Talk:Siglap MRT station

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Siglap MRT Station. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140819084445/http://app.lta.gov.sg/apps/news/page.aspx?c=2&id=3cc2e460-06ea-4245-a37f-df11b602ec7d to http://app.lta.gov.sg/apps/news/page.aspx?c=2&id=3cc2e460-06ea-4245-a37f-df11b602ec7d

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:40, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Aljunied MRT Station which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 09:33, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

GA review

The following discussion 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.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Siglap MRT station/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Icepinner (talk · contribs) 14:05, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: AlphaBetaGamma (talk · contribs) 04:59, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Since I am inexperienced here, and I will certainly miss something, It is a wonderful world will be helping me during this review. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 04:59, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Looks really good so far. I must confess I don't understand "CiteHighlighter flags TST a lot" though. Is this a script I am unaware of? IAWW (talk) 07:50, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

@It is a wonderful world, yes, there is a user script that highlights sources in the references section. I heavily use it because it prevents me from missing stuff during AfC reviews. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 08:04, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for this! I got this script as it seems useful. I made a note in the reliability section below. Note it's best not to use scripts like that to fully evaluate the sources, but they are fantastic for scanning for any quick issues. IAWW (talk) 08:44, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

@It is a wonderful world: have responded to your comments.

• @AlphaBetaGamma: Greatly appreciate it! Please see my comments

Below template also ripped off from IAWW's toolbox:

Prose (Criteria 1a, 1b, 4)

Lead

-While the (TEL) is shown in the History section, the lead lacks one, and I had to backtrack a bit

I don't understand what the issue is. Is it that the lead's history paragraph doesn't adequately summarise the article's History section?

I'm not sure why I wrote that either

History

• I just want to confirm some statements here.

-Initially expected to be completed in 2023, it was pushed to 2024 along other TEL Stage 4 stations due to delays from the COVID-19 pandemic.[13] In October 2022, it was announced that Stage 4 of the TEL was expected to open in 2024.[14] I just want to make sure I got it correctly, but what I have in mind here is "LTA announced that the completion will be pushed to 2024 from 2023 in October 2022". Is that right?

October 2022 is when TEL Stage 4 was expected to open in 2024. I admit the wording is a bit unclear, so any suggestion for changing is much appreciated.

-testing final testings ...Test runs, right? At least this description gives me that impression.

Presumebly. Have changed the wording

-...Maybe just wikilink the entire "Singapore Civil Defence Force" instead? It only appears once in the article, and it is hard to tell what SCDF stands for to a foreigner like me.

Done

Station details

-As with the other TEL4 stations, hybrid cooling fans at the platforms complement the station's air-conditioning to improve air circulation while lowering energy consumption. I don't know, but this feels really minor to me. I need a third opinion for this.

This has appeared in other TEL4 articles. Shall I request ZKang123 for his opinion? He's very experienced in MRT articles and the one who added it for most of the TEL4 articles. ZKang's a bit on a Wikibreak right now but it may be possible to get his opinion.

I think this is relevant enough, since it was the subject of a whole news article. I must say though: "while lowering energy consumption": Lowering the energy consumption of what? and how? IAWW (talk) 11:26, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Have added that it lowers energy consumption for the station. As for the how, not too sure; the article doesn't mention it (it doesn't necessarily imply that the fans lower energy consumption by reducing the need for low aircon temperature)

Er, if there are no specific information available that's okay at this point

Public artworks

-Couldn't find much to point out here

Sources

-This appear to have been raised in other GANs, but I'm hitting a ton of SMRT system maps. Is there a way to like merge all that into one? It's getting too confusing.

I don't understand, do you mean the details section? I've merged the train frequency and station operations under one citation. Should the station's exit directory and map be just one citation?

I was putting that up there because I saw multiple maps with the same content, just different websites. Anyways, the issue seems to be solved.

Health/formatting (Criterion 2a)

-Nothing to say about this

Reliability (Criterion 2b)

-CiteHighlighter flags TST a lot, but since Singapore has little news sources for things like this, and there are not really many ways for a source to be non-neutral on a railway station, I'm not going to take that as an issue.

A better justification than "reliable sources can't be found" is needed here. If it's really the case that reliable sources don't exist, then the info shouldn't be included at all. In this case, "The Straits Times" is reliable enough for this uncontroversial article, and the script only flags the "Today" article because it includes the suspicious word "announce" in the url, which is clearly not an issue. IAWW (talk) 08:42, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, it flags stuff like that. It makes a ton of FPs, so I don't take orange hits seriously if it's not obvious by the website's title.

-Not seeing obvious problems with the reliability of cited sources, considering the uncontroversial nature of railway topics in most cases.

Spot check (Criteria 2b, 2c, 2d)

Going to have ChatGPT randomly choose a random number between 1~31, six times in a row.

• 3 For some reason the citation link leads to Marine Terrace MRT station's address
  • Have replaced it. Didn't realise it, thanks for pointing it out!
• 7 Used Ctrl+F "Siglap" for both REF7 and REF8, couldn't find "Siglap South"
  • [7] is used for the polling in general. I can get rid of it if you want
    • Correction: I see what you mean now. I swore there was an ST article with a table of TEL4 proposed names and their actual names. For now, I have replaced it with a source from the LTA.

Alright, REF8 is a pass

• 14 pass
• 19 pass
• 22 pass
• 28 pass

Because some errors were found, 2 more spotchecks will be done:

• 6 pass
• 21 It looks like the operation time changes on Sunday/PH?
  • Have added that

Copyvio (Criterion 2d)

-Highest match 24.8%, all hits were unavoidable names and the excerpt.

Scope (Criteria 3a, 3b)

-Looking at other SMRT station GAs, I don't think I see an obvious lack of detail here. On hold due to potential 3b issue accidentally pointed out on prose part.

Stable (Criterion 5)

-No edits in July

Media

Tags (Criterion 6a)

-All three files are CC licensed

Captions (Criterion 6b)

-All files look like they are useful in understanding the subject. The start of station details is a bit squished but honestly I don't care. I see no obvious issues with the captions as far as I can see.

Suggestions (not needed for GA promotion)

These are really minor IMO, so I will just stick them here.

-I was slightly confused with "TODAY" (REF12) and "Today" (REF6) both linking to Today (website). I thought they were a different thing for a second there.

Have changed it

-Same thing for how Land Transport Authority is shown in various references

Done

Comments

• I think that's around it for my review. While I was a bit scared because there is a discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Reliability of The Straits Times must be rediscussed, but from what I observe this doesn't look like it is aimed to demote the rating of the source, so nevermind. @It is a wonderful world: just for the extra pair of eyes. We also need 3O on if hybrid cooling fans merit a mention here. Other than that, I think we're close to wrapping up.

It looks like you did a good review here! Well done :) I weighed in on the 3O and would be happy for this to pass when you are. I hope this makes you feel more comfortable reviewing in the future? I'm always happy to help with future reviews too. IAWW (talk) 11:32, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Oh just one more thing. I don't think your pings are actually pinging me? Not sure what is going wrong there. IAWW (talk) 11:33, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Well, the last time I screwed up, I was reviewing an article about a monument in Botswana, and maybe that's why I failed to provide a useful review? It was completely out of my usual editing scope (Japan or railways), so the lack of experience in both areas got to me. I'm going to see if I can extend my reviewing scope to railway lines sometime when I feel like it, but I'm going to have difficulties with longer articles for sure. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 13:18, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

@AlphaBetaGamma: have made all changes. @It is a wonderful world: I must thank you for helping ABG with this review and I hope to see more reviews from ABG in the future. AGB, on a personal note, I agree and would suggest reviewing articles within your scope. So far, I have reviewed articles within my scope (Singapore and train stations), and I typically go for articles with up to 40ish citations, as that is the typical amount citations I have in my MRT articles (so roughly equates to the same length). I would suggest reviewing a few of these before gradually moving to longer articles. After all, you need to take baby steps with a new experience. DYK is also a good excercise for reviewing articles. Icepinner (formerly Imbluey2). Please ping me so that I get notified of your response 13:55, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Addendum: I'm also impressed with how you managed to find my ongoing RSN discussion for the reliability The Straits Times as well as its entry on RSP. Its RSP entry doesn't best represent the ST as it left out the ST's historical nuances and was also rather vague on what "political topics" are; Some have interpreted it to be anything that's government-owned, including the ST (there seems to be a general consensus that "political topics" do not extend to train stations). Anyways, that's enough about the RSN entry; this is a GAN review. Icepinner (formerly Imbluey2). Please ping me so that I get notified of your response 14:00, 24 July 2025 (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.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by TarnishedPath talk 00:38, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that The Darkness which Reveals at Siglap MRT station conveys that darkness can reveal instead of conceal?

• Source: https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/time-after-time-a-first-look-at-new-art-in-transit-installations-at-tel-stage-4-stations

• • ALT1: ... that The Darkness which Reveals at Siglap MRT station takes inspiration from the station's name? Source: https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/transport/time-after-time-a-first-look-at-new-art-in-transit-installations-at-tel-stage-4-stations
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Hadiza Bazoum
  • Comment: As much as I would like to include an image of the artwork, public artwork in Singapore is copyrighted and thus freedom of panorama is ineligible

Improved to Good Article status by Icepinner (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 9 past nominations.

Icepinner (formerly Imbluey2). Please ping me so that I get notified of your response 14:47, 24 July 2025 (UTC).

• Everything looks good here. The hook is cited. A good article, which means that the article is nice and presentable. A pass from me. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 12:55, 9 August 2025 (UTC)