Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 
Shortcuts
This is the discussion page of Tambayan Philippines, where Filipino contributors and contributors to Philippine-related articles discuss general matters regarding the development of Philippine-related articles as well as broad topics on the Philippines with respect to Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects. Likewise, this talk page also serves as the regional notice board for Wikipedia concerns regarding the Philippines, enabling other contributors to request input from Filipino Wikipedians.
Start new topic


September De-stubbing drive

[edit]

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

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

"Largest" municipality

[edit]

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

FWIW, most populous settlement is a standard fixture in similar lists in other countries. I'd rather have that than say three columns on how many LGUs are there. Howard the Duck (talk) 02:12, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, but "largest" in the Philippines most commonly refers to land area, not population. It would likely confuse some readers. HueMan1 (talk) 02:19, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mean to spoon-feed information to our readers, but maybe a watered-down version like "most populated" would work best for us, given that MOS:ENGVAR applies. HueMan1 (talk) 02:27, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The table is already too large and many entries will just be the capital city again. The information is already available on the province articles where it makes more sense, Misamis Occidental#Administrative divisions and so on. CMD (talk) 03:44, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Every column on the province list is on every province's article.
Just like I said, I'd rather replace the three columns of how many LGUs are there with this column. If the capital and most populated settlement is the same, merge the cells. Howard the Duck (talk) 10:57, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On another note, these edits by user in question also raise doubts on my part over their WP:CIR, see [1] and [2]. Borgenland (talk) 15:26, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those are edits where s/he added a section of "Notable people" to provincial articles. This is a content dispute, and I fail to see how WP:CIR applies; WP:IDHT maybe, but not WP:CIR... it's not as if s/he screwed up in the edits and made syntax errors. Howard the Duck (talk) 00:03, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There were, particularly errors in spelling, content that looked either copyvio or soapbox, naming conventions in Philippine cities and most glaringly their own refusal in Albay to abide by the rules they inserted against recklessly adding names without articles. Borgenland (talk) 00:50, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, content dispute. Not everyone knows our naming conventions; we still have discussions somewhere on that. There were also pipelinks that I would not have wanted, but not enough for WP:CIR. I was looking around in articles such as Kentucky and Bali and there were also no sections about famous residents. I LOLed at not following their own rules they imposed. Howard the Duck (talk) 00:59, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suffix and prefix revisited

[edit]

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

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

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

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

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

[edit]

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

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

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

These are the files that have to be changed:

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

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

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

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

[edit]

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

MPSPC

[edit]

Will be renaming the Mountain Province State Polytechnic College to MP State University in a short while per [3]. Also notifying that the history is a probable copy paste tho I cannot check on Earwig because it is down. Borgenland (talk) 15:57, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"born-again" for Evangelical Protestant

[edit]

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

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

Wide-ranging AFD in Philippine venue events

[edit]

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

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

Serious issues in Bicol

[edit]

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

Largest barangay

[edit]

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

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

Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines/Requests

[edit]

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

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

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

File overwrites

[edit]

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

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

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

Tampering on Joy Bernos

[edit]

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

Peer review for Pasacao, Camarines

[edit]

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

I suggest you start with WP:BROCHURE. A common problem in Philippine geography articles is that a lot of them seem to be copypasted from leaflets at the local tourism office. Borgenland (talk) 17:43, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also to consider: WP:NOTGUIDE. Geographic articles are supposed to be written in encyclopedic tone, not promotional tone. Promotional content is best migrated to Wikivoyage (i.e., wikivoyage:en:Pasacao). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 21:28, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Tambayan_Philippines&oldid=1244567786"