Jump to content

Talk:Malaysia–Singapore Second Link

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Twin Deck?

[edit]
  • I am not exactly sure what a "twin-deck" bridge is, but my understanding is that a "twin-deck" bridge refers to a bridge with two storeys. As the Second Link is definitely not a bridge with two storeys, I will remove the phrase "twin-deck" from the article. --Tsumeshogi (talk) 08:14, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


move the article to Malaysia-Singapore Second Link Expressway? It would better reflect the bridge since in Malaysia, it's not known as Tuas Second Link. Tuas reflects a Singapore-centric name. __earth (Talk) 06:05, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know what it is known as in Malaysia? I agreed a renaming is necessary. How about Johor-Tuas Second Link Bridge? I'm hoping to at least include "Tuas" in the name to facilitate searching and recognition. --Vsion 06:34, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's commonly known as the second link in Malaysia but wouldn't be too descriptive. I think Malaysia-Singpore Second Link would suffice. The project official website calls it Malaysia-Singapore Second Crossing instead of Second Link though. [1]. I think it would be better for us to use its official name as stated in the website. __earth (Talk) 07:27, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Malaysia-Singapore Second Link looks good to me. --Vsion 08:36, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me too. Let's move it? __earth (Talk) 04:34, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Done, (preemptively) :D. I'm not sure about the expressway at Johor side, please check my rewording. Also on Singapore side, the official name is Tuas Second Link, so this name needs to be highlighted in bold. --Vsion 06:33, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes! But Earth, Linkedua is also an expressway. Please do not remove the category I have added. Linkedua is located wholly in the Johor Bahru district, and it is an appropriate category, so please don't remove it. If you strongly disagree otherwise, please provide a good reason, and post it on my talk page to notify me, if so. Thanks. Mr Tan 07:45, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bridge or expressway?

[edit]

I am beginning to wonder if this article is on an expressway in Malaysia, or the link between Malaysia and Singapore? It appears to increasingly take on facets of the former dispite the article name.--Huaiwei 13:34, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Malaysia-Singapore Second Link, both of them are bridge and expressway. -- Highway Specialist in Malaysia 22:00, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can see, the expressway is called "Second Link Expressway (Expressway E3)", while the Malaysia-Singapore Second Link refers to the bridge itself. How funny it would be if information on the Ayer Rajah Expressway gets included in this article too?--Huaiwei 14:02, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The Ayer Rajah Expressway in Singapore is not part of Malaysia-Singapore Second Link because the AYE expressway connecting Tuas Checkpoint in the west to Radin Mas flyover in the city centre. -- Highway Specialist in Malaysia 22:10, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The Ayer Rajah Expressway extends from Keppel Viaduct right up to the Second link, and not from Radin Mas as you claim. And how does this lend any weight to the argument that the "Malaysia-Singapore Second Link" is an expressway in Malaysia? What is the causeway then, on hindsight? The North-South Highway?--Huaiwei 14:15, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'am not so sure, I'am fell so tensionlah!! LOL -- Highway Specialist in Malaysia 22:25, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Diao....so how do you feel about splitting this article into two...one for Second Link Expressway and the other for Malaysia-Singapore Second Link?--Huaiwei 14:31, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Tension, PLEASE DO NOT SPLIT THIS ARTICLE INTO TWO. Just stayed this article at once, Thank you Huaiwei, have a nice day in Singapore! LOL -- Highway Specialist in Malaysia 22:10, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why?--Huaiwei 14:54, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If no proper reasoning can be provided, I am going to be bold and effect the article split. We cannot have you single-handedly pilling on tonnes of information on an expressway which has no relation to the bridge in question.--Huaiwei 15:37, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the issue has come up again. The last time that happened, I was removing the "Expressway in Malaysia" category off this page. __earth (Talk) 08:45, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm...so is an article split the best solution? I am still wondering why Aiman rejects this proposal thou, and in capital letters even! ;)--Huaiwei 11:33, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not quite sure. I would but I don't know enough of the subject (rather, too busy to run a research on the subject) to form an informed opinion. The last time, somebody said (I'd assume Aiman is saying the same thing) that the link is part of the expressway. I think User:Mr Tan forwarded that point.
On CAPS, I donno but I'd assume good faith and assume it wasn't done to symbolize shouting but merely for emphasis instead. __earth (Talk) 12:05, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh the emphasize is very strong indeed, albeit without the accompanying justification we deserve to know.--Huaiwei 13:06, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that we should split the article. The Malaysian part of the bridge (the most of the bridge) is part of the Linkedua Expressway. The Singaporean side of the bridge is very short - once you enter Singapore (you'll know it when a "Welcome to Singapore" LED greets you and the road colour changes from light grey to black) the Tuas checkpoint is just in front of you (since it is built on reclaimed land). Joshua Chiew 12:52, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How can the actual length of the bridge within the borders of a country be an influence in the naming of the article? If this article continues to carry information both on the bridge and the expressway in Malaysia, then it continues to be accurate only in Malaysia, and not in Singapore. As far as Singaporean usage is concerned, it is a bridge, and nothing else, even if the bridge is only 1 metre within the Singaporean border. There is no reason why one country should be penalised in this regard just because it choooses to reclaim land to build its CIQ and thus reducing the amount of space left for the bridge itself across the narrow straits.--Huaiwei 13:06, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have to admit that you got your point. The bridge was built jointly by the two countries, not only by Malaysia. It would be better to split the article, but is there any info you can add about the bridge? Perhaps a few photos of the bridge and the CIQ complex of the two countries, etc. Joshua Chiew 01:16, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not have much photos myself as yet, but I do appreciate this agreement that some balance needs to be struck here, especially when dealing with potentially sensitive political topics. I am going to proceed in splitting the article, and I encourage all to contribute information to it. For example, there seems to be little information on the bridge itself as Joshua pointed out.--Huaiwei 04:23, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious claim

[edit]
On 12 July 2006, the Second Link became as a place to illegal racing. The Johor police and the Road Transport Department with the highway operator PLUS Expressway has launched the big operations to crackdown against illegal racing. More than 100,000 people were arrested in this operations.[1]

Although the above is referenced (conviently without a link) and well written it seems very dubious to me. What idiot would carry out illegal racing on the second link? It's not as if it's particularly long or you can get away from the police. It's a bridge for godsake and there are immigration and customs checkpoints at either end so you're likely to get shot at if you start doing stupid things. Secondly 100k people arrested? That's one of the dumbest claims I've ever heard. Nil Einne 13:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As it turns out, the above was partially true. It wasn't the actual bridge but on an accessroad or the expressway. However it obviously wasn't 100k people. Appears to have been 600 people [2]. Anyway it was mentioned in the Second Link Expressway article so I've changed the figure Nil Einne 13:28, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Swoop on illegal racers", Lau Meisan, 10 July 2006, New Straits Times

how to get there?

[edit]

I think this part should be removed as this is not wikitravel. 80.230.159.161 15:12, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Malaysia–Singapore Second Link. 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:

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) 06:07, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Malaysia–Singapore_Second_Link&oldid=1208732582"