Talk:The Straits Times

message: A low quality scan of a front page of this paper would qualify as Fair use, like in [File:USAT01092008.jpg]. Can anyone do this?
Nicholas.tan (talk) 23:46, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair Use Image

message: Removed
 However, the latest AC Nielsen Net Ratings figures show that The Straits Times Interactive has attracted about five-million page views a month since May 2006, making it the top online daily in the country which is read by more than 4 per cent of the adult population monthly—predominantly professionals and executives.
from the page, since it is unsourced and unverified. GrimaH (talk) 20:05, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled section Dec 2009

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on The Straits Times. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110714224307/http://www.sph.com.sg:80/media_all.shtml to http://sph.com.sg/media_all.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:44, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I just removed a writeup sourced from TheRealSingapore as it is a very  questionable source. They don't really have a reputation for fact-checking [][][], a lot of stuff is primarily user generated, and there seems to be practically no editorial oversight on what's allowed there (as seen from the faked news that makes its way there). And for this particular post, its "submitted" by an editor named "Farhan", the name of an infamous writer of questionable news. Yes it may not be the same "Farhan", but the fact that the editor chose to use that name should set alarm bells ringing. 
Plus in the big picture of the article, it's really a trivial thing to get so much attention. Zhanzhao (talk) 23:53, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I have added more sources. Also, it is not so difficult to do a fact check on the HardwareZone if you doubt its reliability. As this concerns the credibility of the mainstream media, we would have to rely on alternative sources. Further, the independence of Mothership that you quoted here is found wanting. https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2014/04/11/whos-fueling-the-mothership/ Jane Dawson (talk) 01:18, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the alternative sources. My main concern was about A.S.S. - its been the source for quite a number of hoaxes now. I will remove the A.S.S reference and leave the independeng.sg link. One thing to note about the A.S.S. link is also cos of the style of writing. Its clearly in a style of a "personal post"/"opinion" rather than a news piece. In comparison, the Independent.sg's style is more even. With reference to the "Mothership" reference, those I quoted reported an action by the SPF which can be found on its official facebook (will take some trawling) and in the case of the "new citizen", a first-person rebuttal bu the person whose picture was stolen. In this, WP's reliable source guidelines give allowance for it. Also regardless of allegations of bias, the main rule of thumb here is that sources must still meet wikipedia's reliable source guidelines. A.S.S. doesn't meet them, and there are more than enough alternative sources other than that questionable site or the mainstream media in question to refer to. (PS: Just did a quick check, even Mothership has also written on the Ashley Wu puzzle). I will be amending the writing to be more inline with the indepedent.sg article, as it also disregards the Hardwarezone angle, which is now unnecessary unnecessary. That point would somewhat deligitimizes it - its like giving credibility to an article by quoting reddit or 4chan). Zhanzhao (talk) 02:13, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  TheRealSingapore not a reliable source 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on The Straits Times. 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/20120103024604/http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne+News/Singapore/Story/A1Story20111130-313509.html to http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20111130-313509.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170813181519/http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/singapore-bans-chinese-american-scholar-foreign-agent-49033721 to http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/singapore-bans-chinese-american-scholar-foreign-agent-49033721
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) 02:24, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The photo currently used on the page "The Straits Times front page on 13 December 2019" has a headline about the 2019 United Kingdom general election. Seems a little incongruous to have a headline about a UK election as the header image... Can someone upload / find a edition of the newspaper that has a headline more relevant to Singapore or the wider region?  Turini2 (talk) 12:56, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Straits Times front page image