Jump to content

Talk:Sounder commuter rail

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Doesn't the Sounder train have it's own logo?

[edit]

I hope that the Sounder logo is added into the Wikimedia Commons and is placed under the Sound Transit logo for proper identification. FOPFan300 22:24, 28 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fairlyoddparents1234 (talk • contribs)

RailPlus

[edit]

I've added an external link that goes to Amtrak and Sound Transit's RailPlus program. I'm a regular on the Pierce Transit operated ST Express (primarly the 592 and 594) routes as well as the Sounder. I'm willing to contribute.

RaggieSoft 19:34, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Schedule times

[edit]

Since Wikipedia is not a How-to guide I'm removing the information about current schedule times. It's likely to date quickly, and we have a link to the current timetable. MKoltnow 00:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Big update

[edit]

The recent edit to the article adds a lot of information, but it deletes a great deal as well. I would like things like the RailPlus reference to return. I also think we should try to avoid use of terms like "currently" and "is planning" since they date so quickly. The sentence describing the reason for the second train's being added "to help increase ridership" appears to be unsourced. Thanks for your contributions. Let's work as a team. MKoltnow 04:07, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eastside Line Proposal section

[edit]

I've removed this section - in addition to being... well, wacky, it didn't meet quality standards.

Just to clarify for the author - Renton won't allow at-grade rail through their city limits, and South Bellevue residents are extremely opposed to rail that often goes (literally) through their backyards. There are also a multitude of at-grade crossings that can't be separated, several of which are park access largely used by children: It would be horribly unsafe to add service on these rails. The rail through there is largely class 2 - all rail would have to be replaced, curves would have to be straightened (with earthwork and a new bridge south of downtown), signaling would have to be replaced, to run at anything approaching acceptable passenger speed. The line also doesn't serve downtown Bellevue or any of the major work centers - it's across 405 from the Bellevue urban core, doesn't hit Kirkland effectively, etc. The issues with this line go on - connections to existing transit hubs are virtually nonexistent, in several places it could never be double-tracked, etc, etc. There's no coherent proposal to use the line for transit because the moment you start looking at the logistics, acquiring new ROW becomes cheaper. Bensch 06:02, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Sound Transit Logo.gif

[edit]

Image:Sound Transit Logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 08:00, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Public Transit infobox

[edit]

I added an infobox template to the top of the page. Information is taken from the article or referenced sources. I also looked at other regional rail line articles to aid accuracy. I'm new at editing, so please let me know if there are things I need to watch out for! Joshuadkelley (talk) 17:16, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Need for expansion

[edit]

To quote my Facebook friend, Rob Ketcherside (author of Lost Seattle), "A Wikipedia oddity - this article makes no mention of early planning that led to Sounder, the date it was approved by vote of people or ST board, or the lengthy delays in starting service and the underlying causes." - Jmabel | Talk 18:19, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone fix the overview?

[edit]

The overview states both Daily ridership = 18,314 and Weekly ridership = 18,314. This is obviously incorrect. I can't see how to edit this infobox. Linktex (talk) 18:24, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Linktex: It's been fixed. I think the issue is with the infobox template itself, which I will investigate further. SounderBruce 19:16, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Sounder commuter rail/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: SounderBruce (talk · contribs) 07:28, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Noleander (talk · contribs) 23:56, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Review by Noleander

[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:


Comments from Noleander

[edit]
  • Initial impression is that the article is xlnt quality. I foresee no issues achieving GA class.
  • Can you distinguish this rail from the Link light rail early in the article? Consider a top template such as template:for or template:distinguish. Or, less helpful, prose in the Lead (e.g. "The Sounder is part of puget sound mass transit system, along with the light rail system Link Light Rail"). The reason is that some readers may come to WP to find stops or map of the Link rail and may accidentally stumble on this article; to many people: a train is a train. The article should help those wayward souls find the correct article.
    • Added both to make things a bit more helpful.
  • Route nearly impossible to see in map https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sounder_commuter_rail#/map/1 ... the blue line is right on the edge of the blue Puget Sound. It is an unlucky combination: a line right on the coast, and the line is light blue. I looked at the Sounder web site, and it looks like the official color of the line is light blue, is that correct? Contrast with the InfoBox map when click on the "Show Interactive Map" radio button: a nice, bright red line, easy to see. Do you have any liberty to change the color of the line in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sounder_commuter_rail#/map/1 map? is there a graphics option in the map to have the light blue line drawn with thin black edges? This cannot be the first time this problem has arisen ... I wonder if others have found a solution.
    • This is controlled by a template that is fed from Wikidata and OSM, where the line color is supposed to match the official colors set by Sound Transit. The alternative option is to use static maps, which will take a bit of time (as it consumes quite a bit of spare time).
  • If I click the "Show All" radio button at bottom of InfoBox, the graphics are all hosed up... two or three maps are drawn on top of each other (config: Apple MacMini, Firefox browser). I recognize that this issue may be beyond your control, but I thought you'd want to know.
    • Unfortunately, this seems to be an issue with {{switcher}}. I will be looking around for a solution and sending out talk page messages, but if it is unsolvable, the interactive map can instead be replaced by the two line maps in the next section.
  • If N and S lines are abbreviations for North and South, consider mentioning that in passing at The N Line begins in Seattle... -> The N (North) Line begins in Seattle...
    • Added a quick mention of their old names in the Lines section, but I don't think further use is warranted; the use of N/S is fairly commonplace now and should become more familiar as time goes on.
  • Can you add words to explain that ticketing uses an honor-system approach: Sounder uses a proof-of-payment for fare payment that requires valid fares to be paid before boarding trains; the system does not have turnstile barriers at stations When I first read that, it seemed contradictory (see bolded words in quote). I had to click on the "proof-of-payment" link to learn what the sentence was trying to say. Can you help readers avoid that click? Consider adding phrase "honor system" into the sentence?
  • Raises more questions than it answers? In June 2024, the N Line had an average of 362 weekday passengers, while the S Line averaged 6,948 passengers. That is a huge discrepancy. Does the article explain that somewhere? Looking at the route map, I see the N line is on the coast, rather than going thru the densely populated neighborhoods. Was the N line only included in the original design for political reasons? Or is ridership on N line way below expectations? Apologies if that is already discussed in the article.
    • This is discussed in the next paragraph. I don't feel like it flows as well when attached to the current ridership statistics.
  • Consider changing "consist" to "trainset" in caption: A five-car consist on the S Line, led by a cab car, near Tukwila station I guarantee you that only 0.0001% of readers of this encyclopedia will know what a consist is :-)
    • Done.
  • Source? The coastline work was also criticized by a local group who sought to preserve beachfront land for a future trail and filed a lawsuit against Sound Transit that was dismissed by a hearing examiner.[151] the cite covers the first part of the sentence, but I could not find anything about dismissal in the source ... but maybe I'm reading too quickly.
    • Good catch. I added a source that covers the lawsuit's outcome in the superior court, but could not find the hearing examiner's judgement.
  • Help lazy readers: A couple of photos have both Sounder & Amtrack trains, without identifying which is which. Can you add "(left)" or "(bottom)" etc to the captions? An Amtrak Cascades train passing through Everett Station, the northern terminus of the Sounder system and Sounder and Amtrak trains at their shared maintenance facility in Seattle I realize a train buff considers it exceeding obvious which is which, but we should help laymen also enjoy the article.
    • Added.
  • Clarify "accessible" and one on-board accessible restroom. Many readers may not know what "accessible" is .. that may be U.S.-centric word? I'm not sure. In any case, consider adding a WP link to Accessibility or have the prose say something like "... restroom, which is accessible to disabled, ... " or something like that.
    • Added a link. Accessibility on modern transit is a given (thanks to the Americans with Disabilities Act), so it is generally skipped over in coverage despite being so important.
  • Faster than what? The Sounder commuter rail system has 12 stations that are spaced several miles apart to allow for faster average speeds. How does the spacing translate into faster speeds? I'm guessing that there was a design decision, and a trade-off had to made, and they chose sparser stations to get the benefit of faster speeds? Is it possible to add some words to make the trade-off more explicit?
    • Added the comparison to Link light rail, which is the closest local proxy. There isn't much analysis that is specific to Sounder; most commuter rail systems in North America have similar wide stop spacing because they are intended as express services.
  • Add introductory words to convey essence: Several stations are shared with intercity Amtrak trains or are adjacent to Washington State Ferries terminals; all 12 stations have facilities for local and regional buses that connect with Sounder trains. I think the key point that sentence is trying to make is something like The Sounder stations provide connectivity to other modes of transportation in the region, including ... The green sentence (and its paragraph) would be more helpful to readers if it had and intro sentence stating the blue fact.
    • Added.
  • Category list at bottom: If you have time, alphabetizing the categories (except "Sounder commuter rail" must be first) is nice, but certainly not required for GA.
    • Done.
  • Table "Active Sounder rolling stock" - The "year" table is confusing. I thought it meant the range of years that the item was in service, but after seeing that none of the years include 2025, I'm guessing those are the years that the items were introduced into service? Is it possible to change that column heading to "Introduced" or "Acquired" or something like that?
    • Added a tooltip to the column header.
  • @SounderBruce: Well, that's all I got. It is a very fine article, as I'm sure you already know. Notify me when you have addressed/resolved the above, and I will finalize the review. Note that some items above are optional suggestions. Noleander (talk) 23:56, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Noleander: Thanks for the review. I appreciate getting some more "normal" eyes on this article, as I intend to take it to FAC soon and would have run into some of these issues there. I have replied to each of the points raised and addressed those that I could; I will work on some new static maps to replace the troublesome interactive maps on a temporary basis. SounderBruce 07:03, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

[edit]

(
)
Sounder trains
Sounder trains
Improved to Good Article status by SounderBruce (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 254 past nominations.

SounderBruce 19:11, 13 April 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sounder_commuter_rail&oldid=1285448978"