Template talk:Yellow Line (CTA)

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago

Illinois

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois

Trains: Rapid transit

Trains Portal

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This template is supported by WikiProject Rapid transit.

Proposed Change

I plan to change the portion that is heading to the planned Old Orchard station. It has the pictogram for interruption, when it should be the pictogram for planned line. I am going to give it a day or so for anyone to object right now. Here it is, with my proposed edit on top, and the original below. (focus solely on the "Proposed Old Orchard" portion):

Legend

					North Shore Line
					Old Orchard (Proposed)


					Dempster–Skokie

					Main

Legend

					North Shore Line
					Old Orchard (Proposed)


					Dempster–Skokie

					Main

Lord David, Duke of Glencoe (talk) 00:27, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I do have to object to this proposed change. You are correct that the proposed line does use the "interruption" set and that is not entirely correct. However, in this case, using the ex variant is ambiguous since it would be used to depict both a former line and a proposed line without differentiation. The proper way to deal with this situation is to add a key for non-standard usage. (This is already in use at Template:Green Line (CTA), for instance). I'll go ahead and add that now.

As a side note, I've shortened both maps to the relevant area to reduce length. Lost on Belmont^3200N (talk) 01:45, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with what you have done; it makes sense. I retract my proposal. Thanks for helping me! (I'm new to this.) Lord David, Duke of Glencoe (talk) 22:37, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]