Talk:Seoul Metropolitan Subway

Page Layout
For some reason no one knows I am starting on making the pages for each line bigger and better. Any ideas? 'ello? Cheers. Nesnad 17:40, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * The new construction section is becoming a bit long (sorry about that). Maybe the larger projects such as line 9 and the Shin Bundang Line should have their own pages?  --JackSeoul 11:29, 9 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Seems fine to me. sikander 17:18, September 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Went ahead and rearranged it and made new pages for Line 9 and the Shin Bundang Line projects. --JackSeoul 15:31, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

I made some changes to Omokgyo Station, see the diff. I think that having a box in every station article with its official hangeul name, its official Hanja name and its official English name (which often enough is not a mere romanization) is much more useful and appropriate than having the box display two romanisations of only the Korean name plus "역".

If that sounds good to you, and if you have too much time at hand, you can change all station articles accordingly, using the SMRT's information pages such as this one for Omokgyo – use the 역검색 button (top of page) to find other stations' pages.

If you disagree, just revert me.—Wikipeditor 13:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Gyeongchun Line?
Why isn't it included in the Seoul Metropolitan Subway template?> It's already completed. 12.185.48.105 (talk) 22:12, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

DITTO!!!!! from Chuncheon, Peterhansen2032 (talk) 13:49, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Jungang Line?
Is there now a Jungang Line in the Seoul subway system? If so, it needs its own article; Jungang Line is about a very different stretch of track. -- Visviva 09:21, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * For the yongsan-dokso section. in Korean wikipedia. we don't have conclusion. we discuss on this section that "this page should separate" Vs. "It must incluse in Line 1". in truth, we don't have exact nothon about "what is line 1 and what is line 1's content" at now. so, I suggest don't make about 'jungang line' as of yongsan-dukso section. - Ellif 06:16, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Third Rail or Overhead Wires?
How is SMRT elevtrified?

Third rail?
 * Overhead lines... I'd like to include this information but I don't know where. There is some more information on Seoul Subway systems here: and

Blue Line Terminology
Technically, there are 2 blue lines, #1 dark blue and #4 light blue. However, it appears that #4 is the official blue line per a recent edit. Any detail?? Georgia guy 13:45, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Organization
This article is not organized very well. Is there a way we can make the article better laid out without compromising the quality of the article? &mdash; † Webdinger BLAH 03:07, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Future expansion maps under "History"
The two maps added by Sh1900 are show various planned or proposed expansion of the Seoul subway along with potential routes and station names. Some of routes they show are 5-10 years from completion. There's no explanation as to what they represent or why they're there. I am removing them. JackSeoul 02:55, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Incheon Line
Since this is the Seoul Metropolitan Subway, not the Seoul Subway, I think it can be assumed that it covers the subway lines in the Seoul Metropolitan Area, so I propose that the Incheon Line (I'm not sure why they call it Incheon Line 1, but they do!) be included in this article and its associated template. JPBarrass 13:08, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
 * It's called Incheon Subway Line 1 because Line 2 is under construction. The offical maps etc refer to it as line 1. I aree that it should be listed here. It's one system, same ticketing is used, and it appears on the official maps such as here.JackSeoul 08:29, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

image overload
Articles are not mere galleries and this article is quickly becoming that. Comparing this version and this current version. I've got to say I much prefer the earlier version. Each station has its own article, there is no reason to have a gallery of images for each station in the main article. And this extremely large image down the side does horrible things to the formatting.--Crossmr (talk) 05:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Main Image
Just comparing the previous main image, Image:Seoul_Subway_linemap_en.pngand the new one Image:Seoulsubway.jpg. I don't have anything against updating the image, however it should be as legible as the previous one. This new one is packed together more and at a smaller resolution. This leaves a few station names difficult to read. Would it be possible to get this image at a higher resolution.--Crossmr (talk) 05:14, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

LRT
To be clear, what is meant by a new LRT line is developing? According to this article there are seven LRT lines in Seoul and 10 in Gyeonggi-do that are in the planning stages. The article specifies EverLine as one of these LRT lines. Is it safe to assume that all these other lines are separate? In Singapore there is the MRT and the LRT and they are integrated but very different. I'm going to move forward under the assumption that these lines are separate and that a new subsection on this page or a new stand alone page should be started. Please commentDaronDierkes (talk) 09:39, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Total Length
> System length 287 km (179.4 mi)

Including or excluding the Incheon Line? Dmismir (talk) 10:28, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Also excluded with Korail Metropolitan lines. It's just with Seoul metro and SMRT. - Ellif (talk) 17:18, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Excluded a bunch of lines in that figure--it even excludes almost all of Line 1! I updated the opening paragraph with the correct total length of the subway, but couldn't figure out how to edit the sidebar.  I also added the lengths of each line, in the table listing the lines.  (I got the figures from the Korean Wikipedia.  I didn't post links to sources, etc., but I think it's safe to say they are correct, and I assume the sources could be found linked somewhere on the Korean Wikipedia, if someone wants to try.)
 * Perhaps the "Seoul metro only" length should be removed, I live in Seoul, and I find the distinction between the two to be simply ridiculous. It's not like a day-to-day commuter in Seoul even knows the difference between the Korail-operated and Seoul Metro-operated lines, and the Korail operated parts of line 1 are integral to Line 1, as there is not a single operation pattern that operates on Seoul-metro only sections. Seoul lines 1~4 have more to do in common with Korail-operated lines than lines 5~9. In fact, line 9 has more to do in common with the likes of Airport Express and Sinbundang line than lines 1~8. For this reason, I find it simply ridiculous to treat Korail-operated lines separately from the others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laggingcomputer (talk • contribs) 08:01, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

map
There are no station (stop) numbers on the map - It is horrible looking for one of over 420 stops! Kdammers (talk) 08:43, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * -As far as I can remember offhand, the official subway maps don't include the numbers either. That is, if you're on (for example) a Line 3 train, in the train will be a map of only Line 3 that does have the numbers... but any maps that show all the lines omit them (because of information overload on a small map, plus I've never heard anyone ever refer to any station by number, only "_____ Station" or "____ Station on Line _" (talk)
 * I have maps from the subway system (thus, I guess, "official") that have the numbers. it is not info over-load _ the numbers are small but readable.  It is especially not a problem if you have a map with only one language for each stop. Kdammers (talk) 08:35, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Inconsistent transcriptions in subway line boxes
Seoul Subway Line 9 and all other Seoul subway articles use the hangul and hanja forms 수도권 전철/首都圈 電鐵 for "Seoul Subway" in the infobox, but the Latin transcription says "Sudogwon Jihacheol", which would be 수도권 지하철/首都圈 地下鐵. Also, "수도권 전철" is "Metropolican Electric Train", while Seoul Subway should be "서울 지하철". Which form is the most correct? Apparently the Korean WP uses "서울 지하철". Jpatokal (talk) 22:10, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The default English name is "Seoul Subway" or some form. The official Korean title is 수도권 전철 which is romanized as "Sudogwon Jeoncheol". In Seoul people say "지하철" and you are right, there is a Korean Wiki page for "서울 지하철" but their main page is "수도권 전철." Rickinasia (talk) 15:08, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Construction
There seems to be constant construction over various parts of the Seoul Subway system. I've been working on that from several sources; the Korean language Wiki pages, the iPhone app '지하철', Naver Maps, and what I see while traveling the subways. Any other websites or tools people can recommend please write them here. I remember seeing a Korean language subway/rail construction website awhile ago but am not sure if the site is still open or dead. Rickinasia (talk) 07:40, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

You can check at Future Rail Database, but It's all korean. - Ellif (talk) 06:44, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Page Name
Please see the m:User talk:Galadrien. - Ellif 06:20, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Korea Metropolitan Subway would be a misleading article name as Korea has subway in cities other than Seoul. It is much easier for a foreigner, who does not know that the Korean literal translation of the subway system, to find this article when searching for seoul's subway system. sikander 18:18, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * But because of Its subways go with 2 cityes and 1 province, it is NOT subway of SEOUL, but metropolitan subway of korea, I think. If like the Busan Subway or Gwangju Subway, I don't insist this way.- Ellif 03:31, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * And, Here in Korea, other subways Don't have name of Metropolitan Subway. And, so how you'll explain about Incheon Subway in KMS? - Ellif 01:48, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I think the page was originally named Seoul Metropolitan Subway because the company's website calls it Seoul Metro ( Metro being short for Metropolitan.. meaning a large population consisting of a city and suburban areas ). Personally I don't think it should be renamed to Korean Metropolitan Subway because Seoul is not Korea... Seoul is a city in Korea. Maybe the Incheon Subway article is called Incheon Subway only because that subway does not go to the surrounding suburban areas ? In any case, I don't think this is such a major issue. If you want, you can add to the article some information about what the subway system is called in Seoul and how Korean people refer to the subway. Have a good day. sikander 05:29, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Original name ; Sudogwan Jeoncheol means Seoul Capital Area Electric Railway so the page is redirected.--Frysun (talk) 21:59, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
 * ....except it's not called that in English. '수도권' is much better translated as 'metropolitan' and while '전철' technically means 'electric + vehicle/cart/car' calling it 'Electric Railway' is a bad translation. It's much safer to go by what the official transit companies call the system and can be checked by looking at an official map provided by the subways. And as a debate/discussion is ongoing, just changing the name of the system before an agreement can be reached is not proper. Please wait until an agreement has been reached before you change many pages about what the proper name is. ₪Rick n Asia₪ 14:00, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Frysun, you're translating it from the characters, not the words. (I think you're getting it from Chinese characters) There's strong consensus among the official subway operators and official subway maps that have no mention of your "translation". Jeon means electric from Chinese character but Jeoncheol means subway in Korean. Capital Area always refers to Seoul Metropolitan Area. Your translation is literate and incorrect. Camins (talk) 15:28, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * If this page was the Korean page than the 한자 would be incredibly important, however this is concerning the English name. To know what the English name is one should simply look at a map provided by the system system; that is the official name. Do not attempt to retranslate it to suit what you think sounds best. This was already discussed on this talk page - no one suggested name changes for seven years before you changed it. ₪Rick n Asia₪ 15:34, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

I noted that there has been a confusion for a long time. Seoul Subway (ko:서울 지하철) is a constituting part of Sudogwon Electric Railway (ko:수도권 전철-Literally translates into Capital Area Electric Railway). The Korean Wikipedia has always maintained two different pages for them while the English Wikipedia confused them with each other which have brought certain problems. I think the changes are correct and long overdue.--Frysun (talk) 14:59, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I noted that there has been a confusion for a long time. Seoul Subway (ko:서울 지하철) is a constituting part of Sudogwon Electric Railway (ko:수도권 전철-Literally translates into Capital Area Electric Railway). The Korean Wikipedia has always maintained two different pages for them while the English Wikipedia confused them with each other which have brought certain problems. I think the changes are correct and long overdue.--Frysun (talk) 14:57, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Frysun your changes are incorrect. The Korean Wikipedia maintains the two for historic purposes - not because they're two different systems. The Seoul Subway term is outdated and no longer used since 2000 when the system was unified under the Seoul Metropolitan Subway. Please see the discussion under List of metro systems article before making any more changes. Camins (talk) 15:07, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't want to conclude that you have been deliberately misleading. Seoul Subway is not defunct and it is part of, not the equivalent of, Sudogwon Electric Railway.--Frysun (talk) 15:20, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * It is defunct as a system - It exists only for revenue counting purpose by the Seoul government which owns Seoul Metro,SMRT and Line 9 - not because it is a separate system. You're right, it is part of the Seoul Metropolitan Subway, which is the accurate translation, not "Sudogwon electric railway" which you mention. Please see Seoul Metro's official English map, which reads "Metro lines in Seoul Metropolitan Area". None of the words of "Sudogwon Electric Railway" are mentioned there. Camins (talk) 15:20, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * And please stop vandalizing Seoul Metropolitan Subway's article - you redirected it to Seoul Metro, which is the name of the operator of 4 lines. You don't seem to understand that there exists only one single system in the Seoul Metropolitan Area. Camins (talk) 15:22, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You were absolutely wrong and please stop your unfounded accusation of vandalism. The fact that Seoul Subway is used by the Seoul authority, as you mentioned, means it is not defunct. On English Wikipedia Seoul Metropolitan Area is the same as Sudogwon but Subway is not Electric Railway. Read the Korean name and it says Electric Railway and you can not equal that to a subway, which has narrower definition.--Frysun (talk) 15:26, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * As you mentioned Seoul Metro, you cannot deny the fact that Seoul Metropolitan Subway is just the company name for Seoul Metro before 2006. How can it be the name of a much bigger system at the same time? The system is the Sudogwon/Seoul Capital Area/Seoul Metropolitan Area Electric Railway, not subway.--Frysun (talk) 15:29, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Camins alleged that ''you're translating it from the characters, not the words. (I think you're getting it from Chinese characters)''. He claimed that Jeon means electric from Chinese character but Jeoncheol means subway in Korean., therefore the page should be named as subway not electric railway. This is categorically wrong. Go to the Korean page for Jeoncheol (ko:전철) and you get Electric Railway not subway. The Japanese Wikpedia can be used to verify the usage of Jeoncheol.--Frysun (talk) 15:43, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Please stop vandalizing the Korean page for the Seoul Metropolitan Subway. For 7 years, it has been saying "Metropolitan Subway in Seoul", now you changed it to whatever you translated to support your claim. This is ridiculous. You're translating it from Chinese characters - Modern Korean and Chinese characters are very different in meaning, don't you get it? Camins (talk) 15:50, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Comparing it to Japan using Chinese characters doesn't make sense - The meanings of Korean and Chinese characters is very different to begin with. The official subway map of Seoul Metro reads "Metro lines in Seoul Metropolitan Area" - no mention of electric railway or capital. Camins (talk) 15:52, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

The names of any article should be the official name used in that language. The Japanese Wikipedia uses the official titles used in the Japanese language, Chinese pages use the official name in Chinese, and English uses the official page names in English. As this subway system seems to have had a different name in the past, it is worth mentioning in the article. But the name of the article should be what the system is officially called, fresh translations are not necessary. ₪Rick n Asia₪ 15:53, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Camins, I think I should remind you as a new user please refrain from labeling me as vandalizing as it is a very serious accusation on Wikipedia. Korean Wikipedia does not use English, and I was simply correcting as they follow the name used here. The fact that it has been imprecise for 7 years (which I cannot verify) should not prevent us from making changes. Also I do not know the reason for your unsupported guessing that I translated the name from Chinese. The fact is that I read both the Hangul and the Hanja on the Korean page. It only seems to me that you are misleading those who have no knowledge of the Korean language here. We both know that the Seoul system is a bit fragmented with many operators, but the simple fact is that there is a smaller rapid transit Seoul Subway which the city government uses to get its annual ridership figures and so on, and there is also a broader system Jeoncheol which includes other railway services like AREX. You may not like the name Electric Railway, but the name Subway is absolutely wrong. First of all, many of the lines in the Jeocheol system are not subway. Secondly, Jeoncheol in Korean literally means electric railway. It is true that many 'Jeoncheol' in Seoul are subways but there are fundamentally different. Thirdly, if you keep pushing the name 'subway' for this article, which name would you use for the real Seoul Subway system? You kept saying that Metropolitan subway is the so-called official name but where is the source? As a third-party alternative, http://www.urbanrail.net/as/kr/seoul/seoul.htm lists the railways in Seoul. Lines 1-9 make up the Seoul Subway and there are also other lines which are not part of Seoul Subway. You should not simply blur the differences and bundle name together under a so-called metropolitan subway.--Frysun (talk) 16:30, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Your timing of editing the Korean 수도권 전철 is extremely suspicious - You did it just as discussion about this name went along just now. Why else would you change it right now? This indicates vandalism. Anyhow, it is wrong to begin with. You're simply denying strong consensus from the official subway operators and the official subway maps. Check out this official English map from Seoul Metro for why you're wrong: http://cafe.naver.com/ArticleRead.nhn?clubid=10191706&menuid=28&boardtype=I&page=1&specialmenutype=&articleid=628&referrerAllArticles=false Camins (talk) 16:40, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree with you that not all sections of the system are "subway" in its technical meaning. But that's not the point. The same could be said for Tokyo subway, New York subway or any other subway in the world because they have ultimately stations overground. So long as the majority of it is underground, the term is fine to be used. Nobody but you challenged it for 7 years, so clearly, it has gained strong consensus for a very long time. Camins (talk) 16:43, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Please do not mention unreliable third-party sites - There is strong consensus to use the official subway operator's maps.Camins (talk) 16:46, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * There is nothing fragmented about the Seoul subway - Sudogwon is Seoul metropolitan and Jeoncheol is subway - as simple as that. Have you ever seen an official map that just lists the line 1-9 you mentioned? No. I would be very surprised if I did. They always include AREX, Budang, Sinbudang and so on. This map has been official since the year 2000 when they were united under one sytem. Why are you denying facts and official operators? There is no "real seoul subway" - it is ONLY used for revenue counting purposes, not as a "system". Please stop confusing about ownership and operations. They are completely different. Camins (talk) 16:54, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Official translation from Korean-English dictionary for Jeoncheol 전철 which says it means subway: http://endic.naver.com/search.nhn?dicQuery=%EC%A0%84%EC%B2%A0&query=%EC%A0%84%EC%B2%A0&target=dic&ie=utf8&query_utf=&isOnlyViewEE=N
 * Official translation from Korean-English dictionary for Sudogwon 수도권, which says it means metropolitan area: http://endic.naver.com/search.nhn?&searchOption=all&query=%EC%88%98%EB%8F%84%EA%B6%8C

Camins (talk) 16:58, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Camins, I think we need to be sincere in our discussion, or it would undermine the mutual trust on Wikipedia. When you give me a link like http://endic.naver.com/search.nhn?&searchOption=all&query=%EC%88%98%EB%8F%84%EA%B6%8C&isEngVer=Y (note I change the interface to English so that others can read as well), it is unfair for you to select only the meaning that caters your argument. The most precise meaning for 수도권 is capital area, capital region, capital territory, etc. Metropolitan Area is also listed because it is often used to refer to a country's capital, as in the case for Seoul, London, Tokyo, but not always (NYC is a counterexample). Now, I know the problem like NYC does not exist in Korea, so this is only the minor part of our discussion.
 * The major part of whether to use subway or railway for Jeoncheol. Again, I think it is very unfair for you to abuse the term official, when what you are posting here are just sources from naver.com which certainly is not the official representative for Seoul subway or the whole wide-area railway system. naver.com is only a third-party source, just as http://www.urbanrail.net/as/kr/seoul/seoul.htm. BTW, I think you are not entitled to say Please do not mention unreliable third-party sites in this context. Third-party sources are the very citations Wikipedia need, and the wide usage of urbanrail.net on Wikipedia as a source clearly refutes your assumption that it is unreliable.
 * I do not deny that the current subway map includes both Seoul Subway lines 1-9 and other non-Seoul Subway, but this does not mean there should be a single Wikipedia page for both Seoul Subway and the Capital Area Electric Railway. The London Tube map includes both the Tube and other non-tube lines like London Overground, DLR, would you say they should all be combined as a London Metropolitan Subway or something? Note that those lines are also integrated. Seoul situation is similarly to London. Seoul Subway is the equivalent of London Underground, and in Korea, as you said, it is used for various counting purposes. Also, Seoul Subway have different operators with other lines. Seoul also have other railway lines which are not part of Seoul Subway but integrated just as London's Overground, DLR. I do not see why we should mix Seoul Subway with Sudogwon Electric Railway. There should definitely be two Wikipedia articles for the two, in particular when the Korean Wikipedia (along with Chinese and Japanese) have been maintaining two independent articles for ages.--Frysun (talk) 19:09, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Fryrun, the dictionary sources from Oxford Advanced Learner, Neungyule and Dong-A Prime, three highly respected, trusted and most widely used dictionaries in Korea: http://endic.naver.com/?isEngVer=Y It is not a third-party source. It's a primary source. Besides, Naver is South Korea's No.1 portal (70% market share versus 2% for Google). Jeoncheol means subway according to the dictionary, why are you denying official dictionary translations and consensus from other users which have stayed for over 12 years? The dictionary officially says "a metropolitan subway line map" in an example phrase below - Why are you denying the dictionary? This is Korea's most widely used and trusted Korean-English dictionary. It does not say "capital area" because that's the correct translation when used in subway maps - Meanings change depending on context. If you say capital, what capital? Capital of Japan? No. It's always translated as Seoul metropolitan because that's the name of the capital.
 * Seoul is different from London because all of its lines have grade-separated tracks and are 100% electric. You can't say the same for London. London overground runs on Diesel and runs on shared tracks. They're not even subways to begin with. That's why it's only listed in the tube map for guidance only and with a separate color and shape. Seoul Metropolitan Subway lines do not share tracks with other railway lines - Line 1, for example, has its own electrified right of way and its own track, even if other railway go right next to it. The so-called "Seoul Subway" is unofficial and doesn't exist as a term to begin with. Where's your source about this name? Do you have any source other than user-edited Wikipedia that lists Line 1~9? No. When people think of Seoul Subway, they think 99.9% of the time about the official maps. Yes, you are denying official maps because can you give me one single map which just lists line 1-9? No. Because they don't exist. They have never existed since 2000. Why are you creating a separate article based on ownership (pretending as if it's a different system) when it can be mentioned in the Seoul Metropolitan Subway article? The Korean Wikipedia does just that - Mentioning ownership along with operators. Do the same for the English wiki. Create a new column mentioning the operators and that it is used for revenue counting purposes if you want. Just because the Korean, Chinese or Japanese do it, doesn't mean it has to be done the same way in English. English readers are a different audience and will be confused that there are two systems, when there's only one. Your imaginative "seoul subway" is only used for revenue counting purposes, not as a system. Seoul government owns line 1-9, so they want to know how much money it makes - Not confuse users with two different maps or systems. Nobody uses it as a system. You're still confused about ownership and operations. If you want, we can mention ownership in the Seoul Metropolitan Subway article but there's no need to create two articles because it will completely confuse the average English reader. There's no point in dedicating an entire article titled "seoul subway" just to mention that they're used for revenue counting purposes. That doesn't even qualify for Notability. Camins (talk) 05:42, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Frysun, you said "I noted that there has been a confusion for a long time." - what confusion? "...while the English Wikipedia confused them with each other which have brought certain problems." - what problems? ₪Rick n Asia₪ 13:22, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * More official proof from Seoul Metropolitan Rapid Transit (one of the two major operators of Seoul subway) that Frysun's made-up name is nonsense - This is the official subway map used on all stations from Lines 5~8 which clearly reads "Seoul Metropolitan Area Subway Map": http://cafe.naver.com/frdb/139 Can it be anymore clear? I think we have enough consensus now - Two of the largest and main operators of Seoul subway (Seoul Metro, the other one operating Lines 1~4 already proven previously) all having no mention of the words used by Frysun. Besides, Sudogwon is just the pronounciation - English readers have no idea what that means. All Wikipedia articles on Korean words have been translated to English (Korean reunification article, for example, we should call it Joguktongil if we follow Frysun's nonsense way of naming) I'm quite frankly finding this absurd at best at this point, the fact Frysun is trying to change such a commonly accepted word in the general public. It's like trying to change the word "car" to "moving vehicle". Nobody calls Seoul's metro an electric railway. Not even close. Ask anyone. If you need further proof, I can take a picture of more official maps from the Seoul subway stations right now to proof how wrong you are Frysun. Camins (talk) 20:07, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The fact that Frysun is no longer discussing anymore suggests we have reached a consensus that it should be renamed back to as it has always been. Camins (talk) 20:08, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You concluded way to early. Normally a contested move should have 7 days of dissuasion OK since the article has already been moved by voting, I'll leave the discussion for now.--Frysun (talk) 10:43, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 1

 * The following discussion is closed. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Sudogwon Electric Railway → Seoul Metropolitan Subway – Contested request (I neither support nor oppose move). Apteva (talk) 21:24, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.



Discussion

 * Any additional comments:


 * Somebody suddenly changed the name of Seoul's metro system which has been "Seoul Metropolitan Subway" for 12 years to an incorrect title invented by himself/herself - The official dictionaries, official subway operators and maps have universal consensus this is the correct name. Camins (talk) 13:12, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose Same request made yesterday. Page not moved by administrator due to ongoing discussion.--Frysun (talk) 18:55, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Support Frysun refuses to participate in the discussion anymore, no participation since last discussion 24 hours ago, yet has time to oppose on this section, clearly abusing the nature of contested technical requests. Strong consensus exists with another editor along with official dictionaries, official operators and maps that Frysun's name is incorrect. Frysun is the only user insisting on this name. Camins (talk) 19:16, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Support and speedy revert to stable title on procedural grounds per WP:BRD. A third party look at article history shows that this TR is starting at the wrong end from a series of disruptive moves by Frysun and any move request should start from the stable title. See discussion on procedure at WT:RM. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:44, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Support We should follow the wikipedian procedure. Moving to Sudogwon Electric Railway for User:Frysun is not fair. And I oppose that this article is splited to 수도권 전철 and 서울 지하철 although two are different in a view. It is easy that this is considered one system. If the name Seoul Metropolitan Subway is not proper, the talk must go on. Sawol (talk) 05:05, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Stop: The procedure is quite clear.  When a controversial move has been made, and it is not possible to revert that, then the move should be undone by an administrator on technical grounds to enable the proposer (if they wish) to formally propose the move to the new title under the Requested move process.  As In ictu oculi says, this mirrors WP:BRD.  This has now been done, and this particular Requested move request needs to be closed down.  Skinsmoke (talk) 13:08, 5 March 2013 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Korea name
The infobox to the right has been on this article for quite a long time before removed by User:Camins, alleging that it is unverified, unofficial and outdated name, please discuss before making any changes. In the previous discussion,, Camins maintained that Seoul Metropolitan Subway is the name for Sudogwan Jeoncheol. Now that the article has been moved and renamed, why deleting its Korean name?--Frysun (talk) 21:39, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Because this name is not official to begin with, having no source. The Korean wiki article is outdated because this name was dropped with the opening of Line 1 extension to Cheonan in 2005 and made further irrelevant by opening of Gyeongchun Line in 2010, both are not in Sudogwon. Line 1 extension to Sinchang is in Asan, another city not in Sudogwon. Camins (talk) 15:38, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes I see. Thanks for reminding me of this. I have updated the name.--Frysun (talk) 23:30, 13 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Please stop ignoring the consensus and do not claim to have "updated" it to another nonsense name when the official proof below clearly states that it is the "Seoul Metropolitan Subway".Camins (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:47, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Updated Name
As suggested in the previous section by Camins, the name of Sudogwan Jeoncheol is outdated since 2005. Following sources show that the current name is 광역전철 (Gwangyeok Jeoncheol) in Korean and Seoul Metropolitan Railway in English, hence the rename of the article. Sources:
 * For the latest published map (2012 edition) || Metropolitan Railway map, the title shows the bilingual names.
 * For the cover of such maps Seoul Metropolitan Railway Map Cover, showing the bilingual names and the railway lines included in the system.
 * For the in-station map of Seoul Metropolitan Railway map in 2010 see here Metropolitan Railway map Station 2010
 * For the latest in-station map of Seoul Metropolitan Railway map (November 2012) see here Metropolitan Railway Station map 2012
 * Note that all maps contain official names both in English and Korean (Hangul and Hanja).--Frysun (talk) 23:30, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Frysun, you continue to disrupt this article, ignoring the consensus to discuss with other users before making any changes and your sources are highly misleading and outdated. Firstly, you've only shown a subway map stand used ages ago by only 4 lines, which is not "updated" as you claim. The other maps you have shown is not from the official operator but from a third-party printing company. Very misleading. Claiming that they're the "latest" and "official" is wrong. To prove how wrong your claims are, I've got on the Seoul Subway today and taken the very latest (accurate as of 18th March 2013 as per camera's date taken) maps not just from the subway stands but also from the subway cars of both operators (Operator of Lines 1,2,4,5,6,7,8). Mind you, the SMRT map has been completely updated on all lines starting February 2013 and the Seoul Metro map is the latest generation subway car opened with the Line 3 extension to Ogeum (the last updated Seoul Metro section). Note this train also operates to Korail maintained section in the west and it's the exact wording as the map used by SMRT, showing universal consensus by the official operators. This should reveal strong official consensus that the official name is "Seoul Metropolitan Subway", not railway, which would be completely confusing to readers anyway with the national railway of Korea. Sure, some sections are not subway in the technical sense, but so are some sections of the New York subway and the vast majority have always been underground and the ones people use daily are 90% underground. Overground sections have far fewer train frequencies because of the lack of people using them. Based on universal official consensus of Seoul's two major subway operators, I strongly suggest we revert this back to the name it has always been for 7 years since this article was created at Wikipedia, or almost 40 years since Seoul Subway's existence, until User:Frysun came along and suddenly it changed it to his taste. Remember there's not a single rapid transit system in the world that's called a "railway". Please stop your nonsense Frysun. Camins (talk) 12:46, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I put the 6 images in a gallery to avoid difficulty for people reading later messages on narrow screens such as iPads. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:12, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Move? 2

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: moved by. I've move-protected the page for one month. Jenks24 (talk) 10:11, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Seoul Metropolitan Railway → Seoul Metropolitan Subway –
 * User:Frysun continues to ignore consensus to keep the article's name as it has always been since its existence, with latest maps from official subway operators all calling it a subway, not a railway. 211.36.133.132 (talk) 12:14, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * -- this was at Seoul Metropolitan Subway for some time before unilaterally moved it to "Railway" twice. It has already been reverted per WP:BRD once before (see discussion at Talk:Seoul Metropolitan Railway), but Frysun refuses to open a new discussion, so should be reverted to "Subway" once again, and MOVE-PROTECTED, to prevent Frysun from moving it without a discussion. And someone please trout Frysun. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 14:16, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Support and speedy revert to stable title on procedural grounds per WP:BRD. A consensus was already achieved by all users except Frysun and there is universal consensus among the official operators that this is a subway. This should be reverted with move protected just like the user mentioned above to prevent further abuses because Frysun ignores any consensus achieved. Otherwise Frysun will move it to another title of his will without any consensus and this issue will simply repeat itself. Camins (talk) 18:24, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Revert to "Subway" and move-protect as that is what official maps and PSA say the title is. ₪Rick n Asia₪ 00:39, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Stop Again, this needs to be reverted by an administrator to Seoul Metropolitan Subway.  If Frysun wishes to propose a move under the Requested move process, then fine, but to continue to make controversial moves of this article without consensus is as clear a case of Disruptive editing as we are likely to see.  Once the page is reverted, it should be move protected to prevent any more games being played to try to circumvent the normal process.  Skinsmoke (talk) 05:20, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Support In South Korea the "subway" or "metro" is the WP:COMMONNAME for the rapid transit, not the "metropolitan railway".  Sawol (talk) 06:07, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Automatic Platform Doors
The page says "All stations of the Seoul subway are installed with automatic platform gates for safety.[5]" However I remember a bunch of lines at the north side of Line 1 didn't have doors upwards of a year or two ago. And last week when I transferred from Sinbundang to Bundang Line and headed south multiple stations I noticed multiple without safety doors but eventually did see some before exiting (forgot the station). The reference mentioned said 92 finished with 173 more to do. I'm not sure how many existed in 2009 but there are nearly 500 now. Did something got lost in translation with "All metro stations in Seoul" or am I missing something?

Really looking for feedback. ₪Rick n Asia₪ 16:16, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Expand article
There are no clear graphs showing the rolling stock, nor are there any links to the rolling stock pages. The page looks confusing with just a list of stock numbers and a gallery. Epicgenius (talk) 01:46, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

'System Map' lacks many new additions to the subway network
'System Map', that is shown at the right corner of the document lacks newly added stations/lines. It seems that the image hasn't been update for a while. I can easily say that it lacks newly constructed lines: Suin line (Incheon - Oido), Budang line Mangpo Extension (Bojeong - Mangpo), Bundang line Wangsimni Extension (Seonlleung - Wangsimni), Everline (Giheung - Everland), Sinbundang DX line (Gangnam - Jeongja), Uijeongbu LRT (Balgok - Tapseok), Line 7 Incheon Extension (Onsu - Bupyeong-gu Office) and newly constructed stations: Seonjeongneung (Bundang line, b/ Seonlleung and Gangnam-gu Office) [There can be a lot more, as I just glanced through the map / Line 7 Extension is quite big change...]

There has been quite changes to the system, so this outdated map could be misleading to people who get to learn about Seoul Met. Subway for the first time.

I have several possible suggestions (I'm new to Wiki and am not used to Wiki's copyright policies, so a senior reader could do this job, possibly) 1. Map by SMRT (Seoul Metropolitan Rapid Transit Corp., corp. that runs Seoul Metro line 5-8) http://www.smrt.co.kr/program/cyberStation/main2.jsp?lang=e (download link at right) As this map is made by operational corp, it is updated decently.

for now, i'm going to try to find some more maps, (since this system is expanding quite rapidly and many maps are outdated) and if other members have found / made great maps, please put it as considerations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mscho527 (talk • contribs) 12:15, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Number of stations
The number of stations is confusing. Depending on who one asks, it can be 615 stations, 585 stations, 493 stations, or 422 stations. Is there a definite source for any of these numbers? Epicgenius (talk) 18:10, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, and I will put that up soon on the intro. Massyparcer (talk) 18:57, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Korail
A few editors appear to have a problem with the fact that one of Seoul's metro operators, Korail, is also South Korea's national railroad. This has been removed a few times today, last with the note that the source given was "a personal blog post" which collided with WP:Verifiability. I would hardly characterize Everydaykorea.com as "a personal blog." It is probably better suited for the topic at hand than, say, Jalopnik. I hope the new sources (Korail, AP) will no longer be doubted. I am glad that WP:Verifiability is now recognized as being important, and I suggest to remove Jalopnik to comply with the new standards for reliable sources. BsBsBs (talk) 15:26, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Sourcing a blog post maintained by one editor is ridiculous. Unlike everydaykorea, Jalopnick, if you look at alexa is ranked 3286th, and is a much more high-profile source by professional editors and hence, more than qualifies under WP:Verifiability. You're suppose to list lines on that section, not explain the operator. Which is completely irrelevant with the purpose of that section. Massyparcer (talk) 15:32, 23 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Whether Jalopnik is professionally edited is a matter of debate. BsBsBs (talk) 15:47, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't think you should post irrelevant and inappropriate content here. The main point is crystal clear from WP:Verfiability - No PERSONAL Blogs which we call "self-published sources" in Wikipedia that is prohibited. That everydaykorea is clearly from one personal guy. Also, I will remove that note added by Epic about the left-hand track, right-hand track nonsense that is totally unverifiable and unsourced original research without a single source. And your completely irrelevant and unnecessary intro to Korail which is completely going against the purpose of that section. Lists and intros are different do you get it? Remember: Any unsourced claims may be challenged and removed. Massyparcer (talk) 19:00, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * The side on which the trains run is pertinent to the article. Epicgenius (talk) 17:46, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Which doesn't matter because it is unsourced and anything unreferenced will be challenged and removed. I advise you to either stop this edit warring nonsense or get us a proper source to verify your claim. I will remove your unsourced claim once again, and next time you revert, you better have a source to prove your claim. Massyparcer (talk) 17:49, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Line 1 runs on the leftLine 4 runs part on the left, and part on the right, and the rest run on the right, according to ko.wikipedia. Epicgenius (talk) 18:16, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Sinbundang Line runs on the left, as does A*REX. Epicgenius (talk) 18:18, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * And we all know that using Wikipedia articles as sources is strictly forbidden. You have no reliable sources to prove your claims. Next time you revert, you better have something better than Wikipedia articles. Massyparcer (talk) 18:29, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * See my comments on the List of Metro Systems talk page. Epicgenius (talk) 18:42, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * You should seriously discuss matters related to this article here, not redirect me to another article's talk page. Massyparcer (talk) 18:48, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * It's because I don't want to type the same comment twice. Epicgenius (talk) 19:02, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * You still have no sources in your latest revert, which leaves me no choice but to remove this unsourced claim. Massyparcer (talk) 20:21, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Don't remove it! You'll break 3RR. By the way, I re-added it because it seemed that other editors were adding it back in as well, not because I had personal reasons for adding it. Epicgenius (talk) 20:27, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Why would that break 3RR? I have only reverted once. That doesn't excuse you to add unsourced and unverified content. I strongly suggest you either get out and do your work to get a reliable source, or we have no choice to remove this nonsense. Massyparcer (talk) 20:37, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Make article, not edit war
One recent editor of this article has just been blocked indefinitely for abuse of editing privileges (such as blanking parts of the article, and calling another editor a "moron.") Please edit responsibly, and do not wage edit warfare. Substantive changes should be discussed here first.

Likewise, characterizing the work product of other editors as "nonsense" is rude. We will all be measured by the standards we set. BsBsBs (talk) 16:03, 25 February 2014 (UTC)


 * The editor in question was vandalizing and blanking pages sitewide; it wasn't limited to this article. Still, it's good advice to take care when you edit. Epicgenius (talk) 03:37, 26 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I know, I follow the edit histories carefully. BsBsBs (talk) 09:09, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:


 * http://www.railway-technology.com/features/featurethe-worlds-longest-metro-and-subway-systems-4144725
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist
 * http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/uijeongbu-light-rail-transit/
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist
 * http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/seoul-metro/
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 13:38, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Korail Source
I found this page on Korail's site mentioning opening dates for lines/sections and lengths. This is kind of a note to myself but also for others if they want to use it. ₪Rick n Asia₪ 02:05, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Seoul Metropolitan Subway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140227072212/http://www.korail.com/file/statistics/2012/2012-04.pdf to http://www.korail.com/file/statistics/2012/2012-04.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

The Wikipedia post on the world's metro lines says that Shanghai is the longest metro in route length. The two data are conflicting. Considering the fact that this data was retrieved in 2014, this data needs fact-check. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.170.26.219 (talk) 00:54, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 00:35, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Seoul Metropolitan Subway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120425051744/http://mltm.go.kr/USR/policyData/m_34681/dtl.jsp?id=422 to http://mltm.go.kr/USR/policyData/m_34681/dtl.jsp?id=422

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:37, 7 May 2017 (UTC)