Talk:Tan Cheng Bock

I think he is dead now

http://beautifultribute.com/dr-richard-teh-fu-tan/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:4E:6A40:1001:D63D:7EFF:FEBF:4956 (talk) 18:54, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Nope. Other than the fact that both are doctors and have the same surname, this is a totally different person. Zhanzhao (talk) 00:56, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

recent attempts at whitewashing

I am concerned that recent anonymous editor(s), with a pattern of instating "resume-style" content at Vivian Balakrishnan, has been removing legitimate content that is in fact, not like a resume, on the grounds of having it be "resume-style" content. The same user also misclassifies a content dispute as vandalism. Elle _{vécut heureuse} ^{à jamais} (be free) 20:20, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Summarize "Think Singapore First section"

The content in that section is currently overly detailed and basically just a cut and paste of the whole sourced communication. We should stick to a description in prose and summarize it rather than just quoting the whole chunk for simplicity sake as well as avoid copyvio. Anyone want to take a whack at it first? I will take a shot at it myself when I have time to sit down and do a proper writeup if no one has done it by then (the time when I am free to do so.)Zhanzhao (talk) 16:42, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Update: Upon rereading again, I just realized that a concise summary of all the quoted text was already covered in the prose preceeding it. I'll be removing the quoted text shortly, and adding reference to the quoted text. Zhanzhao (talk) 13:49, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Publicity Page?

Is it just me, or does the page look like a promotional page.....It practically reads like a CV and huge chunks of word for word quotes are being used especially where it makes the subject look good. Or am I just being cynical? Zhanzhao (talk) 14:55, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

No you are not the only one. Not a fan of the structure. Rewrite the whole page if you have to.202.156.13.11 (talk) 20:33, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

This was pretty embarrassing as the page for a serious presidential candidate. I've restructured the page while trying not to remove anything, which means that many dubious statements remain (hence the liberal use of markers. Please feel free to reorder, flesh out, or summarize as there's still a lot of guff and I'm not sure about the citations to his own blog. Borg2011 (talk) 16:21, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Dr-tan-cheng-bock-smiling.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Dr-tan-cheng-bock-smiling.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests August 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 01:29, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

No blank cheque

Can anyone advise what is the value of the statement under this section No blank cheque? This statement appears promotional to me and it has been repeated inserted by a non-registered user. Does anyone agree with me? Skw71 (talk) 15:01, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Section: Appointment to Chuan Hup

I find the two separate quotations found in this section totally unnecessary and I propose they are deleted with the source used possibly as reference within the text. To my mind, the text without the quotes is highly adequate to cover this matter without the need to the two lengthy quotations werldwayd (talk) 23:24, 28 August 2011 (UTC)