text:
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Singapore/2005 archive

Government Housing District
There are certain clashes that worth noting: Woodlands New Town is within the Sembawang GRC, Woodlands region. Same for the other neighbourhood estates article. Slivester 04:18, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Template for Photography
I had revised a template for photography, and I am sure there are various sections that require amendments. ''See Template:Photograph info Slivester 10:50, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Chinese surnames on Wikipedia
If you're interested in working on how Chinese surnames should be presented on Wikipedia, please comment at Talk:Chinese surname. Thanks. — Instantnood 13:51, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)

194.206.179.4
Someone should take a look at the above user's edits. There is a lot of NPOV language floating around his articles and at least one, Chia Thye Poh, is copyviol - lifted from http://www.sfdonline.org/Link%20Pages/Link%20Folders/chia1.html. --khaosworks 15:47, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I'll redo the entry =p -- Melsith 17:47, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Merging Manglish and Singlish
Yes, I know this sounds a bit controversial. But I think it's a good idea, considering how similar the two really are.

You can see my original suggestion here: Talk:British and Malaysian English differences. All comments are welcome! -- ran (talk) 04:56, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)

Personally I'd rather have the two entries apart =p -- Melsith 17:45, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

It wouldn't be controversial, however, most Malaysians would not find it offensive to have it removed, after all, not quite a topic to be proud of (a point of view from my grandmother, who spoke fluent English, a Malaysian). However, it is something that they, the Malaysians, considered what they had, not a posession of us. I do not think that it would be wise to do such a move. Slivester 18:14, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It sounds rather...weird, because what, we suddenly owe the distinctions and influences of our culture to Malaysia just because they are bigger? Come on! Why do people insist that Singaporean cuisine is the same as Malaysian cuisine, and should be called as such, etc. etc, just because Malaysia is bigger? -- Natalinasmpf 09:36, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Alright alright, I admit it was not that great of an idea. ... :/ However, the Manglish article as of now is very short, and much of the phonology + grammar sections of Singlish can be copied straight over. -- ran (talk) 13:13, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

To be frank, whats so different between Singlish and Manglish, I always uphold the idea that they got it from us. Slivester 05:18, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Repetitive MRT Station work
Can someone help me do a lot of this repetitive work? I've done a template alrady, which you can paste in every MRT station article (ie. Punggol MRT Station, City Hall MRT Station), which I have done for every blue link so far. However, for the stubs, a lot of information can be added with the current format (see some of the current articles for an example) without much thought, just that its tedious. For example, for each line it is on, specifying whether its an above-ground MRT station or an underground one. Of course, specifying it is a Mass Rapid Transit station in the first place (Singapore's kind), rather than the bland "MRT" or generalised "railway" or "metro" station. Don't do that. We have a very good page at Mass Rapid Transit, after all. ;-)

The MRT station template is available by typing. To specify whether its above-ground or below-ground, use above-ground or underground.

Then of course, if you know anything about the station, a map, photo, what street it is on, what landmarks are nearby, overpasses, etc.

I just feel when these tasks are completed, we can go on to adding more information, but this foundation should be worked out first. --
 * To be honest, that template makes the page look a tad messy because it is so long. How about looking at the ones for the Sydney lines, or the London ones for comparison, and we might adopt one of them? I especially like the vertical station list for the Sydney system.--Huaiwei 13:34, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I'll try taking a look at the other ones. In my opinion, it only looks messy because of the alignment, which can be corrected. It does give a sense of cohesion, if not being rather especially useful for the stubs. -- Natalinasmpf 19:04, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Refer to Sydney underground railways, for example, although it is a listing of lines. We can adapt it to show a list of stations instead. Alaso, look at the one used for the London Underground in Acton Town tube station, for example. Maybe we can combine the two for our pages? :D--Huaiwei 19:29, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

I'm also thinking of including the terminal station on each end, as well. So there's five stations mentioned for each line, the current station, the next and previous station, and the "destination", that is, the last station on each direction. I'll try making a new "template" (or what do you call them? Infoboxes?). And maybe a link to other lines the station is not on. It would be tedious though, since you have to modify it for every station. -- Natalinasmpf 11:00, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Currently, there are 2 categories covering MRT stations. 1 is and the other is

I would suggest removing the Singaporean railway stations, since by definition, i think the MRT is a metro, not really a railway. Sandstorm6299 14:05, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Issues related to SG Articles
I was forced to take a Semi-WikiVacation due to real life committments, but now I'm back I realized that there is a lot of things that is left undone and urgently needs to be cleared up. I'm rather upset by a few first-hand experience that involve Singapore-related Wikipedia articles as well.

 * 1) Public Transportation Map of Singapore - This map has been repeatedly put on WP:CP, even thought it should be under Fair Use dealing. What I've heard so far is that there's no Fair Use in Singapore and LTA has properitary rights over the map. However, I did a check on the Internet and Singapore's copyright office (Intellectual Property Office of Singapore) does have a "Fair Dealing" clause. . Unless ressolved once and for all, WP:CP will always come back to haunt this map.
 * 2) Anglo-Chinese School - May have over-emphasised on its achievements. Previously talkpage had comments that the article looked more like an ad. One of my friends actually questioned the validity of this encyclopedia althogether, especially when he felt that the criticisms of the school being elitist/snobbish is somewhat downplayed. I would be interested to hear on what you think on this one.
 * 3) Singapore gay movement - Needs a proper cleanup, or listed on VFD. Sometimes we just fail to know how many actual visitors look at our articles for research and information, as well as trusting that these articles are neutral and reliable. It was listed as an problem article some time ago for its advocate nature, and surprisingly some joker in my JC actually used this information to his research paper on prejudices and discrimmination.
 * 4) Nanyang Girls' High School - Listed for POV Check months ago for some alleged prejudices of its students, annoyed NYGH alum-mata has removed the offending section and now it's a very poor stub. Needs to be reworked on. See Talk:Nanyang Girls' High School
 * Update: The article is being slowly reworked. Contributions are welcome!

 * 1) NPNT - Going, going, gone on VFD. If it doesn't qualify as a full-fledged article, then at least it should qualify to be on Wiktionary.

If you have time to spare, please do have a look and make changes/take action nessecery to ressolve te above problems, as well as giving your comments.

- Mailer Diablo 18:02, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Anglo Chinese School
Personally, I'd chuck the recent achievements altogether. If you look back on the article history, when I first revamped the article last year, I threw out most of the self-aggrandizing and kept to what I felt were the essentials. This was my baseline after all my major edits were done, and then the pigpile of Band, Debate, etc. started.

The snobbishness angle I feel is adequate and NPOV enough if the achievements bit weren't so overblown. For the sake of disclosure, I am an ACS Old Boy (1977-1988), but from the pre-Independent School era, so I grew up with the entire snobbishness dispute and honestly, it wasn't that big a deal even back then. However, a slash and burn would seem to drastic, so if anyone has any suggestions as to how to cut it down, please do so. --khaosworks 19:14, May 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * School tales and image are precisely just that, and not everyone agrees with them. We have the Nanyang article getting stripped down because alumnus disagrees with the over empahsis on reputations, and in the ACS page, we have people questioning its validity because it didnt talk enough on that! Wikipedia is an encyclopedia...not Friday Weekly or the The New Paper. While it can of coz discuss on school reputations and discriminations, it cannot over-present them just because the image is over-blown amongst some quaters of Singaporean society. So we all know there is a reputation of ACS boys being arrogant. What else can be said about this which are encyclopedic?--Huaiwei 19:23, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Suggest a section on famous alumni, and Khaosworks can be the first name there. Other schools' pages can do the same thing also . Vsion 02:33, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Famous alumni is a good idea - some university pages do have them already. But I'm not going to be on any of them. --khaosworks 02:54, May 8, 2005 (UTC)

I've posted a bit of a rant on the ACS Talk page. I regret having to have written those remarks, but I don't regret what I wrote. Those articles need a lot of help. --khaosworks 12:50, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

Singapore gay movement
Your JC friend is no joker. I can vouch for the veracity of every single sentence in this article. It was originally written by the father of the Singapore gay movement himself, Alex Au and everyone in PLU knows the events that unfolded. Attempting to discredit or remove this article would be a great disservice to the documentation of evolving Singaporean history.165.21.154.15 18:37, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

You have not justified your grounds for wanting to delete the article. I have edited the article to remove most of the contentious words. What more do you want? If you feel that it needs a complete revision, why don't you attempt to do it yourself without altering any of the factual events which took place? This is such an important resource for students researching discrimination in Singapore that to even contemplate removing it would be a gross travesty of impartial reportage.Groyn88 18:48, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Homosexuality in Singapore looks fine to me actually, the problem is the MoS (manual of style) and NPOV that has got to do with Singapore gay movement. PLU- the early years and Achievements of the Singapore gay community as a whole still looks very messy and incoherent. It'd be good if you can work on it further to improve and NPOV it. I'll only put it for VFD as a last resort (but unlikely), but if ever I do that then that'll be the time where I'll make my case to justify. - Mailer Diablo 19:51, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

NPNT
If you trace the VFD trail, you'll eventually find that it was me who sent it to the gallows. ASGM and NMNHNLM were also done in by me. The revised reasons for deletion vary slightly for each, but all were non-notable at the very least. This is Wikipedia, not the Coxford Singlish Dictionary created by TalkingCock. Still, if they qualify under another section of the Wikiproject, by all means go ahead. CABAL 10:35, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Current events in Malaysia and Singapore?
What do you people think of collaborating on a project on that, or do you think they can survive as two seperate pages?--Huaiwei 18:09, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Collaborating will be good, I like to read Malaysia articles myself (and Dr M's page is better than Lky's!) I’m too new to comment on the 2nd question. Another related thing: I was tracking the UK election and it was a lot of work. Don’t know when is Singapore's election coming. That could be good for publicity, but we need more users support, and hell will break loose. ;p -- Vsion 02:27, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Collobarion of this sort will be no diff from that between the UK and Ireland, and of HK and Macau, from what we can see in the existing regional current event stuff. Afterall, quite a number of our biggest contributors happen to span the causeway anyway, so I would think this is a natural progression. :D Elections...much talk about it, but only the presidential one has to be held this year. the GE is at most 2 years away, but no one will know...yet :D--Huaiwei 15:25, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Removal of past content on notice board
Hi,

Just came across the History pages of the notice board and I realized Huaiwei reverted my delete. Just to clarify:

 * I removed the discussion on Category:Republic of Singapore Navy naval bases under "Singapore related candidates for deletion" as it was a resolved issue (or so I thought, a consensus has been reached ).

This is a list of current deletion debates...
 * In any case, I assumed that the section contained ongoing debates, since the section lead clearly says:

I do apologize if I offended Huaiwei. I didn't know that "[i]t is meant to be a reference point for all cases, resolved or otherwise." (quoted from History pages, edit summary by Huaiwei on 6 May 2005, 19:53 (UTC))

-Travisyoung 03:35, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
 * No lah I am not offended. I suppose I didnt make the page's usage clear in the first place, so I should share the blame, but anyhow, the page's usage shdnt be dictated by me alone also. My intention of that list is so that we know what changes has ever taken place involving sg cats, and if any sg cat should be deleted before, we might wish to collaborate to write articles such that the cat cat be created again. My biggest concern now is to rekindle the Singapore cuisine category, which was deleted simply coz someone from another city outside SEA fails to understand that cuisine names are kinda shared in this region.--Huaiwei 09:55, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Places in Singapore
Discussion moved to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Singaporean places--Huaiwei 20:59, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Dialects
REDIRECTED to. (It's getting dry!)

Singapore-related templates
Hi, is there a single page that shows all the templates related to Singapore? I'm thinking of something like what appear in User:Ran. It would be very useful, especially for newcomers, to have a quick overview of the structure of Singapore related articles, and it also consolidates many links which is good for quick accessing. If there isn't one now, can we create it? A user page is not suitable, maybe we can show the templates in Wikiportal/Singapore, but I'm not quite sure. A side-benefit is that it would encourage more visits to the portal; also I only then need to bookmark the portal in my browser and can access most articles in just two mouse clicks. -- Vsion 20:42, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Like this? Template:India topics

-- ran (talk) 20:49, May 31, 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, this is a rather high-density alternative (and may be good for those with low-resolution monitors), but wouldn't it be difficult to maintain, since the template of each sub-topic could still be evolving? I like what appear in your userpage, and seriously tempted to do the same in mine as well. ;-) Vsion 21:08, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Clean Slate for Singapore IPs
I've decided to archive the talkpage (of ugly vandal warnings) and add the ISP's notice for the three major ISPs (PacNet, Singnet and Starhub) and welcome message for Singapore IPs. This is to make the Singapore contributors feel more welcomed. If you have any questions or suggestions regarding this, please let me know at my talkpage! =) - Mailer Diablo 18:33, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Singapore political and muncipal buildings
I think its high time we started articles on the central political buildings that house the critical government functions in Singapore...I was shocked not to find them! And I just wanted to write a description of City Hall MRT Station! Oh well. Lets get started on it. Two things I'm about to start: Parliament House, Singapore and Padang (Singapore). We really need to get into this, otherwise its going to be very hard organising, classfiying and categorising areas later if we procrastinate, especially if we need to address them  collectively. Oh, the the article on Singapore's urban geography could address such areas too, not too detailed (as that wouldn't be its roled) but show how they are interlinked. We better decide some framework and taxonomy immediately (what gets categorised where), so we don't have any problems with redundancy, contradiction, or vagueness, especially division of information into geography, politics, economy, culture and so forth, they all have some overlapping areas which need to be resolved on which gets where. Oh, then there's the issue of the reference to the central business district as compared to the Central Area (which is what the Urban Redevelopment Authority classifies it as). -- Natalinasmpf 19:33, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Haha....try figuring out if we should use Padang (Singapore) or Padang, Singapore first! :D--Huaiwei 17:19, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, the Padang isn't a town, its just a (prominent) common field, so Padang by itself is already a city in Indonesia, hence the reason for just brackets. Although redirects would suffice: doesn't seem to be much difference. -- Natalinasmpf 18:21, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but when would we use brackets, and when do we use commas? It would be best if we could standardise the way our articles are titled.--Huaiwei 18:40, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I may consider taking photos of MRT stations and uploading them when I have the time. ;) - Mailer Diablo 19:50, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Standardisation
Yes, standardisation is an important issue....starting with regional classification. We need to agree on a standard taxonomy for locations in Singapore...starting with the classification under the Urban Redevelopment Authority, but some of the 55 regions doesn't include things like Raffles Place, Chinatown or Little India so I'm a tad confused. This applies to many other areas as well, and I would like to standardise them under one hierarchial classification system. I realise there are many exceptions because a collection of a few streets can house an entire commerical district and 50,000 people within the Central Region, for example. Ultimately, I also need to know the distinctions between the Central Region, the Central Area and the Downtown Core....they all have the hallmark of "CBD" or "central", but what are the distinctions, besides size? Here's my current interpretation: Central Region is just a convenient region to draw up to divide Singapore into five proportionate regions (ie. like east, west, central, etc.) - the Central Area is the collective term for Singapore's Central Business District(s), while the Downtown Core is the skyscraper filled area near the mouth of the Singapore River of high commercial density, and was the original port area under the Singapore Raffles Plan. Orchard Road for example, under URA classification, isn't part of the Downtown Core, while Shenton Way is. Which I'm just wondering, is there any apparent economical distinction between say, the Downtown Core? Is it aesthetic? Merely geographical? They both seem to be part of the ERP area. I'm advocating the URA standard, which we can reference to from here - http://www.ura.gov.sg/dc/street_name/street_name.html, but I don't know what areas like Raffles Place and other towns are classified as. That said, I'm thinking of a taxonomy more of, URA Region (ie. Central Region) => Urban Planning Area => Town => Street? I know sometimes the area IS the town, but what about areas where its otherwise? But I believe the URA classification standard will speed up editing due to lack of ambiguity, or explain concepts better we know, but couldn't articulate before, we can have a standard to put places which don't have a common theme like Ang Mo Kio (versus Shenton Way) in templates other than just a template which has collection of places? We could have a taxonomy of templates. -- Natalinasmpf 21:34, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Singaporean government, departments, ministries and GRC's
We really need to get started on those, the first three holding up the FAC process for Singapore - and GRC's, in terms of elaboration on a general level. Ie. Ministry of Finance AND the Minister of Finance (Singapore), and this will also be helpful in aiding the wikifying and organising of the articles for Singapore politicians...(notice how someone like Richard Hu doesn't even have his own article?)...also I'm thinking of modelling the Government of Singapore article to something like the Federal Government of the United States (in terms of formatting and style, not literally). -- Natalinasmpf 12:39, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

photographs
So uh...I'm thinking, should we have a request section for photographs? Which by the way, I'll take the time to ask, when any of us should go out and happen to have a camera available, snap some photos of Singapore's landmarks, and heck normally mundane things, like mee siam and such - food, landmarks and the like. We need some good photos of the Esplanade, preferably both night and day, that are confirmed public domain/GFDL/creative commons - across the riverfront, or from the Carlsberg sky tower, anything! -- Natalinasmpf 20:16, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. The food articles are good examples where photos will make big difference! Should we also include a map request section? I can service these map requests. Let's make Singapore articles colorful and vibrant! :D -- Vsion 20:43, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I have a number of photos, without its articles only though! =P - Mailer Diablo 28 June 2005 15:28 (UTC)
 * Great! You have done the difficult part. You provide the bacon, we provide the bread — let's make sandwiches! Btw, what's the plan for the FAC thing? The copyvio issues has been resolved. If mrt has a better chance, let's go for it!  --Vsion 28 June 2005 17:52 (UTC)
 * See the Mass Rapid Transit todo area - some of the sections actually need to be split off into their own articles (just to be sweet and succinct). Oh Mailer Diablo, sorry to trouble you again, but can we get some photos of the Port of Singapore? I figured it was quite ironic, how we have so much information on a transport boon (rather than a real life or death necessity), but we lack so much information on our port. Evolution of the port, usage of lighter boats, etc. (some of this information can be from the PSA website, discard anything irrelevant, suit to an encylopedic language)...oh by the way, Keppel Harbour is the same as Keppel Container Terminal, right? Or at best, they are related enough for one to be redirected to the other? (Keppel Harbour is in a dismal state, I'm trying to improve it, but that's only if I can clarify how this will set a precedent for other harbours/terminals too.)    -- Natalinasmpf 28 June 2005 18:11 (UTC)
 * Yes, the Port of Singapore, etc., is an excellent topic. Amazed at how Huaiwei revamp, champion, and revolutionize the articles on Singapore Airlines, Changi Airport, etc. Surely Singapore's harbour/sea transport industries deserved equal attention if not more. Very suitable for collaborative effort. :-) -- Vsion 28 June 2005 18:53 (UTC)
 * Er...we give me too much credit. :D Anyway with regards to the harbours, Keppel Harbour refers to the waters between the islands and the Mainland. Its a geographical entity. Keppel Container Terminal is...a container terminal. :D So they arent exactly the same.--Huaiwei 29 June 2005 07:56 (UTC)
 * Support of coz! My comp is still down thou, so I cant contribute them yet. Now accessing the net in school again (actually I am not even supposed to be using this...I am an alumni! :D). It is unfortunate I lost almost my entire photo collection due to an earlier pc issue early this year, so I hv to rebuild my photos again. I have taken quite a few shots of Changi Airport, some city buildings (most of which dont hv an article yet), plus uniformed personal for my police-related pages...haha. Mailer apparantly saw my first contribution last week. Unfortunately, it was a little blurred coz I didnt hv a tripod and lighting was low there.--Huaiwei 29 June 2005 06:09 (UTC)
 * We missed u, buddy. ;-) Vsion 29 June 2005 06:41 (UTC)
 * I miss all of you and wikipedia too. :D What got me so irritated was when I went all the way to my fren's house to borrow his internet access, only to find this site locked for a software upgrade a few days ago! LOL!--Huaiwei 29 June 2005 06:44 (UTC)
 * About the photographs, check out these amazing pictures at a CHIJ Primary website. I found this when google "Sarong Kebaya" and my jaw dropped! Anyone who is a CHIJ alumni or know the principal? -- Vsion 29 June 2005 07:40 (UTC)
 * Wakaoz.....aiyah lets just find our own models lah. Or be the models! I will be safely behind the camera thou. :D --Huaiwei 29 June 2005 07:54 (UTC)

Introduction
This is a rather long statement, bearing on a speech, so bear with me. Or, if you're impatient, you can skip down to the actual proposal, rather than hearing the beginning, which is the justification for such a proposal and why it should be considered over other alternatives.

I've thought more and more about the articles concerning Singapore, and I've come to a few conclusions. Firstly, I guess the thing is theme cohesion and completeness. To have a perfect article (or at least one that you can sigh relief and look back at it as our masterpiece), it needs to be complete, covering every area, and presenting it well. Hence, it covers components from culture to history, as well as division by division (Singapore places)...and to ease presentation, have a general => more specific => even more specific => most specific kind of taxonomical flow for moving content off to different articles. This has been done somewhat, but a lot of general important areas hasn't been covered, namely, mention of the importance and the role of the individual divisions and towns, urban planning, etc. - which needs its own section almost. Then, the fact that the scope of each section overlaps somewhat, and where it doesn't overlap, is simply because content hasn't been included on that part. Hence, this needs to be resolved.

The need for taxonomy
So obviously an important part depends on taxonomy and how articles are organised. We shouldn't have articles making vague references to one another all over the place, rather one needs to be organised under another, for the sake of well, clarity, and so the reader can easily grasp the entire picture. For example, Ang Mo Kio is, in its purest essence, planning area or no planning area, a town, having its own subculture (probably little distinction between other towns, so it's more in terms of attractions and amenities and resident culture, ie. does it have a strong elderly population, does it have a strong youth population). It is home to an extensive amount of residents. It plays a role in mainly housing and education, and some commercial amenities, and little light industry, if any. Compare this to Jurong, with medium industry (heavier ones off to Jurong Island), some residential area, it is a regional centre so it has some commercial amenities as well, but strong emphasis on industry. The Central Area is the central business district, mainly commercial, little housing and industry...etc. mention all this in a main, unifying article or section, which then is tied in to the Singaporea rticle itself. Then the town would be classified according to geographical location, and we can use a traditional rough indicator "south-west Singapore" for Jurong, for example, or perhaps a more defined one, "North-East Region" for some of the other towns, for example. The reader would be able to learn about Singapore far more easily than now. This again, needs to be well linked into the main Singapore article, as for example, Jurong plays a part in both history, politics, culture, economy and geography of Singapore, as do all the other towns, because of economic or residental contribution, GRC's, etc.

As an example again, GRC's - they overlap - while Singapore has 55 planning areas, there are 84 seats, but of course, far less GRC's, even less than the planning areas, in fact. So again, one sort of system needs to be prevalent over the other. This is important: urban planning is a major component of Singapore, just as the port is, just as its culture is...but again, urban planning overlaps, or at least where to place this section. Then of course, there is the fact that Government of Singapore is embarassingly a...stub. This is probably because "Laws of Singapore" and "Politics of Singapore" contains overlapping material compared to Government of Singapore, which starves it of material. Again, organisational taxonomy is key.

There are many ways to organise our articles. Thus, having stated the need for such a scheme, I now state my proposal:

Singapore Places
Some of this originated from the dilemna at Sengkang versus Ang Mo Kio. Both have great content. At least according to the WikiProject Singapore Places guidelines, one is inconsistent in style to the other, yet they both seem fairly well. One of the things that should be reminded is, we should treat articles like Ang Mo Kio Planning Area as a subarticle of Ang Mo Kio. They are very closely correlated. In fact, they should be considered to have the same relationship as Culture of Singapore has with the article Singapore - one the subset of the other. But for example with Ang Mo Kio, I don't see the Ang Mo Kio Planning Area a subsection of the Ang Mo Kio article, I only see it under "see also" - they are not similar articles - but rather, one is the subset of the other. The Ang Mo Kio planning area is to basically plan and allot urban development for the area known as Ang Mo Kio, in relation with the rest of the country. The Ang Mo Kio New Town is to create residential, commercial and cultural infrastructure for the people living in Ang Mo Kio, or for Singaporeans who have chosen to "migrate" from some other part of Singapore to Ang Mo Kio.

Sengkang seems well integrated with itself. However, the other problem is that going into specifics like urban planning details and each amenity isn't necessary for an article about the general area. It needs to be moved into a specific article. But such articles, when they move off, needs to be well-linked with its parent. So thus, and urban planning area article should state how this affects or improves the lives of people, or the economy, or the culture or attractions of Ang Mo Kio. If I state details like, "the New Town is laid in such and such a fashion, complete with this and that", then a statement like "this improves the usage of space in Ang Mo Kio" should also be included, and back to the other article, a statement such as, "a New Town has been built in order to save the space used in Ang Mo Kio, while housing her residences better..." would also be wanted.

This also applies to GRC's. Again, when we create things like "[Singaporean Place] Planning Area" we should remember not to alienate a daughter article from its parent article, nor when editing an article about that Singaporean place, whether it be Ang Mo Kio, Dover, Pasir Ris or otherwise, to include specifics in the general article when they should be in the daughter article. Simply because they disrupt flow when reading about other general things about the area. If I'm reading about say, how Pasir Ris is a housing centre, and its initial history, main issues facing it, and its economic and commercial contributions as a whole, (ie. it has several shopping centres, with such and such a role ), I don't need specific commercial shops to be named, that should be within the New Town article, or in fact, perhaps even the commercial amenities article as a subset of that article. Unless of course, it's a landmark, like the Expo or something. That is what I mean by taxonomical organising.

Language is important. Rather than say, "Jurong Planning Area (or its equivalent, I need to check the URA map) is an important industrial area in Singapore" - which belongs to Jurong, rather say, because Jurong is an important industrial area - the geographical location, "Jurong Planning Area" is defined by the URA to fit urban planning to accomodate industrial growth in Jurong, which is important to it" as an opening statement.

However, new articles, still at stub status say, we shouldn't need to have articles like say, "Queenstown Planning Area", if the actual Queenstown article itself is lacking. (Which it is.) This is just not to alienate the two articles from each other, as well as cause unneeded redundancy about the role it plays - one should temporarily redirect to the other. We should also consider applying this to MRT Stations (ie. the ones in red) to their appropriate place area first, as a section first, then split it off again when we have way more information. (Ie. a paragraph or more about it's relevance to the place it is in) - then it becomes part of say, the "transport" section. Sengkang New Town, which currently redirects to Sengkang, actually has enough material (from Sengkang, which precisely has overlapping, specific information that can be organised into section articles) - for example, should be a subsection of the Sengkang Article....using the ever useful  template. Perhaps I will fix that soon. I just wanted to declare the precedent, and see if anyone agreed.

And integration into the rest of the articles
Having classified place articles to resolve this sticky tendency, then of course, there is the bigger picture. The main thing is also to thus present the different areas within Singapore in an organised manner from the top-down, and it has to be well, succinct. A crowded template box doesn't really suit it, especially if you want to get a good idea of Singapore's different locations. So I suggest classifying them into North-East, Central, etc. (basically following the 5 URA regions), while giving the link to each respective region, just calling it "Towns in North-East Singapore" and a separate one for "islands"...but that would require a dozen new templates, but it would make it rather organised. Ie. so if I look up the Downtown Core I'd see at most the different divisions in the Central Region, although a link to the entire "places in Singapore" article which would link back to the different other regions would be there.

This is because we were getting a funny thing with different areas, ie. Dover or Chinatown, seemingly being alongside as equivalents of Queenstown and Ang Mo Kio, I think for organisation's sake we can classify Dover under Queesntown, as a place within Queenstown (hence a subarticle), as well as treat other smaller areas not being roughly the equivalent of the 55 planning areas themselves as a subordinate of those areas. This would ease the dilemna.

The subarticles can also have convergent parents. Precisely because all the different areas and articles overlap in area, an article "Transport in Sengkang" would mainly be a subarticle of Sengkang, but also be a section perhaps, within "Transport in Singapore", given as it's part of the transport network. (Depending of course, we have enough information in the first place: this for future considerations).

And the ultimate of all, how to mention all this in the Singapore article. I think the place articles basically should be a subset of Geography and Climate of Singapore, as an entire subarticle - hence it's mention in Geography of Singapore would be a few paragraphs, while linking back, and a mention in the Singapore article as one or two. "Singapore is divided into regions, and then divided into towns", and with a mention of the Central Area. From here, a template which basically recalls the five regions (but not going into the specific towns for neatness, that's why it was important to classify them) would be placed in the Singapore article. Then a short discourse on the roles of each area, ie. one region is mainly industrial, the Central Region is substantially commercial, especially in the Central Area. Having laid this out, in areas like Economy of Singapore and Culture of Singapore, these divisions can be further commented on, (namely in terms of economic and cultural contribution), without having to go into detail about urban planning - that would be in the daughter article within Geography of Singapore, for example.

Elaboration on urban planning would be part of the Urban Geography section. Seeing its importance in playing a role in our nation, we need an article "Urban planning in Singapore", although this would be a subarticle belonging to Urban Geography, perhaps, it would also be able to be mentioned in other sections, ie. History of Singapore, Economy of Singapore, when appropriate.

Overlapping Divisions: political versus geographical parentage
I haven't thought about how to introduce the Government of Singapore yet into the article. As far as I know however, Laws of Singapore, for example, should actually be under Government of Singapore. Hence, the two main articles should be Government of Singapore, Politics of Singapore, rather than the current combination. The Government of Singapore would be a subarticle of Politics of Singapore, perhaps, just with the second link for clarity and ease of use. The "Politics of Singapore" should be an article about Singapore's political climate, and about the political system: Government of Singapore should go into the government itself. Seeing how as the constant campaigns, different programmes it has, budgeting, subsidies, etc. should be part of "Government of Singapore".

The mention of the different electoral divisions would be part of Politics of Singapore, of course, (which we have yet to even outline them), but an article about an electoral division, would be basically correlating to the fact that it represents a geographical area, ie. probably a town, or a region. Hence, an article about "West Coast GRC" (when we get one), would be mainly a political article, but would have to be closely interlinked with its geographical counterpart - its purpose is to represent the towns within the West Coast.

Lastly, photos. Mostly I feel it's because there isn't enough space, so hence, maybe a photo gallery at the bottom, and not a sweeping one containing everything from the commons, but perhaps in addition to illustrating the main sections, representing each component of Singapore, ie. the industry, Sentosa, the port, the central business district from really close (think claustrophobia close), looking upwards; the HDB flats (we really need good photos of some of those, of various types) This would really push it to the standard of a featured article, helping to wrap it up - but again, each of the photos should not be redundant, ie. we don't want to see two photos of the same industrial building (in the same article). Stuff like the that. Coastline, especially, and Bukit Timah.

This would make it a complete coverage - do all of you agree? Of course, it wouldn't be the end, it would be complete in the sense that one has completed school for example, and can now, having the base framework laid out, can get on to really specific things without having to worry about alienating articles. Any suggestions welcome. If this policy is agreed on, I feel, it would be universal (in terms of Singaporean articles) enough to warrant notification on the Singapore article talk page itself...although perhaps it's more of updating the todo list kind of thing. This of course would require modifying to the WikiProject Singapore Places as appropriate.

Natalinasmpf 1 July 2005 22:44 (UTC)

 * I basically agree with most of the above, the organisation, taxonomy, 5 URA areas, GRCs, etc, Ang Mo Kio Planning Area is clearly a subarticle of Ang Mo Kio. However, my only concern is regarding (for example) splitting Sengkang New Town from Sengkang, which is going to be difficult given the current content in Sengkang. If we force a split (whatever way), I'm afraid neither articles would be as good as the current one. Argh ... it quite a dilemna ... -- Vsion 3 July 2005 09:12 (UTC)

National Day Parade, 2005
Hi folks, I started the article on National Day Parade, 2005 (with some plagiarism from National Day Parade). This is an interesting topic, don't u think so? Please join in and contribute! (Photos needed!) -- Vsion 3 July 2005 21:09 (UTC)

emergency cleanup needed
Well I'll try to get to it, but I need to ell you that Demographics of Singapore and Bus transport in Singapore really needs some emergency editing and substantiation, especially for articles of their stature. -- Natalinasmpf 16:42, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

People's Action Party
Look at it. It has serious POV issues. Some points are valid though.

Strange, surprising, even shocking that this is allowed to stand. In USA this would have sparked off an edit war. Speaks volumes about Singaporean's political sensibilities. Mandel July 7, 2005 02:42 (UTC)

How is it POV? Looks perfectly fine to me. In fact, we need more content like that, if anything. -- Natalinasmpf 7 July 2005 02:50 (UTC)

 * I just read the article, and it seems okay to me too; although it is far from complete.  -- Vsion 7 July 2005 03:46 (UTC)

For starters:

 * "The party was formed in 1954 by English-educated middle-class men who had returned from Britain."

If this is completely true, why is there a split in 1960s of factions within PAP Barisan Sosialis Party? Some of them are, but not all.

 * "However, the prospect that PAP might rule Malaysia upset PAP relations with UMNO:"

????

 * Adopting a traditionalist Leninist party?

PAP started out as a socialist party, not a Leninist party.

 * Even though PAP can be credited with the economic success of Singapore, it rules the country with authoritarianism....One example of such oppression is all demonstrations against the 2003 Iraq war withered due to lack of demonstration permits registered by the demonstrators.

"Authoritarianism" and "Oppression" are POV. For an accurate description of authoritarianism, try Britannica:

 * "principle of blind submission to authority, as opposed to individual freedom of thought and action. In government, authoritarianism denotes any political system that concentrates power in the hands of a leader or a small elite that is not constitutionally responsible to the body of the people. Authoritarian leaders often exercise power arbitrarily and without regard to existing bodies of law, and they usually cannot be replaced by citizens choosing freely among various competitors in elections. The freedom to create opposition political parties or other alternative political groupings with which to compete for power with the ruling group is either limited or nonexistent in authoritarian regimes."

Or a dictionary:

Authoritarianism - a political doctrine advocating the principle of absolute rule

 * The leading newspaper of Singapore, the Straits Times is often perceived as a propaganda newspaper because it is rarely criticises of government policy, and covers little about the opposition.

Propanganda is POV, to "propagate (actively spread) a philosophy or point of view". For benefits of Singaporeans, whom I reckon will not understand what the term "propanganda" is, try answers.com:

 * Modern propaganda is distinguished from other forms of communication in that it is consciously and deliberately used to influence group attitudes; all other functions are secondary...

 * Official government communications to the public that are designed to influence opinion. The information may be true or false, but it is always carefully selected for its political effect.

Presentation of facts. All criticisms, which make it difficult to understand why PAP was voted in from the 1960s to 1990s (at least before they gerrymander). Mandel July 7, 2005 13:14 (UTC)

 * I agree with all the points except Straits Times not being propaganda. It IS government sanctioned/censored and it does indeed not cover anything about opposition parties.
 * Propaganda is not NPOV. Everything is propaganda, be they produced by the USSR, PRC, USA, Singapore or McDonalds'. Everything that tries to influence a person's opinion is propaganda, and as such, everything is propaganda. (Even purely quantitative statements, like "There's 2 apples on the table" is propaganda, for you never know whether are real apple or wax moulds unless you bite on them, at which point the propaganda has already done its work ;) you get my point.) That is my personal definition, of course. (But from an expert on propaganda, haha!)
 * And I have to criticise your misguided opinion that Singaporeans are ignorant. ;) They're not. Like the people of most countries, they are brainwashed. But they're not stupid. At least in the context of understanding (the government sanctioned meaning of) propaganda. As for whether they can recognise something as propaganda however, is a wholly different matter. -Hmib 16:53, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

If everything and everywhere is propaganda, then nothing is, since the word propaganda will lose all possible meaning.:) If there are no differentiation between man and woman, then the term "gender" will cease to exist.:) The important distinction of political propaganda is active propagation - you must actively indoctrinate your people with the political ideas. If you merely state you support some party, that's not propaganda. If you do not cover news from opposition, that's not propaganda either, merely political bias.

I didn't state PAP does not produce propaganda. But to say ST is propagandistic material just because it does not cover opposition news is a misunderstanding of the word "propaganda".

And I did not say Singaporeans are ignorant. They are ignorant and uninterested about politics, and by choice (yah, they have a choice, they live in democratic country, Americans). Mandel 17:34, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

POV issues? These things perceived as. For propaganda, it's not the articles' official stance', but Singaporeans stance. Ask any taxi driver, they'll tell you it's all propaganda. In any case, the ruling government has already gone through massive constitutional violations, and I believe this qualifies for "authoritarianism". It is precisely that Singapore is not the US that this doesn't spark off an edit war. I don't seem to find a flaw in the article at all. It didn't start out as Leninist party, but it adopted the same structure, although the aims may be different. I believe you are confused on how the Barisian Sosialis got into the picture as well...they weren't part of the founders of the party; they were allowed in because Lee Kuan Yew thought he could control them as subordinates...sort of how Hindenberg thought he could control Hitler as chancellor, of course, with vastly different implications. -- Natalinasmpf 19:19, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Leninism is a very specific term - it implies a communist slant. "Authoritarianism" is also used much more loosely than it ought to be.  It implies that the authority given is not constitutional, not governed by democratic procedures, but the fact that the country actually voted for PAP in much of the history of Singapore (before they gerrymander of course) would belie this.  If one would use the term authoritarianism this way, one needs to redefine it, at least in this article.

 * My gripe with propaganda lies in how it is used to describe the ST, not PAP. The PAP obviously produces tons and tons of propaganda materials.

 * It will be much better to describe the PAP as a brainchild of the British-educated rather than formed by them; the early PAP is something like a coalition between them and left-wing pro-Communist members. For example, one of prominent founding members of PAP was Fong Swee Suan, Secretary-General of the Bus Workers’ Union. Maybe the word "largely" before the "formed by them" is missing. Mandel 23:50, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

Singapore meetups
If anyone wants to organise a meet-up over some kopi, feel free to post here. Police permit normally not required. :D (You can also make use of the Wikipedia groups on Meetup.com)

June 2005 meetup anyone?
I will be effectively unemployed by tomorrow, so just wondering if anyone is interested for a meetup for a chat anytime after the school exam period (for the benefit of our still-schooling folks)..probably in late May or June?--Huaiwei 08:30, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

 * No responses to your call? I think the "scholars" are all doing temp jobs now :P Kimchi.sg | Talk 01:31, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Oh I just realised half the folks here are studying overseas. :D --Huaiwei 03:44, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Haha I just might be going back to SG to bring back all the tons of stuff I left. Probably Jul-Aug. But I think we're better off having online tea instead, eh? -Hmib 15:36, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Online tea? Awwww...haha. Come to think of it, I dont even have a more feasible means of communication with anyone of you. MSN anyone?--Huaiwei 10:28, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I think we all have MSN, at least, seeing how popular MSN messenger is in SG. haomin at erpz dot net. But seeing how the summer break in SG is coming to an end soon (while mine just started yesterday)... -Hmib 02:04, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Here's coffee for all! :D Too bad we can't share real stuff online. :> --Kimchi.sg | Talk 10:11, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Damn the shifted timetable that polytechnics use. :< On a related note, is anyone here from Temasek Poly? CABAL 11:56, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Do you mean the school year that starts in September? That is the correct timetable, actually. -Hmib 22:50, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

December 2005 meetup?
How about a December 2005 meetup? If the scholars aren't out of country for the hols, that is. :D Kimchi.sg | Talk 16:03, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Is this meeting welcomed for every SGpedian? Terenceong1992 15:44, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

 * A gathering for an online community? I've done it before. The purpose of the gathering should be defined first, or participants may end up sitting around just looking at each others faces during the gathering. A library would be a good location for the gathering. - yxTay 02:56, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

I think this meetup should assign the scope of activities to do for the next 3 months. I think we can meet at National Library. For time... It is up to all here.

Ruennsheng 08:49, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * So how are things going. How about a MSN meetup first, and later we really meet. National Library????? How are we going to talk. Actually what do we do? --Terenceong1992 14:59, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Hah I did not even notice this section till now. I would certainly love to do a meetup, and I am relatively flexible with my time (for now). We have...erm....about one week left before the month is over thou! :D--Huaiwei 17:07, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Survey on Chinese dialects
(Allow me to have this survey for some time)

May I know any of these Chinese SGpedians have any knowledge of Hokkien, Teochew, Cantonese or any other dialects and have an account in the Chinese, Malay or Minnan wikipedia? I need help in translating articles concerning about Singapore into Chinese.

If anyone is interested, list your dialects spoken and your ability to speak your dialect.

The purpose of this survey is to expand our article editing into the Minnan and Chinese Wikipedia, and if possible, a creation of a Cantonese wikipedia. I have noticed that many of the younger generation of Singaporeans have lost their ability to speak their dialects. Please do not undertake me as a "show-off".

Since most Chinese Singaporeans, especially the older generation, have dialect names. And having the ability to understand dialects would help us to write the names in dialect, such as User:Mr Tan/Wee Kim Wee (the dialect name may be wrong), and Goh Chok Tong.

Feel free to ask questions concerning this survey, if you have any doubts.

I"ll give the ratings in Class order:

 * Class 0:Unable to speak or understand your native dialect(s)
 * Class 1: Having a knowledge of only a smattering of dialect words and phrases (can understand to a simple extent in spoken dialect, but unable to reply)
 * Class 2: Having the ability to understand dialect(s), but only having the ability to converse haltingly
 * Class 3: Having the ability to understand dialect(s) fluently, able to converse reasonably
 * Class 4: Having the ability to understand and converse dialect(s) fluently
 * Class 5: Having a profound knowledge of dialect(s)

List your entries here:

1. Tan (I'm not old!): 2. Goh wz: 3. Hmib 4. Kimchi.sg 5. Slivester 6. Cowboycaleb 7. Alien2 Classless I dream and talk in Minnan, plus my wife talk to me in Hakka, I read old script in Taiwan and enjoy reading Ho-lo scripts & Greek!Alien2 21:20, 30 September 2005 (UTC) 8. Fooby
 * Cantonese, class 4
 * Teochew, class 3
 * Hokkien, class 2
 * Hokkien, class 2
 * Cantonese-1 (not native)
 * Wuyu-2 (1/2 native)
 * Xiangyu-1 (1/2 native)
 * Cantonese class 3
 * Hokkien class 0 :(
 * Teochew, class 4
 * Hakka, class 2
 * Class 3/4 Hokkien. By the way, I may be missing something obvious, but how do you propose to create a Wikipedia in a dialect (Cantonese) that, to the best of my knowledge, has no written form? Feel free to smack me if I am wrong. :P

Seek help to ID image

Can someone help to ID this image, which tournament is it and who is lifting the cup? Thanks. --Vsion 10:18, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Isnt that last year's tiger cup final match? The person is the team captain...cant remember his name. :D--Huaiwei 15:46, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks! Team captain is a great hint, led me to his name immediately: Aide Iskandar. There is currently no picture at all regarding sports in Singapore. This fair-use image will make do temporarily. I hope to find a picture of Li Jiawei also, but no luck so far. ;-) -- Vsion 19:04, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Hehe...just curious. Where did you get these images from?--Huaiwei 05:43, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

 * It's a screenshot from the MTV of NDP songs, source: http://www.ndp.org.sg/index.jsp?page=videos.htm . Claim fair-use based on (i) screenshot, (ii) low-resolution, and (iii) non-commercial use of (iv) national education material. haha... This particular image is from (jude) Rui En's "Reach Out for the skies" . The TV haven't start playing the MTV everyday meh? Fyi, News clippings are also eligible for fairuse, i.e. if you have a scanner. :-) -- Vsion 06:10, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Haha yeah she is appearing all the time on tv. :D But anyway, all these fairuse thing is making me confused. Do we now have the legal right to use them, as I remember people have complained about this before? And yes, I did wonder. If I were to snap a photo of a copyrighted map, I was wondering if I can then claim I have fairuse of it, coz I needed maps of the concept plans when I expand the Urban planning in Singapore article! :D--Huaiwei 06:33, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I think it depends on what publication it is; whether it is URA's publication and if the publication or map is sold for profit or has some market value. Eg. maps from the Street-Directory book should not be fair-use, but say maps in a HDB sales booklet (distributed freely to potential buyers) should be fair-use for non-commercial purpose, so long as proper attribution is given. For further reading, see fair dealing and Image:Mrtlrt system map.gif for a copy of the copyright law and some arguments for and against. :-) -- Vsion 11:03, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Current events in?
Ok I mentioned this before, but I would like to confirm again. Are you guys ready for a current events section for Singapore such as these in List of current events articles by region? If yes, do you guys want it to be news on Singapore only, or combine it with Malaysia? If we want to go alone, we have to REALLY work hard to ensure we capture the daily news...preferably about 2-3 entries per day? Anyone onz about working on this with me? Thanks! ;)--Huaiwei 11:59, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm in, it is quite fun actually to update news that are of interest to me (sports, elections, and yeah ... political scandal !?!) and I support combining with our dear neighbour Malaysia. --Vsion 21:47, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Great! I am generally more interested in transport, economic, urban development, and criminal news, so I suppose we are a good compliment. So I suppose its confirmed now...the new project will be called Current events in Malaysia and Singapore? LKY will be proud! ;)--Huaiwei 05:40, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

'''The page is up!!! Woohoo!''' ;)--Huaiwei 09:09, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * It's very nice. :D -- Vsion 01:45, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Create more articles on famous people
I wonder if any of you would like to create more articles on people like  Ee Peng Liang,Liu Kang(artist) and Anamalai Chettair.These people have helped shape Singapore.Tdxiang 03:36, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Tomorrowed!
We have been tomorrowed! The editors that has been splashed with blanket coverage from the Straits Times are working on Tomorrow.sg, and even requesting help from their official site. You may want to help them out if you want, but I'd rather you guys leave it in its current form and let the SG bloggers fix up. I'm surprised that they're on Wikipedia when they have their own popular fans, I guess their true popularity are overrated by the press! ;)

I'm binning one of the pages because they binned all the entries I submitted to Tomorrow.sg. Okay, I was joking, the real reason's that it is something that is not confirmed and has no word at all on their official website. Be it Cowboy Celeb, Xiaxue, etc Wikipedia Policies still must be adhered to.

- Mailer Diablo 11:07, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Muahaha...well yes I am a tad surprised that their own page looks kindof dissapointing considering the kind of traffic they are supposed to be getting. Is someone going to creat Mr Brown anytime soon? ;) I am not particularly interested in their entire blogging culture, so I am keeping myself out unless anything funny happens. :D--Huaiwei 11:18, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Agreed, even Tomorrow.sg is considered NN by some fellow Wikipedians, what more about Mr Brown? - Mailer Diablo 11:24, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I suppose there is a cultural shock for bloggers when it comes to wikiing? :D--Huaiwei 12:35, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Sure it is. ;) - Mailer Diablo 13:53, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

I'm more excited about the fact they will possibly contribute to other Singaporean articles. Someone get them to join the SGPedian's Notice Board! Alert them to the work needed at reorganising the Singapore article, the MRT Stations article, as well as the articles on various MRT stations. Uh, possibly we might get hundreds of regular Singaporean contributors sometime soon? -- Natalinasmpf 12:51, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Haha thats what everyone hopes for. Meanwhile, I am just selling wikipedia to anyone I happen to know and who might show interest in this. A few of them have already joined us...wished they are more active when it comes to editing thou. :D--Huaiwei 13:02, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Give you views
Hi i am user:tdxiang.I am working on a school newspaper and i would like all of you to express your views;on wether TT Durai should have quit.Post them on User Talk:tdxiang.ASAP.THANKS.Tdxiang 08:46, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Mice Love Rice
The entry is wrong. The first singers of the song are from Mainland China, not Singaore, and it's a popular internet song. Mandel 16:16, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

What does "Hokkien" refer to?
This is actually a tougher question than it looks.

What does "Hokkien" refer to? Does it refer to any dialect within Fujian (Hokkien) province? Obviously not, since there is Hakka spoken in southwestern Fujian.

Does it refer to all of Min? Obviously not, since the Fuzhou dialect (Hokchiu) is probably not considered to be "Hokkien".

Does it refer to just Min Nan? Obviously not, since Teochew is in Min Nan as well.

So what does Hokkien refer to? The dialect of Xiamen? Or the dialect of Xiamen + Zhangzhou + Quanzhou? Does anyone know?

-- ran (talk) 01:07, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

 * Hakka is not a good counterexample, though, since there are Hakka speakers everywhere - that's the nature of that particular "tribe" since they were nomadic. I'd plonk for Fujian, myself, since Hokkien is translated into Mandarin here as Fujianhua. --khaosworks 01:33, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

But the entire southwestern corner of Fujian is Hakka-speaking, they're predominant there. Also, I doubt that the Minbei, Mindong dialects (e.g. Fuzhou dialect) would be considered "Hokkien" in Southeast Asia. -- ran (talk) 01:42, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

 * The point I was trying to make was that Hakka may be predominant in southwest Fujian, but they are not "indigenous" to it as the Hakka can be found all over. --khaosworks 17:03, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

 * My definition: The predominant dialect spoken by S.E Asian immigrants of the Fujian county, the primary dialect of the Minnan language, similar to but slightly distinct from Teochew. It's probably Zhangzhou + Quanzhou, depending on where you're. Don't think Xiamen dialect comes into play. See helpful article Mandel 14:46, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * Hokkien refers to Colonial British registrar who was sitting at a desk and said to me, Name ? OH Titi-tat .. Place of Birth ?: China < for Chong kor > race  Chinese-Hokkien < must well be MORON so who invent it, the British transliterated it, go ask them ppl!  I am 165.21.154.113 22:52, 30 September 2005 (UTC)alien from Sgwiki<[]>.

Lee Kuan Yew Section
Errors such as spelling mistakes in Lee_Kuan_Yew page has been corrected. Tohlz 18:51, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Ng Ser Miang
I've just done some updating and copyedit of this stub, but it's probably still off on some facts. I recall ST featured an interview with him sometime in the last week or so, but I can't seem to find that interview anymore. Can anyone find it and do a quick check of the facts? Thx --Hamstersanonymous 10:40, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Naming of Singapore-related articles
Hi,

I noticed that some articles on Singaporeans are currently not in line with the official policy stated in Naming conventions. In particular, it says in Naming conventions (common names) that the convention is to "use the most common name of a person or thing that does not conflict with the names of other people or things". For example, Bill Clinton, not William Jefferson Clinton ot William Jefferson Blythe III. =Travisyoung= 09:21, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Same rantings
There's a disproportionate amount of gay stuffs on Singapore articles! Singapore gay documentaries - nothing on Singapore documentaries! Singapore gay theater - nothing on Singapore theater! Singapore gay businesses (whatever this means) - nothing on Singapore businesses! Singapore gay venues, gay conferences, gay charity works... Gives someone the feeling that Singapore is a active pro-gay Asian San Francisco, which it is NOT! So much overlapping materials and gay apologetics, which shouldn't be here in an encyclopedia... can someone merge them into a few good, well-written articles on gay people instead of making it like a mini-forum all over the place? Just look at Paddy Chew. I've got to look several paragraphs beneath to realize why he was notable. Ho-hum! 165.21.154.110 23:21, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Try dropping a line in User:Groyn88's talk page? :D--Huaiwei 02:01, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Working on it. --Miborovsky 00:56, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Norman OhAlien2 20:41, 30 September 2005 (UTC) here, Huawei I maybe have encounter your good self in AMK origin article, still remember me? Just to drop in here (first time ) to see you are hard at it (Politics), I do a lot of articles in Sgwiki [] amd mainly relating to Sporean's issues on Religion and contemporay issues. Politics isn't my cup of tea, but I am passionate about it too. It's an arena not for faint-hearted but we need new blood with cool intellectual ability to parley with the dominant One Party rule, BTW go see some of it in my new postings on Singapore Politics<[]>, you may want to contribute there! I am not exactly good with dialects but Minnan is my MT and I am leaning. I did invite those ppl from ths homosexual active group and they download a tremendous amount of articles and pics which I have to work to edit(add-it) by showing my opposing views whcih really is but not exactly what I like to do, but important. So how can I find things about your good self to read up, here at wikipedia give me some links??Thanks! Alien2Alien2 20:41, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Estate infobox
Just an update to the previous editions. An example for Woodlands, Singapore. Slivester 00:23, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
 * How about adding population and land area (km2), assuming that the information can be obtained easily? --Vsion 02:37, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
 * No problem, that will be added. Slivester 08:44, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Very pretty. But is it for the new town, the planning area, or the general area? BTW...can help us improve the one for our MRT stations too? :D --Huaiwei 16:35, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Certaintly, I will try to find some time to do that. :) Slivester 22:32, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Why not implement it on all the Estates in Singapore, anyway a nice one indeed. Terenceong1992 14:44, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

reality check on article?
Hi. Could one of you take a quick look at Cheng sai mun ? I'm suspicious that it might be made-up vanity, but I don't know enough about Singapore pop culture to make the call. Thanks! FreplySpang (talk) 18:14, September 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * I have never heard of this Cheng sai mun, neither have I heard of Lim Peh Oh. Google search turns up a paltry number of articles on them, and I dont see them talking about him besides via pages which feed on wikipedia information. Vanity seems VERY likely here! Anyone else able to verify this?--Huaiwei 17:00, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Can anyone expand Gold 90 FM?
Hello,I am a listener of this station,but I can't really gather much info about it.Please help me to expand it.Thank you!Tdxiang 04:28, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
 * More in List of radio stations in Singapore. Btw its Gold 90.5 FM...--Huaiwei 17:13, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

sgWiki
Anyone heard of sgWiki? Seems like a good place to write some articles, although it needs better maintainance... b3virq3b 09:26, September 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * sgWiki resembles more of a discussion board than an encyclopedia. Of course, its simply a wiki. Nothing more than that. Slivester 10:49, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually there are hardly any information we can take from there, nor does it seem to make sense for us to move any info from here to there. Not only does it read like a discussion board, it appears to be a blog even. There are, however, some interesting stuff in very specialised fields, such as the info on buses by some bus fanatics? I am thinking of moving one article over on Somapah Bus Terminal! :D--Huaiwei 17:02, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Huawei I got cheeze off by the highbrow intellectual POV and NPOV peerage standing when they decide to delete my expanse article into the trash can of non-existence! Thus, I am the newbie who migrated to '''Sgwiki and I really contribute most of the articles. It's a good place to contribute some of your ideas and we have over 10,000 viewers with a couple of three months, can you beat that at wikipedia articles which you so carefully work thru, wikipedia is a good international opinion site, but neutrality issues on POV and NPOV is a joke!

Sedition Act in Singapore
In view of a recent news event, I decided to look up the Sedition Act (Singapore). There's a link to the wikisource for the full text, but Section 3 is most relevant. 3(1) describes what are seditious, 3(2) describes what are not seditious. Subsection 3(3) says that it is the seditious tendency of the comment that is relevant, not the intent of the person making the alleged seditious comment. In other words, the two men now being charged cannot claim innocence by saying they have no intention to promote inter-racial hostility -- the judge will not consider that in his judgement. Also, sedition is not just restricted to racist comments, but include four other situations as well (see Subsection 3(1)). This is for your info., as I think we should know about it. I believe all SGpedians are okay; I'm more worried about those guys making comments in blogs and forums (especially young people), and hoping to get the message across. :D--Vsion 08:36, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Well sometimes (most of the time actually :D) I'm glad I'm not in Singapore... Remember, Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Singapur! (Wonder if I'll get in trouble for saying that... hmmm) -Miborovsky 00:56, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Mr Brown says it very well; (from Straits Times):

"Popular online writer Lee Kin Mun, aka Mr Brown, pointed out: 'Anyone who grows up in Singapore knows that making racist remarks is unacceptable, whether you write it on a piece of paper or online. But he added: 'Internet users have yet to realise they will be held accountable for their actions online - that lesson hasn't sunk in yet.' Now that two people have been charged, Mr Lee said he hopes Internet users will finally realise that online forums and Internet diaries, or blogs, are public in nature."
 * --Vsion 13:51, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm not highly concerned. I'll continue to criticise our political system publicly. :D I don't know, if I ever get charged, I'll just make a speech in court about democratic rights, then draw a large public backlash that will thus set a precedent. My goal, I guess. -- Natalinasmpf 15:34, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Haha...if I may share my personal opinion online, I say...serve them right! :D As I said in a forum, these people are real idiots to think the law dosent apply online. Certainly hope this will be an important lesson for all, and I repeat my message to those who again take this as another step backwards for civil liberty and human rights: Tolerance for racism is in itself a step backwards for social maturity and advancement, and therefore of civil liberty and human rights. I dont see where the opposition is coming from, unless they are people who believe making racists remarks are a reflection of a civilised and open society? Natalinasmpf...I am not so sure if your dreams of a "large public backlash" is going to materialise to be honest! :D--Huaiwei 16:44, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Very funny. I remember once a government scholar whose blog caused a big backlash owing to racist remarks.  He retracted then apologized.  The government didn't charge him.  So, why duo treatment for two different groups of people?  Only that one is a PSC scholar (and future pillar of some state-owned enterprise) and the other two are not? 165.21.154.115 17:22, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * So what does this gotta do with the supposed humour you see in my post above? Anyhow if you wish to speculate that the government practices double standards when it comes to applying this law, perhaps you may offer us subtantiated information to show the two are directly comparable other than the fact that one is a PSC scholar? I am all ears, and who knows. You may dig up information worth adding to that page! :D--Huaiwei 17:39, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * It's Natalinasmf's post that I find funny (in an ironic way). The PSC scholar stuff is pretty stale stuff, you can google for "PSC scholar" "racist", or for his name "Chua Cheng Zhan". Anyhow, I do find the government practising double standards in many instances.  Maybe luck comes into play, the Lee Kuan Yew scholarship too. 165.21.154.108 17:53, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Ah...that clears up things a little. Anyway, it is not that I am unaware of the PSC scholar issue. I am asking if you know more beyond what we already know, to conclude that "double standards" exist. Are the circumstances which lead to both grops of people getting reprimended similar, besides making racist statements? Did Chua get away with it all, compared to the three chaps here? I honestly doubt they are directly comparable to draw such a conclusion.--Huaiwei 10:02, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I dunno if you guys read Sedition Act (Singapore), but Subsection 3(2) says it clearly; that (I translate and paraphrase) it is not seditious if you criticise the government in a constructive manner as long as you do not bring into hatred, contempt, racial ill-will and hostility, and do not instigate unlawful or subversive activities. So Natalinasmpf may be safe if she do it properly. But of course, there could be other problems, ISA, OSA, publication Acts (?), libel suits, etc., and hopefully we will find out more about Laws of Singapore; that's what wikipedia is for, right? :D --Vsion 06:23, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Don't be silly. The phrase "to excite disaffection against the Government" can be interpreted as any criticism against the PAP. If they are happy with you, you're safe.  If not, ta-ta. I don't think anyone will dare to speak up for Natalinasmpf publicly if he gets charged.  Not with a suit waiting in the wings. That's Singapore. 165.21.154.115 17:04, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Nata's "constructive criticism" would most likely take the form of anti-state propaganda similar to what you find on www.anti-state.com, except of the anarcho-communist flavour. Not something der Führer wants, so... And if memory serves, Nata got called up by the ISD, or so she claims, so she's likely on the blacklist already. In any case, would someone posting what 'could' be considered seditious, but doing so outside from Singapore and hosted on somewhere outside of Singapore, be affected in any way by this? --Miborovsky [[Image:Namechop.jpg|20px]] 03:02, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I would think she is in the "cleared" list, meaning certified "harmless". --Vsion 08:38, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Haha depends. I cant remember, but I wonder if he is the same person as another I know in a forum who once yelled that he got called up by the ISD coz he participated in some ribbon-making (no..not the yellow one endorsed by the Singapore Prison Service :D)--Huaiwei 10:02, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
 * In any case, would someone posting what 'could' be considered seditious, but doing so outside from Singapore and hosted on somewhere outside of Singapore, be affected in any way by this? - Most probably, yes. At least one of the bloggers accused of sedition (the 17 year old private school guy) hosted his blog on blogspot.com, which is in the US AFAICT. Kimchi.sg | Talk 14:48, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but what about someone posting 'seditious' stuff about Singapore, but OUTSIDE the country? I guess Singapore laws are void in the US... a good thing Singapore is US's lapdog, not the other way round... ISD probably can't touch me (even if they wanted to, I guess) but the FBI, CIA, NSA sure can. --Miborovsky [[Image:Namechop.jpg|20px]] 22:29, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

While I do not condone racism, (ie. there can be a huge public backlash and everyone can start hating people who post such things), the line gets to start a bit blurry on offensive. Especially on political opposition. The major tenet of democracy, freedom of speech, includes any opinion, up to making threats against someone or the government. Therefore, while I'll laugh at racists who get their due, the law itself is anti-democratic due to the fact it's widely open to interpretation. And hence, too much potential for abuse. My criticism would probably include ones of gerrymandering and restrictions against forming new opposition parties or making them eligible, actually. I talked to the ISD officer before, and he mentioned something about "out of bounds", which is frankly authoritarian. You have a responsibility to watch your speech, but your peers should judge you as equals (whether you to hate you or not for your ideas, whether to vote for you or not), not an authority judging your opinion. -- Natalinasmpf 18:57, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I positively need to hear the experience of someone who was that close to never existing. --Miborovsky [[Image:Namechop.jpg|20px]] 22:29, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I am probably a good candidate close to it Norey196054 23:12, 30 September 2005 (UTC) goto read about what I wrote on a Government sponsored web site at SGwiki about this topic on current Page at [] It's impossible to get login NOW as the server is set off by too many users so try do it another time, when's free, search my "current Page" Norey196054 23:12, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Collaboration of the Week
Well, a lot of other subjects and fields have a COTW, so I'm thinking, we should start having one too (or do we have one already?) - seeing how we have some already well-detailed articles covering events, whether it be dengue (too bad this isn't on Wikinews) or Huang Na, we should have colloborations for the week on articles or issues we feel need attention on. May thus suggest, Ministry of Education (Singapore). For things like covering MRT stations and Sedition Acts, I think we need an article on a major department of the Singapore government! ;-) -- Natalinasmpf 16:24, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Mailer has setup the page for it at Singapore Collaboration of the Week, although we have not officially launched it yet. I would suggest all of us help contribute to its launch, and when that happens, perhaps we will also get a feel of just how many people or how much help we will get when the COTW itself rolls into action. :D--Huaiwei 16:47, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

 * If the collaborative work on Ministry of Education (Singapore) includes also the expanding of Education in Singapore in general, then i will be very much interested. Education in Singapore already has good content, but I believe this is a super-topic that can be further expanded. Potential areas are:
 * Timeline/milestones/History of education in Singapore
 * Statistics on Education, achievement
 * Budgets, funding, Government Scholarships, study loan, Education policies
 * Kindergarten, PSLE, Polytechnics, ITE, NIE
 * Curriculum, ECA/CCA
 * Issues, (early streaming, EM3, etc).
 * I'm quite out-of-touch with some of these, but I can work on timeline/history and Statistics. :-) --Vsion 03:59, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Hmmm....interesting and logical suggestion to kickstart the whole thing. Afterall, I suppose just about any sg wikipedian will know at least something about this topc! But shall we wait till after the exam fever before launching this? As usual, we may expect a dip in activity twice every year. :D--Huaiwei 14:39, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * No hurry lah.. I'm having serious backlog in my study as well. ;-) Talking about exam, there is a statistic showing a HUGH gap in the average earnings between university graduates and non-graduates. Source: http://www.singstat.gov.sg/papers/c2000/adr-hhinc.pdf (page 3 table 5). Average household income for Graduate is $9827, Poly: $5932, JC/Secondary: $4105, others: $1667. The so called paper chase does have great real-life impact! --Vsion 17:04, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I am shocked. I have been lamenting that I wished I didnt have my degree coz my poly/ite counterparts are getting better paid than me! :D--Huaiwei 17:41, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I wonder how the stats will be in 3 years' time, when I get my degree. o_O Kimchi.sg | Talk 14:52, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Homosexuality in Singapore and all gay articles
I've launched a tirade suggesting how Singapore gay articles can be improved. Please join the discussion at the talk page of Homosexuality in Singapore or Singapore gay movement for your opinions. Thank you. Mandel 13:16, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Mandel I alien2Alien2 21:13, 30 September 2005 (UTC) invited those homosexual to come to contribute on their stuffs and they downloaded mirror copies from their web pages such as U mentioned) and had a tremendous response from viewers and I had to spend many hours working to add-to-it my opinions and views, perhaps you may want to take a look at some of my contrary heterosexual POV and say, it not my particular cup of tea (homo-stuffs) but I prefer coffee(philosophy and religion)consider join us at Sgwiki [] ??Alien2 21:13, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Would someone clean up the mess I made? I'm rather tired of 1. persistent POV pushers who don't ever respond and 2. gerontocrats who think their 20000 edits make them king of wikipedia. -- Миборовский U 05:32, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Opinions needed at current events
User:Andylkl and I has recently introduced mini flags in the Current events in Malaysia and Singapore page to help function as little geographical markers. While he initially introduced only the national flags of the two countries, I experimented with adding Malaysian state flags as well so as to break some "monotony" or overal blandness of the list. In Talk:Current events in Malaysia and Singapore however, Andylkl says that he does find it a uncustomary to have state and country flags listed together like this, a valid concern as some may consider it a breach of flag protocol.

What do the rest of you think about it? Please contribute your views in Talk:Current events in Malaysia and Singapore! ;)--Huaiwei 18:55, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Maps, maps, maps!
We need maps here, like in Hong Kong (which also lacks maps). Maps to tell someone, for instance, where Chinatown is, or Bugis Street, for that matter. Since someone decides to add a template for places in Singapore, there should be more maps! Mandel 21:09, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes, it's a big problem... All (or almost all) good maps of Singapore are copyrighted. (All printed street directories, streetdirectory.com, etc.) The free maps I've been able to find online are woefully dated. Maybe I shall draw some myself... with MS Paint and my trusty mouse, perhaps? :-) But that will have to wait till my exams are over in 2 months' time. :-( Kimchi.sg | Talk 08:10, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

 * We do have a Map Department, I believe Vsion have been providing us with excellent locator maps so far. ;)

 * But I still don't see maps on some pages. Such as Bugis Street, as Mandel pointed out. :-( And you forgot the four tildes... ;) - Kimchi.sg | Talk 14:13, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

As I have said countless times, I want very much to be part of this project, but I dont know how! :D--Huaiwei 14:29, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

 * There is a gallery of ready maps at the Commons Commons:Category:Singapore places locator maps and I believe there is a locator map for Bugis, though not sure how much it overlap with the area described in Bugis Street. But there are still more to be done, like Chinatown etc. I think I can cover most places, by say end of 2005 (because of exams lor!) . Meantime, you can make a request if you cannot find what you want, I can make some maps over the weekends. Btw, those maps are free-licences, so you can modify them to make derivative maps. For example, if you want a locator map for Raffles Institution, you can download the Bishan Map Image:Bishan locator map.png and agar-agar pin-point the location of RI, based on the surrounding road features. Those boundaries are quite exact, so it should be quite easy to locate the place using a street directory as a guide. --Vsion 14:44, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

 * You can check out one map-maker, User:Yu Ninjie at China messageboard who makes excellentmaps. You can ask him what software he uses to manufacture those maps. Mandel 08:59, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

 * One example . Apparently used Adobe Photoshop. Mandel 09:01, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

 * There's also GIMP. ;-) -- Natalinasmpf 12:07, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't think I can produce those type of artistic maps created by User:Yu Ninjie. I will try to learn GIMP though. Btw, I have uploaded several of my so-called "Base Maps" at Commons:Category:Singapore base maps. I call them Base Maps, because these are the highest resolution I can generate (6708x3594). As they have no downsampling artifacts, these maps can be used to make derivative maps more easily. For example, the map Image:Singapore places base map.png shows the regions that have been marked out so far; and I will update this image regularly. There are also base maps for the MRT and expressways as well as a "combo" that shows everything: Image:Singapore combo base map.png. If you have any suggestion or comment, feel free to leave me a message, or post it here. --Vsion 08:21, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

NSAs
Could i request that we have some articles on the national sports associations of singapore? i'm thinking of expanding on singaporesailing. Concluding 12:15, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * And why not? Please feel free to write them if you have the info. ;)--Huaiwei 03:46, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

naming policy
Some of the article's content in respect to their names are atrocious. I for one, am tired of seeing articles that say one thing, ie. about hill, only to say it is an suburb. This should be the other way round. It should be declared as a hill, a river, a street, or whatever it is, before discussing the area named after it! This seems to be the better practice, and when content gets big enough, we can even branch it off. I just fixed multiple articles with the same problem, only to notice it continues everywhere! -- Natalinasmpf 08:10, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
 * You must be frustrated over Bukit Timah and such right? Same headache here. :D--Huaiwei 09:17, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, that article has been fixed somewhat. Notable ones needing a revamp are Bukit Batok, Bukit Panjang, etc. (I do assume Bukit Panjang is different from Pasir Panjang Ridge/Kent Ridge, though? -- Natalinasmpf 15:35, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I will try to expand Bukit Merah soon. Bukit Panjang should be relatively easy, and yeah...its hell far away from Pasir Panjang! :D

 * What does Panjang mean though? The concept of a hill and ridge both having this name seems confusing at first glance. -- Natalinasmpf 14:14, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Panjang means "long" in Malay, if I remember correctly. So "Bukit Panjang" = Long hill. Pasir Panjang = Long Beach? :D--Huaiwei 14:29, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Google Earth
I believe this have been said before, but I have found that we can make use of the "landmarks" function in the software to denotate the venues. I have uploaded one that include some of the best-known areas and roads in Woodlands. Just open Singapore.kml from the Singapore.zip file with Google Earth. Slivester 14:46, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
 * But how do we incorporate that into wikipedia ah?--Huaiwei 14:31, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I have not thought of that yet, perhaps as a downloadable link (of which I am not entirely sure of its state of legality to do so), but I am certain that we can come out with something. Anyway, I will be away up to the end of November due to O' levels. Slivester 13:21, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Do take a break then and concentrate. Perhaps when you are back, google would have tought of something. :D--Huaiwei 15:56, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Shopping Malls
Out of interest, are shopping malls encyclopedic? Mandel 12:41, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
 * If they become important nodes for human social life, why not? :D--Huaiwei 14:26, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Public lavatories are also important nodes for human...s...sanitary life... :) Like MRT stations and bus terminus, their encyclopedic value is at best...fuzzy. I always find that Wikipedia has too many "dead", useless or orphaned links, and that their criteria for inclusion is very lax. I can see Wikipedia hitting 1 million articles, after which it will be arguable whether Wikipedia will remain a useful encyclopedia or merely a search tool akin to Google.  For example, when we can have a useful explanatory article call "Transportation in Singapore", having many many dead links to MRT stations and bus terminus a la a transportation menu isn't useful (at least to me).  Mandel 14:56, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
 * There is an article on Japanese toilet, and it is a featured article. --Vsion 02:20, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Nothing wrong with a general article on toilets, I'm talking about Pasir Ris MRT station, Male toilet Cubicle 2. Mandel 04:12, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
 * lol! Anyway I see your point, Mandel, but I believe red links arent bad in itself. They invite people to make them blue!--Huaiwei 21:50, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

On the Main Page...
Jurong Falls is in the Do You Know... section of Main Page! It's so rewarding to have a Singapore article on Main Page at last! :-D Kimchi.sg | Talk 10:58, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Haha...but its the fifth appearance of an sg-related article on the main page liao loh! :D SGpedians%27_notice_board--Huaiwei 15:54, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

 * =D Sengkang 02:36, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Don and Drew Show
Don and Drew...it needs expansion...Tan Ding Xiang 陈鼎翔 11:33, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Roger Khoo
Ok,remember this blind S'pore DJ?He passed away recently.But who was he and when did he die?--Tan Ding Xiang 陈鼎翔 02:31, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Imageries of Singapore
I have uploaded a substaintial amount of photos related to Woodlands, Singapore. I am looking for someone to maybe, initial an effort to gather imageries of Singapore, especially the dwelling apartment blocks, and maybe our unique form of neighbourhood centres and TOP OF ALL, bus interchanges and roads and people.

Anyway, they are in the wikicommons:

Slivester 02:57, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks...am trying to build up a collection of photos as well beyond what I usually take. Hope to contribute some as well soon! ;)--Huaiwei 05:27, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

 * I was wondering, do you have the issue of "people staring at you when taking photos"? I met with an unusual encounter a couple of days ago when I was taking some shots of Woodlands, and some middle-aged ladies - around 5, stopped to stare at me, as if fearing that I might do something nasty.

 * Then on SMRT 911, on the way home, I overheard some kids behind me making fun of me and my camera, saying that I maybe a newly recruited working for JI, that the camera could be filled with explosives. That just turn me off, almost entirely. Perhaps its my camera, rather huge actually. But I will continue to take pictures. :) Slivester 11:18, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Hahaha thats pretty normal and I get it all the time. If you wanna look at it more positively, it is perhaps reflective of a populance much more aware of the terrorism issue and the dangers Singapore is facing now? ;) Anyhow, to exercise some caution, as the police do have the right to detain you if they suspect you of "unusual activity". Always carry your identity with you just in case, and try to comply with their wishes to inspect and "interrogate" you if they so wish. Afterall we do nothing unlawful, so keep your cool and be nice, and they will be nice in return. ;)

 * Btw you are using a DSLR or something? My camera is "huge" too by "laymen standards", so I always carry a "little sidekick" to boot..muahaha. Macham my machine gun with sidearm. And how you look like may also attract unwanted attention. If you are a small ethnic-chinese girl, no one is probably going to look at your camera (they will probably look at you thou. :D)--Huaiwei 12:29, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Haha! thats a good one - the chinese girl. Yeah, I am using a EOS 300D, and with a rather huge 50-200mm lens. I can't afford a prime lens yet, so I have no choice at all! I can't keep it in a bag, again, can't afford a decent bag! But I will be looking into getting a compact digicam I supposed, could have just get it from a friend or something. Slivester 00:06, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Woo...mine if the EOS 350D. My lens goes from 18-200...so yeah, I suppose our lenses are just about as huge? :) I got a bag lah...but whats the pt of doing that when they should be out to be used! Yeah...a compact cam is always handy in "tight" situations. ;)--Huaiwei 13:47, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * 350D? Cool body there! At least you pay almost the same price I paid for, for a 8 megapixel camera, while I got a 6 :) 18-200mm? Never heard before but I am sure its rather huge. My 55-200mm is around 97.3cm in length, and my old 75-300mm is 122mm, as stated in their booklets, and my kit lens is with a friend. Argh. :( Slivester 12:34, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Haha the next cameras will make mine seem like a lousy deal too anyway. What to do? ;) Mine is a Tamron lens...perhaps why u hadent heard of it. It has nice range, but lousy aperture, so its not too expensive for me. And its actually rather small for such a range (about 9.5 cm...how come your lens can be 97 cm?? :D), so its great for travelling. My kit lens isnt used at all..muaha!--Huaiwei 13:39, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Pardon me, its 'mm' haha :p A 97.3cm in length can kill, haha, imagine that. I actually picked up this fungus-infested 28-80mm Tamron film SLR lens, not sure if it can be mounted on EF, but when I sent it to a service centre, I was told I might as well throw it away, too costly to remove the fungus off such an old lens. Anyway, do you know of any store that sells a bag designed for carrying camera and lense? Slivester 14:57, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * My rather uninformed mind says that you can probably get it from one of the camera and photography shops at Peninsular Plaza. I bought lens cleaning kit from there back when I was managing binoculars for SAF. ;-) Kimchi.sg | Talk 15:24, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I actually eyed on a couple of designs over there, but find it rather unsuitable for me, the colours, the size and so on. So, still back on searching. :p I will be visiting Peninsular Plaza again, probably next week, just to check for 2nd hand stocks, haha. Slivester 16:25, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Huaiwei didn't just try to poke fun at me, did he? *eyes suspiciously* :D -- Natalinasmpf 15:52, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * The ethnic-Chinese girl? haha. :) Slivester 16:26, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Broadcasting in Singapore
I have started this article today with the knowledge I have concurrently. I sensed great potential for this article, as well as the history of television broadcasting in Singapore, really fascinating to me. Just that history of broadcasting is rather a vague concept to me; I was born where too late to understand the transition of SBC to TCS. Slivester 11:21, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Good content but let me correct the English, okay? I need an opportunity to practise writing English and Wikipedia is just the place. :D -- Kimchi.sg | Talk 15:07, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Certainly, I wrote it in such a way even my English teachers will kill me. Haha. :) Slivester 23:53, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * OK, I went over it and corrected most, if not all, of the English already. I hope no sentence was damaged in the process, but there were some redundant or irrelevant parts of sentences that didn't survive the cut. And it would be good if we have a lot more sources... ;)Kimchi.sg | Talk 09:21, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

sgForums
It seems that sgForums users created their own article but then got stuck in an edit war... LOL. I was in there trying to help them clean up the English BTW. ;-) P.S. - they misspelt the article name... see what happens when you turn a bunch of forum users loose onto a wiki. :-P Kimchi.sg | Talk 16:07, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Walao that is really dumb siah. "Very famous forum"? Infamous indeed! :D--Huaiwei 17:09, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * "People to Watch Out For", haha. :) Slivester 00:09, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * If the Japanese have 2channel, why can't Singapore have Sgforums? :P But we've obviously still got a long way to go if we want anything that impressive. :( Kimchi.sg | Talk 14:23, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Using better Engrish can be a start. :D -- Миборовский U 05:29, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Everytime someone on sgForums starts a topic on that very article, it's going to be not-so-subtly messed up... Darn. I asked in sgForums if the moderator could close all those topics but it isn't likely to happen. At least I put it in my watchlist. :| -- Kimchi.sg | Talk 15:16, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * 4 edits do not an edit war make! But yes, it needs work.
 * -- Миборовский U 01:21, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Vandal alert
I would like to bring to notice that Thum Ping Tjin article was being attacked and it somehow escape our radar screens for half a month. Because of that, it is now nominated for AfD Articles for deletion/Thum Ping Tjin. Assuming the result will be "keep", please add Thum Ping Tjin to your watchlist and help to watch over it. Thnks. --Vsion 18:12, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Got it. Slivester 05:59, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

IRC?
Should we have an IRC channel?--Tan Ding Xiang 陈鼎翔 03:03, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Sounds great, at least you get realtime updates. :p I suggest the use of GalaxyNet, #wikipedia. Get some guys to register, hehe. Slivester 05:51, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

NTU students cannot access IRC via the standard 69xx port numbers, last I tried. So if Galaxynet servers operate from those ports and nothing else, I can't join. :( -- Kimchi.sg | Talk 15:51, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that worked similarly for secondary schools. The way I did to gain access is to get someone with a bouncer mIRC script, and set the port to connect to the his/her computer at port other than the default IRC ports, and he/she will subsequently connect to an IRC server through his/her computer. In that way, it acts almost like a proxy. :p Slivester 23:47, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

 * I think we can do it at home if we got computers...--Tan Ding Xiang 陈鼎翔 02:31, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Don't tell me you're all handling Wiki tasks from poly/school PCs... CABAL 10:17, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

 * NUS and NTU hostels are connected to their respective school networks. ;-) -- Kimchi.sg | Talk 14:46, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Jurong West New Town
Where shall I put a picture and a little info on Jurong West New Town? Jurong seems too big an area, Boon Lay is too small to cover it all... Perhaps a new article? But I'd rather do that as a last resort seeing how many SG-location-stubs we have all over the place. -- Kimchi.sg | Talk 15:59, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Putting it into Jurong should be quite alright I supposed? Just like Marsiling, although its a bigger than Woodlands, its put down Woodlands, Singapore, :) Slivester 23:44, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Marsiling bigger than Woodlands?? Convince me! :D Anyway there has been a previous project over Singapore placenames. Jurong, Jurong East New Town and Jurong West New Town all have a place in wikipedia as distinct articles, provided we are able to expand them to a reasonable length.--Huaiwei 06:59, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah, in a sense Marsiling is most definitely bigger than Woodlands, the neighbourhood, hehe. Woodlands (both as a town and a neighbourhood - 2 different entities) is part of the Sembawang GRC, and usually Woodlanders simply include Marsiling, Admiratly, Old Woodlands, Woodgrove and Lower Bukit Timah as part of the "entire Woodlands". In actual sense, Woodlands is a collective of neighbourhoods, namely the larger ones: Woodlands, Marsiling, Admiratly and Woodgrove. Woodlands is also divided into/as constituencies in the GRC, with looser relation with the neighbourhood actually.
 * Its really hard to explain; check out the town council's site, you might understand more over there. :) Slivester 13:51, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Chinese surnames on Wikipedia
Cont'd from archive 1: User:Jiang has started a WikiProject for Chinese surnames. — Instantnood 13:22, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Blocked Addresses
Anyone having problems with blocked IP addresses recently? Don't come often nowadays and I've noticed I'm blocked completely the last two times I turned up. Despite having complained several times to the admins, their rationale is they'll have to block vandals till they drop dead. Well, the vandal(s) is not gone, but sooner or later I'll drop out of the project. What good is it when you can't even reply to questions on your talk page? Mandel 07:25, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
 * You arent alone. I was blocked 4 times in less than two weeks just a week ago. IPs used by sg ISPs are often similar, and hence results in so much problems for sg users in particular with the increase in viewership (and vandals). I am expecting tonnes more after this sunday.....--Huaiwei 08:56, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Too bad Wikipedia doesn't allow users to access at all through IP anonymizers such as Tor and Privoxy. :'( Kimchi.sg | Talk 09:18, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I have been blocked FOUR times. It is very annoying, and I can't stand it! I cannot edit any articles, and once I was half way editing and I was blocked. My IP is shared with a vandal, who vandalises articles. I have to email the administrators and also have to put a special section on my talk page. I hope Wikipedia does something about it. Terenceong1992 04:59, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I was somehow blocked for a few seconds earlier...and that nearly caused me to tear my hair out. Should all affected parties write a combined message to the admins to resolve this?--Huaiwei 11:53, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I was blocked in the evening (GMT+8) for an hour (the time blocked), thanks to the user 202.156.64 who vandalises Wikipedia. I couldn't edit articles for an hour. Terenceong1992 14:48, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
 * If they can trace downloaders of MP3s right down to the cable modem, why can't they trace Wikipedia abusers likewise? :-( Kimchi.sg | Talk 14:59, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Tracing down to that level requires ISP-level access. If you've ever performed a detailed trace that gets you location information, you'll notice that it is always stopped at the lowest level under the control of a ISP's machine. Only the ISP itself can trace it directly to the source. CABAL 13:47, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Today I'm blocked again. I'm outa here. Mandel 12:18, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * They are more interested in downloading pirated MP3 music and video files via P2P. That is their main priority, but they may eventually. Terenceong1992 13:37, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Today I'm still blocked. All four times by four different sysops.  It's a real pain in the arse.  I think I'll come back a week later. Mandel 10:46, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * One week on and still blocked. Mandel 14:34, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Feature in The Sunday Times
There is an exclusive feature on SGpedians in The Sunday Times today. =D Sengkang 06:08, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Guess who are the 2 guys in the photo? And rather it's quite balanced too. :D Kimchi.sg | Talk 07:07, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Haha anyone able to reproduce the article here for posterity? I find it a pity they only quoted my most boring quotes thou. :D--Huaiwei 09:07, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
 * How much of the article? Both Mailer diablo and I have copies. Too bad they don't put newspaper articles under GFDL. :) Kimchi.sg | Talk 10:58, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Copies in what sense?--Huaiwei 11:34, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
 * The paper version. We bought copies of the paper. :) Kimchi.sg | Talk 12:40, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I had mine delivered to my house daily! :) - Mailer Diablo 13:27, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Aiyah chey I tot wat. I also got it at my doorstep daily what. :D--Huaiwei 11:55, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Hope there'll be more people joining us... ;-) Kimchi.sg | Talk 13:51, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Anyone willing to summarize the article? I didn't buy it today, and now it's all sold out. :-( -- Natalinasmpf 15:47, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Summarise? In where? I have the Sunday Times. Terenceong1992 06:37, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

On this very talk page would be sufficient. Or some user-subpage. ;-) -- Natalinasmpf 09:26, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

 * My summary of the article:

 * It starts off coverage of the Lee Kuan Yew name debate, then it discusses the advantages of Wikipedia, such as our 800,000-strong article size and that anyone can edit articles. Then it covers some mistakes the reporter found in articles such as POV in David Tao, someone's attempt at revising history in The Straits Times' School of Rock competition section, and the "confusing" explaination in the Yio Chu Kang stub. The article also asks Jimbo for his views on these inaccuracies and it says while he admits some articles are garbage, "he insists that most of them are not".

 * Then a NTU SCI professor is interviewed and he gives quite a upbeat assessment, saying Wikipedia is "the most exciting application of the open source movement", and that he visits Wikipedia weekly. Last of all is mention of "SGpedians" and the interviews with Huaiwei, Mailer diablo and myself. And in a side box, it has a small "Wiktionary" of commonly-used terms, such as NPOV, Vanity page and edit war. :D Kimchi.sg | Talk 15:38, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Didn't Kimchi.sg say something about the disproportionate number of males to females on wikipedia? Anyway, any seditious stuff in the interview? Everyone's still here, right? Then probably not. -- Миборовский U 08:50, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Can anyone scan the article? I don't read TST, but I'm interested. Mandel 12:15, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

 * I dont understand why Kimchi gets to comment on a topic like gender on wikipedia, while I am asked basic questions and anything beyond that arent published anyway. Hey I am a social geographer ok!!! :D--Huaiwei 13:31, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Scan and post it here please; and oh.. include the pictures. :-). You guys should say female editors are very active here mah, lit dat how to attract more people? --Vsion 18:55, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

 * I find it strange that the powers that be tacitly approved Wikipedia. (Or else Straits Times would never get to run a story on it.) The only reason they would do that is because they find the contents on Wikipedia to their liking, or at least not to their great displeasure... And not to sound conspiratorial, but there might be something wrong with that. Compare and contrast with zh.wikipedia.org and its third banning. (This is not to equate the two, but the underlying rationales are the same.) -- Миборовский U 23:09, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

World Cyber Games 2005
There's an article World Cyber Games in Wikipedia already gathering very brief information of the past World Cyber Games. Should an article for the World Cyber Games 2005 be created? - yxTay 03:01, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Yup, it should. There is an article on the 117th IOC Session. Terenceong1992 14:15, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * In that case, can someone help? I have quite a little information about it. Thanks. I'll try to start the article as soon as possible. 'World Cyber Games 2005' is the correct title? - yxTay 15:36, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Or is it supposed to be 2005 World Cyber Games? Wikipedia seems to love placing the date first...--Huaiwei 15:51, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I've moved the article already, I created the article. Terenceong1992 17:04, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Are you sure about that? The official World Cyber Games website writes World Cyber Games 2005
 * No. The fact that it's held in Singapore is not a good enough reason for you to add something with very little information on. Mandel 10:42, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * It should remain there for the time being. Why not? And Wikipedia puts dates in front. But anyone knows about WCG 2005, that's the prob. It will eventually be expanded. Someone will get info for this. Terenceong1992 14:27, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * There're, in fact, lots of information in the WCG official website, I just don't know which to include and which not to. Anyway, this should be discussed in Talk:2005_World_Cyber_Games. - yxTay 06:29, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Just put as much as you can, it will be fine. I will look into it when it is done, and see what to edit. Terenceong1992 14:23, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
 * The article is done (I believe it should be), although there may be areas of improvement. - yxTay 09:23, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

DHS GEP
There is an article about Dunman High School's GEP. I think it should be deleted, it is not encyclopaedic. Also, it is a case study and has things like teacher's names, and where the students come from which school. This should be voted for deletion, or maybe speedy deletion. Such articles on Wikipedia brings down the standard like written in the Sunday Times when Jimbo said something about the quality. Terenceong1992 04:39, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Why don't you have the honour of putting it up for VfD? I'll put it on VfD. ;) Kimchi.sg | Talk 06:12, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

 * On second thought, shall we trim out the un-encyclopaedic material and then merge the remainder with the main DHS article? Then we won't need to go through 5 days of AfD voting. -- Kimchi.sg | Talk 06:25, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I have placed the notice template for its merger to DHS. The name of the teachers, as well as the talk page (an exact duplicate of the article), has been removed too. Hope that someone will make an effort to merge it. *drew 00:57, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

an informal COTW
I've just added a huge chunk of (specific) info to Primary School Leaving Examination, and I think colloborating on this one for a week will yield fruitful results...you get the gist on how the various formats are elaborated, scoring is done, etc. so perhaps we could all pitch in, perhaps add a photo or two (can anyone think of ten year series could fit in?), a criticisms section et al we could make this quite a good article. I can envision this being an FA next year, or something. -- Natalinasmpf 15:30, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * OK, sure no prob. I see whether I still have this info. And I will add it on the article. Terenceong1992 15:47, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Need some help from the younger ones too, since especially I just realised there have been some major revisions to the format since I took it three years ago. :D -- Natalinasmpf 16:19, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Singlish Babel?
I thought we had one... apparently not. So here's my suggestions for it: :D

Eh? Likee? My Singlish skill level is only 2, so "correct" my Singlish, please! -- Миборовский U 04:07, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Wow, this babel template is damn pro :). I think mine maybe a level 3. *drew 04:11, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and made them =)

Template:User en-sg-1 - Template:User en-sg-2 - Template:User en-sg-3 - Template:User en-sg-4

They're used in the same way as the Babel templates. Just put, for example, if you're native in English and si beh powderful in Singlish.

-- ran (talk) 04:46, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Can someone be native in Singlish? :) I can't think of what to write for en-sg-N!
 * -- Миборовский U 06:10, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

"Wa lau eh!! This person born that day can speak Singlish already one!!"

Sorry, I'm an en-sg-1 at best... so this may not be that di4dao4.

Or maybe we can just merge level 4 and native. If you're si beh powderful in Singlish lidat, then I think you're about as native as anyone can get... -- ran (talk) 06:20, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Hm, we need lots of bad (good, depending on your POV) Singlish in that guy's description... like, 10.

Eh? Merging would be an option, but I don't really know if someone can rightly be considered a native speaker of Singlish. -- Миборовский U 06:32, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

... 10 might be a bit excessive.... -______-"""

About the native thing: anyone who grew up speaking Singlish can be viewed as a native speaker of Singlish. Of course this is complicated by the fact that there's a continuum between Singlish and ang mor English (see Singlish), so what if your native language is (say) 50% Singlish, 50% ang mor? Probably an en-N and en-sg-2.

Another idea would be to take the current en-sg-4 and move it to en-sg-N, then leave en-sg-4 unused. -- ran (talk) 07:24, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, there's a difference between nativity and proficiency. Heck, I didn't touch English for the first 10 years of my life and now I can confidently say my command of the language is far beyond the "normal" native speaker. Reverse for Chinese. My native language (and proudly so, I might add) but my proficiency with it is... shall we say, dismal at best. I would suggest having a en-sg-4 tag for the epitome of Singlishness, and a separate en-sg-N tag for, well, born into Singlish or something. Kinda like the proposed en-5 tag, IIRC.
 * -- Миборовский U 08:01, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Hahaha so funny man. Gave myself a three..although sometimes I think I am probably a 2.5 instead compared to the pros around me? :D About the native thing...I arent sure, but yes, some do grow up being forced by their zealous parents to learn English when the level of proficiency of their parents arent that good too. I suppose Singlish creeps in pretty easily that way from a very young age. Anyhow, note that I changed my English proficiency level to level 4 instead of native as I dont consider myself "born" into that language despite all Singaporeans being taught at first language level?--Huaiwei 08:46, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

You have to have at least one native language, lah. I very buay pai seh, give myself 2 native langs even though one is not my native lang and I suck at my real native lang. -- Миборовский U 08:55, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Well... I think the main problem is that there are just so many dimensions here ("nativity", proficiency, sociolect continuums (as in Singlish) that our one-dimensional 1-2-3-4-N scale simply doesn't come close to conveying the complexity involved. So yeah... I think we don't have to be that "rigorous" about this, and we don't need to be so jin3zhang1 about what "native" is and what "proficient" is... everyone can just give themselves a tag that they think is roughly representative. =) -- ran (talk) 08:59, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Oh... another thing. For en-sg-2, do you think that "not very good" is a bit... um... negative sounding? Not to be PC or anything, but since it's supposed to be intermediate, how about "so-so lidat" or something similar? (As I said, I'm hovering around en-sg-1, so I can't really brainstorm beyond that...) -- ran (talk) 09:01, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Dunno lah. en-sg-2 cannot have more Singlish usages than en-sg-3 mah. -- Миборовский U 09:14, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

No need to put more usages into en-sg-2, I was simply suggesting that the wording can be changed. Since 2 is supposed to be intermediate, I think something that means "intermediate" would describe the level better ...

How about we wait and see how people respond? Judging from number of Singaporeans here, I foresee a high level of usage for these tags. :D -- ran (talk) 09:23, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Walao anything also can one lah! Thou actually I did choose 3 instead of 2 because 2 sounded too outa for my level. Muahaha!--Huaiwei 02:51, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

ex-Hong Kong guy here, so I give myself a 1.0. -_- — Kimchi.sg | Talk 14:24, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

I give myself a 3 lah! Can speak some Hokkien and Malay with Singlish. Has cut down the usage of speaking Singlish actually, but speaks occasionally. Terenceong1992 14:41, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I dont understand why people keep thinking mixing English with Hokkien = Singlish?--Huaiwei 14:56, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
 * That's all I know, OK? -- Миборовский U 23:44, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
 * "lah" is not hokkien hor? :P — Kimchi.sg | Talk 04:11, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Haha I also duno lah. :D--Huaiwei 04:58, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
 * "Lah" is a Malay word. :) Terenceong1992 16:46, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Is it? Haha anyway sometimes I just love Singlish when they are writtern to complain. Perfect language for that man. No wonder sgreans complain king? :D A marvellous example--Huaiwei 09:32, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Yup, it is a Malay word. Terenceong1992 12:03, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * LOL @ Huaiwei's link! If got someone born that day can speak Singlish oreddi one, then I think that's the one. =]
 * Btw, I've made the native box. The full set of boxes is thus as follows:

Template:User en-sg-1 - Template:User en-sg-2 - Template:User en-sg-3 - Template:User en-sg-4 - Template:User en-sg
 * -- ran (talk) 23:28, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Haha apparantly no one dares call himself a native singlish speaker just yet! :D--Huaiwei 17:59, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Not even si bey powderful =/ -- ran (talk) 19:33, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Singapore's losses in WW2?
Can anyone provide authorative information on Singapore's losses in WW2 1941-45?--Berndd11222 23:52, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

See Battle of Singapore - or are you looking for something more specific? -- Natalinasmpf 00:13, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, total losses due to Japanese occupation of Singapore civilians. Is there a modern reliable source that we can post to the Wikipedia WW2 casualties page? Now we have 150,000 civilian dead based on a citation by RJ Rummel of evidence from the post war trials of the Japanese.--Berndd11222 01:13, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Are Holocaust figures counted as casualties of war? I think they count as victims of war crimes, rather than casualties, so I would similarly think that those dying under the Sook Ching et al and the Kempetai would not count as casualties per se (ie. they didn't die in an air raid, while fighting, et al., they died at the hands of the secret police, of starvation, etc.) ... although I'm not sure what the criteria is. The figures for the Sook Ching itself is pretty cloudy (ie. Japanese allege this amount, Chinese allege way more) so that would probably be a reason why there's no concrete figure. -- Natalinasmpf 03:17, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Singapore
Hi all, I hope you noticed that many people have vandalised this page, especially this user, VigilForNguyen who writes things which have no NPOV. For example, Singapore practices cruel and unusual punishment on people. Please watch this page, before bad things come through. Terenceong1992 16:16, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
 * You didn't have to insert the word "stupid" into his user talk page because of that. o_O Let me change it to the template instead — we've all done things in rashness before, haven't we? — Kimchi.sg | Talk 17:28, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Changed to since I think it was meant to be blatant. — Kimchi.sg | Talk 17:36, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Just like Michael P. Fay, it'll eventually blow over...But get ready to catch some blatant vandalism in the meantime... - Mailer Diablo 20:13, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Do you think we should start invoking the Internal Security Act, or at least an instant block for some of these IP's? I mean you have edits like this - which is basicallly a terrorist threat. -- Natalinasmpf 21:29, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Yup, I shouldn't have inserted the word "stupid". :( This kind of vandalism should be stopped at once.--Terenceong1992 07:09, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Re: That particular edit, it's probably made from an ISP's proxy server so we won't be able to nail down anyone in particular. Here's the info on that IP:

inetnum:     58.104.0.0 - 58.105.255.255 netname:     OPTUSINTERNET-AU descr:       OPTUS INTERNET - RETAIL descr:       INTERNET SERVICES descr:       Chatswood, Sydney country:     AU role:         Optus Internet address:     Level 3, 11 Help Street address:     Chatswood, NSW 2067 country:     AU phone:        +61-2-9027-1127 fax-no:      +61-2-9027-1035 e-mail:      oie-netops@optus.com.au — Kimchi.sg | Talk 01:39, 2 December 2005 (UTC) I think you all should be embarrassed by your reaction to these incidents. I am embarrassed for the behaviors of my government here in the U.S. Your government's behavior and your casual threat to invoke the wrath of your legal system on an anonymous Wikipedian is as disgusting as anything I have seen here. 151.203.182.244 01:48, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
 * You may want to forward it to ISD, but I doubt any extradition would occur given that these people are unlikely to be Singaporeans. I doubt too though, that a Singtel-part-owned ISP would do nothing to this. - Mailer Diablo 02:59, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 9 am came and went. I slept right through it leh.--Huaiwei 04:46, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * You're Down Under now? No special vigils or any other kind of remembrance meeting in your part of town? o_O — Kimchi.sg | Talk 07:25, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Huh no lah I am in Singapore all these while! :D--Huaiwei 16:30, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Why are you defending someone who made a bomb threat? This is very strange. --Vsion 02:38, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Why are you putting words in my mouth? Can't stick to what I actually said?  The same thing happened during McCarthyism here in the U.S.: if you criticized the insanity, you were defending the Communists.  Grow up. 151.203.182.244 07:50, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
 * This thread and the above discussion are about a bomb threat made by an anonymous. Are you in the wrong place? --Vsion 08:12, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
 * No dude, you grow up. At least, write some coherent, sensible sentences. What reactions should we be ashamed of? You're embarrassed of your government? Who cares? America is not the world. America is not Singapore. Why should anyone be ashamed of their country just because you're ashamed of yours? And what words exactly are we putting into your mouth? That you're defending someone who made a bomb threat? Quick fact check: 1. The person in question made a bomb threat. 2. You're defending the said person. What exactly are we putting into your mouth?
 * I was in school today to do some 6-hour lab, and while we had an hour to wait for the electrophoresis to complete (getting rather sick of so many already), one of my friends was like, "Hey tell me about Singapore." Then another guy immediately went "They just hanged someone." Given how 90% of Americans think either that Singapore is in China or that it speaks Chinese, the tiny island sure got lots of (negative) publicity lately!
 * -- Миборовский U 08:14, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Somehow, I got a feeling Singaporeans in general have become some of the most battle-hardened creatures around who have had to endure constant verbal attacks, and to react accordingly with zeal and aplomb. I suppose folks in North Korea, Iraq etc probably gets more mudslinging, but how many have to endure this happening right at their faces the way we do all the time? I personally hardly ever give a damn if these same mudslingers dismiss our reactions as typical reactions from brainwashed individuals, and all the more so with each passing day. Makes me wonder why these supposedly "pro-democracy" and "human rights activists" are prepared to negate the Singaporean desires for self-expression and to put forth our views, irrespective of whether they are for or pro certain govt policies?--Huaiwei 16:51, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Lee Kuan Yew and his successors that the Singaporeans have chosen are pragmatic and capable. They know well how the grand chessboard operates like. By having such policies they should have anticipated what the outcome would be like. Don't blame the rest of the world for their comments. They have the rights to have their own say. — Instantnood 18:46, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Why is Instantnood also defending someone who made a bomb threat? Do someone have the rights to make bomb threat as Instantnoon suggested? Before you make further comment on LKY and company, please state clearly whether you approve or condemn the bomb threat. --Vsion 22:31, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Cool down. Instantnood is not defending that, he's just defending the political right to criticize, so long as there's justification. Mandel 02:28, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, instantnood's comments have no relations to what I was talking about, so I simply changed the indention to reflect that. Singaporeans blame the world for their comments? That is probably a new point worthy of a completely seperate debate. By criticising some views from outside Singapore, are Singaporeans denying their rights to comment? Contrast that to how some foreigners deem Singaporean voices as redundant and inconsequential, for they think we are just government-indoctrinated individuals who are just going to be the government's voice too anyway? What kind of garbage are you insinuating, intantnood?

 * And for the record, instantnood is well known for often touching on and criticising human rights issues and democracy in Singapore-related matters. I am hardly surprised that in the midst of doing so, he finds it perfectly alright for a bomb threat to be made as well, for isnt that "freedom of expression" too as far as he is concerned? :D--Huaiwei 03:39, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

 * What did I insinuate? Have I ever criticised on Wikipedia the human rights and democracy records of Singapore? (If yes, when and where?) — Instantnood 09:53, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

 * What bomb threat? My comment was made in response to Huaiwei's comment on verbal attacks to Singapore, not only on Wikipedia. — Instantnood 09:53, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm glad to know you are not a terrorist sympathizer :D. This is the bomb threat, which prompted this discussion. Comments with facts, evidences, and critical reasoning are certainly welcome; but bomb threats and general insults should be comdemned. I should also note that it is comforting that many non-SGpedians have helped to fight many of these vandals. :-) --Vsion 10:38, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

 * The reaction I am criticizing is exactly this: that bomb threats and "general insults" should be condemned, but that executing someone for trafficking in anything is a sovereign right. Most people growing up have school closed one day because of a "bomb threat" and I take a bomb threat on Wikipedia about as seriously.  The insistence on talking about referring the case to a law-enforcement agency that is killing people for non-violent crimes starts to make you complicit in the state's actions, even more so than the casual citizen who supports the state right to self-determination.  It's digusting to me to see responses from those on the ground level who side with law and order over human rights.  Much more digusting than a bomb threat, which, while irresponsible, is not to be taken seriously given its context.

 * The amazing thing is that you guys can dismiss brainwashing even as anyone who criticizes or even opposes you is classed as "defending a criminal act" (at least in Vsion and Miborovsky's eyes). This is the worst kind of mudslinging, because it seeks to distill the world into us-versus-them, as GWB does.  That's why I mentioned the actions of my own country.  There's a parallel that I thought you might be able to appreciate.  I guess I was wrong. 151.203.182.244 04:06, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I have to read your message three times to decipher what you meant. But let me try: the fact are (1) user:58.105.21.64 makes a bomb threat (we now know it is a hoax) (2) we, let say Vsion, suggest to refer it to law enforcement agency. According to you (User:151.203.182.244): Vsion is more disgusting than 58.105.21.64.  This is the meaning of your message, am I correct? --Vsion 04:23, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

151.203.182.244: We frankly don't care what you think about GWB or whether you should have the death penalty in any country other than Singapore, because we acknowledge that different people may have different priorities and values and opinions, and different countries are in different situations and face different challenges, etc. You're the one who's going around crusading for the one-right-way, one-size-fits-all way of thinking, shrilly calling for ideological narrowmindedness and orthodoxy, being utterly intolerant of dissenting opinions, and branding everyone who thinks differently as "brainwashed". You're the one pushing a us-vs-them approach. -- ran (talk) 04:59, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Human rights trump values and opinions. If that's what I'm crusading for, then so be it.  That's not orthodox or narrowminded.  At least I'm not blatantly misrepresenting the words of those who oppose or differ from me, as you insist on doing.  Find where I "branded everyone who thinks differently as 'brainwashed'" and report back on who's being honest and who's huffing, puffing and lying about the situation.  71.195.201.244 05:41, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

What you're crusading for is not human rights, but a specific policy (abolition of the death penalty) that you feel helps human rights, but others feel hurts their own human rights. In their eyes, you're there to take away their right to live in a society where they can raise their children free from the influence of drugs. They feel that the death penalty here -- imposed on a minority of criminals who destroy thousands of lives for selfish gain -- protects the rights of thousands of innocents. They feel that you want to take away this right, that what you advocate will needlessly destroy thousands of lives. And despite this, these people, who feel that you're taking away their rights, aren't crusading to change your views, merely asking you to accept that multiple views exist. Now who's respecting freedom of thought and expression here? Who's being tolerant, and who's being narrow-minded?

Also, human rights "trumps" values and opinions? People with different opinions (let's say, liberals and neocons) necessarily disagree on how to protect human rights. By your precedent, any debate over how to protect human rights can be ended with one side declaring -- "Our way protects human rights better than your way -- and since human rights trump opinions, you have no right to speak against our way!" (E.g. GWB: "The War in Iraq is the best way to protect human rights in Iraq. Anyone who disagrees is against human rights and has no right to speak, because human rights in Iraq trumps opinions.") Is this the sort of environment you're trying to create? -- ran (talk) 06:23, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

 * You are the one insisting about rights or lack thereof "to speak against" a "way" or policy. I've never here suggested nor would ever suggest that you have not the right to disagree.  As to your straw man, it seems you have not the dimmest perception about what the concept of human rights refers to.  If you review Wikipedia's own definition you will see that it refers to "safeguards for the individual against arbitrary use of power by the government".  If someone mugs you in an ally, it's not your human rights that have been violated, it's your local rights to safety as protected by a government.  Human rights are international conventions that transcend any individual government.  In the case of neocons, they could talk about human rights all they wanted but their philosophy is spectacularly about local rights truping human rights.  It is for this reason probably that neocons don't invoke human rights to justify their actions.  The words 'human rights' are not a simple common justification for the purposes of closing down dialogue, they are a progressive and hard-to-implement apex of liberal humanism that has a lot of ground to make up before it can claim serious success.  Each and every time a state violates human rights in the name of some other interest, wherther it be torturing prisoners in Gitmo or executing drug taffickers in Singapore, regular people of goodwill and conviction should stand up for the rights of the individual.  That the people I have interacted with here refuse to do so is far more suspect and serious than  the "Wiki bomb threat".  151.203.182.244 16:57, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Okay, so how about I changed the word "human rights" to simply "rights"? Human rights is not the only responsibility of governments -- they also need to protect what you have termed "local rights of safety". Nguyen has his rights, but the people of Singapore also have the right to raise their children free from the influence of drugs. What makes you think -- against all intuition -- that the first right, of one single criminal engaging in an act that willfully destroys thousands of lives -- somehow overrides the other one, that of thousands upon thousands of innocents? Perhaps you are letting ideological dogma override common sense?

Gitmo is a bad analogy, by the way. Abuse of prisoners is a purely pointless and vicious act on its own that does not help anyone anywhere. On the other hand, the death penalty in Singapore, sanctioned by the government of Singapore and a good portion of its population (as you have seen), helps keep Singapore from becoming a regional node of the drug trade, thereby saving lives in Singapore and elsewhere. -- ran (talk) 02:45, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Well at least now we are down to the meat of the matter, instead of whether or not I am defending a bomb threat. Now that we are down to real objections, I see two related points you are making.  First, that human rights are "ideological dogma", the respecting of which would threaten "thousands upon thousands of innocents" (in the specific case we are discussing, anyway).  Second is that prisoner abuse _is_ a human rights issue, but that there is no analogy because torture is a "pointless and vicious act that does not help anyone anywhere."  About this second point, I would ask, how is it that you know that?  Because there certainly are people out there who disagree, who think torture is what's necessary to protect the public from "evildoers".  I would suggest that you know torture is useless because of the research and advocacy of human rights organizations.  As it happens, those same organizations probably disagree with you that the death penalty is an effective deterrent.  At the very least, they would claim that the rights of the individual not to be killed by the state (particularly by such a gruesome method as hanging) outweigh any potential benefit in law and order.  My opinion is that such benefits are dubious at best, misrepresentations at worst.  For example, there are people who believe (with some amount of reason) that drinking alcohol is a vice that ruins lives.  Therefore, prohibiting the drinking of alcohol would save lives. By further extension, prohibiting trafficking in alcohol would make it harder for those who want to break the prohibition on drinking alcohol to do so, thereby saving lives.  At a certain point you have to wonder about these extensions and interrogate the authority at its source.  Is it even been shown to be a legitimate tradeoff?  In the case of torture it cleary has not been.  I would guess that most other state justifications for capital punishment have similarly not been proven to be effective legitimate tradeoffs.  Instead, it's left to intuition, as you pointed out, and the sovereign national right to do as we please.

 * Consider also that the human right at stake is not to immunity from punishment, but to proportional punishment. Criminal justice is not just a matter of deterrence, it's about a hierarchy of criminal activity.  If a starving person steals a loaf of bread that's not the same cost to society as a serial murderer.  Punishments should reflect this hierarchy. Proportionality of justice can't be dismissed just by invoking the (dubious) need for a strong deterrent.

 * The truth about human rights is that governments have rarely respected them. Honoring human rights by limiting the implementation of local rights (national sovereignty) is quite difficult to pull off.  The idea of human rights is that governments can fulfill their missions without needing to infringe on the rights of individuals in certain fundamental respects. It's my opinion that taking a government's word at face value on these kind of cases is the actual pervasive ideological dogma, rather than the relatively uncommon stance calling for respect for human rights.  71.195.201.244 10:40, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Drug trafficking is a serious offence with lethal consequences. Drug traffickers know that and the punishment they would face. They are responsible for their actions when they took the risk and commit the most heinous crime against their own conscience and against their own society. It is not a violation for human rights when justice is served and innocent lives are protected. --Vsion 10:53, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Hey guys, especially the anon user above, why are we discussing the pros and cons of capital punishment? Singapore is not the only country that has that.  Besides, this is an encyclopedia--we are not here to discuss what is ethically right or wrong (the correct place to do that will be a forum; such discussions are far too subjective for NPOV), but to accurately reflect what is the practice in such countries. Mandel 20:12, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

What is really encyclopedic?
After looking at recent new articles I begin to wonder--who and what are really encyclopedic? Notwithstanding the fact many contributors here are too young to have consulted or even held an encyclopedia in their hands, does places like "Sengkang neighbourhood hub", Compassvale, Anchorvale, Fernvale, Rivervale (???); shopping malls (there must be hundreds around Singapore, close to a million in all the world); events like Mambo Jambo (just a spin on international variants of pub nite-outs); people like Guo Meimei (who have released just two singles of dubious merit), merit a mention in a respectable encyclopedia? Are we mixing encyclopedia worth with news-worthiness? Can we establish decisively what's worth adding on from Singapore, or is anything and everything from Singapore encyclopedic? Mandel 19:08, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure what guidelines you have in mind, but if you wish all the above mentioned articles to be out, I believe it will be quite a hard sell. I respect your opinion, but to me, the above neighbourhood-related articles should keep their articles. So does Guo Meimei if she had release an album. Mambo Jambo should be merged into Zouk (club). Just my 2 cts, the current mechanism is still Afd where we basically just vote and don't have to spend too much time. --Vsion 00:25, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I know it's tough getting something deleted once they're there, but a back-to-basics question—is Wikipedia trying to be exhaustive or selective? Should we, for example, include every single neighbourhoods in Singapore, and down to what size should we slice them into (eg. a 0.5 km by 0.5 km?), before they get, ehm, "unencyclopedic"?  Or do you guys think everything concerning neighbourhood towns, down to the last minnows, are encyclopedic?  If so I think equal treatments should be given to countries in China and US—which means, of course, hundreds of thousands more of such articles.  If you don't plan to be exhaustive, but to be selective, then it helps to state what criteria we have for inclusion. Mandel 02:24, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Your views arent new, nor is it perculiar to Singapore-related articles, hence the two major camps of "inclusionists" and "deletionists". I am personally leaning more to inclusionist, hence I too feel if Rivervale as a neighbourhood name is considered notable enough, than yes, it does deserve its article. We may not be able to say the same for, say, Ang Mo Kio Neighbourhood 1, so the existance of Rivervale dosent really mean we are going to start adding articles for every single neighbourhood in Singapore.--Huaiwei 05:14, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * During my school days, I have always been frustrated in my hunt for coherent and complete articles in order for me to grasp a full picture of the topics and subjects for my research. To add salt to the wound, many articles aren't neutral at all. To me, an encyclopedia has to be as exhaustive as possible to achieve being "encyclopedic". Hence, I am pro-inclusionist. But, at my age, it's always good to know that I am still being considered young! =D Sengkang 07:14, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * What I'm saying isn't a mere repeat of inclusionist or exclusionist views. Inclusionists include everything, that to me is silly. We need to pin down exactly what we intend to include or exclude. For instance, why is Rivervale considered "notable" enough while Ang Mo Kio Neighbourhood 1 is not? Because Rivervale has a nicer name? Are we being fair?  Also, for certain topics an encyclopedia can never be exhaustive—we can't obviously include every human being on earth, so we must be selective.  Yes, for certain subjects: eg. list of universities, species of plants and animals on earth etc, Wikipedia is exhaustive. But every building? Every neighbourhood? So far no one's answering the million-dollar question—what selection criteria? To me one has to be selective when the list becomes far too big, and being pro-inclusionist is akin to wearing a hair that isn't cut for years, huge, untidy, overblown. Mandel 13:46, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Once again, we are NOT going to make every single article for each neighbourhood eg. Chip Bee Gardens. Then this will be unencyclopedic. Rivervale is a prominent neighbourhood in Sengkang. But who knows of Ang Mo Kio Neighbourhood 1? So its a no. From the comments you made, I've seen that you have been opposing to things like the PJ Thum's article, shopping malls saying they are unencyclopedic etc. Adding info is better than removing info. Right? Terenceong1992 15:20, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * You contradict yourself. I was asking for the very reason why Rivervale is considered more "prominent" or more "notable" than Ang Mo Kio Neighbourhood 1.  I don't know Rivervale, but I do know AMK Neighbourhood 1...so does that make AMK Neighbourhood 1 more notable than Rivervale?  If Rivervale is considered notable, then why is Chip Bee Gardens not? No encyclopedia on earth includes shopping mall, I'm asking for the rationale behind these are being considered encyclopedic. Mandel 16:00, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * According to Articles_for_deletion/Precedents, malls are generally considered not encyclopedic and are usually ok'ed for deletion. Mandel 16:41, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Now I get what you mean. But things like Mall of America exists. --Terenceong1992 16:49, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Mall of America was the largest shopping mall at one time in the US, and at any rate it has ceased to be just a shopping mall, and has become a tourist attraction as well. When a shopping mall has enough history, size or prestige on its side to attract foreign visitors, I think it's a good enough point for inclusion.  That's why they say "malls are generally not notable". Mandel 17:11, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * So what do you fellas think? Are malls encyclopedic?  Are neighbourhood clusters as small as 1 km by 1 km encyclopedic? Mandel 21:18, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes they are encyclopaedic. They deserve a space here. You see small neighbourhoods from other countries on Wikipedia. Most of us think that way. I would rather include them. --Terenceong1992 04:41, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
 * "Small neighbourhoods from other countries". Can you give me an example? I'd like to know how small is small. Mandel 07:11, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

COTW
We should have a COTW every week. Any comments?--Terenceong1992 16:55, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Agree, and I am back from the 'O' level! Slivester 12:24, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Either COTW or COTF is fine. — Kimchi.sg | Talk 13:53, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Then it should commence it asap. Maybe today. Terenceong1992 07:49, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The page is up, start nominating and voting. link. --Terence Ong |Talk 16:15, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm surprised no one's going to vote or edit the page. It seems like everyone doesn't want a COTW. --Terence Ong |Talk 13:03, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Ah Beng and Ah Lian
Our good friends, Ah Beng and Ah Lian, are being earmarked for detention and deletion. Do go to the respective pages and vote for or against their PR status in Wikipedia, failing of which they may be permanently deported. Mandel 02:49, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I was away but thank god they are saved. :D Thanks for the input you put in all these while.--Huaiwei 13:17, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

 * We need to do something about these articles. I'm going to the library, and I'll see what I can do with these articles. Mandel 03:23, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Kung hei fat choi??
Since User:Instantnood has deemed it ethical to ask his pals to vote just for the sake of it, then may I also draw all of you guy's attention to some Cantonese folk's insistance in claiming Cantonese ownership over a phrase as common as 恭喜发财. There is an on-going exercise to rename it back to Gong Xi Fa Cai, so feel free to go to Talk:Kung hei fat choi and comment.--Huaiwei 16:33, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * It's not claiming Cantonese ownership over the phrase 恭喜發財, but the etymology of how the phrase "kung hei fat choi" entered and started to appear in English. I did not ask anybody to vote, nor instruct anybody how she/he should vote. It was a notification just in case they're not watching. Jerry, in particular, has actively been involved in editing this article. — Instantnood 16:47, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Sorry, Private and Confidential. --Terence Ong |Talk 16:53, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

 * In what way do I like everything in my own way? The phrase 恭喜發財/恭喜发财 may now be more commonly spoken by people who speak Mandarin (Putonghua) than those who speak Cantonese or other south Chinese spoken variants. Nevertheless this does not change the fact that the phrase itself was orginated from southern China, and has entered English as "kung hei fat choi" through its Cantonese pronunciation. "Kung hei fat choi" is frequently used in English synonymously as "Happy New Year" or "Good Luck", that we should cover this English usage in the article. The Chinese equivalence is never used as such by native speakers of any Chinese spoken variant. — Instantnood 17:28, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

 * In other words, Kung hei fat choi does NOT = to 恭喜发财, since you are purely supporting its existance by claiming it is an English phrase? "Kung hei fat choi" is frequently used indeed, but does that mean "Gong xi fa cai" is not frequently used too? And what is "The Chinese equivalence is never used as such by native speakers of any Chinese spoken variant" supposed to mean?--Huaiwei 17:36, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Sorry, Instantnood for what I've wrote. I am trying to be neutral here. If I had offended you, I was making a wrong comment, but I think I've shouldn't had said it. Accept my apologies. :( --Terence Ong |Talk 17:43, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm neutral and I mean it. --Terence Ong |Talk 17:44, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * No worries. :-D — Instantnood 17:52, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I am not taking sides, all I say is from my POV. :) --Terence Ong |Talk 17:56, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * (response to Huaiwei's comment at 17:36, December 11, 2005) Synonymously as "happy new year" or "good luck". — Instantnood 17:52, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * So? Gong xi fa cai dosent = "happy new year" or "good luck"?--Huaiwei 18:00, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * It does means the same thing, but one is in Putonghua and another in Cantonese. I prefer it to be Gong Xi Fa Cai than Kung Hei Fat Choi. Singaporeans, Malaysians and Mainland Chinese citizens use Gong Xi Fa Cai more often than Kung Hei Fat Choi. However, not in London, where Kung hei fat choi is used. --Terence Ong |Talk 18:10, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Plus the boisterous crowd in Taiwan. Just because a bunch of Cantonese-craving folks in London who are still feeling nolstalgic over the 1997 handover dosent mean Gong Xi Fa Cai has no place in the English dictionary, if not more so.--Huaiwei 18:38, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Several questions: (1) Is the phrase used in London only by Chinese people? (2) Are all these Chinese people Cantonese speakers? (3) Are all Cantonese speakers in London Hongkongers? (4) Do all the Hongkongers in London feeling nostalgic over the transfer of sovereignty? — Instantnood 20:08, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Instantnood, can you give a verifiable proof that the term originated in Cantonese? I believed it originated in South China as well, but people in Taiwan and elsewhere have been using it for decades at least.  Seems to me to suggest it may have a Middle Chinese provenance, and not restricted to Cantonese. Mandel 21:56, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I dont think I need to answer any of those questions, because I am applying instantnootism, and somehow he realises it dosent make sense on his own accord. You claim that Kung Hei Fat Choi had entered the English dictionary since it was used by the BBC. So how does that demonstrate that all Chinese people in London use it? That all Chinese in London are Cantonese speakers? And HKers? What does this has anything to do with HKers other than their notorious tendency in thinking Cantonese somehow has greater relevance to English than all other Chinese dialects?--Huaiwei 12:29, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I will stay out of this for the time being, but will join in if the discussion heats up. --Terence Ong |Talk 07:03, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

IRC Channel
Really,an IRC channel seems ok for us SGPedians here,but we must see who is able to use it...do vote under here...hope to get a channel soon...open one... 09:05, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Votes
Support Oppose Comment
 * tdxiang says he wants one!
 * Neutral, lah. -- Миборовский U 02:37, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Malaysian and Singaporean history
Hey, since Malaysian and Singaporean history are entwined, especially whenever it concerns events that occured prior to 1965, it would be fantastic if we could work together. __earth 08:13, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

MRT FAC
Hi all, for those who haven't notice that the Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore) article has been nominated for FA. You may like to drop by and vote at the link above. Thanks. Every vote counts. --Terence Ong |Talk 18:34, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Downtown Core locator map
That locator map shown on Downtown Core is really for the Central Area....and there's no locator map for Central Area. I guess we need to rename that image, and replace the Downtown Core map.

Oh, can we have an enlarged map of the Central Area, with distinguishing Downtown Core, Singapore River planning areas, etc.? We can get the information from the link provided on the noticeboard at the bottom then transpose it onto a GFDL map.

We should also gauge some consensus on how we should organise articles in terms of planning area vs geography, ie. Orchard Road and Orchard planning area might need to be split. Perhaps we should rename it to, Orchard, Singapore? This reminds me of Singapore River and the Singapore River Planning Area, although we don't have a lengthy article at the time, so no need to split yet, since not so much of an identity crisis (river + watershed more reasonable than road+planning area). -- Natalinasmpf 22:41, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Uh? Anyone in the Wikiproject have time to correct this? -- Natalinasmpf 11:12, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Orchard Road and Orchard planning area should not be split up, and that is same for Singapore River. I will try to do it. --Terence Ong |Talk 11:19, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Perhaps we should move Orchard Road to Orchard, Singapore, since it would also resolve the problem of having an article about a single road, and we can discuss the road in length in that article. Of course there are single roads are notable, but I meant it would help resolve un-needed planning area forks while maintaining context. -- Natalinasmpf 11:57, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Feature article?
I wrote Gurkha Contingent quite some time back, and I wonder if it will ever rich FA status with some additional work on it? Is it too short to qualify? The referencing thing needs to be added in as the main problems with it, of coz, but I just wanna get a general sentiment over its chances, and if the rest of you may help to get it through?--Huaiwei 12:57, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I think its too short to qualify :(. How about trying good article instead. --Terence Ong |Talk 13:16, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I remember the article was getting very good responses after it was posted in the main page at DYK, it is certainly an interesting article and I believe worth trying.  --Vsion 19:00, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

 * It's good, but you need references. Once that's done, it should make it through FAC. - Mailer Diablo 13:02, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * You feel it is good enough for FAC after referencing is done? I do fear it may be too short as Terence pointed out. What do you think based on your experience here?--Huaiwei 13:09, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * BTW I just realised the article has about 3,300 words....compared to MRT's 3,500 words. I didnt even realise it was actually that long!--Huaiwei 17:12, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Start findin' references! :D - Mailer Diablo 21:25, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Light Rapid Transit (Singapore)
I have just created a todo list for the Light Rapid Transit (Singapore) article, with a new discussion. You may like to take a look at it. This article really needs serious rework, and an urgent cleanup. We can't have an article like this for one (Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore) currently under FAC and another of poor standards. --Terence Ong |Talk 08:33, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Let's talk about it after MRT gets promoted as a FA, yeah? :) - Mailer Diablo 17:08, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah. You may like to vote for the COTW. It will start on the 27, will the FAC end by then? --Terence Ong Talk 17:18, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually, you may be interested in this. I'm not sure about the FAC, just pray hard enough that Raul will promote the article. Otherwise I won't want to continue working on something new. - Mailer Diablo 21:20, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * A Merry Christmas to you. :D I don't know whether all of you are Christians or Catholics you see. I hope Raul will do. --Terence Ong Talk 13:06, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Template on Singapore's International ties
I'm thinking of a template like this.

I can't think of any more organisations Singapore belongs to, if there are any mistakes, you may correct it. Comments please. --Terence Ong Talk 14:59, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I tot ASEAN is more of an economic then geographical/geopolitical grouping?--Huaiwei 15:18, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Regarding about that, I'm not very sure. Look at the template below. I am not very good at this.

UK ties2
 * Hmm....ASEAN is not exactly the EU, the later of which is much more political. ASEAN has always tried to avoid politics and emphasized economics, which is still evident in the way it handles the Mayanmar question. The EU, on the other hand, is seen by some as eventually becoming a supranation in its own right.--Huaiwei 15:58, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I've moved ASEAN to internation organisations. Should we submit the template? --Terence Ong Talk 16:01, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

 * May I try playing around with the template before you submit it? :D--Huaiwei 18:17, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Oops I created the template here, Template:Singapore ties, you can edit it there. :D Sorry --Terence Ong Talk 04:55, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

June 2006 Meetup?
Meetup in June 2006 anyone? I know is a long time ahead from now though. We can have it at somewhere like a cafe or a library. --Terence Ong Talk 16:16, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually isnt just a weekend anytime of the year will do? Dont tell me students can only meetup for a few hours during the long holidays! :D (also see above section)--Huaiwei 17:08, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I can. Anytime will do. I don't know about our other school going friends here. I don't have exams in May since I come from an "international school". However, I have tests. Most of us have tests frequently. --Terence Ong Talk 17:16, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Exams and tests are past my time (for life I hope. :D). If you guys are able, just drop a line below here to indicate your intention to meet, and perhaps we can then collectively work out a schedule. And dont worry so much about "what we gonna do". I have had past meetups with online communities too, and all we simply planned for was "lets have a cuppa!". And it worked, for ppl just naturally want to know more about each other after their common adverntures in one site. Wikipedia is supposed to attract the inquisitive and the intellectuals (yeah right), so I dont think we will have an issue with that! :D--Huaiwei 18:23, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I dunno where to have it. Should we have a logo? lol, my weird ideas. Haha. Uh...where you all want to have it? Starbucks? Burger King? McDonald's? McCafe? Coffee Bean? Coffee shop? Food court? Hawker Centre? :P --Terence Ong Talk 17:52, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I super anything one so long that it dosent turn ppl off in terms of pricing. :D Logo? Muahaha....why this Singaporean fetish for logos/banners/flyers for every get-to-gether event? lol! A casual dinner out I had with folks from another forum produced a full promotional flyer with a design sure to give the pros a run for their money! :D--Huaiwei 04:36, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

consolidation of articles
May I advise SGpedians', new users especially to consolidate and improve existing articles (that aren't on the todo list), rather than creating new ones (except for stuff like North-East Region and stuff about urban planning regions, which we need), which we need to complete. We need to concentrate on formality at the moment. Have you seen Bugis Street, or the faculty pages at NUS? It's tearing my hair out. Unfortunately, I found no better way to say this, so I'll have to be frank. Ie. we should focus on regions, not streets until we have covered everything else. Oh, Homosexuality in Singapore and Singapore gay equality movement should be candidates for our next COTW, because, well, lets have our goal to make it a good, neutral article. IMO, the current state of some of our articles is apalling! -- Natalinasmpf 04:44, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I have to agree somewhat, as we seem to be spreading ourselves too thin. At the same time thou, I happen to be temporarily holding on to resources on transportation in Singapor, which includes information on specific roads here, hence my rush to create a few of them before I have to return the books! :D--Huaiwei 04:58, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Ah of course, no problem then. ;-) One other problem is that we seem to be too patronising in the articles, so NPOV should be maintained. This is especially seen in NUS Faculty of Law, but in some of the location articles the anons have the tendency to include "popular place" or "extensive services" when this qualifier really should be toned down. Ie. numbers are better - visitor numbers for tourist sites, number of scholars attending etc, number of residents for residential areas rather than relative qualifiers, which is what we seem to suffer from. For example, I provided population numbers at West Region, Singapore and North Region, Singapore. These facts are easy to obtain from a lot of websites and census reports (in fact I forgot to cite a source for population of some regions which I will do promptly after I rediscover it), prices, etc, or even estimates of populations, which is certainly better than relative qualifiers, which are subtly POV. We should make this more clear to new users, who seem at times too patronising of our articles. ;-) To judge the success of a government program, it can be generally said of the affects in a "before and after comparison", or maybe a budget or two. Easily googled, for a lot of these. -- Natalinasmpf 05:12, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Those articles on NUS faculties are of course in need of alot of work. Somehow I dont feel a lot of anxiety in improving on them even thou that was my alma mata. Maybe I just want to entend the euphoria of freeing myself from their clunches for a longer time yet? :D But trust me...if no one deals with them anytime soon, I will probably be inclined to do so myself...sadly...--Huaiwei 06:21, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Clarifying: I'm sure there's a government census around but this will do for now for populations for each urban planning area: http://www.geohive.com/cd/link.php?xml=sg&xsl=xs1 - looks like a good source for WikiProject Singapore places as well as our articles on places in general. I will post this on the board. Participants of the WikiProject might like to update. Some areas are omitted for population but we can make up for this with estimates and discernment considering that total population is calculated. Any print material is great too! Keep up the research, Huaiwei! (I'm guessing that's how you are so knowledgable over place names' histories. )-- Natalinasmpf 05:20, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Hah you see me too up. :D Those population figures in the source you provided are from the latest government population census conducted in 2000, and there are extensive figures down to the last neighbourhood. Thus, getting statistics isnt a major problem...trying to expand on historical content seems to be the biggest headache. Even the libraries here dont exactly provide extensive information on this unless one sieves deeply through tonnes of volumes or pick up the next propagandic publication by political wards...haha.--Huaiwei 06:21, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Hmm yes, but seeing as its so easy to get them, we should have no problem including them. Numbers add substance to our articles. ;-) -- Natalinasmpf 13:15, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Yeah, we really need lots of cleanup in many of this articles including Demographics of Singapore. --Terence Ong Talk 06:57, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Sub divisions??
Should we have one main notice board and then like regions, North, East, West, Central/Southern and Overseas SGpedians' notice board? Like what Hong Kong Wikipedians have, they are going to have divisions like HK Island, Kowloon and NT Wikipedians notice board. My ideas are becoming lamer each day. :P --Terence Ong Talk 07:56, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
 * That will be quite redundant won't it? But I like the idea, its fleasible and I say it won't harm a try. Slivester 18:17, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Loss of a Great SGpedian
ATTENTION I have bad news for all of my fellow SGpedians, Mailer Diablo has went on an indefinite wikibreak due to a "vote" at his user page for him to leave. --Terence Ong Talk 04:11, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

 * What a shocker! He will be greatly missed. :( Slivester 09:00, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Isnt this the second time I recall whereby he went on an indefinite wikibreak? Something tells me he may come back, but I do hope my optimism will be proven correct! All the best in your examination year, Mailer, and yes, you will do so well that you will miss us! ;)--Huaiwei 09:59, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Quality of Singapore TV related articles
User:Darrentzw has been making a lot of new articles about Chinese dramas on Channel 8 (past and present). He has also made new articles on Xiang Yun, Huang Biren and many more. You may like to look at this category. I appericiate his work of creating, but it needs lots of cleanup. Help to cleanup all this articles, as they are of poor standards. Write plot sypnopsis for the articles. Thank you. --Terence Ong Talk 08:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

COTW announcement
I hereby announce the Singapore Collaboration of the Week is Light Rapid Transit (Singapore). Cut the formality, our very first COTW. I hope we all can make this into a better article, with more photos, even after this COTW. The COTW will start tomorrow (29/12) and end on (4/1/2006). Time really files, holidays are ending soon. :( That means less time on Wikipedia for me. --Terence Ong Talk 18:53, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Templates, templates, templates! Could someone help me to create templates for our COTW. I have a proposal below, it is very similar to the Hong Kong one. You may like to modify the template. It isn't an "official" template yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Terenceong1992 (talk • contribs)

 * I still rather vague in detail regarding the COTW; will be reading up and join you soon! Slivester 15:24, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Feel free to add the announcement anytime. I believe the "This is the current Singapore Collaboration of the Week." line will be replaced by "The current Singapore Collaboration of the Week is Light Rapid Transit (Singapore)"? ;)--Huaiwei 14:28, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

BTW our template seems huge...especially compared to the ones for Australia or the UK? :D

I have created and added the SGCOTW template based on the UK system. Feel free to tweak around with it if anyone wishes to.--Huaiwei 06:53, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Update on to-do box
After some time, our to-do box seems to be getting longer and more cluttered and difficult to maintain. I was looking at other noticeboards, and I found the Australian one particularly pleasing to the eye. What do you guys think about adopting that format over this one, and to beef up on our complete to do list?--Huaiwei 14:28, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The overhaul is completed. Do comment and improve! ;)--Huaiwei 08:04, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
 * A much better format giving an instant view of all the articles without scrolling up and down. Would it be possible to sub-categorise the articles into various subject headings as in the boxes of the old version? --Sengkang 08:25, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Its possible, but I tried not to do that for it lengthens the list and does make it more cumbersome to maintain, unless there are willing parties to do so? :D--Huaiwei 08:29, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I see your point. Guess the current one should be ok. =D --Sengkang 08:43, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Heh see how it goes lah. Things tend to go out of fashion ofter some time, and we might end up changing it to another format again later! :D--Huaiwei 08:50, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

COTW, COTF or COTM?
I am proposing that our SGCOTW be changed into a fortnightly or monthly effot here. Seeking your comments!--Huaiwei 14:37, 29 December 2005 (UTC)