Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Singapore

Article alerts

edit

Did you know

Articles for deletion

Proposed deletions

Featured article candidates

Good article nominees

(3 more...)

Peer reviews

Articles to be merged

Articles for creation

(6 more...)

Good article reassessment for Fort Pasir Panjang

edit

Fort Pasir Panjang has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.

Requested move at Talk:Central Executive Committee (PAP)#Requested move 5 December 2024

edit
 

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Central Executive Committee (PAP)#Requested move 5 December 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Feeglgeef (talk) 05:44, 8 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Need some help List of major crimes in Singapore_(2020–present)

edit

Dear @Robertsky, Justanothersgwikieditor, and Number 57:, I pinged is that I noted the edits by that particular someone I not gonna name, but that one happened to have edited was somewhat new to the Wikipedia (having joined less than three months ago, I think the person was still new to it), and apparently reverting or reversing some of the edits (including mine) that has some issues, along with the editing methods. I just do not want to engage into conflicts against the users involved, but I also not sure on what I am going to do either and if I will interfere, it will become worse. Need help to discuss that in a proper manner, thank you so much! Sculture65 (talk) 07:08, 15 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Sculture65, If it is a content dispute, try engaging the other editor on the article talk page first. I think it is not proper for me or the rest to step in without knowing specifically which edits you have objections to, and also without knowing how the other editor will respond to an attempt for discussion. There's some advice on how to go about doing at WP:RCD. – robertsky (talk) 09:54, 15 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
@robertsky, I not too experienced on how to resolve disputes, and besides the user was new. I read on the RCD, and just to ask is WP:DRN OK? Sculture65 (talk) 10:47, 15 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Addendum, I also noted on the user talk page and it seems to be like being harsh at one other who think that he is right and everyone is wrong. I not sure on what can I do besides RCD and DRN. Sculture65 (talk) 11:36, 15 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Sculture65 If you look at an existing DRN case, you will realise that first question is "Have you discussed this on a talk page? which the answer is a no. So without this first step, DRN will not do anything about it. Ideally discuss it on the article talkpage instead of a user talkpage to reduce influence and sense of "vandalism" on either personal talkpage. Until that is done, I believed we are unable to make any comments as we will be making assumptions. I noted you are on a break, have a good rest and enjoy the festivities first. ~ JASWE (talk) 05:34, 17 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Template talk:SMRT infobox colour

edit

A discussion is ongoing at Template talk:SMRT infobox colour on whether to keep the new or old format of the infobox station name template that's on top of every MRT article.--ZKang123 (talk) 12:15, 3 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Good article reassessment for Article 12 of the Constitution of Singapore

edit

Article 12 of the Constitution of Singapore has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 16:57, 11 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Good article reassessment for Article 14 of the Constitution of Singapore

edit

Article 14 of the Constitution of Singapore has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 17:10, 25 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Good article reassessment for Representative democracy in Singapore

edit

Representative democracy in Singapore has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. WhinyTheYoungerTalk 04:19, 7 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Requested merge at Talk:1966-67 Singaporean by-elections

edit

I have opened a merge-to request of both 1966 and 1967 by-election pages into 1966-77 Singaporean by-elections because both pages are of commonly themed. The discussion is open from here, so feel free to discuss. Thanks. Sculture65 (talk) 17:32, 11 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Is there a merge discussion somewhere, or did you want to discuss here? CMD (talk) 09:27, 12 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Honestly speaking, this is the first time I launched a discussion on merger, so I got no idea... If you want, discuss can be done at said page. Thanks for clarifying. Sculture65 (talk) 12:26, 12 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Requested move at Talk:Pritam Singh (Singaporean politician)#Requested move 22 February 2025

edit
 

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Pritam Singh (Singaporean politician)#Requested move 22 February 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPathtalk 12:38, 1 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

Discussion at Talk:Tuas Lamp Post 1 § Reliability of Mothership

edit

  You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Tuas Lamp Post 1 § Reliability of Mothership. Toadspike [Talk] 08:38, 19 March 2025 (UTC) Toadspike [Talk] 08:38, 19 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

For MSM sources, please be aware of "updates" by MSM itself

edit

Case in point :

Original article (via WBM) - Focus is on Vivian Balakrishnan filing report with Meta + Shanmugam's views

Current article (after being updated) - Focus is on Masagos Zulkifli and Shanmugam (Balakrishnan filing report is gone)

Note that the url is vivian-balakrishnan-facebook-calvin-cheng-mfa-unauthorised-activity-meta-investigating-5039441, meaning original article is hijacked to remove Balakrishnan report to Meta and use Masagos' remarks to replace it.

If using the original article for sourcing, need to set the URL-status to "deviated" (I might be wrong in choice, either dead or deviated) (see Template:Cite web). It will set the archived link as the main link, the current link to "Archived from the original" similar to a dead link. ~ JASWE (talk) 03:35, 14 April 2025 (UTC)Reply