Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Nicoll Highway collapse/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 25 March 2024 [1].

Nicoll Highway collapse

edit
Nominator(s): ZKang123 (talk) 04:45, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Nicoll Highway collapse was a major construction accident in Singapore which killed four people, and it subsequently led to a revision of safety construction practices in the country. This article has expanded from just a start-class with more information regarding the circumstances of the collapse, the rescue efforts and the subsequent inquiry into the collapse. Despite its significance, there remains few international commentary on the incident (not even a memorial nor further acknowledgement of the collapse), with other independent sources and commentaries only from an engineering perspective rather than a political one. I welcome all to review.--ZKang123 (talk) 04:45, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

edit
  • File:Nicoll_Highway_collapsed_site.png: the unique historic images tag is typically used for cases where the image itself has been the subject of commentary - that doesn't appear to be the case here. Nikkimaria (talk) 06:32, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How should it be retagged, however? Non-free fair use?--ZKang123 (talk) 06:50, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, the generic tag works. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:32, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria: Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 09:38, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gerald Waldo Luis

edit

Am only able to edit on occassion so apologies for forgetting about your prev FAC lol. Anyway, here are some of my thoughts. I've put invisible comments to divide my comments based on sections.

  • "After rescuing the three injured people at the site"-- rm "at the site", its repetitive, re: the previous sentence's "at the site."
  • "he praised the coordination between the SCDF and the Public Utilities Board (PUB) for the ongoing rescue efforts. While initially shocked by the incident, Goh was relieved by the small number of fatalities." --> "he praised the coordination between the SCDF and the Public Utilities Board (PUB) for the ongoing rescue effort, and expressed relief by the small number of fatalities." I don't think "While initially shocked by the incident" adds much; it would be noteworthy if he's not shocked instead.
  • "and grouting"-- there is a redirect for grouting
  • "and led to the halting of search operations" --> "and halted the search."
  • "a grown-up daughter and a son"-- I remember an FA guy telling me this is an example of being specific at one point and ambiguous at another. I don't think the "grown-up" part is needed, especially when the other kids are not specified.

KN2731

edit

Reviewing per ZKang's request. I hope I'll have enough time to look thoroughly, will probably focus on criteria 1a/b/c; response times may be longer than usual (time difference + schoolwork) so please ping if I don't reply to something in like >3 days. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 01:51, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stuff on first read through:

  • Infobox 15:30 to 3.30 pm for consistency
  • "At the time, the construction project entailed Singapore's most extensive attempt at cut-and-cover excavation in a 40 m (130 ft) layer of soft marine clay." Couple issues: first, specifying the depth of marine clay makes the record sound oddly specific - perhaps move the numbers to the next sentence, since the rest of the geological context is already there; second, "most extensive" gives the impression of horizontal area instead of vertical depth (which I see is what the report asserts) - should probably be reworded
  • 'constructed using the "bottom-up" method' - why not simply "constructed from the bottom up"?
  • "Gas supply to the damaged pipe was shut off" - as a result of the damage, or as a precautionary measure after it was noticed that the pipe had been damaged?
  • 66kV missing a space
  • Check Oxford comma use - I see "a wife, two young children, his mother and nine siblings", also "steel king posts, walers and struts"
  • Speaking of walers - I suppose it's a type of structural beam (and not the horse) - is there anywhere to link that to? Also king post can be linked. I guess a reader has enough context to infer the purpose of these structures, but it'd probably be appreciated to get a link that leads to diagrams or clearer descriptions as to what exactly they are.
  • Adjust rounding for distance conversions in §Incident, to avoid false precision
  • "expressed relief by" --> "expressed relief at"
  • "For monitoring purposes, [etc.]" This sentence looks too closely paraphrased for comfort
  • I was going to ask if the "readings that were still below trigger values at 3 pm" were recorded at exactly 3 pm (which would then need to be written as 3:00 pm), but I see that's Straits Times' issue instead.
  • Check currency rounding (everywhere) - like with the distances, too many significant figures
  • "Prior to the collapse, [etc.]" maybe this sentence could be split somewhere? I get the information fine, but I think we're in the territory where the lack of commas may be too much for some.

@KN2731: Made the fixes. Also Happy Year of the Dragon to you!--ZKang123 (talk) 03:30, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, same to you! Unfortunately studying abroad means I don't get the public holiday and long weekend - I'll hopefully be able to take another look at the prose some time this week. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 01:28, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Second read through:

  • "The CCL tunnels were realigned with Nicoll Highway station, which was rebuilt underneath Republic Avenue south of its original site and was opened on 17 April 2010" - I feel there's something off with the flow here - probably because reading "realigned" gives me the impression that only the tunnels needed to be rebuilt, when the station also needed to be moved? Something like "The CCL tunnels, along with Nicoll Highway station, were rebuilt to the south under Republic Avenue and opened on 17 April 2010" feels less... jarring(?), perhaps.
  • "To prevent the first span triggering the collapse of the 610-metre (2,000 ft) bridge in case of displacement" - I think "To prevent displacement of the first span triggering the collapse of the 610-metre (2,000 ft) bridge" is clearer, unless I'm misinterpreting something
  • "Nine SCDF officers [...] were also awarded the Pingat Keberanian" - remove "also" and move the link to Pingat Keberanian (and its definition) up here, it's currently two sentences further down - I suppose this paragraph was rearranged at some point
  • Link sumps
  • Rounding again - US$150.7 mil should be US$151 mil, 328 ft should be 330 ft

That should be all I have. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 01:04, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@KN2731: fixed all of the above.--ZKang123 (talk) 12:34, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Made a couple more changes myself, now comfortable to support on prose. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 01:28, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MyCat

edit

I'll review once the above comments are addressed, just to make sure I don't duplicate anything already said! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 02:15, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Heng Yeow Peow, whose body was never recovered - for the lead, I think that clarifying who this is would be helpful: "One of the workers whose body was never recovered, Heng Yeow Peow, was..."
  • Conversions from foreign currency to USD usually requires a citation- unless the conversion is in the source, add a citation for the conversion
  • On 22 June 1956, Kallang Bridge was renamed Merdeka Bridge to reflect "the confidence and aspiration of the people of Singapore". - how is the meaning of the name relevant to this article?
  • as part of the Mass Rapid Transit's (MRT) Marina Line (MRL) - "Mass Rapid Transit" only needs an article if it's referring to the system- here it seems to be referring to the organization, so I don't believe that "the" is needed
  • Hence, as a precautionary measure - cut hence
  • said the rescue efforts rather than apportioning blame should be the priority. - switch this around for comprehensibility: "said the rescue efforts should be the priority, rather than apportioning blame."
  • Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong...President of Singapore S R Nathan... - considering that this event happened in Signapore, I think just "President" would work fine- that is, unless there is some title rule I'm unaware of
  • Heng Yeow Pheow, LTA foreman - the rest of the article says "Peow" but this says "Pheow"- is this a typo or a spelling convention?
  • The COI called for 143 witnesses to provide evidence, including 14 experts - who qualifies as an expert here?
  • Delink Monosys- the main contractors are not redlinked either, so why link the subcontractor?
  • In paragraph 3 of "Resumption and conclusion", strut-waler support system is incorrectly linked- fix it with a link similar to the one in the lead
  • A commemorative stone and plaque have been erected at the former site marking where they believed Heng was buried, and on every anniversary, workers from Kori Construction would visit the site to offer prayers and incense in honour of Heng - tense needs to change to past: "A commemorative stone and plaque were erected at the former site marking where they believed Heng was buried, and on every anniversary, workers from Kori Construction visit the site to offer prayers and incense in honour of Heng"
  • charges under the Factories Act, and Ng Seng Yoong, a qualified personnel from LTA, faced charges under the Building Control Act - do the acts have articles, either on English Wikipedia or Singaporean Wikipedia?

ZKang123, that's all from me, great work. I really like the diagram under "Station relocation and opening"- it's very clear and well-organized. Nice job! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 17:24, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support marvelous work! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 20:01, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source review by Epicgenius

edit

I will do a source review in a bit.

Note: I was the GA reviewer for this article. As part of the GANR process I reviewed the quality of the sources and spot-checked about 10% of the sources. I recommend that a second source reviewer check this article as well. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:55, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have not forgotten about this. I plan to do a spot-check on one of every five citations. I will have some formatting comments tomorrow as well. – Epicgenius (talk) 19:24, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting issues (most of these were already covered at the GA review):

  • I noticed that for some sources, agencies like National Archives of Singapore and Land Transport Directory of Singapore are given in italics. However, since these are not newspapers, magazines, or other works that might normally be italicized, I don't think these need italics.
    • How should these be changed tho? Like, to publisher parameter?
  • I also noticed that some URLs have access dates, while others (mostly for NewspaperSG sources) don't. This is inconsistent even for NewspaperSG sources, as some of these sources do have italics.
    • Fixed. I was initially worried adding access-dates would throw up cs1 issues, but then remembered it was due to url-status=live. Added.
  • In the "Sources" section, the sources should be alphabetized.
    • Fixed

Spot checks:

  • 5: "M212931 - Consumer Price Index (CPI), 2019 As Base Year, Annual". Department of Statistics, Singapore. 23 May 2023. Retrieved 10 September 2023. - It took me a while to figure out how this worked, but there are no issues here.
  • 10: "Merdeka Bridge a 7-Lane Highway Soon". The Straits Times. 5 August 1966. p. 4 – via NewspaperSG. - No issues.
  • 15: "Stage 1 of the Circle Line". Land Transport Authority. Archived from the original on 10 April 2008. Retrieved 10 October 2020. - No issues.
  • 20a: "Incident at Nicoll Highway – Technical Brief" (PDF). Land Transport Authority. Archived from the original (PDF) on 17 July 2007. Retrieved 17 July 2007. - This PDF has three pages, so please add page numbers where applicable. The content of the source is fine.
  • 25: Chin Lian, Goh (14 August 2004). "Tragedy Unfolds Before His Eyes..." The Straits Times. Archived from the original on 16 August 2004. Retrieved 23 August 2023. - The source mentions flames, but not explosions.
    • Attributed to source ref 22. (Loh, Sharon (21 April 2004). "MRT Worksite Wrecks Nicoll Highway".)
  • 30: "PM Goh Says Priority is to Find Missing Men in Nicoll Highway Cave-in, Public Inquiry Later". Channel NewsAsia. 26 April 2004. Archived from the original on 4 August 2004. Retrieved 23 August 2023. - No issues.
  • 35: Ng, Julia; Cheong, Lain (21 April 2004). "Nicoll Highway Collapse: Dead Crane Operator Tried to Escape but Got Trapped". Channel NewsAsia. Archived from the original on 4 August 2004. Retrieved 23 August 2023. - The article says that the victim was 44 years old, but sources say he was 45.
    • Fixed.
  • 40: "Main contractor told to stop all excavation work". The Straits Times. 24 April 2004. p. H3. - Would you be able to send this to me off-wiki? If not, I will have to check another source.
  • 45: Mulchand, Arti (25 April 2004). "Stabilising Ground Is Now Top Priority". The Straits Times. p. 11. - Would you be able to send this to me off-wiki? If not, I will have to check another source.
  • 50: "Appointment of a Committee of Inquiry into the Cause of the Incident at the MRT Circle Line Worksite That Led to the Collapse of the Nicoll Highway" (PDF). National Archives of Singapore. Ministry of Manpower. Archived (PDF) from the original on 23 August 2023. Retrieved 23 August 2023. - No issues.
  • 55: "Progress of Committee of Inquiry to Date" (PDF). National Archives of Singapore. Ministry of Manpower. 1 September 2004. Archived (PDF) from the original on 22 August 2023. Retrieved 24 August 2023. - No issues.
  • 60a: Kaur, Karamjit (3 August 2004). "'Warning Signs' Noticed Since Last Year". The Straits Times. p. 1. Archived from the original on 23 August 2023. Retrieved 24 August 2023. - No issues.
  • 65: Woon, Wui Teck (13 August 2004). "Readings 'Normal 1/2 Hour Before Cave-In'". The Straits Times. Archived from the original on 13 August 2004. Retrieved 25 August 2023. - No issues.
  • 70: Loh, Dominique (6 September 2004). "Nicoll Highway Inquiry Resumes After 4-Day Adjournment". Channel NewsAsia. Archived from the original on 6 September 2004. Retrieved 26 August 2023.
  • 75: Woon, Wui Teck (2 October 2004). "Struts Were As Good As Gone, Admits Manager". The Straits Times. p. 10. - Would you be able to send this to me off-wiki? If not, I will have to check another source.
  • 80: Ministry of Manpower 2005, p. 7. - No issues.
  • 85: "Main contractor offers $30,000 each to grieving families". The Straits Times. 23 April 2004. p. 3. - Would you be able to send this to me off-wiki? If not, I will have to check another source.
  • 90: "Recipients". Prime Minister's Office Singapore. 27 September 2023. Archived from the original on 27 September 2023. Retrieved 27 September 2023. - No issues.
  • 95: Popatlal, Asha (3 October 2005). "First of Nicoll Highway criminal trials gets underway". Channel NewsAsia. Archived from the original on 1 October 2007. - No issues.
  • 100: Cheong 2012, p. 85. - No issues.
  • 105: Choo, Johnson (25 April 2004). "Nicoll Highway Partially Reopened As Recovery Work Continues at Cave-In Site". Channel NewsAsia. Archived from the original on 7 August 2004. Retrieved 25 August 2023. - No issues.
  • 110: Choo, Johnson (4 December 2004). "Nicoll Highway reopens to traffic after reconstruction". Channel NewsAsia. Archived from the original on 10 April 2005. Retrieved 29 January 2022. - No issues.
  • 115: Tan, Christopher (5 February 2005). "Line linked to Circle line may be realigned". The Straits Times. p. 8. "A planned MRT line meant to join the Circle Line at the original Nicoll Highway station may have to be realigned, the Land Transport Authority has indicated. It did not say which this would be." - Quote checks out.
  • 120: "Circle Line stage one likely to be delayed by 2 years: Yeo". Channel NewsAsia. 4 December 2004. Archived from the original on 7 May 2005. Retrieved 30 January 2022. - No issues, though I would probably have said "the completion date of CCL Stage 1 was delayed, first from 2007 to 2009".

I've checked sources 5-30 so far and will check the remainder over the next few days. Epicgenius (talk) 14:55, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ZKang123: Only a few minor issues here. There were four I could not spot check because they were offline. Please let me know if you can send me these; if you can't, I will check four additional sources randomly. Epicgenius (talk) 15:23, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Did the above fixes.--ZKang123 (talk) 03:01, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here are my assessments of the off-wiki sources (I have bolded the source numbers that have been changed):

  • 41: "Main contractor told to stop all excavation work". The Straits Times. 24 April 2004. p. H3. - No issues.
  • 46: Mulchand, Arti (25 April 2004). "Stabilising Ground Is Now Top Priority". The Straits Times. p. 11. - No issues.
  • 76: Woon, Wui Teck (2 October 2004). "Struts Were As Good As Gone, Admits Manager". The Straits Times. p. 10. - No issues.
  • 86: "Main contractor offers $30,000 each to grieving families". The Straits Times. 23 April 2004. p. 3. - No issues.

I'm happy to say this passes my source review (subject to the caveat that I was the original GA reviewer, and that another source reviewer can double-check my work if necessary). Epicgenius (talk) 14:57, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comments

edit
I don't know how to answer the question, to be honest. Is it convention to use a definite article when referring to the highway? Local sources don't use the article (e.g. from a government website and local transport authority).--ZKang123 (talk) 01:59, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In so far as the Nicholl Highway is a proper noun, most uses of it require a definite article ('the') to be grammatical in formal English. The rule is explained here.
Hmm. Let me check that.
TR putting oar in: I'm not sure there is a hard-and-fast rule even in BrE. I can't speak for Singapore English, but in English English the definite article is decidedly negotiable when it comes to thoroughfares and places. I would write "in the King's Road", "along the Strand", "to the Portobello Road", "near the Regent's Park", "at the Philharmonic Hall", "from the Brompton Oratory" etc but many (probably younger) writers would omit the article for some or all of these. – Tim riley talk 14:06, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weell, if Mr riley and the HQ RSs agree, who am I to argue? Gog the Mild (talk) 16:33, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm with Tim, I think there is definitely room for manoeuvre. We wouldn't say "the Main Street", for example, and plucking a road FA at random, we wouldn't say the Interstate 90. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:00, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
May I know which refs specifically which aren't still in title caps? I thought I had converted all of them to titlecaps. Also added the articles for the highway as requested.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:08, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I assume you mean that they are all in title case, which is true. But if the are article titles, eg not book titles, they should be in sentence case. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:38, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh wait... I converted all of them to title case instead of sentence case. I misunderstood since previously you said title case in a past FAC...--ZKang123 (talk) 12:54, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did? Could you pause a moment then, while I check this too. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:40, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well over here, for the North East MRT line.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:25, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]


@Gog the Mild: any further updates or feedback?--02:52, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the delay, thanks for querying my original comment. After consultations, title case it is.

Harry

edit

I haven't checked sources; this is mostly a prose review

  • We generally don't include legal suffixes of companies (eg "LTD"), though the only guidance I can find on that is from the naming conventions for articles rather than the MoS.
  • In 1997, the companies damaged telecommunications company Singtel's underground cables that's quite a confusing sentence as you're explaining what the owner of the subject is before we get to the subject. I'm not sure the ownership is actually relevant so suggest trimming to just "damaged underground cables".
    • Fixed to "damaged underground telecommunications cables".
  • the result of sea level changes in the Kallang River Sea level changes in a river? (Also sea level might need a hyphen as a compound adjective if you're going to use it that way)
    • My mistake. Source did not say Kallang River "Bird et al. (2003) have recently reviewed the age and origins of the Kallang soil deposits based on the history of sea level changes that have occurred during the quaternary period.", but refers more to the sea (Kallang Basin) before the land reclamation.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:36, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Time zone is not normally relevant unless the event straddles time zones or time-zone comparison is necessary (ie, as a Brit, I don't need to know what 3:30 pm in Singapore translates to in my time; the reader just needs to know what time the incident happened in local time because it defines the character of the event).
  • Suggest working the tea break in after you give the time of day. Where it is it appears to imply a connection between the deaths and the tea break.
  • The collapse disrupted traffic on the highway See Wikipedia:Principle of Some Astonishment. Readers can infer that the collapse of a highway will disrupt traffic on said highway.
  • The entire second paragraph of the "Incident" section is very confusing. First you say there was an explosion and fire, then you say the gas was cut off as a precaution (so how did it catch fire?), then you talk about some electricity cables, then you go back to the ?explosion and detail eyewitness reports, but conclude with the LTA denying that there was any explosion. I'm confused. What, if anything, exploded? If the electricity cables aren't relevant to the gas explosion, you should discuss them separately. If the gas was shut off but the explosion was residual gas, mention the shutoff first and explain.
    • Government reports published much later after the collapse tend to conflict with eyewitness and initial reports... Shifted around the facts so that the cables were mentioned first, then the eyewitness reports of fire and explosions.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:36, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The voltage of the cables doesn't seem relevant and we can infer that they crossed the site otherwise they wouldn't be mentioned.
  • Explain (briefly) what the LTA is at first mention.
  • He added the government would investigate the cause through a public inquiry → would convene a public inquiry (or similar adjective); the purpose of an inquiry is obviously to investigate
  • the search for the foreman Heng Yeow Pheow was called off at 3:30 pm the name needs parenthetical commas if you're using a definite article; you could get away with dropping the "the" and use "foreman" as a false title but that would be less good in my opinion.
  • I'm not sure the bulleted list of victims complies with WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Their backgrounds and future plans certainly don't seem relevant, and surviving relatives certainly aren't, though their job roles and the circumstances of their deaths/how they were found probably are.
  • Singaporean authorities dismissed terrorism and sabotage as causes of the incident How long did this take?
  • The COI called for 143 witnesses to provide evidence, including 14 experts That seems like a low ratio of experts to others. Who were the others? Were they all eyewitnesses/people involved?
  • The inquiry into the tunnel collapse began on 2 August 2004 We know what the inquiry is investigating, that's what the article is about; and you gave the date immediately above.
  • there were "fundamental" design flaw who is this quoting?
  • More than 170 witnesses were brought in during the 80 days of the inquiry We seem to have gained 27 witnesses but the article does not say where they came from (or much about who they were).
  • Consider whether naming the criminal defendants is in keeping with WP:BLPNAME

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:45, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Nicoll_Highway_collapse/archive1&oldid=1215580544"