Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Archive 52

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 45←Archive 50Archive 51Archive 52Archive 53

Imported music common between PH, MY, ID, SG, HK and TW

Maybe I just rekindled a discussion about Western songs and artists largely known in PH, but I just found out some artists and songs mostly known in PH are also known to some degree in Indonesia, Malaysia or even Hong Kong and Taiwan/ROC. It seems there is this similarity in between PH, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and also Hong Kong and Taiwan in regard to popular imported music that might be discussed in some article (in a similar vein to "big in Japan"). Just noticed some Filipino artists like Regine, Christian Bautista and Jose Mari Chan have some following in Indonesia (through their English songs) from a cursory glance of Indonesia imported music playlists on Spotify. Other similarities between PH, Indonesia, (and to some degree HK) is with things like adult contemporary music (sentimental songs, including from artists not well known in the West, popular on radio), imported 90s-00s boy bands (Westlife and A1 in particular), and dance music (Eurodance popular also on radio, "Dying Inside" also a 90s best-selling single across maritime SEA). Maybe this is discussed already in articles of the artists and songs largely known in either PH or ID, but is this something worth an article to discuss about or something best discussed at least briefly in each country's/territory's "Music of X" article? TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 10:50, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

There is Music of Southeast Asia, although it's less an article than a disambiguation page. This does seem to be a topic that is covered in sources, [1],[2], so observations could be placed somewhere. CMD (talk) 15:16, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
@Chipmunkdavis: I just read one of the sources, but I didn't find anything about Western/imported music in particular, especially things like ballads or dance music predominant on radio. In particular are Western AC or dance hits that feature heavily on PH/ID/MY/SG/HK/TW radio programming and had popularity in those countries. Well, most of such songs did chart in the West and/or Japan, but there are lots of those that are largely known within SEA/HK/TW due to record sales, radio airplay and cover releases from local artists. With the exclusion of the majority which charted in multiple Western countries plus Japan, such examples are:
  • Rainbow's "Temple of the King" (single released in SEA only, as well as New Zealand and South America)
  • Queen's "Love of My Life" (single from A Night at the Opera; recurrent on PH radio; actually also best-selling single in South America, esp. Argentina)
  • Rex Smith's "Simply Jessie" (recurrent on PH radio, and had some cover versions by PH artists; actually have charted for 6 weeks on 1979 US Billboard Easy Listening/Adult Contemporary chart)
  • George Benson "Nothing's Gonna Change My Love for You" original version (recurrents on PH/ID radio; later version by Glenn Medeiros charted in US, Canada, UK and Europe)
  • Scorpions' power ballads "Holiday", "Always Somewhere" and "When the Smoke is Going Down" (album tracks from Lovedrive and Blackout, all never released as singles; recurrents on PH radio)
  • Nazareth's power ballad "Where are You Now?" (album track from Sound Elixir)
  • Cliff Richard's "Ocean Deep" (recurrent in PH/HK radio; have cover versions from PH artists, also has Cantonese cover versions in HK)
  • Russell Hitchcock's "Someone Who Believes" and "I Can't Believe My Eyes" (singles as solo artist outside Air Supply; recurrent on PH radio)
  • Timmy Thomas's "Dying Inside (to Hold You)" (PH/ID/MY/SG best-selling single in the 90s by certified or claimed sales; has PH cover version by Darren Espanto)
  • Chris Norman's "Some Hearts are Diamonds" (PH AC radio recurrents; actually also had charted in Germany)
  • Steelheart's power ballad "She's Gone" (from debut album; recurrent on PH radio; actually had charted on US Billboard Hot 100)
  • White Lion's power ballads "You're All I Need" and "Till Death Do Us Part" (singles from Mane Attraction; recurrents on PH/ID radio)
  • Rick Price's "Heaven Knows" (from his SEA bestseller album in the 90s)
  • Michael Learns to Rock (90s best-selling artist across SEA and also HK and TW)
  • "I Wanna Be Close to You" (PH dance hit and radio recurrent)
  • Fra Lippo Lippi (had best-selling albums in PH in the 90s, including PH-only releases)
  • David Pomeranz (80s-90s hit: 1998 greatest hits album 13th best-selling album in PH by PARI certifications; some songs such as "Got to Believe" and "Born for You" used on teleserye soundtracks and received cover versions)
  • "Passenger Seat" by Stephen Speaks (2001 PH best-selling single)
TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 17:14, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
@Chipmunkdavis: To expand on the point about popularity of old adult contemporary/easy listening songs, of note is that Western 70s-80s soft rock/folk/MOR/easy listening artists are still a mainstay of SEA AC radio stations (not sure about HK or TW), with artists like the Carpenters, Simon & Garfunkel, James Taylor, Don McLean, Lobo, Jim Croce, Bread, Seals & Crofts, England Dan and John Ford Coley, America, Barry Manilow, John Denver, Ann Murray, Barbra Streisand, Little River Band, Player, David Soul, Olivia Newton-John, Linda Ronstadt, Dionne Warwick, Melissa Manchester, Michael Johnson, Randy VanWarmer, Bette Midler, Air Supply, Stephen Bishop and Dan Fogelberg still having much airplay, and are also karaoke favorites (Lobo in particular had seen success in Asia following drop from Western chart popularity from the 80s afterwards). Ballads from 80s and 90s female teen pop stars like Tiffany ("Could've Been" and "All This Time"), Debbie Gibson ("Foolish Beat" and "Lost in Your Eyes") or Taylor Dayne ("Love Will Lead You Back") have something similar as well, still having AC airplay in PH, ID and MY. Same can be said of some 70s-90s soul and R&B acts such as James Ingram (with "Just Once"), George Benson (with the original "Nothing's Gonna Change My Love for You"), Charlene (with "I've Never Been to Me") Jeffrey Osborne (with "On the Wings of Love"), Atlantic Starr (with "Secret Lovers", "Always" and "Masterpiece"), Natalie Cole (with "Miss You Like Crazy") or even Diana Ross (with "It's My Turn", "When You Tell Me that You Love Me" and "If We Hold on Together"). Same also goes with ballads from acts like Gloria Estefan (with "Words Get in the Way"), Chaka Khan (with "Through the Fire") and the Jets (with "Make It Real" and "You Got It All"). The original "Especially for You" by Kylie Minogue with Jason Donovan was a hit in the UK, Europe and Australia, was also a radio hit in SEA, not to mention it later got a PH cover version from MYMP; Spandau Ballet's "Through the Barricades" (also a UK and Australia hit) and Phil Oakey's "Together in Electric Dreams" (also a UK and Australia hit) are also SEA radio hits. In addition to those by the Scorpions and Nazareth, power ballads from FireHouse such as "Love of a Lifetime" and "When I Look into Your Eyes" has also heavy airplay across SEA (as well as Japan) due to band's success in those regions, so are Bad English's "When I See You Smile" (#1 in most of the West), Restless Heart's "When She Cries", Styx's "Babe" (#1 in US and Canada), "The Best of Times" (#1 in Canada), and "Don't Let It End", Survivor's "Ever Since the World Began" (album track from Eye of the Tiger) and "The Search is Over".
Maybe I was rambling, but after all, what has been causing me to bring this up again and again is with Western songs frequently heard on PH radio not being heard much in stations in Canada (where I moved). Well, lots of 70s, 80s and 90s Western AC songs I hear on PH AC radio did appear on the Canadian charts, but they are surprisingly less played on Canadian AC radio nowadays due to older slow songs being less played and more uptempo AC hits being introduced, and requirement of Canadian content; some 70s artists/song I still hear on Canadian AC radio are the like of Elton John, ABBA and some of Anne Murray, plus Fleetwood Mac, Peter Frampton, Roberta Flack, Eagles, Dan Hill, etc. For 80s, still lots (Lionel Richie, Richard Marx, Christopher Cross, Journey, Chicago, the Police, Heart, Bryan Adams, Corey Hart, Foreigner, Bon Jovi, etc.) but never heard anything such as those aforementioned teen stars (Tiffany's cover version of Tommy James & the Shondells "I Think We're Alone Now" is still heard there but not her ballads, there is nothing of Debbie Gibson, and for Taylor Dayne, only her upbeat pop hits such as "Tell It to My Heart" are played, but usually on classic hits stations) or of those aforementioned R&B acts, and the only Air Supply songs I heard also in Canada are "Lost in Love" and "All Out of Love" (both appearing on the 1980 top 40 there). Also another reason for these discussions is the lack of good charts indicative or their overall popularity in PH; all we have is either reported album or singles sales, as well as radio airplay. The other reason is with the discoveries from searches for popular Western music playlists from Indonesia and HK on Spotify, which I highlighted previously. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 02:48, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
From discussions with those in the international music industry (OR), the Philippines is unique in its regular playing of old music on the radio. I don't know if that tracks across other areas of Southeast/East Asia as you mention, maybe it does to lesser extents, but that is probably why you are not hearing the same songs in Canada and the US. Sadly I can't find any sources on this at a glance, there is plenty of writing about fusions of regionally produced music within the region, but not of western music within the region. CMD (talk) 03:44, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
@Chipmunkdavis You can keep on finding any good academic or industry sources regarding Western music on Southeast Asia, but the problem then is where to include the info. The thing for me is maritime SEA (particularly Philippines and Indonesia), and HK to some degree, has such fondness for old, sentimental ballads that predominated local music in the 70; in particular AC radio in those regions are dominated by old music (70s to 90s) and many soft Western hits are still played in what strikes to be something reminiscent of Galápagos syndrome in contrast with North American AC radio that have largely phased them out of airplay due to need to improve ratings and advertiser appeal. Without having to bring up lots of artists and songs as I did previously, as an example, Celine Dion, Mariah Carey and Whitney Houston are kind of venerated as divas in maritime SEA (PH in particular), with their albums selling reaching gold and diamond, and many of their songs becoming permanent fixtures in local AC radio (and their songs usually played together, especially during lunchtime). The continuing airplay of Western teen pop ballads in SEA such as of those songs by Tiffany, Debbie Gibson and Taylor Dayne makes wonders for me, but may also be driven by the popularity on radio of similar, contemporaneous local acts (like Sharon Cuneta, Rachel Alejandro, Sheryl Cruz and Smokey Mountain, for PH).
Maybe why Philippine AC radio continues playing older Western AC tunes is because they play softer 70s-90s OPM from the same eras and stations are trying to build the mood by adding similar and contemporaneous imported content. Ihat may hold true to some degree for ID, MY, SG, and HK, with their local pop scenes (i.e. Indopop, pop Melayu, Cantopop) during the same decades also being predominantly soft and ballad-driven, and such songs also the mainstay in local AC radio.
Like with Japan, SEA has also been a lucrative market for Western acts that had modest to no success in the Western market, despite challenges from rampant music piracy and religious/social conservatism.
At last, Southeast Asian radio, with the lack of local charts until recently, have to depend on locally-certified best-selling albums and singles, or foreign charts such as Billboard Hot 100 or UK singles charts for content to fill in their playlists. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 05:11, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Just to provide an idea of the prevalence of older non-Filipino hits on PH AC radio, here's a sample of Western AC songs played between around 1:30-2:30PM (Philippine Standard Time) on two Tagalog-language AC stations DWSM and DWYS and around 3:00PM-3:30 PM (Philippine Standard Time) on English-language AC station DWRK. This excludes cover versions by Filipino artists. DWSM plays also some 50s-early 70s oldies in its regular weekday/Saturday afternoon programming, which I excluded in favor of recurrents from the 70s to present.
From DWSM
from DWYS
from DWRK
TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 06:46, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
@Chipmunkdavis You can keep trying for sources regarding the choice of imported/Western popular music in Southeast Asian radio, especially AC. To me, PH AC radio (especially soft AC and contemporary MOR/masa, as well as Filipino-oriented radio overseas, either on-air or online) radio is rather a different animal from North American AC radio as they continue to play Western AC music now associated with older demographics in NA AC such as classic 70s MOR from the likes of Carpenters, Lobo or Manilow, many soft 80s AC such those of Fogelberg, Bishop, Osborne, or even teen stars like Tiffany, and some charting power ballads, not to mention the intrusion of some Western artists with little to no success in the West or UK/Australian hits that did not appear on North American top 40 charts (like that of "Especially for You", "Through the Barricades", and "Together in Electric Dreams", in part due to them being played on radio in nearby Malaysia and Singapore when they charted at their home countries). Well that may sound true even to AC radio across maritime SEA (especially those of Malaysia and Singapore, which are former British colonies) or even HK from the scant evidence I can find from a glance of user playlists from Spotify.
My thoughts as well is whether to include the information about "contemporary MOR"/masa format into the adult contemporary music article. All I got with those info is adding them to the radio in the Philippines article during a major expansion.
Somewhat tangentially related and may be contributory to this discussion is what I saw to be a mass addition of artists into a paragraph in Middle of the road (music) by an IP geolocating to Chichester University in the UK (presumably used by a Hongkonger or a Chinese). I have reverted them as adding little understanding to the topic, not to mention the additions are reflective of Western artists that are typically played in PH/ maritime SEA/HK MOR/soft AC radio, therefore putting an undue PH/Southeast Asian/HK slant into the list paragraph. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 08:24, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
It doesn't seem completely true that many 80s/90s songs that charted in either the US or Canada and I heard on PH AC radio is rarely or no longer played in North American AC radio. I just looked on user playlists on Spotify compiling all the songs played on two big US soft AC stations (KISQ of San Francisco and WLTW of New York), and it doesn't seem completely true; I still found some of the likes of Gibson ("Lost in Your Eyes" came up on both stations all-time playlist), other hit Air Supply songs (like "Making Love Out of Nothing at All"), so are Atlantic Starr's "Always" and Bad English's "When I See You Smile". Maybe I haven't heard much of this in Canada because the local AC station I listened to haven't played them yet or I just haven't heard them.
Maybe we can close this thread, but I would appreciate any research about this thing about popular Western music and acts across Southeast Asia (as well as HK). Back with the sources provided that mostly discuss the local music, there is also much Western influence as well (well, much of modern Filipino pop such as Manila sound and its successor OPM have much Western influence, not to mention some OPM are completely in English). TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 06:28, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Filipinos' (as well as Maritime SEA and HK's) fondness for easy listening, sentimental ballads and associated artists can be a good research topic, but that's a topic for another day. Well, all those territories's vernacular pop scenes from the 70s to 90s seems to tend toward a soft, melodic, and ballad-dominated direction; the influence of Western acts to those may also be worth researching. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 06:21, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Trying to get over this, but the choice of Western songs (usually 70s-90s pop) in PH radio is still much source of intrigue and wonder for me, having been listening to PH AC radio from Canada and comparing their playlists and finding the ones in Canadian mainstream/soft AC station drastically different. Maybe why PH AC stations continue to play those has to do with them featuring already in playlists of earlier AC stations such as DWRK WRocK and DZMB/Love Radio (as an English-language soft AC/OPM station before flipping into Tagalog masa), plus early top 40 stations, as well as cover versions from OPM artists. Would like to ask someone who have grown up in the 80s and 90s if it was the case.
Here’s some 70s to 90s AC songs I can remember playing and/or still on rotation of PH AC stations (either masa or soft AC format). Most of them I can find on the likes of Billboard Hot 100, UK singles chart and Canada's RPM charts:
TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 22:11, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Cleanup of articles with unsubstantiated claims of being no. 1 in PH, and creation of best-selling singles in PH list article

While no good research has come up yet about what seems to be common imported/Western music between the Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore (and also Hong Kong or even Taiwan), so is the continued play of many 70s, 80s and 90s Western AC music in the local radio in those countries, I will like to bring up a plan on cleaning up articles about individual songs which have uncited claims of being no. 1 or just radio hits in the Philippines. Top example is with the mention about "Dying Inside" being a no. 1 hit in the Philippines on the Timmy Thomas article (there's no good Philippine music chart yet during the 90s when it was hit, not to mention it was a best-selling single as well in Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore during the same era by claimed sales; should replace that claim with a more verifiable claim such as claimed/certified single sales from PARI or another contemporary music industry source). Also another thing is with songs being listed as a recurrent in PH radio without any source (take for example "Some Hearts are Diamonds").

I would also like to bring up the potential creation of an list article about best-selling singles in the Philippines (we currently only have a list of best-selling albums). Existing info is on list of best-selling singles by country#Philippines; most instances are based on claimed sales as found in archived editions of Billboard published in the Philippines.-TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 07:00, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Anyone interested? Input, especially from people in the music task force welcome. Also, I just created a draft for a section about contemporary MOR radio format for addition into the adult contemporary music article (just need sources, but I got the wording ready). TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 07:01, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

PH music charts for the years Billboard hasn't published PH-specific data (part 2)

This has been lingering since late April, this thing about a good Philippines music chart for the years Billboard hasn't published Philippines music charts (from around the 60s to around 2016), in an attempt to answer the question on foreign acts that are considered household names in PH. I have been seeing arguments against using radio station charts for any Philippine chart data for years before Billboard PH Hot 100 and Philippines Songs, but I think we should reconsider that considering we don't have no non-radio alternatives and for some countries, reputable radio station charts (usually one from prominent top 40 stations) have been used as acceptable alternative (as with Canada before 1964, so do South Africa before 1985, as far I have found on single chart stats). Now then, is there any reputable archived radio station chart (preferably one from a top 40 station) we can use to get Philippines music chart data for the years Billboard hasn't published PH-specific charts? Would be interesting to see what were the no. 1 singles in PH for the decades before widespread Internet access and Billboard PH launch. You may find such lists in the form of videos in FB or YT, but I would readily question the claims (unless they did cite their sources, such as the charts of contemporaneous top 40 stations or claimed or certified music sales). TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 04:41, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

I think you should check Magic 89.9. They have at least a Top 5 that stretches to July 12, 2005. But maybe if you dug around, you could find a Top 10 or Top 30 on their site. You can start here: https://web.archive.org/web/20050712005351/http://www.magic899.fm:80/ D-Flo27 (talk) 11:41, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Here's MYX's, goes back to 2009 https://web.archive.org/web/20091119041147/http://www.myxph.com/ and https://web.archive.org/web/20090425045750/http://www.myxph.com/tabid/363/MYXCharts.aspx D-Flo27 (talk) 11:55, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
I have no time to read the archives, but I have no idea if Magic's chart served as de facto national chart for PH, much as the CHUM Chart served as the de-facto national chart for Canada until RPM published its first chart? When was its oldest chart and did it cater to every genre?
For Myx, see the deprecated charts section on WP:Record charts. Not only it's single-network, methodology used is questionable.
Tangentially related to this, just noticed there was a bogus Billboard PH chart that appeared back in the 2000s, well before Billboard PH launch in 2016. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 20:09, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
Bummer about Myx. Really was popular back in those days. I think RX 93.1 can challenge that claim as #1 national chart if not Myx, but you or I can check it out. And yes, if we did use Magic, it featured a lot of genres, both Western and Filipino. Earliest I could find online was 2005, but I think someone uploaded some of their older charts, not sure where. D-Flo27 (talk) 06:14, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
@D-Flo27 Well, just came up on FB a video of the top 10 of 1993. Not sure if it's for PH, but no source were given again (not disclosed or just the creator's opinion). I already checked it against the likes of Billboard, UK charts or RPM, but the claimed top 10 are significantly different. Surely dodgy and better search the actual charts wherever they are archived on the Net. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 22:40, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Best-selling singles list

I'm trying to work on a list of best-selling singles for PH, so to complement the best-selling album list. Just a question: do PARI also certifies single sales? Nielsen? TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 22:50, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Appropriate reference for area of NKTI, and location of institutes in Manila

I wanted to add a citation for the area of the National Kidney and Transplant Institute (NKTI). A source mentioning that NKTI is situated in a 58,899 square-meter lot of land along East Avenue, Quezon City is available from a 2017 executive summary by the Commision of Audit. Another possible source mentioning it would be the website of NKTI. My problem is choosing which is more appropriate. Also, I'll try to do the citation manually so I might make a minor error.

Another problem I noticed is citations were needed for the location of several national institutions such as the National Library and the Philippine General Hospital, which are in Manila (by looking at a map?). The paragraph is in the Wikipedia page for Manila. I wanted to raise this after reading advice in Wikipedia on common knowledge and citations.

What would be the most appropriate to do for me here? My initial approach would be the COA report and deleting the [citation needed], but I wanted to know what would the consensus be, as I'm a new editor. I posted my question here so other PH editors can see this, and this can be used as a "basis" for encountering similar problems. RFNirmala (talk) 04:03, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Is the exact land area important? I would rather remove that fact.
I have never seen coordinates being cited. Where is this being needed? With that being said, I'm stumped on what is a good WP:RS for that. Howard the Duck (talk) 05:58, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Hmm... off the top of my head, it strikes me that a Google Maps cite might be useful to readers. I won't try to flesh out the cites here, but see [3], [4]. Just a thought. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 06:56, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Google Maps is essentially a Wiki. Does that make it not WP:RS? What are WP:RS for coordinates? Government mapping agencies like the National Mapping and Resource Information Authority? Howard the Duck (talk) 07:55, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Proposal for Creating Barangay Project

Do you think we should create a Wiki project about barangays? Barangays are one of the sparsest topics in the Philippines, only with five/ten barangay pages/redirects in Eastern Visayas. TheNuggeteer (talk) 00:31, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Probably no need to have a separate WikiProject. I think the existing Tambayan Philippines/Task force LGU is the appropriate place to talk about barangays but since that task force is not as active, I think we can retain discussions here on the main Tambayan talk page since discussions here are not that many that it can be overwhelming. And then just document any stats, guidelines, manual of styles there. —seav (talk) 08:36, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

BINI

Still in disbelief that I am doing this, as a person whose editing portfolio normally covers articles on death, destruction and political violence, but I opened a discussion on renaming Bini to uppercase as per nomenclature of virtually every WP:RS source in this country. See Talk:Bini (group). Borgenland (talk) 15:56, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Also need to clarify if I have to manually post a move notice on article space or wait for a third party or bot to do the job. Borgenland (talk) 15:58, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
@Borgenland You might not need to find out anymore, considering BINI is in the article alert section of Tambayan Philippines, but when you add a moving template, a bot does the job sooner or later. TheNuggeteer (talk) 10:00, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to Transportation Task Force

Hello! I am inviting everyone who's interested to be a part of the Transportation Task Force to make it more active.

This task force aims to improve articles related to transportation in the Philippines, covering topics such as railways, roads, aviation, maritime, and more.

I hope you can share your thoughts and improve the quality of Philippine transportation articles. Thanks! HiwilmsTalk 05:44, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Santiago Colleges

Flagging Northeastern College of Santiago, Isabela for a 68.5% copyvio from school website. Couldn't put the hidden template myself since I'm not proficient in that kind of code. Borgenland (talk) 16:34, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

I've reverted it to the latest non-copyvio version (Which was on 2011). --Lenticel (talk) 09:19, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
Thanks! I saw that the safe version had no intro so I tried to salvage one. Do correct if it still is problematic. Borgenland (talk) 09:48, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
Update: I also ran through University of La Salette and it had a 95.4% copyvio from school website, hence the section renaming. Borgenland (talk) 09:53, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
@Borgenland: No non-copyvio version found. I suggest that you nominate this for speedy delete G12. Lenticel (talk) 01:17, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
A pity though, given that it’s a major university in the area. But I’ll try my best to salvage the thing even if it means downgrading it into a stub. Borgenland (talk) 06:21, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
It can still be recreated but without the added copyvio baggage. --Lenticel (talk) 08:29, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Was going to suggest preserving the references here, but, well. CMD (talk) 09:32, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Update: I chopped it down and finally provided a ref, albeit the school website. Borgenland (talk) 14:37, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
@Borgenland hindi ba't the school website is non-independent? (WP:INDEPENDENT). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:24, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
I was aware of that but I was worried that a lack of sources could lead to G12 so I decided to use it as a stopgap. Borgenland (talk) 10:25, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

(←) School websites may be used as references (per the relevant guidelines) subject to the usual caveats. -Ian Lopez @ 07:44, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

POGO raids

Should the two raids mentioned at Philippine Offshore Gaming Operator#Notable raids be split into separate articles? Or (as an alternative, considering a major debate at Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#NOTNEWS), a list article covering notable raids, like List of raids on Philippine Offshore Gaming Operators? Although the impact and aftermath brought by the raids may be long-term to comply with WP:SUSTAINED. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Is there much more to say than what is currently in that article? I wouldn't split them as written into their own articles or a list. There are other raids that could be added however, taking a quick look this source mentions the Hong Tai raid. (Perhaps a good example of what the hypothetical split articles would look like too.) CMD (talk) 04:53, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Recent church article moves

Several church articles have been recently moved by User:CoptEgypt136. It might need scrutiny since the shorter common names were replaced by the longer official names. As I understand, the official names could be placed in the fullname {{Infobox church}} parameter and in the lead's first sentence. Longer article titles also would clutter the pushpin map since it would be automatically used as the map's label:

Sanglahi86 (talk) 14:17, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Agree. This is an unnecessary overprecision case.Borgenland (talk) 14:23, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
The issue has been resolved as HueMan1 reverted the undiscussed moves. Sanglahi86 (talk) 12:11, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Manny Castaneda

It looks like no one has yet picked up writing an article about Manny Castaneda (even though his death was extensively covered by the media), so I created a new article. Please feel free to add more details. Thanks! --- Tito Pao (talk) 07:41, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Ramon Montaño

Recently deceased subject needs major cleanup. Just gutted it because its content was basically unsourced. Borgenland (talk) 16:21, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

No article and scientific name for dalandan

Currently, there is no article specific to dalandan on the English Wikipedia.

The closest there is to one is a redirect that currently points to Orange (fruit). However, in the interest of having an article specific to dalandan on the English Wikipedia, I tried to determine if there are any existing articles on dalandan in other languages. Confusingly, there are also conflicting sources on what exact orange species dalandan even is.

Varying sources on Google say that dalandan is Citrus sinensis while others say it is Citrus aurantium. Neither Wikipedia articles on the two species mention dalandan as a local name or the Philippines. On other Wikipedias including the Tagalog Wikipedia specifically, it is claimed to be Citrus sinensis and points toward the translations of the Citrus sinensis article.

Can someone help and figure out which of the two species is really dalandan? Or maybe its a hybrid of a certain species or a completely different species? Ganmatthew (talk • contribs) 16:55, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Have you tried looking for sources on the Department of Agriculture? Borgenland (talk) 17:02, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Found this [5] paper from the FDA. Borgenland (talk) 17:03, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
This is pretty helpful. The DA considers calamansi to be Citrus microcarpa var. Bunge while dalandan is Citrus aurantium aka bitter orange.
But I'm a bit confused with the scope and with Annex A. Is the DA using calamansi to refer to all limes and dalandan to refer to all oranges? Annex A's table of variations feels like a stretch because it's considering every orange as dalandan as well as pineapple and watermelon for some reason.
Also, I think I've heard often that dalandan supposedly doesn't turn orange, so calling it an orange is weird. Ganmatthew (talk • contribs) 09:49, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
I'm also just as confused with what the hell a King and a Hamlin is. Borgenland (talk) 13:22, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
The redirect history shows it was a previous article than had been redirected to Orange (fruit). There might be useful information there. In them meantime, I added to the redirect {{R with possibilities}} and {{R to article without mention}}. Sanglahi86 (talk) 15:17, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Need background on a possible incident I might be involved with

Hello! I am currently involved in an investigation regarding a WP:NEWSPAPER and WP:COPYVIO case of a user who is not a member of Tambayan but is also engaged in editing Philippine articles. For transparency, I am not the one under the spotlight but now I am confused since the said other user is alleged to be the sock of an old banned user under the name JudgeFloro or something similar to that. Can anyone enlighten me as to what happened before that? Borgenland (talk) 14:11, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Judgefloro was a prolific photo uploader who was blocked for sockpuppetry. Per WP:DENY, this isn't really something I'd discuss further here. For further action on socks, follow the WP:SPI process. For further action on on-wiki copyright violations, follow the WP:CCI/WP:CPN process, whichever applicable. Chlod (say hi!) 14:19, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
@Borgenland are you referring to me (the other user who is not a member of Tambayan)? I just mentioned a concern by Commons/enwiki admin Explicit when they posted the possible Valenzuela400 sockpuppetry on my talk page. Of course, their concern should not be ignored. Also note that I earlier posted this concern on Just Step Sideways' talk page (he was once critical of Judgefloro's uploads (read here); Just Step Sideways' former username was Beeblebrox). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:22, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
I was referring to the other user (who is also not in this project). Borgenland (talk) 03:40, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
@Borgenland speaking of WP:NEWSPAPER, would Valenzuela400's contribution at SMNI (edit) be a breach of it? It was made in May. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:27, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
I don't think so, the details are concise enough. But I think the title should be shortened into Lawsuit/Libel lawsuit and a lot of common terms need to be delinked. Borgenland (talk) 08:33, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 Done making the edit. No need to link Rodrigo Duterte as the link already exists two times in sections above. Still, cyberlibel needs to be linked as it is a term not used outside the Philippines (a Philippine English-exclusive invention). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:42, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Buendia station (PNR) § Merge with Dela Rosa station

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Buendia station (PNR) § Merge with Dela Rosa station, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. 360kong (talk) 09:42, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

UAAP season 61

Calling for an admin to revert the move, back to UAAP Season 61. Howard the Duck (talk) 20:04, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Anyone? Howard the Duck (talk) 10:23, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Online RS

I notice that our wikiproject doesn't have a Online RS list to discuss to if pinoymountaineer.com is a WP:RS or not?

On that topic, should we create one? Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 13:26, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Actually, there is an existing proposal for a RS list that was started by @Ianlopez1115 and can be found here. We can build off the list of sources there, which are already quite plenty. Ganmatthew (talk • contribs) 04:43, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Per the responses above, I moved the proposal for a RS list from my sandbox to a subpage. As for the Northern Dispatch entry, I added it to the list under "Local and regional". -Ian Lopez @ 09:15, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

With the list created by @Ianlopez1115 now formalized, I think we can now close this discussion. Anyway, excellent list that can be a supplement to WP:RSPSOURCES for Philippine-originated references. The question is, where will the discussions and/or consensus-reaching regarding the reliability of sources take place? JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:51, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
I think the subpage's talk page itself --> Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Sources Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 10:21, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
JWilz12345, I envision that discussions about reliable sources be centralized to the reliable sources noticeboard; however I wouldn't mind if relevant discussions are held at the talk page (this is also done at WikiProject Video games' RS list). -Ian Lopez @ 10:24, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
Taking a few more steps back from this particular tree to get a wider view of the forest, it occurs to me to wonder whether some sources often cited in articles related to the Philippines ought to have entries at WP:RSP. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:24, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Well, Rappler is already listed there. —seav (talk) 08:06, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Baguio Midland Courier

In light of the regional weekly publication ceasing their operations next month, I created a draft article so that other contributors can make the relevant improvements and hopefully move it to mainspace before the release of its final article on July 21. -Ian Lopez @ 08:16, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

To those who heeded the call to make relevant improvements to the said page, thank you. I'll be submitting the draft for review. -Ian Lopez @ 15:11, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Just a reminder that they've officially shut down. If there are articles in which the BMC was cited, the refs are still alive as of now tho ofc these have to be archived. Borgenland (talk) 08:02, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Bagong Silang

The law splitting the brgy was signed on April 5, with a plebiscite expected to have been held before earlier this month? Any updates? Borgenland (talk) 09:05, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Per COMELEC's announcement on June 20, the plebiscite for Bagong Silang, Caloocan will be held on August 31, 2024. -Ian Lopez @ 09:30, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
@Borgenland: Made relevant edits in this revision. -Ian Lopez @ 12:08, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Bar topnotchers in the Philippines

The Bar topnotchers section of Philippine Bar Examinations takes up more than half of the article page. It has been previously tagged for splitting to List of Bar topnotchers in the Philippines. Might someone do the split now? The section just keeps getting longer with newer entries. Sanglahi86 (talk) 05:17, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Looks like there is a split tag but no discussion. The idea of the split makes sense to me, although there is a mixture of prose and list. Perhaps shifting the tables and bare lists leaving the prose, and then shortening that prose for the List article lead? CMD (talk) 05:24, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
I think that is a good suggestion. Although I had no idea the prose is also large; I had thought maybe it is just easier to move the entire section to Bar topnotchers in the Philippines (and omit the "List of ")? Sanglahi86 (talk) 05:57, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Suggest ripping out the entire Bar topnotcher section, move it to the List and leave the very first paragraph as a summary. Borgenland (talk) 06:09, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
The first paragraph is indeed sufficient as a summary. I could do the split later when I have enough time. Sanglahi86 (talk) 06:28, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
I would keep the "In the past, non-law school graduates..." paragraph as well, but on a closer read much of the rest is fluff and trivia. That said, perhaps better to omit "List of" for now if that much prose will also be transferred. CMD (talk) 07:05, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
The split has been done. Thank you for the suggestions. Sanglahi86 (talk) 12:49, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Philippines's at-large senatorial district

We have had Senatorial districts of the Philippines, but we don't have the "at-large" district that is currently used. I've thought through several ways to present this, with the idea that the presenation should not be markedly different with articles such as Philippines's 1st senatorial district. I've made a mock-up at User:Howard the Duck/sandbox7. There are two versions to this: One includes the term of office in the cell along with the name and party, while the second one has a separate columns of terms of office. If you have other ideas on how to do this, just let me know. Howard the Duck (talk) 19:26, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

Seems a bit off-tune but okay, I suggest the first one. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 03:12, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
I've actually settled on one format for all tables when you had commented, and I've indeed went along with the first. Howard the Duck (talk) 12:26, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Okay! 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 12:28, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
There's also Alabama's at-large congressional district on how it can be represented. Howard the Duck (talk) 18:47, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

New task force

Do you think there should be a task force for Philippine Infrastructure? I don't know the name of the task force (if supported) but I'm just reaching out to see your thoughts on this.

Thanks, 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 13:42, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Is this strictly limited to transport or will it include government institutions? Borgenland (talk) 13:53, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
@Borgenland: Sorry, I meant for economy, meaning for Transport, Government Institutions, Buildings, Structures, and everything like that. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 11:59, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
@Borgenland re-pinging. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 03:14, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
The scope feels strange to me. Could you expound a bit more, perhaps? When it's specific, the topic feels too small. When it's inclusive, the topic feels too nebulous. This is something I would support, but I am not sure the terminology is clear to everyone. - Chieharumachi (talk) 10:06, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Basically, the economics task force, it will include everything which is man-made (except events), 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 10:16, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
I didn't realize it was that big. Maybe we should call it something like that? It's a lovely idea. - Chieharumachi (talk) 23:06, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikiproject

Would anyone be interested in joining a sub project of WP:Anthropology on oral tradition? Kowal2701 (talk) 19:40, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Quezon City's "City Districts"?

Quezon City has six legislative districts (the "official" districts). However, in the Wikipedia page of Quezon City, the "City Districts" section lists non-legislative 'districts' and instead areas based on its history (Cubao, Diliman [Quadrangle], Projects 1-7, New Manila, La Loma [and other sitios], etc.) The six legislative districts are listed in "Geography#Barangays and congressional Districts".

I'm planning to edit the articles in a way that the "City Districts" section is an unofficial classification of barangays (city areas of Quezon City), while we recognize the six legislative districts as the "political districts". It can be through adding just an introductory paragraph at the "City Districts" section.

Posting here so I can gather some consensus or feedback on what's better to do.

Side Note: Is "congressional district" the right term or is it "legislative district"? RFNirmala (talk) 10:46, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Just like most of Manila's non-legislative districts (Tondo, Malate, etc.), most of QC's districts are former Spanish era towns that were consolidated into one larger town during the American period. I think it is not proper to call them as "districts" in the modern day, but probably "neighborhoods" or "places", although the word "district" has been used by WP:RS to refer to these.
Legislative districts can refer to a district drawn up for porposes of representation to a legislature: congressional districts are for the House of Representatives. QC also has city council districts, and these are coextensive with congressional ones so it can be used interchangeably. Howard the Duck (talk) 11:04, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Tried adding it in this edit. There's also a Wikipedia section of "Districts" on the nonlegislative districts here in the Philippines (historical districts).
If anyone crosses by this, I found this as a useful reference for Quezon City's history: Pante, Michael D. (2019). A Capital City at the Margins. Maybe for further reading of the Wikipedia page? RFNirmala (talk) 04:37, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
We should highlight them more than the legislative districts. In fact, many of them probably deserve their own pages. I will argue that those districts are in fact more notable in themselves than many "official" (e.g. legislative) districts, precisely because they produce their own cultural footprint. Surely Diliman and Cubao, at least, produce enough literature and art to be notable enough to merit their own Wikipedia page. Arguably the cultural contributions of Diliman and Cubao come somewhat independently of the administration under Quezon City Hall. (And I'll actually have a similar argument for Teacher's Village and Katipunan.) - 02:14, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Philippine English vocabulary entries criteria for inclusion

Philippine English vocabulary contains several entries that are unsourced. As the page was previously tagged as possibly having original research, I added citations and also new entries. A new editor has also been active in adding new entries, though several were unsourced. I had contacted him about citing sources, and he added sources for some new entries he added like in this revision. However, I am unsure if a mere mention of the term in the source (like in the MMDA source in the revision above) constitutes inclusion in the Philippine English vocabulary article. For the entries I added, the terms were explicitly specified as terms used in Philippine English. Maybe you could give some suggestions on the criteria for inclusion of entries? Sanglahi86 (talk) 07:57, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

If there was such a thing as WP:CRINGE I think it would apply to pekpek shorts for as long as a decent ref can’t be found. Borgenland (talk) 09:18, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
You may want to look at Talk:Philippine English vocabulary#Criteria for inclusion, which I believe didn't reach a meaningful conclusion. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:53, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
A major concern is also WP:LASTING as some may only be in vogue for a few years before being forgotten as jeje. Hopefully Eyyyy does not meet the same fate. Borgenland (talk) 15:27, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Eyyyyy is almost exclusively used in Tagalog. Are we sure it is being used in English? Howard the Duck (talk) 18:29, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
I sometimes hear that in my community, especially some conyos. Though ofc that would still be WP:OR pending a decent source. Borgenland (talk) 01:45, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
This does sound like code-switching. Undoubtedly, "eyyy" is a Tagalog expression. Howard the Duck (talk) 02:18, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
I have exhausted all efforts to find reliable sources for the remaining unsourced entries, but could not find any to support its explicit inclusion in Philippine English vocabulary. "Imeldific" is well-cited as part of the PhE lexicon; however, the terms "Yellowtard" and "Dutertard" doesn't expressly include it and is not cited by a scholarly article. I am also unsure if "QC" should be included despite wide usage; if it is retained, maybe other city acronyms like IGaCoS might be arbitrarily added in the future. Some unsourced entries might need to be removed; hoping anyone would help. Sanglahi86 (talk) 14:29, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Just made WP:BOLD removals of uncited there. Borgenland (talk) 14:46, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the bold removals. The article looks much cleaner now. Sanglahi86 (talk) 16:38, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Well, before the major changes there, I have added these following terms: minus one, stock knowledge, warfreak. Now they're gone, but these are quite common PH-specific words that deserve mention. Any source for those? TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 10:16, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
I'll try finding some sources for those terms so I can add them to the list. Sanglahi86 (talk) 11:09, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
I tried finding scholarly articles to be used as references for those terms, but could not find any. I'll leave it to others to find some reliable references. Sanglahi86 (talk) 11:29, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Possible socking

Did we have a user who had to be blocked for contentious editing on Philippine TV? I recall being in conflict with a crappy editor (whose name I can't recall) who tried to POV push their way by demanding that their be untouchable for "not being vandalism" in 2023 and now I have this newbie editor making undiscussed moves to Jhoanna (singer) and having [6] similar edit summaries to the account I discussed. Borgenland (talk) 02:53, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Notice of Move discussion

Not sure if I'm doing the template right, but a move discussion in ongoing on Talk:Jhoanna (singer). Interested editors are invited to participate. Borgenland (talk) 03:44, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Reviving TF PH History

I personally think it's a long time coming that we revive the history task force. I'm noticing some activity in this project recently and there's no shortage of things to do PH history-wise. If there's enough support, we can start clean, have a new to-do list, maybe even drum up interest with an edit-a-thon or something. What does everybody else think? NyanThousand (talk) 06:41, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Surprised that I was unaware of this TF while I was building up articles. Do sign me up. Borgenland (talk) 07:35, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
I'd be willing to help. Ganmatthew (talk • contribs) 19:59, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Nice! With CMD that makes four. I'm going to change the status of the TF and add your names. I'm thinking we should start with cleaning house and getting things in order. Sort out to-do lists, make sure scope is well-defined, that sort of thing. NyanThousand (talk) 15:49, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
I'm in. - Chieharumachi (talk) 02:16, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks to everybody showing interest! I've started a discussion in the TF talk page about scope and tasks so feel free to chime in! NyanThousand (talk) 03:17, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

UP Diliman Units

Hi, I noticed that some of the various colleges, institutes, schools, and sattelite campuses of the University of the Philippines Diliman have wikipedia pages while some of the others do not. A fellow editor has explained to me that this is often a notability issue but to me, it is a bit strange that the UP Diliman College of Science has a page while, say, the University of the Philippines Diliman College of Social Sciences and Philosophy or the UP Diliman Extension Program in Pampanga (which is quite nearly its own entity in Clark, with a history different from the Diliman campus) do not. I would like to work on this, but need clarification about the reasons some units are notable while some are not. So I am seeking discussion? - 01:58, 8 August 2024 (UTC) F72mabalacat (talk) 01:58, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

I think WP:UNIGUIDE is your guide. Most universities are notable, but individual units of a university aren't presumed notable so the WP:GNG prevails. —seav (talk) 06:32, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Images of National Scientists

Hello, I've noticed quite a number of articles of the National Scientists of the Philippines don't use the official photos from NAST. For guidance I've uploaded a chart, taken from the pdf file of NAST's 2018 annual meeting featuring every official photos of National Scientists from 1978 to 2014. It's outdated I know but some of these photos has already been uploaded in Wikimedia Commons and has been used in some of the biographies here in English Wikipedia.

Link: https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Official_portraits_of_the_National_Scientists_of_the_Philippines_(1978%E2%80%932014).png AsianStuff03 (talk) 12:15, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

I wonder if there are high-resolution versions of the portraits available from NAST so we can upload those instead of having to crop the PDF multiple times. --Sky Harbor (talk) 14:53, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
The unedited photos can be found from their official website here. You can find them in their respective profiles. I have uploaded some of these such as those of Juan Salcedo, Jr. and Gregorio Zara but many of the photos hasn't still been uploaded in Commons. AsianStuff03 (talk) 22:48, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Discussion at RSN on Peoplaid.com

There is a discussion on RSN about Peoplaid.com, that could be of interest to this project. Direct link WP:RSN#Peoplaid.com and geni.com. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 11:14, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 10#Manalo Cult

Hi all, you might want to take a look at this redirect for discussion as it is a complex topic. Lenticel (talk) 01:12, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Removal of some Philippines entries from List of historical unrecognized states

I thought I would mention this here in case of interest. See Talk:List of historical unrecognized states#Philippines. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 05:42, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Bamban

Made some changes in the infobox per the unprecedent massacre of officials though I acknowledge it does not look aesthetically pleasing. Inviting users to make alternative solutions. Borgenland (talk) 05:03, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

We should probably stop with listing every councilor in the infobox. Just state the party standings. Howard the Duck (talk) 11:22, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Jaja Santiago

Is it high time to rename her per [7]? Borgenland (talk) 07:51, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Best to follow Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people). Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 08:04, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
The person apparently goes by a new name now. Probably wait what WP:RS calls her in the next few months. Howard the Duck (talk) 11:26, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
Someone already renamed [8]. Borgenland (talk) 15:26, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
The move is premature, we don't know if Jaja Santiago will be referred to Sachi Minowa outside the context of playing for the Japanese national team. Like Naturalized athletes of China had people under their original name rather than their Sinicized names.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 16:42, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Copyvio in Maguindanao

Need copyvio checks on Sultan Kudarat, Maguindanao del Norte as Earwig seems to be down. Borgenland (talk) 03:02, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 9 August 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) SilverLocust 💬 02:59, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines → Wikipedia:WikiProject Tambayan Philippines – WikiProjects start with the "WikiProjects" prefix. This is also what the lead sentence uses in this project page. Gonnym (talk) 10:13, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

I can't find the last RM, but this has definitely been proposed before. Anyone know where that was? CMD (talk) 11:26, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
  • Comment. This may be a controversial and probably unpopular opinion, but why not just move it to Wikipedia:WikiProject Philippines? HueMan1 (talk) 12:21, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
    I support this proposal for standardization and simplicity. Sanglahi86 (talk) 12:31, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
  • Agree Neutral based on feedback from Sky Harbor below. I understand the prestige of the page being under the Tambayan Philippines title for almost 20 years now and I agree it could be nice to keep the name as it is. If in any case it would be required that the WikiProject be suffixed to the page's name, I remain supporting the version raised by HueMan1 and with same reason as Sanglahi86; standardization and simplicity. Markoolio97 Markoolio97 (talk) 15:56, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
    The current name adds a bit of flavor, I don't see the value in going generic for the sake of it. CMD (talk) 14:05, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
    To be fair, we already use "WikiProject Tambayan Philippines" in assessment templates, which I believe is clear enough in signaling that we are a WikiProject. I think we can do more to highlight the fact that we are a WikiProject, which I believe is Gonnym's intention (though I'm also inclined to believe that they aren't Filipino), but I imagine we can do so while leaving the project's name intact, no? --Sky Harbor (talk) 17:43, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
  • Hi, folks. I need to add a bit of context here as to why this is "Tambayan Philippines" and not "WikiProject Philippines". This WikiProject actually started off as the Philippines noticeboard, and the WikiProject came afterward. There was an attempt to move this to "WikiProject Philippines" back around 2006 or so alongside instituting a proper WikiProject, but it was unsuccessful and the WikiProject elements of this board came a bit later after that discussion which, among others, led to the banning of a user from the English Wikipedia. Something that I regret happened on here and I wish will never again happen here.
That being said, I don't see the utility in moving the name of the project. This place, its WikiProject features notwithstanding, is first and foremost a noticeboard and gathering place for Filipino Wikipedians. I think it's important that while we as a community continue to move ahead and grow, we must do so with respect to some of our most cherished traditions which tie us together. The name of this project, if you ask me, is one of them, and for that I must respectfully vote Oppose. --Sky Harbor (talk) 15:00, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
This might possibly be the earliest suggestion to move to WikiProject Philippines as mentioned above Markoolio97 (talk) 15:23, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
In case anyone asks the user referred to as "Akira123323" is me. --Sky Harbor (talk) 15:30, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
  • Oppose removal of the T-word. Although I honestly sometimes omit the T-word when categorizing articles out of laziness, I find it useful in searching for my home project. Although Wikipedia is supposed to be a sober encyclopedia I don't think this has to mean we have to be ultra-conformist as regards to the naming standards, especially since there is nothing disruptive to it. On a personal note, it also makes visitors less scared to visit the project once they get to know the meaning of it. Borgenland (talk) 16:53, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Is there an actual policy or guideline violation here? I scanned WP:PROJGUIDE and it doesn't say anywhere there that WikiProject names must start with that prefix. This proposed move seems like a move for the sake of unnecessary consistency and also in the project namespace for which we should be less pedantic compared to mainspace. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. —seav (talk) 17:03, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I don't see the point in changing the name. It's clear and works fine as it is. Let's not fix something that isn't broken. Waqar💬 17:28, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
  • Rhetorical question, Is the name intended to indicate that this an in-group hangout place on the English WP for Tagalog-speakers interested in presentation re the Philippines here? Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:34, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
  • Oppose Not seeing any benefit from migrating the Tambayan's name. --Lenticel (talk) 01:18, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Notable deaths

Does WP:NOTABILITY also strictly apply to timeline articles? There have been sudden steps taken to hide non-articles, which is a pity given that some of them hold legitimately notable offices. Borgenland (talk) 11:58, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

WP:REDLINK is our guide. For politicians, our baseline is WP:NPOL. This includes members of Congress, Supreme Court, and the Cabinet, the vice president and president, but not local officials. It's unclear if membership in Philippine legislatures in the American era satisfies WP:NPOL. Howard the Duck (talk) 23:38, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Of course, if it can be demonstrated that there is WP:GNG coverage about a person, a red link should be allowed. Howard the Duck (talk) 23:48, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Representative images in Fashion and clothing in the Philippines

Fashion and clothing in the Philippines needs help in representative images per decade (particularly the 1930s and beyond). I tried scouring for photos in Commons and added several images; however, some of these images are either quite blurry or have a poor camera angle. Hope you can help in finding better images. Sanglahi86 (talk) 02:01, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

NewsWatch Plus

CNN Philippines is back (sorta). [9] HueMan1 (talk) 05:34, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Officeholders

Who is acting VG of Abra now that Joy Bernos is suspended? Also need details in Mandaue now that Jonas Cortes is also suspended .Borgenland (talk) 06:25, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

The #1 board member is the acting VG. As provinces are always divided into board districts there is not a straightforward to determine this. Howard the Duck (talk) 06:34, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
I think in this case I would have to assume that whoever won the board in the same district in Bangued would probably be next in line. Borgenland (talk) 06:41, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Not necessarily. You'd get the topnotcher from each district, then compare their votes vs. turnout in their respective districts. The topnotcher with the highest percentage is the #1 board member. Howard the Duck (talk) 07:30, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
None of the news articles I saw particularly say who became acting VG, but we can guess:
In the first district, Victorino Barona was #1 with 42,955 votes out of a turnout of 180,902 valid votes, or 23.74%.
In the second district, Russell Bragas was #1 with 65,547 votes out of a turnout of 235,092 valid votes, or 27.88%.
With this, we can guess that Bragas is the acting VG, and I'll be damned if he isn't.
You can also probably see that the 2 districts are not divided equally, with the second district being the larger one. Howard the Duck (talk) 17:52, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Review of Valenzuela400's contribution

Can other editors review Valenzuela400's contribution at Niño Muhlach#Personal life, specifically this? There may be possible WP:NEWSPAPER issue here. Problematic overlinking too as is the characteristics of many of this user's contributions. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:35, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Just WP:BOLD wiped off the offending sections on grounds of WP:UNDUE as he is not the principal complainant in his son's sexual harassment case. Borgenland (talk) 07:15, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
Also noting that they also have a worrying trend of uploading copyvio images of Philippine architecture as seen in their talk page. Borgenland (talk) 07:16, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
@Borgenland you may mean "public art" (like monuments and historic plaques/markers). English Wikipedia only respects the laws of the United States and does not need to respect the laws of the Philippines, because enwiki is not hosted and served in the Philippines (rather it is served and hosted in the U.S.). U.S. Copyright Law allows commercial exploitations of copyrighted architecture without architects' licensing authorizations, and so U.S. law applies to the images of unfree Philippine buildings ({{FoP-USonly}}). As the U.S. law does not provide FoP for copyrighted artworks and monuments, these plaques and recent monuments are not OK to be hosted locally. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:20, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
Another review: their edit at Kapa-Community Ministry International. Is it appropriately worded or leaning to editorial-style tendency? JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 23:27, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Also: this at Mon Confiado article and this at Jessa Zaragoza article. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 23:40, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
The other edits seem fine, but would be nice if he could review Wikipedia's guidelines on writing style and tone. I've copyedited the Mon Confiado edit though, as that one sounded quite biased against the content creator. Ganmatthew (talk • contribs) 11:56, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
I had warned them before against writing articles like a legal brief but apparently they appear to be a WP:IDNHT user. Borgenland (talk) 01:20, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Perhaps they should be taken to WP:ANI. HueMan1 (talk) 02:11, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Switching party meta colors of Partido Federal ng Pilipinas and Hugpong ng Pagbabago

The 2025 Philippine general election is upon us, and the UniTeam Alliance is no longer. Curiously, the leading parties from that alliance, [Partido Federal ng Pilipinas]] (PFP) and Hugpong ng Pagbabago (HNP), have the colors switched up, but not intentionally.

Both were created in 2018. HNP used the red color because it was one of the colors seen on its logo, along with green and blue. PFP used the green logo, because their original logo was primarily green. These ultimately were the colors of the UniTeam alliance.

Now, Sara Duterte has been associated with green, and the Marcoses have long been associated with red. With this, I'm proposing to switch the meta colors of these two parties, with PFP using red, and HNP using green (not exactly the same hexcodes). For articles using the different modules for party colors, these should switch instantaneously, while for maps and diagrams, these would have to be manually changed.

These are the files that have to be changed:

I may have missed out on some maps. Please add those here

Also, I know for a fact that PFP uses a blue logo, but unlike the green color which is now completely absent on the new logo, it still has the red color; also, the blue color clashes with LDP color, and the current green color clashes with the NUP color.

The reason why the last change was reverted is because not all of the maps were changed. This one only concerns two parties, and fewer maps would be changed. Howard the Duck (talk) 23:29, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

"Largest" municipality

User:CryingSulfur appears to be the same person as the IP editor(s) who insist on adding passages about the "largest" municipality and similar content to every province article. See also Talk:Provinces of the Philippines for some context. CryingSulfur and the IPs are also active in radio station articles. I'm unsure what action to take here. Pinging Chipmunkdavis and Howard the Duck, who were involved in the earlier discussion on the talkpage I mentioned. HueMan1 (talk) 02:03, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

FWIW, most populous settlement is a standard fixture in similar lists in other countries. I'd rather have that than say three columns on how many LGUs are there. Howard the Duck (talk) 02:12, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
I agree, but "largest" in the Philippines most commonly refers to land area, not population. It would likely confuse some readers. HueMan1 (talk) 02:19, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
I don't mean to spoon-feed information to our readers, but maybe a watered-down version like "most populated" would work best for us, given that MOS:ENGVAR applies. HueMan1 (talk) 02:27, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
The table is already too large and many entries will just be the capital city again. The information is already available on the province articles where it makes more sense, Misamis Occidental#Administrative divisions and so on. CMD (talk) 03:44, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Every column on the province list is on every province's article.
Just like I said, I'd rather replace the three columns of how many LGUs are there with this column. If the capital and most populated settlement is the same, merge the cells. Howard the Duck (talk) 10:57, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
On another note, these edits by user in question also raise doubts on my part over their WP:CIR, see [10] and [11]. Borgenland (talk) 15:26, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
Those are edits where s/he added a section of "Notable people" to provincial articles. This is a content dispute, and I fail to see how WP:CIR applies; WP:IDHT maybe, but not WP:CIR... it's not as if s/he screwed up in the edits and made syntax errors. Howard the Duck (talk) 00:03, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
There were, particularly errors in spelling, content that looked either copyvio or soapbox, naming conventions in Philippine cities and most glaringly their own refusal in Albay to abide by the rules they inserted against recklessly adding names without articles. Borgenland (talk) 00:50, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, content dispute. Not everyone knows our naming conventions; we still have discussions somewhere on that. There were also pipelinks that I would not have wanted, but not enough for WP:CIR. I was looking around in articles such as Kentucky and Bali and there were also no sections about famous residents. I LOLed at not following their own rules they imposed. Howard the Duck (talk) 00:59, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Suffix and prefix revisited

We probably need a standard. Most of the more popular foreign head of states does not have the His Excellency, and even more so of those honorific suffixes from orders/awards even if they have them. And having Honorable/HE before a nickname is jarring and not really used in practiced - "His Excellency Bongbong Marcos"

In particular - Does Fidel Ramos, Diosdado Macapagal need to list all of that suffixes? Hariboneagle927 (talk) 15:00, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

I thought it counted as Philippine English? Though I sympathize having to wonder whether a convicted rapist mayor/congressman deserves the Hon in the infobox. Borgenland (talk) 15:11, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
FWIW, David Cameron has the suffix PC, but not the prefix "Right Honorable". Howard the Duck (talk) 16:54, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

There already is a standard, see MOS:PREFIX. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 02:33, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Philippine Senate hearing on the Kingdom of Jesus Christ#Requested move 25 August 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Philippine Senate hearing on the Kingdom of Jesus Christ#Requested move 25 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. HueMan1 (talk) 14:20, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

MPSPC

Will be renaming the Mountain Province State Polytechnic College to MP State University in a short while per [12]. Also notifying that the history is a probable copy paste tho I cannot check on Earwig because it is down. Borgenland (talk) 15:57, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

"born-again" for Evangelical Protestant

Should we be replacing instances of "born-again" in reference to Evangelicals (e.g. "born-again Christian" for Evangelical Protestant, "born-again Christianity" for Evangelical Protestantism)? This is quite the most commonly used term in reference to Evangelical Protestants in PH, but sounds too informal and less precise for an encyclopedia. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 23:16, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Would someone invoke WP:ENGVAR for this? Howard the Duck (talk) 00:32, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
I also assumed it was a case of Philippine English. Borgenland (talk) 02:30, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
I'm certainly no authority about this, but I see an assertion in the evangelicalism article saying, "Conversionism, or belief in the necessity of being 'born again,' has been a constant theme of evangelicalism since its beginnings.', supported by a cite with a quote saying, "What does it mean to be evangelical? The simple answer is that evangelical Christianity is the religion of the born again." Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:14, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
I'll respond with some familiarity with the subject, although my understanding may be flawed at points. There was a trend in the last three decades of the 20th Century (originating in the 70s and possibly peaking in the late 1980s) for Philippine Evangelicals to avoid denominational labels due to an emphasis on "relationship, not religion." This is also why there are so many nondenominational evangelical chrurches in the Philippines. The result is the preference for the term "born again," which started as a sort of euphemism, but later became so dominant that it's percieved as its own denominational label. But as far as I know, the largest organization of Born Again churches (this is a very loose description, because of the aforementioned tendency towards nondenominationalism and congregational independence) is the Philippine Council of Evangelical Churches. A similar euphemism is "Bible Believing", which refers to any protestants (evangelical, mainline, pentecostal, or whichever) adhering to a strict interpretation of Sola Scriptura. - Batongmalake (talk) 15:49, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Wide-ranging AFD in Philippine venue events

Found this widescale AFD involving two Philippine articles. Inviting interested editors to share their thoughts at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of entertainment events at the SM Mall of Asia complex. Borgenland (talk) 14:33, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

AFD is a trainwreck, but FWIW, all such articles should be deleted as per nom. Howard the Duck (talk) 15:59, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

September De-stubbing drive

A discussion was made for a month-long September drive, which eventually was accepted. Trying to get as many participants as possible (not sure if this is the right place to announce this). If you are interested in de-stubbing articles and helping out in the drive, you can click here if you're interested. Regards, 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 11:47, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm in! Hopefully I won't be the only one. D-Flo27 (talk) 11:54, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
The drive is already underway. Feel free to join, plenty of stubs to go around. D-Flo27 (talk) 12:33, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Serious issues in Bicol

San Jose, Camarines Sur may need major gutting due to tons of copyvio and unencyclopedic, unsourced and outdated content. Borgenland (talk) 15:20, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Largest barangay

Now that Bagong Silang is dead, who’s the next titleholder? Borgenland (talk) 17:56, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

The PSA 2020 Census shows barangay Commonwealth in Quezon City had 213,229 inhabitants, after Barangay 176's population of 261,729. Sanglahi86 (talk) 18:31, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
Bagong Silang could have had its own legislative district. Howard the Duck (talk) 21:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
How about in terms of land area? Borgenland (talk) 09:28, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Unfortunately, it's currently not possible to determine which barangay officially has the largest land area because there is no official source for the land areas of all 40,000+ barangays. —seav (talk) 14:02, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines/Requests

There are some requests here that may violate WP:REDLINK:

Howard the Duck (talk) 23:11, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Agree with the others, but I think Cubao should be an exception for the localities. It's the most well known and most culturally significant of the seven listed ones. Ganmatthew (talk • contribs) 13:36, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Same, though given the attention on Commonwealth seen above, I think its viability is higher. 13:42, 5 September 2024 (UTC) Borgenland (talk) 13:42, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
I have no issue with Cubao (which is actually a collection of barangays), but we should be careful with Imperial Manila bias. Cubao may be the most famous non-LGU place in the Philippines as this is the drop-off point of most probinsyanos when they visit Manila (the other option is Baclaran, which is now being made obsolete by PITX). Howard the Duck (talk) 01:04, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
I added most (if not all) of the journal requests, as well as the honorifics. If it indeed violates WP:REDLINK, you may remove it. However, I would suggest leaving the Asian Studies journal since it is commonly used and cited as a reliable source in several articles. I don't know how to call those three honorifics under one article; there is Filipino styles and honorifics but "Po" is included merely as a very short entry in a table. For localities, I see Cubao and Commonwealth in Quezon City as notable. Sanglahi86 (talk) 13:48, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Po/opo/ho/oho are basically identical words that the Tagalog language takes into multiple forms, like dito/rito. A linguist should know how these are called in the terms of linguistics, and like put in an article named "<term> in Tagalog (language)".
Again, as above in regards to Cubao as Imperial Manila bias, while there are indeed journals outside Metro Manila schools, these are mostly UP Diliman and DLSU ones. These academic journals may be used as WP:RS, but creating articles about these may be a stretch as mainstream media do not cover such journals at all, more so in an in-depth scale. Howard the Duck (talk) 01:02, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

File overwrites

I dunno what is the most appropriate centralized page on enwiki for discussing files (but not copyright-related). WP:OVERWRITE is essentially a redirect to c:COM:OVERWRITE.

Is Valenzuela400's File:Bulacan State University Bustos Bulacan2.jpg compliant with relevant enwiki guidelines? It is made up of multiple overwritten files of different angles of a same (or similar) building within Bulacan State University. Valenzuela400 has some more local files with the same issue. The user should explain why they made such overwriting of files, if it was just a "honest mistake" on their part (they don't know how to choose which file is most visually-pleasing for enwiki readers), or if it is a sneaky way to host their near-identical images of the same subjects locally on enwiki. More similar files with overwritten media from them: File:Technics turntable1.jpg, File:Santolan Guerrillas and War Veterans monument3.jpg, and File:Reedley International School Pasig4.jpg. Explicit's concern on my Commons talk page shouldn't be ignored, though, but I leave the concern to the other users (due to my personal and real-life matters and problems). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

My first assumption would be a misunderstanding of how files work here, treating the page as an album rather than as a single file. I don't know if there is a guideline on this, as it's not something that is expected to happen. CMD (talk) 09:41, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
 Comment: the user replied in their talk page in connection to this matter. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Tampering on Joy Bernos

Need extra eyes to look at Joy Bernos. I just warned off an editor who vandalised the article on POV grounds and may have a COI. Borgenland (talk) 16:06, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Peer review for Pasacao, Camarines

I am a local who has been actively editing our town's article, Pasacao. Please help me analyze which area of the page needs improvement. Thank you! Idaljiu (talk) 17:06, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

I suggest you start with WP:BROCHURE. A common problem in Philippine geography articles is that a lot of them seem to be copypasted from leaflets at the local tourism office. Borgenland (talk) 17:43, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Also to consider: WP:NOTGUIDE. Geographic articles are supposed to be written in encyclopedic tone, not promotional tone. Promotional content is best migrated to Wikivoyage (i.e., wikivoyage:en:Pasacao). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 21:28, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Women in Green's October 2024 edit-a-thon

Hello Tambayan Philippines:

WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Edit-a-thon event in October 2024!

Running from October 1 to 31, 2024, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) edit-a-thon event with the theme Around the World in 31 Days! All experience levels welcome. Never worked on a GA project before? We'll teach you how to get started. Or maybe you're an old hand at GAs – we'd love to have you involved! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and women's works (e.g., books, films) during the event period. We hope to collectively cover article subjects from at least 31 countries (or broader international articles) by month's end. GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to earn a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.

We hope to see you there!

Grnrchst (talk) 12:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

WVSU

How do you fix the ridiculous italicization of West Visayas State University in its article title? Borgenland (talk) 16:02, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

It appeared following this edit, though the itals don't show in the title of the diff. See boxed info at the top of {{infobox newspaper}} for instructions about how to prevent it. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 22:56, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
 Fixed --Bluemask (talk) 02:21, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Sulu province out of BARMM

As most of you probably already know, the Supreme Court recently declared that Sulu province is not part of Bangsamoro. There has been a lot of editing to reflect this news, notably by Hariboneagle927 (example edit), but I feel that editing articles to put Sulu inside Zamboanga Peninsula is very premature. Moving Sulu to Region IX is logical (after all, the Sulu Archipelago was originally part of Western Mindanao), but I can't find any reliable source that says that Sulu is to officially be considered part of Region IX apart from this Comelec intention. Note that the Comelec is not the authority in defining administrative regions. In my opinion, I think the correct way to represent this limbo situation now is to still include Sulu in Bangsamoro-related lists but with copious footnotes about the SC decision. This should be somewhat similar to how we treat HUCs with their mother provinces. —seav (talk) 01:08, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

The joining to Region IX is also implied in this opinion piece by Samira Gutoc. It makes sense to keep Sulu in some Bangsamoro lists as that is where any recent statistical work etc. will have placed it, although I expect this will be shifted over time, and it could also be included in Region IX lists with a similar footnote. This source reports COMELEC is reflecting the supreme court decision, although agree better sources are needed. CMD (talk) 03:46, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
Let's just wait for announcements on where Sulu will be grouped with. Most likely Zamboanga Peninsula, or even Soccsksargen, or even a region to its self.
I'd support removing Sulu from Bangsamoro lists and just leave the region as blank or "unassigned". Howard the Duck (talk) 04:07, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
I have reverted the recent changes back to Sulu being treated as a "limbo province". The Manila Times source was the clearest which mentions the COMELEC intends the province to be regrouped with Region 9 in time of the 2025 elections. The GMA Regional TV source worded it in a way that the reallocation has already happened. So again I have reverted changes (including the maps) that treat Sulu as a Zamboanga Peninsula province in light of the new citation and this very discussion. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 05:11, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Request for closure

Howard the Duck (talk) 21:57, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Draft Article

Hi! Is there any patrollers or can someone to review my draft article Draft: Sining (song)? Royiswariii (talk) 10:48, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Clarified a few words, made some tweaks to the references particularly the date format but otherwise it should look fine. May take some time before your article is reviewed - and hopefully approved - by a patroller. -Ian Lopez @ 12:55, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Giant copyvio on NCTs

List of National Cultural Treasures in the Philippines is apparently an 80% copyvio but I do not know which revision it all started as I am a late editor. Borgenland (talk) 13:08, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Many of the entries' descriptions should be significantly trimmed since it is too long and tedious to read. Details should be left in the dedicated articles. Sanglahi86 (talk) 15:38, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
I made preliminary trims and will continue later. Borgenland (talk) 16:20, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
Just finished making drastic revs. Borgenland (talk) 16:59, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Fake murder

Calling out whoever assassinated Rafael Jalandoni, who was merely wounded in the 1949 ambush of Aurora Quezon, using Geni. Borgenland (talk) 04:15, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Could be this. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 05:07, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Philippines National Historical Landmarks

It seems the entries in Philippines National Historical Landmarks has not been updated. Does it refer to "Category:National Historical Landmarks of the Philippines? If so, should it be moved to National Historical Landmark (Philippines)? Sanglahi86 (talk) 08:26, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

That list also needs to be rewritten. It looks like a shoddy school presentation. Borgenland (talk) 08:32, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
Well, given they don't currently have a website, I wonder how important this is. This pdf is apparently based off an old blogspot site. It has 130 sites, not including churches and military sites, whatever that means. CMD (talk) 09:03, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
If I have the time, I could try and search the papers for the latest designations. Borgenland (talk) 09:10, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
Just placed it in the history task force. Borgenland (talk) 09:11, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Area of Philippines

The Philippines' area of 300,000 sqkm has been changed several times by a user, who claims it is larger. At one time, he removed the 300,000 area from the infobox, and a concerned editor began discussing it in the talk page. Please verify if the area is indeed more than 300,000 sqkm and revert if not. Thanks. Sanglahi86 (talk) 09:54, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Most major sources, even those pre-internet have this nice round figure of 300,000. I suppose it's not exactly 300k, but someone has to produce ai authoritative source that trumps all sources stating 300k. Howard the Duck (talk) 10:50, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
I've seen sources with specific numbers both above and below 300,000. For what its worth PSA seems to use 300,000[13]. CMD (talk) 10:58, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
If they cannot be bothered to provide an authoritative source, and I am presuming at this stage that they are solely making up things on WP:OR, they ought to be reported and blocked, if necessary. Borgenland (talk) 14:29, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
Ive seen this round figure too in old textbooks. It jives with the wikipedia policy that Wikpedia should give weight to mainstream knowledge and reflect the common consensus. Rene Bascos Sarabia Jr. (talk) 01:46, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
link to file and page with quotation in question for anyone interested
I checked one source (A pronouncing gazetteer and geographical dictionary of the Philippine Islands, United States of America with maps, charts and illustrations, published by the Government Publishing Office in 1902) and it made an approximation stating that
with 127,853 square miles equivalent to around 331,138 square kilometers.
One of the three figures mentioned (309,615 square kilometers (119,543 square miles)) is close to the 310,800 square kilometers (120,000 square miles) claimed by the now tagged and banned account but it's off by around 1,200 square kilometers (460 square miles). Not sure if that is good enough for the main Philippines article but that may be mentioned in the Geography of the Philippines article probably as a note. -Ian Lopez @ 17:27, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
I suppose this is similar to the coastline paradox, as there may be no exact figure. Most modern sources have 300k. The offered sources are from even before computers (like ENIAC) were invented. People can argue that there could have been more accurate measurements (or estimates) since then. Howard the Duck (talk) 18:31, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
Update. The offending editor has been blocked as a sock: See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/RussianFanboy2010. Borgenland (talk) 02:12, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
Info: it appears the common figure of 300,000 km2 is just a low estimation. Per Talk:List of islands of the Philippines#Conflicting total area, P199 mentions about some sources giving what is claimed to be more exact figure of 343,448 km2. Searched online, and it exists in this opinion piece by the PDI website and in this 2013 research work of the DLSU. Additionally, this is the figure being held by the Wikidata entry, which claims the now-dead PH government page as the source. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 19:40, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
Footnote "d" on the main Philippines article says 343,448 km2 (132,606 sq mi), with a reference from UN-HABITAT, archived here. The WD figure was added by Hariboneagle927 in this edit and the PH government source can be seen in this archived page. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 21:33, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Controversies surrounding Pinoy Big Brother

Thought I'd solicit your comments on this one. I nominated the article for deletion as it seemed merely a litany of WP:UNDUE tabloid fodder than something worthy of discussion e.g. the Mass Effect 3 ending controversy or "No Russian". The controversies section in Grand Theft Auto V used to be in a separate article but was later consolidated on similar grounds, hence why I felt that the PBB controversies article need not to be blown up like that. Blake Gripling (talk) 04:19, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Posted a comment there. Tho for the interests of people here I am inclined to merge to Big Brother (franchise) itself. Borgenland (talk) 06:24, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Kingdom of Jesus Christ compound standoff#Requested move 1 October 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Kingdom of Jesus Christ compound standoff#Requested move 1 October 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. HueMan1 (talk) 22:53, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

LRT Line 1 (Manila) and LRT Line 2 (Manila) rename

A user named Jussie2024 moved LRT Line 1 (Metro Manila) and LRT Line 2 (Metro Manila) to LRT Line 1 (Manila) and LRT Line 2 (Manila).

I understand LRT-1 and LRT-2 cross through Manila, but their routes are also along other cities in Metro Manila. LRT-1 is even extending further than the city of Manila. The (Metro Manila) lines still redirect to the correct article, so nothing urgent so far.

Feel free to discuss whether we should keep the rename or not. RFNirmala (talk) 09:24, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Imo it should be reverted back in my opinion. The new titles are inaccurate. But one could argue the whole of Metro Manila is informally just known as "Manila".Hariboneagle927 (talk) 09:38, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
I'm with my Avian counterpart here but we've discussed this in an RM during COVID and "(Manila)" disambiguation was one of those rejected. Howard the Duck (talk) 10:31, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Revert. It's already bad that we have Imperial Manila, now the city is literally hogging the NCR itself. Also wondering if more serious sanctions could be raised against them given the torrent of warnings in their talk page. Borgenland (talk) 14:24, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
Can a sysop do this? The articles were moved in 2 titles, presumably to prevent move back to the original title. I've tried reading the RM in 2020 and got a headache, but this was one of the rejected titles. Howard the Duck (talk) 20:13, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
These have been reverted. Howard the Duck (talk) 01:26, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

1901 in Samar and Batangas, pacification, and WP:SS

Today, I did a significant rearrangement of content in the March across Samar article. That article now has two focuses; the "March" described in the lead section and, separately, General Smith's outrageous orders and their consequence. I put the latter into a Background section as that preceded the "March"' described in the lead. That Background stuff there is highlighted in Philippine-American War § American atrocities. Also highlighted there are harsh actions ordered by General Bell in Batangas and their consequences. All of that was in the time period subsequent to Aguinaldo's acceptance of statement acknowledging and accepting U.S. sovereignty over the whole Philippines in April 1901. Smith and Bell were reacting to Vincente Lukban and Miguel Malvar continuing the fighting in Samar and Batangas subsequent to that surrender. statement It strikes me that these can be categorized as pacification actions (the Pacification disambig page has a category: A military, political, economic, and social process of establishing or reestablishing control by a government over a population impacted and divided by insurgency). I'm thinking of creating Pacification of Samar amd Pacification of Batangas as WP:SS detail articles for those topics, and thought I would mention that here. I would be intrested in comments or discussion. Wtmitchell Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:42, 17 September 2024 (UTC) (updated)

(update) I have published the Pacification of Samar article. It consists mainly of content taken from March across Samar § Background with a rewritten lead section, some rewrites in the body, and the addition of a number of cites. The External links section and the categories list were imported from that other article with no changes. My intentions are to review that other article after a waiting period for reactions to this article's publication, probably rewriting the lead and removing the Background section after a waiting period. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 02:55, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

(update) I have created the Pacification of Batangas article and left a comment on its talk page. The article needs expanbsion and improvement in areas described in that comment and, no doubt, in other areas. 01:22, 3 October 2024 (UTC)Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill)

Lionheartv

There's a discussion in Talk:Bini (group) concerning the reliability of Lionheartv as a source which may also reach WP:RSN. Inviting interested editors to comment there. 15:52, 29 September 2024 (UTC) Borgenland (talk) 15:52, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

I'd rather use SMNI, an actual news org, for Bini related news than to scrape the bottom of the internet's barrel. Howard the Duck (talk) 21:21, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
That's saying much about SMNI lul; you seem rather sarcastic about a known fake news site run by a now-detained sex offender. Blake Gripling (talk) 05:51, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
SMNI may be propaganda, but it is still a news provider. You can probably use it as a source on local Davao non-political news. Howard the Duck (talk) 10:01, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
The fact that it's been spewing out propaganda isn't exactly inspiring any confidence tbf, regardless of whether the news is of political nature or otherwise. We've had the Daily Mail banned as a source for flagrant violations of journalistic ethics, so why not SMNI? Blake Gripling (talk) 01:01, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
FWIW, SMNI has been marked "Presumed to be generally unreliable" at Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines/Sources. At Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Sources#SMNI/DZAR?, Ian Lopez has the same observation as me: "generally unreliable with regards to coverage on Mr. Quiboloy, his organization and connected political and business interests while I'm leaning towards no consensus for other topics".
Wikipedia is not the Biniverse. Just because it's on the internet and is about Bini then we can be able to pass it off as WP:RS. We have articles for all seven(?) members of this girl group, all not showing independent notability outside of Bini. These articles even share references, and pass of "appearances" as solo appearances, until you realize all of them were there (LOL). I know you guys have to squeeze every reference to demonstrate notability, but this is bordering pathetic now. Howard the Duck (talk) 01:23, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Lionheartv is more of a better than nothing source for me because Pinoy entertainment editors can't be arsed to cite their references. If I can avoid it then I'll avoid it. I still have no idea where these editors pull their uncited information from. --Lenticel (talk) 00:59, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
    If another, better RS has an article similar to Lionheartv, use that instead. If it isn't, it is not notable enough to be written about in Wikipedia. Howard the Duck (talk) 01:04, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Want you all to know that I have raised this to WP:RSN since LionhearTV is widely used in other Philippine entertainment articles besides Bini (group). AstrooKai (Talk • Contributions) 18:42, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
@AstrooKai I would also suggest adding also SMNI to WP:RSN, since it is still not mentioned in the main WP:RSPSS table, to be determined with finality if the source is generally unreliable (with reliability only to subjects that they don't involve with like some showbiz topics), or should be totally deprecated and banned from the site permanently (like the case of The Daily Mail). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 22:32, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
To clarify, there is a difference between deprecated (read: its use as a reference is actively discouraged throughout the Wiki) compared to being banned or blacklisted (unless whitelisted from the anti-spam list, it cannot be used as a reference). For those interested, there's a discussion about Sonshine Media (Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Sources#SMNI/DZAR), consensus about its (un)reliability can be discussed there.
That being said, sites under the eMVP Digital network (not just LionhearTV but DailyPedia as well) ought to be scrutinized for its coverage of Philippine entertainment-related productions, personalities and entities which some people on the internet say is preferential or one-sided. -Ian Lopez @ 08:34, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
I'm not sure if it's in my best interest to raise the issue with SMNI to RSN since politics are not my forte here on Wikipedia, and that I'm not familiar with its issue. There's a discussion on the project's talk page, as mentioned by Ian above, and I guess the issue of SMNI should be discussed there. I don't know how SMNI got involved in this since the discussion tackles the credibility of LionhearTV. AstrooKai (Talk • Contributions) 16:26, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
@AstrooKai I made mention to SMNI because of the apparent disagreement between Howard the Duck and Blakegripling ph, notwithstanding the still-open discussion that Ianlopez1115 mentioned here (the discussion that seemed to have gone stale in my observation). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 00:46, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Benjamin Abalos Jr.#Requested move 2 October 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Benjamin Abalos Jr.#Requested move 2 October 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. HueMan1 (talk) 00:48, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Cityhood sections of some municipality articles

Is it appropriate for articles of some capital municipalities like Kalibo to have mentions of the House Bills automatically coverting capital municipalities of city-less provinces in the cityhood sections? While it may seem OK at first, it may lean towards WP:OR and overuse of WP:PRIMARY sources. Also, there is no guarantee that those bills are going to be passed, due to continued vigilance of the League of Cities of the Philippines against lenient cityhood laws in a similar fasion as cityhood rules of many U.S. states, so it is not sustainable to have mentions of these cityhood house bills for city-less provinces in the articles of capital municipalities of city-less provinces, like Kalibo, Siquijor, and Basco. The mention to the said house bills is probably OK at the main cityhood article (Cities of the Philippines), but those mentions in the articles of 16 municipalities should be removed. Thoughts? JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:43, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

I don't think it's due for every affected municipality. Borgenland (talk) 05:53, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
These should be removed. Until such bills become laws these are not notable. Howard the Duck (talk) 11:46, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
@Borgenland@Howard the Duck your thoughts on the likes of Capas#Cityhood and Cainta#Conversion to cityhood? JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:59, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
woefully outdated and uncited. remove. Borgenland (talk) 13:00, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
If what's being cited is a cityhood bill specific to that city, or issues specific to that city, it should probably be kept. If we're talking about a bill making several towns cities due to some criteria ot circumstance but did not become law, then that should be removed. Howard the Duck (talk) 13:35, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
I just thought that such sections may have some impression that we are endorsing cityhoods, which may run against WP:NEUTRALITY. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:00, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
It's more of a WP:CRYSTAL thing for me. Borgenland (talk) 13:04, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
@Borgenland: will refer to that policy link in my subsequent edits and edit histories in nuking the problematic cityhood sections. Though I may not be able to look for all cityhood sections due to some recurring health issue, so other editors' edits are welcome. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:11, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
Aside from provincial capitals, 1st class municipalities are likely to be included in this. Borgenland (talk) 14:20, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Islam in the Philippines

Recently, I noticed some misinformation regarding an article in religion in the Philippines. Particularly the Islam in the Philippines statistics in the introduction. One anonymous user changed statistics cited from the PSA. For instance, from the official number of 6,981,710, the user changed the number up to 15,231,564. I thought at first that the anonynous user was editing based from the cited sources in the article, but looking into the PSA site cited, the official number is more than 6 million.

I'm not sure regarding the anonymous user's other edits (September 22, 2024) as it seemed to be unsourced. I also noticed that this user's edits were reverted in some Philippine-related articles including the Manila article. AsianStuff03 (talk) 07:44, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Most likely a vandal who got away due to the absence of warnings. Borgenland (talk) 08:27, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
Not sure if unsourced statistics changes are always vandalism per so, but sadly vast majority of such edits should be reverted. CMD (talk) 09:06, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Abu Sayyaf moved to a weird title

I saw this page move/rename by TheLibyanGuy and I don't agree with their reasoning. Instead of reverting, I think starting a quick discussion here would be in order, and potentially a WP:RM in the future. —seav (talk) 02:59, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Nobody in this country would recognize that convoluted name. Plus, Islamic State is also used confusingly to describe the Maute group. Borgenland (talk) 04:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Note that for some reason I couldn't move back the page. Borgenland (talk) 04:06, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Just fixed it now. Borgenland (talk) 04:06, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
So apparently, many people cannot distinguish WP:OFFICIALNAME from the WP:AT ones. I suppose ASG is going by this new name now. They were the ones behind the Mindanao State University bombing, right? How did local WP:RS refer to them? Howard the Duck (talk) 04:31, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
See [14] and [15]. Borgenland (talk) 04:41, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Ok, so apparently it wasn't them that were behind the bombings, but the remnants of the Maute Group. I'd be interested on what the RS refers to them on their actual activities. Howard the Duck (talk) 15:50, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
These were among the most recent clashes: [16] and [17]. Note that AP still refers to them by common name. Borgenland (talk) 15:53, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
It's interesting the AP doesn't even make the Islamic State connection. Howard the Duck (talk) 16:11, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
It only mentions several ASG militants who did pledge allegiance to IS. But then again the latter has a haphazard way of giving out franchises. Borgenland (talk) 16:24, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Ah yes, it was mentioned in midway in the article, but did not specifically name the group after IS. Howard the Duck (talk) 16:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
It was just factions within the Abu Sayyaf who pledged allegiance to ISIS from what I remember. The whole of ASG can't be said to be the same entity as "Islamic State – East Asia Province". ISIS is pretty much more decentralize here in Southeast Asia than in the Levant and Africa. And even if let's say its true, Abu Sayyaf is still WP:COMMONNAME for ISIS in the Sulu archipelago.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 03:57, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi, just wanted to clarify something about the provincial name convention guideline in Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Philippines-related articles#Provincial name convention. I've seen a few articles that have referred to the location of buildings, birthplaces, etc. both in the lead section or infobox in the format of City, Philippines or City, Province, Philippines. An example of this I've seen is Quezon City, Philippines.

Since the current guidelines don't clarify on this, when is it appropriate for a location to include the Philippines and when is it appropriate to just end at either the metropolitan area or province? (e.g. San Juan, Metro Manila instead of San Juan, Metro Manila, the Philippines) Also, should it be Philippines or the Philippines? Ganmatthew (talk • contribs) 06:09, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

"Place_name, the Philippines" just sounds weird and wrong. You never see things like "The Hague, the Netherlands" or "London, the United Kingdom". HueMan1 (talk) 08:30, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Birth and death places should always include the province, if you ask me, unless the person was born in the City of Manila, to which it would be okay to just use "Manila, Philippines". --Sky Harbor (talk) 13:28, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
That is a case where including NCR (after 1975) has a significant benefit, which is to avoid potential confusion. CMD (talk) 13:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
@Chipmunkdavis: But there was no "NCR" prior to 1978, only Metro Manila. HueMan1 (talk) 15:18, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
The 1978 change didn't shift any borders, which is the potential cause of problems here. CMD (talk) 16:27, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
I would think the NCR distinction here doesn't matter; in cases where the birthplace is in another constituent city of Metro Manila, "Metro Manila" is what is pointed out and not the NCR. (Obviously, for people born in a constituent city but before the creation of Metro Manila, use the province where the city/municipality previously belonged to.)
That said, I will say that my point here with birth and death places is specific to infoboxes. It appears to be generally accepted practice to always include the principal subdivision and the country, and so I expect that in that use case this would be an exception. When we first discussed MOS:PHIL's treatment of provinces I was under the impression that this covered prose only, not infoboxes, so I'm surprised that today there is this idea that the guideline also covers infoboxes when this was not the original intention of the guideline. --Sky Harbor (talk) 03:43, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
The AP Stylebook just posted about this on X fka Twitter. I do remember Time in its letters to the editor section always have letters from the Philippines as from "Foo, the Philippines", though.
I'd recommend on using "Cityormunicipalityname, Provincename" for component cities and municipalities, while HUCs and ICCs just get "Cityname", except Naga, Camarines Sur and Santiago, Isabela. For cities in Metro Manila, before its now LGUs were excised from Rizal and Bulacan, if someone was born in say Malabon, it should be "Malabon, Rizal".
For example,
Howard the Duck (talk) 15:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Seems reasonable. As English Wikipedia is a de jure U.S. site, it may be reasonable to use cityname, Philippines in some cases, following AP Stylebook's pattern. If few users may agree, then I'll suggest reverting Angeles City to Angeles, Philippines for the article title. Also, Lapu-Lapu, Philippines instead of Lapu-Lapu City. Of course, Manila goes by its plain-name as being the primary topic of "Manila", and other places are to be dictated by three cases:
I am beginning to realize that Angeles City and Lapu-Lapu City titles are too casual and Filipino-centric, yet enwiki is not only limited to Filipino readers. Some American/European/Singaporean readers may also mistake that "City" is part of the name, in a similar fashion as Dickson City, Pennsylvania or Daly City, California.
I may be OK to reverting Orani to Orani, Bataan (Orani is nothing unique). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 06:57, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
FWIW, even foreigners, no thanks to the sex trade, call it "Angeles City". It's no longer restricted to Filipinos. We've limited "City" to I guess just those two, plus cities that have the same name as provinces ("Tarlac City"). The current convention for names is fine. Howard the Duck (talk) 08:00, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
I usually add Metro Manila when its appropriate since it clarifies the non-"City of Manila" subdivisions being part of "Manila" which is often oversimplified in foreign news outlet as "suburb of Manila".Hariboneagle927 (talk) 03:54, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

PH radio station lists

I have been working on rewriting PH regional radio station list tables into something like those used on US and Canada radio station lists (with call sign first and the tables sortable), but I have ongoing problem with the CAR radio station list as there's one user who wants the existing form divided by province kept. Just have the second revert, asking them to discuss should they revert again for any reason, and I don't want to have the dispute on list table format devolve into edit war. Well I had created a new radio station list for Eastern Visayas, which uses one sortable table instead of multiple tables across multiple headings by province. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 00:55, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Tambayan_Philippines/Archive_52&oldid=1253348335"