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Please post on my user talk page (not my user page) if you want me to delete any outdated / unrelated articles or any unused images existed in sgWiki.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

---

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)

Request for sgWiki Bus REVAMP [Urgent]

Hi Apex-LW'21,

After user 'SMB1341U' had highlighted again on the user 'Master Legend' about his editing, and I ran a background check on his editing once again to look for abnormality, it's seems like the disruptive editing is only done on non-BSEP buses plying BSEP schedule as the following reasons:

• BSEP Buses must not be SPARE
• Non-BSEP Buses 'cannot' performs BSEP scheduled regularly (as in daily basis).
• BSEP Buses must replace BSEP Buses

This three general rules exist when the BSEP kicked in. However, with the massive redeployment and so on for GCM, my proposal together with some user is to merge ALL BSEP Buses into the respective Bus: Example: Merged MAN NL323F (Batch 1) and MAN NL323F (BSEP Batch 1).

Next, is to remove the common rule for all BSEP Buses. Under Line 6: BSEP buses are not considered spare buses. As BSEP is an exclusive for fixed deployment under the BSEP timing, the buses should not be marked as "SP".

If considering this statement is true, ALL user who edited BSEP deployment recently had broke this general rule and result in multiple users being banned and the disruptive editing would not even appear as of now. But to implement the new rule requires some time, and this also helps to facilitate a much quicker editing when GCM kicked in within a year.

I hope you would not procrastinate this urgent issue and grant permission to make a revamp asap.

Thanks & Regards

-Supernutorcrazy (Talk) 27 November 2015 17:36 (SGT)

Reply

Good Morning,

Yes, sure. According to your feedback, you can proceed on with the revamping of the BSEP bus deployments. At the same time, the rule of all unassigned BSEP buses as spare bus, based on your feedback will be lifted.

--Apex-LW'21 (talk) 00:25, 28 November 2015 (SGT)

Official differentiation of registration numbers for SBST Mercedes-Benz Citaros and create relevant Batch 3 pages.

Greetings.

I am requesting for a clear differentiation of the registration plates for the Batch 2 and Batch 3 Citaros. When all 450 Citaros from the order in 2012 (Batch 2) had all been registered by early 2015, more Citaros came in then and were not considered as Batch 3 due to the fact that Batch 3 were supposed to be delivered around mid-2015, while someone rejected the claim that deliveries can be done earlier (given the rate Mercedes-Benz produces the Citaros). But now it is coming near to the end of 2015, with the GCM kicking in as well as the ongoing merger of relevant BSEP and non-BSEP batches in one page, it is now time to consider differentiating the regos to avoid confusion; as the most recent registrations of non-BSEP Citaros is in June this year. Please make the relevant changes when the merger of pages are being done.

Thank you.

--ASA1234 (talk) 20:52, 28 November 2015 (SGT)

Good Evening,

Thanks for the suggestions pertaining to the SBST Citaros registration. You may wish to proceed on with the changes after the merger of pages to avoid any confusion between the Citaro Batch 2 and 3.

Thanks.

--Apex-LW'21 (talk) 22:56, 28 November 2015 (SGT)