Talk:Chicago "L"

Is the Chicago "L" actually a light rail system.
I think that the L, instead of being rapid transit, is actually a light rail system. What evidences this is as follows: The trainsets are of narrow loading gauge, short cars, and each trainset are composed of two cars each, and frequently two trainsets are coupled to form a train composed of two cars or more, characteristic of a light rail system. The presence of several at-grade level crossings are also present in light rail, and rapid transit never has any, with rare exceptions having only one or two.

To show this in the main page, the fact has to be placed like this:

Despite the [US transport department name] classifying the "L" as rapid transit, the design of the trains and the presence of several at grade level crossings make it more analogous to light rail. VivaBlondie2000 (talk) 02:35, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
 * WP:ORIGINAL.  Cards   84664   02:56, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
 * No, not at all.
 * Firstly, what Cards said. Your personal conclusions are inappropriate for a Wikipedia article, and Wikipedia talk pages are not the place to present original discussion.
 * As for the idea, we have definitive and authoritative industry standard references (the UITP and APTA) that unambiguously categorize the Chicago "L" as rapid transit. Indeed, it's one of the oldest and most defining systems of the type. While the presence of some grade crossings is not ideal, the idea that "rapit transit never has any" is false; London and Tokyo have them as well. Neither of your other arguments hold any water at all. The use of married pair train cars is not unique to light rail. At all. Indeed, the cars are in no way light rail like in the least, and are highly similar to other rapid transit systems, such as New York's A Division, Boston' Blue Line, or London, which has cars of similar size on the deep tube lines.
 * I'm sorry, but this entire proposal is just incorrect in facts and conclusions. oknazevad (talk) 17:45, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Although I know that editors can't put original research, I'm afraid you didn't read my entire argument; although I know that a few exceptional systems do have grade crossings, I put "with rare exceptions having one or two"; as for the L, the usage of grade crossings is widespread. And although married pairs isn't unique to light rail (although it is common), I put other facts that say otherwise; the length and size of the cars (narrow loading gauge and shorter than usual lengths). And although the UITP and the APTA classify the L as rapid transit, not every official source can be correct; in Chile, for example, the official operator of the Valparaíso Metro (Empresa de los Ferrocarriles del Estado) states that the system is rapid transit, when in reality it is a commuter rail line; infrequent trains, several grade crossings and long distances between stations all contribute to this. VivaBlondie2000 (talk) 21:13, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Just because you think you're correct, that doesn't mean the rules don't apply to you. You will be blocked from editing if you continue with the original research. (WP:LISTEN)  Cards   84664   03:45, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * And you didn't read my response. Firstly, I debunked the loading gauge argument. The cars on the Chicago "L" are comparable in size to cars on major unambiguously rapid transit systems from around the world. They're wider that deep tunnel London Underground cars and NYC Subway A Division cars. They are the same length as cars on Boston's Blue Line and only 3 feet shorter than NYC A Division cars. They are most definitely not smaller than other rapid transit system cars. And calling grade crossings widespread is false, period. There are a few on the outermost portions of three branches, hardly common in the system. And international standards bodies like the UITP are more relevant the opinion of a random Wikipedia editor.
 * Repeating the same arguments without responding to the facts presented doesn't bolster your argument. It only makes it more dismissible. Making any changes to the article at this point is against both plain facts and consensus. WP:DROPTHESTICK. oknazevad (talk) 04:08, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Article issues and assessment

 * This article is currently assessed as B-class. It was nominated but failed the good article criteria. I have noticed there are several inline "Citation needed tags for 2010, 2013, and 2019. It also has a June 2021 "Gallery" section tag: "This section contains an unencyclopedic or excessive gallery of images" that I do not agree with. This is under a history section that I think better served as a subsection but the historical aspect is interesting and not distracting.
 * However, the criteria (#1) states: The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited. The tags are evidence there have been challenges.
 * At this point solutions to solve career tag issues include:


 * 1) Supply citations
 * 2) Remove unsourced content
 * 3) Reassess the article.
 * #4 of the criteria states: The article is reasonably well-written. On a first and fast read I only saw a few things that could be improved but aside from the tags I would think B-class appropriate therefore I would think #3 the last choice. Otr500 (talk) 07:34, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Chicago "L" or 'L'?
I see both "Chicago "L"" and "Chicago 'L'" used across the web and was wondering which one was the right way to punctuate it (with quotes or apostrophes). I noticed that the Chicago Transit Authority uses "Chicago 'L'" on its website. Here's a quote from their site: "CTA's train system is known as the 'L' (a now-official name originally short for "elevated")" https://www.transitchicago.com/howto/riding-the-train/

I apologize if my grammar or formatting, etc. was bad or if this topic was poorly written. I was in a hurry, and am relatively new to editing on Wikipedia. 68.150.108.209 (talk) 16:39, 20 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Whether to use single or double quotes was discussed previously. Since use in sources is mixed, standard double quotes was preferred. That said, they really aren't quote marks originally, but two apostrophes indicating the elision of letters, so I would not object to moving it back to single apostrophes. oknazevad (talk) 17:14, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Map update
Purple line express trains stop at Wilson since it reopened in 2017. See https://www.transitchicago.com/station/wils/ DavidSSabb (talk) 18:41, 21 January 2023 (UTC)


 * You're probably better off asking at the map image's page on commons, or even posting on the talk page of the person who last updated it there. That tends to work faster, as they already have the file and the ability to update it. oknazevad (talk) 20:04, 21 January 2023 (UTC)