Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Archive 25

Archive 20

←

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

→

Archive 30

WMPH Updates

ChapCom responded to By-Laws changes and the response was positive except for Art 3 Sec. 1. He stressed that the Auditor be elected directly from the membership body. --Exec8 (talk) 16:51, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

This is where we can invoke Title XI, Section 92 of the Corporation Code. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 00:45, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Is there any difference between "elected" and "appointed"? Actually, Effeietsanders used the term "appointed" by the Membership Body. He is also fine with a professional auditor appointed by the Board. Are we in agreement with hiring a professional auditor or we prefer a non-professional auditor appointed/elected by the Membership Body? --Jojit (talk) 07:56, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

To resolve this, let's just say that the non-pro auditor will be elected by the membership body among its ranks during the annual convention. For the transitory provisions, the incorporators will appoint the auditor who will serve until the first annual convention. Does this sound good? --seav (talk) 15:56, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. You also mean, we'll set the first annual convention as a deadline upon which we should already appoint a professional auditor? --- Tito Pao (talk) 01:48, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

BTW, Tito Pao, you're currently a capital subscriber and an initial director. Wanna complete it and also be an incorporator? :-) --seav (talk) 13:28, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, I think I already said "yes" in principle (and in person) in Manila 5 :) --- Tito Pao (talk) 00:23, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I edited the By-laws to include this. --Jojit (talk) 01:58, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Note: I edited it some more. The initial Auditor should be stated in the Article XI (Transitory Provisions), not Article III. --seav (talk) 04:18, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Dee C. Chuan

Another editor, Chinabank (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log), created Dee C. Chuan, which appears to be mostly a copy of http://en.wikipilipinas.org/index.php?title=Dee_C._Chuan

Is it okay to use material from WikiPilipinas.org in this way? WikiPilipinas is licensed under GFDL 1.2 so I would guess so, but I'm not sure. I would appreciate it if anyone could take a look at the Dee C. Chuan article. If we can't use WikiPilipinas text, please cut the article down to a stub that won't be a copyvio. The same editor also expanded Chinabank and created Manulife Philippines and Manulife China Bank Life Assurance Corporation before being blocked indefinitely because of a bad username. All these articles may be of interest to members of this project. - Eastmain (talk • contribs) 08:49, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia can no longer import from GFDL-only sources since license migration. See Wikipedia:Licensing update#Content restrictions for details. The article is now tagged as copyvio. --Bluemask (talk) 10:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

They can however still be rewritten to be sufficiently distinct from the original source. WPinas however seems to be uninterested in the issue of licensing, given how lax they enforce licenses. And they call themselves a "free" encyclopedia. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 11:26, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you both for the explanation. I have stubbed Dee C. Chuan so that it is no longer a copyvio. - Eastmain (talk • contribs) 13:12, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I sent an e-mail to the WikiPilipinas people both before the GFDL 1.3 migration deadline and after regarding their license. It does seem that they don't find the licensing issue a high priority. --seav (talk) 13:22, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

WMPH approval

I emailed all the initial directors of WMPH (plus Alternativity) regarding the approval of the By-laws. Please read it and make a comment. --Jojit (talk) 03:33, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Chief Justice User:Florentino floro?

Expelled ‘psychic judge’ among nominees for chief justice post

Ahaha... What a country... --TheCoffee (talk) 14:16, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

User:Florentino floro FTW!!! So wait, have we proven that the Wikipedian really is Floro? –Howard the Duck 14:31, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

As an avid follower of his work, I have no doubt that it's really him. --TheCoffee (talk) 15:48, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

My God, not the Dwarf Judge again...RE your question Howard, it really is him. I remember him huffing and hawing over some inconsistencies written about him in a WP article of his. We could trust the JBC to select people of much higher caliber than this long-discredited guy. Jeez. --Eaglestorm (talk) 15:55, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Once the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) publishes their announcement soliciting feedback about the nominees from the public, is anyone here planning to send their thoughts to the JBC? :P --- Tito Pao (talk) 00:14, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I just heard that at the barbershop. I asked the barber for the Pilipino Star Ngayon and I saw the news title Nakikipagusap sa duwende nag-apply bilang CJ. Good luck for him. At least the CJ application will have a touch of color and fantasy.--Exec8 (talk) 03:42, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Can we, as a group, actively oppose his application? On the other hand, why would the JBC even consider him since he messed up in the Supreme Court's psychological evaluation? When you're disbarred as a judge, it's a death sentence in the judiciary. Even a lawyer could see through that.--Eaglestorm (talk) 04:26, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Don't look now, but it looks like the Tambays', ahem, best friend, opened another Wikipedia account :P I've forgotten which page should I report this to, so please feel free to do so. --- Tito Pao (talk) 06:22, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

try SPI. I just slapped his userpage with a sock tag.--Eaglestorm (talk) 06:38, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

An update to the Floro brouhaha: Dismissed 'psychic' judge gets High Court's ire. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 13:42, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

This effectively renders moot the question of whether any Tambay should send a letter to the JBC :P --- Tito Pao (talk) 06:24, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I want to give all the Supreme Court justices a big hug and tell them I know their pain. TheCoffee (talk) 14:31, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Latest news inserted into his article. --Eaglestorm (talk) 07:34, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

DYK not showing on the project page

--TitanOne (talk) 19:55, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Because no one updates the DYK listings (I do occasionally, but not at the moment), let's try doing it this way: if you have a DYK, feel free to post it on the DYK section of the main page. The section is editable anyway, and the format is easy to follow through. It saves the hassle of having to dig through thousands of DYK entries just to add them onto the list. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 00:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Dinagat Islands province creation nullified

See the Inquirer.net article. Though it seems they don't know that they're talking about, saying it's going back to being a municipality. TheCoffee (talk) 09:36, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

@#$%@@#!!! --seav (talk) 15:23, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Such a shame, the locator maps you made were so pretty. TheCoffee (talk) 15:44, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

We can still retain it. The ruling is not yet final and executory. So the status quo has to remain, that it is still a province. --Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 03:22, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Where will Legislative district of Dinagat Islands revert back to? –Howard the Duck 04:10, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Should it become final and executory, it should be infused to the 1st District of Surigao del Norte, which it used to belong. I just want to emphasise, the ruling is not yet final and executory, hence to say Dinagat Islands is a former province is just preempting too much. --Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 13:01, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

GA Reassessment of De La Salle University

I have done a GA Reassessment of the De La Salle University article as part of the GA Sweeps project. I have found that the article does not meet current GA Criteria. My review can be found here. I have placed the article on hold for a week and I am notifying all interested projects and editors. If you have any questions or concerns please contact me on my talk page. H1nkles (talk) 17:04, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I would also note that the article Ateneo de Manila University has been delisted as a GA. Lambanog (talk) 07:02, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Loren Legarda

Currently under attacked by censors.--HoppingHare (talk) 08:11, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I do not think you are justified in labeling a good-faith editor as a "censor". The criticism section of that article, as it stands, was clearly written by someone with a malicious agenda. The facts need to stand for themselves, not be rounded up selectively to push a point of view. Personally I think the article is better off with the section deleted entirely. TheCoffee (talk) 12:09, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Philippine general election, 2010

Just asking, should we have page protections placed for presidential, senatorial, and party-list candidates for the Philippine general election, 2010 until May 11, 2010? Because what happened today in Loren Legarda might only be a taste of what could happen in April and May.--HoppingHare (talk) 11:27, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

We don't do it a la Calibrated Pre-Emptive Response, we wait for them to happen, then the admins semiprotect it. –Howard the Duck 13:04, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I've been monitoring Manny Villar, who probably should be the biggest target of vandalism, but so far it has seemed manageable. TheCoffee (talk) 13:06, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

PhilWiki Chat 13

For those peeps who are not busy, PhilWiki Chat 13 will be on

February 20, 2010

8:00 PM onwards 3am of Feb 21

Chat venue: chat site

Note: There is a separate registration for the chat, so ning registration is optional. You can use your wikipedia username. --Exec8 (talk) 13:28, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Ok, but i will join this please, please!!! - Gabby, 14:38, 20 February 2010 (PST)

GA reassessment of De La Salle-College of Saint Benilde

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns which you can see at Talk:De La Salle-College of Saint Benilde/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:24, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

My Way killings

Seriously?! (But the referenced NYT article is an interesting read...) --seav (talk) 13:08, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

I know. I think it's even a category created by the police. I remember reading an article about it in Maxim Philippines a few years back, named The Final Curtain, hell, a Basta't Kasama Kita storyarc from early 2004 revolved around this! As soon as I find the issue, I'll ref it here.--Eaglestorm (talk) 02:32, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Wow. Too bad I didn't know about this article a few days ago, it's exactly the kind of thing for WP:DYK. TheCoffee (talk) 12:41, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Actually, this article gave me an idea for composing a parody song about those karaoke killings. The article itself is fine, no major problems detected so far. Blake Gripling (talk) 05:34, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Melisa Cantiveros

I redirected this before to the PBB Double-Up page, but somebody made a brand-new article. Thought I'd give everybody a heads up, just in case. --Eaglestorm (talk) 03:06, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Big winners get their own article so this will probably fail even a merge request. –Howard the Duck 03:09, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

She's still a showbiz noob, so her article's classified as low-priority as usual. Right now we need to watch and patrol the article for any possible fanboy invasions. Blake Gripling (talk) 03:33, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Ok, don't redirect to PBB: Double Up page, but still expanding mostly. - Gabby 14:29, 20 February 2010 (PST)

Expanding? how about if the article is rewritten by not copypasting stuff mentioning Melai from the PBBDU article?--Eaglestorm (talk) 05:32, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Another person, was created another article named Melai Cantiveros, what's the best name for the article and one is redirect??? - Gabby - 18:47, 23 February 2010 (PST)

GA Reassessment of University of Santo Tomas

I have done a GA Reassessment of the University of Santo Tomas article as part of the GA Sweeps project. My review can be found here. I have only done a high level review at this point and found considerable issues with the article that will need to be addressed before a more thorough review can be undertaken. I have put the article on hold for a week pending work. I am notifying all interested editors and projects. If you have any questions or concerns please contact me on my talk page. H1nkles (talk) 21:39, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Participation needed

Can I request participation to determine the fate of Legislative district of Imus and Legislative district of Bacoor.--Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 11:54, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I left a long comment at the Imus district AfD. I guess my comment would also need input from the community. --seav (talk) 03:53, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

The articles were just resurrected after they've been deleted. --Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 07:22, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

hack

I think someone is trying to hack into my account, from the email: "Someone from the IP address 216.54.83.5 requested that we send you a new login password for the English Wikipedia. The new password for the user account "Jondel" is "fuck_shit". You can now log in to Wikipedia using that password. If someone else made this request, or if you have remembered your password and you no longer wish to change it, you may safely ignore this message. Your old/existing password will continue to work despite this new password being created for you. ~Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org --Jondel (talk) 08:12, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Expand

Can you expand the newest Philippine-related article, 2010 in the Philippines, Thank You for your conservative help... - Gabby 22:36, 27 January 2010 (PST)

Someone may have forgotten that Jayson Aguilar Ivler a. k. a. "Jsin" (he killed the son of a government official, and is/was a rapper) was arrested sometime in the middle of January. -124.217.15.104 (talk) 10:26, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Burger King Whoppers renamed again as Air21 Express

Hi admins. I would like to seek assistance in moving the Burger King Whoppers article to Air21 Express. Bert Lina just recently announced that BK will be renamed again as Air21 beginning the Fiesta Conference. Thanks. -WayKurat (talk) 09:56, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Followup on this request. Thanks. -WayKurat (talk) 13:55, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Marriage and wedding customs in the Philippines

I need assistance in providing other sources for this article. Will appreciate any immediate help so that it would really be good for DYK nom here. Thanks in advance. - AnakngAraw (talk) 03:59, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm a reviewer of this article nomination, I can't add the citations but let me field in a couple of examples. --TitanOne (talk) 13:57, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

• Inquirer Philippines
• Marriage Rites, Customs and Ceremonies of the Nations of the Universe Book
• 12 Books on Harvard's list
• Article Base

Adminship

A user blocked due to sockpuppetry is seeking adminship (RfA) at Tagalog Wikipedia. Concerns, eh? --JL 09 ^_q?c 03:45, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

If he's practically banned here, he'll never be of good use in any other Wikipedia. 'End the persecution, Ibalik ang dangal sa (Bring back the honor in) Wikipedia'? PLEASE!! Nice one, proot.--Eaglestorm (talk) 05:31, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Disagree with the analysis there. There are users blocked or banned on the English Wikipedia who have worked well on other Wikipedias. Emir214, who neither of you know, is a prime example of the case I cite. However, I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt on this one: people may disagree with 23prootie because he tried to split the Tagalog Wikipedia community by proposing a Baybayin-script Tagalog Wikipedia not too long ago. Otherwise he's an okay editor, and he has not yet run afoul of the policies over there. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 02:41, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Edit warring, disruptive editing, persistent sockpuppetry (they're still socking now) using socks and open proxies to circumvent blocks, lying and deceit to save their skin (There's something in SPI and ANI), extremely poor justification of breaking half of the English Wikipedia policies (uses WP:Ignore), and personal attacks? These are hardly qualities that I would call an okay editor, let alone an admin. Admins are users who the community looks up to. I don't think that any community welcomes these actions that I listed. Even though he has not run afoul in Tagalog Wikipedia, 23prootie has shown what kind of editor he is here. What project he's in doesn't change the fact that his behavior is unacceptable. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 04:30, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like he should run for Senator. TheCoffee (talk) 12:42, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Maybe he should. It's not too late for him to run for the Philippine senate election, right? Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 17:59, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Please give him the benefit of the doubt. He was pretty decent before. I will try to investigate but I'm now more involved with the latin wiki.--Jondel (talk) 04:59, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

'Pretty decent'? Not when another sock of yours is blocked within a few hours of creating it...and Elockid has a strong case against him since he handled many prootie SPIs. --Eaglestorm (talk) 05:16, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedians for one are human, and they are certainly capable of turning themselves around. Just because you do misdeeds, it does not mean that your entire service record should be judged just on that. If I had the legal authority to lift blocks (which I do, but as per policy, I do not), I would lift the block on Emir214 on en.wiki. I even see a living example of a "reformed" Wikipedian right above us on one of the older threads (guess who he is). --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 13:44, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

However, the difference is that Emir has reformed himself. 23prootie has not and has continued to repeat the exact same behavior they have been doing the day got them blocked and perma banned. SPI closed yesterday. SPI reopened on the same day. It's a continuous and never ending cycle that looks like it will never end. It's been happening for months now ever since his block and ban and he looks determined to continue. One of the more recent socks which you can see above as HoppingHare (talk · contribs) was initially blocked for edit warring. 23prootie was repeated block for edit warring. In between that time, he has continued to edit war citing I can make these edits because of WP:Ignore. IMHO, I think he thinks he can do whatever he wants. Unfortunately he doesn't know how WP:Ignore works. I don't see him reforming or changing his behavior or anytime soon. @Jondel. I don't think benefit of the doubt works for consistent repeated behavior along with strong and technical evidence. If it was just once or twice spanning more than a day, then yes. But this isn't so. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 16:57, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay, friends, let's have a recount. I don't know Emir214 personally but I saw his block log on en.wiki, some of his contributions so and so. (Oh, when I saw this, I realized that he is on my YM account. He invited me to become his pal and I saw that he is currently 3rd or 4th year high school now, and his account was active about four years ago, anyway.) If my perception is correct, he tried to act like an administrator and he gave his password to anybody. Well, I can't say that Emir214 was a disruptive editor, I haven't known Wikipedia until 2007. You guys said that Emir214 reformed himself in Tagalog Wikipedia, and I am glad of it.

The difference is that being a contributor or sole user that has tools similar to the majority (like us, in short, being an ordinary contributor) is different from being an administrator. If my perceptions are true, there are many processes involved in promoting a user to become an admin. Like, for example, history of editing is generally observed and that testimonials are also given (by the people who support or oppose an RfA). I believe that this would show prospective admins on how they are going to deal negative comments so and so, that may justify their adminship.

Now even though 23prootie did not made disruptive editing behavior in Tagalog Wikipedia, she¹ did them in here. One of the best example is through the use of sock puppets. I know Elockid handled and still handling many SPI cases, it just so happened that he do many SPIs, that he almost noticed all of 23prootie's socks. And that isn't unusual for an editor handling many SPIs. Now, 23prootie herself through her socks believed that Elockid is somewhat "angry" about her because for every sock she creates, Elockid always notices it. Now, I've been interacted with 23prootie during the disruptive editing between User:Boxedor and 23prootie. That time, Boxedor posted POV statements in the article Philippines saying that this and that must be removed because it's too American, too racist, even though his edits made considerable efforts to make it a real POV article. Then 23prootie revert it and revert and revert in such a way violating the 3rr and making an edit war with Boxedor over the article. I filed an ANI about this case after warning both people, resulting to Boxedor's block. I guessed 23prootie became happy that he sent me a cookie on my talk page.

The next time I saw 23prootie is over the article Commonwealth of the Philippines, about weeks later. She saw a Yale U article over the internet where it uses the name "Philippine Commonwealth" alternately with "Commonwealth of the Phil.", and that dates about the 20s or 30s I guess. Because of that she had a reason to move the article Commonwealth of the Philippines (CP) to Phil. Commonwealth (PC). A long discussion goes, but still CP became the more general name for the article. Without finishing the consensus, 23prootie re-moved it again to PC until I called on for move-protection of CP after it was reverted. So PC was left as a redirect. Since CP cannot be moved anymore to PC, 23prootie copied all the contents of CP to PC and she made CP to become a redirect to PC. Still, she insisted that it must be name, without finishing a consensus. Because of that (3rr, edit warring and personal attacks), she was blocked for weeks or months I guessed. But before that blocking, she created the article Francisco Carreon, and modifies the assessment. I once did a modification of article assessment I created but I remember seav saying that it is general to ask somebody to assess the article, and call for reassessment if you are not satisfied with it. I can't remember a rule governing with that, I guess it has no standards.

So that was the time when I encounter 23prootie, where we successfully brought her to blocking. I learned that she was not blocked once, but many times because of editing behavior, violating AGF and posting personal attacks. Most of these blocks are set to expire at a definite time. My notice to block 23prootie was granted and it was also in a definite time. But when she used the unblock template many times, it is a rule for her talk page to become protected. She used an IP address to continue her DYK inclusion request, and according to definitions, that is block evasion. So her IP was blocked, she used another IP, did same editing behavior as 23prootie's and edited 23prootie's pending editing things, so and so, and was blocked again. Until she created several accounts. Most of these IP and new accounts were noticed by Elockid, so as you can see on her SPI archive, many of the evidences were submitted by Elockid himself. Nick-D came into picture when he commented out on many of Elockid's evidence submissions, and I guess he is involved to many SPI.

So I believe that was the reason behind her belief that either (1) me, JL 09 and Nick-D were "cronies" of Elockid or (2) me and Nick-D are socks of Elockid. Later I guess she learned that Nick-D is an admin, so she had this assertion (on her RfA comment in tl.wiki, based on that) that Nick-D uses his administrative powers and his administrative auras to persuade other administrators (the SPI checker, the checkusers, etc.) to finally ban her here.

As what Elockid points out, 23prootie confirmed that HoppingHare was a sock of her (see HoppingHare's talk) and that she will never stop doing disruption using sock puppetry. She also said that Nick-D uses his administrative power to seek revenge or something like that to the users they don't like.

In short, I was really surprised to see 23prootie's rich list of socks on her SPI archive. She mentioned on my tl.wiki talk page that she really was the one behind those user accounts as well as the IP addresses. Except that she wasn't BoyMuslim, the one who vandalised my user page here, like posting thousands of lines saying "Para kay 23prootie" (This is for 23prootie) and inserting thousands of blocking template in my talk page. I don't know if that is real.

I wanted to say on her RfA in tl.wiki she can still translate, revise, rewrite many articles even if she isn't an administrator. I am unfamiliar with admin tools, but based on my observation, it has rich collection of tools that we, ordinary users do not have. Her RfA statement is purely based upon the thoughts that she could edit more if she is an administrator. My say is that a person can contribute millions of articles to the Tagalog Wikipedia, even if that person is not an admin. That is why I said on the RfA that we cannot trust adminship to her due to her behavior here in en.wiki. Furthermore, it is true that Wikipedia changes: there is an English one and a Tagalog one. Contents are entirely different. Wordings are different. Take this as an example: when you use your browser (IE for example), and you have two IE active. You can switch windows between the two IEs. But I am pretty sure that your attitude is the same whether you use the first window or the second one.

What I meant is the difference between Emir214 and 23prootie. Emir214 had reformed in tl.wiki, so does 23prootie. But Emir214 isn't become an admin there. 23prootie is seeking adminship. There are lots of admin there, whereas the number of them is relatively higher that the number of regular users. 23prootie was given many chances here to change, but still she didn't changed at all. How can we be sure that he will not abuse admin tools, to think that we were already deceived by 23prootie here and she failed our trust and confidence many times (when she promised she will never do this, do that again?). I pointed in the RfA some 23prootie's potholes as compared to what the voters in RfA expected from her. In her comments, it seems she doesn't accept negative feedbacks. Kulang na lang ay murahin niya kami ni Elockid at Nick-D. (Based on her feedback, she is almost throwing bad words to us except she really throw those.) Yes, it is true that tl.wiki and en.wiki are different, but remember, she is the same 23prootie appeared in en.wiki. Thus, we cannot assure admin powers to her, especially that it has powerful tools. Thanks.--JL 09 ^_q?c 04:55, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

¹ I used "she" because I sense that she's a girl Correct me if I'm wrong. :)--JL 09 _^q?c 04:55, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

JL, you said a lot and every bit made sense, even if word usage and grammatical errors are abound (I'm a news editor btw), I catch your drift. as for your last TL remark...for the casual EN reader, it basically means "The only thing she hasn't done yet is to curse me, Elockid and Nick-D".).--Eaglestorm (talk) 13:08, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Eaglestorm. Apology for the bad grammar. :)--JL 09 ^_q?c 01:21, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Does anyone agree with me that these are important characteristics of what an admin needs to have:

• 1) Admins are supposed to be editors that you can trust
• 2) Admins are expected to follow policy like everyone else and uphold them (using tools to enforce policy)
• 3) Admins are expected to exercise good judgment
• 4) Admins are expected to have good behavior/exercise good conduct (No personal attacks and such)

Some explanation:

• 1) I don't trust 23prootie at all. Even other admins don't trust 23prootie. See the talk page of this sock of theirs: Reincarnata (talk · contribs). Really, is something like this trustable where they were basically trying to deceive everyone else to get themselves unblocked? Lying and deceit destroys the community's trust in a person. Open proxies anyone? Using them is against site policy and is at best shady. Persistent sockpuppets? These are not characteristics that I would like in admin. I want to overemphasize that trust is one the biggest things an admin needs to have.

• 2) The edit warring is a serious issue and 23prootie has been blocked numerous times for it. What's to say that he won't wheel war if he gets adminship? He's already shown that he is a determined edit warrior. Also, the use WP:Ignore shows that he really isn't interested in following site policy. Any action he'll do that's controversial will probably be something like see I did this and can do it because of WP:Ignore. Also if you can't follow policy, you shouldn't even be here then.

• 3) Cmon. Poor judgment all around. He would still be editing if he had good judgment.

• 4) This gets back to the trust issue again. 23prootie claims that he isn't BoyMuslim posting personal attacks on JL 09's user page, but he's lost the sense of trust from others that would make us believe that BoyMuslim isn't him. CU didn't say that BoyMuslim was unrelated to 23prootie and another admin as a result tagged BoyMuslim a confirmed sock of 23prootie. His rant in TL Wikipedia the day his socks got blocked are not good either. Revenge is not good behavior especially with BoyMuslim. He's also been trying to get JL 09, Nick, and me blocked for months or in Nick's case, desysopped. In my perspective this really just seems like revenge for continuing to report and get his socks blocked.

This is just really scratching the surface. Everyone is human, yes, which means that we are not perfect and we make mistakes. The only mistakes he's learning from over the past months is this: I did something wrong because my IP range and socks got blocked. What did I do wrong and how can I fix it? The SPI supports this. Human behavior is hard to change. In any project, I don't see his behavior ever changing. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 00:07, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Agree on all four counts.--Eaglestorm (talk) 13:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Latest on this controversy: proot's seeking to close the matter and thanking Nickrds09 and AnakngAraw for the approval votes, claiming that the RFA has been hijacked by 'people with selfish interests.' Look who's talking...he even seeks that ANA block a supposed JL sock from the TL version of the Wandering Traveller. Although one of them said TL needed a replacement for Lenticel, I'd bet even Lenticel himself would puke at this. --Eaglestorm (talk) 05:06, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Although I'm tempted to close the RfA, I may add my voice into the fray, since I disagree with the rationale that you need to be an admin in order to facilitate translation. Any editor can translate articles, with or without sysop rights. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 12:29, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Look, I had my RfA there pending for almost a year. And he used it as a ground of posting attacks like he said there. Yes, I remembered Sky saying on my query on Kapihan that I need to do something on merging accounts.. but sounds too complicated, so I decided to abandon The Wandering Traveler. I forgot to sign on the RfA (using The Wandering Traveler) that I wanted to abandon the RfA too. If I'll do it now, I'm afraid of accusation of sock puppetry. Well, that isn't the case. he called me a hypocrite, and she started a new self-nomination because he believes that the active nomination has been hijacked and too political. Again, here he comes deciding things for himself (like closing a nomination -- for him and for mine, tagging sock puppeteer templates which do not yet exist). I'm getting headaches now. Good night everybody. I have to mind my own business tomorrow, which is determining mass moment of inertia using integration.--JL 09 ^_q?c 17:49, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Actually quite surprised that he created a new sock, Turtledove8windmill (talk · contribs) (not blocked yet, but pending CU to block the open proxies their editing) several days after the last one was blocked. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 04:51, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

He is now. Fisherqueen and Dave1185 took care of him.--Eaglestorm (talk) 15:36, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

GMA Fan sockpuppet

• Another GMA Fan sockpuppet, User talk:DisneyChannelFan024. Mostly edits GMA sections and recently vandalized the Wowowee page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.78.109.207 (talk) 19:06, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Satur Ocampo, National Democratic Front (Philippines), etc.

You know, folks, articles concerning those parties in the Philippines considered part of the left are far too vague, and far too general. Not having examined much literature about the left myself, I've no idea where to start beefing these articles up. I think with people like Satur Ocampo, Liza Maza, Riza Hontiveros, and Teddy Casiño taking up more prominent positions in our national conversation, the wikis on them and the organizations they represent should be as informative as possible, right? Especially to help avoid such confusion as this: Ocampo jumps on Villar slip, denies link to NPA. In particular, I'm curious about the precise differences between Social Democrats and National Democrats in the Philippine context. These are labels which I get the impression are important determinants of what exactly a person or group stands for, and yet the wikis are no help in finding out. Hm. Any thoughts? -- Alternativity (talk) 13:57, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

National Democrats: Those who are pro-CPP. Ocampo and his group.

Social Democrats: I think they are originally from the CPP but broke away from them and dropped the armed struggle as a means of converting the country into a communist state. They're composed of the Akbayan group. –Howard the Duck 14:57, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, actually, that's sort of my point... 1) I really shouldn't have to ask, and 2)Satur in the link I shared disavowed any link to the CPP-NPA's armed struggle, which means... what exactly? That he's not under the National Democratic category? Or that he's saying National Democrats don't necessarily support the CPP-NPA's armed struggle? It's so confusing. And I don't know where on earth to start looking for neutral sources. - Alternativity (talk) 06:22, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Speculation is Satur was just publicly dropped but he's still a part of their inner circle. –Howard the Duck 15:10, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Can you help save this image?

This image needs a source for the base image. It appears to be a standard wiki gray/white map of the Philippines. Thanks for your help. Calliopejen1 (talk) 13:02, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Check out the project page of this... project, then press end. –Howard the Duck 15:13, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Wait, it's above the Tambayan roster. That got long fast. –Howard the Duck 15:17, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Errors in Flags of the Philippine Revolution

Some months ago I brought this up: Mix-up in Flags of the Philippine Revolution?.

In short, the Magdalo mutineers' flag is not the same as the Magdalo Katipunan flag, which looks like this. The Magdiwang Katipunan flag is also wrong and should look like this. See links:

• http://filipino.biz.ph/history/flags.html
• http://flagspot.net/flags/ph-histo.html

Also, if any of you have read the 1970s-era history book set, Filipino Heritage, you'd see the original Magdalo flag is indeed different from the modern one.

Can someone make correct images of the flags? I don't have the means or know-how. Uthanc (talk) 13:49, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, where there's a will there's a way.

• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Philippine_revolution_flag_magdiwang_corrected.PNG
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Philippine_revolution_flag_magdalo_corrected.PNG
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Philippine_revolution_flag_magdiwang_corrected2.png - red baybayin

Feel free to (tell me how to) correct any screw-ups. Technically the suns are ripped off some images in the links but the red is ours, and since it's a reconstruction/representation of public domain material... Uthanc (talk) 07:55, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

I will start on the SVG's later on tonight. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 17:42, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Maritime Academy of Asia and the Pacific

This article is off to an OK start, but has some POV issues and is has a somewhat promotional tone. Someone may want to look into it. Regards, PDCook (talk) 19:21, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Cleaned up a great part of the article. There's a lots more to clean up, though :P --- Tito Pao (talk) 00:34, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

WMPH update

Important: To Alternativity, TheCoffee, Leeheonjin, Bentong Isles, Filipinayzd, and Jordz, please read your emails, we have some concerns regarding Wikimedia Philippines. Please give a reply. To everyone else's information, Wikimedia Philippines is getting close to being approved as a chapter. I hope that those who signed-up to be a member are still interested. --Jojit (talk) 09:17, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Noted, replied. :-D - Alternativity (talk) 13:58, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Fresh important note: to those who were on the mailing list mentioned by Jojit above (as well as the others in the know), please check your emails. I sent a very important update about Wikimedia Philippines  :) Thanks. --- Tito Pao (talk) 08:54, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello Wikimedia Philippines, Hello World

I am glad to announce that there was a great progress in our plans to setup a Philippine chapter.

• Wikimedia Foundation Resolution:Philippines Chapter.

We ask your full cooperation for the completion of the remaining tasks. For inquiries, you can post here or send a private message to our lead convenor, Sky Harbor. --Exec8 (talk) 15:07, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Yup, there is still some work to do. We still have to file the legal documents to SEC before being a full-fledged Wikimedia Foundation Chapter. --Jojit (talk) 02:35, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

bump! lets get it on! :D Cloudhand (talk) 03:53, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

@Cloudhand: I concur :D

Anyways...some reminders for those on the mailing list. There are a few more tasks to be completed. Please check your emails, and also provide your feedback (if any) at the soonest possible time. Note that, with the approval now in place, we only need to complete all the necessary paperwork with the SEC in order for WMPH to become a fully established chapter. We've already come this far, so let us all work together to finish what we need to finish. I know we can all do it :) --- Tito Pao (talk) 04:41, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Philippine city

I'd like to solicit input on Template:Infobox Philippine city, that I just made. It uses Template:Infobox settlement, but removes inapplicable fields so that the syntax is less than a fifth of the full settlement syntax. It also standards other things like time zone, and a field for congressional district and number of barangays. You can currently see it used in Manila. TheCoffee (talk) 07:07, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

In a sorta related issue, I'd really have to remove the word "city" from article titles unless:

• There's another LGU that has the same name. (e.g. Cebu City, Quezon City)
• The cityhood law changed its name from an old to a new one. (e.g. Lapu-Lapu City)

–Howard the Duck 12:56, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I prefer that too. --seav (talk) 16:07, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm sticking with my position: no. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 02:39, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

No for what? I'm lost. I think only Caloocan, Pasay and Manila uses zones as an administrative reference to a cluster of barangays. Also Makati City should just be Makati (as you wouldn't really say: I'll be going to Makati City later). Component cities for me should just also have their provinces names after the city name. --Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 17:52, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes. So Dasmariñas City (LOL that place again) should really be at Dasmariñas, Cavite, without the word "city". We should probably iron out the exceptions since many people like idea, and that this should be discussed in another place. –Howard the Duck 17:57, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm glad that was over, hahaha. I was even accused of sockpuppeting, by he knows who he is. Too bad it was dismissed before I can even defend myself. I suggest if a Philippine city template would prosper it has to consider a lot of things, like a proper place where to place local officials. I've done some drop down list of councilors of Metro Manila cities just to keep them from being another section in the article, as perhaps agents of local government entities have been using Wikipedia as their promotional platform, since not all of them have their own websites. I just couldn't bear, that some would even have "Hon." before their names. --Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 18:15, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I'd oppose adding the councilors - the members of the municipal/city councils - to the infobox templates. New York City doesn't have them. And if they'll be added, imagine how long Manila's infobox will be? –Howard the Duck 01:40, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

I agree with dropping the word "City" from most city articles. TheCoffee (talk) 19:08, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

This also includes article titles that involve Philippine LGUs such as the legislative district articles. –Howard the Duck 02:29, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

To answer Scorpion prinz's query, my position stays as is because since this is an encyclopedia, written in a formal tone, it is only proper to allow for the word "City" to stay in article titles. Most formal writing and speech actually append "City" instead of omit it. I've made my position on this countless times before; feel free to browse through the archives. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 04:56, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I dunno. For writing letters, PhilPost considers both "Makati" and "Makati City"; in fact I'd even consider having the word "City" at the end as informal. –Howard the Duck 05:09, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Sky, ok, let's use a simple Google Books and Scholar search for Baguio, Bacolod, and Mandaue as a data points assuming that Books and Scholar embody what you call formal tone of writing.

	Google Books	Google Scholar
"baguio city"	1,322	2,860
baguio -"baguio city"	2,270	4,180
"bacolod city"	956	766
bacolod -"bacolod city"	1,427	1,450
"mandaue city"	660	231
mandaue -"mandaue city"	727	209

I just don't believe the assertion that formal writing would prefer appending the "City" to the city name. Achieving cityhood is taken as a "badge of honor" by the upgraded cities and they tend to "brag" their cityhood by almost always appending the "City" label to the name. Anyway, I think we should take this discussion to the LGU talk page where it belongs. --seav (talk) 05:34, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Hey, since no one's at the LGU talk page we might as well do it here... –Howard the Duck 15:29, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Remember this guy?

Yeah, it's our old friend Gerald again, but this time, under the alias Star Movers. Somebody call the V.F.D. and have him hammered. Oh, and I also posted an SPI case here Blake Gripling (talk) 00:58, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

I suspected as much when I saw activity on his fave article again. --Eaglestorm (talk) 15:06, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

25,000th Tagalog Wiki Article

Hmm. Its been 2 years since the last post, tl wiki now reached 25,000+. Who made the 25,000th article? --Exec8 (talk) 01:47, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, based on this page, it's by an anon and the 25,000th article is Sky Girls. --Jojit (talk) 09:31, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

An anon creating an article? Hmmm --Exec8 (talk) 15:34, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Support the Waray Wiktionary

I ran into this during a round at Meta: a proposal for a Waray Wiktionary. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 13:56, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Can anyone make this article Mapanique massacre

Hey guys can anyone make an article about the rape of mapanique during world war 2? I think its notable and should be included into wiki like bataan death march and manila massacre. [[1]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.201.133.23 (talk) 02:51, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Diva and First Time

The page was originally Diva (TV series) until User:Peparazzi moved it to Diva (Philippine TV series) and Diva (Philippines TV series). I just wanted to correct it because there is no other series in wikipedia that is called Diva, so the "Philippines" in the title, that Peparazzi added, is not needed. Can you help me find a solution to restore it to Diva (TV series), this isn't the first time this happened, Peparazzi also redirected First Time (TV series) to First Time (Philippine TV series), which I also tried fixing. Thank you, -- ISWAK3 (talk) 20.21, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Fast: Contact an admin, slow: use WP:RM. –Howard the Duck 05:44, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't know any admin. Any suggestions? Thank you -- ISWAK3 (talk) 19.58, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm an admin, but I'm disinclined to make the move preemptively. Peparazzi is as entitled to his view as you are to yours. Either disambiguating title conforms to WP:PRECISION and it seems to me that there is a likelihood that an article about a a TV series named Diva from some country other than the Philippines might appear in future (I don't know whether this 1997-2000 TV series is the same one or another series with the same name, I see that diva.ag is a supplier of movies and TV shows, ...). If you want to argue for the move, I suggest that you take it to WP:RM. If the appearance of wikilinks to the article is your concern, see Help:Pipe trick. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 03:29, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Oddly, I didn't know you were an admin, Boracay Bill. Glad to have you on board. :D

In addition to Howard's suggestion, the least controversial move is to request for a move to be performed by an admin at RM. At least in RM, editors will be forced to justify the need to move (or not move) the article. That type of check and balance does not occur through directly asking admins to move articles for you. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 04:07, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I've decided not to take my complain further before, but now I've noticed that User:Peparazzi had moved other pages such as Panday Kids to Panday Kidz (iGMA website titles it with "s" and not with "z") and The Last Prince to The Last Prince (Philippine TV series) (there is only title on IMDb titled The Last Prince, nothing comes close, if you type "The Last Prince" it directs you straight to the GMA series). It seems User:Peparazzi has been redirecting many pages to pages with "Philippine TV series" on it. I have already posted a notice on Wikipedia talk:Requested moves, but I've been told that this method takes a long time, so please consider my request to return the pages before User:Peparazzi had moved them. Thank you -- ISWAK3 (talk) 20.28, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

I'd rather wait for WP:RM; all decisions carried under there will carry some wait rather than a fast-fix by an admin. –Howard the Duck 23:15, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Whether they're move or not, Wouldn't they mean exactly the same anyway? Afterall, they were all really made by the Philippines.--CocaCirca2009 (talk) 22:15, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

True. But isn't Wikipedia an encyclopedia? Therefore, shouldnt we strive tomake it enclopedic by having the proper page titles?-- ISWAK3 (talk) 20.54, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

This is possibly an example of systematic POV bias. Either this is Wikipedia for all English users or it is not. If this is allowed, argument can be made that all other TV series should be identified by nation as well (US TV series, British TV series, Canadian TV series, Australian TV series, etc.). Lambanog (talk) 05:02, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Who decided what is a proper or not proper page name for wikipedia pages. It would be 'not proper' if its really obvious as a vandalism, but adding "(Philippine TV series)" doesn't really seem to be a vandalism. And yes, Wikipedia is worldwide, based on other pages, there are other pages that has exactly the same name as those show such as Diva the word, the film, the magazine etc. Previous users have already told you that the title of the page doesn't matter whether its has "(TV series)" or "(Philippine TV series)" on it, after all they mean the same thing. And please stop bragging them from page to page, its actually getting kind of annoying. You should only discuss this issue on one specific page. Higher users have told you to wait for the decision, so you should be patient to grant your requests. --CocaCirca2009 (talk) 22:11, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Therefore shouldnt those Diva examples should containt Diva (French film), Diva (Britich magazine), etc. If they mean the same thing, what is the point of moving them to begin with. Fine, with Diva, but cases such as The Last Prince, what is the point of having a "(Philippine TV series)" in the beginning? Just like Lambanog, shouldnt all TV series contain the country and then TV series if the case is so. Bragging from pages to pages? I was told to make a request on for this matter Wikipedia_talk:Requested_moves, and I did. And then I asked for ClueBot's assistance on what to do. Yes, i brought this compain on this specific page, but i was refered to go to request moves and consulted ClueBot's response. And yes I am waiting, what more can i do that makes me seem inpatient? -- ISWAK3 (talk) 23.02, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

People, read this: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (television). –Howard the Duck 02:01, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Note: I've placed First Time under the WP:RM procedure. See Talk:First Time (Philippine TV series). –Howard the Duck 14:04, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Another note: I made an investigation at the official GMA website and saw that "Panday Kids" is spelled with an "s" and had moved it back there. Any other page moves pertaining to that article should be reported to WP:AIV. –Howard the Duck 01:42, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Magellen and Lapu Lapu.

When I was In the Philippines in 1966. I was stationed at Mactan Island air Base. When you went to the dock to catch the ferry to Cebu, there was a mural just north of the dock. The mural depicted Magellen landing, and being met by King Lapu Lapu and his warriors. The wording on the mural said on this spot in (year) King Lapu Lapu and his warriors repulsed the Spanish invaders and killed their leader Ferdinand Magellen. The mural was at least 20 feet across. I know it was a long time ago, but I thought there should be some reference to Magellen's death in your page about his cross in Cebu. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.208.24.175 (talk) 18:41, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Edit War: Isang Lakas

• There seems to be an edit war on the Isang Lakas page, which seem to led for User:Knight Crawler X to create a sockpuppet, User:MsGanda. Can someone please take care of this?--CocaCirca2009 (talk) 20:26, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Apollo Quiboloy

Just thought of giving everyone a heads up. I just happened on this article by chance, and found that it terribly lacked sources :( The original page, before I edited it, certainly looked like it was edited by a, uh, very devoted member (to put it mildly) of his denomination, there were certainly plenty of POV issues on it. So I've cleaned up the article and am looking for new sources and information to add, more so since Pastor Quiboloy is on the spotlight as one of the religious leaders being watched by our local media for their election endorsements. Do feel free to contribute whatever you can find, too. Thanks. --- Tito Pao (talk) 04:00, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Mea culpa, it seems that there was a previously better version of the article :P I've reverted it to that one, will try working from that version instead. --- Tito Pao (talk) 04:06, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

AKRHO AFD

Just a little heads-up.

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alpha Kappa Rho (2nd nomination)

I think it's high time that this article got expunged. As my experience with this article mostly consisted of debunking claims of Francis Magalona's membership and decrufting it several times (even got accused as a sock by one of Update 101's socks nonetheless), there's nothing noteworthy in google that would qualify as an RS for this. As some people might say, Akrho bulok! --Eaglestorm (talk) 02:55, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

I wonder if Tau Gamma Phi or another fraternity would follow suit. And maybe nominated by an Akrho member. Oh no, wait...we don't want their "virtual frat war" to extend to AfDs, do we? :P Seriously, am thinking of voting, just that I'm thinking of how to explain my vote given that I'm in the peculiar position of having actually edited on that (and the Tau Gamma) article. --- Tito Pao (talk) 04:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Looks difficult to vote now that you've said it. --Eaglestorm (talk) 18:34, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Latest update: article's now deleted. Should be protected against recreation, I know that SPA (who recrufted it after being inactive for a year) would try. --Eaglestorm (talk) 00:17, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Barangays

You see,there is this article. It is about a barangay. Since I believe that barangays are not individually notable, yesterday, I redirected it to Guinayangan, Quezon, but the article author reverted the redirect. So I am now asking is barangays are individually notable. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 04:43, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Barangays are not all notable, but I'm ok with this article existing as long as it's sourced. TheCoffee (talk) 03:46, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Speaking of barangays, how bout Barangay Onse? The main editor and creator of the article has added hoaxes to that article like this (tallest Redwood) or this (coat of arms from Ukraine) so I'm not sure if the entire article is a hoax. I think I might put for AfD. Any suggestions? Elockid ^(Talk) 22:03, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

WMPH membership list cleanup!

As we finally enter the final stretch of Wikimedia Philippines incorporation, I think it will be most apt if we finally begin the cleanup of our members' list. What worries me though about this is the issue of "retired" or "on hiatus" Wikipedians: given that it would be impractical to leave messages on their talk pages which they will probably never respond to, will it be more practical to find alternative ways of contacting them? I think we'll need to get on with the e-mail/Friendster/Facebook/Twitter/etc. brigade, if ever, given that a lot of the people of that list are probably now inactive (or rarely active). --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 08:29, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Sky, watch out for those PH editors who were community-banned. Since there's a link to the members list, chances are they might make off-wiki threats to those on the list, especially those who were behind their bans. I know of some who could be targeted.--Eaglestorm (talk) 00:14, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I suggest that whoever on the list feels threatened on other users should make themselves anonymous, using their Wikipedia username. But your identity should be made known to the Board of Trustees, who approves and rejects membership applications. BTW, Sky Harbor and Tito Pao will be Wikimedia Philippines representatives on the Wikimedia Chapter's meeting at Berlin, Germany. Let us wish them all the best. Also, the Certificate of Incorporation of WMPH will be released by SEC on April 16, 2010. Details of WMPH launching will be announced soon. --Jojit (talk) 02:34, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Nice. They're on their way now? Good luck then. --Eaglestorm (talk) 13:18, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I'm still here. Will be leaving on board KLM with Pao tomorrow at 10:45 am. I just finished the WMPH PowerPoint, for starters. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 18:27, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Just a quick note: Josh and I have just arrived in Berlin :) --- Tito Pao (talk) 22:24, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Congrats to Elockid for getting the mop!

He is now an administrator! Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elockid. Good luck with dispatching the sock puppets and the vandals! :-) --seav (talk) 15:34, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the congrats Seav. Elockid ^(Talk) 16:20, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Congrats, Elockid. Tignan natin kung makakahirit pa si alam-mo-na-kung-sino sa pagsasock-puppet (Let's see if you-know-who can still carry on with his sockpuppetry).—Preceding unsigned comment added by Eaglestorm (talk • contribs) 16:35, April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the congrats Eaglestorm. Actually, second day on the job was blocking more than 10 open proxies by him in a time span of 4 hours. Looks under control now. Elockid ^(Talk) 16:42, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I found out about this earlier since you mentioned about disabling talk page privileges for Peparazzi, but congratulations from Berlin for earning the mop. ;) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 20:44, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Sky Harbor. Elockid ^(Talk) 20:47, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

User:Peparazzi

Hi. Just wanted to give you a heads up regarding this user. After being blocked last month, he still continues to vandalize several articles related to GMA Network shows and engage edit war with other users. This guy even edited his own talk page to remove all the warnings given to him by admins and replaced them with praises using the admins' signatures. Can I ask WP:AIV to block this guy permanently given these evidences? Thanks. -WayKurat (talk) 14:39, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

The way he prunes the warnings is just pathetic. --Eaglestorm (talk) 15:00, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm keeping an eye on their talk page. Might disable talk privileges if they persist on changing others' messages during a block. Elockid ^(Talk) 21:57, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

can someone here help me, can this user be block forever in Tagalog Wikipedia. tl:user:cybervision kulet kasi eh. Please see recent changes in Tagalog Wikipedia, --Mananaliksik (talk) 01:44, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

The issue there is that when a user refuses to add sources, it becomes the job of more "responsible" editors to find the sources. In the event however that sources are absent or completely unreliable despite the "good faith" of the editor, it then becomes justified to nominate the article for deletion. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 07:48, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

This guy still deletes the "notability" tags attached on his created articles and still don't add valid references after being warned several times. He is still insisting that the IMDB entry is a valid source. I also have a feeling that this user is a single purpose account since the name of the blog that Julius Roden created is similar with this user's account name (See link for reference). I think this user violated WP:COI since it looks like he is just promoting himself and that indie series he keeps on posting on tl.wiki. -WayKurat (talk) 15:53, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Another thing, he just posted a message on my talkpage in tl.wiki and "attacked" me again after posting warnings at his talk page and also admitting that he is an employee of the company that created tl:All About ADAM, obviously violating WP:Conflict of interest. -WayKurat (talk) 15:58, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Wikimedia Philippines is now officially a non-profit, non-stock corporation recognized by SEC!

Greetings to everyone! I gladly announce that I received the Wikimedia Philippines’ Certificate of Incorporation from the Securities and Exchange Commission today. Wikipedia Philippines Inc. was incorporated on April 12, 2010. I have taken a photo of the certificate but I’m not sure if it is permitted to upload in Commons or what kind of license tag will it carry. Should a photo of the Certificate of Incorporation be on public domain? Anyway, you can change the color of the Philippines to blue on the Wikimedia Chapters map since the Wikimedia resolution says that WMPH becomes a chapter once recognized by SEC. Cheers! --Jojit (talk) 07:43, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Please wait until State of the Chapters II tomorrow, when we will inform everyone here, including the Board of Trustees, regarding this matter. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 07:48, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok, got that. So, the State of the Chapters II will be around 4:30pm here in Manila. I hope that I would able to go back home in time to have a video conference with you guys there in Berlin and show the Certificate of Incorporation. --Jojit (talk) 08:00, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm volunteering to do the livestream. Anyone in the core group who wants to view the webcam, please email me your YM id's on the mailing list, I'll be sending out invites at least 30 minutes before tomorow's session begins. --- Tito Pao (talk) 09:18, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure if we can switch laptops around for the live stream, but if we could, that would be wonderful. Everyone can see what we're up to. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 09:21, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I only need to turn around the laptop and point the webcam to the front. At least, for the three minutes you're presenting ;) I think I'll try taking a seat in a more discreet place (say, the side of the conference room) tomorrow. --- Tito Pao (talk) 14:27, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Finally, Manila 5 did something worthy! By the way, I suggest you take a photo of the said certificate and post it on imageshack or for commons is you holding it. If you wish I will be holding the certificate for you. Best of luck on the conference! --Exec8 (talk) 17:00, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Events at the Tagalog Wikipedia

I'm asking for help to contribute in the events in separate dates in the Tagalog wiki? I already finished January. Thanks. -- User:Ryomaandres

time stamping so that it will be archived. --Bluemask (talk) 01:38, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Help on Pinoy Big Brother: Teen Clash 2010

I don't know if any of you watch the show or not, but I need your help because Active Banana (talk · contribs) is very forceful with his edits on the article I mentioned in the section title. He has been removing the profiles of the show's participants because he said they're either unsourced or more like analysis to him (I think he's from outside the Philippines, which I think can justify for his actions). Will anyone deal with him for me? I don't want to argue with him. Thank you. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 16:28, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

The section does need refs outside the PBB-related websites. –Howard the Duck 02:35, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't believe this. We've been doing this for years and yet some wikinazi who may or may not even watch the show comes along and undos all our hard work. Whoopdedoo. --Eaglestorm (talk) 17:59, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Here's a reference. Its from the official website, basically the information on the page were all translated from Tagalog to English on the website. Just click on the photos then the information will be at the bototm. (http://teens3.pinoybigbrother.com/Housemates.aspx) --TwelveOz (talk) 20:34, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

We need sources outside the PBB websites. –Howard the Duck

Manila 7

Date: May 1, 2010

Time: 4:00 pm onwards

Venue: Figaro Coffeeshop, Hanston Building, Emerald Avenue, (now F. Ortigas Jr. Road), Ortigas Center, Pasig City  Starbucks, Megastrip Slot #2, Upper Ground Floor, Building A, SM Megamall, Mandaluyong City, Metro Manila

This is my last meetup so and first for some. So kita-kits! --Exec8 (talk) 15:06, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I encourage everyone to participate on this meetup especially those who signed up to be members of WMPH. Please have your name or Wikipedia alias listed on the meetup page. --Jojit (talk) 06:54, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure to going to the meetup. - Gabby 15:56, 19 April 2010 (PST)

Everyone: Stories and pasalubong (if any) aside, Josh and I have a lot of things to bring home to Manila 7. We're in for plenty of discussions on board. We hope that everyone will be able to participate and come up with plans for WMPH's next steps. We'll appreciate your presence. See you May 1 :) --- Tito Pao (talk) 08:55, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I hope the talk over what happened at WMCON will not take precedence over what we need to discuss at Manila 7, especially with respect to WMPH. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 18:08, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

That's ok Gabby. We're planning to launch WMPH on May 15. Probably, you'll be available at that time. BTW, are we going to change the color of the Philippines to blue on the Wikimedia Chapters map? Did WMF saw the Certificate of Incorporation? --Jojit (talk) 03:05, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm...so, the agreement between WMPH and WMF should be signed first before the Philippines map becomes blue? Is the agreement signed in Berlin? --Jojit (talk) 04:26, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

The agreement was not signed in Berlin as not all members of the Board were there. I'm under the presumption they will be going to Manila. But anyway, I sent the information about the chapter as they requested, and now we need to get rolling with an official e-mail address, a physical mailing address and a telephone number for press contacts. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 06:12, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

There was a problem with Figaro Emerald. So, it was decided to change venue to Starbucks in Megastrip Megamall. --Jojit (talk) 06:26, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

There is a possibility that we might transfer venue from Starbucks Megastrip because there will be a sale on May 1. So, if you will be late, I suggest that you contact me now through email and give your contact number. --Jojit (talk) 07:31, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Agenda

Okay guys, we need to discuss what exactly will we discuss in Manila 7. Any suggestions? --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 05:51, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Here's my suggestion as stated through our email exchanges:

1. Processing of post-incorporation requirements
2. WMPH launching/annual convention on May 15
3. Projects that WMPH will undertake
4. Report on the Chapters meeting at Berlin

--Jojit (talk) 07:31, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Under post-incorporation requirements, we should also include the matter of registering WMPH w/ DSWD as a non-profit corporation. This is to facilitate any future fundraising activities. I think Josh has also done some reading and research on this. --- Tito Pao (talk) 08:35, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

We're registering with the DSWD as an NGO and a charitable organization, not as a non-profit. In addition, we will need to file paperwork with them if we are planning a nationwide fundraising campaign (I believe this likewise includes online fundraising).

A major point of contention into this is exactly what projects will WMPH initially pursue pending the release of grant funds if the projects are indeed approved. As I mentioned in the pseudo-mailing list, I thought of a national Wikimedia caravan. However, I think that there are other projects which WMPH may be able to pursue, especially if everyone thinks that a caravan is too ambitious and we should start off smaller. Remember: the deadline for 2010-2011 grant applications is May 15, the day of our first annual convention. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 15:54, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Possible User:Gerald Gonzalez sockpuppet

Hi. Just wanted to inform you that Gerald Gonzalez may have created a new sockpuppet account. The possible sock has the same editing pattern with Gerald (labelling all his edits as "minor") and edits mostly ABS-CBN related articles. Kindly verify. Thanks. -WayKurat (talk) 00:53, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Seems to qualify as a GG sock, but judging from his grammar I think we need to look for more evidence; the fact that he uses capitalisation incorrectly is one key, although this is further worsened by the fact that he uses public terminals, i.e. Internet shops. Blake Gripling (talk) 00:47, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

WMPH officers

(Will repost on Meta; posted here because I can guarantee exposure)

I made this section because I recently updated Meta to include officer positions which were current as of incorporation. If the paperwork given to me was correct (during incorporation), given all the signing and blah-blah, the following members of WMPH core are your officers:

• President: myself (Sky Harbor)
• Vice-President: Jojit fb
• Secretary: Titopao
• Treasurer: exec8

Non-officer members of the Board are Scorpion prinz, Cloudhand and seav.

Now, the list above is the list that I presented at WMCON, because that was the order to the best of my knowledge. Now hopefully I can get this clarified so that I can clear up the list on Meta, and so that we can settle this brouhaha if we will have elections on May 15. Do we stick with the list, or do I erase all designations and we start clean on May 15? --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 16:16, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Just a short affirming comment: yes, the (temporary) list of officers were presented that way during WMCON '10. --- Tito Pao (talk) 00:30, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I was actually surprised by this when I saw the list in the presentation since I didn't know that we had an election for temporary officers. --seav (talk) 18:16, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

We didn't. I based the order on the paperwork Jojit gave me while I was in Singapore. It was a given that Butch was treasurer, but then he sends me a file with Pao as secretary and me as president. I presumed naturally he was the VP. But again, this is all temporary, and I can revert the changes on Meta pending an election on the 15th if we choose to hold one. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 05:38, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

"City"

I've been engaged in a stupid edit war with anons on Party Pilipinas with appending the word city on city names. It's high time to bring down the hammer and exterminate "city" from article names unless needed. –Howard the Duck 11:57, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Lupang Hinirang

Thanks to User:Zscout370#Good_articles for the list of sample good articles on national anthems. Perhaps we can make a checklist as guide in improving Lupang Hinirang so other editors can help and push for WP:GA. what do you think? Pinay (talk•email) 16:32, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like an idea. I got my music program running, so if we need to make recordings, we could. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 05:11, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Great! More updates soon. Pinay (talk•email) 05:43, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

This should be really said on the LH talk page, but all the same...I can make a lead sheet of Lupang Hinirang. (A lead sheet is a music sheet of just the melody, with perhaps some chords for accompanists). IMHO, this is one thing that should have been included in the LH article long ago. This will greatly help researchers who can also read music. Will try to work on it this week (using Lilypond), for as long as my schedule permits me. --- Tito Pao (talk) 06:30, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

I have a program called Finale that can also make recordings on the sheet music. I just need to see if they open lilypad files. We had sheet music before, but not sure why they went away. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 06:40, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Finale doesn't read Lilypond files :) (unless you turn on the option to compile a MusicXML file you use xml2ly...in which case, Finale can read the MusicXML file). Anyway, I'm almost done with the sheet music, might upload it soon. --- Tito Pao (talk) 07:44, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Welcome back, Ate Pinay. It's been a while. :D

Thank you. It's good to be back. just easing back and still reviewing existing articles in Portal:Bohol for improvement and taking note/s. will keep you in the loop. Great job you're doing here yourself!!!Pinay (talk•email) 07:07, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

We've seen a reduction in the number of Philippine GAs, so this might be a good opportunity for us to turn the tide. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 10:48, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes indeed! I was not too happy about Philippine Tarsier and Chocolate Hills. Hope to work on these 2 soonest. Pinay (talk•email) 03:54, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons

The WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons (UBLPs) aims to reduce the number of unreferenced biographical articles to under 30,000 by June 1, primarily by enabling WikiProjects to easily identify UBLP articles in their project's scope. There were over 52,000 unreferenced BLPs in January 2010 and this has been reduced to 35,715 as of May 1. A bot is now running daily to compile a list of all articles that are in both Category:All unreferenced BLPs and have been tagged by a WikiProject. Note that the bot does NOT place unreferenced tags or assign articles to projects - this has been done by others previously - it just compiles a list.

Your Project's list can be found at Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines/Unreferenced BLPs. Currently you have approximately 304 articles to be referenced. Other project lists can be found at User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects/Templates and User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects.

Your assistance in reviewing and referencing these articles is greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, please don't hestitate to ask either at WT:URBLP or at my talk page. Thanks, The-Pope (talk) 16:56, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

New Domains

I am happy to announce that we have setup domains. Email addresses to follow activated, send requests to admin @ wikimedia.org.ph.

• www.wikimedia.org.ph redirects to Meta (Organization) page
• www.wikimedia.ph redirects to Tambayan Philippines page
• www.facebook.com/pinoywiki is our primary social network site, we will be phasing out ning on July.

Enjoy! --Exec8 (talk) 08:15, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Tong-its page

Hi all, just created a Tong-its page after not finding it in Wikipedia, and I'm hoping to get some editors pitch in, thanks! --Robert Adrian Dizon (talk) 06:20, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Can anyone check if this falls under WP:GAMEGUIDE?--Eaglestorm (talk) 09:38, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

An initial look tells me it doesn't. Try comparing it to similar articles. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 09:47, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Can't it be merged with rummy or any sub-article related to the said card game (such as Tonk, which was referenced in the article? --- Tito Pao (talk) 13:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Rummy merge, you mean add Tong-its to the Rummy#Variants_of_Rummy section, right? Re: Tonk merge, please enlighten me, as I'm not even sure if my argument is valid regards this: If the card game Tong-its has much differences with the Tonk (card game) to the point that the former does not appear a mere variation of the latter, won't the merge make it confusing for readers? --Robert Adrian Dizon (talk) 01:49, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

If tong-its is sufficiently different from tonk or rummy that it merits its own separate article, then by all means the articles should be separate. Having played rummy in the past, I can say that it is different from tong-its despite having some similarities to one another. The question now is how different are they from one another, and whether or not that difference is enough for both articles to stay where they are. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 04:12, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Portal:Bohol

I need the help of anyone who can help fix the contents in the portal. Please leave a message in my talk page. Pinay (talk•email) 18:05, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Logo overhaul

Guys, please expect an overhaul of the Wikipedia logos we have become so accustomed to. We will need someone to update all the logos for all Philippine-language projects pursuant to the guidelines posted on Commons and on the Foundation's website. If anyone is willing to do it, that would be great. Likewise, this would be the perfect opportunity to correct any and all logo errors which we may spot. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 04:18, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Just in time...I'm actually writing an email to the mailing list about this, but I might as well say it. Since I'm working on the brochures for the annual convention this Saturday, I'm volunteering to undertake the localization of the Wikipedia logos. I will work on them tonight together with the brochure template and will upload them on Commons either tonight or tomorrow morning. --- Tito Pao (talk) 04:29, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Manila 8 / WMPH's First Annual Convention

Hello everyone,

Wikimedia Philippines will have its next meet-up (Manila 8) come May 15, 2010 (Saturday) beginning at 1:30 in the afternoon. The venue will be at the Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila at Intramuros, Manila. Concurrently, It will also be our first annual convention for WMPH, pursuant to its bylaws. This will also serve as the soft-launch of WMPH.

Tambays who have signed up to join WMPH are expected to attend, so please be there. Likewise, we are inviting non-members of WMPH as observers; you are welcome to sign up as a member of WMPH. To help us estimate the number of attendees, may we please ask you to list your name on this page, under "Participants".

Thank you, and we hope to see you at Manila 8 :)

For the WMPH Board of Trustees
Tito Pao (talk) 04:58, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

It is now confirmed that the venue will be at PLM. You can still confirm your attendance at meetup page. --Jojit (talk) 09:07, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

2010 election task force

Sorry guys, but I am hastily arranging a 2010 election task force. The task force will have primary responsibility for updating the election counts in all Philippine election articles as they are made known in real time, and will likewise be responsible for updating articles as time goes on. Let us consider this as the community's contribution to safeguarding this election. Sign up now! -Sky Harbor ^(talk) 14:43, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

COMELEC and Smartmatic will have a website (they'll announce tomorrow) that has vote totals for every election precinct. If anyone has time, he can add up all election precincts to determine who will win the national positions. –Howard the Duck 14:55, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

With so many counts to update among so many articles (the 2010 election has the most counts out of all the elections articles we have), I doubt only one person can do the job. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 01:01, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I forgot: we also need people to post stuff on the unusual events taking place in this election, like malfunctioning PCOS machines, pre-shaded ballots, vote-buying and the firefight in Maguindanao. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 05:59, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

This will be the COMELEC site for the election real-time counting: http://electionresults.ibanangayon.ph/res_reg0.html Ryomaandres

One secondary source reporting consolidated election voting results is http://politics.inquirer.net/eleksyon2010/ Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:02, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Here's another: http://www.gmanews.tv/eleksyon2010/nationalcount — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 00:34, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

We'd need someone that'll update the Senatorial election. –Howard the Duck 01:56, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

The page needs to be semi-protected, I mean right now, rage from presidential fans leads to vandalism. Specially the ones with IP addresses.--TwelveOz (talk) 08:06, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Got help from administrators. Page semi-protected.--TwelveOz (talk) 17:10, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Would the group reach a consensus to just use the abbreviated party name as COMELEC uses? Like LKS-KAM, LP, NP, etc. rather than having their full party name taking up space in infoboxes and lists?--Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 19:48, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

WP:NC in candidate results tables. Full names in summary tables. I don't think anyone will recognize LKS-KAM instantly. –Howard the Duck 03:39, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok, the party articles themselves would show the full names anyway.--Eaglestorm (talk) 03:32, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

I rescind that, but I noticed party colors have changed?--Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 08:18, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

People are mistaking campaign colors (Gibo green, Villar orange) for the colors of their respective parties (Lakas blue, NP green). In the cases of the BP, Bagumbayan, Ang Kapatiran, the PMP and the LP though, the colors are correct. I reverted the Lakas color back to Lakas blue. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 09:57, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Like seriously I don't think Magsaysay used orange in his campaigns way, way back. BTW, has anyone seen official COMELEC canvass figures per LGU? GMA has PPCRV figures I'm hesitant to use them in updating the house results articles. –Howard the Duck 12:43, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

They have them on the COMELEC site, but not all localities have compiled results per LGU. Some are still uncompiled (meaning, per precinct). --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 15:26, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

We'd need municipal, city, district and provincial-level results. I don't want to update the tables with PPCRV counts. COMELEC in 2007 had a page displaying the Senatorial results which was always complete, including stats such as those who actually voted and spoiled votes. –Howard the Duck 15:30, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

They have it there, though again, not for all LGUs. Provinces like Marinduque, where provincial-level canvassing is already complete, will have information up to the provincial level, while others, like the rest of MIMAROPA for example, do not. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 17:09, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes you are right. –Howard the Duck 09:54, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Speaking of election results, IP addresses have been replacing the governor/mayor/vice-mayor and the like entries in Philippine cities and provinces where the winners were proclaimed (i.e. Marikina City and Makati City). Shouldn't these be reverted since the elected candidates' term would not start until June 30? - 121.1.11.120 (talk) 09:32, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Just add "will take office June 30, 2010." We can't stop these guys. –Howard the Duck 09:54, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Noynoy Aquino and other Philippine presidential articles are swarming with the succession like he is going to be the 15th President. Should we wait for the Comelec announcement for this? Aquino wasn't proclaimed yet, isn't it? Why is this happening?--JL 09 ^_q?c 10:25, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

To be fair, Noynoy has a four million vote lead over Erap. I doubt the latter can catch up. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 11:06, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Just giving the heads-up that the results of the presidential and vice-presidential race in the Philippine general election, 2010 page haven't been updated for two to three days. - 121.1.11.120 (talk) 06:24, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

There's nothing to update anyway since national canvassing hasn't started. –Howard the Duck 19:32, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

User:Active Banana

• This guy is seriously starting to get in my nerves. Right after he got his hands on one of the Filipino articles, he won't let go until he finds every single mistake in any Filipino article. It started with Pinoy Big Brother and now he's like a virus spreading from Filipino actors/actresses to other Filipino TV shows. Sooner or later every Filipino article will be filled with tags that may even cause deletions. The worst thing is, he's not even Filipino (or is he?) --TwelveOz (talk) 14:51, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Please blocked him??? - Gabby 15 May 2010 12:23 (UTC)

And when you tell them to piss off, they slap you with uw-npa. Eaglestorm (talk) 17:17, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Guido delgado

What's the community's take on this artick? Notability issue? — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 02:15, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

This is the guy who exposed the Ateneo psychological report against Noynoy. Does he count as a whistleblower? --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 16:47, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I suggest deletion per WP:ONEEVENT--Lenticel ^(talk) 01:30, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

I see someone came out of retirement ;) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 03:13, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

(reset indent) After checking the history, the article must be deleted as it was copied from WikiPilipinas. Please be advised that WPinas has not upgraded to CC-BY-SA 3.0/GFDL dual-licensing, and texts licensed only under the GFDL may not be copied here. I can't take care of the deletion request at this moment as I'm studying for an exam, but I'll launch it as soon as I figure out which recourse is required for this type of copy-pasting. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 06:17, 19 May 2010 (UTC) Will tag it as a CV later today. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 06:25, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Article has been tagged for speedy deletion as CV. Haay...I really hope WPinas will move to dual licensing. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 08:51, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

So, is Jejemon notable or not?

Just asking, because it's been created and deleted thrice, but I think there's enough material now to justify it... - Alternativity (talk) 04:17, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

If it fails the WP:NEO guidelines, then let's just say it will be salted for now. Blake Gripling (talk) 04:35, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Put it on Uncyclopedia. The last revision seems more fitting there, and I can provide someone with the text. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 05:40, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

This is a word that uses in the Websites. This is not notable at all. - Gabby 17:39, 30 April 2010 (PST)

Just because something is limited to the Internet, it doesn't mean that it's not notable right off the bat. A lot of stuff related to the Internet actually have their own articles! --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 04:07, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

This has received enough mainstream coverage. I'll create a DYK-ready article tonight. If all comes into plan, it'll be on the Main Page at election day. –Howard the Duck 11:57, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Quite surprised to see this article just a couple of minutes ago. Is this for real? I mean, it *does* have references from local notable and reputable news sources. I was actually about to ask you guys here until I stumbled on this article. But seriously...is this for real? Shrumster (talk) 10:51, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

If it passes DYK it'll be posted either on May 10 (election day) or 11. –Howard the Duck 13:08, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

It'll be on May 11, 1:00 a.m. –Howard the Duck 14:53, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Does the article need pictures? I have some of them on my computer. -Ian Lopez @ 02:56, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

If those pictures are released under a free license, then go ahead and upload them, but be warned: you may get complaints if they see the pictures in question. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 23:40, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

(resetting indent) Will upload it in Commons, with the accompanying "personality rights" template (pending an admin's approval). I'm sure that they only go to Wikipedia to check on their favorite celebrities. -Ian Lopez @ 06:19, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

The article can use a photo of the jejecap. –Howard the Duck 18:27, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Tip in taking the pic of the said item: Go to a clothing shop that caters to low-to-medium income people (since most jejemons belong to that income bracket), and you'll instantly find that item. Just don't wear and/or buy that item - it will make you look ridiculous. (I apologize IN ADVANCE for those who were offended by the previous paragraph. And I can't go outside this week since I have many things to do inside the house) -Ian Lopez @ 11:52, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Hm. If Jejemon is notable, shouldn't Jologs, which, after all, has a TV series and a Movie named after it, be notable as well? - Alternativity (talk) 04:22, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes but finding sources now will be difficult. News sources are hard to find when they were published at least 2 years ago. –Howard the Duck 18:27, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Can someone get me back on the loop?

Uh what happened in the last few months since August 2009? And why does the wiki looks funny? --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:01, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Since August, we have fleshed out the details of what has finally become WMPH (work stopped me from going to Saturday's launch) and I don't want to bore you with details of dealing with certain socks (especially 23prootie, who wants to assume your TL admin duties). Have you read the last three archives?

As for the rather odd design of the new WP, I was surprised when the various editing functions were changed. You'll no longer press the buttons above. -Eaglestorm (talk) 02:44, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Actually, to keep both of you in the loop, the English Wikipedia "looks funny" because it now uses a new skin by default: Vector. The skin was designed as part of the Wikimedia Usability Initiative, and is now the default skin not only for this project, but for a few other projects as well (like Commons). And actually, the buttons above may still be clicked. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 05:18, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

So its Vector. I think I won't be doing some tl stuff for now Eaglestorm, I still need to refresh my wiki skills.--Lenticel ^(talk) 06:17, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

(reset) I"m glad that we are already a chapter. Too bad I wasn't in the historic moment.--Lenticel ^(talk) 00:24, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

How come this is the only project/portal that gets combined/formatted the way it does? Zobango (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:58, 23 May 2010 (UTC).

Well, we like the portal to look pretty, I presume? At least it's more visually appealing than other RNBs/WikiProjects/portals. :P --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 02:58, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Word. =} — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 06:18, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm still out of the loop. :P Hope to be back in a year or so, but for now...have to make do with lurking. *sigh* Shrumster (talk) 12:49, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

I propose a Wikipedia:Lapsed Wikipedian Club where we post a maximum of 73 characters one day every year. Congrats to WMPH! --Nino Gonzales (talk) 07:43, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Giniling

Is there a notable Filipino band with this name? Lambanog (talk) 15:31, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

It's Giniling Festival. –Howard the Duck 16:43, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Went to the giniling page and saw "In the Philippines, picadillo is traditionally made ... In most other Latin American countries it is..." <--- I found that incredibly funny. I'll fix that eventually if nobody wants to do it before I do, but for now, I just end up laughing whenever I try to correct it. hehe. :D - Alternativity (talk) 18:31, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Is Shalani Soledad notable?

I was just wondering whether or not Shalani Soledad is notable, being the future "First Girlfriend" and a third-termer councilor of Valenzuela City? Magalhães (talk) 10:55, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

No, this is just a case of recentism. She only appeared in the public eye last year. --Eaglestorm (talk) 13:38, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

If she does marry Noynoy she'd be automatically notable. –Howard the Duck 13:52, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree. Magalhães (talk) 14:24, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Rajah Sulayman Statue for Requested Image

There is a statue of Rajah Sulayman at Manila Bay, http://travel.webshots.com/photo/1094057758050144464FcweZb. However, I don't know if posting this image in the wiki is justified as fair use. I also don't own a decent digicam and the luxury of going to Manila. The statue, entitled "Rajah Sulayman" was done by Eduardo Castrillo on 1976 http://www.eduardocastrillo.com/figurative.asp.--Lenticel ^(talk) 01:48, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

It's not fair use. You're better off asking for permission to have the image released under a free license or require attribution. Either way, they have to go through the OTRS queue. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 03:12, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I guess we need to ask Mr. Castrillo directly then. --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:43, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Pinoy Big Brother biographies must be brought back

I have finally figured out why the editors of the Pinoy Big Brother franchise included the biographies of the "Housemates" or the "HouseGuests" as US calls it. It is to produce uniformity throughout the whole Big Brother franchises around the world. Every Big Brother franchise pages worldwide have their pages constructed on the same way as the Pinoy Big Brother page was constructed before Active Banana came. I'm sorry, but the page must bring back the biographies, unless the Big Brother US, UK, Australia, Africa, Germany or most of the whole world for that matter changes their construction.

Please check this links of Big Brother Franchise worldwide:

Thank You.--TwelveOz (talk) 18:26, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

I just checked it out, and yeah it should be put back in. It seems the Banana didn't quite do his homework before culling all of that. I suppose he's gonna cull the biographies of the other editions too (and piss off the editors who maintain those pages in the process the way he did in our neck of the woods)? --Eaglestorm (talk) 18:32, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

We need to satisfy WP:GNG -- even on seasonal pages. –Howard the Duck 18:36, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

1) The argument that other articles have this junk too is not a valid argument.

2) You cannot return unsourced or poorly sourced content about living people to any article, and since the Big Brother franchise stands to gain by having "bios" that titilate rather than present the actual facts, the bio information will need to be sourced to third parties. Active Banana (talk) 06:22, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I have given third party sources for the bios, but it ended up being removed anyway since it would be useless without other information, please have patience since I am already planning to insert the sources. And lets look at it the way WP:OTHERCRAP says. Since they used Pokemons, they're basically saying that having a whole article about Bayleaf is totally irrelevant than having a whole article for Pikachu since Pikachu much more known and famous than Bayleaf. Doesn't this basically says that, you are removing the bios of the "housemates" for the Philippine Big Brother while not removing the US Big Brother, UK Big Brother, Africa Big Brother, or Germany Big Brother bios because Philippines is LESS "known" and "famous" than the other franchise? Wouldn't this only lead to the racism we were just discussing about? Which would clearly be a violation of WP:NPA--TwelveOz (talk) 11:11, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Where are these third party sources that you talk about? I have never seen the bios on the page supplied with " All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation." And they certainly werent included in your most reinsertion of the improper material. (Just because there are crappy Pokeman articles or other Big Brother articles improperly contain unsourced BLP bios does not repeat DOES NOT provide any excuse to allow crappy cruft into yet another article. Active Banana (talk) 13:21, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Once again please try to be civil, bragging and having sarcastic or impatient tones does not help on discussions. Discussions are made to help improve the page and not to downgrade or have only one man to decide the future of the page. We are all here to help the page and not to fight about it. Patience is a virtue and if you have only waited, I was almost finish inserting the primary and secondary sources, in which are all present in the page now.

The only question is, how come the Pinoy Big Brother article was filled with tags and warnings while other franchise of Big Brother such as the US and UK were left untouched, which may even clearly lead to racism accusations. Although the sources of the Pinoy Big Brother pages were even more reliable than most of the other franchise. As far as I know, you may not be a Filipino, so please respect other users' opinion since we may have come from different cultures and race, therefore we may have different views and opinions over the informations. Thank you. --TwelveOz (talk) 14:15, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't think the PBB webste, or even ABS-CBN news counts as a "secondary" source. –Howard the Duck 17:32, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

The ABS-CBN website and the PBB Official website is the primary source while The Philippine Entertainment Portal (PEP) is the secondary source.--TwelveOz (talk) 19:05, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm OK with PEP, but ABS-CBN and PBB websites aren't supposed to be used. If PEP references either of those two we can use that too. –Howard the Duck 19:20, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

If the other articles from other countries are also sucky YOU can help fix them! Active Banana (talk) 17:38, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

And I am sad that I have to bring this up yet again, unsubstantiated accusations of racism are not appropriate. That someones efforts focused on cleaning up Philippines articles and not Thai or Ziare or Peruvian articles is not by any stretch racism. Active Banana (talk) 17:40, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Just to make it clear, you were never accused of doing anything racist, as I have clearly stated "which may even clearly lead to racism accusations". I was trying to point out that your actions may lead to racism accusations, not that it already did; future tense, not past tense. And we are discussing Big Brother here, not the wikipedia edits as a whole. I was pointing out that the Philippine/ Pinoy Big Brother was given so much attention about its mistakes while the other franchise such as the US or the UK Big Brother were left untouched.--TwelveOz (talk) 19:05, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

"may lead to accusations" by whom? And until those future accusations come from whomever, what purpose is served by you repeatedly bringing up that unlikely possibility?Active Banana (talk) 19:11, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

From other editors. And I was asking a question. Okay let me re-phrase it. Why did the Philippine/ Pinoy Big Brother was given so much attention about its mistakes while the other franchise such as the US or the UK Big Brother were left untouched? --TwelveOz (talk) 19:17, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

People, bring this to the article talk page, or to your user talk pages. Not here.

(Tip: If you think you want to have the same treatment for all articles, do so yourself. That's what I did to remove the TV schedules from TV network articles.) –Howard the Duck 19:20, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

But this is a Philippine issue, since its Pinoy Big Brother we are speaking about. All I want to hear from Active Banana, is that he admits that he did make a mistake about concentrating on PBB's mistakes while leaving the other franchise untouched and then apologize, so we can just leave the argument and continue with our businesses. But he keeps beating around the bush, is not prepared to apologize and keeps trying to win the argument. For atleast once, he has never mentioned the word "I apologize" or "Sorry". I did accept my mistake of not reading the guidelines thoroughly. --TwelveOz (talk) 19:30, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I do not need to provide any reason at all why I am editing certain articles and not editing others. If the inferior condition of the other articles bother you sooooo much, YOU can start cleaning them up; dont wait for somebody else to do your work for you. Active Banana (talk) 19:55, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

They do not bother me, therefore I do not need to edit them. But the Pinoy Big Brother biographies did bother you sooooo much, DIDN'T THEY? I guess I just have to leave this argument. You can never make pigs fly, specially if they prefer walking. --TwelveOz (talk) 20:04, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the continual reinsertion of unsourced controversaial content about living people bothered me A LOT. I have not gone through point by point, but it currently appears on the face to be generally in compliance with WP:BLP. And now the fact that the article is a non-encyclopedic reinactement of the show overflowing with WP:FANCRUFT instead of an encyclopedic entry only bothers me a little. Active Banana (talk) 20:30, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

(resetting indent) I haven't followed this discussion lately, but I agree with Howard. This discussion on the inclusion of PBB contestant biographies should be best continued at the PBB talk page itself. While the matter at hand may interest some of the Pinoy editors, the direction this discussion is taking suggests that it may be better if it's continued on the PBB talk page so that those who are editing the PBB article (Pinoys or non-Pinoys) may be able to read (and participate in) the points being discussed here. --- Tito Pao (talk) 02:19, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

LOL at the drama on an article involving, of all TV shows, Big Brother. –Howard the Duck 02:22, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Someone stands up over this Wikinazi and Filipino Wikipedia article vandal and no one tries to help him???...pathetic.--PrimeViper (talk) 00:33, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Certainly more pathetic to encourage crappy articles. –Howard the Duck 04:01, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

So, you're basically saying we should encourage vandals than encouraging crappy materials? If this guy didn't stand up for the Pinoy Big Brother article, we would've just been pushed over by some non-filipino-wikinazi. Is this what Filipinos are these days, Push-overs???--PrimeViper (talk) 12:48, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Vandal is too strong of a word. Same for push-over. The person was wrong for deleting them en masse. The other guy was wrong too when crying wolf without doing anything constructive. Instead of arguing with me and wasting both of our time, fetch some sources and fix them yourself. –Howard the Duck 13:30, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Again the return of the personal attacks. And clearly edited self to remove long blue link all caps UNSOURCED AND POORLY SOURCED CONTENTIOUS MATERIAL ABOUT LIVING PEOPLE MUST BE DELETED EN MASSE AT SITE WP:BLP. No ifs ands our buts about it. Active Banana (talk) 15:27, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Please, do not use ALL CAPS and really long blue links. It doesn't help ease the tension and will only make things worse. If this is how everyone dealt with each other it'll be a chore communicating with each other. Now, I dunno how the PBB prose was written but if it is not that contentious, you can slap it with a {{fact}} that. All non-contentious staff (e.g. "X entered the Big Brother house and did X tasks then left") can be left there. Contentious stuff (e.g. "He did the tasks lazily," "He flirted with the boys", etc.) has to be removed on sight. –Howard the Duck 15:44, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for attempting to moderate this conversation. When I am called a wikinazi and told that I cannot edit certain articles because an editor presumes my nationality and has repeatedly ignored one of the basic content policies, I tend to get a little annoyed. Active Banana (talk) 15:57, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I suggest you guys resolve this amongst yourselves, and if that won't work, use WP:RFC. –Howard the Duck 16:01, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Congressional canvass results (a suggestion)

While Congress canvasses results, the article may be edited as soon as possible using figures from this tally. Unlike the Congress official site, which is updated once session is ended for the day, the site I mentioned is updated as soon as new figures come in. -121.1.11.120 (talk) 15:15, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I haven't tried editing "our" tally board, but it takes a chore to put in the correct numbers. I'd rather wait for the session to end then add everything they've canvassed. It's like editing the score of a game every time someone scores, I'd rather wait for the game to end. Dunno if the website is WP:RS, though. –Howard the Duck 15:32, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

And blogs are not generally considered reliable sources - what would make this qualify? Active Banana (talk) 15:52, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I was checking your source and the Congress website and your source had a total of 26,519,852 votes for VP, when there were 26,589,852 accdg. to the Congress website, and the percentages for the presidential tally ignored the fact that Acosta's votes were spoiled (hence are included with the now controversial null votes) so the percentages are different for the two. –Howard the Duck 15:55, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Just noticed that too. Scratch that suggestion. -121.1.11.120 (talk) 15:57, 2 June 2010 (UTC) But the totals per candidate are still correct. - 121.1.11.120 (talk) 16:00, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but the percentages for both tallies will be off. In other results-related queries, anyone has sources (no matter how unreliable) for COMELEC's complete results for the Senate and party-list elections? The results tables for those two are currently empty, except for seats won? –Howard the Duck 16:03, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Renaming "Philippine general election, ____" articles...

...to "Philippine elections, ____" since "general election" is mostly used in parliamentary democracies.

Straw poll

• Support
  1. –Howard the Duck 03:48, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose
  1. Even presidential democracies use the term 'general election', like Mexico, Brazil and Bolivia. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 07:26, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
  2. (Weak oppose) on the same premise as Sky. - Alternativity (talk) 04:48, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

• Neutral

• Discussion:

  Google news hits:

  • 2010 "Philippine elections" OR 2010 "Philippines elections": 89
  • "2010 "Philippine general election" OR 2010 "Philippines general election": 1 ("General election" is always singular)
  • 2010 "Philippine national elections" OR 2010 "Philippines national elections": 8

  Phrases in "quotation marks" are treated as if they're used together. –Howard the Duck 11:58, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Consolodated name for article about non-sourced characters

based on an initial search or two, my expectation is that it is going to be hard if not impossible to locate third party sources for many of the characters in this navigation template Template:Mars_Ravelo to allow them to meet the WP:N criteria for stand alone articles, and so I am suggesting a merge to a centralized article that should be able to be created with third party sources.
Would the name List of Mars Ravelo Characters appropriate and intuitive or is there a better name?
On the other hand, if someone has access to third party sources they can begin to incorporate the content into the articles themselves and note here that they are volunteering to do so. Active Banana (talk) 03:54, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Momay an User:Active Banana

• Oh God, this guy again, he keeps removing the Guest Cast section of Momay. He keeps saying Quintin Alianza (The SCQ Kids Season 2 Grand Questor) and the other kids are not notable, so they shouldn't be inserted there. Just because they don't have an article, it doesn't mean they shouldn't be included in the cast. They are credited in the show.--PrimeViper (talk) 10:09, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

An he keeps doing this on all articles now! 1, 2, 3. Can someone please deal with this?--PrimeViper (talk) 10:54, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

WP:RFC –Howard the Duck 11:30, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Active Banana is a Indian national and keeps editing some pages from the Philippines like Momay, What true that Active Banana flyed to the Philippines for Wikipedia? - Gabby 20:25, 7 June 2010 (PST)

WP:RFC –Howard the Duck 12:31, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

And again, I will point out that any user from any country can edit any article as long as they are attempting to edit within the policy guidelines. Please do not make personal accusations about any editor's motives particularly without providing any basis to back up your claims. And project talk pages are not the place to make such accusations in any case. Active Banana (talk) 18:06, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

For the nth time, WP:RFC is right that way... –Howard the Duck 18:28, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Take Kara and Shelby Hoffman for example; the twins who played the role of Sunny Baudelaire in Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events may not be notable per BLP, but they are credited in the film for doing a major role. Blake Gripling (talk) 00:52, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

To Howard, I don't think any of these users are familiar with WP:RFC - 121.1.11.120 (talk) 07:28, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

WP:RFC will teach the newbs. –Howard the Duck 10:32, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Not all of them are noobs, you know. ;) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 18:38, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

RFC is pretty new for the n00bies and pseudo-n00bs. –Howard the Duck 03:38, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I've given this remark on policy in the past: I hope people recognize that the spirit of policy is as important as the letter of policy. Neither one is supreme: they both go hand-in-hand. Having observed that Wikipedia has gotten significantly more strict policy-wise in the last few years, I hope people will come to terms with the fact that while policies and rules are important, they do not (and should not) hinder our editing work, and if you think it does, feel free to (responsibly) pull off an IAR. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 05:35, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

In this case for example, in American TV series articles such as Gossip Girl, actors who had bit parts (excluding guest starring roles) are usually not included, such as the actors who played Elise Wells or Asher Hornsby, etc. We don't have to add everyone. –Howard the Duck 05:45, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but the kid actors in Momay appeared for atleast 1 to 2 weeks and had most of the dialogues in each episode.--PrimeViper (talk) 14:21, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

If anything, Elise Wells and Asher Hornsby probably had the same TV time (since GG is aired weekly) with these kids. And even if they're to be reinstated, they should be properly referenced to 3rd-party sources. –Howard the Duck 14:42, 12 June 2010 (UTC)