Talk:List of metro systems

I'm not convinced that the correct Australian term is "subway". In Melbourne, the underground railway section is simply known as the "city loop" or "loop", and when referring to systems in other cities they tend to use the indigenous term for that city (using "underground" for the London system and "subway" for New York). --Robert Merkel

---

On another note: Everyone and their brother want their specific name of the "underground tracked mass transit system employed for public transport" to be the article on Wikipedia. That will not happen without a substansial duplication of data. I propose (and will indeed enforce) that we collect all data about theese kind of systems under the Underground article, and redirect from the city/country specific to that article. We are after all discussing the "selben Sache", not waging a nomenclature war. Is this correct ladies and gentlemen? --Anders Törlind

Fine by me. I wasn't trying to start a nomenclature war, just querying an assertion about supposedly correct Australian usage. I agree that redirection to a canonical article is totally the way to go, but note should be made of individual local terminology, and in this case I'm not sure the local terminology was accurate -- Robert Merkel

---

Does Newcastle-upon-Tyne's metro count as an undergound system? --Dweir.

---

Novosibirsk article claims that it was only the third city in Russia to get a subway in 1985. This list has several other Russian cities with subways. Was there a spate of subway building in Russia in the late 1980s and 1990s? Or is the Novosibirsk article wrong? --rmehrmen

---

I *really* worry about the name of this article, in particular. A large number of these systems are not entirely underground (in fact, only a few ARE entirely underground, such as Montreal). It's one thing to have an article about "the Underground," but quite another to claim that Toronto's subway is an "underground railway" when a large portion of it isn't. - user:Montrealais

---

The old figure for London Underground's passenger miles was way off -- what were the sources for the other figures?

I misinterpreted http://www.mta.nyc.ny.us/nyct/facts/ffrank.htm , it is rides, not miles. Patrick 11:56 Nov 19, 2002 (UTC)

Surely this should have remained as underground railway. Numerous countries use different terms; metro, subway, underground. Underground railway is the basic unifying term that all share or understand. I have heard the term metro used to describe a road that is partly underground and partly overground. JtdIrL 03:28 Mar 1, 2003 (UTC)

Metro is also used to describe totally aboveground rail systems. Dublin's new LUAS system is described as as a 'metro' by its European manufacturers. JtdIrL 03:31 Mar 1, 2003 (UTC)

Actually, "underground" is just about the least universal term for this phenomenon. To begin with, as far as I can tell it's used only in the UK, and possibly Australia; for another thing, the great majority of these systems are not entirely underground. But all of these are metropolitan railways. - Montréalais

Don't forget that U-bahn is short for "untergrundbahn"! - Arwel