Talk:Parliament of Singapore/Archive 1
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
File:PAP logo variation.png Nominated for speedy Deletion
|
An image used in this article, File:PAP logo variation.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
|
| Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
A further notification will be placed when/if the image is deleted. This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:14, 16 May 2011 (UTC) |
File:SDP logo variation.png Nominated for speedy Deletion
|
|
An image used in this article, File:SDP logo variation.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
|
| Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
A further notification will be placed when/if the image is deleted. This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:17, 16 May 2011 (UTC) |
Lead too long
I understand, it is indeed a long article, warranting a long lede. However, there must be still some extent to the length of the lede. In this case, the lead section is longer than it should be. Take for example, the Michael Jackson page. (Which i am using for comparison for it is a FA) It's size is about twice as large as this article, but its lede is definitely shorter. I'm very sure some stuff currently (such as maybe the long-winded history) in the lede is not needed or can be less detailed. Leave the juicy "meat" for the body, not the lede. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 11:26, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- Why don't you work on a draft lead section that we can discuss, then? — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 11:40, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- Good idea! But while I'm working on that, would it be alright to put a "lead too long" template? Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 11:47, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- I'd rather you didn't. It serves no real purpose. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 12:05, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- Quite true... Then why'd they come up with this template? Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 12:10, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- My suspicion is that it's for lazy editors who do drive-by tagging but don't actually want to bother with improving articles. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 13:25, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- Quite true... Then why'd they come up with this template? Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 12:10, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- I'd rather you didn't. It serves no real purpose. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 12:05, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- Good idea! But while I'm working on that, would it be alright to put a "lead too long" template? Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 11:47, 3 December 2012 (UTC)