unsourced metro systems. Also, it should be clarified what should the ''planned'' section contain. How can we even source this ? Some articles with some politicians promising the construction of an hypothetic metro system doesn't sound like a valid source. I vote for the removal of this section. Capt'n London (talk) 15:03, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, there's a reason the inclusion was always "shovels in the ground". I objected to the addition of a "planned" section for that very reason: no actual physical infrastructure exists, so they are not a system yet. Saint until some actual construction happens and put them in that section when it does. oknazevad (talk) 09:44, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

actually sometimes infrastructure for a planned metro exists before it is ever built. This may range from small tunnel segments to entire railroads or elevated lines which were built at some point in the past - sometimes with the explicit goal of conversion to metro but sometimes not.

Just look at the history of Athens Metro or Vienna U-Bahn or the Zürich U-Bahn and Cincinnati subway that never were but which still have/had tunnels you can See... 2001:A62:142C:9802:C15C:FFA8:C202:7093 (talk) 03:36, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

No, in those cases construction had begun, but was abandoned before opening, not plans being cancelled before construction began. Infrastructure can't exist before it's built. oknazevad (talk) 09:39, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

I have removed the planned section based on the long-standing consensus seen in the talk page archives multiple times. It was added without discussion despite being previously rejected multiple times. It must not be re-added based on WP:CRYSTALBALL. oknazevad (talk) 09:53, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Absolutely. Ymblanter (talk) 10:59, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Valencia (metrovalencia) is missing

Metrovalencia is missing in the list. It is the second longest metro system in Spain, so I think it is relevant to add it. Rgc1994 (talk) 10:44, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Previous discussions have found consensus that it is light rail, and so it is present at List of tram and light rail transit systems. CMD (talk) 10:53, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis And how do you explain zh:Talk:地鐵列表#关于西班牙的地铁认定 where zhwiki provided a valid against reason to against that "consensus"? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 06:03, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't explain zh.wiki, it has no bearing on en.wiki. CMD (talk) 06:15, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

The Chinese Wikipedia is irrelevant to the English Wikipedia. oknazevad (talk) 14:42, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

References formatting

Why are the citations split into subsections? GraemeLeggett (talk) 07:32, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Definition of "metro" needs clarification

The article contents and "Under construction" list seems to imply that "metro" refers exclusively to an 'underground'/'subway' system. However, the link to the definition of 'metro' in the first paragraph is to the article on 'Rapid transit', which is an expansive definition including both underground/subway systems and overground systems. Despite this, while the two 'first' Melbourne metro lines might be Melbourne's first underground/subway systems, the city has had a Rapid Transit (or metro depending on how you define it) for decades. I'd suggest that the article should clarify whether 'metro' is referring to an underground/subway system, a system with components that are underground/subways or Rapid transit where the system type is irrelevant. If it is the latter, then the "under construction" list will need to be modified since many listed are not the countries' 'first' rapid transit systems. Mcl.hill (talk) 14:40, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Melbourne has never had a rapid transit system. It has had an suburban rail system, full of level crossings and tracks shared with regional services and goods trains. These sorts of systems exist in hundreds of cities.--Grahame (talk) 14:51, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

UITP older and newer definitions. Elk Salmon (talk) 12:03, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Metropolitan railways are urban, electric transport systems with high capacity and a high frequency of service. Metros are totally independent from other traffic, road or pedestrians. They are consequently designed in tunnel, viaducts or on surface level but with physical separation. Some systems run on rubber-tyres but are based on the same control-command principles as steel-wheel systems. In different parts of the world metro systems are also known as the underground, subway or tube.

Metros: UGT systems operated on their own right of way and segregated from general road and pedestrian traffic. They are consequently designed for operations in tunnel, viaducts or on surface level but with physical separation in such a way that inadvertent access is not possible. In different parts of the world Metro systems are also known as the underground, the subway or the tube. Rail systems with specific construction issues operating on a segregated guideway (e.g. monorail, rack railways) are also treated as Metros as long as they are designated as part of the urban public transport network.

South Korea*

In South korea metro list alot of commuter rails as well as light metro systems are added, which isn't a rapid transit system. We should remove such systems from this page. 2402:8100:3875:DD74:4FF:6C18:CE6F:CEBE (talk) 00:20, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

what about Carmelit underground in Israel?

I saw this wasn't included in the list. Was curious if it was an accidental or purposeful omission:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carmelit 120.20.79.105 (talk) 17:16, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@120.20.79.105 it's a funicular railway, not a metro, funicular railways are not metros and they don't belong here Metrosfan (talk) 03:01, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Airport express lines

Many Chinese, and not only, system tend to include airport express lines. But in no form those lines are urban rails and serving the city itself. Elk Salmon (talk) 11:52, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Issues with the "Service opened" date

The list in this article contains inconsistencies with which date of a metro system is considered the one when "service opened". Based on the definition in the lead, a metro system needs to be electrified. Example of an inconsistency:

• London Underground. Inaugurated as a steam railway in 1863. Electrified in 1890. The "Service opened" date used is 1863.
• Athens Metro. Inaugurated as a steam railway in 1869. Electrified in 1904. The "Service opened" date used is 1904. – This one I have fixed to 1869 with refs from the history page of the official website of the operator company which clearly mentions the 1869 date.

I believe there are more similar inconsistencies which have to be fixed. The list must use either the inauguration date or the electrification date. Not a different one for each metro system. —Dimsar01 ^Talk ⌚→ 08:58, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Problem is there is no such thing as real-world, off-wiki consistency here. The Athens line was not created as a metro line but converted from a conventional branch line that still had shared operations with intercity and freight trains well into the 20th century. If anything the 1904 date is generous. oknazevad (talk) 09:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

The year of opening for each metro system is when they became a electrified,actual metro rail system,an example: if the Los Angeles Subway originally open as a non-electrified railway or they originally open as a commuter rail/light rail in 1993, but only became electrified and a actual metro system in 1998, the date will show 1998, im however not sure about how the past discussion for the London Underground went and why it shows 1863 instead of 1890 Metrosfan (talk) 14:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)