Talk:Culture of Singapore

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Culture of Singapore is part of SGpedians' Resources
An attempt to better coordinate and organise articles related to Singapore.
To participate, simply edit this page or visit our noticeboard for more info.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
To-do list for Culture of Singapore: edit · history · watch · refresh

"Only Zouk and laksa, so there's work to be done". —The Straits Times (Singapore). April 30, 2005.

If any of these topics interests you or you have some knowledge about it, please help and contribute in Culture of Singapore.

Expand these topics:

Add Pictures!

  • for all these topics: food, arts, sports, anything! What did you do last weekend? Snap group photos of your Malay, Indian and Chinese classmates, etc.

Create footer template

Contents

[edit] Christians minority?

Are Christians really a small minority? I sort of object to that. They are as major as any other religion in Singapore...otherwise there wouldn't be so many churches, no? Just a feeling...because for example I notice a lot of my classmates happen to be Christians, and in no way are they just a small minority of my class.

In the big scheme of things, they are. As compared to the other major religions in Singapore (i.e. Buddhism and Islam), the percentage of Christian Singaporeans aren't as high. As for your class, well, that probably depends on what school you're studying in. -ryan-d 03:52, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
364,087 out of 2,494,630 resident Singaporeans aged 15 and over in the 2000 census does appear to be a "minority" [1]. Of coz the trend is changing, and Christianity is gaining ground at the expense of Taoism [2], but that is much more apparant in schools than in the general populace since the young take to such changes more readily then their elders.--Huaiwei 05:42, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] organization

Hmm, this really is like a jumble of information and the paragraphs do flow, but not optimally...I prefer it to resemble sub-articles of the Singapore article like Geography of Singapore or History of Singapore, where there is a clear logical delivery of the issue at hand...maybe someone could do this? -- Natalinasmpf 02:14, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Humour

What about humour? Is there a unique blend of jokes or satires that Singaporeans make, while others catch no ball?. -- Vsion 21:54, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cuisine of Singapore

Further expansions to the article for cuisine should be made to Cuisine of Singapore, although with some generalisations and slight expansion to the section in the Culture of Singapore article to give it a sense of being covered generally, then we can *finally* go into the specifics. -- Natalinasmpf 05:49, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Support. Of course! And it is long overdue, let's do it! -- Vsion 07:13, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Support. You guys dont know how pissed I was when someone wanted to refuse recognition of Singaporean cuisine, so how could I object? :D Anyway, try looking up books and stuff offline, because they tend to have much more substaintiated stuff to refer to. On my part, I shall get to an NLB library on wednesday for this project of ours (And also the Places in Singapore project concurrently).--Huaiwei 12:33, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Holidays/festivals in Singapore

yoz, this page may be a good reference for new festivals and such to add. We do have quite alot of other events which are worthy of note, such as the Great Singapore Sale. :D--Huaiwei 12:41, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)


Is anyone feeling the issue with the double mentioning of Islam in this paragraph:

Singapore is a multi-religious country, the roots of which can be traced to its strategic location; after its declaration as a port, a wide variety of nationalities and ethnicities from places as far as Arabia emigrated to Singapore. More than 40% of the Singaporeans adhere to Mahayana Buddhism, the main faith of the Chinese population of Singapore. Other Chinese are followers of Taoism, Confucianism, and Christianity, including Catholics. Christians constitute about 14% of the population of Singapore. Most Malays are Muslims, who constitute about 15% of the poulation, while most Indians are Hindus, constituting 7%. There is also a sizeable number of Muslims and Sikhs in the Indian population.

And I think theres an issue here with topicality and form:

Religious tolerance has been strongly encouraged since the British colonised Singapore; the Sri Mariamman Temple (a south Indian Hindu temple that was declared a national heritage site in the 1980s), as well as the Masjid Jamae Mosque that served Chulia Muslims from India's Coromandel Coast is situated along South Bridge Road, which is a major, and old road that runs through Chinatown. Among other religious landmarks is the Church of Gregory the Illuminator, that was built in 1836, making it one of the oldest religious buildings in Singapore. It has been preserved to the present day, and Orthodox services continue to be held in it. Although orthodox religions are tolerated, some radical groups are banned, including Jehovah's Witness, which opposes Singapore's policy of national service. Zephyrprince 07:23, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Annabel Chong, porn star

So uptight Singaporean editors who turn a faint shade of pink when somebody says "penis" out loud are removing Annabel Chong, star of the World's Biggest Gangbang, from the list of famous Singaporeans. So what makes, say, a manufactured product like Taufik an artist, while an independent and rather intelligent (check the interviews linked from her article) nonconformist isn't? Jpatokal 01:30, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

The list is for Artists, her field of work is not a recognized art form. --Vsion 02:14, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
So acting in non-porn movies is art, but acting in porn movies is not? Jpatokal 12:21, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
No it is not. Otherwise they would be eligible for an Emmy, a Grammy, an Oscar or a Tony Award. Same can be said for acting awards in other languages. --Vsion 07:06, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
You know, you're doing a pretty good job of proving the stereotype I wrote up there. But I'll play along, so why don't the AVN Awards (aka "Porn Oscars") count? Alternatively, you could point out the clause in the Emmy, Grammy or Oscar award conditions that makes porn actors ineligible as you claim. Jpatokal 09:16, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't have the time to look for the clause, and it's likely that it does not exist and doesn't really need to. My main reason, as stated above, is that this is a list of artists and her field of work is not a recognized art form. May I ask what exactly is your reason for listing her? It wasn't clear from your three comments above, which consists of mainly questions. --Vsion 12:36, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Annabel Chong is quite possibly the second most famous Singaporean after Lee Kuan Yew, so certainly she deserves a mention somewhere in here. Maybe you'd care to suggest where? Jpatokal 14:05, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

How about Porn artists from Singapore? May I point out that Michael Fay is more famous because of his "drawing", but he is also not in the list which is reserved for actual artists. --Vsion 02:13, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
So now you're saying she is an artist after all? But she can't be placed under the Artists list? My brain hurts. Jpatokal 08:09, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

And here we go again. I tried mentioning her under "Popular culture", what is your rationale for removing her this time? Would you be happy if I moved it up to "Movies", and since I already know the answer, why not? Jpatokal 05:48, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

It is not singaporean culture because it is not produced nor shown here. Furthermore, it is not mainsteam popular culture. This is very obvious. --Vsion 06:38, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
May I suggest you take a look at Mainstream to understand the term. First of all, you need to understand that porn is a non-mainstream industry. If you disagree on this, this will be a difficult discussion. But if you agree with me on that, then that's hope for reaching a compromise. --Vsion 06:56, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Is this article called "Mainstream culture of Singapore", or where are you pulling this red herring from? If anything, I think this is noteworthy particularly because Chong has herself stated that it's partly a reaction to the island's stifling conservatism:
... she grew up middle-class in one of the world's most puritanical developed places, Singapore. A good part of her X-rated activities can be seen as a passionate revolt against her starchy, super-policed native land. Quek has left Singapore strictures behind to screw and suck on the American screen. As she says in this movie, "To do pornography is to be against the collective agreement of what it means to be a Singaporean. . . . Fuck them, they can lick my ass." [3]
So there you have a Singaporean's opinion on Singaporean culture. It's not pretty, but why do you want to brush it under the carpet and pretend it's not there? Jpatokal 14:31, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Sorry Vsion, but I have to agree on Jpatokal on this one. Working in any film industry qualifies as cultural impact, even as an artist. The thing is you have to be notable, of course. Elle vécu heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 14:42, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
I have to also agree with Jpatokal, I apologise Vsion. Annabel has made herself notable enough to be on the list. I don't see why must we "discriminate" her just because she's a porn star. --Terence Ong Talk 15:44, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, let's continue discussion ... I'm not sure if Jpatokal understand what is mainstream, as he didn't answer my inquiry. You must understand that pornography is different from "restricted-rated movie", it is not distributed nor available to the mass, and in Singapore it is illegal and socially unacceptable (by any measure). Annabel is no more notable than Michael P. Fay who is also not on this list. If you consider porn as a form of arts of expression, it is wrong. Porn industry is about exploitation, the gainers are the movies producers, not the actresses, especially in this case. The comments on feminism and "super-policed native land" are simply marketing stunts. If you don't know, Quek fell out of favour with the producer/director of the documentary even before it was released. I'm not discriminating Quek, in fact I pity her and her family. It is good she has retired and move on, unfortunatey porncraft-behavor keep listing her here, showing a poor understanding of the industry and society norms. My position (to remove non-mainstream material from this article) is commonly applied to any country, not just Singapore. The material should instead be placed in articles such as "pornography in Singapore", "censorship in Singapore" etc., but not on this article. Please go and examine any "Culture of X" articles and see if you can find any porn-related content. You won't find any, except in Culture of Singapore. Is Singapore the only porn-exporter country in the world? --Vsion 18:46, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
As said, your "mainstream" thing here is a red herring. The attendance figures for theatre productions are Singapore are pathetic and the Esplanade is propped up by oodles of govn't subsidies, which means they're not "mainstream" either -- should we cut them out? And hey, come to think of it, why doesn't the article say anything about 4D queues or near-riots at McD's for Hello Kitty dolls, which are as "mainstream" in Singapore as it gets? Go on, find me a schoolboy in Singapore who has never surfed the net for porn, never passed around a copy of Playboy or never bought DVDs from shifty-eyed ah peks. Just because it's technically illegal or societally frownded on doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Also, your POV is showing through bright and clear here. We're not debating whether it was "wrong" or "exploitation" for Quek to get recorded on tape having sex with 251 people, we're debating whether she is notable enough to be included. Google gets 600,000 hits for annabel.chong, which is 10x more than eg. corrinne.may (52,800), 1000x more than michelle.alicia.saram (592) and 3000x more than siow.lee.chin (172!). And since you insist on bringing up Michael P. Fay, how many people have actually viewed his "works", versus how many people have seen Quek perform? Jpatokal 07:20, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm not challenging her notability so your above arguments are not very helpful. My position is that porn have nothing to do with "Culture", because (1) porn stars are not artists, (2) porn is not an arts form, and as an industry or as a content, it is rejected in mainstream societies around the world, (3) if you look at porn, you are not appreciating arts, instead you are engaging in self-indulgence. This is our main disagreement, because in your above comments, you are accepting porn as an arts, and Quek as an artist, but this is wrong. I don't know where you are from, but if you live in some Asian country, I can understand why you are confused because of your lack of familiarity with the porn-industry in Western countries. Maybe, that is also why you guys are curious about Quek, and "in awe" of her "achievement". As I mentioned before, I'm not discriminating Quek, but she is not an artist, rather she is just another victim (albeit a notable one) of an industry that exploited hundreds of young girls each year. There are thousands of porn movies made in the United States and Japan each year, but you don't find it mentioned in Culture of the United States and Culture of Japan, I find it really amusing that we are arguing about this here ... lol --Vsion 08:59, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

My $0.02: Culture? Maybe. Singapore? No. Her "culture" is not of Singapore, not in Singapore, and not on Singapore. Now IIRC all her "work" was done in the US. Therefore, it should be considered part of the US adult industry, and has nothing to do with Singapore. So I have to respectfully agree with Vsion that this does not warrant a mention in this article, but for different reasons. -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 00:08, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

It however, might belong to a section that compared the Culture of Singapore versus the overall of culture of Singaporeans in the world. Elle vécut heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 00:33, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, her profession is not really a distinguishing characteristic of "Singaporeans in the world". There's really nothing distinct about such "culture" that warrants a mention in the Wiki. Anyone can do what she did (well, probably), it doesn't take a Singaporean. -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 01:13, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
In other words, this "culture" must be as Singaporean as apple pie kaisuism PAP to be considered a Singaporean culture. An individual doesn't make it a national culture, nor is it representative of the many Singaporeans over the world. -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 01:14, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
In all sense, to actually state in most neutral POV, kaisuism is just another term for be overly-thrifty, which in many cases, found to have existed in several countries, such as Netherlands. It can be said to have localised, and in a way we find it affectionate to call it "kaisuism", while in other countries they call it in their localised manner. So as for the case of the porn-star (whom I personally is disgusted of), should be considered as an irony against the mostly "conservative" populace. Thus, she don't really qualify to be a symbol of our culture, but rather an object of contradictory. Just my €0.02. Slivester 03:12, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Don't nitpick leh. Now it's PAP, happy? :) -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 04:19, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
I am not being critical over the smallest details, I am supporting your view by putting it in a way where her acts are just as common, and publicised due to her contradictory image, dude. Slivester 06:57, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Her profession has the distinction of dissent. If there was a cultural sore thumb in say, any culture, it would be fair to write about them if they were pretty famous as part of the country's article on that culture, because of the entire nature of it. For all you know, female activism isn't really a distinguishing characteristic of Iran, yet we mention it. Go figure. Elle vécut heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 09:46, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
From the above comments, serious concerns were raised that the "Annabel Chong" story is not relevant to "Culture of Singapore". Jpatokal, who is the main advocate for the insertion, maintain that Quek is very notable; I agree that there are many google search returns on "Annabel Chong" (nobody can beat the porn stars on this), but it alone does not address those concern raised. It seems that Jpatokal's reason for insertion is simply that he wanted to put it somewhere, according to his own words: "Annabel Chong is quite possibly the second most famous Singaporean after Lee Kuan Yew, so certainly she deserves a mention somewhere in here. Maybe you'd care to suggest where?"
I therefore suggest that the Quek's story be moved to an article such as "List of Singaporean porn stars". This is consistent with practice for other countries, such as List of Japanese female porn stars. This, I feel, is the best solution. --Vsion 10:47, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Porn is illegal in Singapore. I don't think there's anyone else (openly) besides Annabel Chong. -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 07:46, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vibrant arts scene or police state?

Is this an encyclopedia article or a panegyric by the We Love Singapore Authority? I've also added in a few paragraphs about Singapore's draconian arts legislation — it's hardly possible to understand why, despite the government's efforts, the local arts scene is as dead as it is without them. Jpatokal 14:05, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

There is the Censorship in Singapore article, addressing these issues. --Vsion 02:17, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
Some work should be done to remove duplication between the two, but I don't think we can pretend the two can be entirely separated. Jpatokal 08:09, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
While I agree articles here should not read like they are writtern by PAP party members, it is also a POV to assert that censorship = non-vibrant arts scene. Of coz, saying the arts legislation is draconian is in itself a POV. There may be various ways of presentation, but I feel an article like this may be best factually describing the actual "arts legislation" in question, and let the reader decide if they are draconian or not.--Huaiwei 23:57, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cultural policy section?

So how about moving the 'controversial' stuff (both our dear Ms. Quek and government interference) into a "Cultural policy" section, modeled on the one in Culture of Denmark? This would seem to provide a nifty way of listing down all the ways in which the government limits cultural expression, and also how some prominent Singaporeans -- not just Quek, but also eg. Josef Ng of pubic hair snipping fame -- have fought back. Jpatokal 06:55, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Please go ahead and add the section. Still I don't understand why snipping pubic hair is a form of cultural expression. Is it because Singapore has too few of these crazy things, such that when it happens, that ah-seow would gain instant "fame"? --Vsion 09:19, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
The section should be similar to the Denmark's article to contains materials such as government's promotion of arts, cultural events, etc. The goverment's vetting of script and screenplay, etc, are relevant to culture and therefore should be included. But Josef Ng's case looks like an obscene act to me. --Vsion 11:11, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

So I spent some time shuffling things around. The bulk of the Cultural policy stuff has been merged into Censorship in Singapore, and our dear little Ms. Quek now proclaims that what she does is very much against Singaporean culture. Everybody happy now?

And is there anything in Wikipedia about OB markers? It's certainly a topic that deserves an article if you ask me. Jpatokal 08:23, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is this a joke?

User:Jpatokal made this edit [4], which he wrote "... Annabel Chong, a Singaporean who became a porn star in the United States partly in protest against the strict regulations in her home country, stated that "to do pornography is to be against the collective agreement of what it means to be a Singaporean."

Is Jpatokal just joking or does he really believe what he wrote? --Vsion 08:18, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
It's not a matter of me believing anything, you read the interview and see what it says: A good part of her X-rated activities can be seen as a passionate revolt against her starchy, super-policed native land. The wording was pretty bad though (because it wasn't actually her saying that), I've tweaked it to make it more accurate. Jpatokal 08:30, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
You are only selecting the part that links Quek to Singapore, but really, the whole review (it's not an interview) casted serious doubts about the movie. For example, the reviewer also wrote "... My guess is that many people are going to walk away from this movie shaking their heads in condemnation of Grace Quek's contradictions and self-deceptions ..."," ....Granted, her final act probably is a dumb "feminist" decision, but . . . " and " .... She's only resolved to make porn movies. So what? ... " This shows that the reviewer himself doubted what she said in the movie. The reviewer also mentioned that the director was manipulative in the way he protray Quek's life. It is not just this review, if you read other reviews, they very much have the same conclusion. This is a very poorly-made movie. I'm not sure if you know much about the director: but he had a drinking problem, had a relationship with Quek while making the movie, then broke up with her right after .... I hope that for your own sake, don't take the movie too seriously and believe what it says. --Vsion 09:13, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Now I see why Vsion does not want Annabel Chong to be on the list. Her movies are poorly made, looks very dumb. More like a joke. Porn stars are not fit here, they are usually banned in Singapore. Porn movies are banned here. The movie does not look good at all. This is bias, and only say the good parts, its a film review not an interview. --Terence Ong 10:21, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

While I personally feel it is alright to talk about Annabel Chong irregardless of her reputation and on Singapore's handling of pornography, I do find it comical reading that section on her work here. If there is a desire to show how artists attempt to test the boundaries, there are plenty of mainstream works which constantly do the same thing and encrouch into taboo topics. Some of Singapore's earliest movies already touch on senstive topics, then led by directors like Eric Khoo, and Jack Neo produces movies which attempt to touch the masses, yet takes obvious swipes at the authorities through playful use of dialogue. Royston Tan wins international acclaim yet produced movies which regularly challenge OB Markers, including even a movie called Cut in reference to censorship of the arts, which itself was nearly banned. [5] [6]. So why this strange fantasicsm over a porn artist alone?--Huaiwei 12:09, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, because it would be POV to judge a certain type of art beneath another because of moral content. For example, if we had a proliferation of death metal bands, simply because we as editors (myself included) think that it requires no effort to create whatever, it would be POV not remove its mention (suppose someone included it) while it was a notable cultural movement (it's not in Singapore, but I was just making an analogy). Elle vécut heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 22:43, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
For the last time: (Wiktionary:)
culture (plural: cultures)
  1. The arts, customs, and habits that characterize a particular society or nation
  2. The beliefs, values, behavior and material objects that constitute a people’s way of life.
Now unless every woman in Singapore is probably a porn star (in which case I missed out A LOT), Annabel Chong is not part of the Singaporean culture! -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 03:04, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
The pron star sure knows how to put a spin on her work. BlueShirts 03:06, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Interesting data point of the day: y'all familiar with The Arts House in Singapore, the Garmin's latest taxpayer-supported arts extravaganza in the Old Parliament building? They've got "I Love Annabel Chong" T-shirts on sale! If nothing else I take this as rather incontrovertible evidence that she's definitely found her way into Singaporean popular culture... Jpatokal 14:29, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Wow, interesting fact. It does not mean that there is pop culture in Sigapore of her, means that she is notable. Pop culture is everywhere. I still don't feel that she is part of the Singapore culture scene since she has been overseas for many years. --Terence Ong 12:07, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Culture section

There is a Culture section in this article titled Culture of Singapore whose first line is Main article: Culture of Singapore. Surely this section can be merged into the introduction?

[edit] Creative writing section

Way too long, longer than the parent article, even. Someone clean that up? -ryand 17:06, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Seems an important part of Singapore Literature/Culture. Shouldn't this section be transfered to Singapore Literature?83.199.105.22 13:36, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] English phrases

I quote from the article:

  • "Favorite local food include:". The phrase is enlightening to me because it is understandable; yet, I would have phrased it
  • 'Some favorite local foods include:'

The double-quoted phrase above teaches me that some subtleties which can be conveyed in a little phrase can be represented in a different way. I hope that those subtleties are not lost in the actual language of the contributor.

Presuming that the contributor of the quote speaks English, and not just writes it, the quote shows that the existential quantifier some is not quite used the same way in all parts of the world. The declension of food is also revealing: my training in English would have morphed the root "food" to "foods". I am not a native speaker of English; I remember going outside to play, watching the mouths of my playmates move, and not understanding their words. Yet, after two weeks or so, I was able to speak with them during play. I grant you that I was probably 3 years old then, and probably in the prime age for learning another language. But there are some parts of English which are not upheld in my own country, which is a reason that I watch double negative and subjunctive mood. Both these concepts are critical for scientific method, which is the reason I edit the encyclopedia.

This said, I am proceeding to alter the article. --Ancheta Wis 12:08, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Forbidden City - Portrait of an Empress.jpg

Image:Forbidden City - Portrait of an Empress.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:41, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Inotstupid.JPG

Image:Inotstupid.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Stephanie sun kite.jpg

Image:Stephanie sun kite.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:36, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Coxford Singlish Dictionary.jpg

Image:Coxford Singlish Dictionary.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC)