Metro Cagayan de Oro, fact or fiction? edit

Some people are trying to portray Cagayan de Oro as a highly developed metropolitan area like in Cebu or even Davao when in fact it is not. Let us not get ourselves too "excited". Currently the City Government does not recognize the idea of a Metropolitan Cagayan de Oro. And most of all, the Municipalities of Libona and Manolo Fortich are part of Bukidnon Province. I doubt they would agree to be called part of Metro Cagayan de Oro. I find this article more fiction than fact unless someone could cite references especially coming from the City Government itself. VisitCDO (talk) 06:47, 17 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

It isn't a hoax, and Metro Cagayan de Oro is recognized by the National Economic and Development Authority as one of the twelve metropolitan areas of the Philippines. The source is cited at the list of metropolitan areas at the Cities of the Philippines article. --Sky Harbor (talk) 13:39, 9 October 2009 (UTC)Reply


  • Metropolitan Areas of the Philippines

When I did my college paper for my Urban Planning and Development subject, based on my research, there is no legal basis yet at least, for the agglomeration of Metro Cagayan de Oro. For a metropolitan area to exist, it should have legal basis by way of an Executive Order or Republic Act.

Currently, only Metro Manila has is its own legislative franchise and recognized as such. Metro Cebu and Metro Davao on the other hand is only recognized by its own urbanity level which Metro Cagayan de Oro does not possess. For Cagayan de Oro City to lead an agglomeration, it should reach at least the 1 million population mark with its surrounding conurbation of local government units contributing another 1 million population.

High population density and built-up areas, including conurbation system are factors considered in determining metropolitan areas.


bedcrawl 11:02, 17 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marletbadeo (talkcontribs)

Creator edit

I am the creator of this page. I believe Metro Cagayan de Oro is a real Metro area. Also Metro Cebu and Metro Davao are real. Coolknot (talk) 07:49, 25 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

More Stuff edit

Where is the government-sourced reference that states that CDO is a metropolitan area? --seav (talk) 03:09, 28 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Teehee!--Coolknot (talk) 00:45, 29 September 2009 (UTC)Woohoo!!Reply

1998 NEDA-PIDS Study edit

Metro Cagayan de Oro concept was based on a NEDA-PIDS discussion paper in 1998 (http://dirp3.pids.gov.ph/ris/dps/pidsdps9814.pdf). The front page of the paper states that the document was for discussion only. No legal references (Executive or Congressional Act) was mentioned for the establishment of Metro CDO.

For Metro Cagayan de Oro to be realized, the city with the coordination of local government units should establish a Metropolitan Council similar to Manila's MMDA to oversea the general operations of the metropolis. However this does not exist to this date. If you read the Wikipedia article about Metro Davao, it even admits that Metro Davao is merely an informal reference to the area and does not have any legal basis or framework to speak off because it has not established a Metropolitan Council. VisitCDO (talk) 04:06, 12 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

File:Cagayandeoro skyline.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion edit

  An image used in this article, File:Cagayandeoro skyline.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:27, 24 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Large population discrepancy edit

While the infobox lists an undated population of 602,088, the lead has a 2007 population of 1,121,561 (without an inline citation). That's quite a difference; which is correct? Miniapolis 17:27, 17 September 2013 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Metro Cagayan de Oro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:38, 9 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

External links modified (January 2018) edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Metro Cagayan de Oro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:43, 26 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion edit

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion edit

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:05, 30 June 2021 (UTC)Reply