User talk:Apex-LW'21

Welcome to my talk page!

Please post on my user talk page (not my user page) if you want me to delete any outdated / unrelated articles or any unused images existed in sgWiki. Also, please provide the links to the uploaded images (if any) when requesting to delete the articles.

I will review the pages first before I will delete, but however, should any of the pages that requires cleanup or is sufficiently related, it will not be deleted, unless there is a reason to believe that the article is the above-mentioned. Pages (including its talk page of a current page) which are blanked out, unanswered or remained for a certain prolonged period will be deleted in the event of any routine house-keeping or cleanup in sgWiki.

If your account is mistakenly banned due to posting of false or unrelated information, etc, please ask the administrator who had originally banned you by writing on the user's talk page to appeal, unless if you are mistakenly banned by me. If an information is mistakenly marked as false statement, you had to clarify with the administrator and provide justification that the information is true and accurate. However, the decision will be made by the administrator and the decision of the appeal is final, after the investigation is complete.

Do note that the successful appeal of the ban (only for those accounts banned by me) can only be done once. Once the ban appeal is successful, you are to comply with the sgWiki Guidelines. Appeals for repeated bans will not be considered.

The appeal procedures will also apply to the warning points imposed to the account.

If any articles or uploaded photos are deleted by mistake, please use my talk page to appeal. Please note that any deleted articles/photos will be subjected to further review and decision. This appeal only applies to articles/photos that were previously deleted by me. If you wish to appeal on any articles/photos that were previously existed in sgWiki that were deleted by any other administrators, please write on the respective talk pages.

Any accounts that are in severe violation of the sgWiki Guidelines will not be unbanned. Please ensure that all edits and articles are complied with the sgWiki Guidelines.

If your account is being affected by any Autoblock function caused by the user being blocked for spam advertising, etc, please use my talk page so that I can remove the Autoblock.

For any Captcha issues, please refer to the administrator 'Jason' by writing on his talk page.

For bus-related pages, if you find any mistakes in any pages (only those edited by me), please use my talk page to point out the mistakes and clarify with me. I will make the necessary corrections as soon as possible.

---

BSEP Volvo B9TL Mess

Hi,

On 17 November 2015, User SBS2652G created 3 new BSEP Volvo B9TL pages to replace the existing three (reason highly because to synchronize the Non-BSEP with the BSEP Batch number.):

• BSEP Batch 1 --> Batch 2 BSEP
• BSEP Batch 2 --> Batch 3 BSEP
• BSEP Batch 3 --> Batch 4 BSEP

2 days later, User Neon replace and revert to the follow three (reason batch number doesn't match with order 1-3):

• Batch 2 BSEP --> Batch 1 BSEP
• Batch 3 BSEP --> Batch 2 BSEP
• Batch 4 BSEP --> Batch 3 BSEP

This make an addition Batch 4 BSEP which is an exact duplication as Batch 3 BSEP which I had no idea whether to delete Batch 4 BSEP or create a relocation link from there.

The two reason that those two users provided were theoretically valid - 1 is to provide synchronisation and the other is to be mathematically right. As such, I would suggest if the BSEP Page merged into the non-BSEP Page, with additional sub-heading differentiating BSEP and Non-BSEP batches, would be a good idea, combining both synchronisation and numbering. Furthermore, Batch 2A and 2B can be merged into Batch 2 with additional heading like those demonstrator and production batch. However, the cons side is that the pages could end up ultimately big and chunky, especially if there are many buses with advertisement.

I am not looking for a reply in my talkpage and I 100% trusted your judgement in cleaning the mess asap before a 'war' happen when multiple users moving pages here and there.

-Supernutorcrazy (Talk) 20 October 2015 17:16 (SGT)

Clearing up the Wright Mess and misconceptions

Dear all, I feel a need to clear the misconceptions that people may have regarding the Wrights and BSEP.

While is easier to separate operator purchased buses with BSEP buses, it does not reflect the orders that have been made. The batches of buses and the BSEP phases have to be seen as two separate issues. There are 4 batches of Wrights, and 2 Phases of BSEP. The 2 Phases of BSEP buses consist of 550 and 450 buses respectively. The 4 batches of Wrights are based on the press releases from Volvo and/or SBS. The body numbers also support how the batches are separated and how it should be designated.

There is a weird obsession within the bus enthusiast community to separate the BSEP and non BSEP buses. Much like buses with advertisement, the bus companies try to run them on their services, just that there are BSEP slots that these buses normally run on. However, when there is a need, they can be treated as any other bus and run on any service that requires them. Thus there is actually no real need to differentiate the BSEP and non BSEP buses. The regos can be a guideline, particularly in recent times when BSEP buses have been transferred to areas affected by the first tender package, but this does not detract from the fact that the buses are ordered together with the non BSEP buses, eg. 3330-3448 are in the same batch as 3240-3299 and 3600-3986, and therefore they are Batch 3 Wrights.

The 4 Batches of Wrights are as follows:
Batch - Rego - Body Nos - Number of Buses
Batch 1: 7500-7686; AD967, ZA001-ZA149, 150 Buses
Batch 2: 7700-7729, 3000-3238, 3269, 3300-3329; ZA151-ZA450; 300 buses
Batch 3: 3240-3299, 3330-3448, 3600-3986; ZB001-ZB565; 565 buses (increase of 15 from what was orginally in the press release)
Batch 4: 1-ongoing, 3449-ongoing; ZC001-ongoing; reported order of 415 buses

BSEP Phase 1 covers Buses bought within the Batch 2 and Batch 3 orders. BSEP Phase 2 covers Batch 4 buses.

I believe there are better ways for these pages to be named:

1) Batch 1, Batch 2, Batch 2 BSEP, Batch 3, Batch 3 BSEP, Batch 4 and Batch 4 BSEP
2) Do away with separate BSEP pages, putting BSEP as a separate table in the interim
3) Combine all Wrights into a list, as practiced by 1005.idv.hk.

I do believe option 2 will be the best option, as LTA has stated they would buy back assets such as buses as part of GCM. When it happens, there will not be any distinctions between BSEP and non BSEP buses. Thus, option 2 will prepare this wiki better for future.

--Scania 18:54, 11 November 2015 (SGT)

Good Evening,

I agreed that Option 2 as stated should be the best option for future deployment listing after the GCM kicks in. In the mean time, I would suggest that the Wright buses be classified as you mention on point (1). This is to clear the misconception since the BSEP buses for Wrights are derived from the Batch 2 (production ones).

--Apex-LW'21 (talk) 21:53, 11 November 2015 (SGT)

Appeal for ban

Hi Apex-LW21,

I am requesting you to ban the user named 'Master Legend'. The reason is that he placed SMB1414T as under 'AMDEP 806/860' when the bus is not even under service 806 although it is under service 860. You may refer to 'MAN NL323F Batch 2' for more information and also Service 806 for strong evidence. Have a nice day.

SMB1368T

Hi Apex-LW'21,

I had ran a history editing check, there is no reason to ban 'Master Legend'. Instead, a mere Warning Point / reminder should be enough to remind him that Deployment must be kept accurate, if he/she had evidence and believed his/her editing are true, he/she must present the evidence when someone revert the edit and not force the information to get through.

Next, I would like to highlight that the Evidence only points to MAN NL323F Batch 2 and there are no evidence in Service 806 as a false claim by SMB1368T. I will gently remind SMB1368T not to present a false evidence in hightlighting a user.

Sorry for the interruption during your intern.

Thanks & Regards

-Supernutorcrazy (Talk) 26 November 2015 17:10 (SGT)

Good Evening,

If the user SMB1368T continues the disruptive editing on the deployment pages after the issuance of the warning point, a temporary ban can be issued in that case.

--Apex-LW'21 (talk) 21:18, 26 November 2015 (SGT)