Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

English translation of Dasalan at Tuksuhan?

Someone marked Dasalan at Tuksuhan for English translation. People were confused at first as to what language it was. [Should I be writing this request somewhere else? It's already listed under pages needing translation into English. --TheBoompsy 06:36, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

You did the right thing. Thanks. --Jondel 07:43, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Capital of the Philippines

There has recently been an edit war over the capital city of the Philippines. If I understand the situation correctly, this should be no big deal, but those of you from the Philippines who know more about local terminology should decide whether Wikipedia should list the capital as Manila or Metro Manila or the NCR, etc. Keep in mind that apparently some citizens of the NCR outside Manila proper might be offended if the capital is referred to simply as Manila. Thanks. --TantalumTelluride 23:08, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

The capital city of the Philippines is Manila. Metro Manila is a region, so it is not the capital city. Circa 1900 04:06, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

That's fine with me. I just wanted to make sure the relevant articles maintained a neutral point of view since at least one anonymous user insisted several times in good faith that Manila was not the capital. Thanks. --TantalumTelluride 04:11, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

The capital city of the Philippines is Manila, but the seat of government is Metro Manila: Manila (executive and judiciary), Quezon City (upper legislative), and Pasay City (lower legislative). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.87.151.2 (talk • contribs) 09:07, 25 January 2006.

So I can understand why some residents of Quezon City and Pasay City might want their hometowns to be mentioned. Nevertheless, every other reference that I can find simply identifies Manila as the capital, so I guess that's what Wikipedia needs to do. --TantalumTelluride 20:44, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

There are no laws defining Quezon City, Pasay City or even Metro Manila as the capital. Presidential Decree No. 940 transferred the capital back to Manila on 24 June 1976 from QC. I repeat: NO law defines Metro Manila as the capital, as of now. If anyone can prove otherwise, fine with me. Circa 1900 18:49, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

So, what might the proper nomenclature be? In Mexico, it's Ciudad de México, D.F. (Distrito Federal); in the US, it's Washington, D.C. (District of Columbia); by analogy, might it be Manila, NCR, perhaps? --Ancheta Wis 19:42, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Simply Manila is fine. --seav 04:22, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Washington (not the state) is coextensive to District of Columbia (dunno about Mexico City and Distrito Federal). However, Manila is not coextensive to NCR. Circa 1900 04:20, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Proposal on airports

Hey what to you think of this idea. We rename Ninoy Aquino International Airport to Manila NAIA, and Diosdado Macapagal International Airport to Manila DMIA This is similar to the London Heathrow and the London Gatwick that are being used. I have two reasons for this. First, to shrink the article titles so that it is easier for people to link to it. Second, as the highway is built, DMIA is planned to serve Manila, the way Gatwick serves London, despite the distance. What do you guys think? Pls archive Tambay na rin, for Tambay is getting too long. Thanks. --Noypi380 13:34, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I think the articles names are fine as they are now... just like John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York and Charles de Gaulle International Airport in Paris. The naming convention is to prefer spelled out phrases to acronyms (see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (acronyms)). You can link to the articles using Manila NAIA and Manila DMIA if you want, since they redirect to the airport articles.

And I archived old discussions. :) Coffee 18:09, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Redirects are fine with me. Thanks. ;) --Noypi380 13:50, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

nl:Wikipedia:Mededelingenbord voor aan de Filipijnen gerelateerde onderwerpen

Starship Troopers Trivia

In the Starship Troopers novel by Robert A. Heinlein, Juan Rico, the protagonist, is a Filipino or of a Filipino family. --Jondel 09:36, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Wow, the character in the film wasn't Pinoy eh. Seems that the original novel would be an interesting read, since it has more diverse characters. --Noypi380 16:21, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Also, one of the ships used by the Earth fleet is named after Ramon Magsaysay. RashBold ^Talk 16:34, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

VfD: Pasig City stampede

An article on yesterday's stampede at the Philsports Arena is currently on VfD. Your votes are appreciated.

The article is saved. It is now agreed that it be called PhilSports Arena stampede. Pls contribute if you can. --Noypi380 17:43, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

VfD: Philippine Cyberservices Corridor

Pls vote here in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philippine Cyberservices Corridor, and a related article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cyberservices --Noypi380 11:52, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

There was no consensus, so status quo. --Noypi380 03:06, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Although it is status quo, I wonder how we can integrate both the "current" corridor and the "future" corridor into one article. It seems to me like a very interesting project. --Akira123323 12:50, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Well yes it is interesting, but I still have some issues with it when it appeared. Due to the lack of consensus, I think the safest thing to do is to let that article grow in content first, regardless of what it is really talking about, although I think it should be written in a way that suggests a planned "future" corridor is in the process of construction. Also, it should not definitely proclaim that something is there when it is in fact not there, coz our RP IT/BPO services workers know that they are not part of any "current" corridor, regardless of POV. :) --Noypi380 03:27, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

The BDO-EPCIB merger

Okay, so I got started on a project to document the Banco de Oro-Equitable PCI Bank merger. Apparently, my lack of resources prohibits me from getting more information on this topic that is shaking up the Philippine banking industry. Help is very much appreciated. --Akira123323 14:34, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Hmmmm....I think that article has more than enough data already. Just some tweaking and some updates would be enough, then the article can stabilize after the merger. ;) --Noypi380 02:12, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Tagalog Wikibook maintenance

The Tagalog Wikibook is undergoing maintenance to reorganize it and to put it to higher standards. As such, much content will be put in, and this is a very big undertaking. Please help. Thanks. --Akira123323 13:49, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Clean-up

Hello. I think the following articles need to be improved: Demographics of the Philippines and Ethnic groups of the Philippines. Here are the changes I'm proposing. Since these articles tend to change a lot, I wanted to align with you guys before I do some work, so we could pull the cart in (more or less) the same direction...

Demographics of the Philippines

• Make the Demographics article quantitative as far as possible. Remove descriptions of ethnicities, languages. If people want to know what Aeta or Taglog or mestiso means, they can go to the main articles of these topics. This seems to be consistent with other demographics articles.
• Simplify the intro
  • Racial
  • Linguistic
  • Cultural/Religious/Political
• Move the History section to Ethnic groups of the Philippines
• Modify the Ethnic Groups in accordance to the discussion in WP:TAMBAY#Filipino_is_beyond_ethnicity

• • What name do you suggest to encompass the 'lowland Austronesian-speaking groups'? I also suggest that you put into account the old demographic sources that User:Al-Andalus has removed. So far, he heas removed everything that is contradictory to his point of view. He also removed one source dating to the Spanish times that shows that 35% of the population of Luzon was Spanish-Filipino Mestizo. :) --Matthewprc 02:53 03 February 2005 (UTC)

Please take a look at the long (and now archived) conversation about this some weeks ago…http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Tambayan_Philippines/Archive_2#Filipino_is_beyond_ethnicity --Nino Gonzales 03:02, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Ethnic groups of the Phil

Principles:

• Proportionality. Larger (e.g., Tagalogs) or significant (Chinese commercially, Spanish historically) should get more space than almost invisible minorities like Indonesians or Malaysians
• Filipino is beyond ethnicity (see WP:TAMBAY#Filipino_is_beyond_ethnicity)

Outline

• Intro (broad description)
• History (from Demographics)
• Ethnic groups (north to south? for each group: size; location; language/s; culture; some special thing about them… e.g., commercial role of the Chinese; a picture of a member of that ethnicity)
  • Ilokano (pic of Marcos)
  • Kapangpangan (pic Arroyo?)
  • Pangasinense (pic of Ramos)
  • Tagalog (pic of Rizal)
  • Bikolano (Raul Roco)
  • Bisaya (Hiligaynon, Cebuano, Waray, etc.) (Pedro Calungsod)
  • Moro (A datu)
  • Mountainfolk (Igorot, Lumad, etc.) (a Negrito, a Lumad in traditional garb)
  • Chinese, Chinese mestiso (Lucio Tan and Kris Aquino)
  • Spanish, Spanish Mestiso (An Ayala and a mestiso actor)
  • Other minorities (American, Koreans, South Asians, etc)

Suggestions? --Nino Gonzales 01:02, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

• • • This is fine, but the pictures you suggested are somewhat not representative of the majority. Marcos is a Filipino-Japanese-Chinese Mestizo (he doesn't look like the typical Ilocano), Rizal is a Tagalog-Chinese-Japanese-Negrito-Spanish Mestizo (doesn't look like the typical Tagalog). It would also be better to use the terms Kapampangan (rather than Kapangpangan), Bangsamoro (rather than simply Moro). Spanish Mestizo is a large grouping/category enough to have its own section, but the Spanish is not.(There are only 16,000 pure Spanish in the Philippines, half of which are even Basques [ethnologically independent of other Spaniards]). The largest foreign (NOT mestizo)minorities based on surveys are as follows (largest to smallest : Chinese (1 Million), American (110,000), South Asian (70,000), Indonesian (55,000), both Korean and Arab (22,000). The smallest minority is French (400).

Yup, Kapampangan… my mistake. It seems Moro or Muslim Filipino is more appropriate. It seems that Bangsamoro refers to the “nation” and not to the person. It seems it is equivalent to Katagalugan or Kabisay-an rather than Tagalog or Bisaya...--Nino Gonzales 03:00, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

My mistake too!...But recently, more and more Muslim Filipinos refer to themselves as the 'Bangsamoro'.--User:Matthewprc 01:04, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Why not this?: Outline

• Intro (broad description)
• History (from Demographics)
• Ethnic groups (north to south? for each group: size; location; language/s; culture; some special thing about them… e.g., commercial role of the Chinese; a picture of a member of that ethnicity)

• • Austronesian-Southern Chinese [which is what Filipinos are]
    • Ilocan
    • Pampangan (pic of D. Macapagal, Arroyo is partly Cebuana)
    • Pangasinense (pic of Ramos)
    • Tagalog (pic of someone residing in Batangas)
    • Bicolan (Raul Roco)
    • Ilonggan
    • Cebuan
    • Samaran
    • Other Visayan
    • Maranao
    • Maguindanao
    • Tausug
    • Cordilleran
    • Mindoro and Palawan Hilltribes
    • Mindanao Hilltribes
  • Filipino Mestizo
    • Chinese Mestizo
    • Spanish Mestizo
    • Indo-Aryan Mestizo
    • American Mestizo
    • Japanese Mestizo
    • Other
  • Unmixed Southern Chinese
  • American
  • South Asian
  • Indonesian
  • European
  • Other foreign minorities (Belgian, Dutch, Japanese, Korean, Jew, etc.)

--User:Matthewprc 3:10, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Oppose. No one uses "Austronesian-Southern Chinese", this goes against avoiding the use of neologisms here. I'll say it again, use either "ethnic Filipinos" or "native Filipinos." :-) --Chris S. 13:51, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I think this outline would also work. Is there any particular reason why you prefer this? Why don’t we come up with some guidelines to choosing an outline and selecting what data to include in the article (this would ultimately be a matter of selection; we can’t possibly include everything about ethnic groups in the Philippines within 30KB, or within a crisp wikipedia article). My proposals are in the section below. I’ll ask Al-Andalus to contribute to setting these guidelines this since he seems to be interested in this article.

In the meantime I placed a POV tag on the article because it seems that:

• It is written from a Pilipino racial nationalist POV, based on its categorization of ethnicities; on what it deems to be “Filipino” and “foreign”
• It is written from a Tagalog/Manila-centric POV, based on its selection of information to include for each ethnicity

I also placed an improvement tag since:

• It is too long
• There are too many controversial claims without any reference
• The POV issues

I'll also asks our admins to not allow editing from anons... --Nino Gonzales 02:58, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Your ideas are great! However, Al-Andalus has mutilated several articles, such as the Demographics of the Philippines (by erasing a vast number of other sources), Filipino people (by periodically erasing Spanish from the list of related ethnic groups), the Philippines, and Ethnic Groups of the Philippines. And we remove the term Austronesian-Southern Chinese and replace it with other terms...--User:Matthewprc 01:04, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Guidelines for writing the Ethnic Groups of the Philippines Article

All, please help in setting guidelines for writing this article. Since it discusses something that seems to elicit impassioned edits from all sorts of POV’s, maybe agreeing in principles would make it more stable.

Proportionality

More prominent ethnicities should get more space. If people want more data, they could always go to the main articles.

• The Tagalogs, Kapampangans, etc. should get their own sections (due to their size and visibility)
• The Filipinos of Chinese and Spanish ancestries should also get sections due to their prominence in Philippine history.
• I’d collapse Korean, Japanese, Vietnamese, South Asians into 2 sentences. Maybe give 3 or 4 to Americans due to their influence in Filipino culture. And maybe 1 for the Japanese because of the war. If people want more details, they could always go to the pages of Koreans, Japanese, Vietnamese, etc. in the Philippines

Brevity

Limit inclusion of data to those which are most significant.

• I would limit this to language, size, location, and something unique about them (e.g., the Ilocano’s reputation of having the tendency for migration)
• Budgeted outline
  • Intro (1 paragraph)
  • History (5 to 10 paragraphs)
  • The different ethnic groups intro (5 sentences)
    • Ilocano (2-3 paragraphs)
    • Pangasinense (2-3 paragraphs)
    • Kapampangan (2-3 paragraphs)
    • Tagalog (2-3 paragraphs)
    • Bicolano (2-3 paragraphs)
    • Bisaya (2-3 paragraphs)
    • Moro/Muslim Filipinos (2-3 paragraphs)
    • Tribal groups (2-3 paragraphs)
    • Chinese, Chinese mestizo (2-3 paragraphs)
    • Spanish, Spanish mestizo (2-3 paragraphs)
    • Other minorities (one paragraph with maybe a couple of sentences about the influence of American culture)

Collapse when you can

• The Bisaya can be lumped together (why not?). Highlight the Cebuano, Waray-Waray and Hiligaynon speakers by noting that they are the biggest ethnolinguistic groups with Bisaya ancestry.
• The Moros/Muslim Filipinos could also be discussed in one section
• The tribal groups could also be in one section.
• I would include Chinese mestisos in the Chinese section and Spanish mestisos in the Spanish section. If you include them in the other sections (there are Tagalog-Chinese, Bisaya-Chinese, Waray-Spanish, Kapampangan-American), you’d have to repeat it in every section.

Controversial claims should be backed-up by generally trusted sources

Here are the sources I was planning to use:

• Agoncillo for the objective things (the what and the when)
• Nick Joaquin for the subjective things (e.g., what it means to be Filipino, the influence of the Chinese, Spanish and Americans)
• CCP Encyclopedia of Philippine Art for the data on each ethnicity
• A few other papers and books to fill whatever gaps there are from the above

Follow convention

Use commonly used terms and divisions

• In outline proposal 1, the division is based on 2 very mainstream books: Agoncillo’s History of the Filipino People and Nick Joaquin’s Culture and History.
• Discussion on terms below

Terms

• Filipino

There are different definition. I admit that some define Filipino in terms of race, but I don’t know of any mainstream scholar who defines Filipino in terms of race. Agoncillo and Nick Joaquin does NOT define Filipino in terms of race. I suggest we avoid defining it; neither explicitly nor implicitly (through some sort of segregation). If we insist in defining it, the several generally accepted POV’s should be represented.

• Ethnicity

From its wikipedia article, it does not (only) mean race, or linguistic grouping

• • Ok! Pero, American (120.000), South Asian (50,000), and Korean (22,000) are very large enough to warrant their own section. Do you think so?

If the major ethnic groups get a section and they are in the millions (even the "full blooded" Chinese are in the millions), maybe ethnicities in the hundred thousands or ten thousands could get subsections in a "minorities" section... or get several sentences... particularly the Americans due to their role in Filipino history, or South Asians due to some Hindu influence in Filipino culture, or to Koreans who have lately been very visible due to English schools and Koreonovelas... how does that sound? --Nino Gonzales 14:31, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Level of detail

If we want to make this article quick and crisp, I think we need to select what are the most important details we would want to include. I think all ethnicities should have the following details:

• location

Maybe better to make it broad (e.g., Ilocanos are the inhabitants of the lowlands and coastal areas of northern Luzon. vs. The Ilocano are found in the original Ilocano provinces of Ilocos Sur, Ilocos Norte, La Union)

• language/s and number of speakers
• religion

And for specific ethnicities

• Ilocano

tendency to migrate

presence in Hawaii

Philippine Independent Church

• Kapampangan

The Tagalog-Kapampangan role during the Spanish era

reliable soldiers of the Spanish colony

• Tagalog

Manila

The national language

Role in Philippine history

• Bisaya

The largest are the speakers of Cebuano, Hiligaynon, Waray-Waray

Bisaya vs. Binisaya

• Moro

The largest groups: Tausug, Maguindanao, Maranao

Unconquered by Spanish

Continuing struggle for various degrees of self-determination?

• Tribal groups

Coldillera, Palawan, Mindanao hilltribes

Least influenced by Islamic, Christian, Hispanic and American cultures

• Chinese

Commercial role

Chinese mestizo role in the development of the Filipino nation

• Spanish

Christianity

Cultural influence

A lot of mestizos in former agriculture centers, showbiz?

What do you think?--Nino Gonzales 15:03, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

• Support. All the suggestions make sense. ;) --Noypi380 00:29, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

PROD: Cartimar

This article is up for PRODing, aka. not-quite-speedy deletion. Alphax ^τεχ 06:05, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Category:Television shows in the Philippines

The articles in this category are a mess. The articles look like a press release or a propaganda thingy rather than an encyclopedia article. What should we do? Also, some Wikipedians (who are apparently fans of these programs) are stubborn and would revert to their own crappy version. Any thoughts? Howard the Duck 08:37, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I agree wholeheartedly. I am not certain however with the other wikipedians. It would be difficult to revert in these matters, as there is a clear and obvious intention of promotion with the contributors. I suggest the best course of action it to spread important wiki ideas to the contributors themselves like (1) wikipedia must have encyclopedic articles, (2) wikipedia is not for propaganda, and (3) wikipedia encourages NPOV, etc. Once the contributors realize these themselves, they themselves will be more productive, and critical of what they have written, or shouldn't have written. Finally, providing them links to Wikipedia:Welcome, newcomers and the like helps alot. Contributors usually get excited in writing without reading up on such things, I know I was when I started. Even some of us experienced ones also forget. :) (ahem, ahem) Hope that helps. :) --Noypi380 02:32, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Category:People from the Philippines

I'm thinking of starting a Category:People from Metro Manila, People from Bulacan, etc. I wondering if you don't agree and if this will cause trouble. Circa 1900 13:48, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

No problem. In fact, we should probably have categories for all the provinces too (like Category:Bulacan, etc). Coffee 17:06, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Go ahead! Be bold!--Jondel 05:23, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I've made 80 categories for the provinces and Metro Manila. If you're going to make "People of X" categories, make them subcategories of those. Now to populate these categories with articles... Coffee 06:54, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I have two little problems: how would I call them? For example, is it People from Manila or Manilenos?. Another question: how about the "divided provinces" (Negros, Samar, Cotobato, etc.)? Would it be Category:People from Negros Occidental and Category People from Negros Oriental or just Category:People from Negros? Or Category:People from Negros, Philippines? Also, I think the Category:People of the Philippines looks like a good head-start. I'm also planning to include Fil-Ams. Circa 1900 15:29, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I think the "Category:People from Bulacan" format would be best. That's how they do it with US States (see Category:American people by state). And people from Negros Occidental and Negros Oriental (and similar cases) should be kept separate, as they're different provinces. Coffee 17:22, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I am now on the process of creating the categories. However, I don't know where places of origin of these people, so much help will be appreciated. Circa 1900 04:39, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I misspelled "South Cotabato", hope the admins would correct it. Circa 1900 08:25, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok, fixed. Coffee 08:49, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Does anyone think the Category:People from the the Philippines be renamed to Category:Filipino people and it should be devoid of articles (just subcats) about individual people? unsigned comment by User:Circa 1900

I agree that the main category shouldn't have any articles as much as possible, just subcategories. But I think some people have been adding articles to the main category even though they were already in more specific categories. :/ Renaming to "Filipino people" is fine with me, though I'm not sure exactly what the naming convention is. Coffee 04:41, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I will be bold and remove the Category:People from the Philippines link to articles about individual people. About naming conventions, majority of the subcats on Category:People by nationality have Fooian people. Perhaps someone might CfD this? Circa 1900 05:20, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I think it would be good to work on subcategorizing everything/person articles a little at a time. Renaming to Filipino people is fine with me too.--Jondel 05:25, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Another mistake, there are Category:People from Pasig and Category:People from Pasig City. I suggest we leave the Category:People from Pasig CityCirca 1900 15:59, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

2005 in the Philippines

Perhaps we can create this article, just like 2005 in Australia. Circa 1900 03:16, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Go ahead. :) Very, very relevant potential article. You can end the article with the December film festival, etc. --Noypi380 02:20, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind, started it already for you, 2005 in the Philippines, 2003 in the Philippines, and 2000 in the Philippines. :) --Noypi380 03:51, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I was lazy these past days. Circa 1900 04:14, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Lazy from wiki? Pwede ba yn? Hahaha Maybe lazy from actual work or job? hehehe ;) --Noypi380 03:34, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Lol, perhaps both. I've also created the 2006 in the Philippines article. Circa 1900 05:47, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Cebu Daily News

So, I was in a department store last Saturday when I stopped by a rack of newspapers to look at the headlines-- and lo and behold, on the front page of the Cebu Daily News, I find my locator map of Saint Bernard, Southern Leyte. It had some modifications to show the other cities and municipalities. It gave no credit to me or Wikipedia (in fact, the graphics were attributed to a "Jessah Diaz"), but I guess I should be flattered. :) There's an image of the front page here. Coffee 07:52, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I can't guarantee but probably the CDN (which is an Inquirer affiliate) decided to give credit to whoever made the modified map rather than to who made the original. --Akira123323 10:17, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I can relate. A few months ago, I was browsing the September-October (?) issue of FU magazine and, lo and behold, I saw my Media:Ph_map_cavite.png map placed in a feature article about Caylabne Bay Resort. The map was modified: the Puerto Azul location was wiped out, the Caylabne location made larger, and some highway markers (e.g. 7-11, Petron) were added. They could use it but they have to license it under the GFDL, which I don't think they have space for. I kept mum about it since it's not a big deal really (but I really would like some attribution, which the GFDL or the CC-Attribution licenses enforce). --seav 15:11, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

Note to admins: somebody(s) vandalized Mike Abundo. I reverted it back to the orig, but I just want you guys to know. Pls check the history of it. I'm not the expert but I think something has to be done. Lastly, is the Mike Abundo article supposed to be there? I'm not sure anymore. --Noypi380 14:22, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

It looks like vanity to me, seeing that it was made by a User:Mikeabundo. I'm gonna try this new WP:PROD thing... Coffee 02:05, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

-> Delete(?) --Jondel 08:30, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Mike Abundo agreed to userify the article. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Abundo. --Jojit fb 08:53, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Philippines as Latin America

http://news.yahoo.com/i/734;_ylt=AstpBrFDVcWtIsdd_jSTdZFvaA8F;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA--

That's funny. :) The Philippines has so much in common culturally, politically, and economically with Latin America that the Philippines can be called latin american in all but ethnicity, language, and geography. :) --Noypi380 00:38, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I was able to travel to Mexico and it felt very much like was in the Philippines.--Jondel 06:05, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Would anyone have a permalink to this? When I took a look, the article was no longer there... --Nino Gonzales 02:01, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

It's gone. --Noypi380 12:24, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Try hacking at http://archive.org. I couldn't find the site though.--Jondel 01:02, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Provincial flags

After getting inspiration from looking at the flag of Bohol (and also of the US state flags), I'm wondering if we can document like a gallery of Philippine provincial flags. It seems feasible to me. --Akira123323 13:28, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

We have an article with a gallery of seals of the Philippine provinces. According to Flags of the World, all of the provincial flags are simply composed of the provincial seal on a solid color background. [1] It also says that the flags are apparently "unused since the fall of the Marcos regime". Bohol seems to be the only province with an alternatively designed flag (FOTW lists it as "Alternate flag?" [2]). Coffee 14:08, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Cagayan also has a different flag, as shown here [3]. Zamboanga del Sur also has a flag different from the FOTW description [4] (different proportions, color, even seal design). --Akira123323 14:44, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Correctemundo, I say, at least Philippine content is more in-depth. Let us show some concern for our country's net image, since it is very hard to find Philippine related data except from wikipedia. I also suggest writing a separate article for the provincial hymns, like Cavite's provincial hymn, etc.

--Justox dizaola 11:24, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

For your information: The Dutch Wikipedia already has an article with a gallery of the flags of the Philippine provinces (nl:Lijst van vlaggen van Filipijnse deelgebieden). This is probably also based on Flags of the World. Magalhães 15:44, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

We have 3 Pinoy billionaires

Google news. --Jondel 05:25, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Wow, or check this link. Lucio Tan, Henry Sy, and Ayala. Galing ng Pinoy! Strange that many not that famous Filipino politicians have longer articles than these businesspeople. We have to extend those articles, info anyone? ;) --Noypi380 13:06, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Pictures to represent each Ethnic group in the Philippines

I'm planning to put pictures to represent each Ethnic group in the Philippines. I don't think the selection of the picture should be based on...uhh racial purity (why does that leave a bad taste in my mouth? err keyboard?) Since ethnicity is more than ancestry, the criteria, I think, should not be based primarily on race or ancestry. So even if Rizal has non-Tagalog ancestors, I think he should represent the Tagalog. For me, he is the quintessential Tagalog. Here’s my plan:

• Ilocano – Marcos
• Pangasinense – Fidel Ramos
• Kapampangan – GMA or her father
• Tagalog – Rizal
• Bicolano – Roco
• Bisaya – Pedro Calungsod
  • I could think of no other historical figure who is called “El Bisayo”
• Moro – someone in traditional Moro garb, or Nur Misuari or Hashim Salamat
• Tribal groups – someone in tribal garb
• Chinese – Lucio Tan and Kris Aquino
• Spanish – Quezon and Lucy Torres/Bianca Araneta/some other showbiz person

Okidoks?

• • Bisaya - Why not HIlario Davide/Lucy Torres/Sergio Osmena, Sr.?

Well, Pedro Calungsod is the only person I could think of that has an origin vague enough for Cebuanos, Ilongos and Warays, etc. to all claim him to be theirs... and... he's EL BISAYO... what could beat that?--Nino Gonzales 13:46, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Pedro Calungsod's picture is actually Ronald "The Saint" Tubid of the Air21 Express. Dunno if he's really a Bisaya. Howard the Duck 05:56, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

The real Pedro Calungsod is definitely Bisaya. His "model" looks pretty Bisaya to me... there's another representation of him, btw, which looks like a chubby chinese-cebuano mestizo... I like the Bisaya better...--Nino Gonzales 15:26, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

The Pedro Calungsod everyone knows is Ronald Tubid. Unfortunately, we can't used Ronald Tubid as Pedro Calungsod simply because he is NOT Pedro Calungsod, unless Tubid is a real Bisaya/Cebuano. (Actually, there's a joke about him misprouncing words, so he can be a Bisaya) Other represetations maybe better User:Howard the Duck | talk, 14:25, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Isn't that like saying we can't use practically all the paintings representing Jesus because they were based on people who were NOT Jesus? Are we not using the word "represent"--meaning, the artist did not paint Ronald Tubid, but tried to paint Pedro Calungsod using a model who would most probably resemble him; and the model just happens to be Ronald Tubid. It could have been any other person who looks Bisaya; it just happens to be a guy named Ronald Tubid.--Nino Gonzales 03:31, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, since according to my research, Ronald Tubid has Visayan blood, and the Pedro Calungsod article looks good enough, I'll support it. Howard the Duck | talk, 03:55, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Spanish - Better if you put someone with no immediate links with any of the aofrementioned groups (i.e., Bisaya, Tagalog, etc.)

) -- Matthewprc

for instance?--Nino Gonzales 13:46, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Aranetas? Zobel-Ayalas? Isabel Preysler? Pilita Corrales? :) -- Matthewprc

I was thinking of representing the stereotypical Filipino Spanish/mestizo... the planter from an old haciendero family in the argicultural areas... or a Spanish businessman... or someone from showbiz... I think your suggestions are ok... I guess the deciding factor is how good the picture is and whether it is uploadable (from a legal perspective...)... Quezon is the easiest since his pic is public domain... and I don't know about you but I sort of connect the Ayalas and the Aranetas with Manila and Pilita with some Cebuano speaking area...--Nino Gonzales 15:26, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

I think its OK if they are connected with Manila, since Manila is perceived to be the melting pot of the entire nation's ethnicities. :) -- User:Matthewprc

I need Help Here!!!!!

People, I know that school has a little more than 1 week left. I am planning to port at least 150-1500 articles from this Wikipedia to the Tagalog Wikipedia. Is this amenable and will I not violate any copyright laws here???

Thanks

--Justox dizaola 01:11, 15 March 2006 (UTC):)

As long as they are written in Tagalog (or Filipino if you prefer) and, if you translated it from here, give a notice at the bottom of the article that it was translated from the corresponding English article, then we are okay. -- bluemask 01:38, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Uh, I've translated many articles related to Universities, Jose Rizal , Katipunan etc to and from Spanish, Interlingua and others without the notice. patay kang bata ka--Jondel 02:55, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I've translated a few articles myself from the English Wikipedia to the Tagalog Wikipedia without the notice, and it worked just fine. Besides, doesn't the GFDL cover Wikipedia articles ported from one language then ported to another Wikipedia different from the original language but is translated in the process? --Akira123323 13:13, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

P.S.: I don't think there's an inherent violation of Philippine copyright law. --Akira123323 13:16, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

To my knowledge, the GFDL allows you to modify and distribute the original text but the original authors should be given attribution. I checked Wikipedia:Spanish Translation of the Week... they translate Spanish pages into English, and on the page it just says to add a references section with a line like "This article draws heavily on the corresponding article in the Spanish-language Wikipedia, which was accessed in the version of June 20, 2005". Coffee 16:38, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

In meta:Transwiki, a copy of the original page history (with the dates and authors) is placed at the talk page of the new article written in the other wiki. We can also follow that to acknowledge the original authors. -- bluemask 05:36, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Featured list: Provinces of the Philippines

I'm happy to announce that we have our first Philippine-related Featured List: Provinces of the Philippines was just promoted (see nomination). :) Coffee 04:27, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Yehey, jubilations for all Filipino Wikipedians. I wish this would serve as a beacon for all of us to strive harder in the name of Wikipedian excellence. Justox dizaola 09:24, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more. I was hoping to get started on a list of Philippine presidents (for another featured list), but I don't know where to start. --Akira123323 09:28, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Astig :) Looking forward to the 1st Philippine-related featured article! (has there already been one, btw?)--Nino Gonzales 15:12, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

There are two Philippine-related Featured Articles, but they're not featured because they're Philippine-related or as a result of Filipino efforts: Mount Pinatubo was a project of User:Worldtraveller. Battle of Leyte Gulf is also featured, but it's arguably more US/Japan-related. By the way, two of Seav's maps are Featured Pictures: Image:Ph map manila large.png and Image:Ph physical map.png. Coffee 16:30, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

@Akira123323: President of the Philippines already is a good start for the list of the Philippine presidents. Just improve that one. Magalhães 02:58, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I actually sidestepped that project for the time being to improve the article on the LRT, which I put up for peer review. --Akira123323 06:05, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I'd recommend taking a look at the List of Presidents of the United States article so we can apply the same to the President of the Philippines list. Howard the Duck | talk, 10:47, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

See User:Howard the Duck/Presidents for developments. You can edit it too. List of Presidents of the Philippines. Howard the Duck | talk, 12:47, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Ateneo de Manila University and National Collegiate Athletic Association (Philippines) were promoted as good articles. I suggest articles that are good enough be promoted as good articles first before subjecting them to featured article nominations, to "test the waters". Circa 1900 06:20, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

City infobox (again)

Okay, while I like the new Philippine city infobox, it seems that city seals get cut off near the bottom (check Manila for an example). I wonder how this can be fixed. --Akira123323 02:16, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

AFD: PINAS FIRST

I've listed PINAS FIRST (a Austrian-based Philippine organization) and its sister articles on WP:AFD. Voice out your opinions as you wish. I may not be able to respond until Sunday because I'll be taking a wikivacation during the Holy Week. Howard the Duck | talk, 16:09, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Barangays again

Barangay articles are popping up here and there, and I'm rethinking my opposition to their creation... We have 41,939 barangays, with an average population of 2094. France has 36,782 communes, with an average population of 1738. Seeing that there are articles that list all of the communes in France (like Communes of the Côtes-d'Armor département) with all of them wikilinked, I'm suppose that they have consensus to keep articles on communes. With that considered, we don't seem to have much of a case for opposing barangay articles. Coffee 05:38, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

All around, the consensus has been to keep articles on small villages, communes, and the such. I don't see why we can't have articles on barangays. Sure, there's a bunch of them, but they exist after all. No need to rush ahead and create articles on all 42K of 'em, but no need to have them all deleted as they pop up. However, I do think they should be merged into articles about any cities or municipalities they are within, if possible. — TheKMan^talk 06:01, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I think the first question we should ask is, if we're going to have barangay articles, should we have articles for each and every one just for the sake of consistency or should only some barangays have articles? My position on barangay articles is all or nothing: either all have articles or none have articles. If we're going to have articles for each and every barangay, then we'd be hard-pressed to write a decent encyclopedic article on Barangay 276, Manila or Barangay 88, Pasay City. And do you really think we need articles each for Talaba I, II, III, IV, V, VI, and VII of Bacoor, Cavite? If the decision is to have articles for some prominent barangays, then we face the problem of the criteria for which barangay should have an article or not.

I think that barangays should not have articles for the meantime, if ever the community decides to have some of them. One major problem of Wikipedia is of too little depth and an excess of breadth disproportionate to the depth. I think the efforts of the community would be better served in improving the current articles where there is no debate whether the article should be there or not. We don't even have a Filipino-produced Featured Article yet!

As for enthusiastic newbies creating articles for their barangays, my suggestion is to merge them into the city/municipality article or to start a Barangays of/in X article, just like Barangays in Cebu City.

--seav 13:02, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Hello, this is my first time to speak in the tambayan. I have learned of this conflict from Akira, and I feel that I make my own suggestion. What about an article about the municipality where each barangay has its own section. when the data about the barangay grows, then we should segregate them. I feel that this solution is better since it will give each municipality an in-depth look, which may lead us to having our first featured article. I also suggest (albeit off-topic) having pictures of the place. is this amenable to all?

--Justox dizaola 11:15, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

All must barangay articles must be merged into their mother municipalities or deleted. They are not notable. For example, if you're in Boise, Idaho, would you bother on researching a barangay from the Philippines? Howard the Duck | talk, 03:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Howard, I think we dont need to be a little specific that every barangay in our country should have a Wikipedia article. Isn't it too much to research a specific barangay? --Glenncando 04:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia and Manila, around April 20

Hi Philippine Wikipedians,

I wanted to let you know I'll be giving a presentation at a conference in Manila on Wikipedia and wikis, and I though it might be a good time for Philippine-based Wikipedians wanted to meet, and also to meet some other prominent Internet-researchers who are fans of Wikipedia. Conference details for "Free Expression in Asian Cyberspace: A Conference of Asian Bloggers, Podcasters and Online Media" can be found here: [5].

I'm also interested in talking to Wikipedians because I am doing research on a book about Wikipedia, and am interested in Asia stories. Please drop me a line if interested, either on my talk page or by email. Thanks. -- Fuzheado | Talk 23:53, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

It seems only few of us are based here in Manila. But this would be a good occasion to get more Pinoys to contribute to Wikipedia.--Nino Gonzales 11:01, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I went to the conference yesterday. Fuzheado gave a good intro to Wikipedia. Some big names in Phil media were there. I hope they'd write about what they learn and encourage more Filipinos to start contributing to Wikipedia.--Nino Gonzales 01:42, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

I wish I could attend.--Jondel 07:42, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Me too. i agree with seav. aaarrgh :( --Noypi380 11:53, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Argh... I'm in Japan right now (until April 28). It would've been nice to attend this conference. =/ --seav 10:32, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

The next best thing? http://freeexpressionasia.wordpress.com/ It has some videos and audios of the event..--Nino Gonzales 12:11, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Filipino People

Hi! Why does the Filipino article lack an 'Ancestry' section? Other 'People' articles do have those. Is it because there are not much genetic sudies on the origins of Filipinos? = ) 11:37, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Please feel free to add. Be Bold.--Jondel 01:41, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Bold text I just want to know if Dennis Rodman is somewhat Filipino? Please post an article about his biography... Thank you!

ABS-CBN copyvio

Okay, I might not be properly aware of this, but someone tagged the article on ABS-CBN a copyvio. Although I'm not sure what's the basis (especially because ABS-CBN's website is one giant portal with no definite location of the purported copyvio), I'm hoping to get help on salvaging the ABS-CBN articles and images so that they can be used in the supposedly "new" article, if needed. --Akira123323 15:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

That's weird... this guy tagged it as a copyvio but "signed" it with a different username and date. I can't find any evidence of the article being a copyvio, so I'm removing the tag and delisting it. That guy seems to mostly edit GMA-related articles, so tagging the ABS-CBN article as a copyvio was probably bad faith edit. Coffee 16:48, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Tsk, tsk. BAD faith edit. Why did he/she do it? See reminders. :) --Noypi380 14:53, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Suggestion

I have been seeing the green e in esperanza members' usernames... why don't we implement that here? like a red "t" (for tambay)... so that other users who may know something about Philippine-related topics may contribute something. What do you think? Howard the Duck | talk, 04:53, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

On the side people, pls visit List of Presidents of the Philippines. It was mostly made by User:Howard the Duck, (galing mo pare!). It is already a featured list candidate, so pls leave your comments here. I think its good, what do you people think? --Noypi380 06:19, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Add two pogi points to Howard the Duck for his List of Presidents! Keep up the good work!--Jondel 13:42, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Hey, I don't even look that good! LOL. --Howard the Duck | talk, 12:36, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Well this is a good thing: this list is now a featured list! --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 13:40, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Yay! (Delayed reaction) --Howard the Duck | talk, 15:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Kiwi Alejandro Camara

This article is up for deletion. Please express your view in the vote.--Jondel 05:56, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

I do think he's not notable. But I could be wrong... --Howard the Duck | talk, 08:49, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Please do not feel obligated to vote 'support'. Vote delete (or support)if you feel you should.--Jondel 11:50, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Another featured list: NCAA basketball champions

So, I was just reading the Signpost and was happily surprised to see that List of NCAA Philippines basketball champions was featured in the past week (see nomination). This effort was apparently spearheaded by User:Circa 1900. Good job! Coffee 04:36, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I've been scouring the candidates pages of featured content lately. I've even caught National Collegiate Athletic Association (Philippines) in WP:FAC. Trying to see which can be included in this list. --Howard the Duck | talk, 08:49, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I noticed that one too... though I don't want to vote on it, since I feel like I'd be supporting it just because it's a Philippine-related article. :p Good luck to that.. Coffee 16:43, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

An appeal: Can anyone copyedit the NCAA article? And by that I mean big bad copyediting. Since its on FAC, we might as well develop it, right? --Howard the Duck | talk, 02:39, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Development: I checked FAC and saw that the NCAA nomination failed. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 04:02, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Publicity vs. Notability

Question. Can anyone distinguish the two terms? How are the two related. Is one part of the other? I read publicity and wikipedia:notability but I would prefer more input from everybody. This is for understanding notability arguments during AfDs. :) --Noypi380 00:04, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure, but for something to be notable it has to be publicized, although it's not always the case. Something can be notable if it's forgotten and remembered again, but then again, it got publicized. Probably they have some weird connection or something like that. --Akira123323 03:14, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I was just getting confused. ;) --Noypi380 14:50, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

AFD: The Best of Philippine entertaiment

I've listed The Best of Philippine entertaiment at AFD here. Have your say whether to delete the article or not. --Howard the Duck | talk, 14:52, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

The article has been deleted. --Howard the Duck | talk, 16:14, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

AFD: Barbie Almalbis

The discussion is here. Voice out your opinion on saving or deleting. --Howard the Duck | talk, 16:08, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

The article is saved. --Howard the Duck | talk, 16:14, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

ATTENTION!CQD!!SOS!!!

I have written to Mr. Jimmy Wales about the difficulties our community is facing. Please be ready to recieve anything Mr. Jimmy will say in the tambayan. Also, be ready for suggestions on how to improve our community. MABUHAY ANG REBOLUSYONG WIKIPEDIANO SA PILIPINAS!!!!!!!! MABUHAY ANG WIKIPEDIA!!!!!! MABUHAY ANG PILIPINAS!!!!!!!! Justox dizaola 15:58, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Could you share your letter? What are these difficulties?--Nino Gonzales 10:41, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

LRT featured article nomination

Okay, this is an admitted first, but I have put up the LRT for featured article candidacy status (admitted self-nomination). You can find the link here. --Akira123323 10:21, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Chavacano Wikipedia

Hi. First, thanks to Jondel for directing me to this Tambayan Philippines page. I certainly feel at home here.

I'm planning to setup a Chavacano Wikipedia to be included in Philippine Wikipedias. What do you guys think? Is it a good idea? I'm fairly new to wiki, still learning all those wiki tags, and basically, I just need some technical help. Anybody here willing to help me? Please leave a message on my talk page. Thanks. --Weekeejames 21:28, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

BTW, I decided that this should be a wikiproject. Any chavacano wikipedians and anyone interested, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page. Gracias. --Weekeejames 22:31, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I look forward to seeing the Chavacano wiki!! Ojala que tengamos un wikipedia en Chavacano. --Jondel 00:50, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Speaking of regional Wikipedias, the Kinaray-a and Pangasinan Wikipedias (and Wikitionary in the case of Pangasinan) proposals are still ongoing. I wonder what will happen to those proposals? --Akira123323 05:02, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I guess they need more support and followup. Guys pls cast your vote here. Also Weekeejames, you can make your proposal for the Chavacano Wikipedia there. --Jondel 06:19, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I will start making proposals for the Chavacano Wiki this weekend. I started reading last night on how to start & etc...seems like it's gonna be a big task, yet it's also a big challenge. I will need support definitely. Gracias. --Weekeejames 21:05, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I will support a Chabacano Wikipedia - but it has to specify which. Like Zamboangueño or Caviteño. --Chris S. 12:14, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the support. It would be best to make it under one big umbrella of PCS (Philippine Creole Spanish) so that Zamboangeños, Caviteños, Davaoeños, Cotabateños, Ternateños, and Ermitaños (if there were any), and even other Filipinos who speak Spanish can participate in translating, writing and editing of articles. Please remember Chavacano is a living and ever-changing language. Language code of Chavacano/Chabacano is CBK (ISO 639-3); See http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/codes.asp?order=name&name=name&letter=c So, the subdomain would be cbk.wikipedia.org --Weekeejames 21:05, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I strongly disagree. Each language should get its own Wikipedia. Dialectal variations within a particular Wikipedia are permitted; e.g, American & British English, Manila & Batangas Tagalog, Cebu City & Bacolod Cebuano, etc. However, Caviteño and Zamboangueño are neither dialects of each other nor of an proto-language spoken long ago. They instead arose developped independently of each other and have different grammatical features. For example the word "we" in Zamboangueño is both kita and kami, only mihutro in Ternateño and finally nisos in Caviteño. Chabacano-speakers would be better served with more localized wikipedias in this case.

On another note, I foresee a similar problem if Bikolanos wish to make their own Bikol Wikipedia since "Bikol" is actually 4 languages; Northern, Southern, Northern Catanduanes, and Bisakol. --Chris S. 04:24, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Good point and is highly taken into consideration. www.sil.org lists the language code (ISO 639-3) as "cbk" and note the spelling - "Chavacano" - which Zamboangeños generally accept (while Caviteños and Ternateños spell theirs as "Chabacano"). If the number of speakers were to be or should be a major deciding criterion, then the Zamboangeño dialect should be used for cbk.wikipedia.org simply because it has the most number of speakers. Would you still support a Chavacano de Zamboanga Wikipedia? --Weekeejames 04:55, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

The address of the Wikipedia does not necessarily have to follow Ethnologue abbreviations. Take Cantonese, for example - it's at zh-yue.wikipedia.org while the Ethnologue designation is YUE. We could maybe do CBK-ZA or something. And yes, you have my support provided it's a Chabacano Wikipedia with a specified variety (Zamboanga, Cavite, etc.) --Chris S. 05:35, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

OK. Since there really is no standard language code for Chavacano as of ISO 639-1 and ISO 639-2, while ISO 639-3 is still developing, I will propose CBK-ZAM for Chavacano de Zamboanga. The wiki will be Chavacano de Zamboanga Wikipedia. Gracias por los comentarios y sujestiones. I need more inputs, of course, first before I start proposing and requesting for a wiki in Chavacano de Zamboanga. Muchisimas gracias otra vez. --Weekeejames 06:44, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Bueno, dime cuando todo esté listo, para que yo apoye tu propuesta, ¿ok?. Gracias. --Chris S. 20:31, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

The address above will create a new article (Cbk-zam.wikipedia.org). It's better to have it at userspace (like what I did at User:Howard the Duck/Presidents) --Howard the Duck | talk, 16:12, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Howard, that issue has been addressed to me by Jondel on my talk page. We discussed it; you might wanna check it out. cbk-zam.wikipedia.org is linked to the subdomain and not as an internal link of en.wikipedia.org see the difference: cbk-zam.wikipedia.org and Cbk-zam.wikipedia.org. The former is a link to the subdomain which will be created when its approved and the latter links internally to en.wikipedia.org --Weekeejames 13:08, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm happy to announce that I have requested a new Wikipedia in the Chavacano de Zamboanga language. Calling all supporters, those willing to help and all Chabacano/Chavacano wikipedians to please support the Chavacano Wikipedia. And, also please help spread the word around. Gracias a todos. --Weekeejames 13:19, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

ATTENTION FILIPINO WIKIPEDIANS: Chavacano de Zamboanga Wikipedia is almost there. I just need help in finding chabacano-hablantes wikipedians and Zamboangeño wikipedians all over Wikipedia. Please help spread the word as we need just one or two native speakers who are willing to work on the Chavacano de Zamboanga wikipedia. If you know of a chabacano-hablante Wikipedian please let me know on my talk page or please direct them to me through my talk page, to this tambay page or to here. Muchas gracias. --Weekeejames 11:34, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Picture de-crowding

Okay, while I do like descriptive pictures to go with articles, I hate to say that the Philippines article is now very crowded with pictures. Unfortunately, I'm a poor judge of choosing what pictures I should remove (or something like that). Suggestions are highly welcome. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 06:50, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

On the other hand, Philippine-related articles in wikipedia in other languages lack photos. --Jondel 00:13, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

That's odd. Probably some of the pictures here can go there, although now I notice that the article has been de-crowded. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 13:35, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Maybe because other languages don't allow fair use images. --Howard the Duck | talk, 14:23, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Probably. Actually, it might work under fair dealing, but I don't know about that. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 15:12, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Rather, there are very very few Filipino wikipedians in other languages. We're too oriented with English.--Jondel 11:57, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Comrades, I need your help. I do not know how to put a picture in a wikipedian article. i have uploaded a file which shows the leaning belfry of the church in Bacarra, Ilocos Norte. it is

Bacarra belfry

. I give 2 options:

1. Teach me to attach pictures

2. Upload it for me.

I made it, and i released it to public domain. Thanks. Justox dizaola 08:45, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

cool pic! are you from bacarra? -- Saluyot 12:27, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Announcement: a first

Although I do not normally stay up very late, I would like to announce that as of today (May 15, 2006), we now have our first Philippine-related featured article (that actually meets the standards of a Philippine-related article as set out before): the Manila Light Rail Transit System. We can all be proud of this. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 18:08, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

But you know, the MLRTS article was the first one done under the auspices of Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines. So congratulations to all. --Ancheta Wis 22:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, it may not be the very first Philippine-related FA (third overall admittedly), but still, we can proud of it. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 00:27, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Well then its the first Philippine-related FA nominated by a Filipino. --Howard the Duck | talk, 12:14, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Congrats, particularly to Akira123323! --Nino Gonzales 12:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Anyway, I'm putting up the LRT article for tomorrow's featured article status. I listed June 12 (we all know that date) or October 29 (the day when the LRT network was completed). Any alternate dates? --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 13:35, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Congrats to Akira123323 and to all of us on the first Filipino-made Philippine-related Featured Article. Ibang-iba ang Pinoy! Ipakita sa mundo kung ano ang kaya mo! :) Coffee 16:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Akiram laudatum est! Praise to Akira!--Jondel 04:44, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Molto Nizza!!! Desiderano In tensione Le Filippine!!! Mabuhay ang Pilipinas!!!! Великолепно! 화려한!! ^_^ --Justox dizaola 01:13, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Cueshe

Cueshe is a very vandal prone article of a Filipino band. It's like the George W. Bush of Filipino music... hehe... Hope you could help keep watch.--Nino Gonzales 12:48, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Well then, you haven't seen the Pinoy Big Brother series of articles before we cleaned it up (lol). Might as well add it to the watchlist. --Howard the Duck | talk, 13:58, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree, although I personally find it odd that people would vandalize the Cueshé article. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 14:01, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Guess what? A vandal just vandalized the article. Hahaha --Howard the Duck | talk, 14:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I decided to trace the vandal's IP address (210.213.91.17) and well this is just shameful. The so-called Cueshé vandal (as per above) is from the Philippines...he's using PLDT Vibe too. Oh yeah, he vandalized again. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 15:04, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I reverted the vandalism (again), but still, this is just odd. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 15:07, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Blocking him/her won't do good. His/her IP changes everytime he/she disconnects. --Howard the Duck | talk, 15:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I'll try tracing the IPs, though I really have the feeling the vandal is a Filipino (or at least someone in the Philippines with an Internet connection). --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 15:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay, according to the traceroute program that came with my router, all the suspected vandal IPs are all PLDT addresses except one, which I think is Globe. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 15:33, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't get it. Sure, someone in his right mind can violate the Gloria Macapagal Arroyo article, but the Cueshe article?--Howard the Duck | talk, 15:35, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I think the user has an in-bred hate for Cueshé, although of course, I'm not a crystal ball. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 15:48, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I thnk this should be blocked?--Jondel 04:34, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

The user uses dynamic IP. It might have collateral damage. I might not even log in hehehe. --Howard the Duck | talk, 04:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

You can try, but I have the feeling that other PLDT Vibe users could be affected from the block, unless the person vandalizes in one sitting using one IP address. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 04:39, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I mean protect the page so no one can change it for lets say, 3~4 days? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jondel (talk • contribs) 12:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC).

That can work. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 04:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Hookay. Here goes.--Jondel 04:47, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

How about semi-protect? Since the vandal/s is/are mostly anons? --Howard the Duck | talk, 04:51, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Good idea. I'll change it now.--Jondel 05:01, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

It should be ok now for registered users to edit.--Jondel 05:08, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I am removing the protect since a reasonable time has elapsed.--Jondel 10:06, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I'll try monitoring the page tonight. I'm still surprised over all these anonymous anti-Cueshé edits. --Akira ^{Say what? | Track record} 11:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

WP:COPYVIO: Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila

I have now reverted the article's content pre-copyvio. Now some guy is reverting it to its copyvio state. I hope the admins maybe present in case of WP:3RR --Howard the Duck | talk, 15:35, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Probably the person is a student at the Pamantasan? I don't know. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 15:48, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

The person has stopped reverting. I've warned him/her about 3RR. Perhaps the person's waiting for the 24-hour limit to expire hehehe... --Howard the Duck | talk, 02:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

The person began reverting it again. --Howard the Duck | talk, 04:03, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I blocked the page and hope this ok with everyone?--Jondel 04:32, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I've added the user on the Admins noticeboard for violation of 3RR. Although I think protection may do the trick. --Howard the Duck | talk, 04:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I am unprotecting this page since a reasonable time has elapsed.--Jondel 09:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Keep an eye, though. Especially by night time. Can you also look at his IP? --Howard the Duck | talk, 09:59, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I will. seesh I don't know how to get the IP. I 'll research this.--Jondel 02:57, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

He uploaded an unauthorized image. I had to block him. Wikipedia 'image has suffered a lot in the past with copyright violations, misleading info, etc.--Jondel 00:27, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Then that explains the sudden appearance of User:Richard Relucio, User:PLM Community, User:PLM Scholar, User:PLMayer, User:PLM Kid, User:Pamantasan and User:PLM Alumni. --Howard the Duck | talk, 05:00, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I will make the appropriate entries Wikipedia:Sock puppetry. --Jondel 05:45, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Judging by the usernames involved, this person has to be from said university. But of course, while the person may have good intentions about the promulgation of the Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila on the Wikipedia (pictures and all), I don't think the person took to account the copyright policy. If he gets caught using the copyrighted material, I don't think he would want to be held liable under U.S. and Philippine copyright laws. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 07:49, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

How about if 'Wikipedia' gets liable? I work in journalism in my day job. Plagiarism is a serious issue. Wikipedia has recieved a lot of bad press due to unscrupuluous editors.--Jondel 01:13, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's understood that Wikipedia shoulders much of the blame for the unscrupulous editors, but its the unscrupulous editors that make Wikipedia the scapegoat in the first place. Sometimes there are people who are just disillusioned by the concept of the "edit this page" button. They think that they can just copy something from the Net and paste it on a Wikipedia article, which obviously is wrong. Anonimity doesn't mean you can plagiarize and get away with it and in turn blame someone else; the same laws apply whether you plagiarize on paper or plagiarize on the Net. If he/she/they is/are caught using that material on the Web, and the material and the contributor(s) can be traced back to the source and the person, the person(s), not Wikipedia, should be liable for their actions. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 03:12, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

There been a lot of activity of PLM page. Hope the admins would look into it. --Howard the Duck | talk, 03:41, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to be any copied material. I wonder if his sock puppets should be blocked.--Jondel 08:30, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Depends. I think it should be analyzed if the material is indeed legitimate first before considering blocking the user or the sock puppets. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 09:01, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

As of now, the sockpuppets may not be blocked. Just examined the changes. Also, perhaps they're "meatpuppets." --Howard the Duck | talk, 11:08, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Copyright on Philippine government websites

Since we're on the topic of copyrights, are content from government public domain? Because I saw a copyright notice at the DOLE website. --Howard the Duck | talk, 12:48, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Section 176 of the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines does not grant copyright to any work of the Philippine government or any GOCC provided it is in the line of official duties (Section 171.1's definition of a "work of the Philippine government"). If I'm right, it should be part of the duty to duly notify the people about their activities (government transparency) and it is the people higher up in government who assigns them to do that work, so the copyright might not be valid. The following sections should apply:

A "work of the Government of the Philippines" is a work created by an officer or employee of the Philippine Government or any of its subdivisions and instrumentalities, including government-owned or -controlled corporations as a part of his regularly prescribed official duties.

No copyright shall subsist in any work of the Government of the Philippines. However, prior approval of the government agency or office wherein the work is created shall be necessary for exploitation of such work for profit. Such agency or office may, among other things, impose as a condition the payment of royalties. No prior approval or conditions shall be required for the use for any purpose of statutes, rules and regulations, and speeches, lectures, sermons, addresses, and dissertations, pronounced, read or rendered in courts of justice, before administrative agencies, in deliberative assemblies and in meetings of public character. (Sec. 9, first par., P.D. No. 49)

Also, the use of copyright notices on government websites is inconsistent (the LRTA website, for example, does not post a copyright notice). --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 05:29, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Does the following consistent with GFDL...

However, prior approval of the government agency or office wherein the work is created shall be necessary for exploitation of such work for profit. Such agency or office may, among other things, impose as a condition the payment of royalties.

... since Wikipedia allows commercial use. Do we need to ask for permission? -- bluemask 10:03, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure of the interpretation, but I think the intended interpretation of that section is to define it as if it is derived as a primary source and not as a secondary source. Since Wikipedia is non-profit, and we're not exploiting the content for profit, it should count as PD for us. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 10:12, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Another thing, I found an appropriate discussion on copyrighted website material at Talk:Legazpi Airport. Also, I can modify Template:PD-PhilippinesGov if necessary, if the PD provision applies only for non-commercial and non-profit commercial use. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 08:57, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Hanunóo

this article could use some work: Hanunóo --Dangerous-Boy 22:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

So work on it? ;-) This article needs to be split up in to three topics: the Hanunoo people, the Hanunoo language, and the Hanunoo script. --Chris S. 04:50, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Talk :Ethnic groups in the Philippines

Hello there. We are having a straw poll on who to include in the collage that would be in the article. Please do join the discussion. --Howard the Duck | talk, 08:56, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Put the Tagalogs, Igorots, Tausugs, Maranaos, Ilocanos, Cebuanos, Hiligaynons, Warays, and the Aetas --Glenncando 22:56, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

The relevant discussion is at Talk :Ethnic groups in the Philippines. The poll ends on June 12. --Howard the Duck | talk, 04:45, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Another peer review

Anyone interested: I'm looking for people willing to peer review this time the article on the Manila Metro Rail Transit System (yes, I've moved on to the MRT). If you can, please drop off your comments here. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 10:19, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Zamboanga City

User:Weekeejames and myself are having a discussion on what map should be used on the Zamboanga City infobox. Everybody is encouraged to state their opinions on Talk:Zamboanga City. --Howard the Duck | talk, 07:33, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

CFD/CFR: Category:Foreigners of the Philippines, Category:Filipino television directors, Category:Filipino writers and Category:Filipino law

Go to Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 May 15 to show your support or opposition. --Howard the Duck | talk, 12:43, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Addendum: I have also put up Category:Filipino law for renaming (to the more accurate Category:Philippine law). Please show your support or opposition at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 May 20. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 13:00, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

About Foreigners category, I couldn't add my vote. Ferdinand Blumentritt never visited the Philippines so he can't belong to the proposed Expatriates in the Philippines. But this is just one exception.--Jondel 03:57, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I dunno, but I think Foreigners in the Philippines sounds better. --Howard the Duck | talk, 04:01, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Are there any precedents (that can serve as a guide?) --Noypi380 13:14, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I dunno. Although the foreigners category is turning out to be a mini-problem. Also, I've added more categories for renaming/merging at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 May 22. --Howard the Duck | talk, 14:35, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Isa pang hirit :Category:Aliens of the Philippines .never mind.--Jondel 07:11, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Foreigners in the Philippines is fine.Lets use this category (if the majority agrees).--Jondel 13:22, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Agree. It is not rascist nor does it demean other people. Justox dizaola 08:36, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Town/City Coordinates

I guess this website could help us a lot in providing the coordinates of the towns and cities in the Philippines — www.heavens-above.com, however it provides the coordinates in decimal format; to convert it to Degree, Minutes format try www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/convertDMS --Scorpion_prinz | talk, 18:42, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. --Howard the Duck | talk, 08:03, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

The Internationale

I have seen in http://www.hymns.ru/ that the Filipino language (or Tagalog) has its own translation of the Internationale. The translation is not explicitly stated there but it has a file which contains a certain choir singing the Internationale in Tagalog. Here is my question to the community which may be affected here.

1. Will I violate any copyright rules here in the Philippines, in Russia (the site is russian based), in France (where the copyright for the song itself rests) or international copyright law?

2. Will I violate any Philippine laws against sedition? I know this is a Communist song and it may be sedition

3. Must i contact hymns.ru to clear it all up in case i violate copyright?

4. Must I ask hymns.ru where they got the song in Tagalog translation and ask the source for permission?

5. Will it be amenable to the community here and will the community support me?

6. If this is made by the CPP-NPA-NDF (na hinala ko) will it not be a seditious document or file?

I hope for the answers. Thanks and regards. Mabuhay ang Pilipinas. Justox dizaola 08:33, 30 May 2006 (UTC)minor edited 08:34, 30 May 2006 (UTC)minor edited again 13:12, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

The Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines respects international copyright law. The song by now would be in the public domain, since it was written in the late 1800s(?). However, you might want to contact the site on who wrote the Tagalog translation, as well as who produced it while sung. Also, freedom of expression I think does not constitute sedition, as sedition would have to present a "clear and imminent" danger to the rule of law. But just to be sure, ask the webmaster first. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 02:42, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

New Member

Hi. I'm Sherly-Mae. Justox Dixaola recommended me here. He asked me if I can help edit some of the Filipino articles here. I'm fond of editing stuffs especially in graphics. And some call me as the "graphic artist"(?) of the site. That's a good compliment.

Hope I'm welcome. Mabuhay! sherlymaine 17:15, 30 May 2006 (UTC)minor edited 17:15, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! It's nice to have a new Filipino around. You might want to check your talk page for a more comprehensive welcome message. --Akira123323 ^{Say what? | Track record} 02:44, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia!! Actually, before becoming a member, you need to write a 200 page thesis about how wikipedia changed your life, how wikipedia will affect the global economy and...--Jondel 07:43, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Ei sherly muxtah na! Welcome to the club kung saan mula science hanggang porno ay pinag-aaralan. No kidding. Justox dizaola 13:06, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

RP First Ladies Project

Hi. I already started making some articles about our First Ladies. Anyone who can make a template or infobox for our first ladies is greatly appreciated. As of now, I've finished already 2 articles:

• Hilaria Aguinaldo
• Pacencia Laurel

Aurora Quezon's article is also done and so are Imelda Marcos and Ninoy Aquino's though he never served as First Gentleman officially. Any public domain pictures are welcome specially from the National Library of the Philippines in Manila. Also, any information or articles that you can contribute is also very welcome. Thanks. --Glenncando 23:01, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Another First Lady was added into an article in Wikipedia, these are:

• Esperanza Osmeña
• Trinidad Roxas

Please do expand these articles if you have any added information especially their public-domain images. I know we still have a lot to do on these articles but I think they also deserve a great credit being the wind beneath the wings of our nation's presidents. --Glenncando 20:20, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Another First Ladies were added to the list they are:

• Victoria Quirino Delgado
• Luz Magsaysay
• Leonila Garcia
• Eva Macapagal
• Amelita Ramos

I am still doing some research on Loi Estrada and Mike Arroyo to complete our list. Again, we still need public domain images. Thank you. --Glenncando 04:31, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Already started a stub on Mike Arroyo. Please expand. -- Saluyot 03:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC)