Talk:National Kidney Foundation Singapore

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Section header

This page currently looks to be a mess. We should seperate the Durai case to another page, I think, and the court statements should not be there verbatim, they are unenclyclopaedic. Keep only revelent statments. Also, I'm pretty sure Durai is not going to be executed tonight SGT, it sounds like a joke, but put it back on (with nicer phrasing) if he is indeed going to be executed. -Hmib 05:46, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like the page has been badly vandalised, but it's understandable especially after the fallout of the recent controversy. I will help clean it up (or maybe reverting). Something should also be done to prevent vandals from striking this article. A.K.R. 07:50, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I have deleted all remaining traces of vandalism, as well as all the court statements. I have also put a notice to wikify the article (I'm not that well versed in wiki markup). I will take a look around and see if there's other things that need to be done. A.K.R. 09:01, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
OK, this needs more than wikifying. This thing needs cleanup. A.K.R. 09:12, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

huh?

Someone went and added "smellybeans was here!" at the Facts section. I don't know what it means, but it's definately not supposed to be here. So it's gone (I hope). -xertnevnI 7.03pm, 14 July 2005, (GMT +8)

I have changed the "Fallout and Backlash" title to the title section format. -xertnevnI 7.13pm, 14 July 2005, (GMT +8)

I would rather think that it should go under together with the Controversies section as a sub-section. A.K.R. 11:22, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't a fallout a major event of the NKF? (considering that now is the Donation Show on Channel U, maybe the last one, and the whole board stepped down?) -xertnevnI 7.37pm, 14 July 2005, (GMT +8)

Well, you might have known that the petition's closing. Added that too to the article. -xertnevnI 8.35pm, 14 July 2005, (GMT +8)

Who's the plumber?

Great content! I wonder who the whistle-blowing plumber is; any information on that? Also, is there an online archive of the original Susan Long's article (april '04)? --Vsion 20:48, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody using the handle damienic posted the entire article on the ChannelNewsAsia forums You can read it here: http://info.channelnewsasia.com/bb/viewtopic.php?t=12878 (it's the fourth post). As for the plumber, nobody outside N.K.F. and S.P.H. knows who he is.
Wow! thanks ... I didn't realised the forums is so active. Maybe I'll register and let off some POV steams occasionally. hahaa..... --Vsion 03:30, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I found a way to point the link directly to the post. I have edited it to point it that way. A.K.R. 07:27, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

600k is peanuts?

The Peanuts Controversy is added. -xertnevnI, 10.05am, 15 July 2005 (GMT +8)

Patron?

Shouldn't it be matron? Or is this a proper noun specifically for the 'protector' of NKF?? -Hmib 21:36, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah its called patron for some reason or other. What exactly is her role being a patron anyway? Patronize them? :D--Huaiwei 04:38, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
LOL actually I was questioning the gender-correctness of "patron", but yeah, what does she do as a patron/matron??? Any specific duties? Does she draw a salary from it? (hopefully not more than S$600,000!) -Hmib 05:35, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Haha IC. I dont know, but I suppose the word Patron is used as a non-gendered term in this regard. As for what she does, I can only guess that she is sort of a "public ambassador" for the organisation, since I saw on tv tt she appears during the NKF charity shows as a VIP or something. Now if only it turns out that she was the one footing Durai's $600,000 salary......:D--Huaiwei 06:19, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
OIC. Arise ye workers from your slumber... :D -Hmib 20:19, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There is a need for a patron, someone "famous" who can be identified with the organization. Something like a mascot. It also helps in working through the red-tape. Thus, if a charity organization is able to get a high profile patron, he or she will be able to help them get things done more effectively. The bane of bureaucracy --137.132.3.12 07:31, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clean up urgent

This page is getting high profile and is currently the #6 return in Google, query on "National Kidney Foundation Singapore". Need to clean up urgently if we want this page to succeed. --Vsion 09:28, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Shall we split off the info on the current controversy to a seperate page? I believe this case will go down in Singapore's history as one of the most famous legal cases for some time to come...--Huaiwei 11:04, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. What should be the name of this new page, National Kidney Foundation controversy? I was surprised by this news and the turn of events. it is somewhat similar to several high-profile whistle-blowing cases in the United States. While there are several applaudable whistle-blowers here (the NKF volunteers and the plumber), what's interesting is that Durai himself is the "loudspeaker" here for proceeding with the lawsuit which would later reveal all their misgivings. It seems he doesn't worth "peanuts" or kacang. --Vsion 11:34, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hm...I cant think of a better name without it becoming super long, but how about inserting "Singapore" into it since the NKF has international affiliates? Meanwhile, I am not sure if you have access to the ST materials, but I have the print version, and there is a two-full page long article on this alone. Fantastic read, and it did directly ask the same questions as you did above. The article muses...could it be that he was emboldened by past wins in lawsuits, and did not realise he is now sueing a cash-rich major institution, and not just a single cash-strapped individual?--Huaiwei 12:31, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Just one day's absence and you guys completely wikified and made the quality of the article much higher than where I and some others left off. Great job! And yes, I do agree that we should split the controversy into a seperate article - we should concentrate on N.K.F.'s history and acheivements here. The controversy is big enough to warrant an article of it's own. As for the title, I suggest something along the lines of NKF (Singapore) 2005 Controversy. It isn't too long, and describes the article quite well. A.K.R. 15:57, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm....or how about National Kidney Foundation Singapore controversy of 2005? I personally try to avoid abbreviations in page titles//although yeah...it does look long. :D--Huaiwei 16:09, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The golden faucet fiasco started way back, so I don't think it's a 2005 controversy. But controversy alone is too broad, so how about... Singapore National Kidney Foundation fund misappropriation controversy? It IS too long, however... -Hmib 20:19, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hey guys, it's not helpful when everyone proposed a different name. Er... how about I proposed another quite different one: Durai's 'gold-plated tap' controversy :D --Vsion 03:38, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Haha ney....gotta have to be a little more professional leh. :D Sekali even NKFS vs SPH can be a page title then! :D Yes its true this incident started long before 2005, but we usually add the year in which it truely became news worthy (many historical events receive the same treatment despite having plenty of lead time), and a year is good for disamg reasons...of coz NKFS isnt exactly hoping for a second controversy in its history I hope!--Huaiwei 05:06, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Pardon me, but I simply cannot resist propose this one: How about Duraigate scandal or simply Duraigate? Then, we can add it to List of scandals with "-gate" suffix to give it an international exposure. -- Vsion 05:25, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
C'mon guys, we need to be a bit more serious here... what we need is a professional-sounding name that specifies the incident without being a mouthful... I still think my name suggestion is the best... :D -Hmib 05:45, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
How about National Kidney Foundation (Singapore) Controversy or National Kidney Foundation (Singapore) 2005 Controversy? A.K.R. 06:18, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
LOL! Anyway the reason why I would propose "National Kidney Foundation Singapore" and not "National Kidney Foundation (Singapore)" or "Singapore National Kidney Foundation" is simply because this page is named "National Kidney Foundation Singapore". If we are going to have a supporting article with a different name, then this page will need to be renamed too. Btw, it seems to me that the "official" name of NKFS has a comma in it..."National Kidney Foundation, Singapore"--Huaiwei 07:21, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
So how about National Kidney Foundation Singapore 2005 Controversy? A.K.R. 07:41, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thats getting close to my suggestion of National Kidney Foundation Singapore controversy of 2005 right? :D Ok reason for me putting it as "of 2005" is because I was looking at the way other articles are named in Category:History of Singapore, and this seems to be the prefered naming format for year-based articles. If hmib wants it to be more specific, how about National Kidney Foundation Singapore fiscal controversy of 2005? :D--Huaiwei 08:42, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a bit concerned about the semantics of "National Kidney Foundation Singapore blahblahblah", because it can be interpreted to sound like a controversy for an international organization called the Natinal Kidney Foundation that took place in Singapore. -Hmib 14:53, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
But thats the name of the organisation wat...how to change...--Huaiwei 14:57, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Dunno, leh. Wahlao very mafan. </singlish> OK how about: National Kidney Foundation Singapore 2005 fund misappropriation, it's more than a controversy, you know. -Hmib 18:04, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Haha...erm...that becomes wierd due to the placing of the "2005"! If we are all wondering why this endless throwing up of ideas is stalling the whole process, its because normally, one of us would probably have just been bold and went ahead to do the split without having to ask others long ago! :D--Huaiwei 18:30, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Haha... I give up, but will wait for the next scandal to try for the "-gate" naming again. Btw "fund misappropriation" sounds like something illegal, but Durai is not prosecuted (yet). The controversy is more about "Lack of Fiscal Transparency", "Mismanagement of Public Fund (donation)" and some degree of "Public deception or misrepresentation" (intentional or unintentional) --Vsion 20:18, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Well the fact is he didnt break any "rules", so I would personally prefer "controversy" over the other options. :D--Huaiwei 20:34, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
OK I give up too. :( -Hmib 21:34, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Walao dun all lidat leh...suddenly I feel gulty liao..:`-|--Huaiwei 21:56, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
So what now? Do we proceed with the splitting process, or have the controversy remain here? Seems like everybody's got a splitting headache over the proposed title... LOL. A.K.R. 16:46, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
All suffering from commitment-phobia? Actually I dunno how to split the article. As for the title, I switch my vote to National Kidney Foundation Singapore 2005 controversy, so that the defining noun "controversy" is at the end. It is a controversy, so it should be "blahblahblah controversy"--Vsion 17:38, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
OK I'll poke this hornets' nest with a long long pole first by resetting the indentation.
Maybe it's a controversy (I still think it's more than a controversy), but it's definitely not just NKFS's controversy. When "that lady" made the peanuts comment it turned from a simple case of fund misappropriation to a case reflecting how out of touch Singapore's oligarchs are with its common people, it lit the wick to the powder keg, and has the capacity to EXPLODE! it's a government scandal!!!
Or am I just overreacting? (Yeah, I guess so, given the lack of any sort of serious governmental criticism...) -Hmib 19:54, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I also don't like "controversy", thinking it is too mild, but I cannot think of a better word. The word Misappropriation is a legal term implying a crime, so we cannot use it without being sued. The new article should focus on the Durai incident. To escalate it to a "government scandal", I feel, is difficult and hard to maintain NPOV. Maybe we can add the "out-of-touch" statement to the "comment from public" section, provided we can find a source on it. -- Vsion 20:41, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Aiyah just use Duraigate lah... :D or more realistically we can wait a few more days and see what mainstream media refers to it as... I don't have access to any SG propaganda, so what are ST and the TV stations calling it? -Hmib 00:17, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
/me reaches for Straits Times /me flips through pages ... they are calling it "the NKF saga". A.K.R. 04:45, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hohum. Not serious enough. The National Kidney Foundation debacle? -Hmib 04:06, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A section on "Responses from public"?

Currently, there is a section from "response from government". However, so far, I personally find that these responses are not representative of public opinion. I feel that the public voice is not given sufficient coverage here. "Public" of course include many donors and therefore not just curious coffeeshop uncles. Should I add a section on "Responses from public" or "Comments from public"? Would this be encycleopedic and be of interest? However, there will be problem of citing sources. Can we cite sources from Internet posting, forum, blogs , etc, where commentators are anonymous? Is there any legal issue? Please comment or give some suggestions ... --Vsion 21:05, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dunno, but go ahead, I guess. -Hmib 21:34, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Responses from the general public are certainly worth a mention. The only issue is putting the ideas across without sounding like we are sympathising with anyone. As for citing from sources.....hm...I would personally use quotation marks and insert a source like an academic article. :D Otherwise, perhaps generally summarising the key ideas will do? If this goes well, we can even expand it to include the implications this event has on Singaporean society in general. The ST today suggests Singaporeans are less the apathetic then commonly perceived! :D--Huaiwei 21:45, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, ST is certainly capitalizing on this. Too bad, I don't have access to these ST articles, because ST Interactive is a paid subscription and I don't earn "peanuts"; so I have to rely more on the CNA, and CNA forum postings, maybe Zaobao also. Are there any other good online sources, forums, etc. (talkingcock.com not counted)? This section should be NPOV and balanced as there are also some diehard NKF supporters out there, and their comments should be included. What's about the "SPH-Mediacorp" rivalry, any interesting notes on that? -- Vsion 22:18, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah the Mediacorp-SPH rivalry should be included on why there is such a hoo-ah in the first place. However talkingcock.com, once you discard the satirical skin, is a valuable source of minority sentiments in SG, so I think we can at least refer to it if not include sources from it. -Hmib 01:53, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Davinder Singh

Is the defence counsel Davinder Singh the same person as Davinder Singh, MP for Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC? Vsion 23:41, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Give your views

Hi i am user:tdxiang.I am working on a school newspaper and i would like all of you to express your views;on wether TT Durai should have quit.Post them on User Talk:tdxiang.ASAP.THANKS.Tdxiang 08:46, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, wikipedia is not the place to solicit responses for school papers . :) Although you can search blogs online, every SG blog has an entry on it, I'm sure. -Hmib 18:53, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

20% subsidy

In addition, NKFS gives patients a 20 percent subsidy only. Subsidized patients, after meeting the stringent requirement of not earning more than $1,000, have to foot 80 percent of the bill.

I remove the above text, until the source is provided, I tried to find but failed. Earlier section indicates that the subsidy is about 30% on average for NKFS patients. But it would be shocking if indeed patients earning less than $1,000 still have to foot 80% of bill! Please provide sources, thank you. -- Vsion 21:30, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Split Durai

Split the Durai case to another article. This article is getting too long. Ruennsheng 11:44, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh, please do that. We have been waiting for someone to do it for quite some time. (see discussion above #Clean up urgent). :D Yes, please split it as you deem fit, Cheers!--Vsion 13:09, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

/Reference Resource Page

See this /Reference Resource Page which I've moved from mainspace. - SpLoT {新年快乐!} // 09:44, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:NKFlogo.gif

Image:NKFlogo.gif 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:53, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed unsourced, trivia list

Removed the list, dumping here: --Rifleman 82 12:22, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

==Facts about NKFS==

  • NKFS is the largest charitable organization in Singapore.
  • NKFS established the world's first public-funded subsidized dialysis programme in 1987.
  • NKFS is the single largest not-for-profit dialysis provider in the world.
  • Singapore first Dialysis Centre opened at Kwang Wai Shiu Hospital in 1982.
  • NKFS created history with the first overseas transplant in Singapore in 1983.
  • The Foundation's determined efforts in lobbying for Human Organs Transplantations Act achieved its desired result with the passing of the Act in May 1987, making Singapore the first Commonwealth country to adopt such legislation.
  • In 1992, NKFS organized the 1st International Congress on Organ Transplantation in Developing Countries.
  • In December 1991, NKFS made possible the first transplant in Southeast Asia using the kidneys of a Muslim accident victim in Singapore.
  • One of NKFS’ patients became the first kidney patient in Asia to bear a healthy baby in 1992.
  • The NKFS, together with the Ministry of Health, officially launched the Singapore Renal Registry (SRR) in 1993; the first of its kind in Asia, the Registry gathers comprehensive data and statistics from dialysis centres and hospitals on kidney disease in Singapore.
  • The NKFS introduced a novel fund raising method using technology – the telepoll, in 1994.
  • The NKFS appointed an independent audit committee to enhance its system of internal control in 1995, making it the first and only charity in Singapore to do so.
  • In 1996, the NKFS launched the Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis (CAPD) programme with its first CAPD Centre in Ang Mo Kio, Singapore.
  • The NKFS launched its Exercise for Life programme, the first in Asia in 1997, enabling kidney patients to improve their physical fitness and gain better control of their health.
  • NKFS blazed prevention trail by offering free health checks for Singapore's workforce through the Partnership for Prevention Programme in 1997.
  • NKFS established Singapore's first Kidney Resource Centre in Aljunied in 1998.
  • NKFS established the Khoo Oon Teik Professorship in Nephrology in 1999.
  • NKFS' Institute of Nursing Education and Research (INER) initiated the formation of the Association of Renal Professionals of Asia Pacific (ARPAP) in 2001, a first in the region.
  • NKFS established the Children's Medical Fund to help chronically ill children and young adults in 2001.
  • NKFS opened the Shaw - NKFS Children's Kidney Centre, Southeast Asia's first one-stop paediatric renal centre in 2002.
  • In 2002, a unique 18-station dialysis and fitness centre was opened which is the first of its kind in Southeast Asia—this centre revolutionised the training and rehabilitation of elderly kidney patients through customised exercise programmes to ensure that they continue to enjoy independence and sustained quality of life.
  • Possess reserves of S$262 million as of July 2005.[1]

References

  1. ^ S Ramesh (12 July 2005). "NKF withdraws defamation suits against SPH and journalist" (Web). Channel News Asia. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)

Edit request

The proposed changes can be seen at this page.--Tdxiang (talk) 03:04, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like this has been done. Primefac (talk) 04:05, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request (May 2017)

Just a minor edit, which is that the current holder for the office of CEO is Eunice Tay. That is the only change to make. Thank you.--Tdxiang (talk) 07:42, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Also added a reference to support the change. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:50, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request (May 2017) [2nd request]

A minor edit, as a new CEO has been appointed. Sources are here and here.--Tdxiang (talk) 03:09, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done TheDragonFire (talk) 07:43, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:National_Kidney_Foundation_Singapore"