Talk:Andrew Kuan

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Singapore Mid‑importance

	Singapore portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Singapore, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Singapore on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SingaporeWikipedia:WikiProject SingaporeTemplate:WikiProject SingaporeSingapore articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Chia Boon Teck

Is Chia Boon Teck a member of PAP? Any source on this? Vsion 08:00, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, he is. Source: today's Straits Jacket. Jpatokal 13:20, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thks for this and also for correcting my mistake regarding the police report. --Vsion 19:14, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Unsatisfactory work at JTC?

Did Chong Lit Cheong explained why Kuan's performance at JTC was unsatisfactory? Thks in advance. --Vsion 17:51, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, they just said it was confidential and that only the elections commission would get the full scoop. They did say no fraud or other crime was involved. Jpatokal 04:21, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Unsubstaniated allegations

The election committee responsible for the nomination substantiated facts with reference to the laws as to why Kuan did not qualify. Nearly all Singaporeans do not doubt the credibility of the committee at all, in respect of this decision on Kuan.

There has never been an opinion survery on the credibility of the committee. Furthermore to state that the committee had "substaniated facts" is also only an assumption as the committee is selected by the government.--Ghormax 17:59, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Kuan

I think the correct name for this article is "Andrew Kuan", as that's the name he goes by. The full name should of course be listed up front. Jpatokal 14:41, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bump. If there are no opinions against I have an absolute majority =) Jpatokal 11:22, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Andrew Kuan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:40, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]