Talk:UAAP Cheerdance Competition

message: I've commented out the results for all those teams or years that do not have sources. I've also reverted unexplained edits which appear to be vandalism. Rmcsamson (talk) 15:14, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edits 

message: We need to include this section. There has been notable events in UAAP Cheerdance history, such as the introduction of point-system scoring in 2008 and new panel of judges in 2009.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luiboowee (talk • contribs) 08:10, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  HISTORY OF UAAP CHEERDANCE 

message: I think a top 10 recorded scores table is meaningless because the criteria is not the same every year. More meaningful would be winning margins, because these represent the difference of two scores based on the same set of criteria. In particular, if the scoring in a given year is high, it would affect all schools.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.127.209.83 (talk) 05:00, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Top 10 recorded scores

message: I've noticed that there are two distinct sections concerning participating teams. One lists "participants" and another discusses "squads and their notable attributes." It might be better to simply combine both sections and include the discussion of "notable attributes" with the name of the participating squad, instead of having two rather redundant sections. If there are no objections, I'll make the changes within the next 48 hours. Rmcsamson (talk) 13:48, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Participating teams

message: I think this section should be deleted. It is a magnet for endless quarreling among the fans of the two squads. There is no way this can be kept neutral, because any information added here is by the nature of the section surely in favor of one over the other, which is an invitation for rebuttal.
This section has degenerated into another online forum where people debate endlessly. This does not belong in an encyclopedia. Let us leave the quarreling in the already numerous online forums where these same topics are discussed.
: Thanks Jerome for removing it. Please watch that it doesn't find its way back.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.127.223.71 (talk) 01:44, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Word Wars, Criticisms, and School Spirit.

message: The article says:
"In 2008, a banner bearing the inequality 100>397 was briefly flashed, which was "countered" by a larger tarpaulin showing the video game character PacMan eating the number 100, with the number 400 (probably pertaining to UST's upcoming quadricentennial) on PacMan's left."
This is wrong! The PacMan eating the number 100 was flashed FIRST. It was shown even BEFORE the event started - I first saw it about 12:20 pm, almost two hours before the program actually started on 2:10 pm. And it was a tarpaulin, meaning, it was prepared beforehand. It could not have been an answer to the UP banner.
On the contrary, the UP banner, reading 100>397, was constructed "on the fly" as a response to the well-prepared PacMan banner. It's message was that UST didn't know how to count - they are only 397 year old, not 400 as their PacMan banner claims, and that the 100 years of UP's existence is greater than the 397 years of UST's. The UP banner was briefly flashed just a few minutes before the start of the program.
In other words, the UP banner is written to counter the UST banner, and not the other way around!
:Since my rants in the discussion did nothing to correct the error, then I took it upon myself and edited the page myself.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.127.220.86 (talk) 01:26, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  400 (<) 100 

message: The section "Chronology of Events" under "UP - UST rivalry" says: "UP Pep Squad won back the title in 2007[8] and defended it in 2008 with a record-breaking 8.03% points gap."
However the scores shown in the "Competition results" table showed UP winning by only 0.01 points, 93.30 - 93.29.
The Philippine Star article on the cheerdance results had the following scores, vastly different from the one in this article:
UP - 93.3 pts
UST - 85.3 pts
FEU - 83.9 pts
Source:
http://72.14.235.104/search?hl=tl&q=cache%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.philstar.com%2Findex.php%3FSports%26p%3D49%26type%3D2%26sec%3D30%26aid%3D20080907129&btnG=Hanapin+sa+Google&meta=
So what's the real score? My guess is the "Competition results" table is wrong, because the other two sources agree.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.127.223.69 (talk) 10:21, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok the table is now correct. Thanks to whoever fixed it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.127.218.30 (talk) 00:41, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's the real gap between UP and UST in 2008? 

message: I think the top 3 for the either 2000 or 2001 competitions are
UP, UE, and UST, in that order.
The other year it is: UP, UST, AdU.
May we know which year is which? And we should change the fdetails here.
----------
i dont recall Ateneo taking 3rd in 2000. that performance sucked. and i'm from Ateneo.
: Was that their cowboy/cowgirl getup? --Howard the Duck
Obviously this page doesn't cite references so I dunno who made this up. But I think the last 4 years are correct. --Howard the Duck 12:04, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  2000 or 2001 Competitions? 

message: Anyone have an idea on how to incorporate the YJ into this? --Howard the Duck 14:54, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  UST YJ 

message: This is inconsistent with the scores and ranking in UAAP Season 70 page.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.240.121.48 (talk) 10:40, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  2007 Result 

message: i think the UAAP Cheerdance Competition started in 1994 and UST has won it's 3-peat from 1994 to 1996, FEU won in either 1997 or 1998, and then there was no competition for a year because it was cancelled, allegedly after a member of the UP Pep Squad was injured during practice and went into a coma.
Here is an article from The Varsitarian that partly supports this:
‘Gawi targets ‘four-peat’
onyxguapo 2:21, 20 September 2007
* i agree, however, there are other articles in the web (inquirer, FEU Cheering Squad in wiki) that supports consistency in info in this page. The 1994 establishment MIGHT be derived from season 57 or academic year 1994-1995. The UAAP Cheerdance then MIGHT be held January-March of 1995. I am not sure but i've read articles that the UAAP Cheerdance Competition has started in 1995. However though, there were some claims in PinoyExchange that there was a year where UAAP CDC was not held. Luiboowee 03:09, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  1994 or 1995? 

message: "The highest and lowest scores garnered by each team are omitted and the remaining scores are averaged. This rule was removed in 2005 (causing the UP Pep Squad to fall to 1st Runner-Up) but restored the following year."
that part was written in favor of UP, has no basis and is purely a hearsay.
a separate section entitled something like "Controversies" should be written separately if they want to discuss this. but i personally think even that would be irrelevant to this article.
deleted by onyxguapo 09:01, 23 September 2007
Since Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia, "some people" had the opportunity to take advantage of this. As a physical manifestation of this taking advantage or whatever term is appropriate, this Wikipedia article is, evidently, one-sided. Instead of having a balanced, objective (without any UNDERSTATEMENTS) format, this has been depicting UST as the star of the limelight. And all other rivals are fallaciously depicted as "cheaters". I recommend removing this entry or revising it, to avoid the spread of ignorance and misinformation which may cause detrimental effects to the already being misled Filipinos.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.106.205.40 (talk) 06:07, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias in Trivia Section 

message: I have removed the note that UST cheated in 2005 in the "Consecutive Wins" section. This is a highly controversial claim and must, at the minimum, cite a reputable source in order to keep its wording ("though 2005 was a cheat"). It might be reworded to "although there were claims of cheating in 2005" but there must be citations. Full Disclosure: I am a UP graduate and currently a graduate student of UP. - Ianalis 16:32, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Claim that UST cheated in 2005 

message: I don't know who keeps on editing the Average Ranking, trying to insist that UST placed 3rd place in 2001.
As clearly stated there, Unless there are recorded rankings prior 2002, the avarage ranking should be based from 2002 to most recent.
onyxguapo 7:07, 30 September 2007
::In that case why include the information before 2002 at all? UST is clearly 3rd in 2001, and the table is misleading. I myself saw the table first, and thought that UST never placed third. The title only says "Average ranking (2002 to present)" but doesn't say that the high and low is also 2002 to present. I was surprised at the other table showing UST got 3rd in 2001. If you insist on placing 2nd, then the table should be reorganized to make it clear what it contains. Otherwise, I say it is definitely misleading.
::: Thanks to whoever removed that table. It didn't serve any purpose after all.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.127.218.30 (talk) 23:49, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: And you think your political ramblings are important? Get a life. We respect your priorities in life. Learn to respect others too.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.127.218.30 (talk) 15:53, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

text: These things need to be discussed to ensure that the article has a NPOV and passes the wiki's criteria. OTOH it is your post that is irrelevant.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.127.218.30 (talk) 23:53, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Average Ranking 

message: Unless no one objects I'll be removing the NPOV notice by Thursday. --Howard the Duck 12:43, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been removed. If you people still find anything POV-ish I suggest editing it yourself rather than re-adding . --Howard the Duck 16:31, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality 

message: Good day. May I propose for a change of the article name? It should be 'UAAP Cheering Competition' rather than 'UAAP Cheerdance Competition'. I believe that we all agree that it has a significant difference. If this proposal is not possible, then a large-scale editing is in order because some articles contain information that involves either only the 'Cheerdance competititon' or the 'Cheering Competition. Please enlighten me on this matter if anyone finds it a little complicated. Many thanks. Cheers!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.69.55.46 (talk) 12:13, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe the event is officially called the "Cheerdance Competition," not the "Cheering Competition." Rmcsamson (talk) 16:19, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Regardless, the event is now called the "Cheerdance Competition." Hence, the present title is accurate, whereas changing it to "cheering competition" is misleading, especially since the competition doesn't really focus on cheering but on cheerdancing.Rmcsamson (talk) 03:29, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

text: What point? You're saying 1995-1997 emphasized "cheering," whereas in 1998 onwards, the competition was called the "cheerdance" competition. Two things have to be made clear: There seems to be no substantiation as to what was emphasized in any of the periods that you wish to distinguish, which means making an unproven distinction the basis for any deletion will make that deletion problematic, if not vandalism. The only thing which is clear is that there was a change of name for the event, along with the possible natural development of the craft. So again, what point? Rmcsamson (talk) 07:18, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

text: That retort is illogical. Again, what point? Rmcsamson (talk) 09:01, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Apparently. And again, your retort is illogical. So again, what point? Rmcsamson (talk) 04:04, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Illogical. Again, your point, if any? Rmcsamson (talk) 04:17, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

text: Illogical. You claim to have a point. You have failed to substantiate your point. You have failed to satisfy the burden on your part. Again, your point, if any? Rmcsamson (talk) 04:23, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

text: o have a point. You have failed to substantiate your point. You have failed to satisfy the burden on your part. Again, your point, if any? If none, say so. Rmcsamson (talk) 04:26, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing the article name to 'UAAP Cheering Competition' 

message: The image :Image:UE Red Warriors logo.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
The following images also have this problem:
*:File:University of the East Official Seal.jpg
*:File:USTLogo.jpg
*:File:UST Growling Tigers logo.jpg
*:File:National University Philippines logo.png
*:File:NU Bulldogs logo.png
*:File:FEUSealNew.png
*:File:FEU Tamaraws logo.png
*:File:DLSU-Manila Seal.png
*:File:DLSGreenArchers.png
*:File:AteneoBlueEagle.jpg
*:File:Adulogo.jpg
*:File:AdamsonFalcons.jpg
*:File:ATENEO-SEAL.png
*:Image:University of the East Official Seal.jpg
*:Image:Unibersidad ng Pilipinas.png
*:Image:Uaap logo.gif
*:Image:USTLogo.jpg
*:      Image:UST Growling Tigers logo.jpg
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --23:23, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:UE Red Warriors logo.png

message: I believe that the to 10 record scores table should be removed. There should also be a new section for the Group Stunt competition.
The article/s seem to be redundant as some always states the 8-time victory of UST SDT. UP and UST rivalry section is also meaningless as to new students now wouldn't get what it's all about.(it lacks information that's why it becomes useless)   
Keljer (talk) 09:29, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Any edit to a protected page must have consensus before being done. There's a suggestion at the section just immediately above this one concerning your first request. As for the second request, that's outside the scope of the edit protected template as that's not as simple as removing sections, although I'd quickly oppose such removals and instead make sure present-day students "get it" by rewriting it. –HTD 13:21, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Keljer, 18 September 2011 

message: I've twice removed it, per WP:TRIVIA and WP:V. Continued edit-warring, especially to insert content that is against guideline and policy, will cause this page to become locked again (and/or accounts lose their edit privileges altogether). DMacks (talk) 13:48, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I've gone ahead and semiprotected the article. DMacks (talk) 13:18, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Trivia" section 

message: Can this article be locked down so that butthurt university babies don't bring their personal school wars here?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.54.32.175 (talk) 12:29, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lock-Down Request