Talk:Jakarta MRT

Stub category/class

This article can only be stub while it is still a mess - the mulitple issues have not been cleaned up yet SatuSuro 08:37, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

how to change link?? Hudha.nurhani (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:21, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jakarta MRT. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121231180302/http://www2.thejakartapost.com/news/2012/12/21/jakarta-finally-goes-ahead-with-mrt-plan.html to http://www2.thejakartapost.com/news/2012/12/21/jakarta-finally-goes-ahead-with-mrt-plan.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:49, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Moda Raya Terpadu

Note to editors: The official abbreviation of MRT used by the company is Moda Raya Terpadu. Juxlos (talk) 14:46, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Jakarta MRT is the fifth in South East Asia.

This is about the paragraph in which Jakarta MRT was mentioned as being the fourth in South East Asia. I recently edited it to fifth to include Manila's LRT system. Note that Manila's LRT is the oldest in South East Asia being completed in 1984.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manila_Light_Rail_Transit_System

The history of South East Asia's rapid transit system timeline goes as

Manila LRT - 1984 Singapore MRT - 1987 Rapid KL - 1996 Bangkok BTS - 1999 Jakarta MRT - 2009

To revert it back to fourth is ignorance.

Themanilaxperience (talk) 01:28, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

If Manila's LRT is counted, so should Palembang's LRT. Juxlos (talk) 07:09, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Kuala Lumpur’s first rapid transit line, The Ampang Line is actually a light metro system no different from Manila’s LRT-1, but was included.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ampang_and_Sri_Petaling_lines

So why should Manila be excluded? Manila’s LRT is more a light metro system as it functions more as a rapid transit system than light rail due to system classification including right of way. In fact LRT-2 (line-2) is even classified as a heavy rail system.

I’m not familiar with Palembang’s LRT network so I can’t comment on that or should decide on including this issue.

Themanilaxperience (talk) 08:16, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Fox for route map template.

Please fix. M nurhaikal (talk) 16:02, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

East-West line

An anonymous account, possibly related to M taufik nur rohim (see my talk in idwp) is persistently adding unreferenced materials for future Jakarta MRT projects, i.e. the East–West line. According to JMRT principals, there was no detailed information about the project nor its gauge chosen. See Special:Diff/1041773261 for the edit. RaFaDa20631 (talk) 12:15, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Based on the IP lookup on whatsmyIP, the person indeed is Indonesian. The material the anonymous account confidently wrote is that East-West Line will use standard gauge (1,435 mm) while there are no single sources, even from Jakarta MRT company itself, says so. Thus material can be challenged, but this anonymous account persistently reverting the article if the "usage of standard gauge" material is deleted. -Muhammad Pascal Fajrin (talk) 12:54, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Gauges

Hi fellow Wikipedians... is it true that the North South line and the East West line have different gauges? That's what the article (and linked ones to the specific lines) seems to say. That seems odd to me, but I wasn't able to confirm or deny it with the sources provided. Thanks! ++Lar: t/c 20:00, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Not true. No explanation or confirmation have been released so far by the PT MRT Jakarta (Perseroda) on any channels. I don't know who is the persistent anonymous editor (their IP address comes from South Tangerang, Indonesia), but everytime we revert not to include the speculative information of 1.435 mm rail gauge, they also always reverted it to include that speculative information. It's been like this for many years and the persistent anonymous user is so persistent that they checked if any reverts are made everyday, and whenever someone reverts not to include the speculative information, they always come back. I think it's time for admins to protect this article from anonymous editing permanently, so everyone have to be registered to Wikipedia in order to edit. Anyways, since the phase III is also funded by the Japanese, my speculative mind says that it will also be 1.067 mm gauge. There is, however, a JICA's open report on the feasibility study for the route clearly says that the route will use 1.067 mm gauge as they wamt to construct an interrunning service in Thamrin station, so trains from East-West line can go to Lebak Bulus station. I've added that to the article, but I don't know if it was the correct file or not. You can search about the report on JICA's open report website by the way. Muhammad Pascal Fajrin (talk) 07:09, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Permanent protection from all anonymous editing is a very strong remedy and it is unlikely to gain consensus. It is, however currently semi-protected (only autoconfirmed users can edit it) which should help.... Blocking a single anonymous IP also tends to be avoided. But feel free to tag me if I can be of assistance. I'm an admin but out of practice. Also you can cite the JICA report in the article. Do you have a specific link to it? ++Lar: t/c 18:22, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

by the way I removed the Category: Standard gauge railways in Indonesia as there is no source for it being standard gauge ++Lar: t/c 18:27, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Well, haven't done a complete read on it, there are some on JICA's open report website. I remember downloaded the file some years ago, but I forgot which document it is, and can't access the file since my PC is currently needs to be serviced. Found this one though, it's about phase III, and if you have a time you can check it too, maybe it can help with the article. If this was the wrong document, there are a bunch of the other documents too about phase III on that website (https://openreport.jica.go.jp).

Was put in the article, but the anon strike that, and afterwards also strike my post in this talk page in which he replaced JICA with Korea's KOICA (even vandalizing others post in the talk page...). To note, Korea's involvement is in phase IV and not phase III, so if phase IV uses standard gauge it will be no surprise, but phases I-II-III is Japanese-funded and the study have been conducted since 1980s and all were envisioned to use 1067 mm gauge just like their system and Indonesia's existing system. Even back then JICA said on one of those open report documents that trains traveling from Balaraja on the western side of East-West Line (phase III), can turn right before Thamrin station and enters North-South Line (phases 1/II) via connecting line, then continue travel to Lebak Bulus depot, a proof that phases I-II-III will use same track gauges. Muhammad Pascal Fajrin (talk) 03:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

They MIGHT do dual gauge but that seems rather unlikely. ++Lar: t/c 09:24, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

It's very unlikely, not a typical way for Japanese to do a job... I see that the only way the gauges can be different is when you have a different investor, that's why I think it's makes perfect sense if the Koreans do 1435 mm on phase IV because it's something that they also do in their country.

For example, even on the same gauge, the Japanese proposal of high-speed train is very far different with the Chinese proposal, with smaller tunnels and clearances. Muhammad Pascal Fajrin (talk) 15:13, 27 April 2024 (UTC)