Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Archive 26

Archive 20

←

Archive 24

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

Archive 28

→

Archive 30

commons:user:joshua rivas uploads

I would like to bring to your attention the uploads of this user at Wikimedia Commons. He claims to have made those images (placing them in a Creative Commons license) which were obviously lifted from other sites. - 121.1.11.120 (talk) 10:27, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Proclamation

Anyone willing to go the Batasang Pambansa this Wednesday? So we can take pictures of Noynoy and Binay winning. –Howard the Duck 18:00, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Ha, I just missed the daily KLM-flight from Amsterdam and will not make it in time. Hopefully somebody will. Magalhães (talk) 13:48, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

How about the inauguration? –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 05:15, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Meetup in Davao

How about planning WP meet up in Davao city in July 2010? --Saki ^talk 10:42, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I suggest leaving messages with the Davao Wikipedians, and to coordinate, make a meetup page at Wikipedia:Meetup. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 15:38, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Somebody would please help me spreading about Meetup in Davao. --Saki ^talk 17:41, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

If this will be on September 2010, I can come at this meetup and help you organize it. July is very close. Some of us here from Manila can come if it would be on September. --Jojit (talk) 01:22, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I'd also suggest informing the Cebuano Wikipedia about the meetup. I'm aware that some Cebuano Wikipedians are from Mindanao, and maybe some of them can go. :) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 03:21, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Tamaraw

Despite being a good article, I think that the page definitely needs a few images. Can anyone upload any picture? There's an illustration but there are no live photos. Thank you -- Joaquin008 (talk) 19:02, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't know if there are any Wikipedia editors here that are from Mindoro.--Lenticel ^(talk) 22:59, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Me too. Ok, I think all we can do is to wait for the pics. Anyway, the article is good. Salamat Joaquin008 (talk) 17:24, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

To be honest, we're going to need people with existing images to license/free license their pics. I don't think anyone'll be taking pics of these in the near-future...or the far future...unless we happen to invent a time machine. :P Shrumster (talk) 12:06, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

You'll find lots of CC-BY/CC-BY-SA pictures of tamaraws on Flickr. =)) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 13:10, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I've searched flickr, the images there are mostly kalabaws, tamaraw falls, FEU tamaraws and strangely, pics of people in swimsuits.--Lenticel ^(talk) 23:51, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I found this picture on Flickr, titled Philippine Tamaraw. Unfortunately, the animals in the photo are Carabaos and not Tamaraws... -- Joaquin008 (talk) 19:00, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I found this on Multiply. This is Kali, one of the two captive tamaraws in the breeding program. However, I don't know if multiply has the same image licensing policies like flickr. --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:06, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Bid for Wikimania 2012

Are we ready yet? First it was 2008, then 2009, then obviously no talk for 2010 or 2011. Perhaps it's time to bring Wikimania back to Asia in 2012. :) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 07:12, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Maybe we can get SM (SMX MoA) to sponsor or something. Shrumster (talk) 12:08, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

It's either at the SMX or the PICC, unless we decide to have it in other cities like Cebu, or we have it at a university campus like at UP. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 13:08, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Dunno about UP. Might be too few accommodations in the area. How many people usually go to these thingies? Shrumster (talk) 06:06, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

A broad estimate is between 500 and 1000. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 13:54, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Would international Wikipedians be expected to comprise a substantial proportion of attendees? If so, might I suggest the Boracay Convention Center as a possibility? Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:39, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, they comprise a majority of attendees. However, I'm not sure how they'd respond to a Boracay bid: the beach might distract them too much from the main conference activities. Plus Internet in Boracay is so expensive. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 02:04, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I still prefer Wikimania to be held in Manila because it is more secure and it would be cheaper for foreign participants since they would no longer take an extra flight or travel on any part of the Philippines among other things. --Jojit (talk) 09:38, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

To be fair, Boracay does have a few advantages:

• Wikimania is held during Boracay's low season, so there will not be a lot of tourists.
• The biggest rooms with single beds at the Boracay Eco Village Resort, which is the location of the Boracay Convention Center, are P2,500/night during low season (P4,000/night during high season). Those rooms also hold eight people, which would bring the cost to P312.50 per person/night should eight people share a room.
• Airfares to Boracay from Manila are very competitive with a myriad of carriers serving both Malay (Caticlan) and Kalibo: PAL/Airphil Express, Cebu Pacific, Zest Airways, SEAIR and Sky Pasada. There are also direct flights to Kalibo from Seoul (Zest) and Taipei (Mandarin Airlines). They are competitive so long as you book in advance (which they will: people normally have tickets 1-2 months before, scholarship recipients 2-3 months before). There are also bus and ship options available as well.
• The resort is on Boracay's famous Puka Beach.
• Boracay is south of the Luzon typhoon belt, which receives more typhoons than the Visayas typhoon belt.

Likewise though, Boracay does have its own disadvantages:

• Internet on the island is much more expensive than in the rest of the country: back in 2006, one hour of Internet ranged from P40 to P70. With inflation, I won't be surprised if that went up to P100/hour. Another Internet concern is that there may not be enough bandwidth to support all the Internet-related activities which are the center of Wikimania.
• The convention center proper does not appear to have Wi-Fi (the hotel does).
• The beach and all of Boracay's tourist attractions could distract participants from the main activities of the conference.
• Items which are cheap in Manila, like toiletries, are much more expensive on Boracay.
• Reaching Boracay could potentially be expensive for local Wikimedians who wish to attend Wikimania.

As far as I'm concerned, I want to see the locations weighed first before making any final judgement. However, since the island did host Miss Earth 2009, I don't see why it can't host a much smaller event like Wikimania. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 13:22, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Request for help in improving of the Presidential transition of Noynoy Aquino and the Inauguration of Noynoy Aquino

Hello one and all. I need help in improving the said articles as they are very important. Rizalninoynapoleon (talk) 04:20, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Sparkle shop

Notable enough for inclusion? — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 11:19, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Manila 9, anyone?

Anyone up for Manila 9 next week? Saqib Qayyum, the user who tried to organize the Davao meetup, is willing to meet up with the far more numerous Manila Wikipedians instead. :D --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 01:49, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

That would be Manila 10, since Manila 9 is the First Quarterly meeting of WMPH, which is publicly unannounced. --Jojit (talk) 09:04, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't think we agreed on making meetups coterminous with WMPH meetings. Countries with chapters have their meetups as affairs separate from chapter meetings. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 12:46, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Take note that the WMPH's First Annual Convention is Manila 8. And yes, it is not conterminous with WMPH meetings. They can be other people who will organize meetup in Manila separate from WMPH meetings. The purpose of WP:MU is to organize meetups of Wikipedians around the world. If Wikipedians are meeting on a certain place, it can be there in WP:MU. So, it doesn't matter if the meeting is a chapter meeting or not. And WMPH meeting should also be announced publicly so that we can invite Wikipedians to sign-up during WMPH meetings and join us. --Jojit (talk) 02:41, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

The annual convention was Manila 8 precisely because we not only publicly invited Wikipedians to attend it, but also we agreed to make it into a meetup of Wikipedians. It does not necessarily follow that just because we have a meeting of WMPH members, it is automatically a meetup of Wikipedians. Meetups are social events: WMPH meetings are to some extent, but mostly are not social events. Had we agreed to make the First Quarterly Meeting a meetup, then I wouldn't mind making it Manila 9, but I don't remember any of us agreeing to do so. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 04:43, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Nobody disagreed either. Silence means consenting. ;-) As far as I remember, there was neither an agreement nor disagreement whether the First Annual convention should be Manila 8. Also, WP:MU does not say if meetups should be social or not. The thing is the Wikipedia meetup pages are dedicated to face-to-face meetings on a particular place in the world. And the Quarterly meeting is a face-to-face meeting of Wikipedians. Besides, it's not really a big deal if it is there or not. --Jojit (talk) 06:03, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

But Jojit, in some cases, silence does not imply consent. Which is why we have three-valued logic in SQL, and also the right against self-incrimination in law. But I digress ;-) Anyway...I'll be out of the country on the first week of July (for a business-related trip), so most likely I can't make myself available on July 3 at the latest as I might still be packing my things. So you can all count me out on the next meetup. --- Tito Pao (talk) 01:00, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I can make my presense if meetup will be on July 3rd or 4th as I will have to move Davao then. I met with Pakistani, Japanese, American and Arab Wikipedias so far and now would love to meet with Filipino Wikipedians as well. --Saki ^talk 17:42, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Try to create Wikipedia:Meetup/Manila 10 to organize it. --Jojit (talk) 02:41, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I think I can organize this one as long as nothing out of the ordinary is going on. Page has already been made. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 16:46, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Manila 10 details

Okay guys, where will we hold Manila 10? We've gone to Megamall and MoA already, so let's try another mall (Robinsons Manila does not count). Maybe Glorietta/Greenbelt, Shangri-La or TriNoma? In addition, what time is everyone free? Since this is a Saturday, I am only free beyond 12:00 pm due to NSTP. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 06:35, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm...I was thinking of Starbucks at 6750 (the Philippines' first Starbucks) as a meeting place, then we can probably have dinner somewhere afterward. Proposed time would be from 3 pm onwards. It seems that the official coffee shop of this community is Starbucks. xD --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 17:42, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Request to move Manila LRT Purple Line to original title

Hi! I want to call attention to any admin available to kindly restore this article to its original title (Manila LRT Purple Line). This user moved the LRT-2 article and several related articles to confusing titles without giving consensus or consulting at the talk page first. Thanks. -WayKurat (talk) 14:49, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I'd prefer:

• Yellow line: Manila LRT-1
• Purple line: Manila Megatren
• Blue line: Manila MRT-3

But that's just me... –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 15:05, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Move done. And no, we must follow SRTS guidelines as to the naming of rail lines. I doubt Noynoy will repeal the EO establishing the SRTS. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 16:13, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, but that's now the people usually call them. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 16:41, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I hardly encounter "Megatren" being used in common speech. LRT-2, albeit erroneous, is still more common. However, I still stand by SRTS nomenclature, and we should lest Noynoy does away with it by executive fiat. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 17:10, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Maybe Megatren was used the first time it opened but not anymore now. I still stand with should use the most popular name, just as Joseph Estrada is not at Joseph Ejercito. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 01:32, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

In this case, doesn't law take precedence over custom? --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 05:57, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Not always. What is WP:NC for? –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 08:05, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, WP:NC takes precedence over the official name, otherwise we'd have the country article at Democratic People's Republic of Korea instead of North Korea, to give an example. --seav (talk) 17:10, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Not in all cases. We have Côte d'Ivoire over Ivory Coast, or Burma over Myanmar. But the point of this is that given that there is a comprehensive naming system of all the lines, it's the system we'd ought to follow. While it is true that Wikipedia does have to bend to the whims of the reading public, there will be times where it cannot do so. As far as I know, the SRTS system is the only comprehensive uniform system of naming Manila's train lines. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 17:34, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Zabag/Sanfotsi/Suvarnadvipa as Manila/pampnga Kingdom'

-Support it we have evidence and other articles containing the History happened inside our Country. Learned from Chinese ,Arabs and Hindu works. Visit "Quests of the Dragon and Bird clan by Manansala" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayson villaruz (talk • contribs) 07:17, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Please monitor articles regarding the 2010 elections

Especially articles about the local level. There is an unknown user (or users) that uses several IP addresses to edit these articles. Though some of them are constructive (I don't like putting [[ ]] on the names of candidates which makes them to appear red especially if there is no article written about them) still many are, say, unacceptable. For example, he keeps on adding names of candidates, to think that election is over. In Valenzuela section about the House of Representatives elections, for example, he added two candidate names on the second district (making them four), but official Comelec list of candidates says there are only two candidates for Congress. Valenzuela City has only two districts, but he added third and fourth districts and inserted names of candidates there. I don't know if it's merry-making but it's annoying. Well, initially, he added the section "2010 Election results" in Valenzuela City, to think we have Local elections in Valenzuela, 2010 article. I keep on removing it but he redo it again and again until I asked for RPP. He then traveled to Local elections in Valenzuela article, this time, adding "fictional names" of candidates and additional districts. Now he is doing it again on House of Representatives in Metro section.

What I want to say is keep on monitoring election articles. I observed he is editing Quezon City, Tarlac, Bulacan, so and so election articles. I am not familiar with the names of candidates on such locale, so I am incapable of saying if his edits (and addition of districts perhaps) are still true or just "putting his name and his friends' name on Wikipedia" for fun. I would recommend blocking his IP range or if the IP is consistent, his IP only. But I can't apply for blocking him/his range because I have no enough evidence against his "malicious" editing except the Valenzuela additions case. Thanks. --JL 09 ^_q?c 08:52, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I've noticed this too. I'll try to revert when I can. I don't watch local elections articles, though. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 13:39, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Images for deletion

See the last 3 sections on Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 July 1. --seav (talk) 23:54, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Benigno S. Aquino, Jr. - middle initial

Does "S" stand for Servillano or Simeon? I have found book sources that conflict the ones shown in the article. The current sources I think seem to be less reliable (one of the contained an inaccurate birth date, and another did not address the issue directly). On the talk page, I put the references I found and tried to compare them. However, I just (temporarily) shortened Ninoy's name in the article to Benigno S. Aquino, Jr. so people can discuss the issue

See here:

• Talk:Benigno Aquino, Jr.#The middle initial "S"

If there are any more reliable references or anything you would like to contribute, please add! Thanks! Mk32 (talk) 02:00, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

EDIT I decided to go ahead and put the name as "Simeon" for now, since I could find more book references to it. Feel free to discuss or revert. Mk32 (talk) 04:15, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

It stands for Simeon. The President's full name is Benigno Simeon Cojuangco Aquino III. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 09:11, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Please note the issue revolves around the current president's father, the deceased Ninoy Aquino who also has an S as his middle initial. Same goes for Noynoy's grandfather it seems. So the three to differentiate are Benigno S. Aquino, Sr., Benigno S. Aquino, Jr., and Benigno S. Aquino III. Crazy isn't it? I'm pretty sure Sr.'s S stands for Servillano and the current president's is Simeon but what Jr.'s S stands for is apparently unclear. Lambanog (talk) 09:52, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

University of San Jose - Recoletos

I'm complaining about my edits being reverted. I edited an article of the University of San Jose - Recoletos, specifically about the Drum and Bugle Corps of the school. What I placed in my edit were real facts about the school's Drum and Bugle Corps. My Question now is why does Wikipedia revert my facts? Did the owner of Wikipedia ever go to school in the University of San Jose - Recoletos? Wikipedia says that the facts I have entered are VANDALISM. How can Wikipedia say that? Does Wikipedia know anything about the University of San Jose - Recoletos' Drum and Bugle Corps? I myself am a student of the University of San Jose - Recoletos of Cebu City. So I have the knowledge about the school. Therefore Wikipedia cannot say or does not have the right to tell me that what I am entering or editing is false or vandalism. I just want the Wikipedia administrators to know that I am just sharing facts about the school's Drum and Bugle Corps. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.60.248.137 (talk) 10:16, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

My advice to you is not to remove information before adding things in because it can be mistaken as vandalism. I highly recommend you make an account and make a separate article on the USJ-R Drum and Bugle Corps, provided that they meat the general notability guideline. Welcome to Wikipedia, and happy researching. (Also, may I interest you in the Cebuano Wikipedia?) :) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 11:32, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Source verification requested

Is it just me, or does the PEP article tagged onto the article actually verify any of the content claims? Active Banana (talk) 02:25, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I believe that you should mention the article in question.--Lenticel ^(talk) 02:49, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

You think that would help? doh Active Banana (talk) 02:55, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

This wikipedia article Green Rose (Philippine TV series) and this "source" [1] Active Banana (talk) 02:58, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

I've removed the ref since the source did not match the article's claims. I suggest that you tone down a bit. Not everyone here is against or supports you. If there are any resulting issue, I suggest putting it to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard.--Lenticel ^(talk) 03:05, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Banaue Rice Terraces

It is strongly hinted in the Banaue Rice Terraces entry that they were built by the Miao people of China. The sourcing is not immediately verifiable, and there is no mention of the Terraces in the Miao's own wikipedia entry. This claim may warrant review or deletion, especially it touches on a potentially sensitive spot. Anyo Niminus (talk) 05:16, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I guess you should bring this to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. What I do know is that the book where the claim is based exist so hoax refs are out of the question. However, it seems that the claim isn't known in mainstream Philippine history and is only supported by one source. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:20, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

I did some googling and added cites to the article for a couple of sources which appear to touch on this, but I've only seen snippets viewable online and not the surrounding context. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:18, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

BUMP! Manila 10

Anyone else planning to come? Attendance for this meetup is dismal at only three people. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 03:02, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Sky, Saki emailed me and he said that he will arrive at Manila on July 3, 1:00am and he don't know anybody in Manila, so its hard for him to wait for the meetup time. --Jojit (talk) 06:40, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I know that, but we can have a meetup anyway. Let's just make the date open-ended so we can decide on a future date. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 07:51, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm so sorry but I'll obviously meet with you guys in Manila before leaving Philippines around July 12-17.--Saki ^talk 11:12, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

July 17 should be okay. That gives us enough time to plan, and it's also on a Saturday. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 17:29, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I'll be there on July 17. I have no plans on that date. Saki, what time is the most convenient for you to meet us on July 17? --Jojit (talk) 03:14, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I meant to say that I'll leave Philippines around July 12 to 17 not 17 as I'm not sure yet because I'm not in the Philippines yet. If you guys can wait until next week. I'll confirm you my exact date. Thank you! --Saki ^talk 08:54, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Ok, we will wait for your answer next week. But if it would going to be a weekday, most probably, we can meet you at night since most of us have work or classes at school during the daytime. --Jojit (talk) 10:19, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I can be online during the japanese holiday weekend (jul 17,18,19) so i can virtually participate in the meetup.--Exec8 (talk) 08:45, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

User: Sreejithk2000

ACTIVE BANANA'S SOCKPUPPET!!!!--79.72.225.46 (talk) 13:31, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

We're sorry but this is not the page to report sockpuppetry. Please go to WP:SPI to file your complaint. --Eaglestorm (talk) 14:23, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

DYAB-TV is not Tacloban

I am referring to edits made by somebody with IP addresses 124.107.87.58 (July 16, 2010); 124.217.19.228 (July 15, 2010) and 124.217.26.106 (July 13, 2010) on the article name Tacloban. The redirect to Tacloban City was removed and the unknown user replaced it with text about DYAB-TV (ABS-CBN Tacloban) for the third time already. Except for the location of DYAB-TV which the unknown user claimed to be located in Tacloban City, I believe that DYAB-TV has nothing to do with Tacloban. --JinJian (talk) 10:03, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Tacloban is not only the victim. See these anons' contributions. --seav (talk) 17:46, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Noynoy headsup

there's an editwar going on at Benigno Aquino III about the inclusion of some website. one anon has been slapped with 3rr. --Eaglestorm (talk) 03:18, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

The Tagalog Wikipedia has reached 30,000 articles!

The 30,000th article is the article on Charlottenburg-Wilmersdorf, a Berlin suburb, by Shirou15. Although I'm not of the "let's flood our Wikipedia with locality articles" camp, at least this one came out well, and we should celebrate it nevertheless. Cheers! --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 04:39, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

we are in a dire need for a new Napiling Artikulo.--Lenticel ^(talk) 06:50, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

That's why we are now playing a very long, tedious game of wait-and-see. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 03:56, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Nah, I like action more than waiting. Besides, as the one of the "elder" tl editors, I think we should set an example and produce decent articles. NA application is way easier than FA application. Anyways, are there any candidates for NA? I'm open for collaboration.--Lenticel ^(talk) 01:09, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Pugo and Togo

Hello to all the Kabayans,

I need help on improving the Pugo and Togo article. I only managed to find a few informations but I don't think it is enough for a comedy duo like this one. Thank you -- Joaquin008 ^(talk) 17:38, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

GG socks, again...

I have a feeling that Gerald is sneaking up on us again... User:CSSH XV and User:Redskater seem to reek of being a Gonzalez puppet, based on editing style and patterns. Blake Gripling (talk) 03:38, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Y4iT

The Philippine Youth Congress in Information Technology article requires cleanup. Hope some help fix it. --Exec8 (talk) 07:53, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Celinna Katherine Cruz

Hello.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Celinna Katherine Cruz was closed as delete as an apparent hoax. The subject was purported to be a Filipino actress. I've been going through cleaning up all sorts of links that added her name. However, I've come across some articles which were created that include her. I believe that these articles may also be hoaxes, however there are some sources not in English. If they are like some of the other "sourcing" I came across, the links are there just to make it look like its referenced and the actual source is about something different. Could I ask for somebody at Wikiproject Tambayan Philippines to have a look at these?

1. User:Hindi na bale
2. Lumayo ka man sa akin
3. Pangarap Ko'y Sa'Yo lamang

Thanks. -- Whpq (talk) 01:20, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Project name

Someone just moved the project to a new title without consensus. --Bluemask (talk) 11:52, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Tournament of the Philippines

Does the Liga Pilipinas-PBL merger deserve a separate article? 110.5.70.66 (talk) 06:13, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't see why it shouldn't. :) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 02:00, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Presidential elections congressional/parliamentary canvass

Anyone knows where to find per province/city breakdowns? –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 14:08, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

gmanews.tv--123.225.163.82 (talk) 16:35, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

I meant for all elections since 1935. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 11:07, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

The COMELEC, perhaps? 110.5.70.66 (talk) 06:11, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

No, you can find only the last couple of elections of the COMELEC pages. Magalhães (talk) 06:16, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Plus the COMELEC doesn't really "count" the presidential election. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 09:57, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

The article that needs help is List of Philippine presidential election results by province. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 10:00, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

My guess is that the National Library of the Philippines probably has some helpful and citeable material on that. See their website. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:18, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Maybe not the National Library, but perhaps the National Archives may have this information. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 02:01, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps it's in the Senate Archives? Or the HoR Archives? 202.57.58.81 (talk) 02:10, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

I suspect a book has one, I saw it on Google Books but I can't view it. Note that we'd only need who won in each province, not the exact numbers in each province, at least for that article. There's an incomplete list at Philippine presidential election, 1946 so there's hope for this. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 07:19, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Speaking of provinces, there had been mass moves of province article names to <Provincename> (province). This has to be checked out. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 18:43, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Example? --seav (talk) 16:31, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Link to AN/I discussion. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 16:37, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Pre-war presidential canvass is unreliable, there are two sources, the one published is the most probable result. Post-war congressional canvass of elections, are hard to decipher at the House Congressional Library because until late 60's there are parts of the Journal are in Spanish. If you were to check the COMELEC, the compilation which I was able to photocopy in their now burned building, it doesn't include any breakdown except the one in 1969. The 1992, 1998 break down are available at the House Library. --Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 03:43, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

For that article, we'd only need who won where; for the individual presidential election articles, we need the breakdown. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 04:52, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

WP:FL: List of Presidents of the Philippines

This was demoted a long time ago (thankfully the VP list wasn't since it's not targetted... yet. So don't tell them lol) because of insufficient references. The old "main" reference, pangulo.ph went offline and we need new ones, preferably books. We can't trust government websites since they are unreliable too and are inconsistent so if anyone wants to help please do. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 07:13, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Ang Dating Doon

I happen to both have a copy of their album and a reference from the Inquirer Saturday magazine. I was wondering, what is the tag on top of the page for? I was confused whether to add them to the article or to Bubble Gang. --112.203.60.147 (talk) 00:54, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

You can add the references on the page itself. -WayKurat (talk) 02:43, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

I did that... do I also have to add the references to Bubble Gang? --112.203.60.147 (talk) 09:26, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Most likely

Zobango (talk) 21:37, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Naming of election articles

Seeing that all articles, save for the 2007 and 2010 article, contents are of the legislative elections, it's time to move them to "Philippine legislative election, year" from "Philippine general election, year," (ideally the two should be separate into a Senate and HOR elections), the elections that didn't have HOR elections be moved to "Philippine Senate election, year" and the more recent election articles that have content other than Congressional elections be moved to "Philippine elections, year." –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 05:17, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

How to best improve 2010 Manila hostage crisis

First off, I pity the Tambayan's inactivity.

Secondly, how can we best handle the article on yesterday's hostage crisis? It looks like the article can use some work. (Similarly, the Tagalog version can use some work as well.) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 13:32, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

There's a tl version? Okay, I'll expand it a little--Lenticel ^(talk) 23:51, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Looks like we won't be able to write about it until after the official reports are released, eh? Maybe the Tagalog Article needs to be renamed. There really seems to be no Chinese angle to the hostage, and the involvement of Hong Kong tourists was just a quirk of fate. Eh? 202.57.58.81 (talk) 02:20, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

That was one of the reasons why I moved the article to its current title (Pagbibihag ng bus sa Maynila (2010)) yesterday. ;) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 04:46, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

The Chinese versions of the article might prove to be interesting. But the discussion should continue on the article's talk page. --seav (talk) 12:21, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

SC reverses its ruling on the cityhood of 16 towns, again!

The Supreme Court is getting annoying: [2] --seav (talk) 12:17, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

How many times can a decision by the Supreme Court of the Philippines be reversed?? (see here) Magalhães (talk) 12:20, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Can we create an article on this? –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 14:14, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Why not, it could be interesting. :) Joaquin008 ^(talk) 17:05, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

If someone does create one, nominate it at WP:DYKS. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 17:13, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Maybe we should put the status of the towns "in question" until an ultimate ruling is delivered. 110.5.70.66 (talk) 02:20, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Their last ruling was with finality. I wonder about this one. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 11:11, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

For a bit more info from what should be a better informed source, see this. Also see the December 21, 2009 decision itself: "... Without belaboring in their smallest details the arguments for and against the procedural dimension of this disposition, it bears to stress that the Court has the power to suspend its own rules when the ends of justice would be served thereby. ... Time and again, this Court has suspended its own rules or excepted a particular case from their operation whenever the higher interests of justice so require. ... The Court, by a vote of 6-4, grants the respondent LGUs’ motion for reconsideration of the Resolution of June 2, 2009, as well as their May 14, 2009 motion to consider the second motion for reconsideration of the November 18, 2008 Decision unresolved, and also grants said second motion for reconsideration. ...". Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 11:39, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

The OSG cites Wikipedia!

Well, I didn't expect that the office of the Solicitor General would cite Wikipedia in a court case. :P --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 03:48, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

This is where our taxes go?--Lenticel ^(talk) 23:52, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Just a side note: this news made its way in this week's Signpost (under "In the news") :P --- Tito Pao (talk) 01:12, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

>_< Man we really need to improve our country's image. Well, we could always start that here at WP and make good and featured articles. --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:24, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

They could have gotten the WMPH position on the matter. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 01:39, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't think they know that WMPH exists. Perhaps we should advertise it somehow. Hmmm... perhaps we could piggyback on one of the WikiPilipinas events or trade shows but it would require some money to secure and maintain stalls. --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:52, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

WPilipinas, the place where they don't give a shit about NPOV for the sake of being "Hip 'n Free?" No dice Lenticel, but certain conventions could have a place for WMPH, just not when a rival Wiki is around. But I read that article. Good point in shooting down that appeal. --Eaglestorm (talk) 04:34, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Good point, collaborations won't fly if there is a huge difference in philosophies. Perhaps the youth congress discussed below might be a better start.--Lenticel ^(talk) 07:33, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

We used to piggyback on WPinas, but we don't need to do that anymore. At the same time, WPinas never really interested itself in WP affairs (when Wikipedia moved to CC-BY-SA/GFDL dual-licensing, the WPinas people were informed and they never responded). Conversely, why should we care with theirs? --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 09:47, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Philippine Youth Congress in IT

Hey, we finally got our first sponsored project! our participation in the upcoming Philippine Youth Congress in Information Technology will be our springboard towards greater awareness. Just let us know if you are interested to participate. Food and refreshments awaits volunteers. --Exec8 (talk) 14:06, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Just to make it clear to everyone: our participation in Y4iT is sponsored by Wikimedia Philippines (WMPH), the local chapter of the Wikimedia Foundation, so in addition to us encouraging you guys to volunteer, we would also like to again extend membership to all interested Wikipedians. Visit the page for more information. :) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 14:13, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

"Philippines" TV series

It's been 4 months since the last issue about this. I've realized that other Wikipedia users ha started moving pages again with baseless information. The most recent being Grazilda being moved to Grazilda (Philippines TV series), the user User talk:Beckerich did not state any reason for moving this page. Grazilda does not have any other use for it, when searched in Google the GMA TV series Grazilda floods the pages, when searched IMDb, there is no other series or film or name with Grazilda on it (see [3]). Therefore isn't only right to removed the "(Philippines TV series)" on the title?

This user has also moved the page Ilumina (TV series) to Ilumina (Philippines TV series), citing, and I quote, "A lot of other Ilumina names as searched on google". I searched both Google and IMDb, and no other form of Ilumina as a TV series or film or anything similar came up. Therefore, I believe Ilumina (TV series) is enough, and not Ilumina (Philippines TV series). Similarly, this user also moved Claudine (TV series) to Claudine (Philippines TV series), without any said reason. I've searched IMDb, and this Claudine is the only TV series listed there, nothing more, see [4].

This user also moved Endless Love (Philippine TV series) to Endless Love (Philippines TV series), I don't how this works for this one, but isn't it similar to how the "s" is not included in the "Philippines" of Philippine Airlines?

This user has been targetting GMA Network TV shows in changing and editing certain information, very much like how User:Peparazzi did before. This has led me to believe that User talk:Beckerich is a sockpuppet of User:Peparazzi. It may be not, but what the user is doing has been proven to be wrong. -- ISWAK3 (talk) 17.19, 01 September 2010 (UTC)

Someone had fixed them already; I fixed Illumina and Grazilda since they're the ones left that haven't been moved back. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 16:49, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Gloria Diaz

Hi guys, it's been a long time since I've posted here. Because of the controversy and the acts of vandalism that have occured so far, I've protected the Gloria Diaz article for two weeks. I also tried to give the mention of the controversy in that article a more neutral POV. Just letting you all know, since I am not on Wikipedia as often as I was in the past. Anyway, I think it could use some polishing up, if anyone's interested. Thanks! --Chris S. (talk) 08:50, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Long time no see ha :). Well take a look at the article.--Lenticel ^(talk) 00:07, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I see more people are finally coming back from the grave. :) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 18:16, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

My two week vacation has afforded me the luxury of coming back from the grave. But when I'm back to the grind, it's goodbye Wikipedia for a bit. But anyway, it's awesome seeing familiar names once again! --Chris S. (talk) 05:28, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

RM: Manila Peninsula rebellion --> Manila Peninsula siege

See Talk:Manila Peninsula rebellion#Renaming, redux. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 18:33, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

User:Beckerich

Guys, just a head up. This user keeps on making threats to other users, just recently on me, on editing several articles involving Philippine TV shows. User had redirected all the articles under the Encantadia wikiproject then removed most of the contents of the main article citing several violations including WP:FANCRUFT, WP:TRIVIA among others. The user even posted this on the admin's noticeboard making a lot of threats.

As I have observed the edits of this user, he/she particularly deletes content on GMA Network programs (one incident involving moving the name of Ilumina (TV series) to Iluminata de Coco ). IMHO, I smell an ABS-CBN fanboy here. -WayKurat (talk) 01:50, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, looking at his/her edits, he/she seems to be involved in disruptive editing over GMA Network programs. It's also the same user that started moving pages again a few weeks ago. Joaquin008 ^(talk) 07:07, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

You know, it looks like this user is a sockpuppet of User:Peparazzi. The behavior is very similar, including the threats. -WayKurat (talk) 07:28, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you. User:Peparazzi was blocked for disruptive editing (mostly targetting GMA Network TV shows) and User:Beckerich is doing the same thing. Joaquin008 ^(talk) 08:05, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

User:ISWAK3 reported this case a few days ago and he does have the same opinions. Joaquin008 ^(talk) 08:24, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I have opened a SPI case to this user. Please provide your comments there. Thanks. -WayKurat (talk) 12:16, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

In fact, Beckerich's redirection are justifiable. Most of the articles created by Encantadia WikiProject are indeed useless and constitutes nothing but no sourced fan speculation. If I were him, I'll do the same thing especially that even individual , minor characters of Encantadia has their own respective articles here. The problem is that he never put into AFD these articles and seek for a consensus of merging and redirect. I previously sent into AFD the article Pirena and the numerous articles regarding the world of Encantadia, but my notion of either deleting them or redirecting them didn't came into effect, partly because a handful of supporters wanted to delete all of them and others to merge them, and partly because I have the wrong rationale for deleting them. Well, if somebody may bring those numerous Encantadia- and Etheria-ish articles into AFD, then it is better than to redirect all of them without everyone's approval.

Oops, some articles have already been transformed into redirect, can't say who did those. I believe that if there are more objections with redirecting them, we can always talk about it.

Finally, we can't synthesize whether Beckerich and Peparazzi are the same people unless we submit proper evidences for investigation. They could be different persons having the same favorites (well, it is possible, right?, It looks like almost everybody can vandalize GMA articles and post threats? I guess posting a warning on somebody's talk page isn't a legal threat, isn't a personal attack, or a harassment) and please let's focus on the issue. I totally agree with Beckerich's reason of merging these articles into Encantadia and Etheria, all of them are fan-made, written with speculation, no references and original research, added by the fact that they aren't notable (like who remembers Agane and Hitano?) except that they appeared into a top TV program. But the method Beckerich employs in doing this, I say it's thumbs down.--JL 09 ^_q?c 12:37, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I have to agree with the redirection of the character articles to the main Encantadia article since most of them are not notable enough, but I am just saying to him/her that if you want to do it, you have to post it first on the talk page of the main article to have consensus. Looks like he/she took my comments negatively and posted this "comment" to my talk page, and he/she even bothered to report me to WP:ANI. I also have given an evidence that links both users. As mentioned above by User:ISWAK3, Beckerich keeps on moving GMA Network programs with the "Philippine" word on it to "Philippines", similar on what Peparazzi is previously doing before that account was blocked. -WayKurat (talk) 12:45, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

If anything, the page moves were malicious. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 15:59, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

That's the point, those actions were malicious and without consensus. Joaquin008 ^(talk) 16:29, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Throughout 2010, many Wikipedia editors have worked hard to halve the number of unreferenced biographical articles (UBLPs) from more than 52,000 in January to under 26,000 now. The WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons has assisted in many ways, including helping to setup a bot, which runs daily, compiling lists of all articles that are in both Category:All unreferenced BLPs and have been tagged by a WikiProject. Note that the bot does NOT place unreferenced tags or assign articles to projects - this has been done by others previously - it just compiles a list.

Your Project's list can be found at Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines/Unreferenced BLPs. Currently you have approximately 324 articles to be referenced. Other project lists can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons/WikiProjects.

Your assistance in reviewing and referencing these articles is greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, please don't hestitate to ask either at WT:URBLP or at my talk page. Thanks, The-Pope (talk) 12:36, 7 September 2010 (UTC)"

Fort Pedro

I have recently been to the Philippines. Was fortunate to go and see Fort Pedro. The pictures I took of the old Fort, could be added to the article? Feedback would be appreciated. Adamdaley (talk) 10:33, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Fort San Pedro has a category in Commons. :) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 14:01, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Cebu Taoist Temple

I have a picture of Taoist Temple, if anyone is interested in viewing it and adding it to the article. Adamdaley (talk) 12:48, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to upload it. We do, after all, have a dearth of Cebu City pictures. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 14:01, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

I have uploaded the file to Wikipedia. I am not sure how people can view it from it's current location on Wikipedia. Adamdaley (talk) 00:37, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

A search for "file:cebu taoist temple" returns six matches Lambanog (talk) 01:27, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

I've added the picture and caption to my talk page. It can be viewed there if anyone wishes to see it. Unfortunately, it wasn't a good day with grey clouds, in my opinion it's the best picture I have in my collection of the Cebu Taoist Temple while I was there. Adamdaley (talk) 04:03, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Basilica of Santo Niño

I also have a picture of the side view of Basilica of Santo Niño. I will add it to my talk page if anyone is interested in adding it to the Basilica of Santo Niño article. Adamdaley (talk) 06:13, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Article on differences between the Tagalog and Filipino languages

I just edited (Filipino) the Philippine peso article, after noticing that the infobox there refers to the "sentimo (Filipino)" monetary subunit, vs. "céntimo or centavo (Spanish)". I added a general reference to the article which confirms "sentimo". I don't happen to have a sub-Peso coin on me at the moment, but I'm pretty sure that they're marked "centavo".

Anyhow, I tied this into WP discussions and occasional edit wars which I see regarding the relationship between the Filipino and Tagalog languages. I know the history of that relationship, in general, but I don't understand either language and don't know the details of the development of the Filipino language. The Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino website is in a language I don't understand, but I gather from this "sentimo" vs. "centavo" difference that differences do exist between the two languages. If I have that right, it seems to me that it would be useful to have an article on Differences between the Tagalog and Filipino languages. Just a thought. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 05:07, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Linguists believe the two languages are one and the same, so I don't see the need for such an article. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 13:27, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm not trained in linguistics, but it appeared to me that the "sentimo" vs "centavo" disparity indicated a difference — being untrained in linguistics, I may misapprehend. I wonder what the KWF might think about that judgement by linguists (perhaps they agree, I don't know). Anyhow, creation and maintenance of such an article would be up to consensus of editors able to contribute significantly on that topic -- which doesn't include me. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:00, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

For practical purposes they are essentially the same. Any differences between the two would be very subtle, the product of decisions made in a bureaucrat's office or someone's imagination. I doubt differences would have anything to do with linguistics. As I understand it the Filipino language is an artificial construct that did not exist prior to the time a group of politicians decided it would be useful to have a national language. Tagalog was chosen to be the national language and to make it more acceptable to the non-Tagalog parts of the country it was renamed the Filipino language. As for the difference between sentimo and centavo, centavo looks Spanish. With formalized rules being drawn up to distinguish the Filipino language, traditional spelling using c is being dropped in favor of s or k since it has been decided the letter c does not exist in the Filipino alphabet. So strictly speaking according to what is being taught in schools kalamansi is the correct Filipino translation for calamondin. Calamansi is in the nebulous void where it doesn't seem to follow the formalized Filipino rules and it is not recognized by English dictionaries, but it is used ubiquitously nonetheless in the Philippines (or at least the Tagalog regions) with no loss of understanding. Other examples are the Spanish calle being translated as kalye, biscocho turning into biskotso, and chocolate winding up as tsokolate. Considering such examples I am not surprised when I see English massacred so often by Filipinos who should know better and the development of txtspk. Lambanog (talk) 01:58, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Calamansi (with the C) is manifested in Philippine English, not in local vernaculars. There have been several debates here in the past involving differences between the two languages, with all of them ending up concluding that the two languages are the same. As far as I'm concerned, the argument that "Filipino is freer with borrowings" (the crux of the Filipinists' argument that the two languages are different) is utter BS. Feel free to search the archives.

As for the KWF, they agree with the linguists' position. It's cited in the article on the Filipino language. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 01:59, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

The problem with Philippine English as far as I can tell is that there is no recognized or widely acknowledged authority on it. For formal usage the safest route is to default to American English. In American English one of the standby authorities is the Merriam-Webster Dictionary. That dictionary does not seem to recognize calamansi as an English word although it does recognize calamondin (derived from a Pampangan term) and adobo. Of course in a Philippine setting I doubt anyone notices calamansi not being italicized as a "foreign" word but it does lead one to wonder whether the ambiguities have led to laxity in grammatical areas that should properly be strictly enforced. Lambanog (talk) 05:10, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

"Linguists believe..." -Filipinayzd (talk) 05:35, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

I believe you still remember our long-winding discussion on the matter from three years ago. ;) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 18:19, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Bill! At one point I thought that it would be useful to have a separate article as you suggested. But in the end I decided that it would be more "condensed" if we just mentioned the controversy in the Filipino article while everything else in the Tagalog article. Or even better, I thought about just redirecting Filipino to Tagalog and everything can just be mentioned there. You know my view on this, however I think many others will disagree. And it's a debate that I currently am not interested in involving myself in at this moment. --Chris S. (talk) 08:53, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Crap on Mendez

Check out Mendez, Cavite - it has some crap on the Barangay section. I can't edit it since I'm too busy. -Ian Lopez @ 04:32, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

The anon's edits have been reverted. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 05:00, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Intsik derogatory?

I was browsing through the Chinese Filipino article and saw a statement to the effect that intsik is considered derogatory. I have not heard this before and took it out of the article. But I have thought it over and have decided to ask here for feedback. Does intsik carry a negative connotation? As far as I know it is the standard Filipino term for Chinese. Lambanog (talk) 12:55, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Please take a look at previous discussions regarding this subject. We can continue discussing it here. --JinJian (talk) 22:49, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

On the Tagalog Wikipedia, both terms are used. Although there are moves to increase the use of Tsino over Intsik due to racist connotations to the latter term, some still use the latter term in articles. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 00:39, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

I understand the wish to avoid unnecessarily offensive or provocative terms but I think it is also important to present the case as it really stands. As far as I know Intsik is not a derogatory term and from comments listed in the thread by JinJian it would seem there are many people unaware and oblivious to the allegedly derogatory nature of the term. It is not clear why it should be considered derogatory either. From comments I have read it is derived from Chinese and has a respectful original meaning. This is not a case like Eskimo that was a name given by a different people and gives a literal description that the the Inuit find offensive. In my view this seems to have more analogies to a black American saying "I want to be called an African-American; calling me black is offensive" or a feminist saying people should use "humankind" not "mankind". To overturn common usage for a reason that may be imaginary and to perpetuate a false idea that suggests offensiveness in perfectly innocuous usage is as grave an error as the one supposedly being fixed. What reliable sources back up the assertion that Intsik is derogatory? Lambanog (talk) 01:19, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

This is an example of culture clash. I understand that Filipino culture does not have ill intention in calling the Chinese as Instik, in fact, there is a theory that the word was derived from a noble origin. However, in an increasing integration of cultures, the Chinese Filipinos, at least some or most of them, are uncomfortable being called as "Intsik" (partly to be blamed is the english word "insect"). Their reactions range from being neutral, some think that it is funny while others find it derogatory. Wikipedia encourages us to use the more neutral point of view. Our own Philippine law even allows us to change our name legally if it sounds funny. It would not hurt if we use the more neutral equivalent "Tsino" instead of insisting the seemingly innocent but controversial "Intsik". This is a good practice in intercultural communication and understanding. --JinJian (talk) 02:42, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

By the way the theory I mentioned on the origin of the word "Intsik" is from Malay origin meaning "venerable uncle". --JinJian (talk) 02:52, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

That's looking at it from a Chinese point of view. From a Filipino point of view the reaction might be "Whaa? Hold on a sec!" From what I know, and I admit I am no scholar on this topic, traditionally there's been no significant alternative to the word Intsik in the local vernacular. However, if one is to accept the proposition that Tsino is more proper, the inference is that Intsik is less so and pejorative. Where once there was no pejorative term, all of a sudden voila! the term Intsik is transformed into one. In 20 years time will people look back and claim that back when Filipinos were using the term Intsik, Filipinos were being bigoted? That through all these years there has been no need to distinguish between a bigoted term and a non-bigoted one is an indication that Filipino culture didn't find the need to be very particular or conscious about the difference. Now there is? I can see how a Filipino language purist might take offense. Tsino looks like a Spanish derived term and Chinese is English. The unfortunate implication is that it's okay to use an English term or a Spanish term for a Chinese but not a Malay term. It feeds into all the negative stereotypes of Chinese unwillingness to assimilate. Also from the sources given by Wtmitchell below it would appear the term Tsinoy was only coined in 1992. Even womyn was coined earlier back in 1975. Should everyone drop the use of woman because some people find it offensive? It all seems kind of political. One of the sources below also talks about how Charlson Ong advocates taking back the term Intsik. There doesn't seem to be a clear consensus on this and it would seem prudent that the project not be unwittingly taken in by an unestablished point-of-view and turned into an advocacy for it. To say usage of Tsino is okay. To say it should be preferred strikes me as crossing the line into advocacy without sufficient cause. There is even reason to believe the opposite if it's true that in Indonesia encik is considered more respectful than orang cina which has a negative connotation and sounds closer to Tsino. Some indication of how widespread the belief that Intsik is considered disparaging is probably called for. Lambanog (talk) 07:01, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

An incident not so long ago was when the Chinese Filipinos protested the use of the term "Instik" by Miriam Defensor Santiago. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 03:13, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

I did a bit of googling. Some of the results: [5], [6][7], [8]. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 04:45, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

I have a theory why orang cina is considered less respectful in Indonesia. I think orang means Man and cina means China. It is like calling the Chinese as China Man. Well, some sectors in the Philippines also considered China Man as derogatory. They are usually being referred to the ubiquitous Chinese who are selling inexpensive wares from China. In Indonesia or Malaysia, it might be okay to call the Chinese as "encik" since it may literally mean "sir" or "venerable uncle", thus it is very acceptable or even commendable to their culture. The acceptability of the term however is not universal. I do not see this as an issue on the superiority of a particular language, it is just we are more polite if we do not call the person or a group of persons the name which is objectionable to them. --JinJian (talk) 07:58, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

If what you say is true then the paradoxical situation that still seems to result is that an Indonesian saying encik is considered fine while a Filipino saying intsik isn't. Given the similarity, it might give rise to the perception that there is a double standard or something else at work. Giving a bad gift is offensive; but so is declining a good one. It can work both ways. Lambanog (talk) 11:33, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

I guess it pays knowing your audience. Calling a Chinese National as Intsik or Encik he will probably ignore you. Calling a Chinese Indonesian or Chinese Malaysian an encik he will probably smile at you. But calling a Chinese Filipino as Intsik he will probably frown upon you. If you are talking to everybody I suggest you better use the more neutral term. --JinJian (talk) 11:58, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation, but I think it's a misguided idea that only serves to exclude rather than include. Embracing both Tsino and Intsik I think is ultimately healthier in the long run for community relations. I will keep on using Intsik whenever the occasion calls for it, and in my view anyone else who has ever been thought of as Chinese should do so too. Lambanog (talk) 22:48, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it's appropriate to force people to subscribe to a term they're probably not going to be comfortable with. The remark above, at least from my point of view, sounds very triumphalist and bigoted towards people who may not necessarily embrace the term Intsik: in fact, I'm Chinese and I have not embraced the term at all, with Tsino still being my preference. What is important here is choice: people should be able to choose which term they wish to identify with, and ultimately whichever term they're comfortable with will be the term that they ought to use, Tsino, Intsik or otherwise. Forcing people to use Intsik, even when they're not comfortable with it and especially with its racist connotations in the Philippines despite its honest etymology in the rest of the Malay world (Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore and Brunei), in my opinion goes nowhere towards promoting "healthier community relations": instead, I see potential tyranny from the non-Chinese Filipino majority who seem to believe that their view of the world is more important than everyone else's. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 14:06, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Triumphalist? Bigoted? Upon what do you base that? You say no one is forcing anyone? As I said it works both ways. A neutral policy is one that does not give preference. When there is a statement, however, that one should avoid the term Intsik because it is supposedly negative, that is taking a side. That is not neutral; it is compelling others not to use the term. My question is whether there is justifiable reason to take that side. From my own experience there isn't. Where does your opposition to the term Intsik come from Sky Harbor? Does it come from personal experience? Or from someone else saying they are offended by the term? Do you use the term womyn because some women are offended by woman? If you are like the majority of people you probably don't. Why not? I do not recall the term Tsino being all that common previously but now you say you prefer it? As a Chinese Filipino you can use either term and hardly anyone can accuse you of bias whatever your choice. But you would restrict yourself to one term? Why? Think about it. Lambanog (talk) 14:52, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

"A rose by any other name would smell just as sweet" but "language of diplomacy is also an art by itself". Do what you think is the best my friend. We have our own ways. I enjoy this discourse. Thanks and Best Regards. --JinJian (talk) 23:41, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Admin assistance for undeletion

Any admin tambays here? Please undelete the following government seals deleted because of lacking FU rationales.

• File:DENR_Logo.png for Department of Environment and Natural Resources (Philippines)
• File:DFA_Seal.png for Department of Foreign Affairs (Philippines)
• File:DILG_Seal.png for Department of the Interior and Local Government (Philippines)
• File:NEDA.png for National Economic and Development Authority

I will place the rationales so that these can be used on their respective articles. Thanks. --Bluemask (talk) 06:39, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

All seals have been restored. :) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 10:47, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Marcos Highway

Just earlier I decided to write a disambiguation page on the Marcos Highways. I know of two (the one in Manila and the one in Baguio), but I have a feeling that perhaps there are more highways named "Marcos Highway" at some point in history. Anyone like to help out with filling up the disambig page? --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 12:25, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

I googled a bit:

• [9] MARCOS HIGHWAY,CUYAMBAY,TANAY RIZAL, 341 km Sampaloc, Philippines (wikimapia).
• [10] Penafrancia Hills Subdivision, Marcos Highway, Antipolo City 351 km, Cainta, Philippines (wikimapia)
• [11] Marcos Highway in Marikina (google maps).
• Linda K. Richter (1989). The politics of tourism in Asia. University of Hawaii Press. p. 68. ISBN 9780824811402. says that the Marcos Highway connects Baguio and Agoo, La Union.
• Yiorgos Apostolopoulos; Stella Leivadi; Andrew Yiannakis (1996). The sociology of tourism: theoretical and empirical investigations. Psychology Press. p. 248. ISBN 9780415135085. ditto.
• Dominique Grele; Lily Yousry-Jouve (15 January 2004). 100 resorts in the Philippines: places with a heart. Asiatype, Inc. pp. 72. ISBN 9789719171973. ditto.

There's other stuff out there. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:24, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Those are the ones listed on the disambiguation page. :) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 05:53, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Please visit the Wikimedia Philippines booth at the Y4IT event

Hi fellow Wikipedians, if you have time please visit the Wikimedia Philippines booth at the Bahay ng Alumni, University of the Philippines. We are at booth number 18. Exec8 will entertain you there. :-) The Y4IT event is from Sept. 14 to 17. There are Filipino Wikipedians who will give talks on that event. I'll be giving a talk tomorrow, Sept. 15, about how Wikipedia changed the Internet at the UP Film Center. Sky Harbor will also give a talk on Thursday. On his own capacity, seav will give a talk on Friday on game development as far as I know. --Jojit (talk) 10:49, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

OK I'll try to go. Is it free? I'll try to go after class.--JL 09 ^_q?c 15:47, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I was there yesterday hehehe. Only seav was there and a couple of volunteers. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:57, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Pictures from yesterday's event. --Jojit (talk) 02:30, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

The UP Bahay ng Alumni entrance is free. The event is until Sept 17 only. --Exec8 (talk) 11:56, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

GMA News has an article for this : Wikimedia launches Philippine arm Chitetskoy (talk) 12:58, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Good job guys and congrats on your launch :) Now if only we have some feminine touch in the project. Para paring kasi tayong frat eh (We still look like a fraternity).--Lenticel ^(talk) 06:12, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

It's not really a frat, Lenticel. We have female members in WMPH like my wife, Dong, and our auditor, Jo. Although, they don't have a Wikipedia account. And the booth at Y4iT have female volunteers. :-) [12] --Jojit (talk) 08:13, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Well at least we're okay at the WPMH. Well the tambayan should have more active female wiki editors.--Lenticel ^(talk) 01:05, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Philippine-related articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Philippine-related articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:28, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

people of philippines

balangay/barangay/ is the name of the people now known pilipino-- barangay by scott william —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.1.45.43 (talk) 14:33, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Second Quarterly Meeting (Manila 10)

• Date: September 25, 2010 (Saturday)
• Time: 2:00 PM to 6:00 PM
• Place: UCCP Shalom Center, 1660 L. Ma. Guerrero St., Malate, Manila

See you there! --Exec8 (talk) 14:59, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

sorry i can't make it coz i am going home to bohol on that date...i hope to make it in the next meetings...Pinay (talk•email) 05:49, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

meeting with Senator Chiz Escudero

I had an initial meeting with Senator Chiz Escudero yesterday at his office at Room 517 in the Senate...i will still sked a sit-down meeting with him and us as a group when you are done with the draft/s etc with your proposals. We will include the request of admin Zscout370 re the ph colors, etc. msg me your email so ...i can forward the said email to you...or email me at pinayadiong@gmail.com Let me know when the best time for the meeting will be...Best regards...Pinay (talk•email) 05:50, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

What did you talk about? Is this related to the copyright amendments Exec8 mentioned above? Also, what exactly is Zscout's request about? --seav (talk) 03:44, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Zach wants the new flag specifications so he can draw a new version of the Philippine flag. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 05:50, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

A Philippine Language Wikipedia reached 1OO,OOO articles

On August 24, 2010, the Waray-Waray Wikipedia has reached 100,000 articles with "Burabod" (spring), by JinJian, who has created at least 10,000 one-sentence geographical entries in the previous month. --Exec8 (talk) 15:50, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Statistics: Tables Charts --Exec8 (talk) 16:06, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately most are still stubs. More works to be done, more editors needed and more time to enjoy before these will become full articles. --JinJian (talk) 22:59, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Out of my sampling of 50 random articles... 48 were cities, 1 was a date, and 1 was a pope. All were single sentence mass-generated stubs. TheCoffee (talk) 11:26, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

CONGRATULATIONS Waray-Waray Wikipedia from Bikol Wikipedia!!! A stub is an article. --Filipinayzd (talk) 16:10, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Stubs indeed are articles, but they are not high-quality articles. Inasmuch as we should focus on quantity, this should not dilute quality. Given that Wikipedia is the only extant Waray-Waray encyclopedia, I would have expected greater emphasis on article quality in a bid to make it more authoritative. I'd reasonably expect the same from all Philippine-language Wikipedias. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 01:55, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

These stubs are still works-in-progress. Although progress is quite slow since it is challenged by lack of resources, I still believe that eventually these will develop to become great articles. I believe that Waray-waray wikipedia community is with Sky Harbor in promoting high quality articles. Thank you Bikol Wikipedia especially to Filipinayzed for your congratulatory remark.-- JinJian (talk) 16:52, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Amendments to RA 8293 : Copyright law of the Philippines

A member of Congress got interest in the community's call to amend the Copyright law. He would like to get your inputs and brainstorm. Please place your proposals below. I hope these proposals benefit not only Wikipedia contributors but the whole Philippine Online Community in general since the law doesn't sync anymore with thousands of Filipinos posting different contents online. --Exec8 (talk) 07:42, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

The obvious: amend Section 176 so that royalties don't need to be paid when using government works. Government works hould completely be in the public domain. Just to ask though: who is the congressman? --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 07:50, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

There should be freedom of panorama. Would be useful to know if works in the National Museum are covered or works owned by quasi-government institutions like the SSS which bought those pieces of art by Juan Luna. Whatever the case there should at the very minimum be public photos freely available of the Philippine presidents. The current situation where even Cory Aquino does not have a decent publicly available photograph that does not come from a United States government agency is ridiculous. Lambanog (talk) 08:08, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

As far as I know, the lack of Panoramafreiheit in RA 8293 would mean that it is tolerated. However, a Panoramafreiheit provision would be great as well. Likewise, I think we can use some provisions with respect to the proposed FOIA (Freedom of Information Act). --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 12:32, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Apparently not on Wikipedia sites: Freedom of panorama – Philippines. That page in general might be a good place to research the subtleties of various legislation in different countries on the subject. Lambanog (talk) 01:32, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikimedia is known for being very strict with image licensing after several issues well back in the past (RA 8293 was a very contentious subject of discussion here years ago), at least compared to the Philippine government. For example, the government does not view uploading government seals on Wikipedia as an infringement of Section 176, but Wikimedia views it otherwise because of commercial use provisions in that particular section of RA 8293 which were carried over verbatim from the old, Marcos-era copyright law (Presidential Decree No. 49), parts of which are still in effect today as part of the new copyright law. I hope the government views favorably on this: after all, I don't think the President seriously meant that we have enough laws, and good ones at that which are simply not being enforced. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 02:08, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the suggestions here:

1. Make the (National) Government's works completely public domain. None of this wishy-washy stuff about noncommercial uses.
2. Add a Freedom of Panorama provision. This lack of provision was the reason why a photo by Jojit_fb Exec8 of the Scout Memorial at Tomas Morato was deleted at Commons a few years back.

--seav (talk) 03:47, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

While we are discussing ways to improve the current legislation, I would like to note that we are taking a Wikipedia perspective here and are thus very sensitive to the ways it impedes us as editors. We should also bear in mind, however, the current laws' strengths and take a wider perspective. In many critical ways Philippine copyright law is actually very generous to the public at large. I would hate to see the current provision of 50 years from creation provision replaced for example or the 25 years provision extended. The trend seen in other countries extending copyright protection for longer and longer is actually contrary to the historical attitudes and is one the Philippines should not jump on the bandwagon of. I wonder if there are pressure groups and vested business interests that are going to come out of the woodwork and are silently behind this move for their own interests. I think it would be a larger defeat for the principles Wikipedia stands for if government materials are made completely free but copyright provisions are extended by decades. Also while I like a freedom of panorama provision I recognize there are security concerns that need to be taken into account. Lambanog (talk) 07:06, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't think we ought to limit the public domain provision to just the national government. Technically, under our unitary setup, local governments are but mere extensions of the national government. Let's make it clear that all government works, both national and local, and including works made by GOCCs, be completely be in the public domain.

At the same time, I'm unaware of any moves to extend the duration of copyright. All moves to amend the Intellectual Property Code do not include provisions to extend the duration of copyright. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 08:41, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Actually I was the one who took the photograph at the Scout Monument. I am thinking of retaking the same monument since it was modified to include former mayor Tomas Morato at the tip of the monument. By the way, Here are the websites that will help in your research:

• • • http://www.whitehouse.gov/copyright
    • http://www.whitehouse.gov/privacy
    • https://www.cia.gov/about-cia/site-policies/index.html#copy
    • http://eng.kremlin.ru/about/copyrights
    • http://www.scribd.com/doc/32089191/HB3732-Freedom-of-Information-Bill
    • http://www.bayanmuna.net/n/data/files/HB%200133%20-%20Freedom%20of%20Information%20Act.pdf
    • http://www.bayanmuna.net/n/data/files/HB%201011%20-%20Free%20Open%20Source%20Software%20%28FOSS%29%20Act%20of%202010.pdf

I can only provide the bridge but it is up to you which direction you like to go...--Exec8 (talk) 16:06, 24 September 2010 (UTC).

I would like to see most, if not all goverment-owned creative works (i.e. logos, seals, etc.) to be released under a free license, since it's bloody hard to find a reusable image of a municipal logo or seal for an article. My father, however, cites rampant fraud and racketeering to be the reason why things are restricted in the Philippines when it comes to copyright, as it is relatively easy, according to him, to slap an official seal in a document or a vehicle, and use it in bad faith, although I don't know of anything that backs up his claim. Blake Gripling (talk) 10:33, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Blake here. I hope the Philippine government will release these images (especially the logos) and other photo releases under Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution Philippines or similar license so that these would be freely and widely circulated. This will greatly improve our articles especially the politician bios. --Bluemask (talk) 13:38, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lotho Lotho

Hi, can anyone please look at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lotho Lotho and see if it can be tidied up, accepted as a live article, or whatever? Thanks,  Chzz  ►  03:33, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Version 0.8

As requested here, we are using a later version of the Philippines article. Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 02:22, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

List of Philippine restaurant chains

There is currently a dispute at List of Philippine restaurant chains. Could editors take a look and give an opinion on the talk page? Thanks. Lambanog (talk) 04:45, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Re: Suggestion that "Battles of the Philippines" be merged with "Philippine insurrection campaigns"

The term insurrection has undesirable connotations. I oppose this proposal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shirley Locks (talk • contribs) 02:28, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

On what grounds is the move being done? I'm kinda sitting on the fence on this one unless I get more information: the name can go either way depending on what the article contains. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 04:24, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

From my understanding looking at the merge templates used, it is the other way around: it is being suggested List of Philippine insurrection campaigns be merged into Battles of the Philippine–American War. I would not have a problem with that, but I would if it was the reverse. Lambanog (talk) 12:40, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

ilokano wikipedia

I am happy that there is an increase activity in the ilocano wikipedia. unfortunately it's all annons. an admin should be nominated. --Exec8 (talk) 15:43, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Encourage the anon to register first. ;) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 15:48, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

LGU Wikiproject to be highlighted at Statistics Convention

Peeps, The Local Government Unit Wikiproject will be on display at the 11th National Convention on Statistics (NCS). This will be a good opportunity for collaboration and resource sharing. Please place your inputs and we will gather them. --Exec8 (talk) 03:47, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikimedia Philippines is currently participating in the 11th National Convention on Statistics which happens today and tomorrow. As a direct consequence, we have the opportunity to ask for data and support from the National Statistics Office and the National Statistical Coordination Board. It would be really great if we can get hold of their vast stock of data, current and historical, because we can then use these to improve the articles in Wikipedia.

I guess the main beneficiaries would be the articles on the country's Local Government Units. The NSO and NSCB's data on population, demographics, and local economy would be very helpful.

In order to really talk with NSO and NSCB, we need to prepare a "project proposal" that we should present to these agencies this month. To that end, I have started a documentation page at Meta Wiki to document our plans: meta:Wikimedia_Philippines/Projects/NSO-NSCB_Support. I hope you can all provide your ideas and suggestions.

Please don't reply here; reply at the Meta Wiki talk page. Thanks! --seav (talk) 14:58, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Going back here, the Department of Tourism is also interested with this project, especially with this news. stay tuned. --Exec8 (talk) 16:35, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

I left comments on Meta which were left unanswered. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 08:52, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Re: SC reverses its ruling on the cityhood of 16 towns, again!

Taking up the discussion about the SC reversing its ruling on the cityhood of 16 towns again, I've noticed that three of the 16 towns -- Tandag, Surigao del Sur, Catbalogan, Samar, and Bayugan, Agusan del Sur -- are again referred to as cities. Mong Alcaraz, 112.198.79.240, and 125.212.34.94 undid Nickrds09's edits.--Emaster82 (talk) 21:15, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

This could've been handled better if all city articles are titled without the word "City" on them, except for disambiguation, and the prose follows suit. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 03:18, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

I also think that the word "City" is unncessary and should therefore be eliminated from the article names of Philippine cities. We could open a discussion for possible multiple page request move and probably have a list of which cities should be exempted. What do you think?--JinJian (talk) 03:57, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm been pushing for this for years now. See Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Task force LGU#Naming conventions for cities (and other LGUs in general). –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 05:20, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Personally, I still prefer keeping 'City' in articles. The main problem with this is that consensus can never be reached with respect to any renaming, since from my point of view, several vantage points have to be considered as well. As Wikipedia competes with formal media, for example, we also have to consider that formal media uses 'xxxx City' as standard, save for newer cities like Biñan or Dasmariñas. The Philippine-language Wikipedias also use 'xxxx City' in their article names. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 08:12, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

I'd dispute that. See these hopefully random example for Olongapo City:

1. [13] In the news article, the phrase "Olongapo City" only appears once in the lead, the title of the article and the rest of the text, it only uses "Olongapo."
2. [14] In this article, the name "Olongapo" appears twice: On the lead, it's affixed with the word "City," while on the next appearance there's no more "City" word.

Here are a couple more examples, this time for Baguio City:

1. [15] Same instance in the first Olongapo example.
2. [16] Ditto above.

–HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 08:55, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

The article name "Philippines" is not even styled as "Republic of the Philippines". --JinJian (talk) 11:25, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

We'd only be moving that to the "Republic of the Philippines" title if there are two or more Philippineses like the two Chinas, Koreas, etc.... which is primarily my suggestion from the get-go on the naming of Philippine cities. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 14:29, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Just to give some context, practically everyone who has ever given an opinion on this subject has more or less agreed that the "City" suffix is unnecessary: me, HTD, Polaron, TheCoffee, and now Jinjian. Sky Harbor is the only hold out. :-D I suggest we continue/move this to the Task force LGU talk page. --seav (talk) 13:25, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for singling me out. ;)

Anyway, opinions notwithstanding, I think we can use further discussion on the matter and, if need be, we can compromise. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 14:15, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

I posted my comments at Wikipedia_talk:Tambayan_Philippines/Task_force_LGU#Article_names_for_Philippine_cities:_.3Ccityname.3E_.3Ccity.3E. I hope that we could reach consensus. We need a lot of support for the big move. --JinJian (talk) 11:48, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Cry of Pugad Lawin

I wonder whether it should be under Cry of Balintawak with Pugad Lawin as the redirect - the reverse of the current state. It was an academic dispute until GMA's dad declared it to be Pugad Lawin in 1963, but these sources make a good case for the assertion that "Pugad Lawin" is just plain wrong. In particular, the second one says one of the three guys who together claimed the cry took place in "Pugad Lawin" (as opposed to everyone else who said the cry took place in "Balintawak", which then encompassed a wider area than today) later admitted he'd deserted the Katipuneros before any of them got to tearing cedulas or fighting the guardia civil. Note that the second event was the 'original' definition of the "Cry" (the first fight) until these guys came along and emphasized the tearing of cedulas instead. (But in some accounts these occurred on the same day, so there should be no conflict.) Teodoro Agoncillo followed their lead, and Pres. Macapagal followed Agoncillo, etc. Asado (talk) 07:35, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Policy page in the article namespace

Ethnic groups in the Philippines/Pictures This appears to be a suggested policy for this WikiProject, but it is in the article namespace. I have suggested deletion of the page without a redirect and am alerting this WikiProject in case you want to move this material to your Project's namespace. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:32, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Legazpi Village in Makati City

Dear Wikipedians living in the Philippines, could someone volunteer to start this empty but obviously important notable article? Feel free to leave any comments here? Zollerriia63 (talk) 10:17, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

How is it notable, especially with respect to WP:NOTE? --seav (talk) 13:26, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

That is possibly attainable. If someone does it s/he should nom it at WP:DYKS. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 14:31, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikimedia Philippines is located there. --Exec8 (talk) 05:24, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

My only concern with the article's notability is that Legazpi Village technically is not a barangay. More appropriately, Legazpi Village refers to the non-gated area of San Lorenzo, similar to how Salcedo Village refers to the non-gated area of Bel-Air that lies within the CBD. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 17:44, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

How do you call individual provincial legislatures in English?

Do you call Cebu's provincial legislature as "Cebu Provincial Board," "Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Cebu," "Cebu Provincial Council," or by some other name? See Talk:Sangguniang Panlalawigan. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 02:40, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Palawan

What region does Palawan belong?

• MIMAROPA of the Region IV - Palawan articles, maps, etc. here in Wikipedia says that Palawan is in MIMAROPA.
• Region VI - Visayas article (see here) cites EO 429 as the basis of Palawan and Puerto Princesa as part of VI.--JL 09 ^_q?c 10:58, 22 October 2010 (UT;C)

Palawan belongs in MIMAROPA. EO 429 was stayed by Administrative Order No. 129, which was issued just a few months after then-President Arroyo issued that EO after opposition from the residents of Palawan. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 11:07, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks.--JL 09 ^_q?c 11:09, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Binahian

Really, how could the article Binahian have been assessed as Start-class? Have you even looked at the article? Actually, even calling it an "article" is a bit of a stretch. It's someone's personal essay on their home town, and it blatantly admits it. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not someone's personal website or blog. I would have deleted the article this morning but the proposal for deletion only expires in the evening. I can't wait for it to be deleted. JIP | Talk 09:52, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for raising your concern. Since the article was already deleted, I could not provide a specific answer. But as you know (since you are an admin here), Wikipedia is a voluntary project and somebody simply volunteered to assess that article. Of course this assessment may be wrong and a single user's edits is not an endorsement by this WikiProject as to that article's correct assessment. You should just have been patient and should have waited for the WP:PROD to expire instead of simply commenting here. After all, there is no deadline. Thanks, and have a good day. --seav (talk) 00:42, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Just mentioning that the Romblon, Romblon article (just one example) went through a similar phase. See e.g., this old version of that article. Binahian isn't listed among the Municipalities and Cities of Camarinas Sur, it's apparently a barangay of Sipocot, Camarines Sur. If I've got the right place here, it looks a nicely sited waterfront town, not too remote. From some googling, it looks like there are efforts afoot to increase its notability as a tourism destination. Maybe the rest of you already knew all of that, but digging it up was an interesting diversion from running through my watchlist. One factoid I stumbled across is that "Binahian" is apparently the Filipino name for Sauropus androgynus[17] It appears to pass WP:GNG. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:45, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

About the Midnight DJ logo

I had recently added a photo of a logo of the said show. Hope that you would appreciate my contribution. Thank You & God Bless You. -NoFoolz —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nofoolz (talk • contribs) 04:57, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

About the Juicy! logo

I had recently added a photo of a logo of the said show. Actually I got it from the TV5 official website and i had only cut the right portion of the image which supposedly included the three hosts of the show. Hope that you would appreciate my contribution. Thank You & God Bless You. -NoFoolz —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nofoolz (talk • contribs) 05:23, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Pascual H. Poblete

Notable enough for Wikipedia? Can somebody do this favor for us? Thanks.--JL 09 ^_q?c 12:35, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

If you think he is, then be bold and do it. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 14:15, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

The content from the tl article may be imported to start with... 110.5.70.146 (talk) 09:52, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

See WP:GNG -- "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article." Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:04, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

The Supreme Court "legalizes" plagiarism!

Apparently, Filipinos, according to this blog post posted on Technograph, now have a right no other country has: the right to plagiarize! What do you think this can mean for Wikipedia? --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 11:09, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

No effect on Filipino Wikipedians. The Wikipedia policies follows United States laws since its servers are at the US. --Bluemask (talk) 17:39, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Not exactly: as far as I know the Philippine-language projects, for example, follow Philippine law by convention in addition to U.S. law (similar to arrangements with other Wikipedias like the Italian and Japanese Wikipedias), so it could complicate things on that end. The issue over all those images used by media outlets without credit could likewise be thrown out as well because of this case. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 18:27, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

From what I read, yes, the Japanese Wikipedia follows both Japanese and US laws. In the case of image use, they used the more restrictive law, i.e. the Japanese law. For the Philippine-language Wikimedia projects, the more restrictive law for "copying" and "plagiarism" will the the US law. That is why I said the Supreme Court decision will have no effect here. My two cents. --Bluemask (talk) 20:54, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Tangent: IMO, the fact that, for example, the Japanese Wikipedia follows Japanese laws and the Italian Wikipedia follows Italian laws is not something dictated by WMF but is just decided by their respective communities. I don't agree with those communities' position since the Wikipedia projects are language-based, not country-based. For example, the Portuguese Wikipedia does not follow Portuguese laws because that will alienate the Brazilian Wikipedians. It just so happens that the majority of Japanese Wikipedians are in Japan and the same goes for the Italian Wikipedia. I don't agree that we do the same for the Philippine-language Wikipedias. (Of course, individual Wikipedians ought to do lawful things in their country of residence, but this should not be a project-wide policy.) --seav (talk) 00:35, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Following Philippine laws sometimes though becomes inevitable, especially since most Wikipedians who contribute in the Philippine-language projects are based in the Philippines (which is why I said "by convention", not "per policy"). For example, the Tagalog Wikipedia uses freer Philippine standards for what is and what is not considered fair use, unlike stricter U.S. standards. Just earlier this year three students from the Ateneo were suspended for plagiarizing from Wikipedia, which is why I brought the issue to the community's attention. We can't deny the fact that there are students who willfully copy Wikipedia content and pass it off as their own, and now they are supposedly legally empowered to do so thanks to some Supreme Court justice who copied text just to come to his conclusion about comfort women. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 03:16, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the impact of the ruling is being exaggerated. The Supreme Court will later say that the applicability of their ruling is "narrow" and will attempt to restrict the applicability as much as possible to that particular case. Just watch. Lambanog (talk) 06:30, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Lambanog is/will be right, especially if the High Court continues to receive flak for this decision. 110.5.70.146 (talk) 09:50, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

<Cityname> <City>

Notices were posted to all talk pages of Philippine cities, announcing the discussion for possible removal of the word "City", from most of their article titles, and providing disambiguation if necessary. Perhaps after a reasonable time of discussion, request for page moves may be made. You may participate here--JinJian (talk) 07:33, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Request for page moves

Requests for page moves have already been made. See

1. Talk:Baguio_City#Requested_move
2. Talk:Tacloban_City#Requested_move
3. Talk:Kabankalan_City#Requested_move
4. Talk:Tagbilaran_City#Requested_move
5. Talk:Science City of Muñoz#Requested_move
6. Talk:Naga City#Requested_move
7. Talk:Bacolod City#Requested_move
8. Talk:Valencia City, Bukidnon#Requested_move
9. Talk:San Fernando City, Pampanga#Requested_move
10. Talk:Lucena City#Requested_move
11. Talk:Alaminos City#Requested_move --JinJian (talk) 07:33, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
12. Talk:Calamba City#Requested_move--JinJian (talk) 14:49, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Massive uploading of articles (again) on the Tagalog Wikipedia

Hi guys. While I'm normally happy with the growth of the Tagalog Wikipedia, I'm becoming increasingly concerned about how while we're growing in terms of the number of articles, we're not growing in terms of the number of contributors, and consequently article growth I fear is becoming too unsustainable for the community as a whole. We're seeing again a resurgence of massive numbers of stubs being uploaded to the Tagalog Wikipedia, this time with a focus on Italian communes, PBA players and even Chief Justices of the Supreme Court (of the Philippines). Since I'm not too sure of being able to restart discussions on the Tagalog Wikipedia, I'm doing so here. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 10:03, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

To bring a semblance of urgency to the issue: the depth of the Tagalog Wikipedia has gone down from 33 just two months ago to 26 today. I'm not sure how to interpret these numbers. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 07:31, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

voters identification card

i am too worried about our commision on elections ID system due to lots of back logs i aplied for voters ID since 2005 but until now i havent receive my voters ID card i enquired to our local comelec elections office but as per advice they are releasing ID cards 2003 ID card.. wow that is our computerazation program.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.201.9.23 (talk) 02:17, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

This is not the place for this, but I do have to get my voters ID card, way overdue since 2004 lol –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 09:38, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

What do you call Gilberto Teodoro's party?

See Talk:Lakas Kampi – Christian Muslim Democrats#Ridiculous new article name. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 09:37, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Please help me with this little research :)

It's about the history of the Philippine Revolution, specifically the Battle of Binakayan or the Battle of Dalahican.

So this thing says that the attack on Dalahican was headed by somebody named General Riego de Dios. As far as I know, there are three "Riego de Dios" in Philippine history: (1) Emiliano Riego de Dios, war secretary of Tejeros Convention and Republic of Biak-na-Bato; (2) Mariano Riego de Dios; and (3) Vicente Riego de Dios. All of them are siblings and members of Katipunan. I don't know what the site is talking about, but does it mean that there's another Riego de Dios, and he's a Spanish general? (Or maybe a Filipino general commanding forces for Spanish colonial government?) I am considering to include Ramon Blanco as general of the battle, especially he sent those troops to finish attack Magdiwang and Magdalo trenches around the area.

Correct me if I'm wrong: is Dalahican part of Kawit, Cavite (where the small village of Binakayan is located), or is it in Noveleta? I remember saying that Dalahican is a bay that connects the rivers within Kawit, so Katipunan's occupation to fortifications at Dalahican would protect the Binakayan forts and the rest of inland Cavite, from Spanish attacks. That's the basis why Aguinaldo and his friends started and successfully liberated Cavite towns little by little at the end of 1896 and start of 1897. Why? This thing says that on November 9, Blanco launched simultaneous attacks on Binakayan and Noveleta, and this book says that Blanco and his friends attacked Binakayan and Dalahican at November 9, so maybe Dalahican Bay is in Noveleta. It also makes sense, because Noveleta is adjacent to Kawit (well, Binakayan is part of Kawit).

Okay, the link also says that the assault at Binakayan itself is headed by someone named Col. Jose Marina. I believe that this is confirmed. Howeverm this one points that it is not Riego de Dios, it is Diego de los Rios. OMG? What's the truth? Need help. Thanks.--JL 09 ^_q?c 08:41, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

As far as I know Dalahican is part of Noveleta near the border of present day Cavite City. Cavite City is of strategic importance as it guards the southern mouth of Manila Bay, the Americans later established a base there at Sangley Point. If you look at a map, you will see it is connected to the rest of Cavite by a narrow isthmus. Binakayan is a commercial area that is part of Kawit on the border of Mabolo, Bacoor. The bridge there is an important crossing. I do not know the historical details but my impression is that the Battles of Binakayan and Dalahican represent two separate engagements carried out simultaneously in different parts of Cavite. Lambanog (talk) 15:20, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Sonia M. Zaide (1999), The Philippines: a unique nation, All-Nations Pub., pp. 238–239, ISBN 9789716420715 has a section headed "Twin Battles of Binakayan and Dalahican" which says that a Spanish General named Diego de los Rios commanded the column of the Spanish invading troops which attacked Dalacan against Magdiwag and Magdalo forces. Also see nthis. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:24, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks friends. I realized (after visiting several sources, like the Memoirs, Davis' 1903 report about Philippine situation during the end of Spanish era, etc.), that the detail of this website about the head of Dalahican assault was wrong, not Riego de Dios but really Diego de los Rios. Thanks :) --JL 09 ^_q?c 08:26, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Photos of Philippine President

Why can't we use or upload copies the conventional photos of Philippine presidents? I mean those pictures that can be bought at the bookstore, for example, this Roxas' picture. It would be better than infoboxes that have pictures taken in sideview, cropped or like they are stolen shots.--JL 09 ^_q?c 08:07, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikimedia considers works of Philippine government as non-free (see Template:Non-free Philippines government) as such their use will be covered by Non-free content guidelines. --Bluemask (talk) 09:04, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikimedia Philippines hopes to fix that: we're working on a position paper with respect to RA 9184 to facilitate the eventual amendment of that law in order to release all Philippine government works into the full public domain. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 10:43, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Another note

Another note, I noticed that the template {{Philippine Revolution}} has the date 1896-1898, which is correct in history, but the contents include events and persons that happened to be in Philippine American War. For example, McKinley, the Commonwealth, Treaty of Manila, has nothing to do with the 1896-1898 Revolution but they all have strong connection to the Philippine American War. How about I suggest creating a template for the Philippine American War? Thanks.--JL 09 ^_q?c 08:24, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

WikiPilipinas

How is WikiProject Philippines related to WikiPilipinas at http://www.wikipilipinas.org/ ? — Stevey7788 (talk) 06:04, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

By the way, I made an list of Ilokano folk songs on http://en.wikipilipinas.org/index.php?title=Ilocano_folk_songs Could this be moved to either the English, Tagalog, or Ilokano Wikipedias? — Stevey7788 (talk) 06:06, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

As far as I know they are unrelated, although WikiPilipinas uses articles and open source software that were previously developed and used on Wikipedia. It seems WikiPilipinas is now trying to move away from Wikipedia content. Lambanog (talk) 06:33, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

First, Wikipedia and WikiPilipinas ARE NOT related, and we have had to deal with this issue in the past. Secondly, you can rewrite the article, but you cannot copy verbatim from WikiPilipinas as GFDL-only content is no longer accepted on Wikipedia. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 07:27, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

And to add to that, WPilipinas' editing style would not pass under WP's pillars, for one thing, those people over there don't care about NPOV, and you could practically write anything and everything without getting speedied or AFD'd. IIRC some editors over there are former WP users who were put down here for disruptive behaviour (such as making Miszabot socks to eliminate references to an article they made but later deleted) --Eaglestorm (talk) 14:07, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

If it helps, there are some users on WPinas who only join to write about themselves. WPinas doesn't mind if you write about yourself, and there's no such thing as COI over there. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 11:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Vandal on Imortal page

This user (User:Oftencrazy101) just vandalized the Imortal page. Please do something about this. Thank you...--DisneySalt (talk) 16:21, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Kindly report him to WP:AIV. -- Joaquin008 ^(talk) 09:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Epifanio de los Santos

I did major edits on Epifanio de los Santos especially the article is more like an essay. Can somebody help me on removing some phrases?--JL 09 ^_q?c 18:33, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

According to User:Rdmelo, Epifanio was known for being the "First Filipino Academician" and "A Man of so Many Talents". We do need some reliable sources to support those claims. -- Joaquin008 ^(talk) 09:28, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Bad references on showbiz-related articles

If possible, everyone is encouraged to removed bad references -- those coming from blogs such as Starmometer and Mukamo. Only newspapers, magazines and PEP.ph are allowed here. If removed most but Mukamo references are plenty. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 08:25, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Aye-aye, sir. By the way, would it be appropriate if we have those Starmometer links blacklisted, too? Blake Gripling (talk) 04:09, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Watch the Anons & Sneaky Vandalizers

Recently, anon IP's such as 46.42.120.131 have been making reckless edits to articles such as Zamboanga City. Often content is deleted randomly (sneaky vandalism) - and surprisingly, often no one reverts these edits. — Stevey7788 (talk) 08:37, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Proposal for Tagalog Wikisource

Someone has launched a proposal for a Tagalog Wikisource on Meta. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 09:10, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

User:Democraticsystem and User:Philippinepresidency

These guys (might be one person) have/has been adding galleries and addng "from Tarlac" (s/he/they even edited "Imelda Marcos from Ilocos Norte" WTF) in presidential election articles. There are two problems with this:

Philippine media doesn't say "Mar Roxas from Capiz" in the same way as American media say "Barack Obama from Illinois."

I'd probably accept a gallery if there are at least 5 images (in which case the gallery will have 2 rows); if there's only one row of images (most of the time there is only ONE image), and sometimes the images used are already found at the infobox.

It also doesn't help these two won't respond for anything I tell them. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 05:01, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

If their edits are problematic they can be reported to ANI or perhaps better AN to start off with. From what I've seen their edits can be interpreted as constructive—even if I may not agree with many of them myself—and may not be enough of a concern yet to resort to any action, so building a consensus and maybe some comments and warnings if warranted would be called for first. Lambanog (talk) 05:17, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

The problem is s/he/they won't respond. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 05:22, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

There is currently a similar case at ANI with an uncommunicative editor [18] but the editor in question there seems to have had lots of warnings already and seems more disruptive. If these editors cannot be ignored and are edit warring you might have grounds to pursue further action. Lambanog (talk) 05:30, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

No idea with that case on AN/I but this/these guy/s, as you've said, may be editing constructively, but others may not agree it's the best course. The thing is you can't block this/these guy/s properly w/out all of the drama there because some people may think the edits were constructive. If it's on a more limited group of people who understand why the edit was not the best course, we could do something w/ less drama. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 05:49, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Are mass copy-pastings from couple of external articles counted as constructive edits?--JL 09 ^_q?c 10:34, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Barangay

Is there any notability guideline for barangay articles in Wikipedia? For example, majority of the articles comprising the template of Cabuyao, Laguna says nothing much of it but have the same contents, like the table listing the 2007 census.--JL 09 ^_q?c 05:17, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

There isn't any because by principle, barangays are inherently not notable, with certain exceptions. It's reflective of the AfD track record of many of these articles. Some were kept, some were deleted and others had no consensus. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 05:51, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Migs Paneda Asian F3 driver

The article on Filipino driver Migs Paneda has been tagged as an unreferenced BLP since December 2008, which is the current focus month for the BLP Rescue Project. I have tried, and failed, to find any reliable sources to support the text in this article and I wonder whether someone here might be kind enough to take a look. The article seems to have been created originally by someone connected to the subject. I can't help thinking that a driver who came to "...dominate the Asian Formula 3 Circuit." should be easier to find sources for than is, in fact, the case. It'll go to AfD if it continues to be unsourced.--Plad2 (talk) 19:13, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

This smells like a 2-year old hoax. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 19:20, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

It's a hoax. The article is unverifiable and I'm surprised about its age. I support the deletion. –Joaquin008 ^(talk) 10:37, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Gas leak at Makati

I'm considering creating an article for this one. What's a good article title? 2010 Makati gas leak? West Tower condominium gas leak or FPIC pipeline gas leak or something else? –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 11:26, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Creating a page about this could be a good idea. For the article title, I would choose between West Tower condominium gas leak or FPIC pipeline gas leak. As of now, the name 2010 Makati gas leak is not appropriate, since there are no other articles regarding gas leaks in the Philippines. By the way, that's my opinion. –Joaquin008 ^(talk) 11:53, 7 November 2010 (UTC)