Blue Line (BART) was aEngineering and technology good articles nominee, but did not meet thegood article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can berenominated. Editors may also seek areassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result July 5, 2007 Good article nominee Not listed

This article is ratedStart-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects:

Trains:Rapid transitLow‑importance Trains Portal This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide torail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit theproject page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to thediscussion. See also:WikiProject Trains to do list and theTrains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport Low This article has been rated asLow-importance on theproject's importance scale. Associated projects or task forces: /  This article is supported byWikiProject Rapid transit (assessed asMid-importance). California:San Francisco Bay AreaLow‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of theU.S. state ofCalifornia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia Low This article has been rated asLow-importance on theproject's importance scale. This article is supported bySan Francisco Bay Area task force (assessed asMid-importance).

Theroute diagram template for this article can be found inTemplate:Blue Line (BART).

Actually, the line passes through Castro Valley, but not Hayward, if one looks at a detailed enough map. --MCB22:22, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The prose isn't bad,per se, but the entire article is just a list. At best, there's a bit on the SamTrans controversy. A good article should cover all the bases of a topic, which means that there should be mentions of where trains are usually stored on this line, when this line was built, who built this line, when was it proposed, etc. etc. The references are also lacking, with a whopping two sources. Also, the lead is way too short for a Good Article. Not to mention that this article was designated a stub for a reason. With time, I'm sure this article can come a long way.Pandacomics11:42, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Having SamTrans no longer involved with the operation of BART's San Mateo extension is better for BART's San Mateo passengers. More frequent BART service in San Mateo County is one example. Does everyone agree?
Native94080 (talk)01:00, 7 January 2008 (UTC)Native94080[reply]

That information is not needed at all. —Kurykh01:01, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, the information is irrelevant. Why don't you remove it?Native94080 (talk)20:04, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...is currently listed as:

underground, elevated, at grade, underwater (Transbay Tube)

That doesn't seem right.--NapoliRoma (talk)00:26, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is a move discussion in progress onTalk:Bay Area Rapid Transit which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot22:32, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Former good article nominees
• Start-Class rail transport articles
• Low-importance rail transport articles
• Start-Class Rapid transit articles
• Mid-importance Rapid transit articles
• WikiProject Rapid transit articles
• All WikiProject Trains pages
• Start-Class California articles
• Low-importance California articles
• Start-Class San Francisco Bay Area articles
• Mid-importance San Francisco Bay Area articles
• San Francisco Bay Area task force articles
• WikiProject California articles