Talk:Aljunied MRT station

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Aljunied MRT Station)

Fair use rationale for Image:NS logo.jpg[edit]

Image:NS logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Aljunied MRT Station. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 00:14, 2 July 2017 (UTC) –  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  00:55, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 7 January 2018[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Consensus appears to support renaming these pages to include "MRT" and a lowercase "s" in station. Editors please feel free to help with the cleanup where you can. Thank you in advance for that! Happy Publishing! (closed by page mover)  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  23:43, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As per MOS:CAPS, and neither the common name nor official name of these stations contain the term 'Station'. For example, [1], [2] and [3] (official sites for SMRT, SBS and LTA) do not include the term 'Station'. R22-3877 (talk) 09:23, 7 January 2018 (UTC) --Relisted.  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  02:59, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

  • Question: is there any reason why "MRT" is included in all titles? Most station names seem to be unambiguous. feminist (talk) 14:17, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment that it might help your argument if you provided examples of the LTA or SMRT/SBS using lower-case "station" in their official websites or statements. Also, that's a whole lot of pages that will need redirect links if this move is carried out... Yikes. Weslam123 (talk • contrib) 14:23, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done. R22-3877 (talk) 09:09, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well... not really "done". All three of your links don't use "Station", but they don't use "station" either, so that's not a really strong argument. Referring to the station simply by its name doesn't prove anything. Weslam123 (talk • contrib) 10:41, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, since they don't use either, wouldn't it be necessary to use 'station'as per WP:NCCAPS, since the word 'Station' is not part of the official name? R22-3877 (talk) 11:51, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The former was completely removed, and the latter's title was changed in this list to Bukit Panjang MRT/LRT Station to be moved to Bukit Panjang MRT/LRT station. That fixed the malformed request, and hopefully coincides with the nom's intentions. Happy New Year!  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  01:31, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment Operator SMRT does not put any suffix to the Station names, and web searches turned up results with capital S in Station.-1.02 editor (talk) 01:49, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose moves to "Foo MRT station". No reason to include disambiguation where it's unnecessary. Move to "Foo station" in unambiguous cases, "Foo station (MRT)" when there is more than one station with that name. feminist (talk) 02:42, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Updated. Changed to 'Singapore MRT' as there are multiple systems with the name 'MRT' though. R22-3877 (talk) 09:09, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What are you saying is updated? Did the proposal change during the discussion? Dicklyon (talk) 00:54, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
For a reason I don't understand, R22-3877, decided to change the move request from "[Name] MRT station" to "[Name] station" after Feminist's oppose comment. It's a little odd to see the requester so suddenly change the move request due to someone's comment, especially without second thoughts or third opinions. I don't understand what "Foo" refers to, either. Weslam123 (talk • contrib) 05:56, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Weslam, I changed the names because I was unsure about what was consensus, and had not read station naming conventions. I do apologise for my indecisiveness. R22-3877 (talk) 07:15, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The current proposal reads to include the MRT; that's where it started, and is what most of the !votes refer to, yes? Dicklyon (talk) 05:16, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If I'm not wrong, yes. As far as I can tell, only Feminist and SMcCandlish are supporting to remove "MRT". Weslam123 (talk • contrib) 13:42, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
R22, no worries. A tip for you, though: if someone makes a counter proposal, don't immediately change the move request to that guy's proposal, especially if you don't necessarily agree with them. There were something like three replies at that time, two of which were comments and one was Feminist's counter proposal. It's way too hasty to just jump to change your move request without waiting for other people to input their opinions or checking the reliability of Feminist's argument. Consensus is something that's determined after WP:SNOW or a thorough discussion by multiple parties, and not via a short opinion by a single editor. Cheers! Weslam123 (talk • contrib) 13:42, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Feminist, please see my note about station naming conventions below. This kind of "preemptive disambiguation" is very widely used. It is what WP:UKSTATION recommends and has been adopted in may other countries. We should talk about separately from the caps issue if there's a desire to switch to a different convention for Singapore. Dicklyon (talk) 00:54, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support the proposal for "[Name] MRT Station" to "[Name] MRT station", oppose the counter proposal for "[Name] MRT Station" to "[Name] station" (excluding "MRT" from title).
Oppose the removal of "MRT" from the article titles. There is no reason to remove "MRT" from the title. "MRT" provides conciseness and disambiguation, especially if there are other articles with similar titles. Additionally, the inclusion of "MRT" in the title can automatically let the reader know that it's an MRT station. If I see "Xilin MRT station", I will know immediately that it's an MRT station. However, "Xilin station" does not mean anything to me; for all I know, it could be a Maglev station in China. Also, keep in mind that all other Mass Rapid Transit systems in other cities all have "MRT" in their titles, for the station articles. For example, Manila Metro Rail Transit System has station articles titled like Taft Avenue MRT station and Ortigas MRT station, and not as Taft Avenue station or Ortigas station. Similarly, the Kaohsiung Rapid Transit System uses titles like Central Park MRT station and Dadong MRT station, not Central Park station or Dadong station. The MRT (Bangkok), Taoyuan Metro, and the Taipei Metro all have Tao Poon MRT station, Kengkou MRT station, and Mingde MRT station, respectively.
However, this being said, I do support the originally proposed move, where the only change was the replacement of upper-case "Station" with lower-case "station". I support this since upper-case "Station" makes no sense, as per MOS:CAPS, as well as that upper-case "Station" does not seem to be actually part of the name of the station, but that "station" is simply a suffix. Additionally, all other Mass Rapid Transit systems in other cities (examples above) have station articles with lower-case "station" in their titles, so it would be best if we maintained continuity with existing conventions. My only concern now is that we'll have a massive amount of work to create so many redirects, if this move is carried out. Does anyone know of a tool that can create article redirects en masse? Weslam123 (talk • contrib) 10:50, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Unless you create a bot to do this, I don't think there is one. Also, if we are moving MRT Station then don't we also have to move LRT stations too? -1.02 editor (talk) 08:48, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, probably not. Doesn't hurt to ask, though. And yeah, that's actually a really good point, I didn't think of that. We should move the LRT stations as well, if either version of this move gets carried out. Good eye! Weslam123 (talk • contrib) 14:01, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've changed it back to original, and I think we should rename the LRT stations the same way as well. R22-3877 (talk) 15:24, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, thanks! I've fixed a few errors you didn't catch. R22-3877, would it be too much trouble for you to add all the LRT stations to this list as well? By the way, 1.02 editor, what's your vote on this? The 7 day period ends in just a few hours, we might end up with an inconclusive result if not enough people support R22's proposal. Weslam123 (talk • contrib) 16:20, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support Honesty I'm supportive of the move but I can't imagine the amount of work we have to do afterwards. 1.02 editor (talk) 01:03, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Same. But honestly, better to do it now than later. Holding this move off will just make any future attempts even harder, when even more stations get added to the MRT network. Weslam123 (talk • contrib) 07:13, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support lowercase; fine with either "MRT station" or "station". Jc86035 (talk) 04:12, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support lowercase per WP:NCCAPS, MOS:CAPS, and WP:CONSISTENCY with a zillion previous RMs. Prefer just "station" over "MRT station" when the shorter name will do, per WP:CONCISE.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  20:30, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support and see my comment on conventions below. Dicklyon (talk) 00:46, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment on conventions – Most countries use station naming conventions similar to WP:UKSTATION; more have moved to this recently. The common alternative WP:USSTATION would omit the MRT, but still include the lowercase station. This RM proposal is just about fixing the overcapitalization, with minimal change to the naming convention otherwise, bringing the articles into the style of WP:UKSTATION. Many of the comments above are from editors unaware of any of these conventions, it appears. Dicklyon (talk) 00:46, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I was unaware of this WP:UKSTATION convention. Thanks for telling me about it. However, I'm still correct about my argument that "MRT" should be kept in the article titles, since the convention also agrees on the exact same format. Given that Singapore is a Commonwealth country, it makes far more sense for these station names to follow the UK convention, and not the US convention, as Feminist and SMcCandlish are trying to argue for. Besides, as I've already stated, all other MRT networks in different cities all keep "MRT" in the title; so why should Singapore's MRT stations be a special case? Weslam123 (talk • contrib) 05:46, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment on work to be done – Don't worry about continuity; no links will be broken as the old names will all be automatically left as redirects. As for fixing the whole lot, yes it's some work, but it goes quickly; even the post-move cleanup edits are less than a minute each, so we're looking at a few hours of work. I did thousands of these last year, and Singapore's set is small by comparison. Dicklyon (talk) 00:59, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My concern that this mass move will be troublesome has now been completely trivialised... lol. Kudos to you for that amazing feat, and thanks for letting me know about continuity; I forgot that old titles are left as redirects to the new title after a page move. Cheers! Weslam123 (talk • contrib) 05:46, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment Anyone knows when this is going to be closed? Its more than half a day past closing time. Nice 35k byte soap though.1.02 editor (talk) 14:14, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Followup – @Feminist and SMcCandlish: – are you two OK with MRT staying in the titles, given the explanation about the widely used WP:UKSTATION convention of including such system info in station titles? It would be much simpler to keep this RM just about the caps as intended, and seems to be a consensus for that, but it would be more clear with your agreement. Dicklyon (talk) 16:32, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sure. We can revisit whether such "over-disambiguation" or "pre-disambiguation" should be done in another discussion. Didn't mean to muddy the water. Consensus mostly seems to be against the idea, but there have been multiple noteworthy exceptions, and I can't be certain that an RfC about UKSTATION doing it wouldn't support the practice for some reason.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:11, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Decaps for LRT titles[edit]

Just a note, all the LRT stations also need to be manually moved to their new titles as well. ("Station" to "station") Everyone, please try to help out with this if you can; thanks! Weslam123 (talk • contrib) 15:46, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Would get to it at sch. Library. 1.02 editor (talk) 00:14, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
i moved Damai LRT Station, Singapore to Damai LRT station, (Singapore) as there is another station with a similar name in malaysia. 1.02 editor (talk) 06:33, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
To editor 1.02 editor:  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  12:19, 24 January 2018 (UTC)...[reply]
Just a gentle reminder that you have used two types of disambiguation where one only should be used. The new title should be either Damai LRT station, Singapore or Damai LRT station (Singapore). The former is called "comma disambiguation" and the latter is "parenthetical disambiguation" – either is much preferred over using both together. Happy Publishing!  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  12:17, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok Thanks. -1.02 editor (talk) 12:36, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Move completed, now comes cleanup. -1.02 editor (talk) 01:51, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Aljunied_MRT_station&oldid=1198418938"