Dictatorial Rule, Doesn't Work...
-
Monday, December 24, 2007
The unintended negative consequences for Singaporeans under dictatorial ruleLadies and Gentlemen,
It is always best in any society to allow the people a say in the governing of their country. This way, ideas clash, new ideas are thrown up, and society advances, because everyone is thinking, and everyone contributes. Each citizen feels important. That his views matter. He is interested in his country. He wants the best for it. This way the country advances. Everyone benefits.
Sadly, not so in Singapore. Since in Singapore, we have a superman. At least that is what he thinks. I am of course referring to Lee Kuan Yew. As far as he is concerned, only he has a brain. And with it he will govern. He will employ or co-opt other successful people into his government with inducement of high salaries. These men, who are after money, join him, and primarily they will carry out his ideas and policies. Everyone else in the country is required just to comply with his orders. After all they are "digits" as he has referred to them. It is not necessary for them to think. All they have to do is to obey.
But you see, this sort of top down government will always face unintended obstacles. Reason being, they do not have the benefit of the thinking of everyone in the country.
These are some of the multitude of difficulties faced in this dictatorial form of government.
First, many years ago, Lee felt that there were too many people. Singaporeans, he said should have only 2 children. They complied. The government succeeded beyond their expectations. Result, too few children. Now, the government wants more people. The population is shrinking. So they are asking people to procreate more. But they are not taking the bait, despite all sorts of inducements. The government set up a matchmaking department. It resulted in a total failure. With all the stresses that Singaporeans face, having babies is not a luxury they can afford! So, they import immigrants from India and China.
The Malays on the other hand have had no problem having babies. They have at the least maintained the replacement level of reproduction. Since Lee Kuan Yew wants Singapore to remain a Chinese country, he is left with no choice but to bring in increased numbers of Chinese from China to keep up with the Malay numbers. Sadly for Lee, it appears that even the Chinese immigrants have no desire to remain permanently in Singapore, or to have children.
So it appears that Lee's plan of Singapore being Chinese permanently will not work. It is going to revert to being a Malay country as it originally was. I say to the Malays, congratulations and go for it. Have as many babies as possible, and show this old Lee that he is not superman after all.
Then the double whammy hurting Lee Kuan Yew. Singaporeans are emigrating. This is despite the daily propaganda being put out by the state controlled press, that Singapore is in fact the best spot in the world. All the coaxing and persuasion does not appear to work. The educated are leaving.
Singapore has about 3,000 lawyers. This small number has remained constant and is even declining. For a commercial city of 4 million, you need 4 times this number. But no use, the lawyers are leaving the profession and new ones are not joining. Why, because Singaporeans realize that there is no rule of law, that Lee abuses the law for his private ends, the law has become into disrepute and no one wants to be a part of it.
To encourage more to stay in the profession, Khattar Wong and Partners, a government connected law firm has offered both money and incentives for new applicants into the profession. Alas, again, no one is interested. It is true, after all, that once a legal system loses it's respect and credibility, as in Singapore's case, it is difficult to recover.
The Chief Justice and Mr. Jayakumar, the Minister for law both hoped that Singapore would become an international legal hub for the settlement of disputes, something like London. Unfortunately, Singapore is not London. London has the rule of law. England knows it. The world knows it. At the same time, the world also knows that the Singapore judiciary is routinely used by Lee Kuan Yew to sue and bankrupt political opponents. No; foreigners are not coming to Singapore to use their legal services.
And the pathetic state of the law, or the lack of it, in Singapore, was clearly made known to the world when the International Bar Association held it's annual meeting is Singapore. If ever there was any one left thinking that Singapore had the rule of law, that person has found out the truth, thanks to Dr. Chee Soon Juan. He succinctly made it very clear that the rule of law does not exist in Singapore; that the law courts are there for the pleasure of the Lee Administration. And those international lawyers have taken back to their countries, this knowledge that Singapore lacks the rule of law.
Lee told the world that Singapore is going to be a biotech hub, among the various other hubs that it was or was aspiring to be. A transport hub. An education hub. An arts hub. Etc Etc.
Alas none of it is happening.
Biotech has failed in Singapore. Not one but several international world renowned scientists who were lured to Singapore with grandiose promises have all left, the last being the creator of Dolly the cloned sheep. I suppose, they felt it uncomfortable to be doing scientific research in a country that denies its citizens their human rights.
As for the education hub, Warwick University, a British university decided it wanted nothing to do with Singapore. Reason, no fundamental human rights or freedoms. You cannot be educated, they said, unless you have freedom.
The transport hub was also another failure. Kuala Lumpur is much cheaper and better. Moreover the whole idea of transport hubs is dead. No reason to fly from Taipei to Singapore and then on to Chennai. Now you can fly direct to Chennai. The Boeing 777 has seen to it.
Arts hub? You must be joking. How does one have art, without freedom? Are you going to perform and keep looking over your shoulder to see if Lee Kuan Yew is upset! Arts hub died even before it was born.
Lee Kuan Yew recently attended some college in Singapore to meet the students. As expected there he gave his, I am sure he was thinking, his earth shattering speech. The students of course quietly listened. At the end, he asked them if there were any questions. None. They as Singaporean students are terrified of him. How could they ever have such courage even to ask a question! What happens if Lee did not like the question? The end of his career! So danger lurks. Best not to ask any question. Safety lies in not being heard, and if possible not being seen! Mind you, this is Singapore.
I understand the electronic industry in Singapore has died a natural death. Costs too high. They are manufacturing now in China.
I also understand that Singapore has got its 10th millionth visitor. So perhaps this is where Singapore’s future lies. A great big amusement park and shopping center. So perhaps Lee Kuan Yew should now open more colleges to train people in the hospitality industry.
At the same time, I understand Singapore is investing it's money, or rather the people's money in various investments abroad through Tumasek and the GIC. In order to do so, they need a constant infusion of money. Problem is, the money is running out. CPF is now refusing to pay as promised. The government is constantly increasing the prices of its HDB 100 year leasehold premises to exorbitant levels; I suppose to squeeze more money from their citizens.
But in the end, this will not work either. There will come a time when the people will just not be able to afford servicing their exorbitant rents they pay for the leasehold premises.
So you see, it is one problem after another. Just because this government thinks they know best, and your opinions do not matter one bit.
Gopalan Nair
-
Originally posted by HyperFocal:
Monday, December 24, 2007
The unintended negative consequences for Singaporeans under dictatorial ruleLadies and Gentlemen,
It is always best in any society to allow the people a say in the governing of their country. This way, ideas clash, new ideas are thrown up, and society advances, because everyone is thinking, and everyone contributes. Each citizen feels important. That his views matter. He is interested in his country. He wants the best for it. This way the country advances. Everyone benefits.
Sadly, not so in Singapore. Since in Singapore, we have a superman. At least that is what he thinks. I am of course referring to Lee Kuan Yew. As far as he is concerned, only he has a brain. And with it he will govern. He will employ or co-opt other successful people into his government with inducement of high salaries. These men, who are after money, join him, and primarily they will carry out his ideas and policies. Everyone else in the country is required just to comply with his orders. After all they are "digits" as he has referred to them. It is not necessary for them to think. All they have to do is to obey.
But you see, this sort of top down government will always face unintended obstacles. Reason being, they do not have the benefit of the thinking of everyone in the country.
These are some of the multitude of difficulties faced in this dictatorial form of government.
First, many years ago, Lee felt that there were too many people. Singaporeans, he said should have only 2 children. They complied. The government succeeded beyond their expectations. Result, too few children. Now, the government wants more people. The population is shrinking. So they are asking people to procreate more. But they are not taking the bait, despite all sorts of inducements. The government set up a matchmaking department. It resulted in a total failure. With all the stresses that Singaporeans face, having babies is not a luxury they can afford! So, they import immigrants from India and China.
The Malays on the other hand have had no problem having babies. They have at the least maintained the replacement level of reproduction. Since Lee Kuan Yew wants Singapore to remain a Chinese country, he is left with no choice but to bring in increased numbers of Chinese from China to keep up with the Malay numbers. Sadly for Lee, it appears that even the Chinese immigrants have no desire to remain permanently in Singapore, or to have children.
So it appears that Lee's plan of Singapore being Chinese permanently will not work. It is going to revert to being a Malay country as it originally was. I say to the Malays, congratulations and go for it. Have as many babies as possible, and show this old Lee that he is not superman after all.
Then the double whammy hurting Lee Kuan Yew. Singaporeans are emigrating. This is despite the daily propaganda being put out by the state controlled press, that Singapore is in fact the best spot in the world. All the coaxing and persuasion does not appear to work. The educated are leaving.
Singapore has about 3,000 lawyers. This small number has remained constant and is even declining. For a commercial city of 4 million, you need 4 times this number. But no use, the lawyers are leaving the profession and new ones are not joining. Why, because Singaporeans realize that there is no rule of law, that Lee abuses the law for his private ends, the law has become into disrepute and no one wants to be a part of it.
To encourage more to stay in the profession, Khattar Wong and Partners, a government connected law firm has offered both money and incentives for new applicants into the profession. Alas, again, no one is interested. It is true, after all, that once a legal system loses it's respect and credibility, as in Singapore's case, it is difficult to recover.
The Chief Justice and Mr. Jayakumar, the Minister for law both hoped that Singapore would become an international legal hub for the settlement of disputes, something like London. Unfortunately, Singapore is not London. London has the rule of law. England knows it. The world knows it. At the same time, the world also knows that the Singapore judiciary is routinely used by Lee Kuan Yew to sue and bankrupt political opponents. No; foreigners are not coming to Singapore to use their legal services.
And the pathetic state of the law, or the lack of it, in Singapore, was clearly made known to the world when the International Bar Association held it's annual meeting is Singapore. If ever there was any one left thinking that Singapore had the rule of law, that person has found out the truth, thanks to Dr. Chee Soon Juan. He succinctly made it very clear that the rule of law does not exist in Singapore; that the law courts are there for the pleasure of the Lee Administration. And those international lawyers have taken back to their countries, this knowledge that Singapore lacks the rule of law.
Lee told the world that Singapore is going to be a biotech hub, among the various other hubs that it was or was aspiring to be. A transport hub. An education hub. An arts hub. Etc Etc.
Alas none of it is happening.
Biotech has failed in Singapore. Not one but several international world renowned scientists who were lured to Singapore with grandiose promises have all left, the last being the creator of Dolly the cloned sheep. I suppose, they felt it uncomfortable to be doing scientific research in a country that denies its citizens their human rights.
As for the education hub, Warwick University, a British university decided it wanted nothing to do with Singapore. Reason, no fundamental human rights or freedoms. You cannot be educated, they said, unless you have freedom.
The transport hub was also another failure. Kuala Lumpur is much cheaper and better. Moreover the whole idea of transport hubs is dead. No reason to fly from Taipei to Singapore and then on to Chennai. Now you can fly direct to Chennai. The Boeing 777 has seen to it.
Arts hub? You must be joking. How does one have art, without freedom? Are you going to perform and keep looking over your shoulder to see if Lee Kuan Yew is upset! Arts hub died even before it was born.
Lee Kuan Yew recently attended some college in Singapore to meet the students. As expected there he gave his, I am sure he was thinking, his earth shattering speech. The students of course quietly listened. At the end, he asked them if there were any questions. None. They as Singaporean students are terrified of him. How could they ever have such courage even to ask a question! What happens if Lee did not like the question? The end of his career! So danger lurks. Best not to ask any question. Safety lies in not being heard, and if possible not being seen! Mind you, this is Singapore.
I understand the electronic industry in Singapore has died a natural death. Costs too high. They are manufacturing now in China.
I also understand that Singapore has got its 10th millionth visitor. So perhaps this is where Singapore’s future lies. A great big amusement park and shopping center. So perhaps Lee Kuan Yew should now open more colleges to train people in the hospitality industry.
At the same time, I understand Singapore is investing it's money, or rather the people's money in various investments abroad through Tumasek and the GIC. In order to do so, they need a constant infusion of money. Problem is, the money is running out. CPF is now refusing to pay as promised. The government is constantly increasing the prices of its HDB 100 year leasehold premises to exorbitant levels; I suppose to squeeze more money from their citizens.
But in the end, this will not work either. There will come a time when the people will just not be able to afford servicing their exorbitant rents they pay for the leasehold premises.
So you see, it is one problem after another. Just because this government thinks they know best, and your opinions do not matter one bit.
Gopalan Nair
Lol i think the authot is kinda biased towards SG ...... but there are some nuggets of truth in there
-
sg is the only city i know that wanna be hub for so many many.
hubba hubba ?
hub hub and away?
how many of these ambitions will be achieved?
its easy to wanna.
lets see if they canna.
-
Don't think the government's policies will work? They have brought us from the third world to the first in 40 years. Let these critics win the confidence of Singaporeans....if they cannot do any better running just a constituency, why should Singaporeans believe they can do any better with running a country?
-
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Don't think the government's policies will work? They have brought us from the third world to the first in 40 years. Let these critics win the confidence of Singaporeans....if they cannot do any better running just a constituency, why should Singaporeans believe they can do any better with running a country?
Because the members of the government are always more capable than their critics?
Idiot. -
Harvey's Singapore at risk from "horrendous" rent rises
Chris Nicholls
Current.com
06 Feb 08
http://www.current.com.au/2008/02/06/article/FZQCANDCBG.htmlGerry Harvey has warned high rents are putting its Singapore operation at risk, along with the operations of its two major competitors.
Speaking in an exclusive interview with Current.com.au, the Harvey Norman co-founder and executive chairman rent rises of up to 50 per cent in one year, coupled with leases restricted to three years, meant all major electrical retailers there were under pressure.
"The rents are just horrendous, and trying to figure out how you can do business is a really difficult thing, because you think 'Well, how do you do this?'"
He said all three major players in the Singapore electrical retail market – Courts, Harvey Norman and Best Denki – had the same issues.
"We all have the same problem, and probably sooner or later one of the three of us will disappear, and there'll be two of us. Then there's a good chance there'll be one of us."
There may be a chance such attrition could have a positive effect, though, he said.
"Maybe with two we can say to the landlords 'Well, you've really got to have us in your shopping centres' … but at the moment with three, they play the three of us off against each other. If they've only got two, maybe that might help. It's which one of us will crack first."
Harvey said while they had no intention of being the first to crack, if landlords put rents up another 50 per cent, it would kill all three chains.
"I don't think they can do that, but if someone else is prepared to take the space, maybe they can and they just say 'We don't want electrical/computer shops in our shopping centres', and where do we go? There's nowhere to go."
He said even if Singapore had plenty of technology shoppers, if they themselves could not pay the rent, there was an issue.
The shopping centre issue in Singapore highlighted the positives in his Australian property ownership model, Harvey said.
"One of the great things we've done in Australia is we've bought so much property over the years … it protects your position long-term."
He cited a problem he had with a Robina shopping centre when Harvey Norman owned Rebel Sports as an example, where a rent rise after three years pushed them out, despite what he said were a raft of incentives to move in at the start.
-
Originally posted by HyperFocal:
Harvey's Singapore at risk from "horrendous" rent rises
Chris Nicholls
Current.com
06 Feb 08
http://www.current.com.au/2008/02/06/article/FZQCANDCBG.htmlGerry Harvey has warned high rents are putting its Singapore operation at risk, along with the operations of its two major competitors.
Speaking in an exclusive interview with Current.com.au, the Harvey Norman co-founder and executive chairman rent rises of up to 50 per cent in one year, coupled with leases restricted to three years, meant all major electrical retailers there were under pressure.
"The rents are just horrendous, and trying to figure out how you can do business is a really difficult thing, because you think 'Well, how do you do this?'"
He said all three major players in the Singapore electrical retail market – Courts, Harvey Norman and Best Denki – had the same issues.
"We all have the same problem, and probably sooner or later one of the three of us will disappear, and there'll be two of us. Then there's a good chance there'll be one of us."
There may be a chance such attrition could have a positive effect, though, he said.
"Maybe with two we can say to the landlords 'Well, you've really got to have us in your shopping centres' … but at the moment with three, they play the three of us off against each other. If they've only got two, maybe that might help. It's which one of us will crack first."
Harvey said while they had no intention of being the first to crack, if landlords put rents up another 50 per cent, it would kill all three chains.
"I don't think they can do that, but if someone else is prepared to take the space, maybe they can and they just say 'We don't want electrical/computer shops in our shopping centres', and where do we go? There's nowhere to go."
He said even if Singapore had plenty of technology shoppers, if they themselves could not pay the rent, there was an issue.
The shopping centre issue in Singapore highlighted the positives in his Australian property ownership model, Harvey said.
"One of the great things we've done in Australia is we've bought so much property over the years … it protects your position long-term."
He cited a problem he had with a Robina shopping centre when Harvey Norman owned Rebel Sports as an example, where a rent rise after three years pushed them out, despite what he said were a raft of incentives to move in at the start.
You do realise that rising rents have more to do with the behaviour of the population than the government.
What you're proposing is for the government to step in and meddle. Isn't that also what you're also complaining the government is doing?
-
Originally posted by deathbait:
You do realise that rising rents have more to do with the behaviour of the population than the government.
What you're proposing is for the government to step in and meddle. Isn't that also what you're also complaining the government is doing?
Then again , Singapore is known as the nanny state with the government as a nanny . The government issues announcements that almost seemingly interfere with lives of individuals , like the " buy cheaper brand" fiasco as thought its own citizens can't think for themselves.
Of course, people expect the government to step in, even in the most trivial thing. If the government wants to be a nanny, it better behave like one.
-
Singapore as nanny state? In the last recession, when people needed help especially those with negative equity on their properties, the "nanny" said Singaporeans only have themselves to blame. the moral of this story is Singapore is not a nanny state. People better look after their own ass.es .
-
Originally posted by Daddy!!:
Singapore as nanny state? In the last recession, when people needed help especially those with negative equity on their properties, the "nanny" said Singaporeans only have themselves to blame. the moral of this story is Singapore is not a nanny state. People better look after their own ass.es .
... this being the case; the "government" should look after their own asses too - don't expect the people to vote for them in all future elections...... they don't owe us a living, we don't owe them one either...
-
Originally posted by Daddy!!:
Singapore as nanny state? In the last recession, when people needed help especially those with negative equity on their properties, the "nanny" said Singaporeans only have themselves to blame. the moral of this story is Singapore is not a nanny state. People better look after their own ass.es .
Not really. The nanny is just playing shift the blame tai chi.
-
Originally posted by HyperFocal:
... this being the case; the "government" should look after their own asses too - don't expect the people to vote for them in all future elections...... they don't owe us a living, we don't owe them one either...
To your first paragraph, what do you think million dollar salaries are for?
-
Originally posted by fymk:
To your first paragraph, what do you think million dollar salaries are for?
... how much more, do you think they dare raise their salaries before something gives?... silence does not necessarily means consent, however, fear also has its limitation...
-
Originally posted by HyperFocal:
... how much more, do you think they dare raise their salaries before something gives?... silence does not necessarily means consent, however, fear also has its limitation...
Yes but what's the use if you are the one of the few voices speaking up ?
Election time comes and greed will take priority over national issues - that is the current political climate you have. How many have voted just because they want their 20 year old 99 year lease apartments upgraded for "greater value" or how many have voted because they think that Singapore will be destablised economically without the current regime?
Like what one former FT of Singapore said to me on his view of Singaporeans : Singaporeans don't work together , they work against each other.
-
Originally posted by fymk:
Yes but what's the use if you are the one of the few voices speaking up ?
Election time comes and greed will take priority over national issues - that is the current political climate you have. How many have voted just because they want their 20 year old 99 year lease apartments upgraded for "greater value" or how many have voted because they think that Singapore will be destablised without the current regime?
... every tactic, scheme, or Game Plan, has its saturation point...... they are running out of repertoire, & the people are indeed wising up...
... over time, they will be hard put to convince people no matter what they do...
... locals are flying way, foreigners can see through their schemes & largely don't plan to stay...
... who's left in the end to row their Economic Dragon Boat at their mad pace?
-
(in my opinion) in the next elections, LHL would win because
(a) LKY timed his son to govern Singapore at the same time LKY's time is up. Another evidence to prove that LKY really cares for Singapore. If he does not care about Singapore, his sons and grandchildren would not be in Singapore already liao.
(b) Singapore will vote LHL's party because the people would forgive any major mistakes he made. We are not going to go the Romans' way of crucifying Jesus Christ.
(c) At the time of LKY's last few years, LKY allowed GIC to go public with Singapore's reserves. This is another major evidence that he has Singapore's interests at heart. This is because we all know Singapore's reserves is huge and in fact is a "national security issue". By opening the books at GIC, it is more difficult for future leaders to defraud it.
(d) I personally like LHL even when i find some policies quite tough to swallow.
(e) 4th / 5th /etc Singapore generations will stand.
just a few of my takes
-
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Don't think the government's policies will work? They have brought us from the third world to the first in 40 years. Let these critics win the confidence of Singaporeans....if they cannot do any better running just a constituency, why should Singaporeans believe they can do any better with running a country?
hey maysbe yous are rights.i oso confused.
i admire the way they handered the thai invest episode.
i think we should have confidonce in them lors.
some other invest of the men oso quite well handered.
-
People experience the world differently. That gives rise to different mindsets that process their subsequent experience differently.
Being exposed to different points of view expands your mind as long as you look at it as another valid way of looking at the world. It may deepen your understanding of the world or it may be so fundamentally different that you cannot understand it. Doesn't mean that someone else may not still find it helpful.
I think what concerns many people is that some may be misled by incorrect viewpoints. However the better solution to that may be to make viewpoints so accessible that people are always being exposed and their viewpoints are always being improved rather then restricting information so they arrive at the "best" viewpoint.
-
-
Originally posted by Daddy!!:
(in my opinion) in the next elections, LHL would win because
(a) LKY timed his son to govern Singapore at the same time LKY's time is up. Another evidence to prove that LKY really cares for Singapore. If he does not care about Singapore, his sons and grandchildren would not be in Singapore already liao.
(b) Singapore will vote LHL's party because the people would forgive any major mistakes he made. We are not going to go the Romans' way of crucifying Jesus Christ.
(c) At the time of LKY's last few years, LKY allowed GIC to go public with Singapore's reserves. This is another major evidence that he has Singapore's interests at heart. This is because we all know Singapore's reserves is huge and in fact is a "national security issue". By opening the books at GIC, it is more difficult for future leaders to defraud it.
(d) I personally like LHL even when i find some policies quite tough to swallow.
(e) 4th / 5th /etc Singapore generations will stand.
just a few of my takes
(a) Same with Kim Jong-iL, Tommy Suharto, Ferdinand "Bong-Bong" Romualdez Marcos, Jr., Maria Imelda Josefa Romualdez Marcos and Siti Hardiyanti Rukmana. They stayed in their home country despite the overthrow of their parents from power. In your own words, I think Suharto and Marcos really cared for their country too, else their children and grandchildren will not have stayed behind.
I wonder if there is, or will be a third most corrupt head of government in the future, or maybe the first position will be overtaken.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Jong-il
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Suharto
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_Marcos%2C_Jr.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imee_Marcos
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siti_Hardiyanti_Rukmana
(b) Huh? What mistakes did LHL make? Care to share? Tsk tsk, now you indulging in blaspheme and sacrilege by comparing Jesus Christ with LHL. I am sure alot of Christians and the government would prefer you leave god and religion out of politics.
(c) Huh? GIC go public with Singapore's reserves? What are the reserves? Maybe you can show us all of the reserves? Why are our reserves a "national security issue"? Maybe you can elaborate on this point?
-
-
Originally posted by Pakal102:
I don't know why so many people still obsessed with Wikipedia (a free encyclopedia). This is an unreliable source, even my 4 year old sister and 80 year old nanny could edit it. Some of those you pasted, might just happened to be the contributions from my family. Only those Chindian or Malay with little or no intelligence would read it. Normal people like me would usually avoid on making reference from those trash.
You mean to dispute that, Kim Jong-iL is not ruling North Korea with the passing of his father?
Or
You mean to dispute that, Tommy Suharto, Ferdinand "Bong-Bong" Romualdez Marcos, Jr., Maria Imelda Josefa Romualdez Marcos and Siti Hardiyanti Rukmana (the sons and daughters of Marcos and Suharto) failed to reside in their home country after the death of their father?
Can you dispute this with other sources of information? If can't then what's the point of crapping here?
I can't deny that the information can be edited by anybody, but most of the information has strong references, secondary sources and external links. Whatever is posted has to be verifiable from a reliable source.
If you have different information regarding the whereabouts of the sons and daughters, please share.
"The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged should be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation.[1] The source should be cited clearly and precisely to enable readers to find the text that supports the article content in question.
If no reliable, third-party sources can be found for an article topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it.
Any edit lacking a reliable source may be removed, but editors may object if you remove material without giving them a chance to provide references. If you want to request a source for an unsourced statement, consider moving it to the talk page. Alternatively, you may tag a sentence by adding the {{fact}} template, a section with {{unreferencedsection}}, or the article with {{refimprove}} or {{unreferenced}}. Use the edit summary to give an explanation of your edit. You may also leave a note on the talk page or an invisible HTML comment on the article page.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability
-
the only hub that's successful here is starhub
-
Originally posted by Daddy!!:
(in my opinion) in the next elections, LHL would win because
(a) LKY timed his son to govern Singapore at the same time LKY's time is up. Another evidence to prove that LKY really cares for Singapore. If he does not care about Singapore, his sons and grandchildren would not be in Singapore already liao.
you's are so rights lors.
well i guess history will show if they future gens continue to stay here for eternity.
i think they loyal loyal wan de lor. u no de believing of the me meh?
-
You mean to dispute that, Kim Jong-iL is not ruling North Korea with the passing of his father?
Or
You mean to dispute that, Tommy Suharto, Ferdinand "Bong-Bong" Romualdez Marcos, Jr., Maria Imelda Josefa Romualdez Marcos and Siti Hardiyanti Rukmana (the sons and daughters of Marcos and Suharto) failed to reside in their home country after the death of their father?
Can you dispute this with other sources of information? If can't then what's the point of crapping here?
I can't deny that the information can be edited by anybody, but most of the information has strong references, secondary sources and external links. Whatever is posted has to be verifiable from a reliable source.
If you have different information regarding the whereabouts of the sons and daughters, please share.
"The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged should be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation.[1] The source should be cited clearly and precisely to enable readers to find the text that supports the article content in question.
If no reliable, third-party sources can be found for an article topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it.
Any edit lacking a reliable source may be removed, but editors may object if you remove material without giving them a chance to provide references. If you want to request a source for an unsourced statement, consider moving it to the talk page. Alternatively, you may tag a sentence by adding the {{fact}} template, a section with {{unreferencedsection}}, or the article with {{refimprove}} or {{unreferenced}}. Use the edit summary to give an explanation of your edit. You may also leave a note on the talk page or an invisible HTML comment on the article page.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability
Wikipedia is generally not considered as a reaible source, not all of the citations are verifiable, even its co-founder Jimmy Wales are well awared of that, you might just have to ask him. "consider moving it to the talk page. " Wikipedia is not based upon facts, but a congregation of all information regardless of absurdity (some of which might or might not easily be verifiable), that's a pillar characteristic of Wikipedia. Furthermore, not all Wiki articles are well-referenced, with over millions of articles, is well established that most of its obscene articles are being largely neglected.