Talk:Singapore

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Archived discussions

Formatting and language conventions

For articles about Singapore, please use the 12-hour clock to show times, e.g. 9AM-noon and 6PM-midnight.

Please show prices in this format: $100 and not SGD 100, 100 dollars or S$100.

Please use British spelling (colour, travelled, centre, realise, analogue, programme, defence).

Phone numbers should be formatted as +65 XXXX XXXX.

Maps[edit]

What's the argument for the need for dynamic maps in the "Districts" section? Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:32, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pushing on the MRT[edit]

"During rush hours, get ready for a lot of pushing and shoving on the MRT (even just to alight) as everybody races for the empty seat. This is a common sight daily, despite signs asking people to be a little more courteous. Also try to gently push others when attempting to board trains in rush hours to minimise the risk of being left behind and waiting for the next MRT train. That said, the mad dash for seats that is common in China is considered to be uncivilised in Singapore."

The two highlighted excerpts are mutually contradictory. So which is correct? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 19:19, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@The dog2: any thoughts on this? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 10:36, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how you describe it, but while Singaporeans may not be as polite as say, the Japanese, it's still a lot better than in China. In China, people literally sprint for the seats while almost violently pushing people away. Look at this video for an example in the Shanghai Metro, but even what you see in this video is already relatively mild. In Singapore, rushing for seats in the way seen in the video is considered uncivilised. In fact, I don't feel that riding the MRT in Singapore particularly different from riding the Tube in London or the New York City Subway when it comes to civility of commuters. For that matter, I've actually seen more uncivilised behaviour (like people sitting with the soles of their feet on the seat with their shoes on) on the New York City Subway. The dog2 (talk) 14:17, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
So, in that case, would you say the first bolded bit either needs to be removed, or toned down? Because without actually knowing what the Chinese experience is like, it seems like the paragraphs message is 'there's a jostling rush for seats with pushing, but pushing and rushing would be uncivilised". If there's a way we can get the most accurate description without bringing in a comparison to an unrelated country, that would be best.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 14:43, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'll be happy to have both statements removed. In general, most Singaporeans will let you out of the train before boarding, just as most New Yorkers or Londoners would. But that said, it is possible that I could be biased as someone born and raised there, so it's probably best to get a second opinion from a European or American who has been to Singapore before making a final decision.
@Jpatokal, Drat70, Pashley: Could one of you please comment? The dog2 (talk) 15:22, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
From of a four day visit in 2013, I don't remember passengers being particularly pushy or rude in Singapore's MRT even during rush hour. Also the monorail station and the monorail to Sentosa were full of people like an outdoors rock festival but likewise I don't remember much pushing and shoving there. --Ypsilon (talk) 17:30, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
OK, it looks like I'm not the only one then. It may well be that my definition of civility and courtesy as a Singaporean is just different from an American's definition, but I have encountered what I consider to be rude or uncivilised behaviour more often on the New York City Subway and Chicago L than on the Singapore MRT. The dog2 (talk) 19:43, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@ThunderingTyphoons!: Looks like nobody has replied for a while. Based on your profile, it looks like you have been to Singapore, so would you agree with me that the pushing and shoving in the MRT is in general no worse than what you will experience in the Tube in London? If so, what do you think of just removing the paragraph? The dog2 (talk) 16:03, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I neither agree nor disagree, as I visited in 2002 when I was but a wee'un (about 8 or so) and really don't remember whether the MRT was even busy or not. I would prefer the situation be clarified, rather than removing the paragraph, but you're the Singapore expert around here. Whatever you think is best - other than leaving it as it is - I will go along with. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:36, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────To put thing in perspective, I will say that you will almost never see on the MRT some things that I have seen on the New York City Subway or Chicago L, such as people putting their feet on the seat, a single person occupying four seats, or people eating and making a mess with their food. And likewise, it's quite rare that you will encounter people talking loudly on their phone in an inconsiderate way, unlike what I encounter on a regular basis in New York City and Chicago. You will most certainly draw a lot of unwanted attention to yourself if you do any of these on the MRT, and there's a good chance someone will tell you off. Likewise, if you start wrestling and violently pushing people away while sprinting for the empty seat like what you see in the Shanghai Metro or Beijing Subway, it's quite likely that you will upset local people. In fact, this kind of behaviour by many mainland Chinese tourists is one of the reasons why many Singaporean Chinese bear some degree of resentment towards the mainland Chinese (tangential to this, many Taiwanese and Hongkongers resent the mainland Chinese tourists for the same reason). And personally, the first time I visited Shanghai and rode the Metro, experiencing how unruly (from a Singaporean perspective) the commuters were was a bit of a culture shock.

If you'd prefer, we can explicitly say that the situation is similar to most major Western cities. The dog2 (talk) 16:59, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ikan Kekek: I vaguely recall you saying in a comment some time back that you've been to Singapore before. As a New Yorker, could you please provide a second opinion whether my comparative assessment of Singapore and New York City is accurate? The dog2 (talk) 17:25, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The most explicit thing is just to describe how things are. Comparisons are not necessary, because this article is about Singapore, and not everyone who reads it will have been on the Shanghai Metro or the NYC Subway. We don't all have the same frame of reference, so let's just state what the situation on the MRT is and leave it at that.
And for what it's worth, the MRT made the rickety old Tube look like a pile of crap to me back then, and when the Jubilee line extension opened with its steel stations and glass platform-edge doors, it seemed to me inspired by Singapore. But the crowds I don't remember. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 22:36, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm making comparisons here just to put things in perspective. I'm not suggesting we put all of it in the article. But I do think simply stating that there is a lot of pushing and shoving in the MRT can be misleading. The fact of the matter is, if you try to push and wrestle while sprinting for the seats like people do in Shanghai or Beijing, you are very likely to offend local people in Singapore, and people will think that you are uncivilised. At the very least, you will be drawing stares and whispers to yourself, and if you are unlucky, you might even get told off by a local. Therefore, I would say just don't do it. Likewise, not letting people off before you board will make you look rude and inconsiderate. So my advice if you don't want to stick out like a sore thumb is to behave just like how a normal local person would on the Tube or any other system in the Western world. The dog2 (talk) 23:01, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Since you pinged me: I spent like 2 days in Singapore in 1976 and don’t remember riding any trains there, so I have nothing to add to this discussion. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:24, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
OK, the MRT wasn't built until 1987, so you wouldn't know then. The dog2 (talk) 02:37, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway, to move forward on this, if nobody objects within 24 hours, I'll go ahead and delete the paragraph. The dog2 (talk) 16:55, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Deleted, but if anybody wants to protest the deletion, please feel free to ping me and reopen the debate. The dog2 (talk) 20:59, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Champion.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 22:17, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Time and date formatting again[edit]

@The dog2: it looks like you added the formatting box indicating that the 12-hour clock should be used in Singapore articles. Looking through the discussions here, I see one from 2013 that decided that the 24-hour clock should be used. I haven't been to Singapore, so on have direct knowledge. What should we do, given the 2013 discussion? Ground Zero (talk) 12:11, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Local knowledge trumps the opinion of the 118 / Alice abuser (before your time, I believe) any day of the week and twice on Sundays. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 12:34, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 13:54, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Generally, we only use the 24-hour clock in the military. Outside of that, the 12-hour clock is more common. The dog2 (talk) 15:02, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Good to have that confirmation. Thanks. Ground Zero (talk) 15:37, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Titles of Chinese and North Korean leaders[edit]

I have seen a bit of back and forth about which title to use for Kim Jong Un and Xi Jinping. Why not just use "leader"? Hobbitschuster (talk) 10:56, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kim is called "leader" and Xi is called "president", per their most common titles in English. Similarly, we don't call Trump "the American leader" or Yew "the late Singaporean leader". The various edit summaries given as arguments by the IP user(s) were irrelevant to Wikivoyage and didn't address or acknowledge comments made by me and others. As an unrelated aside, I note with a sense of irony that of the four politicians discussed, only Yew ever demonstrated any notable leadership qualities. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:01, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
During the Hu Jintao era, Hu was the leader but not the president. Calling Xi the "President" of China is a bit misleading. After all, the President of Germany isn't the one who decides policy, either. Also, the U.S. is (not yet, anyway) not a single party state where party and state positions are intermixed like you can see in China, North Korea or Bavaria... Hobbitschuster (talk) 11:04, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) This is a constant source of disagreement both here and on Wikipedia. For China, the issue as I understand it is that legally "president" is a ceremonial title and Xi's political power derives from other positions that he holds concurrently. Ultimately it doesn't matter much which term we use, because anyone who cares about the difference already knows the details. —Granger (talk · contribs) 11:05, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose from the traveller's perspective "leader" may be a bit clearer than "president". "President" tends to confuse travellers and their hosts in China, because its usual translation is 总统 zǒngtǒng, but in this case it means 主席 zhǔxí. —Granger (talk · contribs) 11:09, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
W:President of the People's Republic of China. Legal and ceremonial titles and powers aside, Xi is most commonly described in English as President. The travellers in question are visiting Singapore, not China.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:11, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hu Jintao was the president of China. It was Deng Xiaoping who never formally assumed the position of president even though he was the de facto head of government. But anyway, Xi Jinping is indeed the president of China, and that's how he's most commonly described. Technicalities about which position actually holds power aren't important for a travel guide. And as ThunderingTyphoons! said, this article is about Singapore, not China, and we don't even cover details about Chinese politics in the China article. Therefore, let's just keep things simple and refer to Xi Jinping using the most common English description, and leave the details on where Xi derives his power from for political blogs or some other site more suited for that. Likewise, Ma Ying-jeou was technically the "President of the Republic of China", as is Tsai Ing-wen today. But we just use the term "Taiwanese president" because that is indeed the most common way they are described in English, regardless of what their official title. The dog2 (talk) 16:17, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Visas for tech workers[edit]

Singapore to Introduce New Visa to Draw Top Global Tech Talent Pashley (talk) 05:31, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tourist flights?[edit]

Volocopter sells out its first tourist eVTOL flights in Singapore Pashley (talk) 07:46, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Police[edit]

Here's some news coming out of Singapore: [1]. I wonder if in the West, there are any laws that say that only female officers may restrain or arrest a woman. The dog2 (talk) 17:19, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely no such laws in any U.S. jurisdiction that I've ever heard of. Only same-sex officers are supposed to strip-search suspects or convicts in custody, though. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:35, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

English variety[edit]

Would we be using British English here, or Singaporean English? There's a couple of words in en-SG and en-MY that rather follow US usage like underpass, to rent, pickup truck etc. While it's really not a big difference, unlike what we did with Irish English where there's little difference, en-SG actually has some differences with language and terms used. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 01:19, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vocabulary often differs even within a country. English spelling tends to fall into two large buckets, US and UK, with minor differences in the Commonwealth countries. Specifying British English in the "Formatting and language conventions" formatbox dictates spelling alone, not choice of words. Nelson Ricardo 2500 (talk) 01:40, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps look at Talk:New Zealand. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:42, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]