User talk:SBS3107H

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)

New WAB logo

I will be changing the WAB logo from a white background to a blue background.

As for the deployment list for each service, I may be changing the WAB status symbol. Instead of using the prefix '[WAB]', I will be placing the Template:WAB Logo on each deployment list. Here are the 2 proposed solutions, one with blue background and the other, with white background.

Current:

Service 2 (24 buses) [WAB]

Proposed:

Service 2 (24 buses) Template:WAB Logo

OR

Service 2 (24 buses) Template:WAB Logo White

Do give feedback first so that I will know which one to be implemented. Thanks.

--Apex-LW'21 (talk) 19:26, 13 March 2014 (SGT)

I prefer "==Service 2 (24 buses) {{WAB Logo}}==" just like what WAB decals placed on buses. SBS3107H (talk) 19:52, 13 March 2014 (SGT)