Talk:Speak Good English Movement

message: I can't speak for the movement, but good English need not be defined as being British. If, for example, a Singaporean wants to do business with an American, he'd be well-advised not to use fortnight which, though acceptable British usage, isn't part of American English. Two weeks is OK in British and American English and might be called part of standard English.
ahh.... i think the last line is a bit racist, POV and just stereotypical... i think it should be removed. an also to the guy above fortnight is used in america, and two weeks is used as well in english based on the british version, it really just depends from person to person. Australian Jezza 07:45, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Different standards of English

message: Here's how the article starts (after markup-stripping):
:The Speak Good English Movement (SGEM) is a language movement in Singapore to encourage Singaporeans to speak grammatically correct English
It continues in the same vein, talking credulously about "good" and "grammatically correct" English in contradistinction to what a lot of Singaporeans speak.
Have the Singaporeans whose Singlish/English is thought to be in need of improvement learned this language as a first language? If so, they'll be native speakers of it and therefore it will be grammatically correct in its own terms, just as any native lect of English, even a stigmatized mesolect, is grammatically correct.
If the purpose of this campaign is to have Singaporeans speak something closer to standard transatlantic or British English, then this does make sense (whatever I may think of its desirability). And if Singaporean politicians, teachers, and other non-linguists believe that nonstandard equals substandard, then this (mistaken) belief merits mention in an encyclopedia. However, for this WP article to suggest that deviations from "standard" English (whichever standard it may be) are "incorrect" or "wrong" would fly in the face of consensus among linguists and do a disservice to readers. -- Hoary (talk) 08:31, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That sentence is a direct quote from the official SGEM site, and I've now labeled it as such.  IMHO the quality of the article has gone down despite/because of the GA push, virtually everything is parroted verbally and uncritically from government sources. Jpatokal (talk) 09:39, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: "Grammatical correctness"

message: Per request, I'm adding some comments on here that could help move the article closer to GA status:
*The structure is the big problem; it's mostly a slew of list pieces year to year, and the article feels stunted as a result. Converting the lists to prose and making it more readable in that regard would be a big help.
*Quite a few quotes are unreferenced, as are most of the programmes.
*For that matter, I don't think noting every program is all that useful. Perhaps just noting the most significant ones would be better. If all are necessary, then the first point applies, it needs to be meshed into the prose better.
That alone should be enough to work with to start out. Wizardman 23:20, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article comments 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Speak Good English Movement. 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/20110830040328/http://www.goodenglish.org.sg/about/about-us/what-we-do/ to http://www.goodenglish.org.sg/about/about-us/what-we-do/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721210057/http://starblog.stomp.com.sg/post.php?blogid=130 to http://starblog.stomp.com.sg/post.php?blogid=130
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.facebook.com/MySGSM
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101029045134/http://asp.marketasia.com.sg/RELC/grammarindex.asp to http://asp.marketasia.com.sg/RELC/grammarindex.asp
*Added  tag to http://www.sdea.org.sg/links.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20031206025211/http://www.elltas.org/ to http://www.elltas.org/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110201235007/http://www.srl.org.sg/ to http://www.srl.org.sg/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110201235007/http://www.srl.org.sg/ to http://www.srl.org.sg/
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) 03:29, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 10 external links on Speak Good English Movement. 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://www.webcitation.org/5u56sao2E?url=http://www.goodenglish.org.sg/2009/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/about-years04-pressrelease-20040421.pdf to http://www.goodenglish.org.sg/2009/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/about-years04-pressrelease-20040421.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100317143644/http://www.ymca.org.sg/pesa/index.html to http://www.ymca.org.sg/pesa/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101231073736/http://www.stomp.com.sg/stompcast/ to http://www.stomp.com.sg/stompcast
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101027072012/http://www.youth.sg/content/blogcategory/72/51/ to http://www.youth.sg/content/blogcategory/72/51/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110906144708/http://www.sixlives.sg/ to http://sixlives.sg/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100409072723/http://talkback.stomp.com.sg/forums/showthread.php?t=100619 to http://talkback.stomp.com.sg/forums/showthread.php?t=100619
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101209144916/http://www.938live.sg/index to http://www.938live.sg/index
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130418112652/http://www.938live.sg/podcast/MDC100319-0000075/Work_Your_Language to http://www.938live.sg/podcast/MDC100319-0000075/Work_Your_Language
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100903175040/http://english.stomp.com.sg/stomp/english/fix_that_sign/ to http://english.stomp.com.sg/stomp/english/fix_that_sign/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101029205301/http://english.stomp.com.sg/english/ to http://english.stomp.com.sg/english
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) 13:20, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello Taymccreary -- anything happening? 
Some effort has gone into this article in the past, but it's terrible. Being terrible, it should be easy to improve (if hard to turn into something good). Just about wherever I look are major problems. Here are just two:
:Since 2003, the Speak Good English Movement has been launched annually with year-long programmes and activities held island-wide to increase the awareness among Singaporeans that speaking good English matters in their daily lives. Each year a different theme focusing on the target audience is created. The themes that were used in the campaign thus far are
Not sure what "focusing on the target audience" adds to this paragraph, but that minor point aside, this implies that the campaign was relaunched as recently as 2017 if not 2018. Is this true, and if it is true, then what has happened since 2013?
::Should the "up until 2015 are:" section be edited to reflect the current year? The logo on the site hasn't changed since 2019, and I don't know where I'd look on the archive to find where they list their themes online right now (very busy) - could the phrasing of this be changed to not require regular updates? Anafyral (talk) 11:34, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The SGEM has received mixed reactions from its beginning; its strongest opponents have included linguists and social commentators.
Not a single example is provided. Whereas in a well-educated democracy perhaps linguists mightn't have to point out that a campaign to have people speak good is based on faulty premises, in a one-party nation where the government always knows best, pointing out this kind of thing may even be slightly dangerous. The article might tell us. Certainly it shouldn't talk airily about "linguists and social commentators" without evidence or examples. -- Hoary (talk) 23:12, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Easy to improve