# Talk:Sembawang MRT station

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) 23:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Sembawang 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/20120426164707/http://infopedia.nl.sg/articles/SIP_364_2005-01-28.html to http://infopedia.nl.sg/articles/SIP_364_2005-01-28.html
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) 02:23, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

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 09:31, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Sembawang MRT station/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: ArnabSaha (talk · contribs) 12:56, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct: 

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation: 

Is it verifiable with no original research?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline: 

B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines: 

C. It contains no original research: 

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic: 

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style): 

Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each: 

Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute: 

Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: 

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 


#### Comments
Solved a minor spelling mistake
Any artwork details?
Station operator not mentioned in body.
Need citation for disabled access, parking access etc.
"www.lta.gov.sg" omit www
Several citations don't have any link. As much as I know Straits Times articles are archived.
Need citation for the note.
Wikilink Woodlands. If possible add more wikilinks.
Add "NS11" as station code in infobox.
"line | Infopedia" remove infopedia.
What is kampung?
Expand lead a little bit if possible.
 Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe  13:37, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Addressed all issues. Well, there was consensus to remove the NS11 as station code in the infobox, since it is already at the top, and it is unnecessarily repetitive. The news articles after 1990 don't have online archives accessible to the public, hence they don't have a web link. The artworks only apply mainly to the newer lines such as the NEL, CCL, DTL and TEL. This station was built prior to the introduction of the Art in Transit programme in 1997.--ZKang123 (talk) 10:30, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Good to go  Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe  11:08, 27 April 2021 (UTC)