Wikipedia talk:SGpedians' notice board

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Shortcut:
WT:SG!
Peer review Welcome to the talkpage of the SGpedians' notice board, where you can discuss about Singapore-related articles and issues. Enjoy! =)
Archive

Archives
1 2 3 4 5

6 7
To-do list for Wikipedia:SGpedians' notice board: edit · history · watch · refresh
These are pending tasks based on previous discussion.

Articles

Others

  • Vote and nominate articles for SGCOTF collaboration
  • Meetup for SGpedians: refer to infobox below or see discussion here.
Singapore Meetup

Meetup 5
  • Status: Currently being planned
  • Date: 2008

Please indicate your interest at the meetup page.
v • d •  e

Contents

[edit] Singaporean Awards and Decorations

I have spent a bit of time updating the Singaporean orders and decorations and Awards and decorations of the Singapore Armed Forces pages, as well as the link pages for each individual medal. However - it has proven a very difficult thing to verify accurately, and I suspect that I may have some errors of fact in the order of precedence for the medals, and I may possibly be missing some as well. If possible, could someone please run their eye over the list, and let me know if it looks accurate?

I should point out that one reason I have had some difficulty is that the Government of Singapore seems very reluctant to give a full list of what awards and decorations they issue! For example, the PM's Office lists the civilian awards, but does not go into a huge amount of detail for them, nor does it mention how they relate to the military list. The Singapore Army medal info page only lists the medals for service, with no mention of the medals for gallantry. If anyone can cite an authoritative list, that would be great... failing that, is there an defence manual/publication that could be used as a reference?

Thanks! PalawanOz 06:18, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

G'day mate! i attended the Singapore Honours, an exhibition honouring S'pore distinguised citizens upon my return from Sydney last year. It was held From Jun 22 - Aug 2006 at our National Library. The event also showcased the process of making the above medals & its criteria for award officially. Do check out & direct your enquiries here -- Aldwinteo 07:04, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Chia Thye Poh

Hi folks, can those on 'guard's duty', kindly cast their patrol wider to cover the abv article and other similar articles on past SG political detainees to thwart any potential vandalism & POV. Cos some human rights 'crusaders' have made substantial edits of late & making disparaging remarks on Chia, S'pore govt & Singaporeans on the article's talkpage. u may want to take a good look on the pix he use to depict Chia's detention on Sentosa. Thks & rgds, -- Aldwinteo 14:59, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

The protection policy states that "indefinite semi-protection may be used for...biographies subject to vandalism and/or POV-pushing that are not widely watchlisted". I believe that Chia Thye Poh falls under this criterion, and suggest you file a request for semi-protection. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 13:02, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I Not Stupid and Singapore Dreaming passed GA - let's keep up the good work!

WikiProject Singapore appears to be flourishing; in the past three weeks, we have written 14 DYKs and 2 GAs (of these, I Not Stupid and Megan Zheng were written by me)! When listing Megan Zheng as a DYK, Blnguyen commented: "Very hard wroking [sic] these Singaporeans".

Let's keep up the good work! I believe we can increase our GA count from 8 to 10 by 9 September (when I will take a two-month wikibreak to focus on my O Levels). I have identified Singapore (a former GA), Singapore 2006 (which failed GA on 18 January 2007) and The Singapore Stone (which passed DYK on 22 July 2007) as articles with GA potential. When can we launch the GA drive and collaborate to improve these articles to GA status?

--J.L.W.S. The Special One 16:09, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I'll also be adopting an article for the GA drive, but I haven't decided which. That'll be in late October. - SpLoT // 16:14, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
I recently expanded "The Singapore Stone" from a stub. I'll be back in Singapore for a month from 12 August 2007. If I have time, I might pop down to the National Library and look up some books for information to tidy up the article. Cheers, Jacklee 17:00, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your interest in the GA drive, SpLoT. During the rest of August, I will improve an article (probably I Not Stupid Too and, if she ever sends me the newspaper/magazine articles she promised, Xiaxue) and nominate it for the GA drive. Hopefully you (and I, after the O Levels are over and I return to Wikipedia on 12 November 2007) will have more articles to choose from then. (I can spot some potential in Bonny Hicks, and Huaiwei may wish to check what could prevent Law in Singapore from attaining GA status.)
Jacklee, do you think The Singapore Stone is "broad in its coverage" (GA criterion 3)? If so, it's time to check for prose, reference and stylistic issues. If not, which aspects of the stone lack coverage?
I have filed peer reviews for all three articles. Your comments are welcome at Peer review/Singapore, Peer review/Singapore 2006 and Peer review/The Singapore Stone. If others mention any problems, we should do our best to address them.
--J.L.W.S. The Special One 14:59, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Jacklee, it's been a week since you returned to the Lion City. How is your research going? As I previously said, if you believe the article is already "broad in its coverage", it's time to check the prose, references and style. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 03:12, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi, yes, I'm back in Singapore but haven't had a chance to go to the National Library yet to look up material for "The Singapore Stone". I'm not sure how "broad in its coverage" should be interpreted in respect of this article: the article is about an artefact that is particular to Singapore archaeology, so its ambit is bound to be fairly narrow. However, when I'm down at the Library I will see if there are any sources situating the Singapore Stone in the context of Southeast Asian archaeology. As for "Law of Singapore", which I also rewrote extensively, I don't think it's ready for a GA nomination. It's too heavily skewed towards the history of the legal system at the moment, and probably needs more information on contemporary law. See the discussion on the talk page of that article. Cheers, Jacklee 06:22, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Actually, one article that might be worth trying to get to GA status is "Sources of Singapore law". I wrote it as part of "Law of Singapore" but I later converted it into a separate article because the "Law of Singapore" was getting too long. However, before it is nominated I think the introductory paragraph needs to be expanded and the links removed from the bold text. Cheers, Jacklee 09:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Welcome back to our sunny island. As a suggestion here, do make a visit to Lee Kong Chian Reference Library's "Singapore and Southeast Asian Collections" (Level 11) at Victoria St. This reference library is where I always go for my research for my writeups & mtg up with fellow history buffs & Research Fellows. It has an extensive collection (over 200,000) of out-of-print bks, resource materials & latest bks too. Kindly note that there's a security check b4 entry & u r required to deposit yr bag (except yr notes & stationery) at the lockers (FOC). Also, bring along a cashcard as it will be needed to pay for photocopying & other transactions. Do approach the Reference Librarians shld u required assistance there. Lastly, a site-visit (helpful in my previous writings too) to view the Stone may inspire u or provide useful leads during its guided tours too -- Aldwinteo 10:19, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] History of...

Hi, all! WP:LGBT just found History of homosexuality in Singapore (2000s) and tagged it with {{newsrelease}}. We don't really have much experience or knowledge around the content of the article, though, so if anyone from this group can give us a hand, it would be much appreciated! Thanks :) -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 06:30, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

who are the veterans and best article writers here?

[edit] Deletion review for List of hotels in Singapore

I have started a deletion review for List of hotels in Singapore at the administrator's talkpage. His deletion rationale, particularly "Just because the article is about Singapore does not make it article-worthy"[1] (he has since removed that rationale thou) dosent appear particularly professionale given the discussions which took place make hardly any mention on keeping the article based on nothing but its association with Singapore.--Huaiwei 02:40, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Update: the above article's has been temporarily "stored" at User:Huaiwei/Cold Storage/List of hotels in Singapore‎ while I consider ways to resurrect the list in a way which ensures it fits within the criteria in Wikipedia:Lists. All are welcome to contribute ideas for the new list. Thanks!--Huaiwei 03:46, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category cleanup of Secondary schools in Singapore

I have just embarked on a cleanup of articles in the category Secondary_schools_in_Singapore. I notices the common problem is that many have huge long lists of courses or CCA's offered, which I do not believe are very necessary nor encyclopaedic. I have deleted these lists withou touching any prose which is related to CCA.

There has also been the tendency of editors to include items such as school's philosophy, mission statements, vision statements and strategic goals. I believe these to be highly promotional texts. In most cases, they have also been removed. Ohconfucius 10:43, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

For articles on Singaporean schools to improve, we need:
  • Guidelines on how such articles should be structured, what information should and should not be included, etc.
  • SGpedians willing to contribute to such articles.
--J.L.W.S. The Special One 14:50, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
  • There are a number of school articles which have made it to GA or FA status, and these can be used as models. Ohconfucius 03:28, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Point me to some of them. Don't include universities in your examples - they're a different animal altogether. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 05:14, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] It's National Day!

Yes, the Lion City turns 42 today. Did you watch the National Day Parade? I did. I couldn't stop singing, because I'm from Singapore. (Get it?) Next year, we should try to get a DYK (or even an FA) on the main page on 9 August. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 14:17, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

w00t, The Majestic, Singapore is on DYK now, complete with a photo too. —Sengkang 15:05, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Cool! Anyone willing to try for a Singapore-related FA on the main page on 9 August 2008? May all Wikipedians hear the lion roar! --J.L.W.S. The Special One 05:11, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Er....how about Singapore itself? ;) Anyway happy belated birthday, Singapore. I couldnt post a greeting earlier as I was there to protect you. :D--Huaiwei 05:43, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Singapore lost its GA status last month, and is one of three articles I nominated for the most recent proposed GA drive. Once the article passes GA, we can aim for FA status! --J.L.W.S. The Special One 15:16, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Project SuperStar, Campus SuperStar

Project SuperStar and Campus SuperStar are too long. Too much information are thrown into the articles, making them sound much like a news release. The scores of every stages are unnecessary and should be taken out. Remember, Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook, or textbook. See also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Cocoma 22:42, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

  • American Idol looks pretty long too, so just what exactly is the trend here when dealing with television shows of similar genre? Split them into multiple articles per season?--Huaiwei 02:21, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Probably organizing the information in a more tidy way would makes the articles better as shown on American Idol. Current score keeping makes the articles fairly long and cluttered. Cocoma 15:43, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Suspected copyright violation

The article The Fullerton Singapore has been listed as copyright violation. See Talk:The Fullerton Singapore. Can anyone by any chance confirm this? Garion96 (talk) 21:13, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

As I was at LKC Reference Lib doing my research & compiling for my upcoming series of WWII writeups recently, I decided to help in checking out the copyvio mentioned by Reaperducer on July 27, 2007. My cross-checking shows that under "The Fullerton Building" section, from para 1 to para 7 (till "In the 1970s to 1995...), the text is a direct lifting of word for word from "S'pore 100 Historic Places" (2002) by NHB, Archipelago Press. As the Fullerton is both a heritage site and a national monument in S'pore, I hope fellow SGpedians wld chip in to rewrite the affected para so as to resolve on this issue quickly. FYI & rgds -- Aldwinteo 04:19, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
I deleted the article and created a stub. I hope it can be a good article again soon. Garion96 (talk) 18:00, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Issue resolved. —Sengkang 02:22, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Majulah Singapura

I was wondering if I can see if any of yall could try and take photographs for this article. BTW, if the article feels short, check the history of the article before trying to smash my head open. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:06, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New template: Malay name

While expanding "Zubir Said", I created a new template, "{{Malay name}}" to explain that Malay names do not have have any surname. Feel free to use or improve it. A separate variation might be needed to explain the significance of bin (b.) and binte (bte.). And while we're at it, perhaps a template is needed for Indian names too! Cheers, Jacklee 06:03, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I've also created "{{Malay name2}}" which explains the meaning of bin (b.) and binte (bte.). Cheers, Jacklee 18:11, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Starting the GA drive

Nobody has objected to my idea of a GA drive, which I previously raised two times. In fact, this suggestion has received considerable support - for example, Chensiyuan commented: "Not a bad proposal". Several SGpedians have expressed interest in adopting articles: Huaiwei commented: "I wish I have the time to "adopt" the Singapore 2006 article", while SpLoT commented: "I'll also be adopting an article for the GA drive".

Therefore, I think it is time to get the ball rolling. If nobody objects within the next 72 hours, I will be bold and add a "GA drive" section to the SGpedians' notice board project page. Feel free to ask any questions about the GA drive, or suggest how the section should be formatted. For now, I'll use a simple format (two examples are shown below):

  1. I Not Stupid Too: The Plot section needs to be summarised and the Reception section expanded, after which the article should be copy-edited and checked for MoS violations.
    adopted by Hildanknight
  2. Singapore 2006: The article's coverage of several areas, particularly logistics, is weak. Several sections lack references, and a copy-edit is needed.
    adopted by Huaiwei

Once I add the section, the GA drive will start - albeit in an experimental stage. We will obviously need a critical mass of skilled SGpedian article writers to participate in the GA drive, if the experiment is to succeed.

--J.L.W.S. The Special One 16:20, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

No objections? I've added the section. It will take me a couple of hours to flesh it out, though. Feel free to improve the wording. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 01:21, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Wah I dio arrow liao ah! :D Erm will try to look into this soon, but please dont rush it into a GA yet shall we? I would rather we submit a polished piece then a rushed one. Thanks!--Huaiwei 07:47, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Relax, Huaiwei. Only after at least three SGpedians adopt Singapore 2006 will the collaboration start. If you have "met [your] major deadlines at work", do adopt the article, and encourage others to. I agree that we should only submit a GA nomination when the article is the best it can be. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 13:44, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Singapore as a regional and global hub

Cleanup & references needed. I've tried to salvage as much as I can out of this piece of drivel. Anyone care to help? Or should we just send it to AfD?--Rifleman 82 03:34, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

After reading the article once, I reckon there is nothing in it that can't be mentioned in Singapore or a sub-article thereof. Should be worth a redirect. Resurgent insurgent 14:37, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
As far as I can see, it is an orphan. Why not speedy it and forget about it? --Rifleman 82 14:55, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
It doesn't meet the speedy criteria. And plausibly anyone who's been given this phrase as an essay title might type it into the search box, where they would be redirected to a good starting point. (If you look at the first version of the page, it was created as a school essay too.) Resurgent insurgent 00:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Arthur Ernest Percival - an FA - not listed in "Featured articles and honourable mentions"

Under "SGpedians' Resources", I noticed an FA - Arthur Ernest Percival - that was not listed in "Featured articles and other honourable mentions". Per the precedent set by Tropical Storm Vamei, all articles pertaining to Singapore are within our scope, and all FAs, GAs or DYKs within our scope should be listed in "Featured articles or other honourable mentions". Could an SGpedian add Arthur Ernest Percival to "Featured articles and other honourable mentions"? The article passed FAC on 22 February 2006 and appeared on the Main Page on 2 January 2007. If there is a reason for not listing Arthur Ernest Percival under "Featured articles and other honourable mentions", I would like to hear/read it. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 02:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Durian, an FA, is listed as being under our scope. How is the article within our scope? Although the fruit can be found in the Lion City, it is hardly part of Singaporean cuisine, unlike Hainanese chicken rice or roti prata. If the article really is within our scope, it should be listed in "Featured articles and honourable mentions". --J.L.W.S. The Special One 07:20, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reliable sources about football in Singapore?

During my 18+ months as a Wikipedian, I have primarily focused on contributing to articles about Jack Neo movies. Having written a GA (I Not Stupid) and 3 DYKs (Money No Enough, The Best Bet and Megan Zheng), I believe I have succeeded in improving Wikipedia's coverage of Jack Neo movies. However, in the long run, I will need to expand my horizons, and write about other Singapore-related topics.

I have an interest in local football (Tampines Rovers rocks!) and desire to know more about Singaporean football clubs and football players. Researching to write (or contribute to existing) Wikipedia articles pertaining to football in Singapore would be a great way to do so.

For any article pertaining to local football - be it about the national team, a professional football competition, football club or football player - to attain GA status (or even DYK), it must be well-referenced. Unfortunately, reliable sources about football are few and far between. In this section, could we compile a list of reliable sources about football in Singapore? Anyone - not just me - who wishes to contribute to articles about football in Singapore would find such a list very useful.

--J.L.W.S. The Special One 12:31, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] S.League clubs

I read 5 articles on English Premier League football clubs - Arsenal F.C., Aston Villa F.C., Chelsea F.C., Everton F.C. and Manchester City F.C. - and reviewed the sources used to reference them. After doing so, I have a general idea of how to structure articles on S.League clubs. My analysis is outlined below. I believe that for an article on an S.League club to meet the "broad coverage" section of the GA criteria, it must have the first three sections and at least two* of the remaining four sections:

  1. History sections of EPL club articles are usually sourced to the club's official website and books about the club's history. Newspaper articles are also occasionally used as references. Has anybody published a book about the history of any S.League club? (In my opinion, 3-6 paragraphs is the optimal length for History sections on articles on S.League clubs.)
  2. Sections listing the players (and management staff) are, almost without exception, sourced to the club's official website.
  3. Similarly, S.League record sections (which should also list continential competition and Singapore Cup wins, if applicable) can safely be sourced to the club's and competition's official website (although newspaper articles may sometimes be useful).
  4. In EPL club articles, the Reserve/youth/ladies teams sections are usually written in summary style, with links to...unreferenced main articles. I'm not sure what sources should be used for such articles.
  5. For Crest and colours sections of EPL club articles, a wide variety of sources are used, including official sites, newspaper articles, reputable fansites and sites dedicated to football kits.
  6. References for Stadium sections tend to be sparse but varied. Official websites, newspaper articles and reputable fansites featire prominently, though.
  7. Finally, Supporters sections primarily rely links on polls, records and statistics, as well as newspaper and magazine articles, as sources. Official sites and other sites are used to a lesser extent.

*Sections should have at least one coherently-written paragraph of no less than three sentences.

Based on my analysis, the most important sources are official sites and newspaper articles. Furthermore, whether an S.League club article has a reasonable chance of achieving GA status largely depends on whether somebody has published a book about the club and its history. The first S.League club article I want to push to GA status would be Tampines Rovers, which I have supported since I was 12 (their stadium is a stone's throw away from my school). Tampines are among the oldest and most successful clubs in the S.League; I believe there would be more information about them than, for example, Woodlands Wellington or Balestier Khalsa.

--J.L.W.S. The Special One 04:56, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Kudos for the research you've done so far. If any books on S-League clubs have been written, copies should have been deposited with the National Library – check the NLB's online catalogue. As for the rest of the information, you'll probably have to rely on the on-line (or, more likely, the print) versions of local newspapers – possibly more trips to the library for you. Don't The New Paper and Today tend to publish more news on S-League clubs? Also, is there a magazine dedicated to local football? All the best for your endeavours. Cheers, Jacklee 11:53, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
I searched the online catalogue for "S.League" and the names of several clubs. All searches returned between 1 and 6 results, suggesting that there are several books available, all of which are worth their weight in gold (for someone researching about the S.League). Perhaps we could go to the LKC Reference Library during our next meetup?
As for newspaper articles, I hope somebody with access to a searchable newspaper archive - such as Newslink, Factiva or LexisNexis - could help me by searching the archive for "S.League", "Tampines Rovers", etc. and e-mailing me all newspaper articles that show up in the results.
My search for magazines (and reliable websites) dedicated to local football continues. If you find any, please post them here.
--J.L.W.S. The Special One 08:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Just a few minor updates:
  • Two Wikipedians, one with access to LexisNexis and one with access to Factiva, helped me search the archives for "Tampines Rovers". There were over 200 results in LexisNexis, and over 500 in Factiva, suggesting that there is plenty of newspaper coverage on local football - far exceeding my expectations. Once my O Levels are over, I will ask them to e-mail me the full text of all the newspaper articles.
  • In Tampines Regional Library, I found a book entitled "S.League: the kick-off", which has some useful information about the S.League. How do I format citations where the source/reference is a book?
  • I have joined several online communities dedicated to local football, such as kallangroar.com and sgfootball.com, under the username "whitekings". They may be able to help me find reliable sources about local football.
  • --J.L.W.S. The Special One 06:44, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
On my birthday, 7 October, Mark e-mailed me several hundred newspaper articles about Tampines Rovers, which he found through Factiva, while I borrowed "S.League: the kick-off" from the library. In addition to information about the formation of the S.League, the book provides information on the S.League's eight founder clubs, five (Tampines Rovers, Geylang United, Woodlands Wellington and the two "armed forces" clubs) of which still play in the S.League. During my (limited, due to the upcoming O Levels) spare time, I will comb the book and newspaper articles for relevant information.
I believe I now have enough information to write a five-paragraph History section of Tampines Rovers F.C. Page 50 of "S.League: the kick-off" and the History section of the Stags' official website should provide enough information about the club's pre-S.League history, while I believe I can write two paragraphs about Tampines Rovers' S.League history based on their official website, the S.League's official website and newspaper articles.
Are any of you interested in local football? If you are, please consider collaborating with me on articles pertaining to football in Singapore. As the saying goes, many hands make light work. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 09:23, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

For citing books, see {{Cite book}}.--Rifleman 82 06:48, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

If you need help with the {{Cite book}} or {{Citation}} templates, get in touch with me. Cheers, Jacklee 16:53, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for providing a link to that template. Do I simply enclose it in <ref>...</ref> tags and fill the fields with whatever information I have? Would you consider the title, author, publisher, year and page number to be the most essential citation information? --J.L.W.S. The Special One 09:23, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes. You should also include any co-authors, the place of publication, and the ISBN of the book if it is known. (If ISBNs are not available from the National Library Board's online catalogue, try those of the NUS Libraries or British Library.) If the author has a first and last name, you should state them separately using the "last" and "first" parameters. Here are some examples:
Wikitext Result
{{cite book|author=Palakrishnan|coauthors=Malathi Das|title=S. League : The Kick-Off|location=Singapore|publisher=[[S. League|Singapore Professional Football League]]|year=1996|pages=10–12}} Palakrishnan; Malathi Das (1996). S. League : The Kick-Off. Singapore: Singapore Professional Football League, 10–12. 
{{cite book|last=Koh|first=Tommy (ed.-in-chief)|title=Singapore : The Encyclopedia|location=Singapore|publisher=Editions Didier Millet|year=2006|isbn=9814155632 (hbk.)}} Koh, Tommy (ed.-in-chief) (2006). Singapore : The Encyclopedia. Singapore: Editions Didier Millet. ISBN 9814155632 (hbk.). 
If you're putting the citation in a footnote, then enclose it in <ref> and </ref> tags as you mentioned. If you're going to cite the same book several times, then the first time you can assign it a name using, for instance, "<ref name="S. League">". Subsequently, you can just refer to the same citation with "<ref name="S. League"/>" (note the forward slash after the reference name). Note that magazine articles should be cited using {{Citation}}, newspaper articles using {{Cite news}}, and websites using {{Cite web}}:
Wikitext Result
{{citation|last=Ekstrand|first=J. [''et al.'']|title=Incidence of soccer injuries and their relation to training and team success|journal=American Journal of Sports Medicine|year=1983|volume=11|issue=1|pages=63–67|issn=0363-5465}} Ekstrand, J. [et al.] (1983), “Incidence of soccer injuries and their relation to training and team success”, American Journal of Sports Medicine 11 (1): 63–67, ISSN 0363-5465 
{{cite news|last=Winter|first=Henry|title=Michael Owen pushes pain barrier|url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?xml=/sport/2007/10/11/sfnowe111.xml|publisher=''[[The Daily Telegraph]]''|date=[[2007-10-11]]}} Winter, Henry. "Michael Owen pushes pain barrier", The Daily Telegraph, 2007-10-11. 
{{cite web|title=Interview : Peter Crouch|url=http://www.fourfourtwo.premiumtv.co.uk/page/Interviews/0,,11442~1082853,00.html|publisher=''[[Four Four Two]]''|accessdate=2007-10-11}}

(If the date of the article is available, use the "date" parameter too, like this: "date=[[2007-10-10]]".)

 Interview : Peter Crouch. Four Four Two. Retrieved on 2007-10-11.
Cheers, Jacklee 12:15, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA review: "Sources of Singapore law"

I've Wikified and rewritten the introductory paragraphs of "Sources of Singapore law", and have nominated it for Good Article status. Cheers, Jacklee 22:21, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your efforts to improve Sources of Singapore law. I hope the article becomes our 10th GA! Perhaps you should have filed a peer review before nominating the article for GA status; if the nomination fails, do file one, and nominate the article for the GA drive.
You are also the primary contributor to The Singapore Stone, which you adopted when I nominated it for the GA drive. Once you expand the lead section and fix the MoS violations outlined in the article's archived peer review, the article should be ready for a GA nomination.
Keep up the good work! Due to my upcoming O Levels, I will be editing sporadically, but I hope to write another GA during the December holidays. Unfortunately, Xiaxue has not e-mailed me the newspaper/magazine articles she promised, so I will have to look for another article to work on (that's why I asked for reliable sources about football in Singapore).
--J.L.W.S. The Special One 07:24, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

The information required for "The Singapore Stone" is all there, but the article still needs tidying up and the introductory paragraphs need rewriting. Am a little busy at the moment; will get round to it soon. Sorry, can't help you regarding reliable sources about football. All the best for your O-levels! Cheers, Jacklee 08:24, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I am pleased to announce that our GA tally has reached double figures after Fort Pasir Panjang and Sources of Singapore law recently passed GA. Congratulations, SGpedians, and keep up the good work! 6 articles (including Jacklee's The Singapore Stone) with GA potential have been nominated for the GA drive; could somebody adopt and contribute to them? As previously mentioned, I intend to write another GA - or two - during the December holidays. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 10:25, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I have tidied up "Singapore Stone" (note the change of article title) and have nominated it for Good Article status. Cheers, Jacklee 01:45, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Singapore Statute template updated

I've updated the {{Singapore Statute}} template so that it is now possible to enter the short title ("name"), chapter number and year of the revised edition of a statute. This means that articles which make use of this template will need to be updated. Do help! Cheers, Jacklee 22:24, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New template: Indian name

I've created a new template, "{{Indian name}}", which can be used at the top of biographical articles to explain that the subject does not have a surname, but that part of his or her name is a patronymic (that is, his or her father's name). Feel free to use and improve it.

As Indian names differ greatly, it may be necessary to create variations of this template – please leave a message on the template talk page if you have any suggestions. For instance, I've noticed that some people use "a/l" instead of "s/o" (son of). I assume that "a/l" means "son of" in Tamil, but don't know what it stands for or the equivalent of "daughter of". Also, someone will need to explain to me how Sikh names work. (Is "Kaur" or "Singh" regarded as a surname?) Cheers, Jacklee 09:13, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I have another question: when an Indian name consists of a given name and a patronymic, is it always the case that the patronymic is put in front of the given name? In other words, if an Indian person's name is, say, "Shunmugam Jayakumar", would it be safe to assume that the person's given name is "Jayakumar" and that his father's name is "Shunmugam"? I'm wondering whether the order of the parameters in the template should be reversed. At the moment, it is necessary to type "{{Indian name|Jayakumar|Shunmugam}}". If the patronymic is always in front of the given name, perhaps it would be better to change the template so that it can be used like this: "{{Indian name|Shunmugam|Jayakumar}}", as this may be more natural for editors. Do discuss this matter further at "Template talk:Indian name#Order of parameters". Cheers, Jacklee 23:22, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Based on the discussion that has been taking place at "Template talk:Indian name#Order of parameters", it seems there is variation among Indians as to whether the patronymic is placed in front of or behind the given name (i.e., "Shanmugam Jayakumar" or "Jayakumar Shanmugam"). In that case, for the time being I'm going to leave the order of the parameters in {{Indian name}} unchanged. Editors using the template will need to be aware that they must state the person's given name as the first parameter and the patronymic as the second one, regardless of how they actually appear in the person's name. Cheers, Jacklee 13:58, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please help the editing CHC article in chinese wiki

There are a lot of misleadings of CHC in chinese edition.

CHC in zh.wikipedia.org

Jyyihch 14:45, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Singapore building infobox for deletion

Please note that the above template has been nominated by User:Circeus for deletion. See Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion#Template:Singapore_building_infobox. —Sengkang 17:28, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

It's not so much a deletion as a merger (which would keep the extra names parameters) into an existing template. Circeus 17:45, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Zubir Said: Translation of Malay book titles

Can anyone help provide English translations of the following book and film titles which are referred to in the article "Zubir Said"?

Do you think this is an article that might achieve Good Article status?

Cheers, Jacklee 16:51, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Use of coat of arms of Singapore in templates

Hi, Mailer diablo recently applied Image:Singapore coa.png, an image of the Singapore coat of arms, to {{Politics of Singapore}} and {{Infobox Court Case}}. While I think that the coat of arms is attractive and suitable for these infoboxes, rule 3(1) of the Singapore Arms and Flag and National Anthem Rules (Cap. 296, R1, 2004 Rev. Ed.) states: "[N]o person shall, without the prior written permission of the Minister or any authorised officer — (a) print, publish, manufacture, sell, offer for sale or exhibit for sale; (b) cause to be printed, published, manufactured, sold, offered for sale or exhibited for sale; (c) send, distribute or deliver to, or serve on, any other person; or (d) cause to be sent, distributed or delivered to, or served on, any other person, any writing, material or object in or on which appears the Arms or any token, insignia, emblem or other thing that so nearly resembles the Arms as to be capable of being mistaken for the Arms." Rule 3(2) states: "[N]o person shall, without the prior written permission of the Minister or any authorised officer, use or apply the Arms on any writing, material or object." That was why the coat of arms was replaced with Image:Singov top 02.gif in {{Politics of Singapore}}, as these regulations do not apply to use of that logo.

I'm not sure whether it is worth writing to the relevant Minister to ask for permission for use of the state crest in Wikipedia articles. The main question is whether Wikipedia articles need to comply with Singapore law, or whether Wikipedia policy is that compliance with US law is sufficient (this seems to be the case for fair use of images, for instance). Can anyone shed light on this matter? If not, is there an administrator we can ask about this?

I've notified Mailer diablo of this matter on his talk page. Cheers, Jacklee 18:36, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

  • I based it off the guidelines of the official site. Didn't know their terms is more complicated than what the site offered. I note that the Supreme Court is also using the COA as their logo. At least there is a point of contact to actually ask. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 18:41, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
    • I would also note that traditionally and from past experience it is almost impossible to get permission from local agencies, so don't have high expectations if you go ahead. - Mailer Diablo 18:49, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Mailer diablo. Well, the website that you refer to states: "The use of the state crest for advertisements or any other commercial purpose is prohibited by law. Only government bodies can display the state crest within their premises. Approval must be sought for any other use of the state crest." There's no problem with the Supreme Court making use of the crest on its website, because the Court is an organ of state. I note that the website also states:

For enquiries on use of the state crest, please contact:

Ms Joyce Lee
Assistant Manager (Heritage Programmes)
National Heritage Board
Singapore
Email: joyce_lee@nhb.gov.sg
Tel: 63324494
Fax: 63323525

Ms Elizabeth Njo
Assistant Manager (Psychological Defence)
National Heritage Board
Singapore
Email: elizabeth_njo@nhb.gov.sg
Tel: 63324495
Fax: 63323525

Perhaps it might be worth contacting one of these persons to ask for permission for use of the national coat of arms in Wikipedia articles. An argument might be made out that this promotes Singapore's heritage and supports psychological defence. Anyway, if we don't try we will never know. But I agree that it's often difficult to get a response from government agencies on matters like this. Perhaps they are deemed to be too inconsequential to merit a response. For instance, I wrote to the National Museum of Singapore for permission to use a photograph of the Singapore Stone published in one of their books, but never received a reply. (The photograph is currently being used in the article under a detailed fair-use rationale, which I hope is sufficient.) What do other SGpedians think? Cheers, Jacklee 18:56, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

  • No reply, that's...odd? Because in the past government agencies actually *came* to us to strongly object the use of their logos and stuff. - Mailer Diablo 19:05, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, really, what happened then? And if that happened, why do you think it's a good idea to use the national coat of arms now? Cheers, Jacklee 19:10, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Almost every other country's infoboxes adopt it. Forgot that our country is 'Unique'. - Mailer Diablo 19:13, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

That could be because the rules concerning the use of coats of arms of other countries are less restrictive. Or that the rules are being ignored. Perhaps we should go back to using a photograph of Parliament House. I remember that that was used at one stage. Cheers, Jacklee 22:34, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I rather liked the photograph – better than the current logo, anyway. By the way, I put a photograph of the Supreme Court Building in the infobox in the "Lock v. Goh" article. Cheers, Jacklee 02:37, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I've restored the Parliament House image. - Mailer Diablo 14:25, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New template: {{Singapore Constitution}}

After much difficulty, I've created a new template, {{Singapore Constitution}}, that inserts a citation to the latest reprint of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore . Do make use of it where appropriate, and if you are knowledgable about templates please feel free to improve the template as well. Cheers, Jacklee 19:17, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] MRT Accidents wiki-worthy?

I've found that many of the MRT station articles are littered with sections on minor accidents. Now, events like bomb scares (Yishun) or train collision (Clementi), those are definitely fine. But to include everything from suicides to slipping on the escalator... not to be insensitive to suicides, but those are minor issues, no matter how you look at it. OK, these may be featured on the news, but it's really hardly worth a mention here. A review of the all the (above ground) station pages should be required to filter these needless information, and to keep what we really need.

If you want a list of accidents, maybe collect them on a single page, for example, List of accidents on the Singapore MRT, although I can't guarantee it won't get VfD. Like I said, most of it should not even be on Wikipedia. 리지강.wa.au (의논하다|기여) 16:36, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I'm replying to bring attention to an issue I feel is plaguing the pages of the MRT stations. Please refer to my previous reply for details. Thanks. 리지강.wa.au talk 19:01, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure how to articulate this, so please bear with my vagueness. I think these minor incidents are indeed worthy enough - not to warrant their own article, but to be mentioned in their respective MRT station articles. While in other places, perhaps, suicides and slips are more commonplace, in Singapore, they are nearly always reported - not only by tabloids, but by the dominant English language broadsheet as well, on multiple occasions. These minor incidents build a (for lack of a better word) history for each station that makes them unique, beyond their names and locations and design. Just my view. - SpLoT // 08:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Only accidents which received significant press coverage should be mentioned on Wikipedia. "Significant press coverage" means that multiple Singaporean newspapers have published multiple articles/news reports on the accident over a reasonably long period (at least a week). Notable accidents may be mentioned in articles about the MRT stations in which the accident occured, as well as in Safety on the Mass Rapid Transit and Security on the Mass Rapid Transit.
Unless there are many notable accidents and several references which cover accidents on the MRT in general, I see no need for a Accidents on the MRT article (it should not be a list). Deletionists seem to think that "Singaporean" means "non-notable". Creating Accidents on the MRT would simply prove them right and give them another article to nominate for deletion.
--J.L.W.S. The Special One 09:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Let's not bring the deletionist label in to this... I think there shouldn't be a fixed threshold - discretion is necessary, but of course we shouldn't add any incident which was not reported by the mainstream media (i.e. with significant circulations). - SpLoT // 11:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
As you said, "in Singapore, they are nearly always reported". And really in Singapore, since the population is much smaller, and the MRT has a pretty good reputation in service, I'm not surprised that even a slip would be reported. I'm trying to look at the bigger picture and see what is important and what is trivial. For example, slips or any other minor accidents can really be collected in Safety on the Mass Rapid Transit and then summarized as a statistic. And then don't get me started on list of "First trains and last trains" on some of the MRT pages. 리지강.wa.au talk 16:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
I think that accidents can be considered to be encyclopedic. Otherwise, each independent article would be too short. Bishan for instance, has a talk about the accidents as because of its history as a cemetery. This is what makes accidents unique. It may be little in each individual part, but when combined, shows the urgency of having platform screen doors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.132.3.9 (talk • contribs) 05:44 29 January 2008 (UTC)
In general, unencyclopedic details should not be added to or kept in articles just to make them longer. Neither should articles be used to support a campaign for platform screen doors or any other cause. "[[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a soapbox|Wikipedia is not a soapbox, a battleground, or a vehicle for propaganda and advertising." However, I would say that whether facts are unencyclopedic depends on the context. If an article about an MRT station discusses safety concerns that people have because of the lack of doors, then information about accidents, suicides or other incidents at the station may not be unencyclopedic. Similarly, 137.132.3.9 says that information on accidents that occur at Bishan station are noteworthy because of its history as the site of a former cemetery. Is there anything in the article that links this fact to the accidents? Is there any evidence that superstitious people feel that there is a connection? (Note that there is a related discussion below at #MRT articles containing excessive and unencyclopedic detail.) — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 13:53, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Use of s-line for MRT stations

Currently, there is a template for station line succession boxes: Template:S-line. Pages for a large number of train and subway systems all over the world have adapted this system. I was wondering if anyone is interested in adapting this for the Singapore MRT as well. If no one is willing to give it a go, then I'll be glad to convert them some time in the future. I understand that the current pages already use a localised template, but maybe for the sake of conserving bandwidth, a common template can be used with the rest of Wikipedia. 리지강.wa.au (의논하다|기여) 16:49, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

  • You mean, standardization? I would appreciate a sample so I can try and convert some, the syntax looks quite a bit to me. =P - Mailer Diablo 15:09, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Yes standardization, couldn't think of the actual word. Anyway, I've created some examples to cover all the MRT lines here. If all goes well, I think we can implement this throughout all the stations.리지강.wa.au (의논하다|기여) 15:19, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Yes, I was reading up on the s-line templates and was thinking of implementing this throughout all the stations. however my exams are here and will help to standardise it after that, about december. cheers! Oahiyeel 21:36, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
  • i've started converting some mrt and lrt station succession boxes. those who want to help here's the remaining list of MRT and LRT stations that needs to be converted! :) I've also drafted out a list of old succession templates at my sandbox that can be deleted once all these conversions are done. let me know if i missed out any! :) - oahiyeel talk 07:54, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Between Silat and Pencak Silat

Silat article, which is under this project, is in the subject of ongoing heavy writing between two views. One insists to separate the two articles while others are trying to combine the two. A consensus is needed whether to merge or to separate these two articles and to avoid any unilateral acts in the future. Your comments are welcomed here: Talk:Silat#Merge_between_Silat_and_Pencak_Silat. — Indon (reply) — 08:13, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Flag of Singapore, again

Would anyone be so kind to try and find me a construction sheet for the flag? Examples of what I am looking for are [2] or [3]. I do not need the colors, since I have found a source already for them (Pantone 032 for Red, Pantone Safe for White). User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:37, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Does this help? http://flagspot.net/flags/sg.html. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 23:24, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Singapore Manual of Style?

I think we are in a kinda interesting position in that our "notice board" is also working as a "wikiproject". What has been missing, and often sorely needed, is some kind of a "manual of style" or "naming convention" for Singapore-related articles. Any thoughts if this is neccesary, and how we may proceed with this?--Huaiwei 01:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Do we really need one? WikiProject Iceland has a (proposed) Manual of Style for Iceland-related articles because of unusual letters in their alphabet and the fact that it is conventional to sort people according to their given names rather than their surnames: see "Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Iceland-related articles)". Are there aspects of Singapore-related articles that require special treatment that are not covered by the general Wikipedia:Manual of Style? Could you give some examples? — Cheers, JackLee –talk • contribs • count– 15:11, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, one thing that comes up often is the issue of handling Singapore's official languages -- there's been a bunch of ridiculous edit wars over this topic and one is about to restart over at Changi Airport. So I'll make the following proposal:

  • Singapore-related topics should have the name listed in all four official languages listed, in the following order: English, Malay, Chinese (zh-cp|c=simplified|p=pinyin), Tamil.
  • The names should be listed once. If the article has an infobox, the name should be listed there. If not, the names go in the first sentence of the lead.
  • If the names have a complex history or vary considerably from language to language (eg. Tekka Centre), this should be discussed in a separate section, not the lead.

Fire away! Jpatokal 02:45, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

That sounds sensible. Perhaps you'd like to do a first draft of "Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Singapore-related articles)". Any other matters that need to be dealt with? Perhaps we should provide some guidance on how to give names to biographical articles as there may be some confusion over the use of Chinese, Malay and Indian names in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 02:58, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
I finally plunged forward and created Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Singapore-related articles). Comments welcome. Jpatokal (talk) 20:03, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sections 377 and 377A of the Penal Code (Singapore): Renaming of article

The Penal Code (Amendment) Act 2007 has been passed by Parliament. The current title of the article "Sections 377 and 377A of the Penal Code (Singapore)" is therefore out of date, and there is now a more urgent need to decide what should be done about the article. There is currently a discussion at its talk page on whether the article should be expanded in scope to cover all sexual offences in Singapore and renamed as "Sexual offences in Singapore", or merged with "LGBT rights in Singapore". Do add any comments that you have on the issue. If there are no further comments on the matter in a fortnight or so, I may go ahead and be bold (depending on how busy I am). — Cheers, JackLee –talk • contribs • count– 15:48, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RfA for User:Rifleman_82

I've been nominated for RfA. Most of my edits have been in the Chemistry articles, but I have made some edits to those Singapore-related articles. If anyone has opinions about my suitability for adminship, you can participate in the discussion here. --Rifleman 82 10:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Looks like the RFA's going to pass. Have you written any GAs - especially Singapore-related GAs? If so, I'll definitely support you. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 05:37, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm not so involved in pushing articles to GA, and I rarely write about Singapore-related articles. I did write/expand SAFTI Military Institute, Foreign relations of Singapore, Singapore Armed Forces ranks, Military history of Singapore. --Rifleman 82 17:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations, Rifleman 82, you are now an administrator! Now please write a Singapore-related GA (or two, or hopefully even more). Since my O Levels are over, I have plenty of time to write articles, and may need you to help me find newspaper articles on LexisNexis. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 03:18, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your thoughts. However, I must decline making promises with regard to the GAs. Like I have said, Singapore-related articles are not my core contributions. I will continue to edit, but as you can see there are only a few articles I get involved in. If they become GAs with or without my help, great. If there are peer reviews, which point out the problem areas, I'll fix them where I can too. But I'm not really gunning for peer reviews, nor will I push and lobby for them to be promoted as GAs. I'll help you where I can with lexisnexis, but once again my time is limited and I can't dig out all 200 or so fulltexts. Afterall, I do need to earn a living. As you know, all editors here, even admins, are volunteers and they are entitled to pick and choose, how they wish to contribute. Hope you understand my point of view. --Rifleman 82 04:58, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "People from the Straits Settlements"?

Yōsuke Yamahata was born in 1917 and moved to Tokyo in 1925. Had he been born in, say, Nagasaki he'd be within Category:People from Nagasaki Prefecture. But he was born in Singapore, which I believe was at the time one of the (British) Straits Settlements. He was hardly "Singaporean". While I'm less than fanatical about categorizing people, I'm idly wondering if there's a category for people such as him. -- Hoary 02:23, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Laksa and Pharis Aboobacker

Just a heads-up: both Laksa and Pharis Aboobacker (of NKF fame) are being edited by users with, um, rather firm beliefs about the subject. Please chip in to help clean them up. Jpatokal 01:14, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Stubbed and referenced. --Rifleman 82 12:55, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Each article listed in "Featured articles and honourable mentions" should have its primary contributor's username next to it.

When was the last time someone praised you? If we thanked and praised SGpedians for their contributions, they would be motivated to contribute more. Hence I propose that every entry in "Featured articles and honourable mentions" should include the username of the article's primary contributor.

Let's use the entry for I Not Stupid as an example. Currently, it looks like this:

After adding my username to the entry, it should look like this:

Note that I used "thanks" instead of "written by", as the latter implies that I own the article. We want to thank them for contributing to Wikipedia, not to suggest that they own articles they contribute to.

Letting others know who writes Singapore-related FAs, GAs and DYKs has other benefits. For example, new SGpedians who wish to write a Singapore-related GA would know who to ask for help. Should a Singapore-related FA be taken to featured article review, it would be easy to find and contact its primary contributor.

If nobody opposes this suggestion within the next 5 days, I will edit all the GA entries to include their primary contributor's username.

--J.L.W.S. The Special One 14:05, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Just add your own username if your want, but probably not others' without asking them first. --Vsion 14:18, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Sorry but I am kinda apprehensive over this proposal. I am afraid many will interpret it as a sign of WP:Own. If you wish to pat yourself on the back, a better way may be to list the article in your userpage as examples of your best contributions. Give others barnstars if they make significant contributions. I am sure users with a clear sense of their purpose in wikipedia will not find this inadequate, if it is necessary at all.--Huaiwei 16:01, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
As I noted above, I am also concerned about implications of article ownership. Hence my choice of "thanks" over "written by". In my opinion, "thanks" does not imply article ownership, only that the Wikipedian's contributions are appreciated. Feel free to suggest a better phrasing. If you feel that including the primary contributor's username in each entry will imply article ownership regardless of phrasing, state so.
I do not wish to "pat myself on the back", as Huaiwei suggests; I was merely using the entry for I Not Stupid as an example. This suggestion aims to encourage others to pat me on the back and allow me to pat others on the back. (Of course, I do not have to do the patting or be patted.) Is this clarification adequate?
--J.L.W.S. The Special One 03:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
I think this idea has the right intentions but for me I write GAs and FAs mostly out of interest rather than anything else. There are already barnstars to show appreciation. Chensiyuan 03:30, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
There are barnstars, but they are underused. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 03:42, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
I think this problem can be easily solved. Let's use them more! :D--Huaiwei 03:47, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Yeah! Let's use them more! Thanks for leading by example, Huaiwei! By the way, how many Singapore-related GAs have you written? I want to return you the favour by awarding you a barnstar for improving Wikipedia's coverage of Singapore. My suggestion would also encourage Wikipedians to award more barnstars, as those who read I Not Stupid (again, just an example) would know who to thank and award barnstars to. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 04:28, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
We may fret long and hard over wordings, but I doubt casual users are going to interpret it the way we intend. Thanking someone can also be seen as acknowledging someone's ownership of a specific article. Also, please do not take offence over the "pat on the back" comment. It was just an illustration and is not a reflection of what I think your intentions are. ;)--Huaiwei 03:47, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
No offence taken. I just thought that you had mis-interpreted my suggestion as an attempt to "pat myself on the back". Since you think that regardless of wording, including the primary contributor's username implies article ownership, I'm not sure if I should pursue my suggestion further. Frankly, I think that over-application of WP:OWN may lead to article writers not getting the credit they deserve. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 04:28, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 4th SGpedians' meetup

Could someone update me on the status of the 4th SGpedians' meetup? I intend to attend it if it is held on a weekday. Perhaps we could go to Lee Kong Chian Reference Library and find references for GAs we intend to write. By the way, the box at the top states that the meetup will take place on 27 Nov, while the "Proposals" section indicates that it will take place on 17 Nov. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 14:27, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

The 17th has come and gone, and I guess there wasn't a meet up. If there is to be one on the 27th, I question the choice of the date — it effectively excludes all editors aged 19 and above. So, when is it going to be? --Rifleman 82 (talk) 13:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
No meeting took place on the 27th either? Can we agree on a date? More importantly, now that Terence has left, who will organise the meetup? --J.L.W.S. The Special One 14:44, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Please see section below. Thanks. Terence (talk) 05:41, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Prepping Singapore for Veropedia

Singapore is one of the core articles for Veropedia, which intends to collect stable, high-quality versions of articles suitable for students and teachers. Would you guys be interested in spending some time working on this article? I'm new to this project, and I'm still feeling my way around. But I'll try to identify the areas which need to be worked on. --Rifleman 82 17:03, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't mind helping, although the extent to which I do so depends very much on how busy I am. (Final year of my Ph.D. Eeep.) I can probably assist with copyediting. I encourage other SGpedians to lend a hand – this is a wonderful opportunity to get the article back to Good Article status again, following its recent delisting. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 19:57, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Jack, that sounds great. While being GA/FA/A class etc is not a prereq for veropedia, getting it cleaned up is still a step in that direction for the article which will remain here. --Rifleman 82 04:59, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


I've cleaned it up and "passed" it to veropedia. You can see it here. References need improving. I'm trying to fix all references by the end of the week, using {{citation}} style templates. Also, some less-WP:RS sources should be changed to proper sources. Blogs should be excluded. Material from Singapore Department of Statistics, United States Department of State, the United States Library of Congress & CIA World Factbook, though public domain, should be properly cited as well. The list of references should be turned inline. Help will be good! --Rifleman 82 (talk) 18:29, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Featured article review suggested

Another editor has suggested that the Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore) article might not be featured article quality and stated his objections in the review proposal. It was removed from the main review page because the nominator put up three other articles at the same time for review. However, this gives us a chance to be a little proactive with this nom so we can clear up some of the problems before the review request is added again. If you have time, please view the objection list and work on the items that you can to help keep this article at FA status. Thanks. Slambo (Speak) 15:53, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I've looked at the objections and whilst most of them are valid, most of them can also be rectified easily. Perhaps the principal editors would remedy most expeditiously. Chensiyuan 16:10, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm surprised I wasn't notified. Looks like a list of fixable MoS issues. I'll do up the article tomorrow morning. - Mailer Diablo 17:29, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
I am also surprised that some of the issues raised were actually discussed prior and decided upon long ago. For example, on why "Safety" and "Security" ended up as two sections. Maybe we can discuss this in detail over in the article's talkpage.--Huaiwei 01:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Since Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore) was promoted almost two years ago, and standards have risen, I am not surprised that the article no longer meets the FA criteria. We should address the issues as quickly as possible, so the article will not need to undergo the endless nitpicking and incivility that is FAC (and FAR) again. For starters, I moved the misplaced references behind punctuation marks. Mailer diablo (and others who have contributed significantly to the article) should try to find references for the under-referenced sections, while I will try to rope in a native speaker of English to copy-edit the lead section (and the rest of the article). --J.L.W.S. The Special One 10:42, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

(reset indent)What makes you so sure that an ang moh's English is better than one of ours'? --Rifleman 82 12:42, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, whosoever is good at copyediting should be good enough lol. Chensiyuan 12:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
In this context, "native speaker of English" refers to one's command of the language; a "native speaker of English" need not be an ang moh. If you are proficient in English - proficient enough to give ang mohs a run for their money - feel free to help copy-edit the article. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 15:30, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Even the reviwer himself is claiming that. Seriously, can someone look into this one while I work on the Odex one? - Mailer Diablo (talk) 18:00, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I have filed a request with the League of Copyeditors and found a native speaker (Haemo, who copy-edited I Not Stupid) who is willing to help copy-edit the article. Nevertheless, I don't see why you can't work on both articles. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 02:13, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm sure he's entitled to choose lol. Chensiyuan (talk) 02:21, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Expressway map

Our expressway map, such as the one at Expressways of Singapore, has the MCE added in but the ECP truncated in the Marina Bay area. This is jumping the gun, no? We know the ECP will be truncated, but this is going to be quite a few years down the road. Thanks. --unkx80 20:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, perhaps a 'current' map and a 'future planned' map? - SpLoT // 04:00, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Either two maps (like the MRT one), or make the U/C or planned sections explicit in the map.--Huaiwei 04:07, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. i prefer one current one with the MCE "dotted lined" :) oahiyeeltalk 07:10, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Dotted for U/C or planned sections sounds good, but either way is perfectly fine. To the people who drew the maps, thanks for the work! =) --unkx80 (talk) 05:47, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Nobody actually seemed to fix the ECP truncation, so I edited Aran's map and uploaded a new version. As I cannot overwrite Aran's version, I uploaded a copy at [4]. Can somebody please change all the articles that use Aran's map to use my map instead? Or better still, have my version replace his version instead (but I am not too sure how this works). Thanks! --unkx80 (talk) 18:54, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] #sgpedians channel on Freenode?

Perhaps the SGpedian community could have its own channel on freenode, allowing us to socially interact and thus strengthening the SGpedian community. We could also use the channel to plan meetups, GA drives and recruitment drives. Furthermore, if one urgently needs to contact an SGpedian (especially an SGpedian admin), they could use the channel to do so.

I propose that we all speak in Singlish during discussions in that channel, so kaypoh ang mohs catch no ball. (Of course, if they join the channel to seek our help, we should use our best English when responding to their queries.) The main drawbacks to this proposal are that not everybody can access IRC and that starting and running a channel requires time, effort and resources.

--J.L.W.S. The Special One 16:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually... we already have a channel, and it's been around for over a year now, at #wikipedia-singapore. :P Yes all, feel free to chit chat or whatever. Singlish or not, no need to care lah, unless really got ang moh lor. - SpLoT // 08:28, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for telling me about that channel, SpLoT! I lurk in that channel everyday, but unfortunately, I always seem to be the only one there. Could you, and other SGpedians, lurk in that channel more often? --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 09:11, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
No need to impose... if people aren't interested that's fine. - SpLoT // 08:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for help

Hi, Im a user in England who has had an interest in schools but is now helping with "Did you know" nominations. I picked on Henderson Secondary School as a recent article and added some 3rd party references to add to its notability. I would like to nominate it for the front page (I know about this bit) but I could do with some local help. The original author is helpful - but is new to wikipedia. Are there some exoperienced SGpedians who could help? I think we need

  • some free use images - anyone local with a camera?
  • some more 3rd party refs
  • a bit about how SG schools are different from other countries... we have to remember that some readers may not be in Asia.

Any chance?

PS. See you are rearranging your schools in clusters... are you aware of the debate about notability on the schools project? Victuallers (talk) 16:49, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Few Singaporeans own digital cameras or support the free software/media movement; we are more concerned with bread-and-butter issues. On a more serious note - could you tell me more about the notability debate? As a Singaporean student, I am considering writing a GA on a Singaporean school, and knowing the notability criteria would be very useful. Although the education system has become a part of Singaporean culture, Wikipedia's coverage of education in Singapore is horrendous. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 15:31, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm surprised that SGpedians lack cameras - they are pretty much standard issue in the mobile phones here. We don't need a full quality image - a "snap" will do. Anyway... thanks for making a reply ... its appreciated. The notabity debate is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:School ... enjoy. I I was hoping to get HSS to Did you know ... but I think I overestimated the help that might arrive. Victuallers 16:40, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't imagine it's the case that "few Singaporeans own digital cameras". You probably haven't had a response because the number of active SGpedians is not large, and perhaps there isn't anyone interested enough in Henderson Secondary School to schlep over to it and photograph it. (Sorry, can't help you myself – I'm not living in Singapore at the moment.) Have you tried contacting the school – perhaps they have a photographic society or some other student organization there which might be able to help? — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 03:22, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Had a look at HSS's website. There isn't any photographic society, but you might try e-mailing the school at henderson_ss@moe.edu.sg. There are also a number of blogs belonging to student organizations within the school. You could try leaving a messages on one or more of them. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 03:38, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I own a digital camera, but don't live near there. Also, photographers might get stopped by school security guards as "trespassing". - SpLoT // 03:55, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Come to think of it, that happened to me before. I was asked by a cousin of mine to take photographs of the Anglo-Chinese Junior School at Barker Road, as he emigrated from Singapore many years ago and wondered what it looked like now. I took a few photographs inside the school grounds, but was subsequently approached by a security guard and told that photography was not permitted. Perhaps there's a fear of terrorist or (*ulp*) paedophile activity. But there may be less of a problem taking photographs of a school from outside the school compound. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 04:34, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
The anti-fair use brigade will not tolerate such "excuses". If I were you, I would not risk being arrested as a trespasser, paedophile or terrorist. Articles do not need images to qualify for DYK; in fact, articles without images can achieve GA status. By the way, what interesting fact are you going to use as the article's DYK hook? --J.L.W.S. The Special One 13:38, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for all the advice. The DYK opportunity has timed out now. The hook was going to be the dengue fever work which is a part I had added to make a DYK possible. I know there may be few SGpedians - but you do a very good job of looking after Singapore. I have had other Singapore based articles that habve been excelent. However without pictures the article would be poor. Cheers Victuallers 14:43, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Majulah Singapura needs a section about use of anthem and its place in Singaporean culture

I encouraged an ang moh, Zscout370 to write a Singapore-related GA. The article he chose, Majulah Singapura, achieved GA status on 12 November 2007. However, I am concerned that the article is not "broad in its coverage".

What it lacks is a section about the use of our national anthem and its place in Singaporean culture. (Zscout370 is not to blame; as an ang moh, he does not have this knowledge.) For example, all Singaporean students have to sing the anthem during flag-raising ceremonies in school. Flag of Singapore (a current GA nominee, which I think should pass) has a similar section which could provide some useful pointers.

Could an SGpedian do the necessary research and write the section? Even a short section (a couple of paragraphs) should be enough to make the article "broad in its coverage". If no effort is made to address this issue, somebody may file a GA reassessment request, which may lead to the article losing its GA status.

--J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 15:34, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

It's worth doing a Google search to see if there are any news articles regarding the National Anthem that could be incorporated into a "Use of the National Anthem" section. That's how I found the New Paper articles about the use of the National Flag which I added to "Flag of Singapore". There should probably be some mention as well of the laws regulating the performance of the National Anthem. Will help out if I have the time. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 14:15, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
What we need is someone who has access to Newslink, Factiva or another newspaper article archival service. Relevant information from Zubir Said can be copied over. Majulah Singapura should be complete as a standalone article; do not assume that someone who has read it has also read Zubir Said. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 14:54, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
On a connected note, is it still the case that TCS marks the end of the broadcasting day by playing the National Anthem? This was certainly the case in the past, but now that some channels broadcast 24 hours a day perhaps the National Anthem has been dispensed with. Does this practice till apply to the non-24-hour channels such as Central? Perhaps someone could check which channels still broadcast the National Anthem, and we could mention this in the article. And was it ever the case that the National Anthem was played before news broadcasts, and in cinemas? I'm afraid this was quite before my time. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 14:22, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
TCS? That was over 5 years ago. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 14:54, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Oops, I think I meant MediaCorp. Anyway, I've added more information to the article, but could do with help with the following:
  • A Straits Times news article entitled "Majulah Singapura has been sung patriotically for 32 years" which is reproduced at http://ourstory.asia1.com.sg/independence/ref/zanthem.html is supposedly dated 9 March 1990, but this seems to be wrong as the article refers to another article dated 22 July. I suspect that the articles were published some time in 1991. Would someone with access to Factiva try to locate these articles?
  • The web page http://ourstory.asia1.com.sg/independence/ref/zanthem2.html includes an intriguing link at the bottom to an article entitled "5 or 6 anthems in the old days". Unfortunately, the link is dead. Again, would someone try to locate this article and any other information about national anthems prior to "Majulah Singapura"?
  • A source states that the national anthem was named after the motto that was part of the coat of arms of the City of Singapore that was displayed in the Victoria Theatre. I seem to recall the coat of arms on a wall of the second floor landing just outside the entrance to the stall seats of the theatre. Would someone please photograph it for inclusion in the article?
  • Should the official Mandarin and Tamil translations of the national anthem be included in the "Lyrics" section?
  • Please try and find a reference for this sentence in the "Salutes" section: "Persons in military or paramilitary uniforms generally to don their head dress and salute on the first note of the anthem, holding the salute till the last note."
  • I remember that Singaporeans were encouraged by the Government to hold clenched fists to their hearts when singing the national anthem or taking the national pledge some time in the 1990s or 2000s. Can anyone provide an accurate date and reference for this?
  • Can anyone think of any other uses of the national anthem? Was the anthem ever played in cinemas before films were screened? I know it was (and in some cases still is) played at the end of broadcasting hours on TV and radio; is or was it also played at the start?
The introductory paragraph also needs expansion. Please discuss the matter further on the article's talk page. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 04:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

How did a 5.8 kB article suddenly quintuple in size to 30 kB? The optimal length for GAs is 15-20 kB. Nevertheless, you have done a great job, Jacklee! With regards to your requests for assistance (and several points I have to make):

  • Not everyone is as interested in legal details as you (a lawyer) are. Trim the "Guidelines for use" section, please.
  • I don't think we should mention the parody lyrics that are sometimes sung in Singaporean schools. Here they are, for your amusement: "Mari kita ya So-and-so跳楼自杀变成roti prata! Hallelujah!他的妈妈是个gorilla!"
  • The Wayback Machine does not have an archived copy of "5 or 6 anthems in the old days".
  • Any SGpedian who is willing to take a photo of the Coat of Arms at the Victoria Theatre (which entails dealing with the security guards there) deserves an award for boldness (an euphism for recklessness) and support of the anti-fair use brigade.
  • Are the Mandarin and Tamil translations well known? Can you find a highly reliable source for them? As this is the English Wikipedia, others may oppose the inclusion of the Mandarin and Tamil translations, but I am all for having them in the article.

--J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 12:48, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, J.L.W.S. My responses:
  • OK, will see how I can trim the "Guidelines for use" section, though I think it is interesting and pertinent for readers to note that the national anthem is actually protected by law! Not many people know this.
  • Never heard the parody before! :-)
  • I don't see why it should be difficult to take a photograph of the City of Singapore coat of arms in Victoria Theatre. It is a public place, after all.
  • There are official Mandarin and Tamil translations, so I thought there shouldn't be any objection to including them in the article. However, looking at the article's history I realize that these translations were in fact originally in the article but were later taken out by Rifleman 82 on 27 November, so perhaps there needs to be a discussion as to whether they should be in the article in the first place.
— Cheers, JackLee –talk– 13:34, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
No, don't think non-English language text should be here unless it is necessary to expound on a point. I think it's already on wikisource. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 13:38, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
I wanted to have links to Wikisource, so we don't get a cluttered article that is full of lyrics. The format of the lyrics style is what I have done with other national anthem featured articles I wrote. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:40, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Instead of including the official Mandarin and Tamil translations of the lyrics in the article, add a link to said translations in the "External links" section. You could also add a sentence about the translations in the "Lyrics" section, using a link to the official translations as a reference. If the translated lyrics meet Wikisource's criteria for inclusion, transwiking them, as Zscout370 suggested, might be a good idea.
Keep the "Guidelines for use" section concise and stick to the most important details. That the national anthem is protected by law may be "interesting and pertinent", but the same cannot be said for some of the other information in the section. Similarly, information about the "should we change the language of the anthem" debate does not belong in the History section.
--J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 13:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
I think we should continue this discussion on the talk page of the article as it is useful to other editors working on the article whom may not be aware of the discussion here, so I've copied some of the above comments and replied to them there. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 19:15, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Meetup/Singapore 4

Well, I am back from the dead and I would like to inform you that there will be a meetup (CONFIRMED) on 29 December 2007, which is a Saturday. I hope this time it would be successful and it won't be cancelled again. Please indicate your interest here. Thanks. Terence (talk) 05:40, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


Singapore Meetup

Meetup 5
  • Status: Currently being planned
  • Date: 2008

Please indicate your interest at the meetup page.
v • d •  e

[edit] MediaCorp TV Drama Page Vandalism Alert

Deat all SGwikipedians,

Although I am not a member of SGwikipedians, I would like to alert you all of recent vandalism attacks on various MediaCorp TV drama pages. Since September, User:ColourWolf, along with his sockpuppets and Zombie IPs, have been vandalizing various MediaCorp TV Drama pages by inserting blatantly fake contents. The fake contents generally deals with superpowers and cartoon figures. I suspect the vandal is from Uncyclopedia.

So far, the pages affected are Holland V, Honour and Passion, Metamorphosis, and the separate pages of The Unbeatables series. I believe there are other pages that are affected.

I am not Singaporean. I just happened to catch one of these vandalism attacks after watching Honour and Passion on the internet. I hope the members of this WikiProject will kindly check all MediaCorp TV Drama pages, and erase any vandalism where it happened. Thank you. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 02:32, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing this vandalism to our attention. I have added the articles to my watchlist and will revert any vandalism I spot. Hopefully the SGpedian admins (Rifleman 82 and Mailer diablo) will not only watch the articles, but semi-protect them and block the vandals when necessary. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 15:52, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Pardon me, but despite everything, I was actually somewhat entertained while reading those stories! :D--Huaiwei (talk) 16:43, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Although funny, the vandalism must still be reverted. If you watch the articles, when they are vandalised, you can enjoy the stories and then revert them. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 09:42, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
ColourWolf is back. His sock: YangLiang, just attacked my userpage, and vows to further vandalize the pages. He apparently has many accounts that appears to be good-faith editors on the surface, but they will turn at some point to become vandals. Be careful! Arbiteroftruth (talk) 18:52, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA drive: Indians in Singapore

I think "Indians in Singapore" is a potential GA. It has been regularly edited in a constructive manner, mostly by anonymous IPs, and is now quite substantial. I think it needs a once-over (copyediting and Wikification) by an experienced SGpedian, and there may be an issue regarding some of the statistics used in the article that I raised on the talk page which has yet to be resolved, but after that it should be good to go. Anyone want to adopt this article? — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 15:15, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Although referencing is an important measure of GA potential, it is by no means the only one. Structure is also very important. Problems with structure usually suggest that the article is not "broad in its coverage" and may have POV issues as well. Moreover, dealing with structural problems often calls for a complete rewrite of the article. Reading FAs and GAs on ethnic groups should give you an idea how Indians in Singapore should be structured. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 15:51, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Didn't think there was anything particularly wrong with the structure of the article. Anyway, afraid I'm not volunteering to adopt this article – am too busy at the moment. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 02:18, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

I just thought you should know what I look for in a "potential GA". Besides referencing and structure, I also consider prose quality. However, knowing that most Singaporeans are not native speakers of English, my standards for prose are quite low. Since stylistic and image problems are normally easier to deal with, I usually overlook them when evaluating an article's GA potential. (Of course, such problems must be mentioned when nominating an article for the GA drive!)
Although the structure of Indians in Singapore is far from perfect, improving the structure should not be too difficult and is unlikely to require a complete rewrite. A greater concern is that the article is not written in summary style. Here is how I think the article should be structured:
  • A short Etymology section, discussing the definition of "Indian" (already present).
  • A long History section, detailing the migration of Indians to Singapore (can be created by merging several existing sections).
  • A short Demographics section, containing various statistics about Indians in Singapore, such as languages, religion, education and income (some information is already included).
  • A long Culture section, detailing Singaporean Indian culture, such as cuisine, music and literature (some information is already included).
  • A short Institutions section, discussing various Singaporean Indian institutions, such as self-help groups (more information is needed).
When I am free, I might help reorganise and improve the article. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 09:49, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

You might want to repost these comments on "Talk:Indians in Singapore", in case some of the regular editors there want to take them into account. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 14:20, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I have cross-posted my comments to Talk:Indians in Singapore per your suggestion. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 14:37, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I believe I'm one of the main contributors to this article so far. I confess I've not been very good at logging in each time I edit, or noting the changes in the edit summary - sorry if this makes things more difficult for other editors. J.L.W.S - I'm not a very active Wikipedian, but to the extent that I think I understand the issue of 'summary style', I do share your sentiments. One of my own concerns about the article is its length. I was hoping some kind soul with more experience could step in at this point and help to clean up and wikify the piece, but failing that, i have had another go. I think J.L.W.S.'s proposed structure makes sense, and have attemped to work towards that in recent edits. I have also created new pages to move some content there (e.g. History of Indians in Singapore), so that this page remains a summary. Am still in the process of doing this. Meanwhile would appreciate any further comments or ideas. I'm pleasantly surprised that Jackless thinks the article is a potential GA, and I'm hoping that with some new contributors, we could have a new Singapore GA to add to the list before too long. I'm posting this here as a follow up to the earlier posts, but will also cross post on Talk:Indians in Singapore. Ishouldbeworking (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 07:39, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Progress report

Since September, we have made remarkable progress; our GA tally has skyrocketed from 8 to 18! Of the 10 articles that achieved GA status during this period, 5 were primarily written by Aldwinteo and 4 were primarily written by Jacklee (the remaining one, Majulah Singapura, was primarily written by Zscout370 and has since been brought up to standards by Jacklee). Therefore, could we give a round of applause and barnstars to our prolific GA writers?

Kent Ridge Park and Selarang Barracks Incident (both primarily written by Aldwinteo) are currently GA nominees, while the GA nomination for Jacklee's Flag of Singapore is currently on hold. In addition, I recently nominated Odex's actions against file-sharing (primarily written by Mailer diablo) for GA; the nomination was placed on hold and subsequently failed due to the hold expiring. With 4 articles "nearly there", I am confident that we will reach 20 GAs very soon.

Once the 20-GA target is achieved, our next aim could be to double our GA tally from 20 to 40 in 12 months. If our prolific GA writers keep up the good work, that is not an unrealistic goal. I am currently working on Tampines Rovers FC and Homerun (film), and hope to become our next prolific GA writer. Some SGpedians, such as Chensiyuan, have written GAs; if we could convince them to contribute to Singapore-related articles, we would have more prolific GA writers.

Another cause for optimism is that there are several high-quality Singapore-related articles (such as Singapore, Singapore 2006 and Bonny Hicks) which have GA potential. We should endeavour to identify and improve such articles. Former SGpedian Sengkang has written over 60 DYKs; some of them might have GA potential. Perhaps an SGpedian could look through our 175 B-class articles to identify the needles in the haystack?

However, an analysis of our GAs suggests that Wikipedia's coverage of Singaporean topics is very uneven. Although we have many GAs pertaining to the history (thanks to Aldwinteo) and media (Fann Wong, I Not Stupid and Singapore Dreaming) of Singapore, some areas are poorly covered:

  • Considering how well Singaporean students do in international competitions and the controversies surrounding our education system, there really should be a Singapore-related GA under Education: Besides Education in Singapore, articles about educational policies that are unique to Singapore and top Singapoorean schools should be considered. As a Singaporean student myself, I will consider working on an education-related article in future.
  • There are no Singapore-related Sports GAs at the moment, but this is likely to change soon. Hopefully, Tampines Rovers FC will be the first GA on a football club located outside Europe or South America. Another article I intend to start working on next February is Fandi Ahmad. Since I know almost nothing about other sports, I invite other SGpedians to make Joscelin Yeo, Li Jiawei or Ronald Susilo GAs.
  • No articles about our Culture, which reflects our ethnic diversity and unique characteristics as a nation, have achieved GA status. What a shame. Readers will probably find GAs on our "national language" (Singlish), unique aspects of Singaporean culture (karung guni) or Singaporean cuisine (chilli crab) fascinating. Unfortunately, I doubt I can make such articles GAs.

--J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 16:28, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Marina Barrage

Hey, just a note to any SGpedians who want to check this out. The article says this project should be finished "by 2007" and it's 2008 now. Is the project finished? Anyone want to go over there and get a picture/more details for the article? Peace. Nesnad (talk) 16:11, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Chinese Translation of Singaporean Pages

I am currently translating some of the Singaporean-related articles here over to the Chinese Wikipedia. Due to syntax and other issues, translations will e a lengthy process. I was wondering if anyone can help me with this? I am currently translating The Golden Path, and I will move onto other pages in the future.. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 20:14, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] MC King

I haven't been editing on Wikipedia for awhile, but for those who haven't heard yet, Jimmy Nah has just passed away. Might be a good time to expand his article and clean it up, add a picture, tag it with the current event template, etc. I'd help out but I'm enlisting into NS in about two days, so I thought I'd just leave this heads-up here. -ryand 13:41, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

This raises an interesting point. As news articles on the websites of Singapore newspapers such as The Straits Times and Today are usually only accessible on-line for no longer than one week, and few people have access to Factiva, it is often difficult to find out biographical information about Singaporeans (birth and death dates and places, names of spouses and children, education, career highlights, etc) or facts about events relating to Singapore. In fact, obituary notices, which may state the birth and death dates of persons and the names of their family members, do not appear on-line at all. I wonder if it is feasible for interested editors who have access to the print versions of Singapore newspapers or who regularly read news websites to note down such key information, complete with references. One way might be to create an article like "2007 in Singapore" at the beginning of each year and have different editors interested in different topics constantly add information to it on topics of their choice. A few people could keep an eye out for deaths of significant persons, others could look out for sports news, and so on. In addition, facts and citations which deserve to be recorded somewhere for later retrieval but which are not presently in an encyclopedic form can be parked on a temporary page such as "2007 in Singapore/info". Anyone think this is a good idea? More importantly, is it something that can be sustained long-term? — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 05:47, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] SG Ratings without Summary

On the SGpedian Resources Ratings template, it stated:

(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

So why do goodwill contributors of SGpedian Resources randomly rate articles without giving a short summary to explain THEIR ratings. Then if they rate without giving a summary on why they rate the article so, then how can the authors of the page know what's wrong with the page??? Anti.Exams (talk) 04:28, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

This isn't a problem confined to the {{SG}} template. Very often, articles are rated through the use of other templates such as {{WPBiography}} without reasons being given. Personally, I don't think this is a major problem, as the rating just provides a rough idea of the quality of the article. (In fact, it may be a good idea for the {{SG}} template to be amended by deleting the sentence that you set out above.) If you would like specific comments on an article you have created or expanded, I'd suggest that you nominate it for peer review or put a note on this talk page requesting that another SGpedian comment on it. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 05:29, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Chinese chess players

This category name is highly confusing, since Chinese chess is the common English name for a different board game, and one would naturally expect it to be filled with players of Chinese chess. Any suggestions on renaming it? 70.51.9.174 (talk) 07:47, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

"Category:Chess players from China"? Why is this matter being discussed in this forum anyway – does it relate to Singapore in some way? — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 12:22, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Can category pages have disambiguation links at the top? If so, a disambiguation link to Category:Xiangqi players should suffice. I do not see how this query pertains to Singapore, except that two Singaporean chess players - Wu Shaobin and Ignatius Leong - are incorrectly listed in the category and should be removed from it. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 13:10, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Hmmm, don't think "xiangqi" (the Mandarin term for Chinese chess) is well known enough to most English speakers. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 22:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, I could be wrong about that. Just noticed that "Chinese Chess" redirects to "Xiangqi". — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 00:27, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm sure that Chinese Chess is the common English name for the game. Anyways, see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2008_January_5#Category:Chinese_chess_players for discussion. 70.55.87.75 (talk) 05:17, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lighthouses in Singapore

I've recently created a navbox {{Lighthouses in Singapore}}, which helps remove the bulky and less-maintainable "See also" lists. I've also moved some info to {{infobox lighthouse}}. This is really, not my field. Perhaps someone might be interested to write the main article, lighthouses in Singapore, and help out on the other articles? Also, an article/section request for Fullerton Light. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 14:37, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

If the article is written, the Pedra Branca lighthouse should be mentioned. Awaiting the decision on Pedra Branca!Archtransit (talk) 01:07, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Horsburgh Lighthouse already exists. May I also point out that the outcome of the case may actually have no bearing on the lighthouse ownership, as Singapore do operate several lighthouses on Malaysian soil.--Huaiwei (talk) 05:33, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User:Majulah Singapura blocked

I saw this today, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Majulah_Singapura . What a terrible thing to do, choosing such a username and then accused of being a sockpuppet of a bad user.

With admin Mailer Diablo retiring and Khaosworks who notes that he is not an active contributor, this leaves only Natalinsmpf (now La goutte de pluie) as the only S'porean admin. If I am promoted, I will be happy to assist any S'porean WPedian in need. Even if I'm not, I'm still willing to help. Archtransit (talk) 01:04, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps you should ask the blocking admin (Raul654) to explain his block. Since taking her O Levels in late 2006, La goutte de pluie has been relatively inactive; however, Rifleman 82 had a successful RFA in November 2007 and should be added to the list of Singaporean admins. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 09:55, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AFD on Singapore Airlines Flight 380

I would like to call on all members here to take a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Singapore Airlines Flight 380, where a horde of users seem intent to downplay an obvious significant moment in the history of flight, and to disregard Singapore Airlines as a major contributor to its significance. This is not a call for nationalist reactions, but a call for basic unbiased common sense to prevail. Thank you!--Huaiwei (talk) 14:39, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Our best friend is at it again, now shifting his attention to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emirates Airlines awards and accolades, where Singapore Airlines awards and accolades is also nominated. This is the second Afd nomination by the same fella with regards to the SQ article.--Huaiwei (talk) 19:18, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I am happy to inform that Singapore Airlines Flight 380 has survived the AfD. However, I call on the community's help to bring it up to at least a GA standard in time to come. Thank you!--Huaiwei (talk) 16:12, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disruptive renomination exercise to delist existing GA/FA articles

Dear folks, I wld like to call upon your urgent attention to monitor our hard-earned GA/FAs carefully in order to pre-empt any potential disruptive trolls/anons (usually with ultra-nationalistic agenda & POV) and their sympathetic (or misguided) accomplices. Fyi, Singapore was one of the recent 'victims' along with countries such as Lithuania, Argentina, Morocco, Papua New Guinea etc under the official banner "to raise and uphold the quality of Good articles" (See my earlier comment here). A few recent high-profile SG-related articles were caught in an edit war with insults thrown on Singapore & fellow SGpedians too. Fearing that more SG GAs may be degraded & subsequently delisted thru' such acts, I stepped in earlier to issue a final warning to the user which spared our SG articles from his attacks for the time being. Instead of lying low & cleaning up his acts later, the user still continue his disruptive acts/reverts/racist remarks on other articles & its contributors such as Russia, United States, Indonesia, PISA & many more while promoting Macau for FAC. He was blocked recently and currently being reported again for his recalcitrant ways at this page. Also more details on his talkpage too at 1 2 3. Do be on the look-out for such trolls & any of their spill-over effect during your patrols in future. -- Aldwinteo (talk) 08:02, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I am not seeing much of this at my end, either on the SG articles I worked on to pass GA or at the Belarusian articles that are at the FA/GA standard. However, I will keep my eyes out. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 10:23, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Disruptive users have always been an issue to be tackled with here, which for some reason happens to be on Singapore-related articles. It may be due to Singapore's unique situation on the global arena as a rather controversial entity, thus inviting the attention of some individuals who cast a suspicious eye on anything positive concerning this country. Singaporeans who attempt to counter these activities directly can be deemed to be brainwashed "government lackeys", thus attracting even more intense reactions, often degenerating into ridiculous mud-slinging which can drag on for years. This is the issue that Singaporeans will always have to face (even in real life), but I feel the best long-term response may be to simply strive hard to write in a well-balanced manner beyond what we may be conditioned to write on as per the spirit of NPOV. It may not be easy (my own difficulties on Singapore Airlines related articles is one great example. Just see the preceding section for a life demonstration), but once that is achieved, there is simply little disruptive editors can do.--Huaiwei (talk) 19:11, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
I invite you to apply Ockham's Razor to the following alternative explanations:
  1. There is a vast, shadowy, multinational conspiracy of editors which exists solely to suppress and pervert True(tm) information about Singapore in general and your edits in particular.
  2. Every now and then, you're wrong.
I await your well-balanced, non-mud-slinging reply in the spirit of NPOV. Jpatokal (talk) 02:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
And the answer is as demonstrated herein: [5]. Nationalism at its finest, no less?--Huaiwei (talk) 10:08, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Please assume good faith, Aldwinteo and Huaiwei. Although Coloane has a history of disruption on Singapore-related articles, the GA reassessment request he filed for Singapore would not have closed as "delist" had the article met the GA criteria. Not everyone who proposes the delisting of Singapore-related GAs, whether through a GA reassessment request or one of the GA sweeps, is motivated by "ultra-nationalistic agenda & POV". For example, last week, Canadian Paul, an experienced GA reviewer, sweeped through the "Actors, models, performers and celebrities" category of GAs and placed Fann Wong on hold, citing several minor concerns. I believe that he hopes the article will be improved so it can keep its GA status. Since Fann Wong is "nearly there", why not address the issues? --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 15:05, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
I do not believe Aldwinteo is raising this issue against anyone reviewing a Singapore-related FA or GA as you are suggesting. While all of us would like to assume good faith, bad faith editors do abound once in a while, and if left unchecked, can leave a trail of damage which may go unnoticed. It is simply uncommon for a user as new as Coloane to call for a GA review that early in his editing career (this was his 20th edit, in fact), and I doubt it is coincidental that condescending and insulting remarks are made by the same individual against an entire nationality. It was only through my tussles with him in one article did I discover his colourful editing history, which has not only sparked disputes with Singaporeans, but also with many other users. Perhaps Aldwinteo's tone may be a tad extreme, but I do not see it as an issue to warn others of potentially disruptive editors.--Huaiwei (talk) 16:13, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Except for hardcore vandals & trolls, I've always assume good faith as I rarely post comments or intervene all these while as I'm a Exopedianist in Wikipedia. I'm fully aware & familiar with the procedures, the going-ons & discussions of the respective WikiProject groups, i.e. GAC/FAC/GAR/FAR/GA/FA sweep groups due to my involvement in the GA project which I undertook on my own initiative for SGpedia since Sep 2007, which the SGpedian community have credited me for earlier. I share my concern here earlier when I noticed increasing cases or repeated users that abuse or 'game the system' for selfish reasons, revenge or whatever cause (Nationalistic/POV/Anti-'certain group/country' etc), that disrupts the Wiki community or degrade the quality of the articles at the expense of good faith & hard work of past & existing contributors. Besides the abovementioned case, there're a few similar cases which I did not mentioned that were dealt with earlier or currently been reported at the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents now. u can check out the cases or its archives there and at the GA/FA sweeps for details. I hope fellow SGpedians do read & understand my msg in the proper context. On this note, I end my conversation here. -- Aldwinteo (talk) 18:56, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blog (SGpedia)

Greetings, there is a blog to share your views about Wikipedia with SGpedians', notifications of community meets, and also to post kopitiam topics (not related to Wiki, anything you like). Here, you can post anything you like. If you wish to write on the blog, please let me know. The blog is semi-private, so if you want to read/write, do email me. All are welcome to post and read. Terence (talk) 07:52, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] MAJOR PROBLEM WITH SINGAPOREAN ARTS AND ENTERTAINMENT PAGES

Tonight, vandal ColourWolf's proxies struck again, vandalizing The Golden Path (drama), along with my user talkpage. After I defeated this wave of attacks, I have checked other pages that I suspect was hit in the vandalism attack, and it appears that there are even more pages that are vandalized. Liang Po Po: The Movie's page had a very fake and phony synopsis on it for months, and no one took notice.

I am urging you all to please take a look at ALL Singaporean arts and entertainment pages for factual errors. ColourWolf's reign of terror has gone on long enough, and SGpedians need to rise to the challenge, and truly make pages on Singaporean issues truthful. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 08:17, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

ColourRedux, apparently a sock puppet of ColourWolf, posted a reply here, but his post was reverted by Chensiyuan. In the post, he claimed that he has given up, but recommends we delete articles on Channel 8 dramas. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 03:22, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
J.L.W.S., we cannot bow to these wikiterrorists! It is absolutely deprived morally, as well as being unashamedly corrupt! Arbiteroftruth (talk) 07:41, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello. Whether I am ColourWolf or not doesn't matter. What matters is that the vast majority of the Mediacorp dramas are so obscure that it gives people the chance to introduce fake information without gathering much attention. In fact, there are still Singapore articles that still have remnants of ColourWolf's edits. Inaccuracies are still a high in Singapore articles.Nosey Fellow (talk) 10:21, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Arbiteroftruth, I think you misunderstood my post. I merely summarised and paraphrased his reply, but did not state whether I agree or disagree with him. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 02:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] MRT articles containing excessive and unencyclopedic detail

Upon perusing some MRT station articles, I found that someone has taken it upon themselves to list every single train delay or accident in MRT articles, even where the "incident" in question is simply a 20 minute delay. Here is the worst example I have seen, in Farrer Park MRT Station:

"On the evening of 25 December 2007, Some technical difficulties were experienced along the North East Line caused delays for train services. A member of the public who was affected by the delay said she waited for at least 20 minutes for the train at the station."

I feel that this information is unencyclopedic and also fails Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Delays and suicides etc. happen on all train systems. As far as I know, we don't make a habit of mentioning every single one in our other train system articles. - Mark 00:18, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Only major incidents should be noted. Mark, I think you're justified in going ahead and removing the unencyclopedic information. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 00:31, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Agree. Only incidents like that of one many many years ago when 2 trains collided are noteworthy. IMO, even suicide cases are not encyclopedic enough to be mentioned. - oahiyeel talk 03:07, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, should change to lists like List of rail accidents in the United Kingdom - Fernvale (talk) 13:53, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Although I have a bone to pick with deletionists who think "Singaporean" means "non-notable", I certainly do not want Singapore-cruft to remain on Wikipedia. Are MRT stations, local drama serials, etc. really notable? If so, we need to develop guidelines on how such articles should be structured and what information should (and should not) be included. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 14:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I'd say MRT stations sure are notable, just based upon the fact that just about every other train station in the world has an article already. As for the local dramas, assuming they are shown on Channel 5 or 8 or similar, then they would reach a large audience and therefore should satisfy the notability requirement. - Mark 15:36, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm not a train enthusiast, but I agree that there are aspects of MRT and LRT stations which make them notable, including their history, architecture and the part they play in the MRT network as a whole. I notice there are articles about present and former London Underground stations, for instance. As for local drama serials, I don't see why these shouldn't be notable. Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia, so there's no reason why articles about niche subjects shouldn't be included for people wanting to find out more about them. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 15:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
By the way, note that there is a related discussion above at #MRT Accidents wiki-worthy?. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 13:55, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
If they are notable, we should develop guidelines for such articles, covering how they should be structured, what information should (and should not) be included and where to get reliable sources for them (remember, reliable sources establish notability). --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 03:32, 8 February 2008 (UTC)


I hope this discussion doesn't die out like the previous one. Here's a set of guidelines that I have come up with:
  • Introduction: name, station number, location
  • History: opening date of each line, major incidents (mock terrorist exercise, train collisions, terrorist threats, bomb hoaxes)
  • Future: connections, extensions
  • Prominent extras: e.g. Bishan (superstition), Art in Transit, other relevant info that makes the station stand out (and by that I don't mean the type of info listed below)
  • A short list of nearby prominent structures (shopping centres, major buildings, major attractions). Not supermarkets, pri/sec schools or jcs, food outlets, libraries
  • Bus connections (this section needs to be standardized throughout all the articles)
  • Locator map
  • s-rail template (before and after stations)
  • Finally, an infobox needs to be drawn up to summarise all the information: name, alphanumeric codes, a picture of the station, URA planning area, operator, opening dates, associated bus interchange, no. of platforms, no. of exits. Any other related info is welcome.
These are sections that I think we generally agree should not be in the articles:
  • Slips, falls, trips, pushes and suicides
  • Trains stopping, stuttering or failing
  • STOMP articles - which is pretty much tabloid news
  • First train, last train
  • Shops and facilities within the station
Some people feel that more of the above info is better, but they are useless. It's just unnecessary padding to make the article seem large. Feel free to discuss the above. 리지강.wa.au talk 15:15, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fann Wong has lost its GA status

On 8 January 2008, Canadian Paul re-reviewed Fann Wong as part of the GA sweeps and placed the article on hold, citing several issues with prose, referencing and the lead. The primary contributors did not address the issues; Ryan-D is currently serving his National Service while Voda voda appears to have left Wikipedia. As a result, the article was delisted after the seven-day hold period elapsed.

Please note that unlike the disruptive Coloane, Canadian Paul is an experienced GA reviewer and I will assume good faith, that he is motivated by a desire to improve the article, rather than "ultra-nationalistic agenda & POV". Since the issues are relatively minor and easy to address, I nominated Fann Wong for the GA drive and adopted it. Could others adopt the article and collaborate with me to address the issues, so that Fann Wong can become a GA again?

--J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 03:59, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

For the benefit of those who are ignorant on GA sweeps & GAR, the abovementioned reviewer is one of the 17 official GA sweepers as per this taskforce list only. To become one is by invitation only as extended by any member of this taskforce: "only experienced reviewers who are established (trusted) within the project should participate in this initial sweep". (I was approached by a senior GA reviewer to help out with the WP:GAN backlog but I politely turned down his invitation recently). Also, an official GA sweeper adheres strictly to a Code of Conduct wrt their conduct & assessment. Otherwise, anyone not on this taskforce who delisted or nominate any existing GA articles straight away without any due process or claims to be a GA sweeper, has to 'show cause' or practise due diligence by checking on such individuals, their history log profile or post an inquiry to alert the bonafide folks at the GA sweep talkpage. Same goes for any imminent FA sweeps too. Fyi, the disruptor u mentioned still continues with his exploits & personal attacks until he was stonewalled by a group of admins recently at the U2 FAC (his caustic remarks were later removed by admin), & was referred promptly for community ban at ANI once again. His case is still pending now but he chooses to 'retire' suddenly a day after his case was being brought up.[6] A proxy appears soon after on the ANI page to defend his actions despite the weight of evidence & possible COI earlier. -- Aldwinteo (talk) 16:57, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
I think we should stop focusing on Coloane. Instead, we should try to improve Fann Wong by addressing Canadian Paul's concerns. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 14:59, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deleted copyvios

Today I deleted nine articles, all about Singaporean hospitals or libraries, which were all copyright violations. All the revisions of these articles were tainted by the copyright violations. I would appreciate people more familiar with the subjects considering if they are notable and, if so, writing stubs for them.

The list of articles which I deleted are as follows:

  • Ang Mo Kio - Thye Hua Kwan Hospital
  • St Luke's Hospital, Singapore
  • Adam Road Hospital
  • Jurong West Community Library
  • Bedok Community Library
  • Toa Payoh Community Library
  • Queenstown Community Library
  • Bukit Merah Community Library
  • Marine Parade Community Library

I found them when I noticed a user had removed a bot-added copyvio notice from a page he or she created, and investigated further. The reason I did not re-create the articles myself at this stage is because I am unfamiliar with whether individual public libraries are considered sufficiently notable to have an article for each. - Mark 10:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 新年快乐，恭喜发财，万事如意，身体健康，学业进步！

Chinese New Year is here again! Have a pair of Mandarin oranges, everybody! However, since I am not married, I cannot give you guys hongbaos. May the Year of the Rat see SGpedians write more GAs!

Speaking of GAs, would anyone like to collaborate with me on Fann Wong or Odex's actions against file-sharing? Both articles have considerable GA potential. All they need is a little polishing, which I am willing to do, as long as others will pitch in and help.

--J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 03:59, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Gongxifacai! Arbiteroftruth (talk) 03:22, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] National Day celebrations on Wikipedia

In a discussion I started on National Day last year, I suggested that "we try to get a DYK (or even FA) on the main page on 9 August [2008]". This suggestion inspired me to develop a proposal, detailed below, for comprehensive National Day celebrations on Wikipedia. You may consider this proposal premature, as it is only February, but writing FAs and GAs requires months of dedicated effort. Did you know...that those who perform in the National Day Parade have been known to start rehearsing nine months in advance?

The celebrations will entail:

  • Having Singapore, or an article about something that is relevant to our national pride, as the main page FA on 9 August. "Relevant to our national pride" should be broadly defined; examples of things that are "relevant to our national pride" include, but are not limited to, national symbols, sportsmen or other people who have done our country proud, unique aspects of our history or culture and unique achievements of the Little Red Dot. Note that 9 August is the date the FA appears on the main page, not the date it passes FAC. The article should pass FAC at least two weeks in advance or Raul654 is unlikely to entertain our request to feature it on the main page on 9 August.
  • Two Singapore-related articles attaining GA status on 9 August. As a member of WikiProject Good Articles, I can arrange with members of the project to have both articles nominated and reviewed on 9 August. In fact, I would be happy to write one or both GAs, as well as assist any SGpedian writing a GA for our National Day celebrations.
  • Each of the four DYK refreshments on 9 August containing an entry from a Singapore-related article. All articles should be chosen in advance, with considerable research being done before the articles are written on 5 August. I might write at least one of the DYK articles.
  • Creating a section on this talk page on 9 August, for everyone to wish the Lion City a happy 43rd birthday and have some friendly banter.

--J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 14:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, J.L.W.S. No, February is not too early to start thinking about a project like this. It does sound interesting. Have you checked if it is Wikipedia policy in the first place to permit having so many elements relating to the same country appear on the home page on the same day? I don't want to be a wet blanket, but I'm just wondering if it is at all possible. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 23:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
I do not think there is any policy against having a Singapore-related FA and Singapore-related DYK on the main page at the same time (GAs do not appear on the main page, unfortunately). The DYK rules state: "No DYK installment should have more than two entries relating to one country, topic, or issue, and no more than one is even better." In my opinion, having one entry from a Singapore-related article in each refreshment is fine. However, if there is sufficient support for this proposal, I will seek approval from "Upstairs", by posting on relevant policy/process talk pages. If Upstairs says cannot, then cannot lor.
For this to be a success, we need SGpedians to write the FA, GAs and DYK articles. Any volunteers? SGpedian legend Aldwinteo, with 7 Singapore-related GAs to his name, appears to have retired, but Jacklee, the primary contributor to 5 Singapore-related GAs, is still active. There are others, such as Chensiyuan, who are prolific GA (and even FA) writers, but unfortunately do not contribute to Singapore-related articles; they should be invited to be part of this. As I mentioned above, I will write one of the DYK articles and one or both GAs.
--J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 02:12, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Due to personal commitments & travels, I'm currently semi-retired since Nov 2007 but still assisting the community as a 'Watchman' in countering vandals, trolls or POV pushers whenever possible. I may embark on the GA project once again after I've fully settled back in S'pore a few months later. Fyi, u folks can approach a SGpedian newbie, Marcuslim (contributions) another history/heritage writer like me, to contribute more DYKs as part of this on-going DYK/GA drive. u can check out one of his latest writings - Chua Ek Kay created on Feb 14 (Do touch-up & nominate it for DYK if nec). I'm currently guiding him along the way but do appreciate u folks to advise or assist him whenever necessary so that we cld have a bigger pool of DYK/GA writers instead of the same old tired faces now. -- Aldwinteo (talk) 03:05, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Hildaknight asked me to commonet on this. I'll *tentatively* say I have no objections to have a Singapore-related FA while no more than one DYK at a time are also Singapore related. Raul654 (talk) 02:42, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Here's another proposal for the National Day 2008 celebrations: jazzing up the SGpedians' notice board. I've been tinkering with a new home page on and off for a while. Have a look at what I've done so far at Wikipedia:SGpedians' notice board/underconstruction. Suggestions for improving it are welcome below, as well as help with fixing the large gap in the right panel – I can't figure out how to get rid of it! — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 01:28, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Singapore's diplomatic representation

There is an error in the Wikipedia list as it does not include Singapore's Embassy in Bangkok. More generally, I'd like to ask why Singapore has such very limited representation overseas. It is a wealthy country and can afford it. For example, according to the Wikipedia list, there is no representation at all in South or Central America, while the representation in Asia omits both Pakistan and Sri Lanka. Maybe the list is in error. Perhaps the relevant Ministry can fix it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.8.76.152 (talk) 03:21, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] NUS research on Wikipedians

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am an honors undergraduate from National University of Singapore doing a thesis on motivations to contribute to Wikipedia. Please help me out by taking part in this online survey, https://esurvey.nus.edu.sg/onlinesurvey/wikipedia_survey.htm.

The approximate time to complete this survey is 10 minutes. Please be assured that your responses will be kept strictly confidential and only be restricted within the use of my academia. Your help will be deeply appreciated. Thanks a million!

Yours sincerely, MeiHui

Participant Information Sheet

A study on knowledge-sharing motivations in Wikipedia.

Principal investigator: Dr. Cho Hichang Organization: National University of Singapore, Arts and Social Sciences Department, Communications and New Media Department. Email add: cnmch@nus.edu.sg

Co-investigator: Chen MeiHui Organization: National University of Singapore, Arts and Social Sciences Department, Communications and New Media Department. Email add: u0400730@nus.edu.sg

Purpose of research

The aim of the study is to study the motivations behind contributing to Wikipedia.

You are invited to participate in a research. This information sheet provides you with information about the research. The Principal Investigator (the research doctor or person in charge of this research) or his/her representative will answer all of your questions about this research. Read the information below and email the Co-investigator, Chen MeiHui, at u0400730@nus.edu.sg any questions about anything you don’t understand before deciding whether or not to take part.

Eligible participants and duration of research

Only members registered under Wikipedia between the ages of 21 to 70 are allowed to take part in the online survey. The survey link will be send randomly to them once in the period between February and March. The members will be contacted via their Wikipedia email accounts.

Approximate number of participants.

The number of participants is targeted at approximately 200.

What will be done in this research

The data you indicate in the survey forms will be used solely in the research. The data will be analyzed as statistics and quotes.

Protection of Privacy & Integrity of Data

Identifiable information will never be used as the survey is conducted anonymously. The data the respondent provided in the surveys will be used strictly for our academic purposes. As such, there will be strong protection of privacy and integrity of the data.

Risks to participants An online survey will be disseminated to the participants. There are no risks associated with the participation in this research.

What are the possible benefits to me and the others? There are no monetary or direct benefits to the participants of the online survey. However, the responses collected will contribute to academic research. The results of the online survey will help us to understand what factors motivate members of Wikipedia as well as the factors that inhibit others from contributing. These will have implications on what can be done to increase contribution from the Wikipedians as contributions from members will be pivotal to the success of a user-generated content type of virtual community (i.e. Wikipedia).

Refusal to participate in this research Your decision to participate in this research is voluntary and completely up to you. You can refuse to participate in this research. Contact Details for further enquiries

Please contact the Co-investigator, Chen MeiHui at email u0400730@nus.edu.sg for all research-related queries.

For an independent opinion regarding the research and the rights of research participants, you may contact a staff member of the National University of Singapore Institutional Review Board (Attn: Mr Chan Tuck Wai, at telephone 65161234 or email at irb@nus.edu.sg). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Woaikandianshi (talk • contribs) 16:19, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Merger proposal

I have proposed SPH MediaWorks Channel U‎ to be merged into MediaCorp TV Channel U‎. Please leave your comments at the talk page! - oahiyeel talk 19:06, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New home page

Here's another proposal for the National Day 2008 celebrations: jazzing up the SGpedians' notice board. I've been tinkering with a new home page on and off for a while. Have a look at what I've done so far at Wikipedia:SGpedians' notice board/underconstruction. Suggestions for improving it are welcome below, as well as help with fixing the large gap in the right panel – I can't figure out how to get rid of it! — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 01:29, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm, isn't anyone interested in this at all? — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 14:11, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea. However, what are the goals of the new design? Facilitating collaboration? Attracting new SGpedians? Answering that question will help you make various decisions regarding structure and aesthetics. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 11:17, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I think the current notice board looks tired and needs freshening up. Having a revamped home page that looks more professional may certainly attract more editors to sign up as SGpedians. I'm not sure, though, that merely changing the way the home page looks will facilitate collaboration, so I wouldn't put that down as one of the goals. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 13:14, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tropical Storm Vamei GA Sweeps Review: On Hold

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria and I'm specifically going over all of the "Meteorology and atmospheric sciences" articles. I have reviewed Tropical Storm Vamei and believe the article currently meets the majority of the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. I have left this message at this WikiProject's talk page so that any interested members can assist in helping the article keep its GA status. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, and I'll leave the article on hold for seven days for them to be fixed. I have left messages on the talk pages of the main contributors of the article along with other WikiProjects. Please consider helping address the several points that I listed on the talk page of the article, which shouldn't take too long to fix if multiple editors assist in the workload. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 04:21, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

SGpedians, please give a round of applause to Hurricanehink. He did a great job addressing all of Nehrams2020's issues. As a result, Tropical Storm Vamei will retain its GA status. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 08:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nanyang MBA

This article currently reads like an advertisement! Could someone with sufficient knowledge help to edit it appropriately. Also, it has been suggested for merger into the Nanyang Technological University article, or renamed into a more appropriate title i.e. Nanyang Business School. - oahiyeel talk 03:05, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] NS logo.jpg

Someone please see Talk:Serangoon_MRT_Station on the "fair use message" on Image:NS logo.jpg. I don't really know Wikipedia well enough to address this. Thanks! --unkx80 (talk) 18:42, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

A fair-use justification has already been added to Image:NS logo.jpg by another editor. Have a look at the image description page to see how to do so for future reference. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 19:00, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright of Straits Times and other SPH publications

Dear all, it has come to my attention that the usage of images from Straits Times electronic copy, became quite a concern with some users, and they've shared their kind concerns with me. While I take the lead from a reply by ST journalist Sandra leong on copyright infringement, and kindly being posted on Tomorrow.sg's website at http://tomorrow.sg/archives/2006/07/30/straits_times_infringes_on_copyr.html, I would still like to refer to the kind opinions of fellow Sgpedians who have been here longer than I did, and shed some light on this issue. As a fellow person passionate about Singapore issues, I do not wish to continue to ruffle feathers of other users (apologetically done so to the kind users who have shared their initial concerns with me) With that, I hope to hear the views of other Sgpedians here. Thank you! :) -- Marcuslim (talk) 03:31, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Marcus. As you're aware I've been in conversation with you on the topic. For the benefit of other SGpedians, let me expand on what I've said on the matter.
  • The discussion on Tomorrow.sg related to concerns that people had over The Straits Times making use of photographs from websites without the consent of or even attributing the authors. Journalist Sandra Leong's response was that no issue of privacy was involved as there is no privacy law in Singapore.
  • What Ms Leong said was true, and therefore no persons featured in the photographs (or their personal representatives, if they are deceased) have a legal claim for breach of privacy.
  • However, Ms Leong conveniently sidestepped the issue of copyright, which is distinct from privacy law. (This point was raised by several people who participated in the Tomorrow.sg discussion.) There most certainly are copyright laws in Singapore which prohibit the reproduction of copyrighted images without consent: see the Copyright Act (Cap. 63, 2006 Rev. Ed.).
  • Even if The Straits Times (or any other publisher) has used images in breach of copyright, this does not give any of us a right to copy those images from The Straits Times and reuse them on Wikipedia. That is still a breach of copyright and contrary to Wikipedia policy, even if the copyright owner is unknown.
  • The only ways that a copyrighted image can legitimately be used on Wikipedia are (1) if permission is sought from the copyright owner for the image to be licensed to Wikipedia under a free licence, or (2) an appropriate fair-use justification is provided for each use of the image in an article. If an image is used in three articles, then three separate fair-use justifications have to be provided: see, for instance, "Image:Coxford Singlish Dictionary.jpg". What constitutes an "appropriate" fair-use justification is difficult to say – it depends very much on the particular administrator assessing it. In general, the justification has to establish the importance of the image to the article and to explain why the copyrighted image cannot be replaced by a free alternative (perhaps because it is of a deceased person, captures an unrepeatable historical moment that is important to the article, or because it is unique – logos and book covers, for instance).
  • Altering a copyrighted image by reducing it in size or resolution or by cropping it does not give one a copyright in the altered image. The altered image is regarded as a derivative work of the original image and is still subject to the original copyright. Therefore, altered images should not be uploaded to Wikipedia under GFDL or Creative Commons licences. As mentioned previously, such images can only be used if permission is sought or if fair-use justifications are provided.
I think I've correctly understood the law and Wikipedia's policies on the matter, but am happy to hear any other views on the matter. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 13:23, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
I believe that's more or less correct, but one important nitpick: Wikipedia is run under US jurisdiction and can thus claim fair use under US law, but the Straits Jacket is in Singapore and thus subject to Sing copyright law. However, the Copyright Act sec. 35-37 do provide for "fair dealing". It's quite similar, but note this (emphasis mine):
Fair dealing for purpose of reporting current events
37. A fair dealing with a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work, or with an adaptation of a literary, dramatic or musical work, shall not constitute an infringement of the copyright in the work if it is for the purpose of, or is associated with, the reporting of current events —
(a) in a newspaper, magazine or similar periodical and a sufficient acknowledgment of the work is made
So yes, the ST can use others' work for reporting on current events, but only if they credit the author.
In your shoes, I'd take the ST to the Small Claims Tribunal: it's an open-and-shut case as far as the law is concerned, and their legal might is of no use there. Jpatokal (talk) 14:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I agree that The Straits Times can rely on the defence of fair dealing for reporting current events, provided they properly acknowledge the works that they reproduce. (By the way, claims for breach of copyright can't be brought before a small claims tribunal. The jurisdiction of such tribunals is limited to claims relating to disputes arising from contracts for the sale of goods or the provision of services, claims in tort in respect of damage caused to property, and claims relating to disputes arising from contracts for the lease of residential premises not exceeding two years: Small Claims Tribunals Act (Cap. 308, 1998 Rev. Ed.), section 5(1).) The essence of my previous message, though, is that whether or not The Straits Times abides by the law, the use of images on Wikipedia needs to comply with Wikipedia policy. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 17:43, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Do you have an explicit reference for copyright being excluded? I don't see why "any claim in tort in respect of damage caused to any property" would not apply to intellectual property as well and the damage caused to the property owner by unauthorized reproduction. Jpatokal (talk) 03:16, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Hmmm, interesting. You may well be right. Neither "tort" nor "property" is defined in the Act, and a checklist stated on the Small Claims Tribunals website does not indicate that intellectual property claims are definitely excluded from the jurisdiction of the tribunals. I'm not aware of any case that has decided the matter one way or another. By the way, the website also indicates that the current monetary limit for small claims is $10,000 ($20,000 by agreement), and not $30,000 as Marcus indicated. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 13:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
To my understanding about copyrights from a layperson's point of view, the whole purpose of this copyright law is to protect the creator's rights from any other commercial sales / profiteering by other people who have, benefitted non-commercially as a result of this production by the creator. And if there need be to extract / cite information from its original source, we do need to provide credits and copyright information with of its creators.
To bring in Small Claims, and other jurisdiction, would mean there is profiteering involved in this case, doesn't it? And yes, I agree with Jack that such matters doesn't reach Small Claims Tribunals as they're more involved with ligitations involving commercial sales conflicts, and with items not more than SGD $30,000. In the case of our "Wiki-peding", wouldn't it suffice to jz simply accredit the source and owner of the photos, i.e. to the Singapore Press Holdings, for any ST FILE PHOTOS reproduced on Straits Times?Thanks for taking time to shed light on laws, Jacklee -- Marcuslim (talk) 02:28, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Marcus. You're right about the general purpose of copyright law. However, when using copyrighted images on Wikipedia where permission of the copyright owner has not been obtained, it is not enough just to provide the source and copyright owner. "Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline" needs to be complied with. As I mentioned, this guideline requires a detailed fair-use rationale to be provided for each article that the image is used in. It is also necessary to include a suitable copyright tag on the image description page. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 03:02, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Jack, thanks for the new insight. I now appreciate your reasonings with clearer picture, knowing now it's not so much that the practice of copyright is in question, but it is more about application of our conducts when applying this copyright, and applying it that complies with Wiki's laws.
I have also spoken to a friend about this, and my friend sheds light that it may be difficult to obtain permissions from SPH, as she understands there is no authority that looks into rights and permissions on a user level, i.e. you can email a letter to them but nobody will reply. I did that too, and indeed this is the case. So how shall we get around this issue? -- Marcuslim (talk) 12:32, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Here's what I would suggest:
  1. See if you can find a free image that can be used in the article. Check the Wikimedia Commons and Flickr.com (images that are tagged with the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) and Attribution-ShareAlike (CC-BY-SA) licences can be imported to the Commons using a tool called Flinfo). Or can an old image that is out of copyright be used?
  2. Failing that, consider who you can contact to try and obtain permission for an image to be licensed to Wikipedia. Often, the owner of a website on which an image appears is the person to contact. If the photograph that you wish to use is of an individual, does he or she have an agent, manager or publicist? What about the company or organization that the person owns or works for? See "Wikipedia:Example requests for permission" and "commons:Email templates" for sample e-mails that you can use. I've had some success with this before.
  3. Otherwise, consider whether the article really needs to have the particular non-free image that you wish to include. If so, as I mentioned above, upload the image and provide a detailed fair-use rationale complying with "Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline" for each article that the image is used in, and a suitable copyright tag on the image description page. What you must do is explain why the image is important to the article and why the copyrighted image cannot be replaced by a free alternative (perhaps because it is of a deceased person, captures an unrepeatable historical moment that is important to the article, or because it is unique – logos and book covers, for instance). For an example, see "Image:Coxford Singlish Dictionary.jpg". However, be aware that non-free images uploaded with fair-use justifications may be deleted by administrators if they do not feel that fair use of the images has been made out.
I hope that helps. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 13:38, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Your safest option is not to use any images, lest you get into trouble with the anti-fair use brigade. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 15:21, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I've made some progress on finding out more about copyrights from SPH, and basically their answer is no money no licence. You have to pay - and pay quite a large amount - for the right to publish any of their images online for mass viewing.
SPH's recently launched search engine [[7]] will clearly indicate the prices and their usage rights, when you use their image search engines. Don't worry - searching is free. Otherwise, you may contact the following person who's in charge of access to archived SPH articles or to request copyright permission.
Sebastian Chow
Senior Manager
Database & Newslink
New Media - Internet Business Unit
Marketing
Singapore Press Holdings Limited
Tel : 65 3192060
E-mail: [8]
I hope this discussion has been useful, and continue to be for all Sgpedians with questions on copyrights in SPH. Many thanks to Jack and all users who've contributed to the discussion. Cheers --Marcuslim (talk) 01:31, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] National Day main page FA discussion

Last month, I posted a proposal for comprehensive National Day celebrations on Wikipedia, which Jacklee described as "interesting". The most challenging task in the proposal would be "having Singapore, or an article about something that is relevant to our national pride, as the main page FA on 9 August". Therefore, we should start selecting, and collaborating on, an article as early as we can.

I have identified four articles which are of high quality and are about something "relevant to our national pride". All we need is an SGpedian who is willing to improve one of these articles to FA status:

  • Singapore - This article has improved considerably since it lost GA status in July last year. It is now very well-referenced, although rather messy. Topic-wise, this article is my first choice.
  • Flag of Singapore - A national symbol is definitely "relevant to our national pride". Moreover, the primary contributor, Jacklee, is still active and has previously written an FA (about British author Richard Hakluyt). All that prevents this article from attaining GA status is a rather weak lead section and several other sections not being written in summary style. Once the article becomes a GA, FA status should not be too far away.
  • Singapore Changi Airport - The success of Changi Airport and the awards it has won make it "relevant to our national pride". Unfortunately, since attaining GA status, the article has been the subject of several content disputes of varying severity; in addition, several sections are marked as short and requiring expansion.
  • History of Singapore - Currently a GA and rated A-class. Apart from a copy-edit, not much is needed to get it to FA status.

--J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 15:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Beef chow fun ban?

I heard from various sources that the Singaporean Government bans Beef chow fun from being cooked within the country, due to its unhealthy properties, and that big punishment (jail, my friend said death penalty, but I doubt it for such a "trivial crime") awaits for those who eat of make this dish. Are runors of a ban true, and if it is, is the government still enforcing it? Arbiteroftruth (talk) 22:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it's still illegal, but the punishment for the offence is that you get force-fed vegetables and made to serve another three years of national service so that you get fit and healthy again. ;-) — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 01:37, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

My local coffeeshop says no, they still serve me the dish when I order it. Man, the things these hoaxers do to see how gullible we can be sometimes... *BURP* -- Dave1185 (talk) 05:31, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ferry Terminals

Could somebody please find information on the HarborFront Passenger Terminal, the Tanah Merah Ferry Terminal, and the Changi terminals. There's a new seaport under construction right? I read something about cruise ship operators not liking to unload their passengers next to freight trailers but Singapore not having a wide enough berth for them in a tourist terminal. Really, I don't know much about these places. Could somebody write something for them. If I did it, there would be little more than a stub. A stubette really. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DaronDierkes (talk • contribs) 09:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Teban Gardens and Pandan Gardens

Firstly, I would like to state that I hailed from Teban Gardens. Secondly, I'm looking for user(s) who would be able to help me with more details or other interesting facts that can be added into pages of Teban Gardens or Pandan Gardens. Thank you. -- Dave1185 (talk) 05:39, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

What can I say but thanks a million to Huaiwei & Chensiyuan for the help rendered to the two articles above. Still, that doesn't mean that it cannot be improved upon, so if anyone of you grew up here or has friend from here, please help me contribute more to this small little town to write down its page in history, I hate to see it go the way of Taman Jurong. Thanks again guys! -- Dave1185 (talk) 15:51, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] {{User Singapore}}

I've updated the userbox {{User Singapore}}. It is now possible to specify that you are a "friend of Singapore" by typing "{{User Singapore|status=f}}", or that you "live in Singapore" by typing "{{User Singapore|status=r}}". — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 18:54, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Samsui Women

Can someone improve on the page? I did my best, but alas, I am not Singaporean, and my knowledge of Singapore history is limited. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 07:06, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi abiteroftruth, I applaud your interest in this group of hardworking women. To share some facts, Samsui women typically comes from the place call Shan shui which means three rivers. While most people think of Samsui women as those who don on red headgears in respect to a tradition which started by Su Dongpo's mistress in the early dynasties, the truth is Samsui women also don blue headgears - and they come from the Teochew province in Guangzhou. Also, not all Samsui women work as labourers in construction sites. Some become majies (house maids) servants to European famillies living in Malaya. Hope this helps in your direction to writing the article -- Marcuslim (talk) 12:51, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Homerun (film)'s GA nomination currently on hold; input appreciated.

Homerun (film)'s GA nomination was placed on hold by Collectonian, who appears to be an inexperienced reviewer. I disagree with some of his comments. Thus the review would benefit from input from others who are familiar with film articles, the GA criteria or both. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 14:30, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

The article has achieved GA status. Special thanks goes to my copy-editor, Haemo! --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 09:39, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Personal interviews and voice recordings as valid references

Hi everyone, I've began my own quest to talk to artists, and attend live discussions about art and artists. I was wondering if Wikipedia accepts citations from recorded interviews? If so, how does one present it as a reference? Thanks for your advice -- Marcuslim (talk) 12:45, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Your interviews of artists are not acceptable as references unless they are published in a reliable source, such as a mainstream newspaper or magazine. Perhaps you could ask the artists to point you to useful resources? --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 10:43, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Color Codes for different genre artists

With the creation of Ng Eng Teng's page, I'd like to start the ball on the thought of standardizing color codes for different pages created under Category:Singaporean artists - one color for each genre. Through the page on web colors, I picked out the Gainsboro color (#DC DC DC) for Singaporean sculptors, as it seems to aptly describe the color of stone and steel which they use commonly in their work. I'd like to hear other suggestions from other contributors what other appropriate colors would be good for genres listed here. Thanks! -- 03:55, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

  1. Singaporean painters -
  2. Singaporean ink painters (this one's at the back of my head now) -
  3. Singaporean calligraphers -
  4. Singaporean photographers -

[edit] Progress report: We have reached 20 GAs!

On 17 April 2008, Ho Yuen Hoe achieved GA status, becoming our 20th GA and Aldwinteo's 9th (he is one GA away from double figures)! Homerun (film) also achieved GA status this morning; it is my second GA. Keep up the good work, SGpedians! --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 12:17, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank u for your kind compliments. As for total GA count, I wish to clarify that the abovementioned article is my 10th GA (incl. a Thai geograhy article), not 9th as mentioned earlier. I got a few selected SG history/heritage articles to improve & nominate on hand before I call it a day next. Fyi, our total Singapore GAs is 21, not 20 to date. (Count this) -- Aldwinteo (talk) 15:08, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
I only counted your Singapore-related GAs, although I am pleased to know that you wrote a GA about a Thai village, as such contributions also help fight systemic bias. Ho Yuen Hoe is our 20th GA; our 21st is Homerun (film). Hopefully you will contribute two DYKs (and maybe even a GA) to the National Day celebrations programme before leaving. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 11:16, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Have I not being doing that all along? When will these requests ever end? As a lay Buddhist myself, one shld learn & be mindful of the cause of Annica (impermanence) & learn to let go of attachments with Upekkha (equanimity) & skilful means (For example, look around at the strong emotions attached, silly antics displayed & retaliations that exist even in the virtual space of Wikipedia) Most importantly, one has to know to do the right thing when the time is given to u. If I do return to Wikipedia one day, I'll focus more on Buddhism-related theme (already written some to date) & the Pali Canon, as I'm familiar with the original Tripitaka (Sutta texts) as taught by the Sangha in Pali or Sanskrit from young. With Metta -- Aldwinteo (talk) 03:06, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dawn Yang

The article on Dawn Yang has recently been nominated for deletion. I had never heard of her before, but if she is a celebrity who appears on magazine covers in Singapore, that would seem to make her notable. However, I have hardly been able to find any reliable sources about her that would help support keeping the article. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 14:45, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] China and PRC articles request to be renamed

As this is likely to be of interest to Singaporean users, User:SmuckyTheCat is requesting that China be renamed, and replaced by the People's Republic of China article at "China". 70.55.88.176 (talk) 08:11, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] An Invitation from the Philippine Wikipedia Community

Hello folks,

The Philippine Wikipedia Community will be holding its 1st Meet-up in Cebu City (the fourth one in the Philippines) on June 23-24, 2008. This coincides with the first Philippine Open Source Summit, also to be held in Cebu. The Philippine Wikipedia Community is an Implementing Partner of the Open Source Summit. We invite you to join us in this event. If you are in the IT or IT-enabled services industry, this would be a great opportunity to meet people from the 4th best outsourcing city in the world. This is also a good excuse to visit our beautiful beaches :)

If you're interested in joining the Wikipedia meet-up, please join our discussion. You can register for the Open Source Summit here. If you would like some assistance with local accomodations, you may email User:Bentong Isles.

The Philippine Wikipedia Community
WP:PINOY

[edit] Draft Guidelines for Lists of companies by country - Feedback Requested

Within WikiProject Companies I am trying to establish guidelines for all Lists of companies by country, the implementation of which would hopefully ensure a minimum quality standard and level of consistency across all of these related but currently disparate articles. The ultimate goal is the improvement of these articles to Featured List status. As a WikiProject that currently has one of these lists within your scope, I would really appreciate your feedback! You can find the draft guidelines here. Thanks for your help as we look to build consensus and improve Wikipedia! - Richc80 (talk) 14:04, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal to rename "Pedra Branca dispute"

There is a discussion on whether to rename "Pedra Branca dispute" as "Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge (Malaysia v. Singapore)", as this is the official name of the International Court of Justice case: see "List of International Court of Justice cases". Your comments on the article's talk page are welcome. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 17:30, 4 June 2008 (UTC)