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.

Regarding my account

Hi Admin,

            I feel very puzzled as my account was being blocked when the IP address issue is not my fault. It will be Glad if you could unblock my account. Thank you.

Yours faithfully,

User SG5064X

User:GoAheadAmbassador

Hi,

I would like to flag out the disruptive edits done by the above mentioned user.

1. Early this year, he claimed that the VSOs faced full retirement.

• [1]
• [2]
• [3]
• [4]

2. He uploaded an inappropriate file using the same file name as the current photo reflected on the Volvo B10TL (CDGE) page.

• [5]

3. He requested to revert an edit on his behalf when he could have reverted it by himself.

• [6]

4. He reminded 'SBS9631X' to block an editor when it is up to the administrators to decide.

• [7]

5. He vandalised with nonsensical/unnecessary information on administrators talk page.

• [8]
• [9]

6. He requested the administrators to amend/update ad details based on his spotting/observations, when he could have done them by himself, or patiently waited for other editors to fill in the details.

• [10]
  
• [11]
  
• [12]
  
• [13]
  
• [14]
  
• [15]
  
• [16]
  
• [17]
  
• [18]
  
• [19]
  
• [20]
  
• [21]
  
• [22]
  
• [23]
  
• [24]
  
• [25]
  
• [26]
  
• [27]
  
• [28]
  

7. Asked a favour as if 'SBS9631X' owes him a living.

• [29]

Please do review the edits.

Thank you.

Re: User:GoAheadAmbassador

Dear Admin

I am sorry that I will not do any disruptive editing ever again.
Thank you.

Yours faithfully
GoAheadAmbassador

User:Go-Ahead Ambassasor

Hi there,

With regards to you un-banning the following user, I guess we could agree to disagree. Because I banned him due to me receiving feedback from several other users, with regards to him adding in details that do not make not much of a difference to the overall listing.

Adding in a "Pte Ltd" word is more accurate rep perhaps to the company name, but to me (& many others), if that company name / extra details he edited doesn't appear anywhere at all on the ad (on the bus itself), his edits becomes inconsequential and pointless.

However, if his edits are on correcting the actual ad details (which are listed on the bus ad itself), then yes his edits would be a more accurate rep of the ad listing.

Hence, even though you and I have a different interpretation on this, nonetheless I will continue to monitor his edits and make sure he does not repeatedly edit pointless stuffs (after pointing out the rationale to him on my earlier ban to his account). He told me he will now edit more responsibly, so we shall KIV and see what happens.

Thanks & Regards, SBS9631X

Locked page for SMRT Services 700-883

Hi I've been waiting to edit the updated rostering for the following Services 853 854 855 857 but with the page locked to only allow admins to edit how am I able to help edit to improve the accuracy based on rostering? Just because few kids who have been vandalizing the page? Now it's affecting me already. I got the updated duty numbers for those services which sgwiki has been outdated very badly and I was the one who have been updated those Mandai services. Thanks

~ Arthurjie

AMDEP Rostering

There has been alot of conflicts of what was reflected in AMDEP's rostering v.s. what is deployed by the starter each day. The way 167 roster put all MAN buses but reality deploys so many more OCs, 980 full fleet OC + 1 Citaro in roster but in reality alot of MAN buses + minority OCs, 854 put OC500LE SD perms but in reality MAN A22/Citaro perms.

However it is also impossible to tell readers that AMDEP has many spare buses (like telling people AMDEP has 100-150+ spare buses in the past?!?!?!) because AMDEP practices rotational/random deployments unlike other depots out in KJ/WL/SBST depots. All my edits have followed based on the rostering, so by implementing that warning point it shows your admin team obviously doesn't know my current jobscope & industry I'm working in. Besides, your service pages has many outdated rostered duties both weekdays & especially wekeends, which some services could have received various timetable updates.

Oh you can also tell SimonLim88 if spotting the fleet is the way to deduce perms every single time, den I also wish how I'm able to figure out the actual deployed perms through how AMDEP deploys their buses.

It is also worth letting ya know 1709 1710 1711 1733 are reflected as 882, 981 perms in roster, which obviously I don't dare to edit knowing AMDEP deploys them on 171 way more frequently.

The question now is whether your team want to tell people what the roster reflects each buses are, or you want tell them how each buses are observed as which perm. After all, there should also be ways to explain how do the adverts from each buses come about & a rough gauge which service.

Thanks and no thanks to the warning point. I will defintiely appeal against this warning point and hope this can talk out to your team why I should not deserve that warning point. However if your team insists then I'll step out from all other accurate edits since more contribution = more warning point/editing ban. Thanks

~ Arthurjie