Talk:Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore)/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

On articles of all stations

This is about the articles about all stations of the Mass Rapid Transit. I edited the Enterprise MRT station and the Boon Lay MRT station article to removed bold on the parantheses about the line code per MOS:BOLD. It was reverted by Seloloving under this summary: "While I am on the fence if the formatting is wrong, to only unbold 2 pages out of 150 over stations would create an inconsistency. Suggest bringing up on the talkpage of a station or the main MRT article to gain consensus and standardize formatting." So here I am. I am looking for a way to have all station articles have bolds on the parantheses removed. We can gather several people and have us edit the bold article by article. We could split in groups, so that editing is way easier. Maybe groups of lines, or numbers. Anyone? GeraldWL 11:10, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

I am in favour of removing the codes from the Lead entirely, seeing as it's already listed on the station infobox. As far as I know, no other subway stations with codes list them in the Lead. Seloloving (talk) 11:27, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Same as Seloloving, I am in favour of removing the codes from the Lead. Additionally, I can run either suggestions through AWB if it lightens the editing load. – robertsky (talk) 11:32, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

I will support this change, since yeah its already on the header in the infobox.--ZKang123 (talk) 12:11, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

On another point to note, I have finally fixed something which has bugged me for years - I unbolded the codes and Malay names in the infobox. It should look better now. Can I suggest we remove the Malay names if the station a) is already in Malay (Bedok, Tanah Merah, Aljunied) or b) lacks one completely (Admiralty, Canberra, etc). Seloloving (talk) 14:10, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Done removing the station codes from the lead for MRT/LRT pages. There are about 200 pages. I should have caught it all, however if you all see any that's not removed, just remove them. – robertsky (talk) 15:07, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Cool. Can you also help in the cleanup of the infoboxes (change the rapid transit to Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) station? And remove the station codes from these and even replace the maps to the new proposed one by Seloloving (see previous section(s)).--ZKang123 (talk) 15:47, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Do you have the diffs for before and after versions so that I can accurately capture what needs to be done? There are two station codes (header and other information) in the infobox. – robertsky (talk) 16:32, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

I think replacing the maps should be done manually, as several station still lack positioning information. I left it out of Brickland by accident and within an hour it was caught by someone (who presumably specializes in the matter and has a script running of some sorts to detect this) and the map removed. That said, thank you for the quick action to remove all the codes from the Lead. I think what ZKang123 is trying to say is to remove the codes from the "Other information", as it's repeated information from the header. Seloloving (talk) 04:27, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

@Seloloving: OK. Got it. if you have the coordinates in a list format, I can add them in too. – robertsky (talk) 05:35, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

@Seloloving and ZKang123: Done changing the type param from "rapid transit" to "Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) station", also standardised to that. Some pages had "Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) station". Also done removing the station code from the "Other Information" section. As for the map, I just saw what needs to be changed, and I think the time spend on configuring AWB for it will take longer than editing each of the remaining pages in total. haha. – robertsky (talk) 01:31, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

@Robertsky Strange, I did not get a ping from this. Oh well. Thank you very much for your help! I was going to ask in what format would you like me to present the list of coordinates in but that's a moot point I guess. Seloloving (talk) 12:37, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

@Seloloving: No worries! I am updating the articles manually at the moment, going through in alphabetical order from Category:Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore) stations. From what I have seen so far, it is mostly the newer stations or stations still being under construction that require insertion of the Coord template. I am drawing the coordinates from Google Maps. Eyeballing the before and after versions of the infobox seems to match the placement. I have completed stations A to C. I should be done till J before I call it a night. Not sure how you are iterating through the list though. – robertsky (talk) 17:37, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Also drew the coordinates from URA Master Plan map for some that Google Maps does not have yet. i.e. those within the new Tengnah estate. – robertsky (talk) 18:27, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

@Robertsky - I am just drawing the coordinates by overlaying my map over it - if it makes your part easier to use the method, I hope it helps. I am doing them by line then alphabetical order though. Irregardless, I can see your progress as I have every station page under my watchlist. Seloloving (talk) 21:35, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

@Robertsky. Thanks for the modifications made. Meanwhile I am going to replace the current floating map to the new type by Seloloving. I don't really have a plan or something to follow; I just edit them as I go, especially when including new photographs to stations i have visited.

I encourage more Wikipedians here to take more quality photos for upload on Wikimedia commons!--ZKang123 (talk) 09:37, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

@ZKang123: Er... Can you work on replacing the map in the LRT pages, if there's a need to do so as well? I think I am done with updating the maps on the remaining MRT station pages, except for Sungei Kadut MRT station which is not even indicated on URA's master plan. – robertsky (talk) 11:59, 6 August 2020 (UTC).

I am not so sure. I thought @Seloloving: will be doing a series of different maps for them.--ZKang123 (talk) 12:06, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

I unintentionally left the discussion without watching it. Thanks for the anticipation, and apologies for the mistake of not watching. GeraldWL 13:05, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Putting this article up for review

I decided that it is almost time for this article to go through a re-review. If there are some edits you will like to make you can do so. There are some parts of this articles that remain uncited, especially with regard to the COVID-19 updates and the train depots. Try searching the web archives on the train depots.--ZKang123 (talk) 04:08, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Image for NSL

@ZKang123: wouldn't stations such as Jurong East, Orchard or Marina Bay make more prominence than Toa Payoh? Telsho (talk) 08:32, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

It isnt just about prominence. But I chose Toa Payoh because it is the oldest station on the network, and it best contrasts agaianst the CCL NCH station.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:50, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Speak

Another subject here, this time it is about this article. I have been having this crazy idea on speaking this article. The last spoken version of it is already outdated and the article has changed a lot since, and I feel like it's best to update it. I will try revise this article. What are your thoughts? GeraldWL ✉ 18:08, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

You can try to do this, why not?--ZKang123 (talk) 04:08, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

I think it's too unstable at the moment to warrant a spoken version. Seloloving (talk) 11:58, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

[citation needed]

Argy003, can you provide a source that supports this addition? GeraldWL (Pine wish!) 08:35, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Answer

Gerald Waldo Luis, here: https://i.imgur.com/k9zuf2f.png Argy003 (talk) 10:01, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

@Argy003: That's not a real map from the LTA. Please only refer to the official website for future stations. Seloloving (talk) 09:45, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Argy003, the layout gives me the thought that it is fan-made. LTA doesn't make such headers, and Singapore is absolutely nuts if they make such many stations and lines. GeraldWL (Pine wish!) 10:19, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Seloloving, how can I gain permission to upload images of the new crl stations ftom the LTA site? Argy003 (talk) 10:01, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

@Argy003: You can't, they are copyrighted by the LTA and not acceptable for Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons to host. Please do also sign your comments with a four ~ symbols at the end of your replies to sign your comments. Seloloving (talk) 09:56, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Seloloving So I only can add images created by me?Argy003 (talk) 10:03, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes, photos that you have taken, or maps that you have created that do not resemble the official LTA map. To put it simply, nothing from LTA can be uploaded here. Seloloving (talk) 10:05, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Argy003, if you want to know if materials from a website are not copyrighted (Creative Commons, public domain), see the footer of the website or bottom of the article. There should be a disclaimer on its license. Seldomly, websites use Creative Commons icons. If an image has a CC or PD sign somewhere, it also indicates no copyright. GeraldWL (Pine wish!) 10:25, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Seloloving Not counting the LTA. Anything from any other website can't be uploaded?Argy003 (talk) 10:09, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Pretty much everything related to the Singapore government, its websites, contractors, etc are copyrighted. Singapore's copyright law states that published content expires 70 years from the date of publication or the death of the author, so nothing from LTA or any Singapore govt website will expire anytime soon and will only expire around 2070-2090. While there are exceptions to works in the public domain, for example, US archival or government websites, they are not applicable to Singapore. To be safe, only upload things you have created yourself. Seloloving (talk) 10:13, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Just to add, please do not upload anything from SGTrains or Land Transport Guru either. They are copyrighted to their respective authors. Seloloving (talk) 10:15, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Seloloving and Gerald Waldo Luis Thanks for everything — Preceding unsigned comment added by Argy003 (talk • contribs) 10:21, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Passenger numbers

Hello there, fellow Wikipedians.

I have managed to find a way to gather ridership numbers for stations and lines. Basically, you need to access the LTA DataMall, follow the API documentation guide, and generate an excel sheet for the month via PostMan.

Once the sheet is generated, it will show a mess of data, which you can sort yourself according to the station code. The data will generate both weekday and weekend numbers, with separate numbers for each the time of the day.

To get the data for a specific station/line, filter the table to get the desired station(s) (for the line, please do not miss out any stations for accuracy). Add the numbers for both weekdays and weekends, and divide by the number of days of the month.

I have already added numbers for a few stations and lines. A new list will be generated on the 15th of every month.

The list for July/August has already been generated. Here is the shared spreadsheet.

I will appreciate if someone go and sort the data themselves and try this out.--ZKang123 (talk) 13:29, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Updates to the spreadsheet

This spreadsheet now allows you to edit the calculator tab. Just copy-paste the desired contents from the respective month and station.--ZKang123 (talk) 07:22, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Infobox image

...is too much. Especially considering it is a network of a small island. It seems like whoever combining them all wants to make it a representation of the full picture, but I'm afraid it's, as I said, too much. Suggest changing it to this:

Row 1: File:C751A trains in Sengkang Depot.jpg and File:CC5 Nicoll Highway Exit B 20200907 175902.jpg — this shows two different aspects of the network: the train and the station. The SMRT train will be represented below, keeping...

Row 2: File:NS1 EW24 Jurong East MRT exterior 20200918 173458 cropped.jpg — this shows the largest station, Jurong East (maybe, feel free to correct me), and the SMRT rolling stock, both new and old. In a sense, the gateway to it all.

Row 3: File:CG1 Expo EWL MRT Platforms.jpg and File:Bedok North MRT station 151017.jpg — this represents the stations, elevated and underground.

I bet that there will be people saying that this not the full picture of the SMRT. The thing is infoboxes don't need to represent the full picture. In fact it's hard to. The current doesn't even give one. Generally infoboxes only have one to four images; New York City Subway, despite being larger than SMRT, only gives two images. Thus, I feel like this article doesn't need much images either.

Thoughts? GeraldWL 12:17, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Well the collage was put up with a discussion with Seloloving. The inspiration for the collage is taken from Moscow Metro. I do somewhat agree it is too much. I might agree with your decision, though I may think I will go for Toa Payoh and NCH at the top, to show the contrast between the oldest and one of the newer stations, and have Little India station replace Bedok North.--ZKang123 (talk) 12:24, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

ZKang123, I'm not really a fan of the Little India photo. With a small size in the collage, I initially thought it's a food court in a station. GeraldWL 12:32, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Hmm what about this photo then, on Kovan station? Btw can you stop pinging me, I already have the talk page on my watchlist.--ZKang123 (talk) 12:45, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Much better, considering the signs. GeraldWL 12:51, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Ok will then proceed with the changes. Seloloving is busy at the moment and left the decision entirely up to me.--ZKang123 (talk) 12:53, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Name capitalisation

I have recapitalised the names of all lines on the page, after reading Talk:IRT_Lexington_Avenue_Line. This is why:

There was never a RfC nor a MOS to dictate that "line" should be decapitalised in a proper name of a railway line. This is akin to M2 Hills Motorway, Singapore Strait, London Bridge, where the proper name takes precedence. When referring to them in the plural, it's normal to decapitalise them, per: Pan Island and Ayer Rajah expressways; Singapore and Malacca straits; Helix and Esplanade bridges - this is not a good reason for the decapitalisation of the singular form.

Unlike the London Underground, the full name of the lines includes the word "Line", as seen in numerous published sources of both the authority, local, and overseas media, which are present on the page itself.

Regarding the debate around book sources, I would also like to point out that though they remain wildly inconsistent with regard to proper capitalisation, an emphasis should be given to the actual, independent, sources used in the article. Excluding official sources, it is clear that a vast majority of the news articles and publications, both foreign and local, capitalises the the 'L' in the word line. They very clearly outnumber book sources with a clear majority. Seloloving (talk) 20:55, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 3 February 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not Moved ZKang123 (talk) 09:57, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

---

Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore) → MRT (Singapore) – Majority of our news articles and websites generally use MRT instead of the full name Mass Rapid Transit. See here, here and here. In fact, rarely is the full name mentioned at all. Also, the article for the Hong Kong metro uses the abbreviation instead of the full name. ZKang123 (talk) 11:07, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Support: No one uses the name "Mass Rapid Transit" as a common name, not even in news articles. It will also align with pages such as MRT (Bangkok). Seloloving (talk) 13:31, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

• Support per nom and Seloloving. Articles like CNN, Medan LRT, and PDF also use abbreviations, as they are the ones widely used by sources and more familiar. WP:COMMONNAME is the relevant policy. GeraldWL 13:36, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
• Comment (leaning oppose) commonname calls for something that is recognizable, which in this case applies to both the full and contracted versions of the name, although for convenience the contracted version is used more often. Also worth noting that the bangkok MRT does not stand for Mass Rapid Transit but instead Metropolitan Rapid Transit, and all the systems that are called Mass Rapid Transit use the full name as can be seen at the disambiguation page. If we are talking about consistency, then keeping the full name would be better. bit of OR here but google seems to do a good job of recommending the correct (local) article when searching up MRT in google, as only the singapore MRT page turns up in the search results and not any other MRT so there is no real reason to change it. (If it ain't broke don't fix it) Pentagon 2057 (T/C) 14:13, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose per Pentagon's comment. also, this may open a can of worms down the line on renaming entities that are more well known by their abbreviations than full name. i.e. People's Action Party to PAP (Singapore). – robertsky (talk) 18:39, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Comment: Replying to both robertsky and Pentagon 2057 here as you have cited his comment.

I would just like to point out that that's not a fair analogy. The People's Action Party is still referred to its full name at least once in most published sources; that's not the case for the MRT system.

In addition, Pentagon 2057's usage of Google as justification is incorrect as a) Google uses your location to serve up results that are related to your geographical location and b) we don't name pages for Google to easily find it. As for the disambiguation page, per his comment "all the systems that are called Mass Rapid Transit use the full name", that's not true. Out of 7 pages excluding the Singapore MRT and two corporation names, we have the five pages with unique names: Jakarta MRT, Kaohsiung Rapid Transit, Taichung Metro, Taipei Metro and Taoyuan Metro, leaving only Malaysia and Chennai systems with the full Mass Rapid Transit name. Seloloving (talk) 21:16, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

@Seloloving: My analogy is fair, given that the media still refers the system as Mass Rapid Transit even as recent as 2020 ([1], [2], [3]). – robertsky (talk) 08:53, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

• Support per nominator, MRT is the common name. Thryduulf (talk) 11:00, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
• Support as common name. TheGreatSG'rean (talk) 17:13, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose As per the Article titles policy, "Abbreviations and acronyms are often ambiguous and thus should be avoided unless the subject is known primarily by its abbreviation and that abbreviation is primarily associated with the subject (e.g. PBS, NATO, Laser)." The fact that MRT is not primarily associated with the Singapore system is attested by the fact that disambiguation is necessary. This is a policy and cannot be overriden by local consensus. (t · c) buidhe 15:55, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
• Difficult but oppose for now. I've spent some time now trying to sort out the scopes of the various articles and organisations. I'm sure it makes sense to Singaporians but we are a general encyclopedia, and we need an overview article that sets out the relationships of all mass rapid transit facilities and organisations in Singapore. And we don't seem to have one. So decide on what that article is to cover and be called, and write it, and then we can look at the scopes of the other articles, and only then can we decide on their names. Andrewa (talk) 02:23, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. I compared the n-gram "Singapore MRT" and "Singapore Mass Rapid Transit". I found that usage of "Singapore Mass Rapid Transit" is slightly more common. Additionally I noticed that many news articles will use the full form first and then continue using the abbreviation. This makes the n-gram slightly biased towards MRT. So if we additionally discount this bias, it is clear that Mass Rapid Transit is the better term. (There is an additional bias in the form of local news coverage which might use the abbreviation, as the target audience is already familiar with it). In any case, we usually use the full forms as article titles to avoid ambiguity and I don't see a need to change this.--DreamLinker (talk) 14:13, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose. Hmm seeing that there’s considerable opposition to the move, then it would be better not to. I have contacted LTA who still uses the full as the start of their sources. (In addition, they said they now refer the MRT+LRT network as Singapore Rail Network). To also keep consistent with the Light Rail Transit article, it would be advisable to keep the current article name as it is.—ZKang123 (talk) 03:00, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

July 2021 updates to lead

Old lead as of 1 July 2021:

The Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) is a heavy rail rapid transit system that constitutes the bulk of the railway network in Singapore, spanning—with the exception of the forested core and the island's rural northwest—the length and width of the city-state's main island. The first section opened on 7 November 1987, and the network has since grown rapidly in accordance with Singapore's aim of developing a comprehensive rail network as the backbone of the country's public transportation system, with an average daily ridership of 3.384 million in 2019, compared to 4.099 million for the bus network in the same period.

Singapore's MRT infrastructure is built, operated, and managed in accordance with a regulatory framework called the New Rail Financing Framework (NRFF), in which the lines are constructed and the assets owned by the Land Transport Authority (LTA), who allocates operating concessions to two for-profit private corporations, namely SMRT and SBS Transit. Both are responsible for asset maintenance on their respective lines. These operators also run bus and taxi services, thus facilitating the full integration of public transport services.

As of January 2020, the MRT network encompasses 203 kilometres (126 mi) of route on standard gauge, with 122 stations in operation, spread across six lines set in a circle-radial topology. The network is expected to double to a total length of almost 400 kilometres (250 mi) by 2040 as a result of ongoing expansion works to its six existing lines and the construction of three new lines. The network is complemented by a small number of local Light Rail Transit (LRT) networks in the suburban towns of Bukit Panjang, Sengkang, and Punggol that link MRT stations with HDB public housing estates, bringing the combined length of the domestic heavy and light rail network to 231.6 kilometres (143.9 mi), with a total of 159 stations in operation.

The MRT is the oldest, busiest, costliest, and most comprehensive rapid transit system by route length in Southeast Asia, with almost S$100 billion (US$75 billion) spent on the construction of rail infrastructure, the procurement of rolling stock and other rail assets, and the periodical renewal of assets. The system has the added distinctions of having the longest fully automated and driverless network in the world, as well as some of the longest and deepest subway tunnel sections in the world. The MRT is also unique in that the vast majority of underground stations in the network double as purpose-built bunkers and air raid shelters, being built for the purpose of withstanding conventional aerial bomb and chemical attacks.

Revised lead as of 3 July 2021. Edited for flow, syntax, vocab, brevity, the usual:

The Mass Rapid Transit system, more commonly known by its abbreviation MRT, is a heavy rail rapid transit system that constitutes the bulk of the railway network in Singapore, spanning—with the exception of the forested core and the island's rural northwest—the length and width of the city-state's main island. The first section opened on 7 November 1987, and the network has since grown swiftly in accordance with Singapore's aim of developing a comprehensive rail network as the backbone of the country's public transportation system, with an average daily ridership of 3.384 million in 2019, representing an annual ridership of over a billion passengers.

As of January 2020, the MRT network encompasses 203 kilometres (126 mi) of route on standard gauge, with 122 stations in operation, spread across six lines set in a circle-radial topology. The network is expected to double to a total length of almost 400 kilometres (250 mi) by 2040 as a result of ongoing extension works to its six existing lines and the construction of three new lines. The network is complemented by a small number of localised Light Rail Transit (LRT) networks in the suburban towns of Bukit Panjang, Sengkang, and Punggol that provide a last mile link between MRT stations and HDB public housing estates, bringing the combined length of the domestic heavy and light rail network to 231.6 kilometres (143.9 mi), with a total of 159 stations in operation.

The MRT is the oldest, busiest, and most expansive rapid transit system in Southeast Asia; it is additionally one of the world's costliest on both a per-kilometre and absolute basis, with state expenditure on rail infrastructure broaching S$100 billion (US$75 billion). The system is managed in conformance with a quasi-nationalised regulatory framework; the infrastructure is constructed and the assets are owned by the Land Transport Authority (LTA), a statutory board that allocates operating concessions to the for-profit private corporations SMRT and SBS Transit. These operators are responsible for asset maintenance on their respective lines, and also run bus and taxi services, facilitating the full integration of public transport services.

The MRT has the longest fully-automated and driverless network in the world, as well as some of the longest and deepest subway tunnel sections in the world. Although much of the early network is elevated above ground on concrete viaducts, newer lines are largely subterranean, with the vast majority of underground stations on the network doubling as multi-purpose Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) bunkers and air raid shelters with reinforced blast doors and hardened station boxes that can withstand conventional aerial bomb and chemical attacks.

References

cc: Seloloving Cheers, Tiger7253 (talk) 03:18, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tiger7253: Nice work. Upon a quick glance, I wonder if it would be possible to relocate some of the notes and sources to the body of the page itself. In addition, there's a few "in the world" claims which might not be necessary. I will have a better read tonight. Seloloving (talk) 04:16, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Experimental image montage in infobox. Seek input.

On the 16th of July an IP editor altered the image montage by swapping out the image of the exit of Toa Payoh's station with a nondescript image of the exit of Canberra. I did not revert the user's edit, but it got me thinking: The absence of a proper framework that governs the composition of images in the MRT article's infobox will inevitably result in the infobox becoming an amorphous soup of images before long with little relation to each other + spark an endless back-and-forth haggling between editors that will result in retaliatory reverts, edit warring, and things of the sort. It is thus imperative that we dispel with the vagueness of it once and for all by adhering to some sort of fixed standard, so I have come up with a set of loose pointers after some deliberation:

4 exterior images (let's call these X), 4 interior images (let's call these Y), and one centrepiece image (let's call this Z).

1. Singapore is known for being verdant ("garden city"). Reserve one slot for an image of a station's exterior shrouded in greenery and/or adjacent to a natural feature of some sort, like a body of water. The image can be replaced if a better one comes up in its stead (example: when the JRL is complete and the stations around NTU are enveloped by forest/if the Pandan Reservoir station directly overlooks the water and provides a nice juxtaposition between built infra and the environs), but the category shall remain fixed. (X1)

2. Singapore is a heavily urbanised metropolis. Reserve one slot for an image of a station surrounded by urban features. The image can be replaced if a better one comes up in its stead, but the category shall remain fixed. (X2)

3. Some of our stations were designed by starchitects. Reserve one slot for an image of a station that fits the bill. The image can be replaced if a better one comes up in its stead, but the category shall remain fixed. (X3)

4. Some of our stations were designed with Singapore's heritage in mind (either housed in heritage buildings or loosely inspired by older buildings in the vicinity). Reserve one slot for an image of a station that fits the bill. The image can be replaced if a better one comes up in its stead (example: when Cantonment station is completed and utilises the old KTM terminus), but the category shall remain fixed. (X4)

5. Singapore has MRT stations at critical infrastructure points (airport, stadium, cross-border RTS, cruise terminal, so on). Feature the interiors of these high-profile stations - they are typically more kitted-out/less threadbare. The image can be replaced if a better one comes up in its stead (example: when the TEL/CRL link to T5 is built or if the GSW line under planning stops at Seletar Airport), but the category shall remain fixed. (Y1, Y2, Y3)

6. Above-ground infill stations are built from time to time. Platform will have newer architectural features, which makes them ripe for display. The image can be replaced if a better one comes up in its stead (example: new infill station gets built), but the category shall remain fixed. (Y4)

7. Centrepiece image. The current centrepiece - bird's eye view of Jurong East interchange - works great. (Z)

If this rough framework is agreeable, Seloloving, Gerald Waldo Luis, ZKang123, and TheGreatSG'rean, then all editors shall have freedom to shuffle the images every once in a blue moon whilst still adhering to the general framework outlined above. This will prophylactically stave off conflict and rid us of the need to start a new discussion about a topic that has been done to the death - it will give editors some wiggle room to feature images that float their boat without needing to seek fresh consensus over something relatively trivial.

As a test balloon I have put up a montage of images that adheres to this standard (see main article).

X1: Exterior of Stevens (Description: Stevens MRT station at street level)
X2: Exterior of Telok Ayer (Description: Telok Ayer MRT station at street level)
X3: Exterior of Expo (Description: Expo MRT station at street level)
X4: Exterior of Raffles Place (Description: Raffles Place MRT station at street level)
-
Y1: Interior of Woodlands North (Description: Woodlands North MRT station at platform level)
Y2: Interior of Stadium (Description: Stadium MRT station at platform level)
Y3: Interior of Changi Airport (Description: Changi Airport MRT station at platform level)
Y4: Interior of Canberra (Description: Canberra MRT station at platform level)
-
Z: Jurong East Interchange (Description: Jurong East MRT station bird's eye view)

Take note that the montage adheres to the following aspect ratio:

4:3 | 4:3
16:9 | 16:9
Centrepiece
16:9 | 16:9
4:3 | 4:3

and the following layout (alternating):

Exterior | Interior
Interior | Exterior
Centrepiece
Interior | Exterior
Exterior | Interior

Look forward to your input.

Cheers,

Tiger7253 (talk) 07:27, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Tiger7253, props for the detailed consideration. However as ZKang pointed out, it's too much and cluttered. The infobox doesn't have to represent all of Singapore, it just has to give a decent first impression of the subject. If I were to agree with you, I would suggest changing Changi Airport's image to the interior of an above-ground one, to make that with underground interior equal. Any station will be fine for me, but I would recommend the colorful ones, like Redhill, Queenstown, or Commonwealth. However there are more styles of MRT stations, there are also those with domes, etc. As you can see, it's hard to represent a subject as a whole in an infobox, that's the body's job.

What I agree with you is that what should be put in the montage is up to editors' experimentation, and I think it should be updated if newer-style stations open. Other than that, I agree with ZKang that the former montage is better. GeraldWL 07:44, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tiger7253: I see your proposed changes. However, the downside now is that it is too cluttered, and there are too many varying perspectives of the stations.

Originally, as you can see here, we featured two rolling stocks, the central piece Jurong East station, three "symmetrical" shots of the platforms, and two pictures of station entrances. However, as Gerald raised concerns that there are too many photos for the infobox itself, since we aren't really much of an extensive network (yet), we decided to reduce the number of images to this collage.

In fact, I feel that if we want to showcase the architectural features that showcases SIngapore's status as a green city and our heritage, we can do so in the body itself. We don't have to pack the infobox with too many photos.

I still prefer going back to the collage before you edited it. That collage is good enough, representing the old and the modern stations, the rolling stocks of NSEWL, and architectural and art features of the MRT (Expo platform architecture and the Kovan Art in Transit). Only sadly we cannot fit in DTL and TEL for now.--ZKang123 (talk) 07:39, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the swift input ZKang123 and Gerald Waldo Luis. I'll wait for Seloloving to chime in before reverting to the older collage (with Toa Payoh, not Canberra as added by IP address editor). I believe a switch back to the older collage is almost certain at this point; in the mean time, Gerald Waldo Luis, feel free to switch the Changi Airport interior image in the experimental montage to an image of your choice to get a feel of things if you wish.

(I did consider using the collapse template as a workaround, but Wiki policy (specifically WP:COLLAPSE) prohibits it).

Tiger7253 (talk) 09:56, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

I suppose if anyone wants to continue experimenting with the collage, they should be encouraged to try it in their own sandboxes. Maybe I will put a notification for that.--ZKang123 (talk) 10:36, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

My personal opinion is that everyone is overthinking this. The collage is meant to be a fun pictorial of our system and a quick insight and portrayal of our stations and trains... I believe that Tiger7253 has good intentions and has come up with an extremely detailed and good proposal to reduce edit conflicts in future. As it stands now though, it's most certainly too long, and I feel its length should be minimally reduced to the previous length.

I think this is Wikipedia, and if an IP editor wishes to swop out a photo with Thomas the Tank Engine, they are allowed to, just as we are allowed to revert. Let's just handle disputes as they come by (especially if a photo is lousy) and not maintain a wall of red tape in the name of changes. :) Seloloving (talk) 15:24, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Well, since Wikipedia is free to edit, I agree anyone can play around with the collage, but ultimately edits must be constructive.--ZKang123 (talk) 11:49, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

I feel like the current iteration and proposal by Tiger7253 is a huge improvement, and represents Singapore's MRT system way better. I'd say keep it as it is now! 118.137.212.129 (talk) 20:57, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Glitch on line bar above rolling stock.

Hi everyone, if you venture to the rolling stock pages now, there's a black bar visible on the infoboxes of trains running only on a single line, such as Hyundai Rotem CJ151 or Bombardier Movia C951/C951A. This bug is not visible on rolling stock running on two lines, such as Kawasaki Heavy Industries & CSR Qingdao Sifang C151A.

As far can I can tell, the template Template:SMRT Rolling Stock Infobox Colour which handles this has not been changed, so I am at a loss as to what is causing the issue. It's obvious the black bar is a result of the template not reading a second line, but nothing has changed in the template itself.

Should we just remove it from all the rolling stock pages? Seloloving (talk) 11:16, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Seloloving, did a quick investigation and found that the issue was caused after some edits on {{SMRT color}} made by AlgaeGraphix. Algae, the default colour you have set is black. Previously there is no colour set. Do you think it can be removed, or can you place one more nested if condition is needed at {{SMRT Rolling Stock Infobox Colour}} if the lrtline/lrtline2 parameters are not entered? – robertsky (talk) 12:01, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Robertsky, I removed the default field but I am not sure if it broke anything else. The issue on the rolling stock pages is fixed though. Seloloving (talk) 07:13, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Seloloving, so far it just produces invalid css which browsers will ignore anyway. i guess this is temporary until the infobox colour template is fixed. – robertsky (talk) 07:27, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Previously, there was no #default value for {{SMRT color}}, which caused errors elsewhere. Changing it from #000000 to transparent should fix things for everyone. AlgaeGraphix (talk) 19:17, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

AlgaeGraphix, thank you. That should fix it. Thanks to robertsky for diagnosing the core problem too! Seloloving (talk) 03:01, 5 August 2021 (UTC)