Talk:Link Light Rail
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] POV and sources
Just a quick explanation for the POV and reliable sources templates I put on the East Link controversy section.
- The controversy subsection is unnecessary. The section isn't that large the text covering the "controversy" can easily be worked into the East link section.
- The wording in the section is extremely POV and none of it is supported by any reliable sources. As an example the references to "most controversial", "vigorous opposition", and the complete lack of qualifiers in connection to the residents of eastern King County make the opposition appear more widespread than perhaps it really is, especially if there isn't sources to support it.
#The Woodinville Subdivision paragraph may not be applicable to an article on light rail. The line is heavy rail which (from what I understand) isn't compatible with Link Light Rail and the consultants I've read are talking about fixing the rails for a heavy rail system. So perhaps the Sounder commuter rail is more appropriate for that paragraph?
- Only the opposition viewpoint is presented and is perhaps given undue weight.
And just because I'll probably be going through and rewriting the section, here's a link to the version I'm talking about.[1] --Bobblehead 23:52, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
