Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Archive 18

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

→

Archive 25

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Florentino floro

Just a heads up for those interested...there's an RFC on Florentino floro, so those who want to share their views, please feel free to. Thanks. --- Tito Pao (talk) 03:16, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

This is kind of odd, but I'll be sure to look into the matter. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 10:55, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not surprised the matter came to this. I had observed from early on that he and Maxschmelling were having disagreements re his contribs. I'm taking a rain check on this one though. — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 03:55, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Floro's getting out of control. He's started to accuse me and maxsch of a number of things, such as being sockpuppets of vandals, conspiring to delete his edits out of malice, and being somehow linked to airplane crashes in India. For those who have dealt with Floro before, but haven't taken a look at the RFC, we'd appreciate you taking the time to comment, as in the last few days, he seems to have gone completely nuts--I've taken the liberty of documenting his past and present rantings in the discussion page of the RFC. There's quite a lot, so if you don't have time to look over it all, there's a quick primer at the top. --Migs (talk) 13:33, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Can you tell me how long will the RfC stay? I am planning to write my own take in a few days, just that I need more time to read through his edits (was away from the Internet last weekend because of some commitments). My understanding is that it's supposed to be there within 30 days from the time the RfC was opened---please correct me if I misunderstand the RfC guidelines, I'd really appreciate it. Thanks :) --- Tito Pao (talk) 00:46, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Putopops Special Puto

I hereby submit this new article for your perusal mga Tambay. Does it pass notability? Or is it another example of the author using Wikipedia as his soapbox? — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 11:21, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I had the articles speedied per CSD A7 rules; the author did not explain why Putopops is notable. Although I think their puto is quite yummy... = ) Blake Gripling (talk) 11:36, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree; we should drop by San Juan sometime. =) — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 11:42, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Clearly an advert. -- Felipe Aira 11:41, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Knol

Google officially launched Knol (http://knol.google.com) to the public. We’ve almost forgotten about Google’s attempt to supplant Wikipedia in the content aggregation business but today it’s showing much promise, or so I hope. --Exec8 (talk) 06:41, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a giant, Knol is just a baby and different stuff

I want to think if I should be proud to be the very first Wikipedia editor who became a registered Knol user / member / editor / contributor on July 24, 2008, just hours after the July 23 historical beta public opening[1] of the Google project.[2][3]

Florentino floro (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I don't know if you can also try and send me a mouthful of ideas about this. Can you prophecy if Knol will have 2.5 million articles? Stay away from those mind boggling parameters. By the way our Filipina Lorie made record and won the WCOPA cup. Cheers.--Florentino floro (talk) 15:18, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Aren't you being a bit blithe Mr. Floro?--Jondel (talk) 08:54, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Just had my darkest night[4], in 25 years. Cuil

[5]--Florentino floro (talk) 14:26, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that, Floro. For future reference: http://www.livejournal.com --Migs (talk) 15:01, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

WelCome, Dominique. BTW, agree with User:LUIS, Armand and Angel, If Internet is including in the modern Seven Wonders of the World, I vote Wikipedia to be the Eighth.[6]Journal?[7] Lj[8], keep it short, found this:

This user sometimes or always feels useless on wikipedia.

This user is one in 47,357,334.

Philippine Revolts Against Spain

Hello mga Tambay, is the capitalization of this article appropriate? — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 11:21, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

No. It is not a title. Starczamora (talk) 13:25, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

When I first created the article, it was Philippine revolts against Spain. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 13:42, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I moved it back to the sentence cased title. You people may want to apply sentence case to the section titles. --Howard the Duck 14:22, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

NPOV dispute: Lapu-Lapu

Greetings mga Tambay. There is an ongoing NPOV dispute regarding the Lapu-Lapu article, specifically the claim that he was also known as Kaliph Pulaka and that he was Muslim. I value your participation. The discussion is here. — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 02:16, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Wrapping up the dispute guys; Efe, Scorpion prinz and Jordz, any final thoughts on this? — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 10:26, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

UPCAT

For those who are scheduled to take this Aug 2-3, send us pictures of UP during UPCAT (outside exam rooms/ buildings of course). --Exec8 (talk) 03:09, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Mobile phones are discouraged from being brought to UP. Likewise, use of electronic devices is a grounds for disqualification for admission to UP. By the way, I'm one of the first test-takers: this Saturday, 6:30 am at Bocobo Hall (Law Center). --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 07:48, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

And nobody who is not taking the exam would want to go to UP because of the traffic. So SkyHarbor, you really planning on studying here in the Philippines instead of the States? :-) --seav (talk) 08:32, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey good luck Sky. As for the article, I believe it is in dire need of good inline cites.--Lenticel ^(talk) 10:50, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

BTW, this might help you Sky.--Lenticel ^(talk) 10:52, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I read (and bookmarked) that article. I'm taking the UPCAT, ACET, DLSCET, SAT and ASEAN Scholarship tests for the greatest variety. God knows where I will be studying. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 11:08, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

I have pics of the test administration this morning (August 2) after the collection of test booklets. Should I upload? --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 08:17, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't know if this is a leak but there's a question about Wikipedia putting encyclopedia publishers on the hot seat and kinda "threatening their businesses" in 5 years - I'm not even sure. And UPCAT was hard enough for yours truly. (I took it in the Los Baños campus). -iaNLOPEZ1115 12:20, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

We have the same set! Haha. I found that selection quite amusing (BTW, it was in the correct grammar and punctuation section). --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 12:24, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Backlog at Category:Unknown-importance Philippine-related articles

There's 50+ articles there waiting to be assessed. --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:48, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Now less than 50. Please check this one: Basak Pardo. Thanks. --Efe (talk) 04:01, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Seems non-notable to me...kulang na lang , sabihin ilang barangay sila =P (Note: it IS a barangay. after some sleuthing, it seems that the creator also happens to be Basak Pardo's barangay chairman, or used to be (it wasn't clear enough in the User page) :P ) --- Tito Pao (talk) 04:44, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Done with the actionable ones. The remaining have some remaining clarifications. --seav (talk) 18:45, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Is AfDing appropriate for this? --Efe (talk) 05:29, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the help guys. I think it is better to prod the thing or merge it to its parent municipality article. Afd just attracts too much drama.--Lenticel ^(talk) 07:59, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Merge siguro if there are substantial information. --Efe (talk) 10:31, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Table of Contents

Can the Table of Contents for this page be moved up to the normal location? If falls below the opening screen, and so it is almost useless. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 21:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

 Done. Revert if someone don't like it. --Jojit (talk) 01:07, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

GRP-MILF Bangsamoro Agreement

How do we cover this? The lead of ARMM was updated but Bangsamoro itself is not updated. Does the deal/agreement need a separate article? Or should the information be incorporated in the respective articles. --seav (talk) 03:14, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I think it should be included on both articles, aside from a separate article about Bangsamoro Judiciary Entity or the controversy surrounding it. Starczamora (talk) 03:29, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

For map makers : - this article might help. --Exec8 (talk) 03:56, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Help needed on Basilan

Help! A dedicated editor is adding what looks like reams of Original Research to this page, which is already way too long! Can some of you drop by and help out in patrolling so that the additions don't get too far out of hand. I would like to begin to pare back the length of this article by making subsidiary articles out of the content, but the esteemed editor, Jjarivera, is adding and editing without pause for reflection, it seems. Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Basilan&action=history. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 22:17, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I think you need to cut in into several articles for example, you may create an article page called History of Basilan, you will just put a summary on the main Basilan page but all the infos will be on the History of Basilan article. The Moro uprising section could be integrated into the history page. The entry for People, Religion, Population Growth and Language could be integrated as a sub-topic of Demographics (they all talk about one thing-the people of Basilan). You may also create a whole page dedicated to the Demographics of Basilan and only a summary will be placed on the main Basilan page. See this page for more info: Wikipedia:Summary style. I hope I helped you. Good luck in editing!Kleomarlo (talk) 14:26, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Mount Pulag and Mount Dulang-dulang

So which is the 2nd highest peak in the Philippines after Mount Apo? --seav (talk) 06:31, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Dulang-dulang is higher, however, Mount Pulag is the highest peak in Luzon. PS I don't want to brag but I am just going to share this to you all; I have reached the peak of Mount Pulag on December 28, 2007. Hehe -- Felipe Aira 07:03, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Youth for I.T. Congress 2008

One of the topics scheduled during the 6th Philippine Youth Congress in Information Technology (Y4IT 2008) specifically on September 4, 2008, 1:10-1:50 at the University of the Philippines, Diliman is "Wikipedia and Collective Intelligence". The speaker is a certain Prof. Oliver Malabanan of the De La Salle University IT Department. Maybe a Tambay or two could hear him out, and hopefully participate in the open forum if any misconceptions about Wikipedia in general and the Filipino Wikipedia community in particular arise? =) — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 08:20, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Maybe he's already a Wikipedian himself and is lurking here? :-) --seav (talk) 16:51, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

That's a thought... =) — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 01:06, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Angel Locsin peacocking again...

Is it me, or is Cutie guyx22 doing the POV stuff again? He recently uploaded this image, which he claims to be under GPL, although it is likely to be a non-free image. Is he a Gerald sock, or is he just some editor needing some tutoring? Blake Gripling (talk) 04:32, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

It does look like a copyrighted, non-free image to me. (Unless he was the real photographer, that is.) --- Tito Pao (talk) 04:51, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Can an admin protect this for 2 weeks. Lets see if the Gerald and his followers will do something. --Howard the Duck 14:40, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

The flag as body paint

See here (NSFW?); this was in the news back in June; I wonder whether it would be fair to the parties involved to mention the act may have been illegal, making them liable to prosecution (har har)

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8491 AN ACT PRESCRIBING THE CODE OF THE NATIONAL FLAG, ANTHEM, MOTTO, COAT-OF-ARMS AND OTHER HERALDIC ITEMS AND DEVICES OF THE PHILIPPINES [9]

I. Prohibited Acts

SECTION 34. It shall be prohibited:

... e)To wear the flag in whole or in part as a costume or uniform;

SECTION 48. Failure or refusal to observe the provisions of this Act; and any violation of the corresponding rules and regulations issued by the Office of the President, shall after proper notice and hearing, shall be penalized by public censure which shall be published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation...

SECTION 50. Any person or juridical entity which violates any of the provisions of this Act shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not less than Five thousand pesos (P5,000) nor more than Twenty thousand pesos (P20,000), or by imprisonment for not more than one (1) year, or both such fine and imprisonment, at the discretion of the court...

The model's own words:

This image for me is something that is inspiring, the same way sports brands have produced their Philippine flag-inspired track sports jackets and limited edition shoes. It is the same logic why people put Philippine flag or map tattoos on their bodies...

I reckon these are all violations - especially the latter examples, and the gov't is too lenient. Doesn't excuse the magazine and her. -snort-

...I wanted to make a statement. I wanted to be part of something that breaks the “rules” and provoke people to think and feel... [10]

Tell that to the judge. Uthanc (talk) 18:33, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, I think the Philippine Olympic team should also be sued for wearing patches of Philippine flags on their uniforms. That law, as far as I know, only concerns actual Philippine flags and not designs, clothing, and accessories inspired from the Philippine flag. Anyway, that photo could be great for the Rogue article. Starczamora (talk) 19:07, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

AFAIK, using the flag itself as a piece of clothing or as part of the piece of clothing (say, a la Superman's cape) is prohibited by law. Representations of the flag, as far as it goes, is permitted (that is why we have pins of the flag, flag patches and even screen caps of the flag in the sign on/sign off videos on TV channels...heck, some grade school teachers would even ask pupils to draw the flag on a whole piece of bond paper). Body painting the flag on a nude model's body is something else (and that, I can't say as I'm not a lawyer), but if you'll be overly literal about it, that model wasn't using a real flag as part of her...erhmm...garments :P --- Tito Pao (talk) 01:26, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Wearing the flag in whole or in part as a costume is prohibited by RA8491 (is the model on the magazine cover wearing the flag, in part, as a costume?). RA8491 also prohibits adding an imprint of any nature on the flag (is the depiction of a zipper in the model's flag costume "adding an imprint"?), using or displaying the flag as part of any advertisement or infomercial (is a magazine cover designed to attract attention to the magazine an advertisement?), using the flag as trademarks, or for industrial, commercial or agricultural labels or designs and printing, painting, or attaching representation of the flag on handkerchiefs, napkins, cushions, and other articles of merchandise (e.g., pins of the flag, flag patches). Penalty: a fine of not less than Five thousand pesos (P5,000) nor more than Twenty thousand pesos (P20,000), or by imprisonment for not more than one (1) year, or both such fine and imprisonment, at the discretion of the court: Provided, That for any second and additional offenses, both fine and imprisonment shall always be imposed: Provided, further, That in case the violation is committed by a juridical person, its President or Chief Executive Officer thereof shall be liable. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 02:30, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Further, regarding earlier comments: "...I wanted to make a statement" and "Tell that to the judge", RA8491 does seem to fly in the face of Article III, Section 4 of the RP Constitution—"No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances." Nonetheless, it is the law of the land. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 02:42, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

That RA8491 is just unenforceable. TheCoffee (talk) 19:06, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Au contraire. See, for example, Supreme Court CIRCULAR NO. 62 - 2001. Also, try searching for HB04199 here. There's an interesting article titled Reconciling Freedom of Expression and Flag Desecration: a Comparative Study here. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 12:20, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Banahaw Broadcasting Corporation and other logos

OK, so I decided to make an SVG version of the BBC logo, since the original logo was rather shoddy:

Image:BBC2Phils.svg

I intended to make it an almost-exact copy of it, but I suck at nudging the nodes at the text, especially the "2", to make it resemble the original better. Any thoughts on this? Blake Gripling (talk) 05:04, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2008 August 10

I added two suspected Philippine-releated hoax articles in the list: Family Broadcasting Television and List of Programs currently broadcasted by FBT; GMA and ABS-CBN are unlikely to sign a contract with each other for this, and I haven't seen it air on TV, or show up as a valid result in Google or Yahoo. What do you think? Blake Gripling (talk) 08:31, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, huffed per AFD debate... Blake Gripling (talk) 02:46, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Morning Girls with Kris and Korina

Hi all, in the course of merging in the trivia section of Morning Girls with Kris and Korina I've realised that it needs a fair bit of improvement. The problems are that it's not very neutral (see the talk page), it's not well referenced and the structure could be reworked. Any ideas on how to improve this? I'm afraid that it's not my subject area! - Tbsdy lives (talk) 10:54, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I have made some revamp on that.. I hope I had fixed or at least lessened the POV materials there. -- Axxand SPEAK ACT 05:26, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Wow, great work! That has largely removed any NPOV problems from the article. Thanks Axxand :-) Tbsdy lives (talk) 10:32, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

just always here to help! :) -- Axxand SPEAK ACT 05:43, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Why is "Rajah" a dog?

I'm... flustered. Why is the Rajah link to a dog? And why are cases of the use of Rajah in a Philippine related articles being changed to Raja? Alternativity (talk) 13:55, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Suggest that Rajah the dog be subjected to disambiguity, like Rajah (dog). Starczamora (talk) 22:44, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Suggest that Talk:Rajah and/or Talk:Raja would be a better place to discuss this. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 01:22, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Hehe. Just trying to figure out how much of a concern this is for us tambayan folks. :-D (naghahanap ng kakampi. hehe) -- Alternativity 05:28, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, not sure about cultural insensitivities, but I do think the move was somewhat ill considered. I'm not sure of the reasoning by the administrator, but I have proposed that the move be rolled back. See Wikipedia:Requested moves#11 August 2008 for the move request, and place comments at Talk:Rajah#Requested move. - Tbsdy lives (talk) 11:04, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

For a new DYK

Do you know...that the Manila Grand Opera House served as a theater, opera house, residence, cinema and nightclub before its original building was demolished and re-constructed as a hotel? I nominated this yesterday, so I hope this makes it. --Sky Harbor ^(talk)

I improved the assessment as we can't promote Stubs.--Lenticel ^(talk) 13:19, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

A photo would be nice. Starczamora (talk) 13:24, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

It's a very old building, so we can't get pictures now. Perhaps if we dig in Google Search (since the MGOH is old, pictures of it before 1958 will do nicely). --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 07:48, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

There's a small one dated 1907 here. I seem to recall that RP law makes photos over 100 years old public domain, but I would need to search for backup on that. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 11:34, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

That picture is available at the Filipinas Heritage Library in Makati. Anyone want to take a visit? --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 12:09, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Can anyone fix the Hukbalahap article

Requesting someone to maybe fix or organize the Hukbalahap article. It's a mess and as I have read the talk page, there are some debates regarding the article (pro-communist, POV) and the ones that are debating over the topic are, I think, non-Filipinos. The article is important to Philippine history considering the effect of that movement to the whole political system of the country. And Filipino wikipedians have more access to resources regarding the matter. Thank you.Kleomarlo (talk) 12:58, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Whew. Just reading the talk page makes my head spin. Alternativity (talk) 13:43, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I did too, kinda hard coz its not my specialty. Im not good at History and Geography.. Tsk, all I can remember way back schooling days is the meaning of Hukbalahap. :) -- Axxand SPEAK ACT 05:47, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

José Nepomuceno

Guys can you help expand this article to at least DYK status? I already have a hook.

• ... that José Nepomuceno produced the first ever Filipino silent film?

I hope that you could help expand this article within five days. Showbiz is not my strongest suit so you're on your own here.--Lenticel ^(talk) 04:56, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I wish I could help.. but I am doing most of my edits while at work (yeah, right now!.. hehe.) and, I am limited to surf the net as I could only access work-related sites including, of course, wikipedia. Expanding this assignment verged impossible on my part. I am only useful in fixing, grammar editing.. and the such. T_T -- Axxand SPEAK ACT 04:35, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Pinoy

The article was rescued and expanded (editor was given a barnstar). Now it is up for GA. I suggest that we help improve it.--Lenticel ^(talk) 23:38, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Iskul Bukol

I've become interested in fixing up this article. Can anyone help? I've just repaired the lead, but the rest of the article seems to be too peacocky. Thanks. --Eaglestorm (talk) 15:40, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I made a makeover on that but there seems to be a problem in the reference section.. Hm, I hope someone would fix that in no time! -- Axxand SPEAK ACT 05:20, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Update: I've cleaned up the characters section and the back to iskul bukol section. I'll work on it further if I have the time. --Eaglestorm (talk) 18:39, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Ancient Luzon founded by Sung dynasty refugees?

There's an article that claims that the ancient kingdom centered at Tondo on Luzon (pre-1521), was likely founded by Sung Dynasty refugees escaping from the Mongols in 1279. And that the name Luzon actually means lesser Sung. The claim seems far-fetched on the face of it, but the article is prodigiously cited. If anyone has any specific knowledge of the history of ancient Luzon, and is able to shed light on this subject and point us to proper citations about it, perhaps they could comment over on the talk page of the article Luzon Empire? Thanks lk (talk) 17:01, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Hehehe. I had to create Ancient Tondo to contest Luzon Empire. I also put up a majority of the tags on Luzon Empire. Alas, I am not knowledgable with procedures for Merging, and as I said on Talk:Luzon_Empire, I do not know how to read Chinese and therefore am not able to very effectively transfer those beautiful beautiful source materials. I'm knowledgable with that era as an amateur, enough to be able to confidently say that such foreign source materials are certainly the best source of information about that era. The only surviving document we have from that era is the Laguna Copperplate Inscription. That said, the creator of Luzon Empire is not a prodigious citer. Or rather, he's a prodigious citer but not an accurate one -- he used legitimate sources to prop up completely uncalled for conjecture. Hence, the hoax tag. I really appreciate the attention, lk, and I continue to solicit help for that article. Cheers. -- Alternativity (talk) 05:21, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

(no "Hehehe" here) If you have created Ancient Tondo with the objective of contesting Luzon Empire, both articles should probably tagged {{Contradict-other|other-article|talk page section}}, with a talk page section designated where the contradictions can be discussed and resolved. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 11:52, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Someone already tagged the articles. I'd like to note that the Luzon Empire -- Ancient Tondo matter has expanded to include the top level article History of the Philippines (pre-1521), because material from Luzon Empire has apparently been pasted to that page. I'd like to remove the material, which I hold to be innacurate, tonight if nobody objects. -- Alternativity (talk) 09:50, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh. That somebody was you, as it turns out, Boracay Bill. Thanks. Now I know how to do that the next time I encounter a similar problem. Thanks. Alternativity (talk) 09:56, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Actually, Starczamora placed the tags. I twiddled their content a bit, after first making a small enhancement to the {{Contradict-other}} template. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 23:58, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Edit replacing wikiref/mention of Ancient Tondo with Luzon Empire

I don't know whether or not this is an issue of interest to anyone but, in light of the foregoing, I thought that I would mention this edit which just popped up on my watchlist. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 03:29, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Looks like a Japanese site (I don't want to go there as it might compromise my PC). Does anyone have a friend who knows Japanese and can translate it for us? I think we can't safely revert or discuss it unless we know what it means. Also the anons removed the pam and tl wiki tags for some reason.--Lenticel ^(talk) 13:08, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Use this http://www.windowslivetranslator.com/BV.aspx?ref=Internal&a=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lib.kobe-u.ac.jp%2Fdirectory%2Fsumita%2F5A-161%2Findex.html to translate the page. Seems like a gallery of scanned old books. It is the "Digital Archive of the Kobe University Library". -- Felipe Aira 13:15, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Good link. Anyways, I think we're better off removing the said ref, restore the old one, and re-mark as dubious since we can't even verify the contents of the site with a translator. Still, we could enlist a Japanese speaker to read the files in jpeg for us.--Lenticel ^(talk) 13:22, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Eat Bulaga! NPOV dispute

Some guy has just added info about Joey de Leon's alleged insults to Pokwang and the journalists, and is in need of a POV fix, since it more or less inclined towards ABS-CBN/Wowowee supporters/fanboys rather than staying on the neutral side... What do you think? Blake Gripling (talk) 23:42, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I removed the section, we do not need uncited negative claims to living persons here.--Lenticel ^(talk) 23:59, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I am watching this page 'cause there is this user:driftandd who insist and continually putting the section removed by Lenticel ^(talk) which is so-POV.. that is why I am also watching Joey de Leon's page too, as he (user:driftandd) asserts on putting his POV statements on the said page. --Axxand SPEAK ACT 01:13, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Anyways, i am not sure deleting the controversy made by user:driftandd over to Joey de Leon's page or should we rephrased that taking out the POV elements?--Axxand SPEAK ACT 01:28, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I warned Driftandd about it; should he attempt to add POV info about it then it's time to throw the block hammer on him... Blake Gripling (talk) 04:22, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

"Block hammers" may be good when he is really out of line, but this type of repetitious behavior does not merit such a punitive action unless he is really determined to really retain the info at all cost. Not all POV disputes should be settled with blocks, lest we become a community that prefers force over diplomacy. Talk him into line first, and when all else fails, block him. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 14:03, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Agreed this is a difference in opinion and not really a banable issue. BTW i've also removed comments about this from the Pokwang page.harlock_jds (talk) 14:16, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

No trouble. Due process was made. Blake Gripling just warned him. He did not block or ban him. :) --Axxand SPEAK ACT 22:35, 23 August 2008

Philippines beer

Hi guys can you provide a picture of people having a "session" or a beer establishment? Just avoid being beaten up by the drunkards (Mag-picture kayo. Bilisan nyo takbo). Okay?--Lenticel ^(talk) 23:34, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't the title be Philippine beer instead of Philippines beer? — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 02:08, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

You're right, I'll move it.--Lenticel ^(talk) 03:07, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Suspected Gerard Gonzales socks committing loopholes in Commons?

Check out this latest version of Angel Locsin article, wherein User talk:Loverboyz (who, by the way, has been vandalizing Marian Rivera) added images of Locsin which are possibly Flickrwashed. They are uploaded in Commons under different user names, using different authors. This is the same user who uploaded Rivera's Marimar photoshoot in Commons under the author "Clarissa Monteverde" (when in fact it was Jun de Leon who took the shot). How can we possibly complain this to Commons? Starczamora (talk) 04:56, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Post the commons username, plus the images and I'll see what I can do... –Howard the Duck 04:58, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Here they are:

Image:Gel in studio.jpg authored by Charice Santos, uploaded by Commons username Marianadikz15

Image:Angel Locsin.jpg authored by Jayce Guadradsca, uploaded by Commons username Mary jane12

Image:M2008 AngelLocsin.jpg authored by Grazer Sy, uploaded by Commons username Maxim 391

Image:Angel in B&K.jpg authored by Jasper, uploaded by Commons username Harry Martinez

Notice that all licenses are similar: under GFDL, claims to be of own work, with a complete name of supposed author of the image. Starczamora (talk) 05:04, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Yep, noticed them. I guess this situation with Gerald calls for a formal revocation on his part... Can't we just have this guy banned, or something? Blake Gripling (talk) 05:37, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I've marked them for deletion. M2008 AngelLocsin.jpg seems legit so I sorta left it out but it's still listed. –Howard the Duck 05:47, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Will this be the Final Solution? Anyways, good luck in banishing Gerald to "Madagascar". -iaNLOPEZ1115 09:02, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

This is very long term vandalism. Probably it's time Arbcom should know and ban. -- Felipe Aira 10:29, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. That way, we can teach this fanboy a lesson... Blake Gripling (talk) 10:39, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Good but I won't personally report this since I don't really know much about the matter. Perhaps you Star and/or Ian can report? -- Felipe Aira 11:52, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Users Loverboyz and ZMaxim is now harassing me; his activity seems to be similar to Gerald's. Now can we just bang the hammer on him? I'm getting sick and tired at that vain guy. Blake Gripling (talk) 05:16, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Found another photo:

Image:AngelLocsin.jpg authored by Rea Valtemor, uploaded by Commons username WRCurtis.

Seriously, when will these immature acts stop? Starczamora (talk) 14:22, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Added; also, the uploaders all have different usernames. –Howard the Duck 14:46, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Is it me, or is Flicrz trying to disrupt us again with his edits? I reverted his edits when he reverted what Starczamora did to his revisions, but he then retaliated... Any suggestions? Blake Gripling (talk) 06:40, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

New sock activity, again using the loopholes in Commons:

Image:Angel Alwina.jpg and Image:Darna.JPG allegedly authored by WRCurtis.

I would nominate Angel Locsin for full protection, but we have to remove the immature, fannish edits. Starczamora (talk) 14:58, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Any more new pics would have to nominated on a new page. I rarely visit Commons (I only go there if I'll upload free pics). –Howard the Duck 15:19, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Candaba, Pampanga

Found this on the unassessed section of WP:TAMBAY. I already removed the list of barangay officials as I think it is not necessary. See the secctions "7-Year Development Program Candaba, Pampanga for the Years 2004–2011" and "History", I think they need to be trimmed or deleted but I want your opinions first.--Lenticel ^(talk) 00:09, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Remove Uncited, unnotable and excessively long. -- Felipe Aira 06:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I already huffed the offending sections, but feel free to edit it if needed, OK? Blake Gripling (talk) 06:31, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Looks better now. Thanks guys.--Lenticel ^(talk) 07:55, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome... Blake Gripling (talk) 08:44, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Public domain illustrations?

Maybe we can use some of the ones pointed here --seav (talk) 13:35, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure if we can use that. According to the New York Public Library website, permission must be obtained even if a nonprofit organization will be using it. Although, low resolution images can be publicly obtained for educational, creative, and research purposes. Also, there are some images here in Wikipedia that came from NYPL. --Jojit (talk) 03:30, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I wouldn't agree with that. The drawings were sure to be drawn at least a century ago; meaning it's already in the public domain regardless of which country it was derived from: Philippines requires 50 yrs, UK 70 I don't know about Spain or the US but I am sure that can't be more than a hundred. And even if they aren't in the public domain, we can still use them under this licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/). That is the licence being used by the link given by Seav. -- Felipe Aira 11:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:2008 main page redesign proposal

Hi, I received a message on Wikipedia:2008 main page redesign proposal-[11] by User:NickPenguin. Let us, Filipinos, share our wisdom on this, please, since many of you are Information Technology. Here, please - Wikipedia talk:2008 main page redesign proposal Cheers.--Florentino floro (talk) 08:58, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

He's right. Maybe it's our time to make a difference by redesigning the Main Page. I dare you to take up the challenge. -iaNLOPEZ1115 12:03, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

It's been going on for about two months, we're in the second stage of the selection process though you can still get in. ChyranandChloe (talk) 01:46, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Y4iT Talk: "Wikipedia and Collective Intelligence" redux

See this for context. Anyway, I got to chat to the speaker for that talk and he said that his lecture is not really about Wikipedia but about wikis in general. I think he's just using Wikipedia as an example of a successful wiki. Incidentally, he was part of Filipiniana.net before and was consulted by Gus Vibal for their WikiPilipinas project. :-) --seav (talk) 16:07, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Yahoo!Groups external links

Are external links to Yahoo!Groups valid for Wikipedia articles? It may fall under "sites that require registration to view content". Ideas please... — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 04:47, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

No. See Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published_sources: "... self-published books, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, blogs, knols, forum postings, and similar sources are largely not acceptable." -- Boracay Bill (talk) 05:51, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Er, my query is not with an issue of verifiability, rather it has do do with whether or not a Yahoo!Group url is a valid inclusion in the External Links section of an article. Hope this clears it up. — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 08:34, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Whoops. Found it: WP:ELNO. Thanks Bill. =) — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 08:39, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure, but if it was a fictitious or a blog made by some company, such as Sam Fisher's ghost-written blog, will it be acceptable? Blake Gripling (talk) 10:24, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:SPS. It states there that: Self-published material may, in some circumstances, be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. However, caution should be exercised when using such sources: if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so. For example, a reliable self-published source on a given subject is likely to have been cited on that subject as authoritative by a reliable source. ---but it is limited as: self-published sources should never be used as third-party sources about living persons, even if the author is a well-known professional researcher or writer; see WP:BLP#Reliable sources. Now we are all thinking. Axxand SPEAK ACT 10:59, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Ow. I just (partly) repeated what Boracay Bill said. tsk. tsk. Axxand SPEAK ACT 11:01, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Fannish templates

Seriously, those fanboys of ABS-CBN and GMA Network need to take a chill pill and stop making fannish templates like this one. Starczamora (talk) 03:11, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Huff them while it's hot, I guess... Blake Gripling (talk) 00:31, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Be proactive and TFD it. Don't go around bitching here or else you're becoming like them. I TFD'd this one for you. If you spot more, don't hesitate to TFD them.

PS: We should need an admin that'll be quick to the draw. Waiting can be very bad especially with their edits that multiply exponentially. –Howard the Duck 16:36, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Fanbots make me sick!

I cant stand fanbots who are so shallow. See the edit summary made by user:Flicrz reverting the edits of blakegripling ph and also with Starczamora. And also the two article pages of Land_Down_Under_(movie) and Land_Down_Under_(film). As you know, we have this. Kindly check. Im kinda in a rush right now, so bear with my explanation.Axxand SPEAK ACT 06:38, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

And so am I; I'm fed up with this fanboy, you know... Blake Gripling (talk) 06:49, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I Redirected the other one Flicrz (talk) 07:03, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I'd recommend a full protect for the Angel Locsin for 2 months. Only significant edits would be made. No addition of pics, etc. –Howard the Duck 14:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Three suspected socks are editing Angel Locsin like crazy (and they actually "communicate" with one another via talk pages). Starczamora (talk) 15:00, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Now, you know the pain. Sorry for being at the sidelines of this epic acts of humiliation (and eradication of our hard-earned gains). Maybe the sock has other persons doing their part of the damage, but I'm not sure. If they can't stop, go send in heavy artillery. -iaNLOPEZ1115 12:03, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Seems Land Down Under (2008 film) is still there. This is one version of two Land Down Under Film. As you know, the two other pages of Land Down Under were deleted because of lack of notability and crystal-issue as requirements on making an article.. but hey, merong isa na nakalusot.. and we have this. It seems there are actually three pages of Land Down Under Film that was made. Whew! Maybe this should also be deleted Land Down Under.Axxand SPEAK ACT 07:45, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I redirected the Land Down Under link to Australia, since it's a common nickname for the country, and the link jumps to an article be a banned user (I'm sure you all know who that is). I think User:Mz12 is another GG sock... Blake Gripling (talk) 09:21, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Check out Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Land Down Under (2008 film). Blake Gripling (talk) 09:33, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Yup, better that Land Down Under be directed to Australia.Axxand SPEAK ACT 10:18, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. Blake Gripling (talk) 10:21, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Hm, but I dont know if that will cause problem with Land Down Under (engine) cause that is the original article of Land Down Under. It says on Land Down Under (engine)'s history that User:Flicrz redirected the original page to the engine page to have the supposed-Angel Locsin's film have their page as Land Down Under. Axxand SPEAK ACT 10:23, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Seems to be a legit redirect based on the fact that Land Down Under commonly refers to Australia, but of course, it was done by a banned POV-pusher on the purpose of respawning a deleted article... Blake Gripling (talk) 11:46, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Philippine Municipalities Map by User:Ieph

Click to see Image --Filipinayzd (talk) 02:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Nicely done! Finally we have a very detailed comprehensive Philippine map! -- Felipe Aira 09:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Perfect for the 2010 general election, especially for the presidency. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 12:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

w00t. --Howard the Duck 13:06, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

There are some errors that should be fixed such as municipal and regional boundaries. --Filipinayzd (talk) 15:09, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Yep that's true there are many errors, especially the boundaries. Notice how Novaleta, Cavite is not shown in the map, and also 4 municipalities in Abra appear as one! That is why I am to focus the next days starting now on making a new municipality map of the PH from scratch, wish me luck! -- Felipe Aira 10:03, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Good luck, Don't forget the many new municipalities in the ARMM Region and the Sulu Islands. Magalhães (talk) 10:25, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm done with Abra. I guess this will take me a month to make. -- Felipe Aira 12:54, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

It would be better if it is one click (flood) per municipality. Here are some errors: Connecting lines Camarines Sur- connect Garchitorena and Quinalasag Island (closest); Caramoan and Lahuy Island (closest), Albay - disconnect San Miguel Island (northest) from the island group and connect it to Tabaco City; disconnect Cagraray Island (second) from Batan and Rapu-Rapu islands; Missing municipalities Camarines Sur - Canaman, Camaligan, and Milaor; Albay - Polangui, Ligao, and Guinobatan, Boundaries - not quite accurate (e.g. Daraga-Legazpi City, etc.) --Filipinayzd (talk) 18:37, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually I'm making it with Inkscape (same software I used for the POSS pdf's) right now, and I gotta say the images are very cool. I'm currently working at the Ilocos region. -- Felipe Aira 11:14, 4 July 2008 (UTC) Here is a sample. Do you like it? -- Felipe Aira 12:34, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Love it. --Filipinayzd (talk) 14:58, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

In case new maps will be published, please upload it in Wikimedia Commons and give the best license on it. --Exec8 (talk) 00:17, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

To Filipinayzd, response on your question that you left at my tl talk page: Yes I am using a special software, it's Inkscape. It's pretty much a free (although less powerful) version of the ever popular Photoshop. -- Felipe Aira 10:26, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

The map (under construction); I'll be uploading updates continuously

Nice and excellent map but I have noticed some errors, you include Palawan into Region IV-B that supposedly Palawan must be included in Region VI.--Joseph Solis in Australia (talk) 09:28, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

As I understand it, Palawan is currently in limbo between Regions IV-B and VI. EO429 moved it from region IV-B to region VI, but AO129 directed that the implementation of EO429 be held in abeyance. See info and supporting cites in the Palawan article for details. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 12:55, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

New Maps needed

You need to check new municipalities in the ARMM region as well. Yeah we know its erratic --Exec8 (talk) 06:14, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Maguindanao and Shariff Kabunsuan municipal maps need to be redrawn.

New Municipalities in the ARMM Region include:

• Maguindanao
  • Datu Anggal Midtimbang
  • Mangudadatu
  • Pandag
• Tawi-Tawi
  • Sibutu
• Sulu
  • Omar
• Basilan
  • Akbar
  • Al-Barka
  • Hadji Mohammad Ajul
  • Hadji Muhtamad
  • Tabuan-Lasa
  • Ungkaya Pukan
• Shariff Kabunsuan
  • Datu Blah T. Sinsuat
  • Northern Kabuntalan

Revised map should be created for:

• Maguindanao
  • Buluan
  • Talayan
  • Talitay
  • Pagagawan to Datu Montawal (rename)
• Tawi-Tawi
  • Sitangkai
• Sulu
  • Luuk
  • Tongkil to Bangulngi (rename)
• Basilan
  • Lantawan
  • Sumisip
  • Tuburan
  • Tipo-Tipo
• Shariff Kabunsuan
  • Upi
  • Kabuntalan

Exec8, I am basing my maps on existing Wikipedia maps that are used on infoboxes of municipalities, and I am just simply redrawing them, and putting them altogether. In the case of new/resized/divided/partitioned/whatever Mindanao municipalities, I can see that there are still no Wikipedia maps, available, so I'll just try to find ones from other sites. And also Exec8, I publish all my original images, except photography, under the public domain at Wikimedia Commons, as part of my advocacy for the Commons.

And lastly, I am sorry for not responding as fast these weekends, all PLDT connexions here at (most of) Dasmarinas were cut off due to some man stealing the PLDT cables. And as such, I wasn't able to create maps during these weekends (where I have the most free time and no school work) so progress was slowed down.

The provinces of Abra, Ilocos Sur, Ilocos Norte, Apayao and Cagayan are already done; and you might notice that the image on the right now includes those provinces, if it doesn't refresh your cache. That's a high resolution image (2568 x 3876). And people, what do you think would be the best resolution for the Philippine map (all provinces)? The higher the resolution, the more detailed it is, but there's a bad side on to it; the file's bigger, and of course a pain in the neck for those with slooow connexions. Currently, I am working on Batanes. -- Felipe Aira 10:06, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I believe scorpion_prinz have access to the new towns in ARMM. --Exec8 (talk) 04:12, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

It would be best if you can keep the resolution as high as possible, then just upload a smaller file for people with slower connections (and people that just don't need that much detail). By they way you're doing incredible work, keep it up. :) TheCoffee (talk) 09:14, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Apparently the highest resolution possible is around 300dpi. The MediaWiki cannot create any thumbnail for anything higher than 12,500,000 px which around 300 until 305 dpi. -- Felipe Aira 12:46, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I know there's an inland body of water between Ifugao and Isabela. --Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 01:22, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

That's the Magat Dam reservoir. --seav (talk) 04:21, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Do you think it should be included? It wasn't since the locator maps (my bases) didn't. Perhaps it isn't big enough? -- Felipe Aira 10:10, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I guess, it's significant enough in this map, which I'm aware was derived from Google maps.--Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 21:53, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll try to include those bodies of water, and perhaps other significant bodies of waters too, in my next upload. I'll use the idea of yours, which is Google Maps. -- Felipe Aira 08:42, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Also, you might get the extrapolation problem with your methodology: when you end up doing Tawi-Tawi, it might become out of scale with Batanes. --seav (talk) 00:25, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry about scaling; I had that problem when working on the Batanes Islands. I am using another Philippine Map as a cross reference. The Map is on the background, almost transparent, as a cross reference, of my Inkscape file whenever I am/will be working with Island groups. -- Felipe Aira 08:40, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. Also, are you making sure that all municipality/city shapes are closed paths and that all of their individual bits (e.g., islands of Itbayat, Batanes) are together? (In the SVG file, each city/municipality should have only one <path/> element.) --seav (talk) 10:40, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Closed paths in a way that "there are no spaces between paths"? If that is, then yes all are closed paths. And also the bodies of water to be included in the map are Magat Lake/Dam, Pantabangan Lake (a lake around 3/4 of Magat; near Baler), Cagayan River, two rivers/lakes near Cagayan, minor lakes in Pangasinan (I am doing Pangasinan now). I'll upload a new one 2 days from now. -- Felipe Aira 11:40, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Closed paths as in closed curves (like 'O') and not open (like 'U'). Also, associate separate pieces (like islands) of cities/municipalities together so that each one can be selected by just a single click. --seav (talk) 02:13, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Yep they are closed. You mean I should group them? Yes, I am grouping them. For what purposes then? Do wish you me to upload its SVG too? Are you planning to edit it in the future? -- Felipe Aira 11:42, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Just added the provinces of Pangasinan, Nueva Ecija and Tarlac, and also bodies of water as requested. -- Felipe Aira 13:35, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Errors in the Ph locator maps

While I am working with Zambales, I noticed that something in the Ph locator maps are conflicting one another. On the right shows Subic, Zambales. Look at Pampanga's coast line. In the following two maps, Pampanga's coast line seems to have been smoothed with it's entire features removed entirely. Google Maps confirms that the map on the right is the correct one. Any motions on correcting the tens of locator maps of Pampanga and Bataan towns and cities, which are wrong? -- Felipe Aira 07:17, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

• 
• 

Well, Pampanga's coastline is a pure delta of the Pampanga River. So, the coastline can be the farthest extent of the delta or the most inland submersion of the Manila Bay. --seav (talk) 08:44, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Maybe google map can help you delineate it. --Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 22:14, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

So it is decided that the maps will be redoed. Well then I'll just upload new PH Locator maps of my own version after I finish the whole map. -- Felipe Aira 09:52, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Error update: I found an error on how 2 Municipalities of Bulacan are bounded. This is the boundary between Calumpit, Bulacan and Pulilan, Bulacan in which the boudary between the two of them has a significant space between them that makes the illusion that there is a municipality between them. -- Felipe Aira 13:03, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Requesting for Geographical maps

Is there any chance we're going to be able to have a map that details geographical features, such as mountains and peaks and rivers and lakes? Or perhaps we can have a collection and directory of Sattelite images relevant per location? Useful for such articles as Marikina River or Mount Sembrano -- Alternativity (talk) 15:54, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

How about just crop the Philippines from existing satellite images. They are in the public domain aren't they? Then just overlay political boundaries over them. Just like how the map of Algeria on the right was cropped. -- Felipe Aira 05:39, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Er, no. Not all satellite images are public domain. LANDSAT images are public domain but practically every hi-res satellite images you see in Google Maps, Yahoo! Maps, and MSN Live Maps are copyrighted. --seav (talk) 07:19, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

You may wanna try, Demis Gallery[12], not exactly as sophisticated as this topographical map, but you can manipulate the map, to show rivers, streams..etc. --Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 07:57, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok final question: do you wish me to create geographical maps of the Philippines? If yes, that's no problem; I'll be happy to do it. However I cannot promise that it will be on this year, and I may only start working on it on December, since I expect to finish my map on mid-September. And if so happens, I'll just get NASA's since theirs are public domain. -- Felipe Aira 08:29, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Aira, yes po. The Laguna de Bay - Pasig River watershed is a pet concern of mine, but I think major mountains and river and lake areas would also benefit from this. I suppose in the end these major geographic points are the main reference for these maps rather than municipalities... Alternativity (talk) 09:48, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Scarborough Shoal

Can we have it represented by at least small dots on the map? --Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 19:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Will include those. Also I will include the Spratly islands, but only the islands occupied by the Philippines; that is based on this map: Image:Spratly with flags.jpg. -- Felipe Aira 10:09, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

If its not too much, maybe just dot them around regardless if we occupy them or not, so as not to appear that there's no land feature in the area, just have them grayed out maybe. --Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 12:34, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I still think that only those occupied by the Philippine government should be included in the Philippine map since it wouldn't be right if I did otherwise. Just as how this (Image:Deutschland Bundeslaender 1957.png) only shows Germany even though Germany has a lot of neighbours. -- Felipe Aira 10:14, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Updated

I guess you can just remove that "lake" between Malabon, Caloocan and Manila.--Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 09:17, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Why? It's part of the geography. -- Felipe Aira 10:10, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

It fully covered by land now. =)--Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 02:08, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Well if that's so then I'll remove them. PS Google Maps say otherwise. -- Felipe Aira 08:50, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Er, don't rely on Google Maps alone. The shore outline in the "Map" tab of Google Maps uses outdated shorelines (e.g., no reclaimed areas). Also, if you switch to the "Satellite" tab, you'll see that indeed there is no lake there. --seav (talk) 15:10, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Manila's boundary should also reflect this Image:Ph_map_manila.svg. --Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 07:05, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Actually this (Image:Metro manila map.png) is the one I used as a reference for Metro Manilas shoreline. It just happens that Google said that there was a lake in that area so I included it. Don't worry; it will be gone in the next update. -- Felipe Aira 09:59, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

You can also check out..kabeet.com it has a reclaimed land along the Manila Bay coast. --Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 11:10, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Uggh. Kabeet.com is often added as a spam external link to Wikipedia articles... --seav (talk) 11:21, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Felipe, I hope that you can finish the map in 3 months. Thanks for adding Cavite, Laguna & batangas to the map. -iaNLOPEZ1115 12:03, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Luzon island is almost complete. Bravo Felipe!. Paki sunod ng Mindanao. --Filipinayzd (talk) 19:11, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Not yet actually. Catanduanes, Sorsogon and Albay still needs to be added. -- Felipe Aira 04:13, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

The "peninsulas" of Pagbilao, Quezon are actually islands. --seav (talk) 02:07, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Will correct that. -- Felipe Aira 04:13, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Yung "lakelets" near San Miguel Bay (Camarines Sur), Bicol river yun. The cut-off channel created two islets within the River. --Filipinayzd (talk) 17:39, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Severe NPOV concerns over Mapúa Institute of Technology

I personally don't know a thing about the Philippines, but a casual reading of the article is enough for me to raise NPOV concerns, especially writing paragraphs like this:

The Yuchengco administration destroyed the tradition of excellence of Mapua Institute of Technology. They implemented the Quarter System which only resulted for a higher profit for Yuchengco but not for the improvement of the Institute's quality of education. The students demand the administration to focus on quality improvement but it seems that the administration is not interested for their demands. Students are now so disappointed about the status of their beloved "Alma Mater".

without any kind of substantiation.

I hope someone would spend some time dealing with this. --Samuel di Curtisi di Salvadori 22:51, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Capitol Medical Center Colleges was put up for deletion here...

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Capitol Medical Center Colleges. The discussion was closed as no consensus, but the upshot was that the article should be sent over here to see if better, possibly non-English, references could be found. Can you guys help out? Thanks! - Richfife (talk) 16:38, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I can't find good sources over the net, the best thing that I found was a government directory listing. Perhaps it is better to delete this article.--Lenticel ^(talk) 23:23, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Capitol Medical Center exists but I didn't know it has a school. –Howard the Duck 01:36, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Just as a matter of curiousity... why is Capitol Medical Center now red if Howard says the article once existed? I was born there :-0 -- Alternativity (talk) 04:26, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Just to be clear, Capitol Medical Center exists IRL. The Wikipedia article doesn't exist or was deleted previously. –Howard the Duck 04:32, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

It was created. However, it only contained a link to its official website. As such it was speedy deleted.--Lenticel ^(talk) 10:23, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

too many of these articles end up that way, because they contain only material copied from the website. If it's worth inserted an article, it's worth doing a reasonably good one. See our Business FAQ (which also applies to non-profit organisations) for the factors that apply. DGG (talk) 23:09, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Powertripping reviewer?

User:Eduhello, who is notorious for putting keep in every comment on an AFD, went about and rejected several articles for WP:GA, including Pinoy. I believe the reviews were in bad faith, especially seeing that the review pages are still blank. Starczamora (talk) 21:46, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

• I reviewed it, and you got a pass too. ViperSnake151 00:52, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

You could've just reverted it. I'm sure the peeps at GA would understand. –Howard the Duck 04:20, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Jose Mari Chan

I guess you guys might take a look at this section, since it's ridden with POV and needs some cleanup... Blake Gripling (talk) 01:01, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

made some de-POV there.--Lenticel ^(talk) 01:46, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Gee, thanks... Blake Gripling (talk) 05:31, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Himamaylan City

Hello mga tambay, please assist in watching this article. Unknown IP's keep appending Yahoo!Group links to it, as well as removing referenced material and attempting to turn it into a soapbox. Cheers! — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 02:56, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

The 29th Manila International Book Fair

Date: September 12— 16, 2008 (Friday to Tuesday)

Time: 10:00 A.M.— 8:00 P.M.

Venue: Halls 1-4, SMX Convention Center, SM Mall of Asia Complex, Pasay City

Anyone interested? --Exec8 (talk) 21:16, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

I always go there every year but this time I'll be present on Sept. 13 only. --Jojit (talk) 13:05, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll probably drop by on the 13th or 14th. Too see SMX if nothing else. :-) --seav (talk) 13:10, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Most probably I'll be there to indulge in a display of book envy ;-) just that, I don't know (yet) when. Most probably I'll hang around the whole of Sunday until 6pm. --- Tito Pao (talk) 05:31, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll be going there Saturday. I noticed last year (28th MIBF) there was a Tagalog-Tagalog Dictionary as thick as Websters and is not made by UP. Hopefully I can see it again. --Exec8 (talk) 14:45, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

You're not referring to the Viccassan (Victor Castillo Santos) Dictionary, are you? :P We have it in our home library. --- Tito Pao (talk) 14:50, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

The Vicassan's dictionaries, as far as I know, are either English-Tagalog or Tagalog-English, not Tagalog-Tagalog. Then again, the New Vicassan's English-Tagalog Dictionary does quite a good job of documenting Tagalog vocabulary, comparable to the UPDF (I frequently associate this dictionary with DLSU, so I also call this the "La Salle dictionary"). --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 08:13, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I just came from the book fair and it was named The New Filipino-Filipino-English Dictionary. All words in Filipino (Tagalog) and imported words in the English Dictionary with definitions in Filipino and English. It was arranged in Filipino Alphabet (and yes including Ng for the word Ngipin). It was compiled by Wagnalls Publishing Group and encleare foundation and printed by ISP International. Its hard to find, I cant even find it in National, Goodwill or Powerbooks. It was in the book fair. --Exec8 (talk) 12:40, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Psst... improve nyo naman yung tl wiktionary gamit yang libro na yan. Hirap kasi mag-translate eh. Parang makatang ewan ang pakiramdam ko.--Lenticel ^(talk) 14:10, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I even saw this book The New Philippines Comprehensive Dictionary with all languages in Tagalog, Bikolano, Cebuano, Hiligaynon, Ilokano, Ilonggo, Pampango, and Pangasinan. They post it online at http://www.aklatpinoy.com. --Exec8 (talk) 21:48, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

When I was at the book fair, I planned to buy The New Filipino-Filipino-English Dictionary but it's very expensive. I didn't buy it because it's around P 2,995, although by the looks of it, the dictionary is comprehensive than the UPDF.--Jojit (talk) 16:32, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Buddha's Light International Association - Philippines

Please take a look at this article. ThanksKleomarlo (talk) 10:29, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I cross-posted in WP:BUDDHA here.--Lenticel ^(talk) 14:14, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

POV in Laarni Lozada article

This article really needs serious revision. Can someone do something about this, I'm not familiar with her background except that she is the winner of Pinoy Dream Academy (Season 2).

Thanks Kleomarlo (talk) 07:40, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

removed the copyvio, it seems that it is being subjected to some de-POV session.--Lenticel ^(talk) 08:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I see. ThanksKleomarlo (talk) 09:10, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Philippine-related

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:32, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Please review Mumu, Philipino Monster and Mother Goose Playskool and Gradeschool articles

Requesting someone to review the following articles:

• Mumu, Philipino Monster, which I think should be redirected to the Philippine mythology page
• Mother Goose Playskool and Gradeschool, which I think is an insignificant article about the Philippines. If we will include all the preschool and grade school schools in the Philippines, I think we will have big problem. I think we should review the educational institutions that should be included in the Philippine Wikipedia, suggesting that we focus on tertiary level institutions (such as UP or ADMU) and not much in high school and grade school.Kleomarlo (talk) 01:16, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

IMHO, Mumu should redirect to Multo. And there should be a Multo article. But Multo right now is a redirect to Philippine mythology. As for gradeschool... isn't it the case that in votation, most tertiary institutions end up as keep, most gradeschool institutions end up as don't keep, and high schools show mixed results (Remember Rizal National Science High School)? Perhaps we could act accordingly. Alternativity (talk) 01:55, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

mumu could be redirected to the Mumu disambig page where an entry is already given. I think "mumu" is more in line with "boogeyman" than anything else. As for mother goose, I found this which mentioned the school. I think the school system might have a good article. But this particular school will not survive an afd.--Lenticel ^(talk) 02:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Philipino? Ew... redirect that to Mumu. Starczamora (talk) 17:25, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

As per Starczamora's request, DONE. Alternativity (talk) 04:10, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Onib Olmedo

Found this article while doing assessment of Philippine-related articles. If you have time, can someone wikify this article or confirm its notability. A curriculum vitae was posted as well as entries riddled with NPOV violations. I thought for a second that my nose will bleed. Haha Kleomarlo (talk) 03:33, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Whoever wrote that page is just asking for trouble. Another promotional artick worth a CSD.--Eaglestorm (talk) 03:44, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Speedy that guy's article? Or save it from deletion? He seems notable, but it seems as though the one who wrote all the unnecessary POV stuff should know that WP's not a shrine or a fansite... Blake Gripling (talk) 03:47, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

removed the article by Alice Guillermo. It will be considered as copyvio unless stated by Alice Guillermo. --Lenticel ^(talk) 05:11, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm getting good hits on Google books, I think this can be cleaned up and sourced provided a tambay has the patience to do so. --Lenticel ^(talk) 05:14, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

The article looks trashy, but it seems worth the keep. Just a clean up, a major revision, deletion of nonsensical sentences.. and voila! the article seems noteworthy. Axxand SPEAK ACT 11:59, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I cleaned up and stubified the article.--Lenticel ^(talk) 05:49, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Reference for VOT FOR D CHAMPP?

There are several articles that refer to this 2001 election acronym. Does anyone have any newspaper reference? The online archives of the broadsheets don't go back that far. --seav (talk) 19:10, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

It looks like you've made a spelling error in the acronym. I see VOT FOR D CHAMMP in the Acronyms in the Philippines, Franklin Drilon and People Power Coalition articles. I found a relevant archived article from ops.gov.ph here )archived on Sep 27, 2006). -- Boracay Bill (talk) 21:52, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

AfD on Far Eastern University Boosters flouted

I can't rememeber how often something like this has happened but just so you know: the Far Eastern University Boosters was actually deleted per its AfD, but the original author merely cut and pasted the same content to the just-deleted article. Thanks. --- Tito Pao (talk) 00:24, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deleted as G4, please warn the user to get reliable sources first before posting the article back again.--Lenticel ^(talk) 02:31, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Assessment department update (September 2008)

Philippine-related articles Importance Top High Mid Low None Total Quality FA 5 3 1 2 11 A 1 1 GA 6 7 9 5 27 B 102 45 100 41 288 C 4 8 13 7 32 Start 183 393 1244 1136 2956 Stub 46 145 1601 2035 3827 List 1 9 18 34 4 66 Assessed 348 610 2986 3260 4 7208 Unassessed 1 5 6 Total 348 610 2986 3261 9 7214

Since the last update in July, we have tagged about 850 articles as part of the Philippine-related articles assessment drive. There are still approximately 2,000 articles left to tag. The bulk tagging of past articles is the first phase of the Assessment department's activities. Let's continue clear up the backlog, people! :-)

By the way, please go to this section to install a user script that greatly simplifies the tagging. Combine this script with a tabbed browser and you should be able to tag 100 articles in 15 minutes.

--From your self-appointed Assessment Department Chairman, --seav (talk) 05:41, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

The assessment script's author had a hissy-fit and had the script deleted from his userpage. So invoking the GFDL, I'm saving a copy of the script under as User:Seav/+assessment.js and updated the instructions so you can use the script again. --seav (talk) 18:02, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

The script is really useful. I think I assessed more than 1,000 articles using it. I just hope that I assessed the articles right.Kleomarlo (talk) 12:49, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiCup

Thought you might be interested in this.[13] You can still join under a different country like I did; I joined under the Vatican City when I'm from the Malolos. Florentino Floro is top contender of User:WBOSITG/WikiCup Competitors for the 2009 Wikicup (Wiki World Cup tournament).--Florentino floro (talk) 08:07, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I thought you can only represent the country where you're from. --Efe (talk) 12:26, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Please review Philippine College Of Health and Sciences article

Hello! I found this articles while doing assessment of Philippine-related articles, please review. thanks.Kleomarlo (talk) 12:11, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't it look like an ad? --Eaglestorm (talk) 18:06, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Suggest sending to Afd. Google search for "Philippine College Of Health and Sciences Inc." gave an overwhelming 13 hits.--Lenticel ^(talk) 23:47, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

New RfA at Tagalog Wikipedia

Please take note that there is a new RfA at Tagalog Wikipedia. Kindly participate by proceeding to this page. The nominee is an active contributor and helpful Tagalog-language Wikipedian. Thanks. - AnakngAraw (talk) 22:24, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

The Basilan article really needs your help

I think someone should take a look at the Basilan province article. Although the contents are good, it really needs some cleaning up to do. It's a complete mess, no offense meant to Jjarivera. Kleomarlo (talk) 05:32, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Yup it does. I wonder why the BIG map is there.--Eaglestorm (talk) 06:07, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Too many pictures...maps are too large...Kleomarlo (talk) 09:38, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

It is a mess. The text is riddled with weasel words and a lot of text has little or no sources. I suggest that more experienced tambay mapmakers study the maps. It doesn't look like a original work for me. The background looks like it was lifted from some commercial map.--58.69.149.127 (talk) 06:40, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I think the map is from NAMRIA. Could it pass for a PhilGov Fair Use?Kleomarlo (talk) 08:43, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

No I think it is not fair use as other tambay mapmakers have to make their own maps from scratch. I think someone with a WikiCommons account should start a deletion case there. I think what he did is a derivate work and cannot be considered as his own free work. --Lenticel ^(talk) 11:20, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Done something. I don't know why the captions had to be in italics. --Efe (talk) 09:01, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Some of the photos are being passed as "original work by uploader", but appears to be sketchy. And do we really need those school logos? Starczamora (talk) 17:10, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I think the logos are not fair use. It must be used only in an article about the school, unless there are some discussions regarding the logo. --Efe (talk) 11:48, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Are Leucaena leucocephala and Ipil (tree) the same?

It seems this plant is the same as the ipil-ipil in the Philippines, but there is a separate entry for "Ipil (tree)". Anyone care to comment? Alternativity (talk) 10:30, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I think they are different as they belong to two different genera.--Lenticel ^(talk) 11:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

There is one entry for ipil and another for ipil-ipil in the James English Tagalog-English Dictionary. - AnakngAraw (talk) 20:19, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Intsia bijuga or the ipil (with one ipil word) is also known as taal according to the J. English dictionary. - AnakngAraw (talk) 21:08, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

While the ipil-ipil (Leucaena leucocephala; with two ipil words) is also called santa-elena and santaelena. - AnakngAraw (talk) 21:16, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

List of Presidents of the Philippines at FLRC

Hello, I nominated the List of Presidents of the Philippines at WP:FLRC. I believe some changes are needed in order to keep this list featured. Please, respond here. Thank you.--Crzycheetah 22:03, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Lira Luis

I'm not really an expert on this but I think this is written like a promotional material (like an advertisement perhaps/). Please take a look and see what you can do. Kleomarlo (talk) 09:13, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

The article is really an advertisement of an unnotable person, again, unnotable, promoted by IP user(s). PS The interwikis it shows are broken. Meaning it doesn't exist in other languages. This is a candidate for deletion. -- Felipe Aira 11:53, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll tag it as speedy. By the way, the user who made the article is User:Liraluis, probably some promotional-only account... Blake Gripling (talk) 11:58, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I also took time to study that article and found out within seconds that it really IS a self-promotion page, no matter how much a grasp of proper wiki page construction that the user made for a beginner. I hope she doesn't try to reproduce it anytime soon. It reminds me of a guy a few months ago who tried claiming that he was an associate producer for MGS4 whose resume-type article was deleted by three admins. to quote the block handler when he countered the guy's unblock request, "You may be a real person with a real bio, but we really don't like people coming on Wikipedia trying to promote themselves." Ms Lira Luis, whoever the hell she is, ought to understand it too. My two centavos. --Eaglestorm (talk) 17:55, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

She recreated it... Better warn her again... Blake Gripling (talk) 05:50, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Looks like she might pass notability. I think it is better to put this to Afd just to get a wider consensus. This can't be speedied as a repost as it is not similar to the deleted version. Besides, I think that the article's improvement is a sign of good faith.--Lenticel ^(talk) 06:09, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. --Eaglestorm (talk) 07:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

For the record, there is no such word in the dictionary as "UNNOTABLE". Where did you get this word? I suggest you learn the English language first before trying to do the work of an "editor". Is English your first language anyway? I think not! Liraluis (talk) 04:37, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

And so do many of Wikipedia's editors, who come from all over the globe and whose first language is not English. (And, I guess, more than half of Wikipedia's editors are.) That doesn't make them less deserving to be Wikipedia editors; if they made lapses in grammar, those can be easily corrected (except, however, in Talk Pages such as this one, so just be a little more understanding). AFAIK, English as the editor's primary language was never a requirement in becoming a Wikipedia editor. Regarding your article, I didn't vote on the AfD either because I couldn't make up my mind on it or I don't know if having an article about you (in case you really are Ms. Lira Luis) would pass Wikipedia's notability standards and conflict of interest policy (or both). If you do believe that the article shouldn't have been deleted, you can try thedeletion review process, let's first see if that will work out. --- Tito Pao (talk) 05:44, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Let me add to that. Uncivil comments such as being accused of conspiring with other editors to act against Lira Luis' notability for inclusion here in Wikipedia out of 'jealousy' for her achievements will not get you anywhere. How dare you do throw that at me, Blakegripling, and Lenticel. If you really want to make good on contributing to Wikipedia, maybe you should read up on WP:Civility, plus the policies referred to you earlier.--Eaglestorm (talk) 05:58, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes we are all conspriring against you since we view your unlimited expertise as a threat to Wikipedia, which compared to you is only a spec of dust. Would you like me to call up Jimbo Wales, and tell him to appoint you as the Supreme Tsar of Wikipedia so that you may forever guide us stupid Wikipedians who built the least popular encyclopedia? I would also like to thank you for sharing with me your words of wisdom. -- Felipe Aira 10:11, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

What have I done? I just recommended this article for review by other wikipedia editors.I think I don't deserve THIS rude comments. She accused me of jealousy and conspiracy (those are very deep words) and to think that I didn't even know Lira Luis. I think she should read the policies and principles of Wikipedia if he/she really wants to write about her here (I don't have anything against her) or go elsewhere and establish a fansite for her.Kleomarlo (talk) 15:35, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Who in their right mind would write about themselves in Wikipedia anyway? Starczamora (talk) 17:21, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to BURST YOUR BUBBLE Starczamora but I am not Lira Luis. I WISH I was her so I can tell you off. Who in their right mind would ASSUME, with no facts to back it up that Ms. Luis is writing about herself? I happen to be the creator and big fan of hers. Go get a life.FanofLiraluis (talk) 23:38, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

You seem to forget to read this: WP:Civility. With your choice of words, you yourself do not represent an ideal Wikipedian. Starczamora (talk) 00:26, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't know Starczamora...people with big-ass egos, maybe, especially those with ZERO notability? WP:AUTOBIO's good reading material for people attempting to put themselves here...even though there are notable Wikipedians with their own articles, there are still people who just want to get noticed here for the wrong reasons.--Eaglestorm (talk) 17:35, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I am a native speaker of English; so what? We need all the competent editors we can get; if the grammar's weak, we'll fix it (although I do wish some folks weren't quite so eager to work in a language they really haven't mastered yet). --Orange Mike | Talk 01:09, 20 September 2008 (UTC) Not a Filipino, although my father became disabled fighting for Philippine freedom in WW2

It's weird, orangemike, that she marked everybody else in this thread as conspirators, when she didn't even sent you, the guy who speedied the article, the stuff she foisted on us. Talk about selectivity.--Eaglestorm (talk) 02:30, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, she hollered pretty loudly on my talkpage about how mean I was and what lousy English you guys write. Never did address the COI issues; nor the notability issues, really. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:43, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I take it back; just saw her messages on your TP. All huff and puff, but no stuff I'm sure. Those links seem like one big laundry list...except for some that run afoul of WP:EL. What a conspiracy theorist. She says we have lousy English? Tell that to the millions of other Wikipedians who do not have English as their primary tongue. --Eaglestorm (talk) 03:41, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Should we block her for not respecting WP:CIVIL? Blake Gripling (talk) 07:42, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

No need as the user seems to be inactive at the moment. Besides, that would be punitive rather than preventive. We should keep an eye on the deleted article and her contribs though.--Lenticel ^(talk) 09:04, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Just a heads up on this issue. I don't know if i did the right thing, but while she has made no attempt to recreate the article, she erased sections of her talk page that were against her efforts to create the article. I restored all of them, because I think she's just trying to hide the fact that she got burned for writing what is not accepted here in WP. To be honest, erasing those vital edits are nothing but cowardice IMO (pardon the PA). --Eaglestorm (talk) 19:13, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

This is a request to administrators with higher rights than Eaglestorm: Please monitor Eaglestorm's activities on Wikipedia as this person does not seem to represent this website in a professional manner and abusing rights to edit on this website. The above request is one example. This person appears to have a hidden agenda behind his edits including the one above. This person's actions misrepresent the efforts of Wikipedia. In my opinion, this person should be stripped-off his rights. Thank you for your kind consideration on this matter.FanofLiraluis (talk) 23:41, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

You are not supposed to erase the talk page, that is why. Starczamora (talk) 00:19, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually she can if she wants to. It's just like what some non-archiving users do: periodically erase their talk page, which is what she did, and completely her right. See WP:BLANKING. -- Felipe Aira 03:19, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

This is a request to other Administrators having rights higher than Eaglestorm and Starczamora. Please review their comments in this chain/thread. Clearly their motives lean towards "revert-wars" so may I suggest that their actions in Wikipedia be carefully monitored. It appears that these two have the motivation to abuse their rights by continually reverting good-faith edits or for use in revert-wars. And in the case of Eaglestorm, he has done the deed by overstepping my right of WP:Blanking. Thankfully, there are other administrators who corrected the action. With the case of Starczamora, this user is giving misinformation to other users by saying that "..you are not supposed to erase the talk page.." when there is clearly a provision for this for users. This is a clear demonstration of the misinformation this person has with what is the right/ not right of a user. Not having a clear understanding of this important information shows incompetence specially if this person was granted administration rights and seems unfit to do the work this privilege entails. Thank you for your kind consideration. FanofLiraluis (talk) 02:07, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Not everyone knows anyone is allowed to blank their own user talk page. The point of posting messages in the user talk page is that if the user blanks it, it is assumed s/he read it already. It just appears rude blanking the user talk page though, and a great majority of user talk page blankers are noobs. –Howard the Duck 02:20, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Let me make this clear to you: Starczamora and Eaglestorm are not administrators. No one can strip them off of their "elevated editing rights" since they don't have elevated editing rights at all. You have practically the same editing tools/powers/rights as they do. -- Felipe Aira 03:33, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I personally have no idea that Wikipedia allows editors to blank their own talk pages, but I believe such actions are meant to erase (or hide) the warnings of delinquent Wikipedians. Starczamora (talk) 07:00, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Requesting someone to review/cleanup/wikify this articles

Found these articles while doing assessment of Philippine-related articles.

This articles requires cleanup and rewriting:

• Bautista, Pangasinan
• Filamer Christian College

This article has POV violations and needs to be fixed:

• Filemon Lagman

Please find some references for this articles because there is a question for its notability:

• First Philippine Mount Everest Expedition

Kleomarlo (talk) 02:22, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I tried to clean the Filamer Christian College, but my efforts are not much of a help. :) Axxand SPEAK ACT 11:32, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

• Bautista, Pangasinan

I reverted this to its original stub form since there are no sources to back up the claim in the article. --58.69.149.127 (talk) 06:56, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

• Filemon Lagman

Ka Popoy's article now has references.--Lenticel ^(talk) 15:09, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to check the articles.Kleomarlo (talk) 05:48, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Apolinario Mabini

Hi folks. Based on style and the lack of inline citations, I am starting to think that the Apolinario Mabini is likely a direct copy from the Zaide book that is cited as the only reference for the article. Can anyone confirm this? Someone near a bookstore perhaps, or who owns the book? Please note that the first two article headings and the section on legacy are mine. I'm asking about the content within those subheadings po. --Alternativity (talk) 13:14, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

It looks like it came from a book. I think its best that you change the wordings in all paragraphs (just to be safe).--Lenticel ^(talk) 23:42, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Working on it, and beefing up the article. :-D Alternativity (talk) 15:15, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

persistent IP vandal

Hi, Please note that a very persistent IP vandal has been adding hoax material to articles on the Philippines' military, military history and ethnic groups. The IP addresses they've been using include:

• 118.93.25.93 (talk · contribs) (30 September)
• 202.37.68.125 (talk · contribs) (19 September)
• 118.92.225.165 (talk · contribs) (17 September)
• 118.92.131.99 (talk · contribs) (13 September)
• 202.37.68.109 (talk · contribs) (12 September)
• 118.92.176.95 (talk · contribs) (29 August)
• 118.92.139.74 (talk · contribs) (22 August)
• 202.37.68.120 (talk · contribs) (2 August)
• 202.37.68.85 (talk · contribs) (12 July)
• 202.37.68.124 (talk · contribs) (11 July)
• 118.93.84.47 (talk · contribs) (7 July)
• 118.92.160.13 (talk · contribs) (2 July - admitted posting incorrect info at: [14])
• 68.89.176.172 (talk · contribs) (30 June, used this IP again for vandalism in early July, blocked 6 July - posted abuse on talk page and block extended for another month, responded by stating that they will continuine vandalism once the block expires [15])
• 118.93.111.221 (talk · contribs) (29 June)
• 118.93.143.205 (talk · contribs) (26 June
• 202.37.68.110 (talk · contribs) (25 June)
• 118.92.107.236 (talk · contribs) (25 June)
• 118.92.229.177 (talk · contribs) (20-21 June)
• 202.37.68.69 (talk · contribs) (17 May and 19 July, probable)
• 118.92.109.90 (talk · contribs) (5-7 May)
• 203.118.180.86 (talk · contribs) (28-30 April)

Annoyingly, this vandal seems to be able to use a different IP address every 24 hours so it hasn't been possible to permanently block them so far. As such, anything added by IP addresses starting with 118.93., 118.92 or 202.37 should be considered highly dubious. Nick Dowling (talk) 23:17, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the warning. I think they are probably Internet cafe-hopping.--Lenticel ^(talk) 02:55, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

This is also a persistent headache at the Tagalog Wikipedia. --bluemask ^(talk) 02:57, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

FWIW, I ran the first 20 address above through http://www.ip-to-location.com/free.asp, with the following results:

IP Address	Country (Short)	Country (Full)	Region	City	ISP
118.93.25.93	NZ	NEW ZEALAND	AUCKLAND	AUCKLAND	THE INTERNET GROUP (IHUG) LTD
202.37.68.125	NZ	NEW ZEALAND	AUCKLAND	AUCKLAND	WORLDNET LTD
118.92.225.165	NZ	NEW ZEALAND	AUCKLAND	AUCKLAND	THE INTERNET GROUP (IHUG) LTD
118.92.131.99	NZ	NEW ZEALAND	AUCKLAND	AUCKLAND	THE INTERNET GROUP (IHUG) LTD
202.37.68.109	NZ	NEW ZEALAND	AUCKLAND	AUCKLAND	WORLDNET LTD
118.92.176.95	NZ	NEW ZEALAND	AUCKLAND	AUCKLAND	THE INTERNET GROUP (IHUG) LTD
118.92.139.74	NZ	NEW ZEALAND	AUCKLAND	AUCKLAND	THE INTERNET GROUP (IHUG) LTD
202.37.68.120	NZ	NEW ZEALAND	AUCKLAND	AUCKLAND	WORLDNET LTD
202.37.68.85	NZ	NEW ZEALAND	AUCKLAND	AUCKLAND	WORLDNET LTD
202.37.68.124	NZ	NEW ZEALAND	AUCKLAND	AUCKLAND	WORLDNET LTD
118.93.84.47	NZ	NEW ZEALAND	AUCKLAND	AUCKLAND	THE INTERNET GROUP (IHUG) LTD
118.92.160.13	NZ	NEW ZEALAND	AUCKLAND	AUCKLAND	THE INTERNET GROUP (IHUG) LTD
68.89.176.172	US	UNITED STATES	TEXAS	HOUSTON	AT&T INTERNET SERVICES
118.93.111.221	AU	AUSTRALIA	VICTORIA	MELBOURNE	THE INTERNET GROUP (IHUG) LTD
118.93.143.205	NZ	NEW ZEALAND	AUCKLAND	AUCKLAND	THE INTERNET GROUP (IHUG) LTD
202.37.68.110	NZ	NEW ZEALAND	AUCKLAND	AUCKLAND	WORLDNET LTD
118.92.107.236	NZ	NEW ZEALAND	AUCKLAND	AUCKLAND	THE INTERNET GROUP (IHUG) LTD
118.92.229.177	NZ	NEW ZEALAND	AUCKLAND	AUCKLAND	THE INTERNET GROUP (IHUG) LTD
202.37.68.69	NZ	NEW ZEALAND	AUCKLAND	AUCKLAND	WORLDNET LTD
118.92.109.90	NZ	NEW ZEALAND	AUCKLAND	AUCKLAND	THE INTERNET GROUP (IHUG) LTD

-- Boracay Bill (talk) 04:26, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Damn, Boracay Bill, that's a lot of IPs I wonder why PH articles are being targetted from Down Under and the Land of Middle-Earth. --Eaglestorm (talk) 08:01, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. For what it's worth, my guess is that this is a kid from a Filipino background who's living in NZ. They also like to add nonsense to articles on American rappers who are popular with teenagers. Nick Dowling (talk) 22:56, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Middle-Earth IP's, eh? Perhaps an abuse report to the NZ ISPs would be necessary... Blake Gripling (talk) 00:22, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Tagalog Wikipedia Drive September 2008

There is currently an ongoing drive for the continuous building of the Tagalog Wikipedia (see also Tagalog Wikipedia Main Page). Please kindly read and spread the community's invitation from here. Thank you. And more power to all the other Philippine-language Wikipedias. Let's help each other in advancing our wikipedias! - AnakngAraw (talk) 12:38, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Philippine-language Wikipedias Drive: flyers etcetera

A discussion was started at Tagalog Wikipedia's Wikipedia:Kapihan regarding the usefulness of producing and distributing printed materials to promote Philippine-language Wikipedias. The talk was inspired by the Wikipedyang Sinugbuanon and lead to a printable invitation page at Tagalog Wikipedia. However, as suggested by User:Lenticel, perhaps it is best that a discussion be also held here at WP:Tambay to gather the opinions and suggestions of other tambays about the issue, and for the benefit of all Philippine-language Wikipedias. Thoughts, ideas... any one? Perhaps, an "all-in-one" type of printed material, meaning: inexpensive, easily distributable manual, pamphlet, flyer, or business card, but includes/mentions/introduces all Philippine-language Wikipedias for our intended audiences. Also, perhaps User:Sky Harbor can also enlighten us more about the current status of WMPH, because he mentioned something about it at Tagalog Wikipedia. - AnakngAraw (talk) 06:43, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Jojo Alejar

Showbiz tambays, can you help expand this article which was recently closed as Keep? I've done some minor formatting fixes--Lenticel ^(talk) 00:27, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Reminder to those interested: Existing RfA at Tagalog Wikipedia

Good day everyone. Please take note that there's still an existing RfA at Tagalog Wikipedia. Regarding: User:Delfindakila (See his contributions from here; make sure to scroll down to see all of them). Link to nomination/voting page is right here. Thank you in advance for participating. - AnakngAraw (talk) 12:48, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Kapampangan Wikipedia

Hello again to all. One of our concerned Wikipedians, User:Leeheonjin informed us at Tagalog Wikipedia's Kapihan that Kapampangan Wikipedia also needs some attention. Interested Wikipedians can help in improving the site and its page contents. Thank you. - AnakngAraw (talk) 14:13, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I (and a lot of others) don't know Kapampangan. :-P --seav (talk) 07:15, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Eriberto V. Loreto and Eskrido articles

Please review the articles. They need to be wikified and cleaned. ThanksKleomarlo (talk) 12:50, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Loreto's article was stubbed to remove memorial like text and peacock terms.--Lenticel ^(talk) 13:07, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

w00t! That was a fast reply/action! :-)Kleomarlo (talk) 13:12, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

I posted a link in WP:Martial arts regarding Eskrido, I have no idea how to improve this article due to lack of RS. Perhaps the martial arts wikipedians can lend a hand.--Lenticel ^(talk) 01:01, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

ThanksKleomarlo (talk) 02:05, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

GA Sweeps Review for Chocolate Hills

Just a note to let the project know that an article tagged by this project, Chocolate Hills, has been placed on hold as a result of its GA Sweeps Review, which can be found here. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:07, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Philippine lakes

Hi! I created this navigation box template for Philippine lakes(Click here: Template:Lakes of the Philippines). If you have materials of one or more items on the box, fill free to fill in the red links. Thanks.(You can also make comments about the infobox or you may add a lake that is not found in the list)Kleomarlo (talk) 11:17, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Not sure but is/are there lake/s called Seven Lakes in the Philippines?--Lenticel ^(talk) 12:42, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

I think those are the seven lakes of San Pablo City. --seav (talk) 14:49, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Are we going to have an individual article for each of the seven lakes or should we lump them in a single article?Kleomarlo (talk) 00:56, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps it is better to lump these lakes into one article not because of notability issues but because that could pool the information into a concise Start/C class article.--Lenticel ^(talk) 01:24, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

New article: Khryss Adalia

I came across a news article saying that this director passed away last Monday and since there were news articles about him from several news media, I think he is notable but we didn't have an article about him. So I started a stub article. I think this is the first time ever I created a showbiz-related article; I'd appreciate it if someone can look it over and maybe add a bit about his directing career. (I doubt this could become DYK, but you'll never know.) :-P --seav (talk) 14:53, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually, it may make an interesting DYK item. Something along the lines of. DYK...that Philippine movie and television director Khryss Adalia died three (?) days before the end of his last directorial job, "Ako si Kim Sansoon?" A little morbid, but would be interesting...it's like Jonathan Larson dying on the very day of Rent's premiere =P --- Tito Pao (talk) 03:50, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Baguio Artists

Any suggestions for this article?Kleomarlo (talk) 04:03, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

prod it, looks like a list of artists who happen to live in Baguio. Had they been members of the same artist circle then this might be a viable article.--Lenticel ^(talk) 05:10, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Merge the list into Baguio City... put in a list of notable residents or something. TheCoffee (talk) 06:04, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Done. Merged the article to Baguio City under Art section.Kleomarlo (talk) 09:02, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

There IS actually a Baguio Artist's Circle. Will try to look into finding sources for an article on it. Alternativity (talk) 14:25, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Communications in the Philippines

I think someone should take action on this article. It is a very significant article for the Philippines and needs to be wikified or cleaned. Thanks Kleomarlo (talk) 08:18, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I browsed some of the Communications in X articles and it seems that they do follow the same format as this one.--Lenticel ^(talk) 13:31, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Ah okay...I'm not familiar with the format used in this articles but I think it should have a better lead.Kleomarlo (talk) 00:45, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Of interest

The blind-rich can see the dream match on Dec. 6 on DZBB radio LIVE.[16][17]. And HBO will show both boxers' biopic[18]. Now, please be invited to join this Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Contest. Cheers.--Florentino floro (talk) 09:45, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Luzon Empire vs Ancient Tondo

Folks, I've just been to the Pampanga#History entry and lo and behold, another reference to Luzon Empire. I am an amateur historian, creating articles or adding to them whenever I can based on what I find in orthodox textbooks and historical documentation by municipalities. I'm not an expert. But I DO know that the "Lower Song" Luzon Empire is a hoax, or is at least an unvalidated theory with no support whatsoever by orthodox Philippine historians. The Luzon Empire article has been marked as a possible hoax, and I am not so much bothered by it as I am by the perpetuation of the myths in small snippets of articles such as Pampanga#History. It pains me to see the degree to which the prehispanic Philippines wikipedia entries have been infiltrated by this myth, in violation of WP:NOR. I'm asking for help. Seriously, this problem constitutes a major attack on the accuracy of Prehispanic Philippine history as documented in wikipedia. The infiltration is so pervasive that I do not know how to proceed. Help. Alternativity (talk) 09:30, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I think it's time to move to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Present the facts there, ask for someone who knows how to read the text in the webpage in question (the .jp one right?). Hopefully we would know whether we should keep or delete it.--Lenticel ^(talk) 10:56, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm really much more concerned about the other articles po. The ones with Luzon Empire reference inserts. Kung ito lang, I'm not actually that worried, although yeah I think it ought to be acted upon na rin.Alternativity (talk) 12:39, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

We need to prove that the source is unreliable first. Only then could we revert on a massive scale without the community not seeing this as a strong arm tactic.--Lenticel ^(talk) 05:40, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh. I thought we'd managed to argue that rather decisively already. If that's the case, then I certainly agree with going to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard at this point. - —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alternativity (talk • contribs) Septembre 23, 2008

Reset Indent. I ended up raising the matter up at Wikipedia:No original research/noticeboard instead, as my issue with this article is mostly of OR. I suppose I could also raise the matter up in Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard but somehow I'm inclined to focus on what I feel are the biggest flaws of the article? Thanks. Alternativity (talk) 17:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Maybe you should give it a week in the NOR board first and let's see where we'll go from there.--Lenticel ^(talk) 23:43, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

In the meantime, may I (Alternativity (talk) 11:10, 1 October 2008 (UTC))request a review of the following articles (not necessarily complete) with various levels of reference to the supposed Luzon Empire:

• Manila
• Luzon
• Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo
• Kapampangan people
• History of the Philippines (Before 1521)
• Candaba, Pampanga
• Buddhism in the Philippines
• Lakandula
• Pampanga
• Emperor Bing of Song
• Japanese settlement in the Philippines

A week has passed, are there any progress with the post on the OR notice board?---Lenticel ^(talk) 01:02, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

There's been SOME response, but I got knocked off the net for a week before I could gather all the input much less take action on it. I'll start looking around for details now. Alternativity (talk) 14:23, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I think that the discussion has led to a point where some consensus regarding a merge has been reached. The material shared between Luzon Empire and Ancient Tondo has more or less been reduced to those matters under dispute as a potential hoax - areas of the Luzon Empire article which have been identified as containing a poor translation/unpublished synthesis at the No Original Research Noticeboard. May I seek Admin comment on this now? Thanks. Alternativity (talk) 03:38, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

I think that's enough info for you to move on and mass revert/remove the sources in the articles that you mentioned here. Should anyone question you, kindly redirect them to the discussion in the OR page.--Lenticel ^(talk) 12:17, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

That's it. Merge performed. Please do help me improve Ancient Tondo, and more wikipedians working on prehispanic Philippines are always welcome. -- Alternativity (talk) 09:28, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

luha mg buwaya

could you summarise this novel? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.95.204.0 (talk) 16:35, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

If you're asking this because you have a homework to prepare, I'm sorry to say you've found the wrong place. Better start reading the novel yourself and do your homework. Hope you'd understand. --- Tito Pao (talk) 23:43, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Are you referring to Luha ng Buwaya? Unfortunately, it still a stub or not comprehensive. So, are you requesting that the article should include a summary? --Jojit (talk) 09:01, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Alodia Gosiengfiao

Requesting attention to the editors regarding the notabiity of this girl. Thanks Kamuixtv (talk) 17:38, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

The Polish link is broken since it was deleted thrice at the Polish Wikipedia. — Felipe Aira 01:18, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

I remember the article on Alodia Gosiengfiao also being deleted on the Tagalog Wikipedia, although I know she's a notable cosplayer. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 11:43, 20 October 2008 (UTC)