User talk:Brythain

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Huaiwei 15:47, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Find the rest of the Singapore community!
Yeap, you can find us in these pages:


 * Singapore portal
 * SGpedians' notice board
 * Singapore-related topics
 * Complete to do list
 * Singapore Wikipedians

Do leave your name at the notice board, and thanks again for making wikipedia your online abode! ;)--Huaiwei 15:47, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Linkspam
-- Alarics (talk) 20:24, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

-- Alarics (talk) 09:10, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Expulsion vs Separation
Please refer to:-
 * 1) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Singapore&oldid=410538299&direction=prev ; &
 * 2) Talk:Singapore/2010_archive.

Thank you for your interest on the article page of Singapore, as you understand that certain words may not meet Wikipedia's requirement for reuse here hence my rewording of the term "expelled" to "separation" since the former was a straight forward violation per WP:Synthesis & Neutral point of view. As stated in the constitution of Malaysia prior to July 1965, member states are allowed to join the federation but there wasn't any legal provision for member states to leave it; Lee Kuan Yew being an established lawyer was well aware of this and had gotten Eddie Barker to request from Tunku for the necessary amendment to the Malaysian constitution in view of the deteriorating situation then, which was documented in "Lee's Lieutenants" (South Wind Production) ISBN 1-86448-639-2 and also, according to a web archive in the United States Library of Congress, effectively a third party view of the whole scenario.

The term "separation" was quoted consistently throughout, while "expel/expulsion" being a term used mainly by Tunku and Malaysian politicians (mostly for their political gains), Tunku and UMNO delegates didn't really understand how the constitution really work. In order for Singapore to separate from Malaysia, a minor change in the Malaysian Constitution was necessary so as to allow both leaders to sign the official papers, which states that Singapore secede or separate from Malaysia.

Honestly, I can't fault you for thinking that expelled was the correct term when it isn't so because of the cloud of political uncertainty back then which indirectly compelled the popular media to write and report in sensational terms. That said, I like the way you had reword the sentence but the term "expel" has got to go. Thoughts?

Best. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 03:58, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Actually, I don't think expelled was the correct term; however, secession (the other word used in most of the texts) seems wrong as well. I am glad you've settled on separation, actually; it seems to be a good antonym for 'merger', which initiated the state of affairs. The problem is that historically, 'expulsion' was used in Lee's account, as you've probably noticed. I would go further in agreement with you by noting that Yeo Kim Wah and Albert Lau, in Chapter 7 (pp 117-153) of 'A History of Singapore' (edited by Ernest Chew and Edwin Lee, London:OUP, 1991; ISBN 0-19-588917-7) use the word 'separation' throughout. Thanks! Brythain (talk) 08:59, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Helping out on Singapore

 * Hello again. The page is fully locked up but IMO, you being an uninvolved third party and all that, you can still help to make some changes to the article. How? Very simple, you just need to setup a sandbox under your username (such as → User:Brythain/Sandbox ←, which I've created on your behalf and you may add it in your user page for other future uses as well) and then... blast away! Oh, I've taken the liberty and copied the page content from the article into that sandbox... so like I've said, blast away! When you're done, simply leave me a message and I'll get a friendly Admin to help with the input. Or if you want to do it yourself, you may proceed to User talk:Ged UK and tickle him.

Don't worry, I'm usually not that in your face kind of guy, but the actions of some people really irks me when they pretend not to see or notice my/our complaints and went on to irritate me and the other editors by blindly reverting contents without first discussing them. Hope this clear things up, cheers! -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 18:41, 13 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Hey, Dave, thanks very much for the response. I was gone a few days, off and on, and suddenly there were all these revert sequences. Got kind of lost. Glad to receive help. Brythain (talk) 16:39, 14 July 2011 (UTC)


 * No problem, and knowing that you're still a novice, I'm just glad I could help. To which, I will leave you with the following. Cheers! -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 16:46, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Meritocracy
Hey, you posted on the Singapore talkpage awhile ago a quote from a book about the ruling style of the PAP. Do you think you could whip up a paragraph about the PAP for the politics section with the sources you have? That way the article will conform to WP:LEAD. Cheers, Chipmunkdavis (talk) 02:49, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * A paragraph on the ruling style of the PAP? Give me a rough idea of what you think is needed and I'll get it together. The problem with having too many sources is you can't see the trees for the wood. Thanks! Brythain (talk) 11:40, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, at the very least we need to expand on what was considered necessary to include in the lead during the discussion on the talk page. Information about how the PAP operates; how it determines who enters the party, how the party is structured, and how it chooses who to employ as civil servants. This is where information about meritocracy would be useful. Do you think going into historical electoral support for the PAP would be useful? Anyway, this could be balanced out by the criticisms of its authoritarian style and its control over domestic life and elections. More is better than less at the moment. It doesn't seem right to have a politics section on Singapore without an explanation on the party that has ruled for over half a century after all. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 14:43, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)