Difference between revisions of "User talk:SBS3107H"

From SgWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Since you IGNORED me.)
Line 46: Line 46:
[[User:Lim2|Lim2]] ([[User talk:Lim2|talk]]) 16:55, 22 December 2013 (SGT)
[[User:Lim2|Lim2]] ([[User talk:Lim2|talk]]) 16:55, 22 December 2013 (SGT)


==Colour scheme==
==Proposed deletion==
I'm proposing for this article, [[Singapore Bus Specification]] to be deleted, as there are no further updates to the specifications of the current running buses since its existed on the respective deployments page. As for the former buses that were retired, I will just shift over to another newly-created article.<br>


I have decided to change the colour scheme for the table headings for SBS Transit Bus Deployments (HTML colour code #5D1E79) and SMRT Bus Deployments (HTML colour code #E3031E) to match the corporate colours of the bus companies.<br>
--[[User:Apex-LW&#39;21|Apex-LW&#39;21]] ([[User talk:Apex-LW&#39;21|talk]]) 22:34, 5 March 2014 (SGT)
 
The sample are as follows:<br>
<font color = "ffffff"><span style="background-color:#5D1E79">SBS Transit Sample</span></font>
 
<font color = "ffffff"><span style="background-color:#E3031E">SMRT Buses Sample</span></font>
 
For Bus Plus buses, the HTML colour code for its green corporate colour is #015B41.
 
Please take note of the above corporate colour scheme when it comes to doing the tabulation and their colours is '''different''' from the normal purple (HTML colour code #800080) & red (HTML colour code #FF0000) colour scheme. '''Do not''' revert back to the normal colour scheme for the tables.<br>
Thank you.<br>
 
--[[User:Apex-LW&#39;21|Apex-LW&#39;21]] ([[User talk:Apex-LW&#39;21|talk]]) 09:59, 13 February 2014 (SGT)
 
: Noted. [[User:(SBS3107H)|<b><font color="red" size="3px">SBS</font><font color="purple" size="2px">3107H</font></b>]] ([[User talk:SBS3107H|<font face="Comic Sans MS"><font color="orange" size="2px">talk</font></font>]]) 12:58, 13 February 2014 (SGT)
 
==Future De-Registration of Buses==
 
I will be renaming the above page as '[[Bus Lifespan Expiry Date]]'. A redirect to the new page has been added to the former page '[[Future De-Registration of Buses]]'.<br>
All information will be transferred to the new page accordingly.<br>
 
In that page, '[[Bus Lifespan Expiry Date]]', instead of using 'De-registration schedule', I will be naming it as 'Lifespan expiry date'.<br>
The 'De-registration of Buses' page will remain, and this page is only meant for buses that are currently undergoing retirement or soon-to-be retired.<br>
 
--[[User:Apex-LW&#39;21|Apex-LW&#39;21]] ([[User talk:Apex-LW&#39;21|talk]]) 21:33, 13 February 2014 (SGT)
 
: Noted and agree with the renaming. [[User:(SBS3107H)|<b><font color="red" size="3px">SBS</font><font color="purple" size="2px">3107H</font></b>]] ([[User talk:SBS3107H|<font face="Comic Sans MS"><font color="orange" size="2px">talk</font></font>]]) 12:36, 14 February 2014 (SGT)

Revision as of 22:34, 5 March 2014

Seiko Criteria ad.

This ad. have 2 different version.1 is Wang Leehom as feat., 1 is Sammi Cheung as feat. Their captions also different, please help to clarify. Thanks! (User talk:SBS5032B) 13:13, 6 December 2013 (SGT)

Re: Clarifications

With regards to Svc 961,

1) Batch 2 MAN A22 registered will usually follow a trend that they will perm a service chronologically in order. Given SMB1342S and SMB1344L perm WL961, high chance SMB1343P perm WL961 too.

2) SMB1343P has been on doing Svc 961 for 2 months.

3) TIB481C has been running around on other services lately like a spare bus, just that it only returns on 961 for the past 2 weekends.

Source of info: "Singapore Bus Enthusiasts" FB Group. Please don't tell me you don't trust FB sources and only trust those from SGF. At the very least look through arguments carefully.

As for SMB129Z, my original source has been invalidated. Hence, I will only revert edits related to TIB481C and SMB1343P.

User talk:ArthurJie 12:58, 8 December 2013 (SGT)

Nope, I'm just asking you to reverify with TIB1051D again. Quoted from FB: "481C still need confirmation, doing duty 10 doesn't mean it's still perm... it only appeared on 961 for the past 2 weekends!"

User talk:ArthurJie 13:07, 8 December 2013 (SGT)

I have given a note to TIB1051D and will await a reply from him. SBS3107H (talk) 13:38, 10 December 2013 (SGT)
I agree with what ArthurJie mentioned. SMB1343P was indeed deployed on 961 for 2 consecutive months, while TIB481C deployment may be WLDEP SP//961*. But I will also help check on both buses on 961 these days to confirm their deployments.
SMB1341U (talk) 15:45, 10 December 2013 (SGT)

Clarifications - SV 961

Hi, just to provide some clarifications about the current deployments of this service.

I don't see a point of arguing over deployments. For there is always a clear line of difference between what is planned to be done (rostered / scheduled permanent buses), versus the actual situation (actual deployment of buses). These 2 are controlled by two different parties, one side being the scheduler, and the other being the starter of the depot or ONP venue.

I have been aware of SMB1343P's consistency on SV 961, I'm seeing it regularly. However, what goes inside the scheduled list in the roster is TIB481C, which as of today, is still valid.

I have my reason for editing SMB1343P out of the list, and TIB481C back into the list. Unless it can be verified on paper that SMB1343P is indeed in SV 961, through roster, through waybill or whatever means which is in black and white, otherwise it will not hold valid.

Please feel free to pose me questions onboard SgForums (ID: TIB1051D) or onboard Facebook (Christopher Thian). Thank you!

Bodywork assembler

Can you help me to answer this question here please? No one answer this yet...
Thank you!
Lim2 (talk) 16:55, 22 December 2013 (SGT)

Proposed deletion

I'm proposing for this article, Singapore Bus Specification to be deleted, as there are no further updates to the specifications of the current running buses since its existed on the respective deployments page. As for the former buses that were retired, I will just shift over to another newly-created article.

--Apex-LW'21 (talk) 22:34, 5 March 2014 (SGT)