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Please post on my user talk page (not my user page) if you want me to delete any outdated / unrelated articles or any unused images existed in sgWiki.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 rules as stated on the sgWiki Guidebook 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.

---

Summary of Issues

Highlighting Production Batch Ordered by comapnies

Johnlyh77 had suggested to display the original company ordered by (for buses prior to BCM).

SBS3602U and Supernutorcrazy had realised the important of listing as the Production Batch for Mercedes-Benz O530 Citaro may cause confusion and conflict between users as both SMRT and SBS Transit purchase the same buses and some of it from SBS Transit had been used in SMRT fleet. As such, it would be best for a new column to be place which stated the original purchaser.

Solution Example:

Bus model	Registration no.		Originally purchased by	WAB
Mercedes-Benz O530 Citaro	Demonstrator	SMB136C	Template:SMRT Buses
	Batch 1	SMB139U – SMB148T
	Batch 2	SMB149R – SMB188C
Mercedes-Benz O530 Citaro	Batch 3	SG1691L – SG1699R	Template:SBS Transit

Comments

This one is ok. But as for those buses under Tower Transit, it is also best that the former operator be included in this table.

--Apex-LW'21 (talk) 23:46, 9 August 2016 (SGT)

I find that the wording "Originally purchased by" is misleading, as the SG plated buses are not neccesarily purchased by SBS Transit. Yes the earlier ones are, but as it stands, there are more Citaros than what was reported in SBS Transit's press releases (1000 in total). I therefore suspect that LTA has purchased additional Citaros with SBS specs, and it may also be the case for the Wrights, and similarly for the batch of SG plate A95s. Given that there is now possibly a mix of LTA and SBS ordered buses, and that we cannot determine which is which as yet, it is best not to put such information on the pages.

In short SBS spec ≠ purchased by SBS. (similarly for SMRT spec buses)

--Scania 16:46, 10 August 2016 (SGT)

User Scania has a valid point there. The other way I could think of was to only indicate the purchaser for the Citaros bought by SMRT, since SMRT spec Citaros have been discontinued.

--SBS3602U (talk) 17:26, 10 August 2016 (SGT)

It will be better bus deployments are classified under their own package wef 1 Sept 2016.

• Bus Contracting Model (BCM) Bus Deployments (E.g. Bukit Merah Bus Package Deployments)

- Listed by Packages

- Bus models should not be listed by Batches, will cause more confusion for the editors as well as the community (Taking the SG1691L - SG1699R batch as an example).

• Bus Contracting Model (BCM) by Services (E.g. Bukit Merah Bus Package Deployments by Service)

- Listed by Packages

- Increasing order of services, be it a Trunk, Feeder, Express or NightRider/NiteOwl service in a page instead of the current version.

• Bus Contracting Model (BCM) from Depots

- Listed by Services from all Packages.

• Bus Contracting Model (BCM) Spare Buses

- Listed by Packages.

This is to help make editing easier when it comes to a change in operator for any package (E.g. By just simply changing the operator logo).

--SMB315C

Did you mean anything like in [1]

Anyway, I believe that you were user "SMB1341U" in this wiki? It is greatly appreciated if you could help clean up the BCM mess in sgWiki as you do have some good ideas :)

--SBS3602U (talk) 14:11, 12 August 2016 (SGT)

As mentioned earlier:

"- Bus models should not be listed by Batches, will cause more confusion for the editors as well as the community (Taking the SG1691L - SG1699R batch as an example)."

SMRT did not order any other Citaro buses and they come in with SBST's Batch 3 specifications (except for some minor changes like the Priority Seats notice and more), and not SMRT's "Batch 3 Citaro specifications". Same applies for the Volvo B9TL buses.

Thanks.

--SMB315C

[Half-Resolved] Redundancy of Tower Transit Bus Deployment By Service

Supernutorcrazy has suggested that the pages for Tower Transit Bus Deployment by Services was redundant as lack of quality information.

SBS3602U suggested that we will wait for a period of time to see if the deployment will be stabilised if not the whole pages and subpages to be deleted.

Request for a dateline before the pages to be deleted.

Comments

Tower Transit deployments for the day is somehow irregular. But I found that the Enviros running on Service 106 are much stablised and certain Wrights on 78, 79 and 143 as well.

Also, I think we can change the title page as Bus Contracting Model Deployment by Service, since there would be Go Ahead coming next month.

--Apex-LW'21 (talk) 23:46, 9 August 2016 (SGT)

[Unsolved] Messy Headers and Format especially with a single model with multiple long headers

Supernutorcrazy had suggested to merged it to a single table with a new columns that represent the operator which operates it and include a sortable table to reduce the need of long headers as the operators who operates the buses may not get it in running order.

However, SBS3602U highlight that if we will to get rid of it and follows Volvo B9TL (Wright Eclipse Gemini 2) (Batch 4) By Registration, it will cause editor to scroll down pretty far and may causes mobile devices to crash while editing. The long section names etc was still messy.

In light of this, it is possible to semi-get rid of it, but limit the number of rows per table to about 200 and also retain certain element like not in running order. (Eg: SBS1Z – SBS23K; SBS3449X – SBS3482Z & SBS3487K – SBS3523P; SG5000E - SG5120S & SG5176G – SG5185E; SG5300P – SG5395R & SG5397K – SG5399E; SG5546Y – SG5555X)

Comments

This page is for experimental purposes. Since these buses would be transferred to the respective operators (such as Go Ahead next month) and some will remain on their respective incumbent operator, this page would be useful especially when those existing bus registration plates might be re-registered to the SG plate in the near future. So this page will be kept for now.

--Apex-LW'21 (talk) 23:46, 9 August 2016 (SGT)

--Johnlyh77, SBS3602U, Supernutorcrazy

Tower Transit Deployment by Service

For what I know,

1. Tower Transit don't deploy any bus for any Service.
2. Each Bus Captain everyday drive different bus. (No regular bus)
3. Each Bus Captain switch 2 to 3 buses daily. (especially meal time)

--Johnlyh77 (talk) 18:45, 9 August 2016 (SGT)

Recently, Service 106 especially, has been stabilised with the Enviros as they had the notice "For 106 Only" on the windscreen. But if you also notice, that buses that did on a particular service can jump over to another service.

As such, there's different buses deployed on a particular service. No fixed drivers are deployed to run on each bus.

--Apex-LW'21 (talk) 23:39, 9 August 2016 (SGT)

Lay up buses in the existing lists

I have observed that lay up buses and buses that are missing but not laid up have been removed from the lists. While it doesn't matter for retiring buses, doing so for types of buses which are nowhere near retirement causes inconvenience for users who need to edit it when the buses are back from repairs/missing. It also causes inconvenience for users who have to check the deregistration page for layup buses. I therefore suggest that layup buses be retained in the lists while only removing deregistered buses, especially when the pages do not have a link to the deregistration page.

--Scania 16:08, 13 August 2016 (SGT)