Talk:Interborough Express

Route map requested

See the main discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains § Map needed for Interborough Express. Qzekrom (she/her • talk) 05:05, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Discussion

I am maintaining the Light Metro definition on this page, because that is what this line can be technically classified as. The definition is not uncited, as it is linked consistently where the term appears. Even though the official classification remains as light rail, it is fully grade separated, therefore not counting as a light rail line. Examples of the "metro" term applying to LRV-running grade-separated systems include line U6 (Vienna U-Bahn), Metro Line M1 (Budapest Metro), and the Metrorrey system. Furthermore, many systems labelled as light rail throughout the world, such as the Manila Light Rail Transit System and Jakarta LRT, are not actually classified as Light Rail. Maethe2006 (talk) 18:05, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

All official sources refer to the line as “light rail”, and that terminology should therefore be reflected in the article. Wikipedia articles are based on reliable sources rather than editors’ personal interpretations of whether the IBX should be classified as light metro. The sources cited at the beginning of the Description section explicitly describe the preferred mode as “light rail”, so I do not believe that terminology should be changed there. Additionally, before my edit, the Streetsblog article cited later in the section was not accurately reflected in the text (including misleading wording and the incorrect mention of August instead of May). For these reasons, I believe the edit is consistent with the cited sources. If there are reliable sources supporting alternative terminology, please provide them for discussion. Aquarialfish (talk) 21:51, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

I would also like to point out that the line has not yet been physically built, nor the design phase finished, so there is no empirical evidence regarding its actual characteristics beyond what is described in reliable sources (which unambiguously describe it as "light rail"). Aquarialfish (talk) 22:08, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

For other articles regarding systems called "light rail" but not functionally fitting well into that category (the Manila Light Rail Transit System and the Jakarta LRT, for example), more ambigious terms like light rapid transit, urban rail or rapid transit are used. Perhaps the term light metro is too specific, but it may be a better idea to use one of those terms instead of calling it light rail. That said, I understand that this is only applicable given that a source can be found which shows it is grade-separated.

While it is referred to in official documents by the term "light rail", there is a frustratingly indirect way the MTA shows it is planned to be grade-separated. Previously, the project was meant to go partially at-grade in order to bypass the All Faiths Cementary. However, this was changed in 2024, as the plans were modified to allow for a tunnel under it, meaning the only grade crossings were eliminated. The conclusion that it was grade seperated was mentioned extensively by informal sources, such as transit bloggers. However, I understand that this information is not citeable, so I might file an information request for planning document.

I have submitted an FOIL request from MTA Construction & Development verifying the plans for grade-separation. If such a document is provided, do you agree that the designation can be changed as described earlier in my response? Maethe2006 (talk) 21:22, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

Quick clarification: The statement "Despite its official naming, the IBX still qualifies as a light metro due to its lack of grade crossings" seems to imply that full grade separation alone is sufficient to reclassify a system as light metro. According to which reliable sources? If there are verifiable, published sources that explicitly state that grade separation is a defining or essential characteristic of light metro systems, and that this criterion would apply to the IBX (explicitly so that it would override the MTA's own description of the project as light rail), please provide them. In the absence of such sources, reclassifying the IBX as "light metro" based solely on grade separation would constitute original research, which is not permitted under Wikipedia's content policies. See: Synthesis of published material Aquarialfish (talk) 19:02, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

This is why I proposed in the beginning of that response to broaden the description to something such as “light rapid transit” (as is done in the examples I provided), instead of re-designating it to another specific term. Maethe2006 (talk) 19:04, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

The statement that the preferred mode for the IBX is light rail is easily verifiable and explicitly supported by multiple sources cited in the article. I do not believe that introducing more ambiguous terminology without adequate sourcing would improve the quality of the article in any capacity. Aquarialfish (talk) 21:36, 15 May 2026 (UTC)