User talk:Supernutorcrazy
Rules for my feedback to stop irritate me.
- Please kindly wait for up to 7 days unless stated otherwise for my reply to your feedback. No reply will be given if your feedback does not require reply or I could not answer to your feedback.
- Please do not ask for general question like How to etc.
- Please do not ask for permission to do something.
- Please refrain from requesting to retrieved deleted article as excessive history will be cleared.
- When requesting me to edit locked pages, please give either
- Affected sections code
- Advertisement in full
- Affected parts to change in details.
- Avoid statement like same as other vehicle
- Please kindly indicate Autoblock ID if you have been affected from it.
- I will not entertain any request under BCM transition.
Leave your message below
Rail Wiki Expansion
Hi Supernutorcrazy,
Is it OK to add info of train deployments (including TRNs and their sequences), acronyms legend and train fleet info (similar to what's done for buses)?
Data can be obtained from here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PMuCeF31etWzPv_U42qMaFoHvYwDpnkSWHgjvuuTxdg/edit
All data collated in the above document are based on spottings and observations from fellow enthusiasts.
I hope you will support us to make these valuable information more accessible to all. Thank you.
White/blue UPD sticker
Hi,
The white/blue UPD stickers differentiate UPDEP buses between those under tendered contract (white) and those not (blue). This is exspecially a problem for UPDEP spare fleet, and buses in depots like AMDEP, BNDEP meant for Bukit Merah package. Hope this helps.
Regards, Kay
Re formatting of some svc fleet and all bus fleet pages
Hi I’m just wondering why is all bus fleet pages alongside some svc fleet pages completely changed by someone who's “destroying” sgwiki completely & thinking it’s his own personal website and this makes it annoying for us editors to edit things right now I really hope u do revert most of the old format changes back as editors like me definitely do prefer it.
Re: reformatting of bus service pages
Hi, I see why you and sgbustrain may want to reformat it to make information more easily accessible by displaying information about each bus service all on 1 page. However, by reformatting these pages, they basically show information similar to what other websites and apps display. They will just be like landtransportguru’s bus service pages, but with much less information (i.e. route length, travelling time, and many photos of the bus service), rendering these SgWiki pages useless and replaceable. Even if you still insist on reformatting pages to have a page for each individual bus service, I hope that it will also include information like perm buses, down routes, duty table, etc. In conclusion, Sgwiki’s pages should offer something different and not just duplicate existing pages. Thanks.
Regards, LTA Bus Irrationalisation
Bus History page
Hi is it possible that History page be kept untouched? I nearly missed out on Sv 78's amendment to Jurong Town Hall Int when doing a complication of the bus history for today (26 November)
Nearby Attraction issues
Hey, do people even add nearby attractions, schools, malls, etc. editiors just add train stations and not care, is it still even right to use the term "Nearby Attractions" or should it be "Train Stations".
Bus Service 298 Fleet Trial
Please consider quantity of a particular bus model to make it easier for people to count and add a link to bus model pages to navigate easily.
removal of overnight parking bus park like BRBP, CGBP etc and using the parent depot control like AMDEP, BNDEP etc for former deployments
Hi,
As BRBP is an overnight parking bus park, I would suggest those former deployments for BRBP to be edited to AMDEP because BRBP parent depot control was formerly under AMDEP before being given to HGDEP due to the permanent closure.
For example BRBP 60, BRBP 90, BRBP 141 etc to AMDEP 60, AMDEP 90, AMDEP 141 etc
As CGBP was an overnight parking bus park before closure and the parent depot control was BNDEP, I suggest the removal of overnight parking bus park and usage of parent depot control instead.
For example CGBP 4, CGBP 47, CGBP 81 etc to be removed
Thanks.
SBS prefix section on bus ad page lags badly on phone
Hi, can you consider removing all the N/A columns on the bus ad page as they cause unneccesary lag. What's the point of having the N/A columns, just like how the non revenue buses page only list buses that are non revenue instead of all buses.
My suggestion:
Double deckers
SBS-registered
| Registration no. | Model | Advertisement |
|---|---|---|
| SBS18B | Volvo B9TL (WEG2 Batch 4) |
ABC Holdings • ABC Enterprise: Join Us Now. |
| SBS3888L | Volvo B9TL (WEG2 Batch 3) | |
| SBS7588B | Volvo B9TL (WEG2 Batch 1) |
Lorem Ipsum Pte Ltd - Lorem Services: Flat Rate For New Users. |
New Bus Service Pages
Hi there,
Just wanted to point this out as my capacity as a user of this site, I do not think it is right for the new Bus Service pages to have its service description completely copy pasted from Land Transport Guru, even if only certain paragraphs are copy pasted.
This is in violation with the Copyright Act and is a serious issue. Unless the person editing the information here is also the person who is editing the information on Land Transport Guru, this is very unethical in practice. Even if credit is given to the source, Land Transport Guru, it seems like no effort is being made at all to paraphrase or craft out any service description to be uniquely for sgWiki.
Regards, Themystery
History Page for Defunct Services
Hi supernutocrazy,
Just wanted to propose something for the bus service history pages. After all existing services have their own page with their own history, perhaps we could remove all the "refer to bus service xxx for more info" and compile all the defunct services' history into one single page, like what was done with advertisements. However, this may be inconvenient for users as the page will be extremely long. So another option is to seperate them by SBST defunct services and TIBS/SMRT defunct services (or TTS/GAS if any).
Regards, svc135bsoe
Reply regarding to opinions of proposal changes
Put your replies here
- 23ispolo:
- 8549H:
- Al92:
- Alphabetlorefan1: Hi, I saw what you wrote on my discussions page. I would like to say, it would be so great if we have a bus spotting page. This can help everyone to type in what they saw. This one can go easy. Second, speaking of subpages for respective bus models, that would be so cool if we do that. I mean I would like to see what it looks like. Never seen a subpage in sgWiki before. sgWiki should be improved with suggestions like these. Thanks.
- BusFan74: Hi, I saw the message that you wrote on my discussions page. Like Alphabetlorefan1 said, bus spotting page can be useful based on observations. I like that suggestion because this wiki has not created a subpage here before. First of all, the page is neatly organized and I liked it, easier than cluttered. Thank you.
- CastJared: Hi. I agree with this format, because, I praise on the subpages that hasn't created it before on this wiki. Thanks.
- Gabrielcheong:
- Haram:
- Hearmeout:
- Matthiasgoh76:
- SBS3720L: Yes, in agreement with other editors, bus spotting page is indeed useful in terms of deployment accuracy. As for sub-pages in regards to advertisements, personally, I feel it is redundant to include that as part of the main table. Because, advertisements are just there for maybe 3-4 months before they are removed, whereas all other information are a necessity to keep track of the bus activity throughout its lifespan (I.e. operator, service and depot are needed info to update former deployments). Unless there's a page that keep track of ALL the advertisements a bus had pasted in its lifespan, I feel there's not a need to include advertisement as a column. On mobile, the current 4 columns already looks very squeezy.
- Sgbusntrain: Yes, subpages would be better especially since some enthusiast go to places to spot buses using the deployment pages, but most of them use their phones as it is the easiest thing to carry around instead of a tablet or a computer. For the advertisement page, it would be better to merge them into their own bus model deployment pages, for easier reference, especially
buses where you can check whether the ad has expired (BUD/MDD FD) or whether it is still active (BUD/MDD Svc). Now about the bus spotting page, i do not see the need to create one as this wiki already has problems about pofma, like how deployments are changed when a bus does a cameo once. Due to the pofma problems, and the gradually increasing amount of fake cameos, the bus spotting page will be not be that useful if wrong information gets increasingly added. About the columns, I believe they all should work fine, just wondering about the operators and deployments, as the operators can also be found at the former deployments section why not use that to show operators since dupe info anyways. E.g. /Tower Transit: MDDEP FD (Jun 2020 - Sep 2024) MDDEP 169 (Sep 2024 - Present) - Sgeditransport5929:
- Svc135bsoe: Sorry for the late reply. Anyways I wanted to say that the bus spotting idea is wonderful, for both deployment accuracy and also since we currently do not have much bus spotting lists online. It happens to be out today and is looking great, so keep it up! About the bus deployments by model, I am completely fine with maintaining the status quo, as advertisements change over time and have to be updated frequently. Hence I feel it is unnecessary to include advertisements as a column and the current seperate advertisements and deployments lists are fine. However I am in agreement that the seperate pages for each 100 buses are more mobile-friendly and can be implemented.
- Themystery:
- TTEDC: While I advocate for the integration of the advertisement page into the main fleet page, I must stress my view that foldable boxes (where one has to click to open the information) should be implemented simultaneously to accommodate the long information of advertisements and former deployments. I express no strong opinions on the sub-page or bus spotting pages proposals.
What is going on with sgWiki right now?
On my last edit in 2024, the layout is normal. But when I came back today, what I saw on the Alexander Dennis Enviro500 (Batch 1) page, the layout changed, and something happened. What is sgWiki now?
Reply: Opinion
Good day.
I shall pass the first question.
Yes, I have to admit that the information is inaccurate these days, and I don't wish to update it as the process is more complicated than the previous version of the wiki.
If we are heading towards the subpages, I suggest merging all the batches under one main page.
Take Volvo B9TL fleet as an example:
- Volvo B9TL/SBSxx
- Volvo B9TL/SBS30xx
- Volvo B9TL/SBS31xx
- Volvo B9TL/SBS32xx
- Volvo B9TL/SBS33xx
- Volvo B9TL/SBS34xx
- Volvo B9TL/SBS35xx
- Volvo B9TL/SBS36xx
- Volvo B9TL/SBS37xx
- Volvo B9TL/SBS38xx
- Volvo B9TL/SBS39xx
- Volvo B9TL/SBS75xx
- Volvo B9TL/SBS76xx
- Volvo B9TL/SBS77xx
- Volvo B9TL/SG50xx
- Volvo B9TL/SG51xx
- Volvo B9TL/SG53xx
- Volvo B9TL/SG54xx
- Volvo B9TL/SG55xx
- Volvo B9TL/SG56xx
Current deployments
| Registration no. | Operator | Deployments | Advertisement |
|---|---|---|---|
SBS1Z |
|
LYDEP 2 | N/A |
SBS2X |
LYDEP 3 | ViewQuest | |
SBS3T |
LYDEP 6 | Parkway East Hospital |
Former deployments
| ExpandClick to expand/collapse |
|---|
Cheers.
Deployments page (alternative with Batch & lifespan expiry date) & registration coloring
Specs will still be different across all 4 batches. Will work on a sample soon
Ads do not need to be that detailed imo. Just company & campaign/product will do
| Registration no. | Batch | Operator | Deployment | Advertisement | Lifespan expiry date | Former deployments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SBS3238M |
2 | 
|
SWDEP 25/660*//80/80A* | ABC Holdings Inc • Peach Mart - 3.3 Mega Sale | 23 Dec 2029 |
Expand |
SBS3240E |
3 | BNDEP 39 | Land Transport Authority - Friendly Streets | 29 Jan 2030 |
Expand | |
SBS3241C |
HGDEP 410W | Land Transport Authority - Chinese New Year Celebrations 2025 | Expand | |||
SBS3242A |
De-registered & Scrapped | Expand | ||||
SBS3243Y |
|
Bus Under Repair | N/A | 12 Feb 2030 |
Expand | |
Notice for SBS3238M & SBS3243Y there's a template so that operator column will no longer be needed. When a bus transfers to another operator just change the template format
Plus, emissions shall have seperate pages (ie. for K230UB, NL323F & ND323F one page for each emission. SG2017C would be an issue though but I would put it as Euro 6 demo
Question
Have you considered the opinions of other users before implementing the updated format? Defeats the purpose of our inputs if you are going to implement your idea.
Merging of Euro Emission & Batches
Yes I feel Merging of Euro Emission & Batches is a good idea.
Disagreement in Merging of Euro Emission & Batches
Disagree. As we all know, these models, namely Volvo B9TL (Wright Eclipse Gemini), Mercedes-Benz O530 Citaro have more than 1000 buses each. And there will be important variants here and there, which is the main reason why the page separates the variants according to Batch and Emissions.
I would also like to point out that what we are currently doing, splitting clustered current bus service pages into individual services - has been a way of easing and segregating the volume of editing, and focuses more attention on the bus service itself.
However, merging everything into one bus model page makes the subpages extremely clustered and defeats the purpose of trying to track a bus. Let me explain in detail why.
The current split Scania K230UB Euro IV (Batch 2)/1 to Scania K230UB Euro IV(Batch 2)/4 has made editing easier because of simpler titles for respective regos, a lesser need to scroll down, and from a batch of 400 buses, is simplified to finding 100 buses each out of 4 subpages - similar to Scania K230UB Euro IV (Batch 1) which has only 100 buses. This only requires 2 steps - searching batch, then click on subpage, which takes negligible time, and scrolling through 100 buses, which is just a short timespan.
However, when putting everything into one Scania K230UB page, it is going to be 1400 buses and 12 subpages. That means a more time is spent on hesitation to check which subpage one should click on to find the registration. Furthermore, some of the K230UB registrations already crisscross one another in emissions and registrations, namely 81xx in Batches 1 & 2, 85xx in Euro IV and Euro V, and SBS8888D, a supposed Euro V registration registered into a Euro IV bus.
Similarly for B9TL (Wright Eclipse Gemini), that is more than 1600 buses in at least 19 subpages, and Citaro in more than 1100 buses in 14 subpages. The current problem that the admin wants to address is about too many buses based on Batch/Emissions, but having too many registration subpages based on one model isn't going to solve the root cause of the issue. Would users rather find 1÷100 OR 1÷14÷100?
From what I understand, when most in the bus community search for a registration with bus specifications they already know, they look for the emission/batch first, then they view the current and the former deployment. In the other way round, if an unfamiliar newcomer searches for a bus registration, the wiki results can already generate the page that clearly states the model and batch/emission in the title. See pic below.
If batch numbers and emissions are to be squeezed beside the bus registration box, it is going to be viewed as excessive information by readers, which is the opposite effect of what is intended on the current batch/emission pages. As many editors here explore many factors including mobile viewing - this proposed arrangement is also going to make things difficult for mobile users too, as each column has little space to display so much information in one table.
To conclude my opinion, merging too much information is not going to simplify the search for a bus registration.
If there is anything I would suggest, I would say that the current subpages among batch/emission pages is already an improvement for viewing and editing - the Scania K230UB Euro IV (Batch 2)/1 to Scania K230UB Euro IV(Batch 2)/4 already addresses the main issue and this should be implemented on other bus model pages with hundreds of buses.
Wekelwrady
- I would like to voice my agreement with the views expressed above by Wekelwrady.
Regards, TTEDC
Yeah. I think I didn't want for this because it creates a confusion.
Ur plan for merging
I think its good idea where we can just see one page for one specific model which is good, less troublesome just changing pages when editing the exact same model but different batch.
But the issue comes when buses just have the continuous number e.g. ND323F EV B2 which goes from 5740 to 5799, subpages just gonna have one batch making it useless (SG57XX like what you did in the kub), next is spec, im concerned about the specifications as each batch has its unique specs squeezing all specs into one main page will confuse people, no one wants to read the crammed tables just to find what they need.
So, i HIGHLY do not recommend merging.
To rethink erm, ill give a proposed format
User:Sgbusntrain/Proposed format (interactive)
or
just putting this on top
Give some thought and probably ask around for feedback
Adding links to bus interchanges in BS Template
Hi Supernutorcrazy, is it ok if I add a link into the BS template when there is a bus interchange page? It will look something like this as an example:
Punggol Pl
An example of this template (note its not edited yet) when the Punggol Bus Interchange is created. Lets see if you are ok with it when replying.
Thanks
Alphabetlorefan1 (talk) 10 February 2025, 11:23
Reply
Hi Supernutorcrazy, nice template design tho. I think I am ok with that template design due to it having hyperlinks.
Thanks
Alphabetlorefan1 (talk) 11 February 2025, 11:39
Add on
Is it possible to introduce subpages of the bus stop templates to standardise the nearby attractions of these bus stops?
Elaboration to support Hearmeout's case
I think that landmark standardisation is an advantage that we can make use of to display where the bus routes stop at, because it first and foremost provides community benefits. I won't ask the admin to rush/immediately create for my elaboration, but I can say positively that when I see admin displaying "CCK Polyclinic" in the 975 page (even I wont be reminded abt Polyclinics until I now know), this gives me a framework to display the following important landmarks.
- MRT stations (first and foremost, already implemented)
- Shopping malls/plazas that are publicly known
- Town Centres (Grouped into a name, eg. Tampines Hub, Heartbeat@Bedok, J Connect, One Punggol)
- Government Polyclinics
- Publicly known Civil Service Institutions (ie. "Official Open" classification such as NS Hub, CMPB)
- Tertiary Institutions (priority for those approved under AGC, followed by ITE)
- Major tourist destinations like theme parks, museums, building icons (that cover a suitable and specific area eg. Gardens by the Bay, National Gallery Singapore)
I of course know that there's still lot to do, but I think we can make this the first item as an afterthought only after all bus services are created (and of course I will bundle that completion of the truncation of alternate travel pages tgt with the bus services).
Phase 1 work on TWE
Heads up, I will be starting to renewing templates for TWE and finish up on Tampines.
Reply
Hey, replied to you on my talk page. Dragomir7 (talk) 12:03, 7 March 2025 (+08)
^
- Dude ... tell you what. Sure you can reserve all the pages for defunct services (move their titles to "History of defunct services XX - YY" or whatnot) but listing each and every one of current service in this way is more than not just going to increase the clutter and colour glare on the page, AND it creates trouble for users who want to look at the histories of current services with a smooth flow because now they have to backtrack for each step, and comparing side-by-side (say svcs 2 and 3, or 2 and 2A) also becomes difficult.
- That's why I added the transclusions earlier on to facilitate the smooth display of historical information of existing services in their own right on a dedicated page (which you appear to have deleted), in a way that doesn't result in repetition while causing the least disruption to existing viewing habits. Hope this explains. Dragomir7 (talk) 12:52, 7 March 2025 (+08)
Re: Warning Point
Hi, I saw what you put on my talk page. Ok I am sorry for not updating the former deployments but I will update them. That is because they have been doing these service in the past few weeks so thats why.
I did not know former deployments is needed to update
RobloxXF
Add licensing requirements
Sorry for not editing much as i have been busy couldnt spend a lot of time on the transportsg.me replica too but I texted you to request adding licensing requirements/options for files. On default the files instead of ‘none’ it should be ‘File is sourced online’ and another licensing option (where you have to set it urself) is ‘File is produced by the uploader of the file’.
I belief you can edit licensing options since i can do that for the transportsg.me replica.
Reply: History for Woodlands Service
I feel that stating Woodlands is enough. I was just attempting to help you standardise the 'Temp Int' indication since you edited it for those selected pages.
Re:Travel Time/Bus Service Pages
(1) Travel Time
With regards to indicating travel time on the route diagram, I would support that since the intention is to display the rail route and the respective travel times in one diagram.
Your 2nd point: keep those route when we can easily use Others. I was also revolving through the same thought because some stations are within close proximity with one another. For instance, we can explore indicating that Shenton Way is within the same vicinity of Downtown or Marina Bay, likewise Tanjong Rhu is within the same vicinity of Stadium. With that, we can at least omit out the walking part and just use W2T diagrams to show the proximity of stations in the same vicinity.
With that in mind, I will try make some changes to improvise on that.
In addition, where expressway travel is applicable, I have also added varying timings for expressways with an average of 15 to 20 minutes deviation as a result of slow moving traffic since we are now entirely focusing on travelling time and excluding waiting time.
(2) Bus Service Pages
I think I will leave the denote at the route information instead for bus services that do not have poster announcements on eves of selected holidays. This shall ensure that the deviation of operating hours still remains clear while no official posters for the relevant services are out.
I have also noticed that the admin has made an enquiry regarding TIBS/SMRT's holiday variant services. I recall back in the days while electronic displays signs and bus stop poles reflect "853" "925" "961", the bus information panels at the bus stops reflect "853#" "925#" "961#". There was no standardisation for how the holiday variants were reflected, which is why in the LTA posters on renumbering to "M", the former version was rather being said as "853 (Sunday/Public Holiday)" "925 (Sunday/Public Holiday)" "961 (Sunday/Public Holiday)" as the old format made no attempt to have one fixed name distinguish holiday variants. We stick to the bus eguide/datamall in this case.
If I remember correctly, there was a huge change in the bus stop poles around the same time of the renumbering ard 3Q 2019, which introduced "170X" (170X was blue during desto era) and "G/W" onto the bus stop poles to differentiate bidirectional feeder services. Note that this happened shortly after the B10BLEs retired and thus the end of the usage of destos. But it is very hard to aim at the date at which the standardisations happened, considering that the KUBs were introduced in 2008 to many services (with gradual retirement of older fleets between 2009 - 2011, and 2018), in 2014 to 170/X, but bus stop poles only reflected these EDS displayed numbers at a much later date. I will think whether there is a solution to this. Will make another reply shortly.
Thanks and Regards
Reply
For 170 (Blue) to 170X, we can mark 2014 as the time of change when Scania K230UB deployments replaced B10M deployments, which meant the phase out of the blue desto.
Before 2014:
After 2014:
As for the G/W bidirectional feeder services, I don't think it is accurate to say that the renumbering happened in 2019, because the first appearances of "G/W" were indicated in older town guides decades ago which you can see in Gallery of Service Guides page. We can tell that these were required in order to people to queue at the correct line at bus interchanges. This in turn was then reflected on the first batches of WAB buses with electronic displays. The change of white/green plates to G/W was a slow gradual process and simply did not occur on a fixed date. Despite these changes, SBS Transit and Go Ahead Transit still reflect the bidirectional feeder services as one service under one service guide, with Go-Ahead even indicating the green and white colours on the 382 guide.
Therefore, it is clear that both the G/W alphabets and the coloured plates complement each other. I will suggest that we do with this to reflect the past and present process.
Reply #2
That is because 859A transitioned(separated) from a short trip to a full day service while the parent service 859 still remained as a trunk service between Sembawang and Yishun. This is a different path from how single feeder services/84 were amended and renumbered into bidirectional G/W feeder services, as one ring service but bidirectional(not separated).
Bidirectional G/W works in one set where previously bus stop info panels only indicated "225" "243" "382" "410", whereas 859A/859B works in another set where bidirectional variants coexist with a parent trunk service. Likewise, 853/925/961 also works in another set where holiday variants have already been distinguished on the bus stop info panels.
Where applicable, 859A and 859B pages can have the same illustrations on how the bidirectional loop works while having the reference to the page of other loop at the same time.
Spare bus page standardisation
Hi there, in view of the respective service pages that voids categorising the respective model into Batch 1/2/3 etc, I believe we should do the same for the spare bus page also as standardisation. The following are the changes I am proposing (Which is the same as the current fleet template in the respective service page) and would like your pov. Thank you. ~SBS3720L
Bukit Batok Depot (BBDEP) (18 buses)
| Fleet | |
|---|---|
| Single Deckers | Double Deckers |
|
SBS6750E SBS6845R SBS6850A Mercedes-Benz O530 Citaro
SBS8067G SBS8071T SBS8163L SBS8419A SBS8489Y SBS8860H SBS8939R Scania K230UB
|
SBS7522R SBS7525H SBS7526E SBS7551G SBS7553B SBS7555X SBS7562A SBS7609A Volvo B9TL
|
Train Travelling Time
Hi admin, if travelling times along rail lines are expected to adjust, should there be a possible exploration of an option where the station layout diagram is connected with the centralised travelling time graph that has been set up?