Talk:Link light rail

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More information Article milestones, Date ...
Good articleLink light rail has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 7, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
November 20, 2025Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on December 29, 2025.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the Link light rail system in Seattle is planned to include the first railway line on a floating bridge?
Current status: Good article
Close
More information Associated projects or task forces: ...
Close

Land Use Impacts

@SounderBruce Re: Land Use Impacts, I agree that in text attribution is maybe unnecessary but think it would be helpful to at least include the source because it speaks to local land use impacts and the relationship between Link Light Rail and changing land use / transportation behaviors. Your thoughts? MarcusLeland (talk) 20:11, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

There are better sources out there for the land-use impacts that Link has specifically affected; enabling students and workers to commute in from further out, more affordable housing is applicable to most transit systems and is thus unremarkable. This is a summary article for the system and should not be going into those kinds of details. SounderBruce 20:13, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Do you propose an additional article or? MarcusLeland (talk) 23:20, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Following up on this, by this metric would it not be logical then to remove this "By concentrating new development along light rail lines (a practice known as "transit-oriented development"), more people can live more densely without the increases in automotive commuting traffic that might otherwise be expected. In addition, the concentration of residents near stations helps maintain ridership and revenue. Climate change activists also point out that compact development around light rail lines has been shown to result in reductions in residents' CO2 emissions, compared to more conventional suburban automotive commutes." because it applicable to most transit systems and thus unremarkable. And not sure what you mean by better sources for land-use impacts Link has specifically affected. MarcusLeland (talk) 23:31, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
I haven't touched that section yet, so what is written there is entirely disposable to me until I get back to it. SounderBruce 07:46, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Criticisms Section

Generally speaking think it is warranted to include this given that there are criticisms and ongoing issues / debate around Link Light Rail and starting a new article on this would split it up which is not conducive to Wiki policies. MarcusLeland (talk) 20:15, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

See the essay at WP:CRIT. A mixed bag section is to be avoided, and it's better to spread it out into appropriate sections. I'm hoping to take this article to GA and FA status in the near future when the dust settles on the Line 2 situation, so it'd be best to avoid making a mess out of things in the meantime. SounderBruce 22:17, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Read the essay. Understand you are looking to take the article to GA / FA status but do not think that the article should be compromised / watered down by excluding mention of valid criticism (disability access, technology / design choices, etc. ) in the interest of GA / FA article status. That said, I acknowledge that it would be best spread out into appropriate sections as the essay points out - when I have time I will work on incorporating this (understanding that for something like accessibility, this would require a section or similar on accessibility across the entire system). MarcusLeland (talk) 23:28, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Colored line route diagram templates and consolidating interactive maps in infoboxes

Recently, I've been adding line colors to the route diagram templates and interactive maps of many different public transport systems across the United States, as well as their individual line articles (like for example, what I've been doing on the articles for Los Angeles Metro Rail, etc.) and consolidating them all in the articles' infoboxes. I was curious if it would be fine for me to do it here, for the Link light rail system, and also adding interactive maps to the other public transportation systems like the Sounder commuter rail and others. OrdinaryScarlett (talk) 03:35, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Link is a weird system with two (soon to be three) disconnected lines, so I don't think cramming the interactive map into the infobox is a good use of space at the moment. I would be opposed to throwing Sounder and other rail systems into the map, as Wikimedia Maps do a very poor job of showing legends or labels, so it would mislead readers into thinking Link includes those lines. SounderBruce 03:53, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Ah, fair enough then.
Just to clarify though when I am referring to Sounder and the other rail systems, I don't mean to cram them all into one big interactive map, rather I was intending to create individual interactive maps for each of those systems (Sounder, the two streetcars, and the monorail). OrdinaryScarlett (talk) 03:58, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
A Sounder map would be helpful; the streetcars and monorail already have their own interactive maps. SounderBruce 04:06, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 Done Here you go. Let me know if there's any changes that you'd like to see on it. I made the N Line red and the S Line blue just so readers can tell them apart. OrdinaryScarlett (talk) 04:18, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
@OrdinaryScarlett: The map looks good; I'll go ahead and change the colors a bit (since blue and red are both used by other transit lines in the region). I think it would be worthwhile to also move the existing monorail and streetcar maps to Commons, though they are in need of some code cleanup. SounderBruce 04:26, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
@SounderBruce: Imported both the monorail and streetcar maps to Commons here. You'll have to forgive me for not being knowledgeable enough with coding, so I unfortunately don't have the expertise to help out in code cleanup for now, but hopefully that's half the battle out of the way. OrdinaryScarlett (talk) 04:59, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Separate article for rolling stock


I'm thinking it might be a good idea to create a separate page for the "Link Light Rail" rolling stock. This would tidy up the main page and allow more thorough look into the details for those interested

As the system grows more and more cars will be ordered, with the 1, 2, and T line expansion in a few years I believe this section will soon become crowded making the overall article difficult to navigate.

Hope I can hear y'all's thoughts! matt. (talk) 03:48, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

It might be best to have a general Sound Transit fleet article to also remove some clutter from the Sounder and ST Express articles. I've gone ahead and parked a redirect there, but I do have a draft from a few years ago in my userspace that I can revive. SounderBruce 04:03, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
that sounds like a really good idea! I'd love to help out :) matt. (talk) 19:24, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Same here. Sage or something (talk) 16:11, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Photo quality

I see that some of the photos are old, and some lacking quality. Might it be a good idea for me to venture out to Seattle and get more to add and replace old ones?

Sage or something (talk) 16:14, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

2 line section

Is it a good idea to add a section for the 2 line (opening on 27 april, 2024)?

Sage or something (talk) 16:18, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

There already is a subsection that can be merged into the appropriate ones on April 27. SounderBruce 04:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
True. How should that be done?
Sage or something (talk) 15:42, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Add Static Map to Article in Line with Other Metro/Light Rail Networks in the World

Hi All - I'd like to have a static map of the link light rail system in the page. I think it would be more readable than the geographic map, and would align the Link's wikipedia page to the pages of other similar systems. I am thinking at these maps https://www.soundtransit.org/get-to-know-us/maps

It would also be great to use a static map to show each Line individually in their respective sections and page (see Map section of the Paris Line 1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_M%C3%A9tro_Line_1) 2601:602:9603:AA90:A4F4:2E72:F3ED:D5CE (talk) 20:08, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Sound Transit's maps are copyrighted, so they should not be added. A recreation with distinct elements would be fine, but would need to be updated with the next few rounds of expansion. SounderBruce 05:21, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Reliable source for the lead section.

Map dispute

Station art photo w/ GAN

GA review

Passed. Zzz plant (talk) 03:13, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Link light rail/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: SounderBruce (talk · contribs) 05:08, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: Zzz plant (talk · contribs) 22:21, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi SounderBruce, thank you for your work on this article. I’ll be taking it up for review and will post some preliminary comments within the next day. A quick note: I usually make a couple of passes through an article during GAR, focusing on one major criterion at a time, with prose/style generally coming last. So there’s no pressure to respond each time I update the page. Zzz plant (talk) 22:21, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

@Zzz plant: Thank you for the thorough review. I am planning to take this article to FAC in the future, so this level of review is very much appreciated. I have made almost every prose change that was suggested and trimmed away some of the sections. SounderBruce 02:49, 20 November 2025 (UTC)
You’re very welcome! This was an enjoyable read, and great to learn more about transit in WA. Since all of my comments have been addressed, I’ll be promoting momentarily. Best of luck at FAC! Zzz plant (talk)

Prose

  • Generally, the prose is very good! It's readable and engaging. I will offer some minor c/e suggestions below (and will add new subsection titles as I go through the prose).

Lede

  • "Tacoma Link began construction first in 2000 and opened on August 22, 2003, becoming the first modern light rail system in the state." suggest removing "first", seems a bit redundant
    • Done.
  • "The trains initially ran from Downtown Seattle to Tukwila International Boulevard station before being extended south to Seattle–Tacoma International Airport in December 2009." suggest adding "the" before Tukwila International Boulevard station
    • The article is not needed, as typically train stations are treated the same as general placenames; e.g. "the Seattle" on its own wouldn't work.
  • "The Sound Transit 3 (ST3) ballot measure was approved in 2016 and funds plans to expand network to 116 miles (187 km) and 83 stations by 2044." suggest adding an article of some kind before "network", maybe "the" or "its"
    • Done, that was a typo.

Predecessors and earlier proposals

  • I go more into this in scope, but as a whole I think this could stand to be trimmed down - this background section represents almost 700 words before the reader even gets to the article topic
  • "The first form of scheduled public transportation in the Puget Sound region were various steamboat ferries that later evolved into the "mosquito fleet" in the 1880s as the area's population grew." suggest replacing "were" with "was" for subject-verb agreement, as it refers to "the first form"
    • Fixed.
  • "Electric streetcars and cable cars debuted in 1889 under other companies and continued to grow outward into new developments called streetcar suburbs." suggest clarifying new housing developments (or new residential neighborhoods?); I initially thought it referred to new developments in transit infrastructure
    • Added "residential".
  • "The Seattle Transit System, which operated buses within the city, launched one of the nation's first express bus systems in 1970 and drew new suburban riders but continued to face financial issues." I would recommend splitting out the last clause into a new sentence, like "The Seattle Transit System, which operated buses within the city, launched one of the nation's first express bus systems in 1970. This drew new suburban riders but the system continued to face financial issues."
    • Split.

Rail plans and Tacoma launch

  • overall, the detail about the long-term studies seems a bit granular. I think you could condense this into a shorter first paragraph without losing the valuable overall background.
    • I'm afraid that trimming away any more from the first paragraph would lead to gaps in coverage; all four steps in the planning process are crucial to the development of the rail system.
  • I'm a bit confused about "It would be constructed by 2020 if approved by voters..." - the jump forward into contemporary era doesn't feel fully contextualized to me. It sort of leaves me confused about what is going on- a study's recommendations from 1983 are still being actively considered for enactment?
    • The plan predicted that, if immediately approved, the rail system would be finished by 2020. Reworded to be a bit clearer.
  • "An audit of Sound Transit’s finances from the inspector general of the U.S. Department of Transportation was ordered by Congress before further grants would be approved." suggest rephrase to "Congress ordered an audit of Sound Transit’s finances by the inspector general of the U.S. Department of Transportation before further grant approval."
    • Done.
  • "A private audit commissioned by Sound Transit determined that the agency's financial estimates had been "overly optimistic", lacked adequate contingencies, and were drawn from insufficient data." I would just say "that their financial estimates..." if you're talking about Sound Transit itself
    • Fixed.

Expansion packages and openings

  • "The Great Recession was anticipated to decrease tax revenue needed to fund ST2, particularly from southern King County; in response, Sound Transit scaled back its extensions to Federal Way and Redmond, removing the construction budget for their final sections, and deferred several other projects." - I think these sentences (joined by semi-colon) would benefit from being split. I would suggest adding something like "in response to projected loss in funding" to make the transition a little clearer
    • Done.

Lines

  • "The use of other color names was avoided because they carry various associations, would require more complex names, or would be confused with the Swift Bus Rapid Transit system in Snohomish County; the use of letters was found to conflict with King County Metro‘s RapidRide system, which already used them, and was retained solely for Sounder." recommend splitting the sentences at the semi-colon, also can remove "which already used them" by just saying "the use of letters was found to conflict with King County Metro‘s established RapidRide system."
    • Done.

1 Line (Lynnwood–Angle Lake)

  • "The northernmost four stations, in the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel, were shared with buses until they were moved to surface streets in 2019." - I assume the buses were moved as that makes more sense, but I feel like this could potentially be clarified as right now "they" could be interpreted ambiguously
    • Fixed.

2 Line (South Bellevue–Redmond)

  • no comments, looks good

T Line (Tacoma Dome–St. Joseph)

  • "Fares were not collected until the 2023 opening of the Hilltop Extension; the T Line was the first Link line to use a flat fare rather than a distance-based fare." recommend splitting to two sentences a the semi-colon
    • Done.

Stations

  • "Link, like many other light rail systems in the United States, also uses proof-of-payment for fare validation with marked paid fare zones instead of turnstiles." I would remove "also" since it's already implied with the "like many other..." clause.
    • Done.
  • "Stations on the 1 Line and 2 Line are also identified by three-digit station code that was implemented with the opening of the Lynnwood extension in August 2024." three-digit station code either needs an article ("a") or recommend changing to plural ("codes")
    • Fixed.
  • "The system has two-digit numbers that increase from south to north for individual stations, with the central point of Westlake station designated as "50"." - I find this a bit confusing. Maybe replace "system" with "stations"?
    • Replaced with "codes".

Public art

  • I think it's worth mentioning the name of the public art program, which appears to be STart
    • Added.
  • "...and newer pieces that are designed to be integrated within the architecture of stations." - I think this phrasing could be simplified somewhat, maybe like "...and newer pieces designed to be integrated with station architecture."
    • Fixed.
  • is there a reason "Sound of Light" is in quotes and the other art pieces aren't?
    • Fixed.

Transit-oriented development

  • "Sound Transit and local governments have encouraged the use of transit-oriented development (TOD) and smart growth to add housing and job density around existing and future Link stations." - I think this section could benefit from a stronger lead sentence. suggest something like "Sound Transit and local governments promote transit-oriented development (TOD) around Link stations to increase housing and employment opportunities."
    • Fixed.
  • "Approximately 10,000 housing units are planned to be constructed at four stations on the Lynnwood Link Extension, which opened in 2024 in the northern suburbs of Seattle." - I would maybe say "around" or "near" rather than "at", since the construction is planned in proximity not necessarily at the actual stations
    • Fixed.
  • "It requires that reserve and surplus land surrounding light rail stations be used for affordable housing development where possible. The "80–80–80 rule" applies to 80 percent of surplus land around transit projects and mandates that it be offered to developers who designate 80 percent of residential units to residents who make 80 percent or less of the area median income." the transition between the general program and the specific 80^3 rule could be improved, maybe to make it clear that this rule is part of this program or a way it's being implemented
    • Merged the two sentences, as they were a bit redundant.

Service

  • "The T Line has trains every 12 minutes on from Monday to Saturday..." recommend removing "on"
    • Fixed, that was a typo.
  • "Service on the 2 Line and T Line is extended on evenings with events at Marymoor Park and the Tacoma Dome, respectively; additional trains are also deployed on the 1 Line after major events to increase capacity and reduce crowding." recommend splitting into separate sentences at the semicolon
    • Split.
  • I would make it consistent if you're including ":00" in even times or not- you have both, for instance 1:00 a.m. and 10 p.m. either is fine with me. I noticed it first in this section but there may be another instance or two in the document worth checking too.
    • Fixed.

Ridership

  • no comments, looks good

Fares

  • "The original enforcement system for non-paying riders were suspended in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the racial disparities in received citations..." suggest "was" suspended for subject-verb agreement (as subject is singular - "original enforcement system")
    • Fixed.
  • "The distance-based fare for the 1 Line and 2 Line were eliminated on August 30, 2024..." - same for this, suggest "was" since subject is singular
    • Fixed, these were both leftover from an earlier version.

Infrastructure

  • "They are sometimes described as light metro lines due to their extensive use of grade separation and longer trainsets that are more similar to rapid transit systems rather than North American light rail." - this sentence is a bit complex, suggest separating out latter clause with a comma like this ...longer trainsets, which are more similar to rapid transit systems rather than North American light rail."
    • Done.

Rolling stock

  • "Digital signage with maps were added to trains beginning with the rollout..." suggest replacing "were" with "was" for subject-verb agreement
    • Changed to "digital signs", which is plural.
  • "Each Series 1 car has 74 seats arranged primarily in a transverse pairs..." recommend removing the "a" before transverse pairs
    • Fixed.
  • "The articulated section has fourteen seats..." I would write 14 numerically rather than spell it out to be consistent with the rest of the article
    • Fixed.
  • "By the end of the Sound Transit 3 expansion program in 2048, the Link system is planned to have 460 total light rail vehicles maintained at four total operations and maintenance facilities." two "total"s in close proximity, I would eliminate the first one
    • Removed the second, as it is less necessary.
  • "Each Škoda car has 30 seats and can carry an additional 85 standing passengers at crush loads." - I would say something like "...and can accommodate 85 standing passengers at crush load capacity." - although crush load is defined earlier in text, it's used in a slightly different way here that may not be as intuitive
    • Done.

Electricity and signaling

  • "Trains are supplied electricity..." suggest adding "with" after supplied
    • Done.
  • "Electricity is supplied to substations and converted into the appropriate for use by Link..." - I'm a bit confused by this phrasing- maybe "converted into the appropriate form for use by Link"? I would also separate the following sentence out into a separate sentence (that's joined by semi-colon)
    • Added missing words and split.
  • "Link also has transit signal priority on some at-grade sections that overrides turn signals..." - a non-expert reading this may think "turn signal" refers to cars' indicator lights. I would say "traffic signals"
    • Done.

Maintenance facilities

  • the second para has two "as well as"-es in relatively close proximity, I would trim one of them for conciseness
    • Removed the second.
  • "The East OMF faces a section of the Eastrail bicycle and pedestrian trail and includes a "Nails", an art installation..." I would remove "a" before "Nails" - also just noting this is one of art piece titles that's in quotes while others aren't (in public art section)
    • Fixed.

Future expansion

(including all the smaller subsections under one header)

  • for the 4 Line (South Kirkland–Issaquah), I would simplify "depending on funding availability" to "depending on funding"
    • Done.

Safety and security

  • "Sound Transit contracts with local law enforcement agencies to provide policing services, which includes patrolling..." - plural subject (policing services), so I would change to "which include"
    • Fixed.
  • "These include a dedicated unit of the King County Sheriff's Office and members of the Lynnwood Police Department, who both are contracted..." - "who both are" sounds a bit awkward to me, I would suggest "...both of whom are contracted..."
    • Fixed in a different manner to preserve the adverb.
  • "Sound Transit also contracts with four private security firms with 550 uniformed security officers who patrol stations and trains and respond to incidents." - repeats both "security" and "officers", suggest "Sound Transit also contracts with four private security firms, employing 550 uniformed officers who patrol stations and trains and respond to incidents."
    • Fixed.
  • "By 2021, 8 people had been killed and 54 injured in train-related incidents on the Rainier Valley section; a Sound Transit study endorsed the use of new pilot projects, such as handheld swing gates for pedestrians and new barriers for vehicles, to reduce the number of collisions." - I would separate the sentences joined by semicolon, and I think you can remove the first instance of "new" since newness is implied by pilot program
    • Fixed.

Sourcing

  • EW 20.6%, mostly because of proper nouns. All the small fragments of overlap look acceptable. No copyvio concerns.
  • Sources look reliable- books come from reputable publishers, articles from established newspapers with editorial oversight, and use of primary sources for noncontroversial claims seems appropriate.
  • Reference formatting is generally good. Only thing I would suggest is linking to publication names in references (i.e. The Seattle Times, Seattle Post-Intelligencer). You can also link to Newspapers.com. Since each citation stands alone, this is permitted under MOS:DUPLINK. I think it’s helpful to the reader, as they can quickly evaluate an in-line citation by hovering over the #, and click to view the publication info if they want to learn more.
    • Generally, I tend to avoid creating a "sea of blue" situation in reference sections that would otherwise hide the most useful and necessary part of the individual citation (normally the external link).
      • Understandable to try to avoid a "sea of blue." I personally feel that linking the publication names in the references helps readers quickly verify the sources behind the citations, which I think is more important than style/visuals. That said, I think this could be a matter of personal taste, and I’m happy to defer to your preference on this.
  • There are also a handful of missing archive links, could queue up an IAbot run or I think many of these are already backed up in archive.today (that's how I accessed many of the sources for spot checks).
    • Will do so once the review is finished and fewer changes to sourcing are made. SounderBruce 10:09, 16 November 2025 (UTC)
      • sounds good!
  • no indication of original research; text summarizes the sources and does not come to its own conclusions

Spot checks

ref numbers as of this revision

  • [16]: article "The federal funding that was earmarked for the Seattle project was instead reallocated to the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority in Atlanta, Georgia." vs. source "The federal money earmarked for Seattle went to Atlanta’s MARTA rapid transit system." checkY
  • [47]: article "It had no fares and exceeded its 2010 ridership projections by early 2003, carrying its 500,000th passenger in April of the year." vs. source "Tacoma link...carried its 500,000th passenger last Saturday, according to Sound Transit... + "Weekday boardings are averaging an estimated 2,320, exceeding consultants' projections that it would take until 2010 to exceed 2,000 weekday boardings." + "Actual ridership is part head count and part guesswork because the streetcar is free. checkY
  • [56]: article "The inspector general's interim report criticized the FTA and Sound Transit for advancing in the grant review process without having a firm cost estimate, which had changed several times due to modifications to the preferred project." vs. source "The report criticized Sound Transit and the FTA for pushing for a $500 million grant agreement last year "despite information that the project's cost and schedule were changing significantly."" checkY
  • [62]: article "The inspector general's second investigation of Sound Transit took ten months and was completed in July 2003;" vs. source "Last spring, three Inspector General auditors...spent the next 10 months poring over financial procedures and interviewing staff to determine their competency to build the largest public-works project in state history. checkY/☒N mostly verified, but not seeing the "completed in July 2003" bit - and the source is from June
    • Moved up the next source to cover this one.
      • looks good nowcheckY
  • [85]: article "Daily ridership on Central Link increased from 39,000 passengers prior to the extension's opening to 65,000 by February 2017." vs. source "In the year before their opening, about 39,000 people each weekday on average used light rail. Now, about 65,000 people do." checkY
  • [102]: article "Construction of the next Link extension funded by ST2, traveling north by 4.3 miles (6.9 km) from the University of Washington campus to Northgate station with two intermediate underground stations, began in August 2012." vs. source "Sound Transit's Northgate Link 6.9km light rail extension" + "from just north of Roosevelt station to University of Washington station." checkY/☒N the gist is there, just not seeing a mention of ST2 funding or specification of how many underground stations would be built
    • Replaced with press release and supplemented to cover more of this content.
  • [107]: article "[The Northgate extension] was the first Sound Transit project to be completed during the COVID-19 pandemic, which caused ridership to decline to 22,000 daily passengers by May 2021; frequency on Central Link (soon to become the 1 Line) was cut to 12 minutes due to a lack of available train operators." vs. source "Ridership remains low at just 22,000 daily passengers as of mid-May" + "A shortage of train operators, caused by COVID-19 illnesses and quarantines, was the main reason for curtailing service...waiting for Sound Transit trains 12 minutes apart at peak" checkY/☒N mostly verified, just not seeing Northgate confirmed as first project completed during COVID-19 pandemic or its later title of 1 Line
    • Dropped the first, but do not think we need a WP:SKYISBLUE citation for the pandemic's place in the timeline or the eventual 1 Line switch.
      • okay fair enough on the 1 Line switch point, and the sentence about first COVID construction project has been dropped so this is resolved checkY
  • [117]: article "The Seattle–Mercer Island express lanes were closed to traffic in June 2017 and replaced by a set of high-occupancy vehicle lanes (HOV lanes) on the outer lanes of Interstate 90." vs. source "This weekend the express lanes will permanently close...before Sound Transit contractors take over this month. + "One new high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane is being squeezed into each direction of the freeway mainline." Question? seems like this article was written before permanent closure
    • It is not uncommon to use citations that announce expected and scheduled near-term events in this manner. There is rarely follow-up coverage of such changes.
      • seems reasonable, resolvedcheckY
  • [127]: article "Service between Seattle and Bellevue is scheduled to begin in early 2026, pending further tests on the section." vs. source "Transit will accelerate the start of Federal Way light rail service to this fall, pushing it ahead of the Seattle-Bellevue crossing over Lake Washington expected in early 2026." checkY
  • [185]: article "Link stations and facilities are furnished with pieces of public artwork as part of a Sound Transit program that allocates one percent of the capital budget for art." vs. source "One percent of the non-tunneling construction cost of Sound Transit projects goes to the art program." checkY
  • [202]: article "Sound Transit also contracts with four private security firms with 550 uniformed security officers who patrol stations and trains and respond to incidents." vs. source " Sound Transit has increased its unarmed security to 550 employees, providing near-constant presence in stations." checkY/☒N verifies 550 unarmed guards, but doesn't seem to specify contracts with four security firms
    • Added source for the four firms claim.
      • checkY looks good now, text fully verified
  • [311]: article "All trains and stations have emergency intercom systems and Sound Transit also allows passengers to use text messages to contact security officers." vs. source "Emergency intercom buttons are also on every train and at the Link platforms." + "Did you know you can text the Sound Transit Security Desk to report anything amiss on board your train or at your station?" checkY
  • [232]: article "A full rebuild of the section to add grade separation is estimated to cost $1.1 billion to $1.7 billion. vs. source "How much money and hassle would it take to fix Seattle’s most hazardous stretch of light rail, by getting trains off the road surface in Rainier Valley? The answer was at least $1.7 billion to move the tracks 30 feet overhead like a monorail, or $1.1 billion to sink them in a trench..." checkY
  • [317]: article "Sound Transit began to block seating areas near operator cabs in 2022 to prevent fumes and smoke from affecting employees." vs. source "Sound Transit has strung yellow plastic chains to block the seats near control cabs of its light-rail trains, following incidents of operators being overcome by toxic smoke" doesn't explicitly state year, but it's from 2022, I'm good with that checkY

Scope

  • Covers everything I can conceivably think one would want to know about this rail system- background, history, operations, safety, and future plans.
  • it is on the longer end of article guidelines, at nearly 10k words per WP:SIZERULE it may benefit from some trimming. that being said, there's nothing overtly out of place or any conspicuous detours; all the information is relevant and logically organized. the three areas I would suggest could most benefit from a bit of pruning are:
  1. History#Predecessors and earlier proposals - while this is fascinating transit history, I don't think all of this is critical to understanding the modern link light rail as it stands today.
  2. Infrastructure#rolling stock - this is a bit granular in my opinion. some of the stats could probably be condensed.
  3. Safety and security - can perhaps be trimmed slightly to focus on the most pivotal incidents that had policy or longer-term implications. as is, it reads a bit like an incident log.
Consolidated a good portion of the predecessors section and trimmed away parts of the other two sections. As this is a system article that tries to juggle two incompatible areas, the length of the rolling stock section is going to be rather difficult to pare down. I do have plans to write a separate article for the rolling stock (along with Sound Transit's other rail and bus equipment), which should allow me to make further cuts in the future. SounderBruce 02:49, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

Neutrality

  • Neutral language throughout, everything appears fairly weighted

Stability

  • Constructive edit history. No indication of edit warring, only one difference of opinion on # images but only one revert and no follow-up issues.

Illustration

  • Really well done- not just photographs but the maps too! All relevant and suitably licensed. I particularly like the "Series 2 light rail vehicle" panel showing three different views.
Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

Downtown East Link opening date

Infobox system map offset

Dead system length source

Related Articles

Wikiwand AI