Talk:Choa Chu Kang MRT/LRT station

Choa Chu Kang MRT/LRT station has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: July 30, 2024. (Reviewed version).

Trains: Stations / Rapid transit Low‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Stations.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Rapid transit (assessed as Low-importance).

Singapore Mid‑importance

	Singapore portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Singapore, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Singapore on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SingaporeWikipedia:WikiProject SingaporeTemplate:WikiProject SingaporeSingapore articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

On 7 January 2018, it was proposed that this article be moved from Choa Chu Kang MRT/LRT Station to Choa Chu Kang MRT/LRT station. The result of the discussion was moved.

New Shop under Choa Chu Kang MRT Station

I found a number of shops at Choa chu Kang MRT station —Preceding unsigned comment added by RacerzGTR (talk • contribs) 09:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:NS logo.jpg

Image:NS logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:57, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: Original Research Being Included

An editor going by the handle of Lee480 has been very insistant on updating the progress of installation for the Platform Screen Door section which I'm pretty sure does not comply with Wikipedia policies - WP:OR & WP:V. I would like an external opinion to the matter as the editor in question does not respond to my messages. - Rgds. Planenut (Talk) 08:51, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Planenut: I can challenge the fact that Lee480 hasn't been complying with WP:OR & WP:V, as the "original research" you claim has actually been verified by the relevant authority, well for EWL at least, here: http://app.lta.gov.sg/corp_press_content.asp?start=9y6t63252ecdq43t2gwza070tsqkm1zf372ydxjgnd9sa4xiz8. Please go and learn more about the topic in question before you start accusing my fellow editors. Thanks. Luacs1998 (talk) 13:38, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Before jumping to conclusions, please refer to the material being cited from. I see no specific operational date being specified in the document. Unless you can produce a document say XXX Station's HHPSDs went into operation on XX MAY 2011. This is simply not sufficient. - Rgds. Planenut (Talk) 13:44, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with the HHSPD statement being included as part of History being included in the article but not as a standalone section to warrant one and definitely not the the dates of completion and going "live". See WP:NOT#NEWS - Rgds. Planenut (Talk) 13:55, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can. http://forums.sgtrains.com/showthread.php?tid=8. Luacs1998 (talk) 13:46, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer to WP:SPS. A forum no matter how independent is it is still NOT a reliable source of information. Only certain sources are approved. See WP:SOURCES. I quote The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth which means no matter how much you guys know first hand, it will not pass as verificable information unless the citied from an approved source. - Rgds. Planenut (Talk) 13:55, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, have it your way. But I would like to point out that the LTA source can be applied to EWL, as long as activation/commencement dates are not included, as I have reedited the Jurong East station article to point out. But need I remind you that other users have been leaving it the way it is, without challenge, until you came along. Are you trying to drag all of us into an edit war? Luacs1998 (talk) 14:26, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you look at my edits in relation to the HHSPDs have been inclusion of citation tags and not removals. Material without citations can be freely challenged. Remember that contributing to wikipedia is not complusory. (See WP:CHOICE) - Rgds. Planenut (Talk) 14:30, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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 09:30, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discarded section

Incidents

On 7 April 2008, a man was hit by a train at Choa Chu Kang station at 8 am, resulting in the disruption of northbound train services from Yew Tee to Bukit Gombak for about 50 minutes. He was subsequently pronounced dead by paramedics. A bus-bridging service was deployed between Yew Tee and Bukit Gombak stations as trains were made to turn around at Yew Tee, Bukit Gombak and Choa Chu Kang stations.

References

GA Review

Passed. brachy08 _{(chat here lol)} 02:30, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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:Choa Chu Kang MRT/LRT station/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 06:36, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Brachy0008 (talk · contribs) 05:16, 14 July 2024 (UTC) hi there! just going to start a review for this article. (i have 1 ongoing, but most of the points have been pointed out, so yeah)[reply]

Hi @Brachy0008, just a ping to remind you to finish this review. -- asilvering (talk) 01:00, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

alr doing it afap brachy08 _{(chat here lol)} 01:03, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ZKang123 finished the review brachy08 _{(chat here lol)} 01:19, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ZKang123 i put out all the points i have. brachy08 _{(chat here lol)} 05:54, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. Give me some time. I'm just working on another article at the moment.--ZKang123 (talk) 07:37, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

alr brachy08 _{(chat here lol)} 08:12, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Responded to the comments.--ZKang123 (talk) 12:34, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvios

Violation unlikely (12.3%)

Source review

North-South line

~~FN 8: Where does it say the contract involved Jurong MRT station?~~
- Fixed
FN 9: 9 January 1988 → 10 January 1988
- It's 9th because the newspaper (published on the 10th) said "yesterday"
  - Understood
FN 12-13: Does not say that the Branch line merged with the North-South line.
- Not exactly, but you and I know that the Woodlands extension combined the NSL and the Branch Line.
  - I'll let it pass

Bukit Panjang line

FN 16: Who is ABB Daimler Benz (taken from source but not on article)
- Not so sure.
FN 32-33: Not archived.
- It's not necessary to have them archived since the links are still live.

Jurong Region line

FN 39: Not archived.
~~FN 42: Wrong source date. Also why is it in 1970?~~
- Likely something from the backened as I put it through a citation generator. Fixed.
FN 42-46: Not archived.
- Similar reasons. They would be automatically archived by a bot once they are discovered dead.

Other stuff

Bukit MRT line missing link. Link it to Branch MRT line
- Done already in the first mention up in the article.
OPTIONAL: The details section can do a bit of expansion.
- Well, there aren't many sources for the station... Hopefully more commentary when JRL opens.

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.