User talk:SimonLim88
!
|
NOTICE | !
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Please take note that some administrator will be patrolling your edits.
Administrators: Block this user if the user continue disruptive editing. | ||||||
Service 854 using OC500LEs in the fleet
Hi this edit is to answer regarding the OC500LE spam in Service 854's fleet. I don't fault your enquiry cuz I'm sure many sgwiki admins also share the same sentiments with regards how Mandai deploys their buses.
The rostering on 854s single deck duties have apparently reflected these OC500LEs as 854 perms indeed and the adverts do go to those buses in fact most likely. However, I also understand from your point of view (cuz I see everyday myself too_ that SMB Citaros & MAN A22s were deployed on those single deck slots in reality while those OC500LEs do 167 853 980 wayyy more often and 854 OC500LEs are apparently very minimal and not even the listed perms at all. For now I can only reflect based on what is in the roster. The only way I could try to account for the less spare buses than 100+ in sgwiki apparently is to find out how they are assigned in roster, and also account for the number of single decker buses in 854's fleet despite not being OC500LEs in reality.
While this being said, there is also no way to track 854's perm Citaro fleet by spottings because the duties will change every single day, just like how the 855 Citaros reflected in sgwiki don't stick to their same service or same duty in fact, they are all based on rostering. Of cuz, the advert A22s from WPDEP side would follow the rostering a little more strictly while most other double decks too don't follow the roster too.
~Arthurjie
Reply
Hi,
As what I point out to Arthurjie about the Warning Point that was previously issued, is due to the fact that despite knowing it differs, there is no footnote/other information being stated that it is differ and hence classified as a fake information to the general public.
Regarding your suggestions:
- 1) Making a separate page for Mandai Services only, allocating the actual roster deployments apart from the deployments in reality. This was doable, but it created another problem for editors as there are now 2 service pages to keep track and update which may be confusing as why some was listed as Service X and the other page was listed as Service Y.
- 2) Relocate all Mandai allocated buses back to "AMDEP SP". This was the original plan but like what Arthurjie had mention, it become too big for the amount of sparebus in a given depot.
- 3) Open a vote to all sgwiki admins / users to decide if Mandai deployments should be based on AMDEP( Like an election basically. ) AMDEP or not is not a concern here in my opinion.
- 4) Have a discussion before deeming the bus as a permanent. (For example, SG5879L has been performing on 965 regularly but in the roster it is actually on 857. Keep the bus on hold until SG5879L has been observed appearing a certain amount of times on 965 and then verifying that it no longer appears on 857 on the following day.) This is what it is currently done (aka normal practice). For example, if SG5879L had been performing on 965 regularly (not appearing on 857) but in the roster it is on 857, the deployment page for 857 should not have SG5879L while the deployment page for 965 should have SG5879L.
Furthermore, by displaying the information on roster have its problem - it actually make wikipedia as a personal information page as the number of editor able to edit significantly reduced. i.e. if roster was to be display for Mandai service, then only Arthurjie is allowed to edit. That's break the purpose of a wiki.
Thanks & Regards
Reply
Hi,
Thanks for your feedback. Regarding your suggestions:
- 3) Open a vote to all sgwiki admins / users to decide if Mandai deployments should be based on roster vs reality ( Like an election basically. ) This was basically not applicable as it involved more on the guideline and rules and had to be made carefully to strike a balance. Unlike the elections where we conducts for Mercedes-Benz Citaro (Batch SMRT or merge) is due to standardization of naming convention and not on the editor guideline.
- 5) Open another block to differentiate reality vs roster instead of creating a new page. A new notation can also be introduced to indicate a roster to reality basis. (Eg . SG5879L AMDEP 857///965) Or any other notations deemed fit. As per what I had mention, a new notation can caused confusion to general public. Furthermore, by displaying roster information, only Arthurjie is allowed to edit. That's break the purpose of a wiki.
Thanks & Regards
Service 969
Hi SimonLim88,
I refer to this below mentioned note on the Service 969 deployments:
- SG6080S (Service 969) will perform on Service 854 during Weekends PM Peak & Saturdays.
I would like you to kindly change the phrasing of this note as I completely do not understand what the note is referring to. The "Weekends PM Peak" that you have mentioned is very contradicting to the fact of putting the word "Saturdays" there. Kindly please make the necessary changes to make it clearer as I cannot get your point across effectively. Thank you.
Themystery
Reminder
Hi.
Please be reminded that you should not add any information that you are unsure of.
- Don't know how SBST deploys their buses but I have noticed it performing on 372 when I was heading to Yishun to observe 854 fleet. Idk if crossovers exist in SBST. (Update : 1815 Depart SK int)
- 1 edit for unregistered batch 1 citaro buses [3]
- Those 2 were missing from the Batch 1 Page. If someone can fill the svc please do. Missing from OM so I presume it's scrapped?
Thanks.
Re: Simplification of Notes Section
Hi.
Thanks for suggesting this.
You may want to visit themystery's talk page and have a look at our past discussion regarding this.
Yes I agree that the current notes arrangement is really messy ever since the early trips & down-route trips information were transferred over. I have previously attempted to input these into a wikitable under the notes section. However I feel that the presentation may not be any better as there might be different buses deployed under different duties for the respective days. Hence it would be best if we could to stick to our current arrangement.
Thanks.