Talk:Kent Ridge Park

message: Should this article be called Kent Ridge Park or just Kent Ridge? It appears that this article is assuming the two are the same, although one is a geographic feature, while the other is just a park?--Huaiwei 16:15, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to NHB, "Kent Ridge" was named as such after the park on the ridge (formerly Pasir Panjang Ridge) was renamed to "Kent Ridge Park" on 3 Oct 1952. If u r interested to find out more, do check out the commemorative plaque that was erected at the junction of Kent Ridge Rd & South Buona Vista Rd next time. (Want to guess how Kent Ridge Rd got its present name?). Geographically speaking, the park itself lies on the main Kent Ridge range that covers nearly 2 thirds of the Ridge that is bounded by South Buona Vista Rd in the west and Pepys Rd in the east.(See map) It has an average elevation of over 50m above sea level & the highest peak at 61m (near Carpark B) is found in the park. Even if one chooses to write a separate article called "Kent Ridge" for pedantic reasons, I strongly believe that the author will more or less cover the same topics & its association as mentioned in my article earlier i.e. etymology, history, WWII site, geography, flora & fauna etc. I choose to write under "Kent Ridge Park" was due to its historical significance which is already self explanatory. Thank u for yr assessmenent & feedback. -- Aldwinteo 18:16, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a definitive source stating that the name of the park actually comes before the name of the ridge? While it is generally okay to refer to "Kent Ridge" as both the ridge and the park, it is not as accurate to refer to "Kent Ridge Park" as a ridge. Plenty of content in this article is far more suited for Kent Ridge, while Kent Ridge Park should probably be confined to the physical park itself which presently occupies part of Kent Ridge. Please be mindful that the National University of Singapore, which sits on the western half of Kent Ridge, is not part of Kent Ridge Park, for example.--Huaiwei 05:27, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Sorry, I mixed up the date & its association in my earlier reply. As per commemorative plaque's inscriptions, the ridge was renamed as Kent Ridge on 23 February 1954 by the Governor of Singapore, Sir John Nicoll to commemorate the visit by the Duke & Duchess of Kent to a former military area somewhere on the park itself on 3 Oct 1952. I wld like to reiterate that my original intention is to write on Kent Ridge Park cos of its rich historical & natural heritage. As such, it was titled "Kent Ridge Park" as my prior research, references used & topics covered are pertaining to Kent Ridge Park only. I'm fine whether it's interpreted as "Kent Ridge" or "Kent Ridge Park" as long as the quality and integrity of the article is not compromised. Hope we have reach a common understanding on this issue as lengthy debates will be counter-productive. (i'm in the midst of researching and writing my upcoming 3 WWII articles during my limited free time & will be taking a long wiki-break afterwards) Lastly, I'm no stranger to the habitat of Kent Ridge & its surroundings as i'm associated to a nature society and a biodiversity museum at NUS. Rgds, -- Aldwinteo 17:54, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I thank you for the clarifications made over the naming issue. I agree fully that the area is rich in historical & natural heritage, but this is associated with Kent Ridge, not Kent Ridge Park, the later of which was a much more recent entity. The Battle of Pasir Panjang (and Battle of Bukit Chandu), was fought over at Pasir Panjang Ridge, now known as Kent Ridge. Kent Ridge Park was built much later to preserve a specific area of the ridge which has the greatest historical significance. I would therefore call for all information related to the area's history be moved to an article called Kent Ridge, while this article will concentrate on the natural history within the confines of the park (not the entire ridge), with only a passing comment on military history which may have occured within the park. I do not doubt your familiarity of the area, but I would think as a graduant of NUS, and a geography major with a keen interest in urban planning, it is only natural for me to sense geographic inaccuracies when they are due. The National Heritage Board may be a good source to write up on heritage-related articles, but I would think other agencies have a hand to play as well, most notably the Urban Redevelopment Authority, which obviously has a different idea on just what Kent Ridge/Kent Ridge Park really is.--Huaiwei 18:21, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article name

message: This information, while good, has virtually nothing to do with Kent Ridge Park, and more to do with the Battle of Bukit Chandu. It is not repeated there, so it would be more useful to move and integrate it there. --The_stuart (talk) 16:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank u for your review and edits done on the article earlier. Though your rational seem sound to remove the battle section (not a third but at 40% of the article, from 13.7kb to 8.3kb based on your last edits), it has become a 'watered-down' version in terms of its significance and content now, which doesn't do justice on its status as one of the 11 WWII sites of S'pore and being the final historical battle site during the Battle of Singapore. As per context of the article which I wrote earlier, my purpose was to provide a deeper insight on its history and significance. If one is to visit the park itself, the 'essence' felt on-site is its unique history which I hope to deliver in my writings earlier. Fyi, much time & energy was spend in research & site-visits to the park and I've included as much as possible the relevant information gleaned from the war museum, the National Parks Board and the national archives earlier. As such, I do not have any more content to add as mentioned earlier. Moreover, the SGpedian community and myself wld not only be greatly disappointed of the article arriving at such a state now as per 'rationalisation process', but also be deeply saddened should it failed its GA status as a result of lack of in-depth info at its current context now. -- Aldwinteo (talk) 02:51, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you should make a new article on the Battle of Bukit Chandu with this information. That would suit the purposes of the sgpedians, and be a useful use of this information. --The_stuart (talk) 04:37, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

text: The 6 paragraphs which u removed in the 'History' section earlier was intended to provide the necessary background story on the hill (aka 'Point 226') mentioned in the article & its significance during the final days of the Battle of S'pore. That's the rationale why it was incorporated in the first place so as to provide the necessary scope and depth for the article concerned. As I've retired from active writings for Wikipedia (only helping out with the GA exercise for SGpedia now), I'll leave it to the regular editors from 'Battle of Bukit Chandu' or SGpedians to evaluate & follow-up whether to incorporate the excised info later. Moving forward, I've nothing more to add or copyedit further & wld like u to give a final review on its status soon. -- Aldwinteo (talk) 05:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  info removed from the article 

message: I reverted this edit and changed it back as it is still listed as a good article. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 17:29, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reverted edits 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Kent Ridge Park. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nparks.gov.sg/park15.asp%23
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070906071943/http://rmbr.nus.edu.sg/news/ to http://rmbr.nus.edu.sg/news
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:32, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified