Talk:B Line (Los Angeles Metro)

California Mid‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Trains: Rapid transit Mid‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Rapid transit (assessed as Mid-importance).

The route diagram template for this article can be found in Template:B Line (Los Angeles Metro).

Honestly, there HAS gotta be a better way to list bus connections. Putting it in the table would bloat things up. Pacific Coast Highway 04:33, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia is WP:NOT a bus service directory. The bus connections are unnecessary and unencyclopedic. BlankVerse 13:37, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I concur, Bus connections can be found on the Metro web site. Further bus routes change every six months as Metro introduces and eliminates new routes.

The chart itself is rediculous. The Word "red" is repeated all the way down the colunm. The reader knows it's the Red Line. That is what the article he or she is reading.

Further, It is not necessary to have a seperate article on each individual station. These articles are all stubs. --SAUNDERS 22:54, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You are swimming against the tide on station stubs—they are just as bad as the innumerable schools stubs on the Wikipedia. You'll find that most New York and London stations have articles, and even if Californians don't care not one whit about Metro stations, rail and subways fans from elsewhere will continue to create them. My personal opinion is that the only Southern California station that needs its own article is Union Station (Los Angeles). I've thought about doing a preemptive strike and creating all the currently red-linked stations stubs as redirects to the appropropriate LACMTA line, but have so far been too lazy. BlankVerse 12:40, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Westward expansion stopped

There is obvious bias in the "Westward expansion stopped" section.

It would be nice of you to elucidate and/or correct them. --Jfruh (talk) 22:40, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I must add: The actual original red line route was Wilshire west to Faifax Ave, North on Faifax, then a slightly diagonal path to Hollywood and Highland (where the current Red Line the follows the original path up to the Valley).

Because of the political chicanery, the pass was altered to the current route (Vermont and Hollywood Blvd), thus avoiding the Fairfax District. Supposedly to avoid the gases of the Fairfax district but reportedly to keep the subway out of the westside. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.84.225.10 (talk) 22:31, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A Line and Line 802

These are NOT the official names of the Red Line. Metro Red Line is the "official" name used for all public reference to the line. Line 802 is used by the scheduling department for it's database listing all Bus and Rail lines. I am not even familiar with the A line's use within the Agency, although I have heard the term before. Don't confuse people unfamiliar with Metro Red Line. Gohiking 20:12, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Turnstiles (Removed from article)

Transit officials are considering the addition of turnstiles, station attendants and officers, thereby eliminating the barrier-free honor system which was designed to increase ridership in Los Angeles' car oriented culture. Currently, L.A. County Sheriff officers and fare inspectors patrol the entire Metro Rail system by riding trains to different stations. This can leave many stations unattended for extended periods of time. Given budget constraints and many other ongoing transit projects, these additions may not be implemented for some time with the estimated cost of installing turnstiles between $50 and $150 million and hiring of station attendants at $24 million annually.^[1]

The primary reason I removed this section is that turnstiles were considered since day one of construction for the Metro Red Line and were included in the original station drawings. However, with fare evasion being less than 3% of all riders, it was decided that it was not necessary and gave Los Angeles a more "open" feeling at the stations. Another reason is that the argument that turnstiles provide greater security is a joke. A terrorist with or without a ticket can enter the station unchecked and a turnstile has no benefit in providing any greater security for the riding public. The last thing that is obviously misstated is that although some fare enforcement and LASD do ride the trains, the majority are stationed at a stationary location such as Union Station and monitor that location throughout their shift, driving a squad car to an incident at another station if called. Gohiking 06:44, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The gross errors aside, if it's published, I don't see a good reason to exculde the information. Pacific Coast Highway ^{{X's • and O's!}} 07:13, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Too much focus (and article space) on current events, especially when they are speculative at best makes the article unbalanced and not WP:NPOV. If the turnstile plan is approved in the future (and I am certain it will not be), then an addition to the article is merited. There are hundreds of other LA Times articles regarding the Red Line that are not included in the article, and this is just one more. Gohiking 18:50, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with PCH. Even though it is a current event, it is valid discussion and could dramatically change the way fare media is issued for Metro Rail. Also, the article space that it would take is only one paragraph. If the incident is mentioned in the first place, then the follow up to it should be mentioned as well. Stephen12786 01:33, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Blankstein, Andrew and Jean Guccione. "L.A. subways may get security overhaul", Los Angeles Times. February 10, 2007. (Retrieved on February 10, 2007)

line map

im not sure if i like only have a line map as a list of nodes rather the the lines geographic layout. perhaps both should be included. not in the same section but atleast in the same article. --Jerjozwik (talk) 21:51, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

-i know i wish someone would put back the old line maps for all the lines

the new one looks horrible

SOMEONE PLEASE TAKE IT DOWN ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.245.3.130 (talk) 00:15, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Modification of Red Line tunnels to accept Light Rail

There have been hints of this here and there and it makes sense, but I can find no mention of it. I'm talking about adding a pickup wire to the top of a heavy rail tunnel (e.g. Red Line) which would allow LRT vehicles (e.g. Blue Line, Gold Line) to run on the same tracks. My understanding is they are the same rail gauge and I don't know about station platform height - but does anyone know if this has been seriously considered or if it's possible? Lexlex (talk) 09:19, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Planned Move

Shortly, I plan to move the following pages, as follows:

  Metro Blue Line (LACMTA) --> moving to --> Blue Line (Los Angeles Metro)
  Metro Green Line (LACMTA) --> moving to --> Green Line (Los Angeles Metro)
  Metro Red Line (LACMTA) --> moving to --> Red Line (Los Angeles Metro)
  Metro Purple Line (LACMTA) --> moving to --> Purple Line (Los Angeles Metro)
  Metro Gold Line (LACMTA) --> moving to --> Gold Line (Los Angeles Metro)
  Metro Orange Line (LACMTA) --> moving to --> Orange Line (Los Angeles Metro)
  Metro Silver Line (LACMTA) --> moving to --> Silver Line (Los Angeles Metro)
  Metro Expo Line (LACMTA) --> moving to --> Expo Line (Los Angeles Metro)
  Expo Phase 1 (LACMTA) --> moving to --> Expo Phase 1 (Los Angeles Metro)
  Expo Phase 2 (LACMTA) --> moving to --> Expo Phase 2 (Los Angeles Metro)
  Crenshaw Corridor (LACMTA) --> moving to --> Crenshaw Corridor (Los Angeles Metro)
  Regional Connector (LACMTA) --> moving to --> Regional Connector (Los Angeles Metro)

The purpose of this change is to replace a less-well-known, technical name ("LACMTA") with a very descriptive and very familar name "Los Angeles Metro". This will allow people who are unfamiliar with the acronym "LACMTA" to find information about the system in the Los Angeles area.

(BTW, "Los Angeles" in this case refers to "Los Angeles County", since the City of Los Angeles does not have any system called "Metro".)

Jcovarru (talk) 23:10, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redistribution of Red and Purple Line Information

Information related to the Metro Red and Purple Lines has been redistributed among three articles, as follows:

The article Red Line (Los Angeles Metro) describes the current service known as the Red Line. This article also discusses the history of the project historically known as "the Red Line", which built the subway corridors now used by the Red Line and Purple Line services. Finally, this article also lists possible future extensions of the Red Line route.

The article Westside Subway Extension (Los Angeles Metro) describes the history of and plans for the future subway corridor west of Western Avenue.

The article Purple Line (Los Angeles Metro) describes the current service known as the Purple Line.

The Red and Purple line articles were in serious disrepair and included inaccuracies, speculation and redundancy. Hopefully the newer, clearer distribution of information will help prevent this from happening again.

Jcovarru (talk) 15:33, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stabbing

It is an unfortunate fact of life that crime happens on public transit, but that doesn't make it encyclopedically notable. I suggest Metro_Red_Line_(LACMTA)#2011_Stabbing be removed. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:58, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot told me that this page lacks citations; where shall I help?

SuggestBot wants me to place citations here, but I don't really know where in this page the information lacks. HanSangYoon (talk) 20:33, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Citations used in the talk page

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Red Line (Los Angeles Metro). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070103195104/http://www.westlachamber.org:80/page_graphics/newspaper/back_issues/Jan06-GWLABusMthly.pdf to http://www.westlachamber.org/page_graphics/newspaper/back_issues/Jan06-GWLABusMthly.pdf

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:13, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed changes to structure of Metro Rail/Busway articles

Hi all! I'm planning on changing how Wikipedia covers the history and future of the various Metro lines, moving some material out of the articles for individual lines and to articles specifically about history and expansion. I've put a longish description of my plans and rationale here, if you're interested! --Jfruh (talk) 19:47, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Incidents"

I don't see much of a point of a section with descriptions of four randomly selected bad things that happened on the Red Line? I would strongly suggest that they be cut them from the article. --Jfruh (talk) 20:08, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:A Line (Blue) (Los Angeles Metro) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 10:16, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Blue Line (Los Angeles Metro) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 14:31, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Blue Line (Los Angeles Metro) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 09:01, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Blankstein, Andrew and Jean Guccione. "L.A. subways may get security overhaul", Los Angeles Times. February 10, 2007. (Retrieved on February 10, 2007)

[1]