Talk:List of interurban railways

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am still working on these and the list is not yet complete for the US. Most listings are taken from Hilton & Due. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 23:55, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I've finished working through Hilton & Due. Maybe not a complete list yet, but closer. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 12:37, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Type

Please help improve this article or section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. (January 2007)

It's unclear from the intro if these are passenger or freight, existing or defunct. -- Beland 04:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I've added to the intro. The definition of 'Interurban' requires passenger use as the primary intended purpose of the system. Some remained in operation as freight lines after passenger service ceased. Most of these lines are defunct; of the remaining, the vast majority are now freight-hauling shortlines. I am going to progressively add operating dates to these; these will generally be taken from Hilton&Due. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 22:12, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Terminology and other matters

The use of the term "interurban" needs to be clarified - both on the Interurban page and here.

First, some clarity about what this list "should be" is needed. Is this to be:

1.) A list of electric railways having an overall "character" that was very much confined to the U.S. and Canada - listing only U.S. and Canadian systems, or

2.) Same as 1.), but with other countries included.

If the answer is 1.) then OK, this is a "List of interurbans in the U.S. and Canada, and should be retitled as such.

If the answer is 2.) then:

a.) is the intent to apply a U.S./Canadian perspective in an arbitrary manner, ignoring formal (i.e. legal) and "real-world" distinctions between countries, or

b.) to make some effort to take these into account ?

The list as it exists shows distinct signs of "a.)" - which is unfortunate. Two examples: The Katowice (Poland) tramway system, despite the large area it serves, is not an "interurban" system and the use of this term is not appropriate. Even more flagrantly, the Kowloon Canton Railway light rail system in Hong Kong is by no stretch of imagination "interuban." This is an egregious misuse of an "Americanism" to describe something far away from the U.S.

I would also advise against the use of the term "defunct." Although popular among U.S. enthusiasts, this word is a rather flagrant Americanism and should be avoided. Ldemery 21:41, 4 August 2007 (UTC)