Talk:Outram Park MRT station

Map

Do you guys think that the map located at http://www.sbstransit.com.sg/nel/img/NE3_big.jpg is a better one compared than the map shown here? Because the EW-line part of the station map appears to be missing from the LTA picture. unkx80 10:19, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

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) 23:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:OutramMRT surroundings.JPG

Image:OutramMRT surroundings.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 ensure 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) 14:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Outram Park 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/20120908133557/http://app.mot.gov.sg/News_Centre/Latest_News/NewsID/1025BFFF26792831/Speech_by_Mr_Lui_Tuck_Yew_Minister_for_Transport_at_the_Inspection_of_Downtown_Line_1_Station_and_A.aspx to http://app.mot.gov.sg/News_Centre/Latest_News/NewsID/1025BFFF26792831/Speech_by_Mr_Lui_Tuck_Yew_Minister_for_Transport_at_the_Inspection_of_Downtown_Line_1_Station_and_A.aspx

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) 01:24, 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 09:30, 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:Outram Park MRT station/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Voorts (talk · contribs) 14:03, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

GA Review: First assessment

Review forthcoming. voorts (talk/contributions) 14:03, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
First assessment completed. Placing the review on hold for the nominator to fix the issues noted below. voorts (talk/contributions) 15:35, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):

   Copy edit completed by reviewer.

   b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Copy edit completed by reviewer.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a. (reference section):

   Although this passes under the GA guidelines, some of the citations can (and should) be cleaned up by using citation templates.

   b. (citations to reliable sources):

   Several of the sources cited are not RS because they are primary sources. Additionally, tThe "Services" subsection links to a dynamic map of the MRT system; is there a way to link to a stable version (e.g., a PDF timetable)? Additionally, I noted one {{failed verification}} in the article. See discussion below. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:28, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

   c. (OR):

   As noted, several of the sources are primary sources. See discussion below. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:28, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

   d. (copyvio and plagiarism):

   Checked using Earwig's tool.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a. (major aspects):

   b. (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Checked edit history and talk page.

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):

   Checked copyright tags.

   b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Images are informative.

7. Overall:

   Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

Discussion after first assessment

Creating this section to discuss the initial assessment and any edits made to fix up the article. voorts (talk/contributions) 15:35, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

On reflection, I think the sources cited above meet WP:PRIMARY because "A primary source may be used on Wikipedia only to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge". However, upon reviewing the sources, several of the statements in the article appear to be WP:SYNTH or not substantiated by the source cited. For example, the article states,"On 29 August 2012, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) announced that Outram Park station would interchange with the proposed Thomson Line", and cites to [1]. That source, however, does not say anything about the Outram Park station. I've marked some additional failed verifications in the article. Finally, the art section should definitely have nonprimary sources as sources by the Metro system are biased. Has anyone reviewed the murals or other art projects? voorts (talk/contributions) 00:18, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Courtesy ping to @Brachy0008. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:20, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

I don’t think so, but I found a non-primary source and I’m not really sure if it should be added [1] (It’s FourSquare.com) Brachy08 (Talk)(Contribs) 00:26, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

No, per WP:UGC. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:29, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

ok Brachy08 (Talk)(Contribs) 03:46, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

I solved all the issues I could find. Is there any more? Brachy08 (Talk)(Contribs) 08:00, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Can you find a non-primary source about Mata Mata? voorts (talk/contributions) 21:29, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

I can’t. I’ll delete it anyway. Brachy08 (Talk)(Contribs) 01:12, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I will pass the article. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:17, 11 July 2023 (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 AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:33, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

North East line platforms of Outram Park MRT station

• ... that there was a police shooting that took place at the North East line platforms of Outram Park MRT station? Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20080307150231/http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/333299/1/.html
  • Reviewed:

Improved to Good Article status by Brachy0008 (talk). Self-nominated at 04:29, 12 July 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Outram Park MRT station; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited:
• Interesting: - n

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: @Brachy0008: Good article, but I dont find the hook all that interesting. That's probably due to me being an American but I feel as if a different hook should be proposed. Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:15, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

ALT1 ... that one of the artwork pieces of Singapore's Outram Park MRT station features themes on Chinese opera, law, and medicine?

ALT2 ... that one of the artwork pieces of Singapore's Outram Park MRT station features 69 engravings of surreal human forms, which are intended to represent the state of mind of commuters?

@Brachy0008 and Onegreatjoke: How do these sound? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:05, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

ALT2 is interesting. Brachy08 (Talk)(Contribs) 05:39, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I think those are fine. Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:52, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

@Onegreatjoke: Ready to approve the article? Brachy08 (Talk)(Contribs) 06:19, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

I did? Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:14, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

I wasn't notified? Brachy08 (Talk)(Contribs) 09:41, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

It isn't on DYK yet though (Courtesy ping to @Onegreatjoke: Brachy08 (Talk)(Contribs) 09:54, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

I approved it. It just hasn't been promoted yet. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:56, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Peer review

Outram Park MRT station

Previous peer review

i've listed this article for peer review because i'm...ready for it another attempt at promoting this article into a featured article. this time, i am willing to do a little peer review to avoid the mistakes that i kinda made at my first attempt (i looked back and improved it to the best of my ability).

the only thing that is different is that i expanded the article from the book sources User:ZKang123 gave (thanks, man =D), so i think it has enough material for it to become a featured article, the only thing that should be addressed is most likely clean-up and stuff.

thanks, brachy08 _{(chat here lol)} 01:00, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Comments by ZKang123

I decided to give a quick look over this. At this point, it's shaping up well, but I also saw a few other things for improvement.

• Alt text should not merely just repeat the caption. Usually there will be a bit more description. Like the first image, maybe describe more in detail like: "An entrance to the station next to a bus stop, featuring a modern architectural design with a large overhanging white roof supported by distinctive, angled cylindrical columns."
• Lead should be expanded more. Like at least giving an overview of some of the construction challenges. Also, perhaps details on the design and what artworks are displayed there.
• There's this groundbreaking ceremony for the EWL station
• For NewspaperSG links like Ref 10: remove the archive link, since they don't usually work. Also they should use the cite news template and the work be by Singapore Monitor, for instance, and add page numbers. This is essential for source formatting consistency. See Ref 13 on how usually they should be formatted.
• The NEL station has four underground levels, with the second one being out-of-bounds and the first one intended for a public underpass – This bit should actually go under the details section.
• Remove ISSN for Ref 31; usually unnecessary
• On 6 March 2008 in the NEL section of the station – Usually I try to avoid "in the NEL section" but would say at the NEL platforms or concourse
• Ref 39: Don't use Streetdirectory but cite OneMap instead.
• I would actually use SBS Transit or SMRT journeys to cite the surrounding landmarks. Please see Orchard MRT station or Little India MRT station
• Arup also has more details of the current layout of the station. And also an old LTA leaflet. (First page)
• You forgot to mention the TEL artwork for Outram Park.

My overall thoughts: While it's an improvement from the last time I read this, I think there are still a few more gaps before it can be at the FAC stage.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 02:51, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

there was mention for TEL's artwork. however, due to well... the GA review, i kinda removed it. shld be an easy fix. brachy08 _{(chat here lol)} 03:57, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Actuall7

Hello Brachy, good work on this article so far. Just wanted to point out a few issues that I found in it when I read through.

• In the lead's second paragraph, North East line is hyphenated as North-East line despite the name of the line not including a hyphen. The mention of East–West line also uses a hyphen (East-West line) instead of an en dash. World Trade Centre is also misspelt as World Trade Center.
• The lead also doesn't mention the Artworks section of the article.
• Something I'm not too sure about is whether the infobox of the station should have more references, given that some articles reference everything in the infobox whilst others don't.
• The link to Singapore should be removed per WP:OL.
• Certain things throughout the article should be standardised, such as the capitalisation of "line" in the History section headers. Another instance is with the mention of "communications minister" and "Transport Minister".
• S. Iswaran should be linked.
• Not sure if the Incidents section should be included. While it did happen at the station, I'm unsure if it's notable enough to be mentioned.
• In the Details section, you link Havelock and Maxwell as between Havelock and Maxwell stations, when throughout the article mentions of two MRT stations is linked as such: between Tanjong Pagar and Tiong Bahru stations.
• In the Artwork section, it should be Art-in-Transit, not Art in Transit.
• Refs should be standardised, some link The Straits Times, NewspaperSG, eg, while others don't. Standardise the mention of CNA as well, some use CNA while others use Channel News Asia.
• Refs 47, 48, and 49 should be Land Transport Authority as publisher instead of www.lta.gov.sg. Refs 29, 31, 34, and 45 should also be Land Transport Authority (or expanded from LTA).

Hope my suggestions help you and the article gets to FA. actuall7 (talk | contrib) 02:37, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Drive by comment by S5A-0043

I'm not familiar with the FA criterias so I won't give a full length feedback, but I want to ask on why in the details section the On the EWL, the station ... Tiong Bahru stations. is (somewhat oddly) in a separate paragraph from As of October 2024 ... to 12:10 a.m., while for the NEL and TEL ones the frequency and the adjacent stations are within the same line. I feel that either the EWL adjacent station part should be moved down, or the adjacent station sentences are in the same paragraph and the service timings in another paragraph for consistency. S5A-0043🚎^{(Leave a message here)} 08:04, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Drive by comment by Icepinner

Similar to S5A, I don't have expereince with FA criteria. This is repetitive from Zkang and Actuall7 but I honestly think there should be some mention of the Art-in-transit artworks in the lead. It has its own section and is decently major so it should be mentioned in the lead. Icepinner (formerly Imbluey2). Please ping me so that I get notified of your response 14:06, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

@Icepinner i should have addressed most of the points in the peer review (including ur ait mention). thanks for the comment =D brachy08 _{(chat here lol)} 02:33, 21 April 2025 (UTC)