User talk:Haram
Recent Edits
Hi refer to the SG6241U, the previous user is saying that SG6241U is sharebus duty with 51 and 161. SBS Transit has introduced a sharebus system.
DDs on 858
Hi just to clarify that that bus 858 DDs are cameo.
Regards,
Alphabetlorefan1
Important
Hi Haram, I know you are editing based on your observations but in fact you missed out the former deployments. It is very important to update these former deployments but you refuse to do that and thats why I had to keep reverting your edit. Please dont make me do it again when you are told to update former deployments. Also why are you giving me unfriendly offensive words when you undo my edit just now? Its not funny so dont do that again. One more unfriendly offensive words to me and I will report you to an admin. Please understand what I am saying.
Thanks, Alphabetlorefan1 (talk) 17 July 2024, 15:29
Singapore Bus Fleet
Hi Haram,
I see that you were on the first bus departing Boon Lay Int this morning. As SBS3288T is a Wright Batch 3, it’s considered a debut. Hence, could you help me fill in this page for what service it ran on? No reply needed. Thanks.
Regards, LTA Bus Irrationalisation
BYD buses
What you say is not correct. Ulu Pandan is a package. Thus buses are also assigned to this package /depot. So by right, all the buses under Ulu Pandan should be deployed on Ulu Pandan packages only. So those UPD buses parked in AMDEP/BNDEP should be amended under UPD as well.
Likewise for the BYD buses , these were assign to the serangoon package (I would think you mean HG-Sk packages) as per your advice. So these should be the same situation as those UPD buses.
And with AMDEP closures, AMDEP buses most likely will switch to SWDEP for the time being.
There are two new depots (kim chuan and lorong halus) which should be for HG-SK n serangoon/eunos package. So SWDEP most likely is for AMDEP
Re: Old Page Naming
Hi,
With regards to the purposed renaming for:
- MAN NL323F (Euro VI) → MAN NL323F (Batch 4)
- Scania K230UB (Euro IV) (Batch 1) → Scania K230UB (Batch 1)
- Scania K230UB (Euro IV) (Batch 2) → Scania K230UB (Batch 2)
- Scania K230UB (Euro V) (Batch 1) → Scania K230UB (Batch 3)
- Scania K230UB (Euro V) (Batch 2) → Scania K230UB (Batch 4)
- MAN ND323F (Euro V) (Batch 1) → MAN ND323F (Batch 1)
- MAN ND323F (Euro V) (Batch 2) → MAN ND323F (Batch 2)
- MAN ND323F (Euro V) (Batch 3) → MAN ND323F (Batch 3)
- MAN ND323F (Euro VI) (Batch 1) → MAN ND323F (Batch 4)
- MAN ND323F (Euro VI) (Batch 2) → MAN ND323F (Batch 5)
The old format does not used what you had proposed. It had long be in this title format. I can't remember the old Scania model page uses "(Euro IV Batch 1)" or "(Euro IV) (Batch 1)" for the old format. But even so, it is still minor.
The reason why MAN ND323F renamed to the new format is to "standardised" with Scania K230UB naming convention in 2020/2021.
Regards
Supernutorcrazy (talk) 06:41, 28 July 2025 (+08)
Ban Practice
Hi,
As per discussion, it is aligned with the old sgWiki Buses rule - immediate ban for not syncing. There is no such thing as other editors will do it for you. This is the practice that was practiced since 2008s which majority voted for. The more forgiving ban practice was migrated, with the split of sgWiki Rail to Miraheze.
The first ban was applied for failure to edit Former Deployments of SG5917K from SWDEP to SWDEP 161. You had edited on 17 July 2025 at approx 11.45pm, where the ban was applied only at 18 July 2025 6.35am. There is gap of time for you to update, which 23ispolo did it for you - Hence the indefinite ban was applied. After SMB315C clarify the removal of indefinite ban policy removal (from 2020), no further ban was applied.
The second ban was applied for failure to edit SBS3696Z for former deployment of changes for SBS3128Y and SBS3696Z from SWDEP to SWDEP 25 at 28 July 2025 at 8.35am. The ban was awarded only on 28 July 2025 at 1pm, where there is gap of time for you to update. Hence the 2nd strike applied with the instruction. As there is no indication that it was immediate perm from editing comment it was assumed that SP had to be declared, on otherwise specified.
If you feel this rules are unfair, you are free to head over to sgWiki Miraheze or leave. I was just merely applying the rule of the great old day of sgWiki Buses (which is NOT FORGIVING).
Regards
Supernutorcrazy (talk) 19:26, 12 August 2025 (+08)
RE: Sengkang West Bus Depot redeployments
Hi Haram,
23ispolo here. Thank you for reaching out to me on 27 August 2025 regarding SWDEP bus deployments (particularly for MAN A95 and Volvo B9TL redeployments), and apologies for replying so late.
I understand your point about how you suspect that the most recent redeployments involving SWDEP's A95s and B9TLs might be temporary redeployments that may not last after a month or two, let alone a week or two. I have observed SWDEP sometimes deploying a bus temporarily on another service for more than a week to replace a missing bus. For example, SG5515L (SWDEP 89) covered SBS3110Y on 80 sometime in June or July this year for around a week and a half as the latter bus (SBS3110Y) had an overly vibrative and sooty engine that required fixing/overhauling.
However, I am inclined to think that (at least most) the recent redeployments may be more permanent due to the large scale of redeployments, and the reshuffling of buses within services (e.g. 161) after being redeployed to new perm services. For example, SBS3217Z changed "perm" timings on 161 a week or two after its first consistent appearances on 161.
That said, the large scale of the more recent SWDEP DD redeployments necessitates further close observations, as well as corroboration of information by different spotters. For example, while you have stated SBS3664R to SBS3666K as being redeployed to 89 perm based on roster, and SBS3921Z & SBS7702M being MIA from 161 recently, I still spotted SBS3665M & SBS7702M on 161 (at night) on the same blks several times over the past few weeks. However, it is possible that the buses were recently redeployed or reshuffled to different timings/blks on 161 sometime last week. I will see if I can observe 161's fleet regularly over the next few weeks to check if buses like SBS3665M, SBS3921Z & SBS7702M are still on 161 (by any chance), as well as the fleets of other SWDEP services involved in the recent A95 and B9TL redeployments.
In conclusion, I believe most of the most recent deployments are more likely to be intended as more permanent/extended redeployments that will likely last longer than a month or two, possibly for mileage purposes or the spreading out of A95s from 161 to other SWDEP services (e.g. 51 & 89). That said, I will take into account your comments on the possibly more temporary nature of SWDEP's current DD redeployments, especially since the redeployments involve buses being redeployed onto services outside their intended package (e.g. SBS3900J being likely redeployed to 161 despite being a Bedok package bus). Lastly, I shall emphasise the importance of continued observations for SWDEP's daily DD deployments in the midst of these redeployments, as well as the need to corroborate information across editors/spotters for a more complete and accurate picture of SWDEP's DD redeployments puzzle.
Thank you for reading, and I hope my points make sense to you. Feel free to ask me more questions if needed. Thank you!