User talk:Supernutorcrazy
Rules for my feedback to stop irritate me.
- Please kindly wait for up to 7 days unless stated otherwise for my reply to your feedback. No reply will be given if your feedback does not require reply or I could not answer to your feedback.
- Please do not ask for general question like How to etc.
- Please do not ask for permission to do something.
- Please refrain from requesting to retrieved deleted article as excessive history will be cleared.
- When requesting me to edit locked pages, please give either
- Affected sections code
- Advertisement in full
- Affected parts to change in details.
- Avoid statement like same as other vehicle
- Please kindly indicate Autoblock ID if you have been affected from it.
- I will not entertain any request under BCM transition.
Leave your message below
Rail Wiki Expansion
Hi Supernutorcrazy,
Is it OK to add info of train deployments (including TRNs and their sequences), acronyms legend and train fleet info (similar to what's done for buses)?
Data can be obtained from here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PMuCeF31etWzPv_U42qMaFoHvYwDpnkSWHgjvuuTxdg/edit
All data collated in the above document are based on spottings and observations from fellow enthusiasts.
I hope you will support us to make these valuable information more accessible to all. Thank you.
Map progress /Alternative Travel Method Upgrades
Hi,
I think in the long run, it is still best to display the entire line as the degree of disruption may vary nonetheless.
As for an entire line breakdown, sections with parallel bus services make dispersal and waiting time less complicated.
However, it is rather strange that going between South & North, between East & West it's faster and easier to get alternatives due to the availability of TEL and NSL respectively (I am not sure how many FBBs Pasir Ris to Boon Lay one has to go for a whole line breakdown), while it's much harder and haywire finding alternatives for origin/destinations within the same area in the West and North sections.
For eg. due to the changes within Canberra town, the route to the next station Sembawang is only faster by FBB than by 117/M. Another example would be how travelling West from Tiong Bahru is only available via 33 and 122 which barely touches the next few stations westward.
I suggest that we can add footnotes for the above aforementioned stations that FBB is faster.
Would also like to request to delete the older revisions of File:W2T CityHall-Esplanade.png and File:JurongEast_LocalDirectory as I managed to figure out on editing and resolution sizing, thanks!
Wiki plans
On a side note, I welcome the changes to add tourism elements to the wiki. Prior to that I also had listed down getting pictures for public amenities in the Planning Areas page, when I have the free time, I will revamp again.
Reply: Fleet Size of 912
Hi.
I will leave the fleet size as 4 for now. As far as I know they only have 4 buses scheduled with 5 AP duties every day.
Concourse and exit layout WIP
Bedok draft has been sketched from Photoshop, and I am on my way to collect more icons, and will make a visit to Admiralty probably next week to trial a similar layout.
Current elevator dimension is 160x160 on a side note.
As discussed before, I agree that there is indeed a need for a file sharing system, especially for icons. Thanks and Regards
User : Draconite Dragon
Hi Admin,
I would like to bring your attention to this user : https://sgwiki.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/Draconite_Dragon
On 30 Jun 2023, he claimed that SG6198L and SG6199J has been on 161 for a week on his talk page. As I am a regular passenger of Service 161, I have never seen these 2 buses perform any trips of 161.
(Link : https://sgwiki.com/index.php?title=Trunk_Services_160_-_169&diff=prev&oldid=584281)
He then removed SG6077C and SG6102M from 161. However, these 2 buses were still being spotted daily.
(Link for pictorial proof : https://www.instagram.com/p/Ct9AGtXxp8T/)
After playing a cat and mouse game of undoing and redoing edits, he suddenly removed the two buses (SG6198L and SG6199J) from 161 and added them into 154, despite "saw it doing 161 for a week or more.".
(Link : https://sgwiki.com/index.php?title=Trunk_Services_160_-_169&diff=prev&oldid=584379 and https://sgwiki.com/index.php?title=Trunk_Services_160_-_169&diff=prev&oldid=584379)
I believe this is not the only standalone case. The user has made many edits and some edits involved shuffling in buses into a service and then removing them a few hours later.
I believe his edits are just merely acts of vandalism, and those buses he proclaimed to be on whichever services, do not actually exist.
Please do take a while to look at his edits, as there are a lot of inconsistencies in his edits, which would cause a lot of reliability issues with the wiki.
Regards,
Haram
Recent edits
Hi admin,
Please kindly take a look at this user edits on service 5, user had placed false info on bus deployments and undoing them will make it hard for other users. There are more new accounts created like this. Thanks
https://sgwiki.com/index.php?title=Trunk_Services_2_-_9&action=history
ItsRaboot
Hi,
Would like to bring the above user's edits to your attention. They have edited the AWBDR CDGEs into the grey box section in the infobox, even though these units aren't deregistered yet. See https://sgwiki.com/index.php?title=Volvo_B9TL_(CDGE)&curid=7032&oldid=590814 . This is their 3rd time editing this, despite me & another user telling them not to. I would've reverted their edits if not for 3RR.
Thanks,
AirFan19
User Weilong
Hi could you keep an eye on this user Weilong, his edits look dubious, plus he doesn't edit the relevant pages, not even sure if his edits are correct or not
user: Draconite Dragon
pls look into the edit for this user Draconite Dragon
all incomplete edit... alway fail to edit former deployment. and even when he edit former deployment, the dates are all wrong (many are backdate to Jun 2023? or Dec 2023??)
seem like his edit are based on single day spotting. alway have to undo his edit...