Talk:List of metro systems

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.

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)

@Elk Salmon Can you give more explanation on what you are trying to say? Metrosfan (talk) 13:55, 14 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)

The opening year should depend on the percentage of grade separation. The London line from 1863 was nothing more than a 6 km connecting tunnel between the Great Western Railway with the Great Northern Railway (and others) to form a unified network. Both Railway companies had lines in London way before 1863. Deciding on the opening date for legacy systems (like London, Chicago and Athens) is difficult because at their very first origin had not much in common with the current definition of a metro. I agree with Oknazevad that the 1904 date for Athens is generous. KatVanHuis (talk) 18:16, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

The following links contain more detailed history on both London and Athens systems. From what they say, London became a real metro system in 1890 and Athens in 1957.

https://www.urbanrail.net/eu/uk/lon/london.htm

https://www.urbanrail.net/eu/gr/athens/athens.htm

So it seems as if those should be the dates we should be using. I am not sure if this logic would affect any of the other legacy systems. Goldeneyed (talk) 20:20, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply and research. I'm inclined to choose the 1957 date for Athens too. However London had a grade-separated line in 1863, and electric traction was only reasonably developed during the 1880s so it's difficult/unfair to disqualify London based on not having electric traction. Moreover, Wikipedia works with consensus, so the vast majority has to agree with certain years/dates. KatVanHuis (talk) 12:26, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

I don't think 1957 is suitable, because the Athens Metro was often viewed as the oldest in the Balkans and second oldest in Eastern Europe, and in the top 10 Oldest metro systems list, I think 1904 is the suitable year Metrosfan (talk) 14:49, 8 October 2024 (UTC)