Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Archive 5

message: Can an admin move it back to List of programs broadcast by the Associated Broadcasting Company? I made a big boo-boo. Also, delete the very long name as a redirect. --Howard the Duck 09:53, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not an admin but I moved back to the correct name. Now we need an admin to delete the incorrect redirect. --bluemask (talk) 10:53, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks a lot. --Howard the Duck 13:00, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem. :) Coffee 13:14, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

text: BTW, the Associated Broadcasting Company-rleated articles aren't following naming conventions. I've listed them at WP:RM. --Howard the Duck 08:39, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Emergency: [[List of programs broadcast by the List of programs broadcast by Associated Broadcasting Company]] 

message: I am involved in a dispute with Tobias Conradi.  He is insisting on making Cebu, Pangasinan, and Iloilo disambiguation pages instead of Cebu (disambiguation), Pangasinan (disambiguation), and Iloilo (disambiguation). He wants to move the provincial pages to the namespaces with (provinces) in them when there is clearly no need to do so. How should we go about doing this?  Should we put this up for a vote in each of the talk pages?  I've already set up guidelines in Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Philippine-related articles)#Provinces, but he is apparently just ignoring me and accusing me of abusing my admin powers. He even went to my old RfA and put details of my abuses there. Ay, buhay. --Chris S. 20:53, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is already something called Primary topic disambiguation. If the word is predominantly used for one of several things, then that thing can use the unqualified article name with a link to the disambiguation page at the top. This is similar to Rome. So as long as we can show that the names are used principally for the provinces then Wikipedia guidelines back this position. You can also check to see what the incoming links are to see what fraction of them refers to the province. --Polaron | Talk 21:37, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

text: This is not the first time. See Talk:Provinces of the Philippines#Ambiguous Provincial Names. His opinion is that the provinces are not that important or significant enough to warrant the "primary topic disambiguation" honor. Some province names do need to have the base name as a dab page especially for international usage (e.g., Antique, Aurora, Kalinga, Laguna, La Union), but for province names where all the references so far point to Philippine-related topics and all those topics are primarily related to the province (e.g., Aklan, Pangasinan, Biliran, Iloilo, Cebu, etc.) I personally think these provinces should have the "primary topic disambiguation" honor. Possible exceptions are Samar, Leyte, and Cotabato; with the first two, you equally use the name to refer to both the province and the island, while the latter just has too many distinct references. Davao is the prime example of a dab page for primarily PH-related topics. I think we should put all provinces to a consensus vote. BTW, I really hate the "Iloilo Province" name, I much prefer "Iloilo (province)" if dabbing is the result. --seav 22:11, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Argeed. If a great majority of the incoming links are about the province then that should be enough to qualify primary topic disambiguation. Also, I oppose appending "province" to the province name unless it is part of the name. The parentheses method is better because we can use the pipe trick when writing articles. --Polaron | Talk 23:47, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And so far, that applies only to Mountain Province. But thaaaaaaaank you for the pipe trick!  That's awesome! --Chris S. 00:02, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I wouldn't be quick to rely on the number of incoming links as a gauge on the importance of an article. Provinces link to each other all the time, thanks to the lateral links at the bottom. Furthermore, cities and municipalities link to their mother provinces as well. (Locator maps too.) That provides a good number of links already. You should provide a much more better case for arguing for importance. See the aforementioned Talk:Provinces of the Philippines#Ambiguous Provincial Names for some discussion. --seav 00:31, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh, ok, I see that I'm not alone. That's the reason why I made the MoS for Philippine related articles, because of all these non-standard ways of doing things Now, where should we hold the vote?  On each individual countries' pages or somewhere else? Or even here at Tambayan? He's being very ridiculous, with the way he's acting. He's looking into ways I abuse my admin position - asking other people - rather than working with me. --Chris S. 22:48, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He should assume good faith, anyway, I agree that the most used entry can be, and should be the article on the base name. Try talkin it through with him. To fix the problem, let's just finish the MoS first, and then we can apply the style in the articles.  :) --Noypi380 23:38, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, we have to get back to making the MoS Wikipedia policy.  I'm going to have to figure out a way of getting that off the ground. --Chris S. 00:02, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: BTW Chris, you didn't "abuse" any power. :O When one wants to move an article to a occupied link with no content you can always, from wiki, ask an Administrator to have it deleted. :) Tobias probably didn't check Help:Moving a page, when he accused you of abuse. No worries. Cheers. There's a pipe trick? Help:Pipe trick. I shuda found that out dati pa! haha :) --Noypi380 00:11, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Lets make the Philippine-related MOS official by having a dicussion at the talk page. --Howard the Duck 04:01, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I guess you're right.  I just found this link: Wikipedia:How to create policy. I'll read up on this and see how we can make it officialy policy. --Chris S. 04:24, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dispute with Tobias Conradi 

message: Who's interested in having one? It'd be nice to put faces to the contributors. =) --seav 23:09, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Me. Where and when. Some of us are students ya know. Somewhere convenient and sometime convenient cguro. --Justox dizaola 11:18, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I feel interested myself, although convenience is also of the essence.  --Sky Harbor 12:35, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's why we talk about the details here, if people are interested. We should maximize the convenience for everyone involved. It should most probably be on a weekend in a place very accessible to public and private transport. --seav 07:31, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I would be interested in a meet-up, but I'm not currently anywhere near Manila. :/ Speaking of matching faces to contributors.. seav, I think I remember finding you a long time ago on Friendster, though I can't remember how. :p Coffee 13:14, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Stalker! Joke, hehehe. --seav 06:40, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Lapit lapit ng Tokyo kung iku-kompara mo sa American Samoa :D --Weekeejames 19:55, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

text:  Dewdz, i propose na ganapin ito sa Robinsons Ermita or SM Manila. It will be very accessible to the LRT. Gamitin natin ang SRTS. --Justox dizaola 03:00, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was actually thinking either Ayala Center or Ortigas Center or Araneta Center. accessible to MRT, LRT-2, and are important transportation hubs. --seav 14:10, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The question now is where are we going to meet in the first place?  I'm fine where we're going to meet in general, but we also need somewhere specific.  Although as a Makati resident, Ayala is nice (lol).  --Sky Harbor 14:39, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Talo kita. Stateside kasi ako. :-D --Chris S. 06:41, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ok ako sa LRT or MRT vicinities, tutal taga aparri lang naman ako =p  †Bloodpack†   argh!  00:04, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Talaga? Taga-Tuguegarao ang lolo ng lolo ko. --Chris S. 00:51, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: errr...joke lang po =p   †Bloodpack†   argh!  02:34, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Uy, please tell me if the meet is pushing through. I'll go if the venue is anywhere near an LTR or MRT station. Perhaps we could set an agenda aside from just getting to know each other... like perhaps planning out how we could get more Filipino editors... --Nino Gonzales 02:34, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll try setting up a coordination page for meetups.  Getting an agenda in on what we plan to do would be nice too, although how can we promote the Wikipedia (especially those in Philippine languages) effectively?  --Sky Harbor 13:36, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I talked to a friend who teaches in UA&P about what this guy (User:Fuzheado), who teaches in Hong Kong, is doing--teaching his student how to do research by improving Wikipedia articles. He got very excited. Imagine if we could get just a handful of teachers--that would already be thousands of new Filipino wikipedians.--Nino Gonzales 04:47, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Manila Wikipedians Meet-up 

message: At the Tagalog Wikipedia, :tl:User:Qahaluluhah contributed two interesting articles :tl:The Ministry In The Church Of The MessiYàh and :tl:Pangalan, clearly POV. Any advice on how to proceed? --bluemask (talk) 15:08, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Delete. Not encyclopedic. --seav 06:43, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Delete the first, (really) rewrite the second.  An article on what a name is would be notable (but rewritten to match the content), but an article on a not-so-notable (possibly Christian) sect is not.  --Sky Harbor 12:41, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advice for a tl: admin 

message: I seem to be getting in disputes with non-Filipinos over Filipino topics lately. Bakit kaya? ;-) Some of you might remember that I put up :Category:Filipino people by ethnic or national origin and its 18 categories up for deletion. These categories were created by User:Lagalag, and frankly it's ridiculous.  He categorized people like Visayan murderer Paco Larrañaga as a Basque Filipino and Spanish Filipino probably because of his last name; NEVERMIND the fact that this murderer said he was Basque or Spanish or that it even mattered at all. He did the same thing with actor John Prats making him a Catalan & Spanish Filipino because of his last name.  Former President Marcos & Rizal were put under Japanese-Filipinos even if the Japanese part of them is unnotable (my g-g-g-g-g-great-grandfather was Swiss, and it be ridiculous for me to say I am a Swiss Filipino). You get the idea.
Anyway, the CfD failed to get consensus. But the fact still remained that many of these people are still miscategorized.  So I removed the categories.  Now, User:Hmains is very unhappy because he claims I subverted the process. So now he's going back and reverting everything I did (oodles of articles).  Any idea on how to handle this?  --Chris S. 21:15, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: May I assume that these non-Filipinos are actually Filipinos pretending not to be? hehe :) Anyway, I get the idea, notability is not only for the text in the article, but also for its categorization. Lets try to make consensus again. Kulang na lang may Marsian-Filipino cat, lol.:) --Noypi380 02:21, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No sources =no categories. That's the best solution hehehe. --Howard the Duck 08:36, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

text:  Yea. Remove the categories. My grandparents were venetian mrchants na naligaw sa ilocos kaya dun nagstay, but that does not make me italian-filipino, right? ^_^  --Justox dizaola 12:20, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Unless the ancestry of celebrities makes it (or them) notable, what's the point of categorizing them as such?  I may be of four ethnicities (Filipino, Chinese, Spanish and French), but would I be willing to classify myself as one or the other?  It seems irrelevant unless the ethnicity issue makes it relevant.  --Sky Harbor 12:39, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another dispute 

message: I'm hoping an admin's magical powers may do these:
*Regional Science High School (RSHS) -> Regional Science High School
*Programs broadcast by ABC -> List of programs broadcast by the Associated Broadcasting Company
Thanks. --Howard the Duck 18:19, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --Chris S. 20:45, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yay --Howard the Duck 06:03, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

text: One more: Talk:Programs broadcast by ABC -> Talk:List of programs broadcast by the Associated Broadcasting Company and deleted Talk:Programs broadcast by ABC. --Howard the Duck 07:05, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  But what do you mean "deleted?"  Did you mean delete?  Right now it's a redirect to the page you wanted me to move it to. --Chris S. 07:55, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: (The extra "d" made all the difference lol). What I meant was to delete the Talk:Programs broadcast by ABC after it was moved. --Howard the Duck 08:02, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page moving 

message: So today he hit Sarangani, Cotabato, and Quirino - all of which have been reverted (eh, parang bagyo sa 'Pinas ang pinag-uusapan ko! hehe).  He is not happy that Jondel protected Cebu and Pangasinan and so he's been calling it admin abuse. Another admin warned him for acting the way he his.  Coffee & seav have also been helpful. In any case, since we as Tambayan members and Filipino wikipedians have a consensus on how these pages should be handled, I am asking you all to help out in making sure the province articles stay that way; I or another editor may end up violating 3rr or something.  I've tried reasoning with him, and that doesn't seem to work. He seems to believe there's no consensus. In any case, just an update. --Chris S. 22:02, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, personally, I think Cotabato should be a disambiguation page, like Davao and Zamboanga. Unlike Cebu and Cebu City, Cotabato City and Cotabato province are distinct and unrelated entities. But that's just me. --seav 02:16, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, I see your point and pardon if I mistakenly included you in the consensus.  In any case, I see it this way, and let me know what you think.  Currently, there are no provinces named Zamboanga and Davao. Hence, there is nothing currently notable that would justify it having its own namespace.  Because of this, it would make sense for Zamboanga and Davao to be disambig. pages. On the other hand, there is a province called Cotabato. A province is more notable than a city, is it not?  So that's why I think Cotabato province deserves its own namespace and also because Cotabato City already has its own suffix (City). That's the rationale I am going on. However, if my opinion does not reflect the consensus of others here, then by all means I'll revert Cotabato to Cotabato (province). --Chris S. 05:17, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For me, this pages should redirect to dab pages: Cotabato, Quezon and Rizal. --Howard the Duck 05:20, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And Quirino? I am inclined to agree with you on Quezon because of Quezon City and the fact that it seems that people (including myself) tend to call it "Quezon province," but wouldn't a disambiguation statement suffice (the For other meanings, blah blah blah thing)? --Chris S. 05:29, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Quirino should remain at Quirino. Cebu (province) should be at Cebu, Iloilo (province) to Iloilo, etc. The province should be the primary topic disambiguation. Then a dab note at the top. It's not that hard to click, especially, if its at the top. --Howard the Duck 06:02, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I think Quezon and Rizal shouldn't be dab pages but rather be the province pages. You never refer to the city as simply "Quezon" and I think it's well established that when you simply say "Rizal" as a location, it means the province. The only instance when you refer to the people with simply "Quezon" or "Rizal" is when it is clear from the context that you are referring to a person. Same with Quirino. --seav 14:05, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, IMO, Cotabato City is actually more notable than Cotabato province, being an important port city and the administrative capital for both ARMM and SOCCSKSARGEN regions. In any case, when people simply say "I'm going to Cotabato." Does that primarily mean the province? Or the city? Anyway, my opinion is not set in stone and I'm perfectly okay with having a dab notice at the top of the province article. --seav 14:05, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

text: If the current principal usage of these names are for the province then the province articles should be at the unqualified names. --Polaron | Talk 22:05, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I guess, Cotabato/City could follow the Washington/D.C. example. Just make sure there are plenty dab notices everywhere. =) --seav 03:53, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tobias Conradi redux 

message: To the mapmakers out here.  I have finally gotten around to giving Bikol languages an overhaul.  To improve the article and to reduce the confusion by all the names of places where certain Bikol dialects are spoken, the article needs a dialect map. 
I have taken the liberty of making this easier on the potential mapmaker. I need a very large map that encompasses the whole Bicol Region.  Such as the one I edited and uploaded here.  This has the color scheme I am aiming for.  I patterned it after the map at Provinces of the Philippines where one color represents a region, but shades of a color indicate the province.  As an example, the largest dialect group, Northern Bikol, is going to be in red.  Bikol Daet, is going to have its own shade. Then Bikol Naga will have another. And then Bikol Legazpi, which extends all the way from Albay to Sorsogon will have another. The same principle works for the others.
Another version of this map, by linguist Jason Lobel, is available here. And then here's a link to his classifications if there are any doubts.  At the very least, I'd like the dialect names next to each color, and if possible city (and maybe municipality) names. I don't know how feasible that would be. Diyos Mabalos / Maraming Salamat in advance. --Chris S. 01:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think i could make it. Coffee 21:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Woohoo. Thanks! You rawk. :-D --Chris S. 05:35, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map request 

message: I've nominated History of the Philippines at FAC (see entry) and it would be much appreciated if you can give your input and help bring it to FA status. Concerns brought up so far have been mostly about references. And, umm... I gotta ask, please don't vote support just because it's a Philippine-related article. :p I'd feel better about it if it reached FA status on its own merits. :) --Coffee 04:50, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Congratulations on the FA. I'm adding it to my watchlist because FAs tend to get degraded over time (I lost 2 FAs that way, but your work has just bumped up my counter as well!). --Ancheta Wis 03:15, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yehey, my first Featured Article! I've nominated it to be featured on the main page. The image I put on there is just the flag of the Philippines, but if anyone has any better ideas for the image please go ahead and change it... :p --Coffee 03:55, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of the Philippines FAC 

message: FYI: On the Dutch Wikipedia, I have just completed the writing of the last municipality. I guess it is the first wikipedia (after the English Wikipedia) to complete all 1501 municipalities. Magalhães 08:53, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Keep up the good work!--Jondel 12:49, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Very nice. :) Coffee 21:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philippine municipalities 

message: As part of giving Philippine National Railways an overhaul (albeit with a lack of resources) towards FA status, the last of the Strong Republic Transit System articles to probably get this status, I'm looking for potential mapmakers who can be kind enough to produce a map of the Philippine railway network (excluding the LRT and MRT) for the PNR article.  So far, this would only cover the Manila-Legazpi line, as well as the train services up north from Manila.  As of the moment, this is the only map I could find with the rail lines: http://www.gov.ph/aboutphil/images/bigmap.gif, which is on the Philippine government portal, as well as (probably) the map of Manila on its article.  Since PNR only operates rail services on Luzon (it doesn't operate the Panay Railway), a zoom-in would be nice.
The color scheme for the map of the Pan-Philippine Highway, for example, is adequate.  Since I don't know which line would be Northrail or Southrail, the respective green and orange designations per SRTS guidelines can't work.  But, then again, we might never know which line's which (the PNR website is down for some reason).
Thanks a bunch!  --Sky Harbor 13:52, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rail map

message: Can we rename Araw ng Kalayaan? If it has an English equivalent, it must be moved. :) --Noypi380 11:40, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not Independence Day (Philippines)? (I dunno if other independence days are in their native languages.) --Howard the Duck 11:56, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  A lot of other independence day articles are named after their native equivalent, like Yom Ha'atzmaut (Israel), Gwangbokjeol (South Korea), Hari Merdeka (Malaysia) and Yaum e Azadi (Pakistan) to name a few. -- Mithril Cloud 12:52, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay. :) --Noypi380 00:18, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

text: But since English is co-official in the Philippines and since this is an English wikipedia, maybe the English name should take precedence. --Chris S. 01:22, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: True. I actually got the idea from Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use_English). So should it be moved? --Noypi380 10:47, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with moving it. Coffee 05:13, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Moved. :) --Noypi380 01:56, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rename

message: Looks like we now have a new province (80th so far): the ARMM Regional Assembly made the province of Shariff Kabungsuwan out of the first district of Maguindanao, invoking powers granted to it under RA 6734, I think.  There's an article on it in the Philippine Star, and is endorsed by Zaldy Ampatuan, although it still has to undergo the plebiscite process.  --Sky Harbor 14:29, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, I can't find much other info about this Shariff Kabungsuwan. I guess we'll wait for the plebiscite before updating all the articles. Coffee 05:13, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure, but Kabungsuwan is a myth rather than a historical character? And now a province, so a couple of articles would be made right there. :) --Noypi380 04:39, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Unless the voters approve this, the province is still not in existence. --Howard the Duck 04:43, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  80th province 

message: Thought I may give you guys a heads up. --Howard the Duck 01:54, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spamming in the [[Philippines]] article 

message: Come and join the fun! --Howard the Duck 12:53, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, I thought this is what Tambayan is for. --Chris S. 14:39, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: On second thought, now I get it why you are guys aren't excited... for it will be divide efforts. Why don't we merge the Wikiproject with the tambayan? --Howard the Duck 11:18, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I think both of these pages serve the same purpose (to improve Philippine-related articles), especially now that the project page of Tambayan has been expanded. Right now the only thing I see on that page that isn't covered on other pages is the "to do list".. perhaps the "Article requests" section of Tambayan could be turned into a "to do" section? And article requests could be a subsection of it. Coffee 11:15, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

text: It is about time that Philippines gets its own Wikiproject underway. --Siva1979Talk to me 18:10, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why don't we upgrade the Tambayan page into a Wikiproject? That way, we can post talk page notices, COTWs, etc. --Howard the Duck 12:21, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Lets just upgrade this page. --Howard the Duck 09:41, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I redirected it to the Tambayan user page, sadly. - Emir214 07:19, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  What's the difference between a RWNB and a a WikiProject? Do WikiProjects have more "perks"? If they do, lets upgrade Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines into Wikipedia:WikiProject Philippines. --Howard the Duck 07:26, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are there really any perks with upgrading this to WikiProject status?  It seems that as of the moment the majority thinks that the current setup is best, since we can't wrest commitment from all members of a designated WikiProject.  This is more of a compromise, or better, a laid-back approach to a WikiProject, in my opinion.  --Sky Harbor 12:31, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps we can edit  so that it resembles ? --Howard the Duck 02:45, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you mean Football? You know what, let us hust have a voting to see which will be better, a WikiProject or the Tambayan to end this discussion. - Emir214 03:36, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What I meant was posting talk page notices ("This article is part of WikiProject Football"]]. For me, that's the basic difference between the RNWB and a WikiProject. --Howard the Duck 03:47, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Like I said, let us just have a voting to see which will be better, a WikiProject or the Tambayan to end this discussion. - Emir214 07:39, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think voting's necessary, everyone seems to be happy here.  That's consensus there, no? --Chris S. 07:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Not to mention that Voting is evil. --Howard the Duck 10:45, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Lets not divide our efforts here. There should only be one central place for Filipino Wikipedians to meet up and improve articles. Like what I've said before, I'm open to the idea of "upgrading" the  Tambayan into a WikiProject. --Howard the Duck 10:45, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, it's useless. No need to reinvent the wheel. --Chris S. 14:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Why the animosity? Would the WikiProject and the Tambayan be in competition with each other? Would it be redundant? Isn't this a bit stupid?  There is a Tambayan already, I dunno why the efforts should be split - and two competing projects at that! This is the epitome of the Filipino's utak talangka (crab mentality), isn't it? I'd say we merge the efforts into one page, I don't care which would be retained, but there should only be ONE Philippine project. --Howard the Duck 11:44, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have to disagree. Today, Tambayan is divided into two, the main Tambayan and the breakaway group WikiProject. If no one will participate fine! There are many other Filipinos to back me up in this one! TAPOS ANG KUWENTO!!!! - Emir214 12:43, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry, but with an attitude like that I think your WikiProject is doomed to fail.  You have very misguided misconceptions of what collaborating with other editors is about. Or perhaps in general. I see that you're 12 years old, we are not out to get you or anything. We just want to write good articles. ;-) --Chris S. 12:50, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Ok, have fun. I didn't mean to offend you, I'm just saying what I think. There is no need for a Wikiproject when one already exists. Tambayan is a Wikiproject in everything but name only, imho. --Chris S. 12:42, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just two questions, why is this WikiProject (Tambayan) not in the List of WikiProjects and why the other WikiProjects such as Canada are using the WikiProject name? - Emir214 12:50, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why does it matter? --Chris S. 12:52, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And just to point out, the WikiProject for Canada is not as active as WP:CWNB. --Chris S. 12:59, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

text: For everyone concerned, the Tambayan is a regional notice board, it is not a Wikiproject, but I may add the participants of the Tambayan may have produced 3 FAs 3FLs, 2 FPs, 5 GAs and 9 DYKs, more than some other WikiProjects. --Howard the Duck 05:49, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see your point, since we've evolved from our regional notice board roots. Kaya seguro dapat lang natin ilipat? But first, rather than voting (since voting is evil), let's start with a straw poll so we can see what the others think. A question like "Do you support the move of Wikipedia:Tambayan to WikiProject Philippines?" Keep in mind that it's just to gauge consensus, not to force a decision. --Chris S. 06:30, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest to do that on a subpage. --Howard the Duck 06:34, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Ahm, Emir214...Comment lang po ako. Alam mo tama ang sinabi ni Howard tungkol sa crab mentality nating mga pinoy. Ang hilig-hilig natin sa mga break-away thingie. Hindi na kailangan talaga ang wikiproject mo dahil halos lahat ng mga pinoy wikipedians dito na talaga tumatambay. Kaya nga tawag TAMBAY, eh. Pero hindi rin ibig sabihin useless ang wikiproject mo. Hindi rin dahil lang sa may Wikiproject na ganyan tulad mga taga ibang bansa eh dapat makigaya tayo (gaya gaya mentality) - oh bagong concept yan para sa bagong article. In fact, mas maganda nga kung unique eh. Ang Canaduh ba may tambayan? Wala. Tayo lang meron. We should be proud of it, and help develop it to the fullest. Ang efforts mo para sa wikiproject Philippines mo, dito mo na lang i-contribute. Let's unite sa lahat ng aspeto. Pati din dito sa Wikipedia! I-merge na lang natin ang dalawa and let wikiproject Philippines redirect to the TAMBAY page. --Weekeejames 19:30, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: WALANG UNIFICATION! WALA! WALA! WALA! NAGMAMATIGAS AKO, ISA PANG NABASA KO YANG MERGE MERGE NA YAN AY BAKA I-AFD KO PA YANG TAMBAYAN NYO! -Emir214 22:59, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ibig sabihin, ikaw ang bunso dito. Ang batang matigas ang ulo, pinapalo sa pwet ahahaha :P --Weekeejames 23:58, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Sorry I had to revert the page from its previous version because of the threat above (although kahit ipa afd nya pa, di naman ibig sabihin i de delete na agad ang Tambayan page). I think the threat is serious by nature and I wonder if it violates any of Wikipedia's rules and regulations and if the user is ought to be castigated with some admin disciplinary action. Anyone...admins/sysops?  --Weekeejames 23:48, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I may be three years older than the person in question, but I can indeed say that I would prefer a nice, peaceful co-existence of both projects.  We won't lose the WikiProject as what's being championed here today, but we can coordinate here and do work there, ensuring a nice deliniation for which page is being used for what.  As for discipline, it does nothing.  It will only exascerbate the problem.  --Sky Harbor 00:17, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I've warned the user on his talk page. --Chris S. 05:42, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Sigh... having another page is just dividing our efforts. We've already built up this nice little community, and we all just want to improve Philippine-related articles. I don't see the point of having another page with the exact same purpose. Coffee 03:03, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

text: In this case, I am with whatever the majority decides. It doesn't matter to me, really, if this project is moved. At the same time, I am against the idea of two separate projects for the reasons that Coffee outlined.  Like I said, no need to reinvent the wheel. We have a great thing going on here and it has been working for quite some time now. --Chris S. 05:41, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See the reason why I left on my userpage. - Emir214 12:48, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

text: He didn't leave per se; he's active on the Tagalog Wikipedia.  You never know what could happen next, but we should anticipate a return if possible.  --Sky Harbor 13:58, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe we don't even need to send it to MFD... we could just redirect it to Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines, and merge any salvagable fuctions of the two pages. --Coffee 15:07, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this is better, but changing it into a redirect would make it easier for anyone to reestablish the WikiProject. I do like the talk page notices, though. --Howard the Duck 15:11, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

text: How about copying the code/moving Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines into Wikipedia:WikiProject Philippines, then we'll retain Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines, with Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Philippines primarily on the appearance of the WikiProject page? Either way, it seems fine for now. --Howard the Duck 14:47, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, maybe not. I'm expecting wikiproject to be deleted anyway, eventually. :) --Noypi380 01:28, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

text: If you think Tambayan is lousy, you are entitled to your opinion, but you should still work with the community. Don't take it personally if you don't always get what want. It is normal to be emotionally attached to your contributions, everybody is! :) But everybody trusts each other to modify, edit, etc. everything for the better. So, I suggest you "unretire" yourself, contribute in the articles you like, and have fun. The people who spoke above do not have bad feelings for you, and neither should you have bad feelings for them. Happy editing as Emir214! :) --Noypi380 14:35, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Philippines]] 

message: Anyone interested? Since User:Emir214 apparently left Wikipedia for good, and with no active members, I'll list this at WP:MFD. Any objections? Also, we should really be a WikiProject by now, so that things like things would not happen. --Howard the Duck 11:27, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See the reason why I left on my userpage. - Emir214 12:48, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

text: He didn't leave per se; he's active on the Tagalog Wikipedia.  You never know what could happen next, but we should anticipate a return if possible.  --Sky Harbor 13:58, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe we don't even need to send it to MFD... we could just redirect it to Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines, and merge any salvagable fuctions of the two pages. --Coffee 15:07, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this is better, but changing it into a redirect would make it easier for anyone to reestablish the WikiProject. I do like the talk page notices, though. --Howard the Duck 15:11, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

text: How about copying the code/moving Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines into Wikipedia:WikiProject Philippines, then we'll retain Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines, with Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Philippines primarily on the appearance of the WikiProject page? Either way, it seems fine for now. --Howard the Duck 14:47, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, maybe not. I'm expecting wikiproject to be deleted anyway, eventually. :) --Noypi380 01:28, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

text: If you think Tambayan is lousy, you are entitled to your opinion, but you should still work with the community. Don't take it personally if you don't always get what want. It is normal to be emotionally attached to your contributions, everybody is! :) But everybody trusts each other to modify, edit, etc. everything for the better. So, I suggest you "unretire" yourself, contribute in the articles you like, and have fun. The people who spoke above do not have bad feelings for you, and neither should you have bad feelings for them. Happy editing as Emir214! :) --Noypi380 14:35, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Deleting [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Philippines]] 

message: There are several Hispano-Filipino articles which makes a wrong conclusion from this study:
Capelli et al, A Predominantly Indigenous Paternal Heritage for the Austronesian-
Speaking Peoples of Insular Southeast Asia and Oceania (http://hpgl.stanford.edu/publications/AJHG_2001_v68_p432.pdf)
For instance, the following statement:
According to a genetic study, an estimated 3.6% of Filipinos have at least some European ancestry, a large part of this is very likely Spanish.
Can be corrected as:
According to a genetic study which included 28 genotyped individuals from the Philippines, "Some European introgression was also evident in Southeast
Asia (2.3%–7.8%) and the Philippines (3.6%)." A large part of this European introgression is very likely of Spanish origin.
It would be great if you could help out with the corrections if you get to encounter other inaccurate conclusions from this study.--Nino Gonzales 04:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I support its trashing if used inappropriately (which is probably all usages here). 28 is actually around 0.00004%... hehe... it would be interesting to see a real study of the genetic make-up of the phil--Nino Gonzales 11:46, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Lets remove the mention of this study and use a better study. --Howard the Duck 14:28, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Stanford Study on Phil Genetic Mix

message: This won't push through if no one will propose a time and venue. So let me give it a shot: Sept 9, this Saturday, the Wendy's in the corner of Kalaw and Taft (near the UN LRT station).
If many people are OK, great!
If few will come, we could make it a pre-meet-up Meet-up, where we will prepare for the real meet-up.
If no one will come, I'll still be passing by the place.
My item in the agenda is a project which aims to get more Filipinos involved in Wikipedia. Please tell me if you'd like to help out. We could talk more if ever the meet-up pushes through. It's pretty simple: get teachers to use Wikipedia for teaching their students. Here's a draft of the project plan: User:Nino Gonzales/TTT. This is for the good of humanity!--Nino Gonzales 05:04, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have some debate council thing in the morning (and early afternoon, I think).  I think sometime in the afternoon would be better.  --Sky Harbor 13:52, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I'll try to go tomorrow, although I might be a little late because of the debate council thingy.  --Sky Harbor 11:43, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Good luck sa EB nyo today! Picture naman ng eb, este meet-up pala.  --Weekeejames 19:51, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems there's just gonna be 3 of us... anyway, we can just discuss how we can prepare for a bigger meet-up... if you're interested, we could also talk about how to get more Filipino Wikipedians... Fuzheado says he's gonna support us... Fuzheado was one of the speakers of the conference on new media and press freedom a few months ago in AIM... He's a teacher from Hong Kong who uses Wikipedia for teaching... and he's currenltly writing a book about Wikis... I'll be there by 2:30, but will have to leave by 3. I'll bring a laptop with a Wikipedia logo so we'll know who's who...--Nino Gonzales 05:54, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There was a bit of a place conflict earlier: I ended up going to the original location (Wendy's T.M. Kalaw) than the new location (Wendy's Vito Cruz), of which I found one of us, but not the other.  I think we need to coordinate locations better for one thing.  --Sky Harbor 08:00, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, definitely. Sorry, my fault... shouldn't have updated the proposed venue to somewhere very similar... I was there, btw, with my Wikipedia logo... hehe... anyway, it's great that you guys have met... I'm sure next time we'd be more successful--Nino Gonzales 11:39, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Manila Meet-up and Project: TTT

message: Any suggestionsa for selected article and selected pic? --Howard the Duck 15:59, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oooh...how about the LRT, MRT or our newest featured article on the history of the Philippines?  Don't know about the featured picture though.  --Sky Harbor 12:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't have to be featured so that I'll be included. I'm looking for the church pic that was posted here. That's a nice pic. --Howard the Duck 13:20, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You could use just any picture, I guess. Coffee 03:03, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Portal:Philippines]] 

message: Make it a dump of all of our map files/images. --Howard the Duck 16:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Maps of the Philippines]] 

message: Can any admin move Congressional District of Marikina City to Congressional district of Marikina City and fix the resulting double redirects? Thanks. =) --seav 23:46, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done! Coffee 03:03, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Admin move request 

message: Hey guys, what do you think of this navigation template that User:Emir214 has been adding to pages:
It seems 100% redundant with Template:Indy Philippine cities, Template:Metro Manila, and Template:Philippine regions. I don't mean to antagonize Emir214, but I think this template should be deleted. Coffee 03:03, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: List it at WP:TFD. I'll support for deletion there. --Howard the Duck 05:09, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

text: The Spratly Islands are missing from the infobox, btw.  But it looks nice.  --Sky Harbor 11:18, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was going to add them, but they're at Kalayaan, Palawan already. --Howard the Duck 12:00, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Template:Philippines]] 

message: Josh and i talked about this on the scheduled meet-up and we came up with a discussion regarding the TTT. 
Here are some of the dillemas we foresaw: 
:*We cannot easily gain government support
:*We have not enough people to do the project
:*We have a lot of geographical disconnections
:*Not enough $$$
Therefore as a solution to the problem, We have come up with this idea: Make a Wikimedia Foundation Chapter here in the Philippines. These are the possibilities I personally have considered:
:*Have at least 5-10 members (non minors) register it at SEC
:*To help us gain more resources, let us hook up with the Foundation Chapter at Japan and probably make us a sub-chapter for some time until we can go our own way.
Hoping for your kind consideration on this solution. Justox dizaola 07:10, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, you really think big! I was actually just thinking of startling small... like approaching a few teachers and "selling" to them the idea of using the editing of Wikipedia to teach their students some general reseach principles (NPOV, citing reliable sources, etc)... I figured that if it really works (i.e., using Wikipedia as a educational tool), then it would spread throughout the Philippine academia like wildfire! But your idea is great--a foundation would facilitate a lot of things :) ----Nino Gonzales 04:21, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As of the moment, Wikimedia Japan is merely an idea, but Wikimedia Taiwan and Hong Kong are being organized.  I can't find any government information on how to organize non-profits, but I wonder if we can set up a co-op?  --Sky Harbor 11:08, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

text: How about a proposal like this: Since the Taiwan and HK are in formation and Japan is already in incubator, I porpose to make all our efforts channeled to one big chapter with subchapters in the other places. Then, for all Asia's good, the communities there will link up and we shall have a larger pool of resources at our disposal, what do you think? Jondel will really be a great help here. Also, the Wikifoundation bulid-up will make Wikifoundations everywhere in Asia spread like wildfire. Then, as we grow more autonomous, we shall keep the Big Umbrella Wikiorg as a loose confederation of friendship and will help other wikifoundations transfer their resources to the more needy ones. Por mi patria y continente, excellence. --Justox dizaola 11:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

text: To add something, let us incorporate Mr. Gonzales' selling thing to give us some publicity for the wiki and after we gained at least 20+ members then we shall form the foundation. --Justox dizaola 11:56, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

text: this is cool! --Saluyot 01:27, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Wow ang cute!!!23prootie 05:12, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We're looking for people to join this thing eh...we need 15 legal-age Filipino citizens to incorporate a co-op (I'm not one of them), along with all the other paperwork.  I don't even know how to make an Economic Survey (technically a feasibility study).  --Sky Harbor 05:22, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  My suggestion for the feasibility of the TTT project 

message: I have started drafting the Wikimedia Philippines page.  Visit User:Sky Harbor/Wikimedia Philippines.  If there is consensus, I will move this to the Tambayan namespace (Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines/Wikimedia Philippines) and possibly to Meta also.  --Sky Harbor 14:48, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: this is cool! --Saluyot 01:27, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Wow ang cute!!!23prootie 05:12, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We're looking for people to join this thing eh...we need 15 legal-age Filipino citizens to incorporate a co-op (I'm not one of them), along with all the other paperwork.  I don't even know how to make an Economic Survey (technically a feasibility study).  --Sky Harbor 05:22, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikimedia Philippines

message: When a Roman sees a beautiful woman , he might exclaim "O Babae!" which means "O Wonderful!" from Greek. Duo means two in latin which is similar to dua in Visayan languages. Cepit is seize or grasp (like 'kapit'). Tata is Estrucucian and old Latin for father.--Jondel 03:37, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ever been to Nanay Mo, British Columbia? ;-) --Chris S. 05:01, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bizarre coincidences in language

message: Is it legit to put addresses on radio and TV station articles? Check out these articles: Radio Philippines Network and National Broadcasting Network. I think it violates Wikipedia's policy (WP:NOT). Danngarcia 08:48, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd recommend their removal. --Howard the Duck 10:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Addresses on Radio/TV station articles 

message: Someone is spamming the Davao City, Davao del Norte, Davao del Sur and Davao Oriental pages (although s/he seems to ignore the Compostela Valley page), adding his/her website at the top of the article, no less. My 3RR is running out so I figure I'd need assistance. --Howard the Duck 14:51, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Adding links that are clearly spam is considered vandalism (if done repeatedly). Reverting these should not be subject to 3RR. --Polaron | Talk 14:57, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spam alert 

message: Wanna rename Kilusang Bagong Lipunan to New Society Movement? Coz of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English). There are English books that use New Society. :) --Noypi380 01:43, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The thing with the policy is that we should use the English name if it indeed is more popular.  The question here is which is more popular: the Tagalog KBL or the New Society Movement?  And if we do move the KBL article to its English name, we have to do that with all other remaining parties that use Tagalog names, as well as party-lists and coalitions, except those whose Tagalog names are more popular.  --Sky Harbor 13:32, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Looking around, List of political parties in France gives the English names. --Howard the Duck 13:37, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The list of recognized political parties in India gives both Hindi (or any other Indian language) and English names.  In the main political party list, it says that English translations are provided, but the parties themselves seldom use the English name.  --Sky Harbor 22:16, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess we should use the more popular in the English-speaking world. --Howard the Duck 15:45, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. Any more comments for/against a move? The French example is good too. :) --Noypi380 03:35, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes. Good examples too. Status quo then. :) --Noypi380 11:49, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename again 

message: I've introduced a lot of  tags to help in referencing the article. --Howard the Duck 06:01, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Referencing [[Philippines]] 

message: I think it was last month when I inserted the "Controversy" section in Rómulo's article, wherein the info was taken from Pío Andrade's book about alleged lies of the former UN official. A citation or source is now being asked for a quotation that I took from the book's introduction ("ignored by the press, the Philippine Congress, and the National Historical Institute, all of whom should have taken action to remove Romulo from the pantheon of Filipino heroes."). I don't understand. Do I still have to insert the book's name as the source of the quotation when I already wrote before that that it was already culled from the introduction?
Thanks.
Pepe alas 20:35, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Carlos P. Rómulo

message: Need photos for Claro M. Recto, Jose Diokno, Raul Manglapus.
Also an article on Lorenzo Tanada. If anyone could help. thanks KaElin 21:59, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Recto picture uploaded :Image:Claro M Recto.jpg. Scorpion prinz 09:54, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Photos

message: After fixing up Asi language, I decided to make articles for islands in Romblon that didn't have articles already. When I was done, I wondered where this island named "Sibale" that I have heard before.  Well, it turns out it's another name for the island of Maestre de Campo.  But it's not clear to me which is more popular/official. Which should I use?  For now, I have made Sibale Island the redirect page to Maestre de Campo Island. But the people call themselves Sibalenhon. What to do, what to do... --Chris S. 09:57, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sibale is easier to type :D ! --Jondel 11:05, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the website of the Municipality of Concepcion, the island is known by three names: Maestre de Campo, Sibale and some other name given by a Spanish clergyman in the past.  Looking at Concepcion, Romblon's webpage, Sibale appears thrice, Maestre de Campo only once.  I think Sibale is official, but this is unknown.  --Sky Harbor 11:05, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maestre de Campo or Sibale? 

message: Well, it seems that the teachers are already aware of Wikipedia: in this case, another map, the map of Malolos City, made by TheCoffee, was used as the background for the front cover of the Grade 7 issue of a Philippine HEKASI/Araling Panlipunan/Social Studies magazine called the Students' Digest.  I actually have the magazine at home and can provide a scanned version to show, but then again, they used this map a la-ABS-CBN, that is, WITHOUT CREDIT.  --Sky Harbor 10:50, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Images in textbooks are always uncredited. --Howard the Duck 13:28, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Textbooks tend to credit images now (my Science and Social Studies books credit borrowed images), but the media in question is a magazine, not a textbook.  On the front cover of a magazine seen by thousands (if not more) students.  --Sky Harbor 13:51, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is that like the SciTech magazine variety? --Howard the Duck 13:52, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes it is.  At least that, Budyong (for Filipino) or Tatsulok (for Math) don't take images a la-ABS-CBN.  --Sky Harbor 14:13, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not even a teeny weeny caption? If you can scan it then it can go at the In the press page haha --Howard the Duck 14:17, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not even a teeny, weeny caption on the bottom of the cover.  Well, it would be fair use, so I can't put it in directly, but I might write an article on the magazine (lol).  Worse, the magazine (like most other school magazines) is DepEd-approved, so this means even the government doesn't know about this.  --Sky Harbor 14:20, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yet another nice map factoid 

message: At the shock of all of the residents of San Jose del Monte City, the other city of Bulacan, we have this: the city's homepage, with Coffee's map of SJDM City being prominently displayed.  And yes, this one is WITHOUT CREDIT.  --Sky Harbor 14:31, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What's wrong with these people! The letter to ABS-CBN is not even done yet, and there are other violators of fair use?! :( --Noypi380 00:55, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The letter is done, but the matter of sending it is another thing.  We don't even have a return address.  --Sky Harbor 12:46, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: And yet another nice map factoid

message: Hi! Am I welcome? Help!
Honestly, I still consider myself as Web semi-literate. There's too much info here I don't know where to begin.
Hey Chris S., remember me (Jomar)? I'm from our yahoogroups. Are you reading this?
This site is awesome!!! I'm a big fan. I can't believe that I'm already here! I even feel like a rockstar already!
¡Saludos a todos!
Pepe alas 01:54, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Jomar! Long time no see.  Don't know where to begin, huh? Well, what kind of topics interest you?  What do you know about? Look around and see how you personally can contribute to that topic. Also, familiarize yourself with Wikipedia policy. Anyway, welcome to Wikipedia.  --Chris S. 09:14, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hello? 

message: On the Tagalog-language Wikimedia projects (Wikipedia, Wiktionary and Wikibooks), the convention is to use the name website in Tagalog spelling, in this case, websayt.  Well, the Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino decided to invent a new word for website: webpurok (see their new wiki here).  Should we adopt?  I personally prefer websayt.  --Sky Harbor 08:32, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Lambatpurok is better, but I'd recommend we follow the KWP. --Howard the Duck 08:50, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My Tagalog-English dictionary says that lambat means net.  Then again, the KWF is using webpurok, but it doesn't sound right for some reason.  The only other website with pages in Tagalog, the government portal, still uses website over webpurok.  Should we adopt this new word?  --Sky Harbor 09:15, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok so, sapotpurok. The thing is, we should follow what the authorities here. Wiki might be the first reference website so do it, so lets take the advantage. --Howard the Duck 09:30, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Avoid neologisms. --Chris S. 18:43, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Sapot is a black mantle.  But anyway, we can use webpurok, as since the KWF is using it.  The question is whether there is a clamor to move to webpurok from websayt.  --Sky Harbor 09:35, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, sapot means web, as in sapot ng gagamba (lol). Since webpurok is now correct and official (although it doesn't mean websayt is wrong), I feel we should use webpurok. (And websayt isn't Tagalog spelling either, its the Filipino spelling, there is no equivalent Tagalog term for website). --Howard the Duck 13:34, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Blame my Tagalog-English dictionary (it never said sapot meant web).  I also checked the news section of the KWF wiki, and it seems that one of the commissioners of the KWF made the KWF wiki.  I'm not sure if that commissioner made use of the word webpurok as an invention, but just to be safe, we should check.  Then again, if the KWF uses it, why not the rest of us?  --Sky Harbor 13:40, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For a variety of reasons.  (1) It is not listed in any "Filipino" or Tagalog dictionary. (2) Google results for "webpurok" show only 211, sites all of which have ties to that particular KWF site. (3) It is not clear if that KWF site is the real deal (why isn't it on a gov.ph domain name?) (4) One says "website" in Tagalog/Filipino. (5) From a linguistic standpoint, a self-proclaimed language "authority"'s prescription is hardly the gospel, the last word on a language issue.  If the word catches on and is widely used (look what happened to salimpuwit coined by the purists) should it be used on Wikipedia. But you and I know that ain't likely to happen anytime soon.  --Chris S. 07:51, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Then again, as much as I would love to prefer websayt over the odd-sounding webpurok, the KWF doesn't even promote new words that they do invent that often.  I have yet to see the word webpurok on any KWF publication.  --Sky Harbor 23:46, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

text: With regards to the (new) website's legitimacy, it was founded by a commissioner on the behalf of the KWF.  Not all Philippine government websites need to necessarily end with .gov.ph (examples include the National Youth Commission and the Presidential Commission on Educational Reform).  Even the Philippine government portal recognizes the KWF wiki as official (see here).  --Sky Harbor 23:56, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Webpurok" 

message: Hey there guys! Why don't we include a city in the Philippines in the unofficial bids for Wikimania 2008? I was planning on including Cebu. Because the 2006 ASEAN Summit is gonna be held in Cebu. The acommodation, transportation, etc. in Cebu is also cheap and a lot of Filipinos would be able to join Wikimania 2008. chris 14:33, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was hoping to get Wikimedia Philippines organized first, since looking at the candidates for Wikimania 2007, excluding Alexandria, London and Turin are cities with Wikimedia chapters, and Taiwan is forming one.  It would be nice though if Wikimania 2008 were to be hosted in the Philippines, and with Cebu being somewhat central, it seems somewhat ideal.  --Sky Harbor 15:10, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikimania 2008 

message: I really don't we think we need these:
* List of ABS-CBN personalities
* A - D
* E - H
* I - L
* M - P
* Q - T
* U - X
* Y - Z
--Howard the Duck 16:02, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At the very least those should be merged to one page. 192.127.94.7 07:33, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is that it makes it quite monolithic and large, which is bad considering article size.  --Sky Harbor 11:03, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is listcruft at its finest. --Howard the Duck 11:36, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[List of ABS-CBN personalities]] 

message: Manila's map should be rectified to show a small strip of land of the Cultural Center complex as part of Manila. Please refer to . I have made visits to the Manila City hall, and their maps show that Manila's and Pasay's boundary is projected perpendicularly from Roxas Blvd., showing Manila's jurisdiction over an isosceles shape strip of land in the CCP complex, as well over the Manila south cemetery as an enclave within Makati. Scorpion prinz 14:07, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, yeah. I'll get to it. Eventually. I'm still debating whether I'd stick with the old raster image or make it into an SVG image. The problem with SVG is that I can't control the fonts unless I convert the text into outlines too. Anyway, I want to have a comprehensive list of changes that need to be made. Everyone, please visit  and add to the list of corrections. --seav 23:28, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Manila's map correction

message: Is a candidate for featured portal status. The nomination page is here. --Howard the Duck 09:39, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone might want to fix the formatting...the portal looks all messed up on my computer.  Yes, I've tried everything, but I think the formatting in one of the sections needs to be rectified.  The "Did you know" section, which normally takes half-a-page widthwise, extended to the full length of the page.  --Sky Harbor 13:31, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I fixed the screw-up; the selected picture is at fault. Take a look it is fine already. BTW, what browser do you use? IE or Firefox or other? --Howard the Duck 13:53, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I use Firefox most of the time.  --Sky Harbor 08:44, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Its fixed now. What the portal needs is content for selected article, picture and biography. I can keep up the DYKs and the News section. --Howard the Duck 13:53, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Portal:Philippines]] 

message: Hey, I just found a video of the audiovisual of the Philippine National Anthem which can be seen at sign-off and sign-on of tv stations. I linked it to the Lupang Hinirang page. Maybe you would mind visiting. It could be found HERE! Follow the link and you will see. I'll ask him where he hacked it. --Justox dizaola 10:38, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The real holy grail, my friend, is a video of the Philippine National Anthem being sung in the original Spanish. --Chris S. 18:40, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To find that would take a lot of time and patience, as it is illegal per the Flag and Heraldry Code of the Philippines to sing the National Anthem in a language other than Filipino.  --Sky Harbor 23:06, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ugh, yeah, I know. Such a stupid law. I wrote about my disdain for it in my blog. --Chris S. 07:55, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I do have a copy of the Philippine National Anthem video used during the centennial celebrations. It's 13.8MB and in mpeg format, am I permitted to upload such videos here? Which format will be best so it can be played in the browser? Scorpion prinz 05:14, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about uploading only the audio part in .ogg format? --Howard the Duck 05:26, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Aight, however the CD where I extracted the audio file that I have is copyrighted. Scorpion prinz 10:22, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: the first 30 seconds may be fine. --Howard the Duck 11:28, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Holy Grail Found 

message: The Chavacano wiki is running.--Jondel 18:34, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Both the Pangasinan and Chavacano Wikipedias are up.  This is great!  --Sky Harbor 21:35, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OO nga! Nakakatuwa :) Just few months ago, dream lang yun. Tapos medyo alanganin pa kasi kokonti o wala pa rin akong nakikitang contributors. But if the purpose were good, I'm sure it would bear fruits in the future! TY sa support nyo sa Chavacano Wiki! Sa translation ok lang at kaya ko kahit pa konti-konti at mabagal. Wanted na rin ng kung sinong gustong mag admin/sysop sa Chavacano Wikipedia at help na rin sa technical stuff (eg. wiki tags/borders/tables etc...May WYSIWYG software/program ba for wikis?). Di kasi ako gaanong marunong sa mga ganon. Leave a message na lang sa userpage ko. --Weekeejames 00:29, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: WYSIWYG programs I'm unaware of, but I can probably help in design.  As of the moment, I'm aware that you have to request sysop status (albeit temporarily) for the Chavacano Wikipedia; you can do that in Meta:Requests for permissions.  The interface also needs to be translated from English to Chavacano.  But anyway, good luck.  --Sky Harbor 09:04, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just added myself to the sysop request page. Yup, I do really need some help sa design. I will translate the interface as soon as I'll be granted sysop permissions. --Weekeejames 19:47, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I'll try to help with the technical stuff.--Jondel 20:30, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Chavacano wiki

message: Hello, just popping in here from WikiProject Tropical cyclones. I hope all of you are fine and didn't get affected too badly by Typhoon Xangsane (Milenyo). As you may already have noticed, the TC project still doesn't have an article for Xangsane/Milenyo. We're working on it in userspace (User:Coredesat/Typhoon Xangsane (2006)), but one big problem we're facing is the lack of information on preparations in the Philippines (we have sufficient information on impact and aftermath). If anyone could help with adding preparation info (properly sourced as per WP policy, and no OR), or finding preparation info, it would be appreciated. – Chacor 08:54, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well for one the weather bureau grossly underestimated the wind strength/gust/whatever geeks call it. (Saw it on TV. I have no link) --Howard the Duck 09:50, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Once it appears on TV, the data will be posted online shortly. - Emir214 07:39, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typhoon Milenyo (Xangsane) 

message: Hi! I know it was a long time ago but I think this article also needs help, so could anyone give any?23prootie 04:19, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guimaras oil Spill 

message: Hey, I made this blank Philippine map with provincial borders, just like :Image:BlankMap-World.png. It has only two colors (gray land, white water) so you can easily color it with a simple program like MS Paint. I've also removed the tiny islands so you coloring those... all the land in this image can be colored in with just about 180 clicks. Hopefully you guys can make use of this.
A warning though, it's pretty big at full size. Also, I must have saved it as a monochrome png, so currently when you try to color it, it will just turn out as dark gray. But here's a way to get around that problem... just open MS Paint first, then open the :Image:BlankMap-Philippines.png in your browser. Copy and paste it from browser to MS Paint, and then you can color it properly (but don't forget to save it as PNG!) . Umm... if any of you have access to Photoshop right now (which I don't), maybe you could reupload the image as a non-monochrome png for me. :p Coffee 01:44, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: TheCoffee, can you edit that Wikipedia that shows a globe graphics file on the upper-left side of a page and have the text as "Wikipedia El Libre Enciclopedia". This is for the main page of cbk-zam.wikipedia.org. Di kasi ako marunong mag edit ng graphics file. Thanks! --Weekeejames 20:49, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The thing after making the logo though is that you must have a developer switch the logo from the English one to the Chavacano one.  You can go to Meta:Requests for logos for that.  --Sky Harbor 00:08, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there a place on META where you can get the names of the languages changed?  I am talking about the sidebar of a particular article, which has the interwiki links to Wikipedias in other languages.  Pampangan should be Kapampangan and Samar-Leyte Visayan should be Waray-Waray. --Chris S. 02:27, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure where, but there's a link to the bugzilla for the Wikimedia projects there.  --Sky Harbor 07:59, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Blank Philippines map

message: I am pleased to announce the completion of the Legislative districts of the Philippines, which lists all representative districts of the country's cities and provinces and their representatives to the legislature from 1907 to present. It also includes in the Defunct legislative districts of the Philippines the old representative districts of the Philippines and their respective representatives to the legislature. I still need to update it though with the list of representatives during the Second Republic National Assembly, I only have a list of the representatives, but doesn't show which province or city they were from, I still need to obtain a copy of the representatives per province/city which I had already seen in the House Congressional Library. Ü — Scorpion prinz 14:47, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Completion of Legislative districts