Talk:Singapore River

Singapore B‑class Mid‑importance

	Singapore portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Singapore, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Singapore on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SingaporeWikipedia:WikiProject SingaporeTemplate:WikiProject SingaporeSingapore articles
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Rivers Mid‑importance

	Geography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rivers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rivers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RiversWikipedia:WikiProject RiversTemplate:WikiProject RiversRiver articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article needs a map.

Untitled section 1[edit]

Hi. Perhaps a native Singaporean historian would like to expand on the historical significance of the Singapore River. I did the best I could in 10 minutes with what I can remember... Alex.tan 02:27, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

River mouth[edit]

Too bad I am not a historian, but a geographer. :D But which is why I wonder why it was mentioned the outlet was pushed out...presumably to the Marina Channel? Not really true..coz the river mouth it still at the old Merlion site. The river flows out to Marina Bay, which is already considered the open sea and not part of the river.--Huaiwei 08:21, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Well, I stand corrected. I am not a Singaporean, after all - though I did spend some time there. If you say the Bay is considered sea''Italic text, well, I guess it is. Well, why don't you fix it as you're the Singaporean geographer? :-) Alex.tan 09:37, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hehe...well...I would probably do so when I can spare the time later. Got some pesky essays to complete now. Meanwhile, the commentary on the daming of the Marina Channel do seem to warrant its own article, dont you think? We might be able to move the information there.--Huaiwei 10:08, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Writing Style[edit]

I think the section on the river's history is written in a romantic style not encyclopedic style. For example, the part on Stamford Raffles' realisation of Singapore River's significanceWai Hong 15:31, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New picture[edit]

I've uploaded a new picture on commons: Image:Singapore_River_top_view.jpg. I'm not sure how to include it but I'm putting it out there for all now.

River Length[edit]

The article states that the river is 11km in length. However, I fail to see how that is possible. According to map, it is about 3km from the Esplanade bridge to Kim Seng Road. If you add in the above ground portions of Alexendra Canal, that's an additional 2km. I have gone it's distance on foot and via bicycle and it cannot be 11km. Unless someone can document how it is 11km, I will change the article. Bryan MacKinnon (talk) 06:55, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed the river length to 3km from 11km. Bryan MacKinnon (talk) 08:24, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What does this mean?[edit]

In the lede, it is written:

Despite its name, Singapore River is not a river because it lacks the three courses of a river

. What does it mean? What are the three courses of a river? --Cyclopia ^talk 17:47, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem removed[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: Singapore : a guide to buildings, streets, places Singapore : a guide to buildings, streets, places. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Darylgolden^(talk) Ping when replying 05:53, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]