Talk:Downtown Line

Talk:Downtown Line
Featured articleDowntown Line is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Did You Know Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 24, 2020Peer reviewReviewed
March 12, 2026Good article nomineeListed
June 25, 2026Featured article candidatePromoted
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 23, 2026.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the construction of the Downtown Line required diverting the Singapore River?
Current status: Featured article

GA review

Latest comment: 5 months ago72 comments3 people in discussion
Passed. Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 08:17, 12 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Downtown Line/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 02:16, 6 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: Whyiseverythingalreadyused (talk · contribs) 11:48, 6 March 2026 (UTC)Reply


I intend to review this article as I saw it fresh out of the oven at the WikiProject Singapore page. Hello there, ZKang123 Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 11:48, 6 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

By the way, § Architecture appears to have at least one AI-generated paragraph, according to suggestion mode
Can someone fix it? I don't want this article quick-failed Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 13:34, 6 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Oh well, I fixed it myself Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 03:09, 7 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

I appreciate your effort to review. However, I felt this article would best also have a second pair of eyes, especially from a more experienced reviewer. I encourage you to actually try review other shorter articles in the meantime. Plus, I don't think the suggestion mode is a reliable AI-detector either.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 04:28, 7 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

So… are you trying to seek a second opinion or have me removed or something? Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 04:34, 7 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
That's not even my intention at all. I don't wish to remove you as reviewer. I just felt a second pair of eyes would be required for this article which is considerably longer and wider in scope.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 04:48, 7 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
:) Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 05:37, 7 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Whyiseverythingalreadyused, ZKang123 asked me for a second opinion because I've conducted extensive reviews of several of his GAs. Don't worry, you can stay on as the main reviewer. I'll leave some extra comments and will recommend to you whether this should be promoted or not.
I'll begin reviewing this on Tuesday or so. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:04, 8 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thanks :) Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 15:10, 8 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Below is a short review of what I see as the article's degree of compliance with the GA criteria.
  • WP:GANOT § 1: Does the article comply with criterion 1?
    1. a (clarity)?  Yes
    2. b (compliance with five specific MOS guidelines)? Will check later  Yes
  • WP:GANOT § 2: Is it verifiable?
    1. a (list of references presented per the layout style guideline)?  Yes
    2. b (reliable sources cited inline)?  Yes
    3. c (no original research)? Yes... Seloloving, your DTL history map mentions a plan absent in the article for Rochor station interchanging itself; I feel like it may be a stumbling block
      →  Not an issue anymore
    4. d (no plagiarism)?  Done for all sources available online (inclusive of the first two in § Other sources); last source is an offline book that will need to be verified separately
  • WP:GANOT § 3: Is it broad in its coverage?  Yes
  • WP:GANOT § 4: Is it neutral? Yes (by adherence to the prior criteria since it is not CTOP-related or otherwise controversial)
  • WP:GANOT § 5: Is it stable?  Yes
  • WP:GANOT § 6: Is it illustrated appropriately with transparent copyright statuses?  Yes

Pinging Epicgenius and ZKang123; Seloloving is pinged above for his opinions on a certain history map Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 02:01, 10 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Whyiseverythingalreadyused, thanks for the update. Before you pass or fail the article, could I kindly ask you to wait another day or so, until I can post some prose suggestions? – Epicgenius (talk) 04:43, 10 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Sure (I never said "aha pass" lol) Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 05:07, 10 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
(In actuality, I'd kind of like to wait until at least that or until Seloloving arrives, whichever is later) Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 14:06, 10 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Seloloving will not be answering; he told me off-wiki he has no wish to engage in such talk here. I've also updated the map source.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 14:12, 10 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Oh well, that's one condition out Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 14:14, 10 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Seloloving, if you're somehow seeing this rn, thanks for this (he shouldn't be receiving a ping for this; I used {{np}}) Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 01:43, 11 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Fair enough ;-) I'll leave feedback soon. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:36, 10 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

EG prose comments

My prose comments are here. Epicgenius (talk) 20:02, 10 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

Lead:

  • Para 1: via a loop around the city centre. - I would say "...making a loop around the city centre." Also, I would specify that this refers to the Central Area, Singapore.
  • Para 2: Despite the insolvency of Alpine Bau, the main contractor for three stations, Stage 2 commenced operations in 2015, followed by Stage 3 in 2017, which spans from Fort Canning to Expo. - I would split these into two sentences (after "commenced operations in 2015"). I would also mention which stations Stage 2 covers.
  • Para 3: At 41.9 kilometres (26.0 mi), the DTL is the longest underground - I would specify that it is the longest such fully-underground line.

Planning:

Construction:

Opening:

  • Para 1: presided by prime minister Lee Hsien Loong - Is the correct wording in Singapore (and British English in general) not "presided over by prime minister Lee Hsien Loong"? Same with para 3, "presided by transport minister Khaw Boon Wan".
  • Para 1: The DTL was hit by a 15-minute disruption on its opening day. - This seems so minor to me that it doesn't really bear mentioning, even considering that Singapore has fewer delays and disruptions than counterparts such as NYC.
  • Para 2: In July 2016, the LTA reported that daily weekday ridership on the DTL has tripled from 83,000 in October 2015 to 250,000. - This should be "had tripled from 83,000..."
  • Para 3: In August 2020, transport minister Ong Ye Kung disclosed that the DTL's construction costs amounted to S$21 billion. - Conversely, this should be "had amounted to S$21 billion".

Subsequent developments:

  • Para 1: While initially planned to be completed by 2024, transport minister Chee Hong Tat announced on 6 December 2024 that DTL3e would only commence operations in the second half of 2026. - Did this involve any tunnelling or other contracts? You mention this for the firt three stages, so I'm surprised it's not mentioned here.

Service:

  • Para 1: The DTL is a medium-capacity rail line. In June 2025, the DTL recorded 463,000 daily passenger trips. - Could these perhaps be combined?

Route:

Stations:

Rolling stock; Depot - I will review this tomorrow

Signalling - I will review this tomorrow, but para 3 has a typo: ...modules were developed to suppor UTO. - should be "support"

Rest of article - will review tomorrow

@Whyiseverythingalreadyused and @ZKang123, I'll review the rest tomorrow, but this is what I got so far. – Epicgenius (talk) 20:02, 10 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Epicgenius: if the frozen GA is anything to go by, the spelling for the former name of Promenade should be Millenia and not Milennia Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 02:39, 11 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Hey ZKang123 did you already implement suggestion 1 for planning? I don't find any mentions of the merge in the third paragraph Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 02:41, 11 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
"I would not ask this question if we were talking about NYC or a similar city, but such a delay seems to be more unusual for Singapore."
No idea; on the other hand, the government does have a reputation for opacity among foreign political scholars Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 03:43, 11 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Whyiseverythingalreadyused:Thanks for some of the edits, but I prefer to go over them myself first.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 04:36, 11 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Epicgenius @ZKang123 I just reviewed § Signalling and it appears to be way too expansive (compare the signalling subsection on the GA-reviewed version of the NSL article) Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 06:35, 11 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Whyiseverythingalreadyused and @ZKang123, for the Signalling section, I wouldn't say it's too expansive, just a bit more detailed than the NSL. Maybe there's more details available about the DTL since it's newer.
Aside from that, though, the fourth paragraph of the Signalling section seems to talk about train reliability, not signalling (From 2021 to 2024, the DTL was the most reliable MRT line by mean kilometres between failures (MKBF)). – Epicgenius (talk) 13:21, 11 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Yeah I managed to retrieve the journal article (and paid some money for it) to uncover more details, otherwise it would just be one paragraph. Also, the North East Line has quite some documentation of the signalling too. As for the reliability, I added that there because reliability is still linked to signalling. But I can shift it to network and services if you feel that's the more appropriate section.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 13:40, 11 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Rolling stock:
  • Para 1: The DTL's rolling stock consists of a fleet of 92 three-car trains - Do we really need "a fleet of", or is "The DTL's rolling stock consists of 92 three-car trains" sufficient?
  • Para 1: in Changchun, with design work done in a Bombardier engineering centre in Hennigsdorf - I would add the country for Changchun and Hennigsdorf.
  • Para 2: The trains are fully automatic - It's mentioned in the Signalling section that the trains are driverless. One of these may be redundant
  • Para 2: The train design is intended to improve commuters' comfort and convenience, which include an ergonomic curved seat design and perch seats in the gangway for wider standing space. - Grammatically, this would be incorrect since this would read as "the train design ... which include". Do you mean "...with features which include"
  • Para 2: reducing overall weight and electricity consumption of about 2,000 MWh per year - Since the 2,000 MWh figure refers only to the electricity consumption, I'd say "...reducing overall weight and cutting electricity consumption by about 2,000 MWh per year."
  • Para 4: There is a space between two of the refs, which I'd remove per WP:REFSPACE.
Depot:
Signalling:
Station facilities:
Architecture:
  • Para 1: Stevens station, which has a depth of 34.22 metres (112.3 ft), has a stacked platform arrangement due to limited space constraints by the nearby flyover and canal. - Since you mention this, do the sources say whether the remaining stations have side or island platforms?
  • Para 2: I find this paragraph in general a bit too detailed, since it talks about a single station and should really be in the Bencoolen station article. At most, I'd have two sentences about this station here. The third paragraph does mention specific stations, but only for one or two sentences each, not a whole paragraph.
    • Merged with previous paragraph
Artworks:
  • Para 1: Each artwork must not only be integrated into the station's architecture - The word "must" raises the question, who imposed this restriction? Or is it that the LTA seeks to integrate each artwork into the architecture?
That's all for me. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:40, 11 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Epicgenius and @ZKang123: was kinda late here; as to the part about MOS compliance, it complies with the first three and does not relate to the last two
I'm going to the nearest library (well, not exactly near my home) that has the Art-in-Transit book Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 02:28, 12 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
The prose fixes look good. I have no further issues with the prose. – Epicgenius (talk) 03:02, 12 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Epicgenius @ZKang123 (again): I reviewed the Art-in-Transit book and everything checks out Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 06:50, 12 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Now... source spotcheck lol Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 06:54, 12 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Sources spotchecked:
  1. 3 New Rail Lines in Next 15 Years (original webpage is live)
  2. Government Approves Building Of The Downtown Line (original webpage is dead)
  3. Singapore Plans Fifth Line (original webpage is dead)
  4. 33-station Downtown Line gets go-ahead, will be ready by 2018
  5. Updates on Downtown Line 1 Construction (original webpage is dead)
  6. Downtown Line 2 Tunnelling Works Begin at Beauty World Station (original webpage is dead)
  7. One more station for Downtown Line (original webpage is live)
  8. Key MRT project contractor goes bust (original webpage is dead)
  9. New Downtown Line 2 contractor appointed, entire stage to be ready in mid-2016 (original webpage is dead)
  10. Downtown Line opening marred by disruption at Bayfront Station (is original webpage)
  11. Hume MRT Station on Downtown Line to Open Ahead of Schedule on Feb 28 (original webpage is live)
  12. Two new MRT stations for North–South Line by mid-2030s; potential new rail line being studied as part of Land Transport Master Plan (original webpage is live)
  13. Downtown Line 3 Extension (original webpage is dead)
  14. Siemens-equipped driverless underground metro line in Singapore starts operations for Downtown Line 1 (original webpage is dead)
  15. Art in Transit (original webpage is live)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Whyiseverythingalreadyused (talk • contribs) 16:08, 12 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

Everything seems to be alright; I'll pass it now Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 08:16, 12 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

Latest comment: 5 months ago5 comments3 people in discussion
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. You can locate your hook here. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Zzz plant (talk) 01:48, 18 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

(
)
  • ... that the Downtown Line in Singapore was initially conceived as three separate projects before being merged in 2007?
Improved to Good Article status by ZKang123 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 21 past nominations.

ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 00:34, 13 March 2026 (UTC).Reply

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Obviously, for an article that just passed GA, the review is more about the hook than the article content, which has already been checked: and my own checks of the content turned up no problems. I'm not crazy about a map as a source for ALT2, but it'll do. ALT1 is supported but could be made more interesting: "...diverting the Singapore River two times?" I'm not really getting the sources for ALT0, though: they seem to just say it will be completed in three stages, rather than being three separate projects. This is not very unusual anyway; as I said above, I'd much rather run one of the other hooks, so the question is rather moot. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 18:15, 15 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

Then I will strike ATL0. Honestly, I proposed that as I was trying to reflect the complicated background behind the DTL and why it ended up in a rather weird alignment. I'm fine with the change for your rephrased ALT1a.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 01:08, 16 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.