Talk:List of potentially active volcanoes in the Philippines

Mount Melibengoy aka Parker

Mount Melibengoy is being monitored all the time as it is supposed to be potentially active but it's not in the list. I guess it should be added? --62.112.55.14 (talk) 12:44, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I suggest we merge Active volcanoes in the Philippines into this list. Whether each volcano is active can easily be indicated by adding a column here, instead of having to maintain two separate lists and sets of coordinates.

Also, whether a volcano is considered "active" can be fairly arbitrary, so it isn't a good criterion for defining members of a list. I'm not aware of any other country where we keep a separate list of active volcanoes. -- Avenue (talk) 09:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

1. All of the articles for the active volcanoes in the Philippines listed all of the active volcanoes in the Philippines as part of their articles. It is easier to have one list of the active volcanoes in the Philippines with a single wikilink to that list than to list all of the 22 volcanoes in 22 separate articles.

2. Most Filipinos are interested in knowing which volcanoes in the Philippines are active volcanoes. A separate list satisfies that need.

3. Typifying Filipino needs in terms of other countries' practices appears somewhat xenophobic.

4. A separate list, enables the article to be expanded to deal with active volcanic specifics, as originally intended.

5. A separate list of inactive volcanoes is also needed rather than including them in either of the other lists. The interest in inactive volcanoes is slight, but the list is needed for completeness. If a list of inactive volcanoes is to be produced, a list of active volcanoes would be complementary.

6. The list specifies that it is based on the active list of Phivolcs (the Active volcanoes in the Philippines article has a link to Phivolcs). It was intended to expand the list in the medium term to include those volcanoes in the GVP which are considered active. That would bring the two main external listings into one readily accessible list.

7. The map of all active volcanoes contained in this article is also particularly useful. Its usefulness would be lost in a merge.

8. It is easy to be destructive and delete or merge a work. It is much harder to put in the long hours required to contribute a new beneficial list. The list of active volcanoes in the Philippines is a beneficial list. Deleting it or merging it would be quick, destructive, and detrimental.

Gubernatoria (talk) 14:12, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I may have been too hasty. Now that I see the new content you've added since I suggested the merge, especially the recent eruption dates and current activity status, I can see that a separate list might be worth the trouble. So I'm happy to remove the merge tags.

None of your other points (i.e. besides number 4) seem convincing to me, though. In particular, I don't see the point in having a third list for inactive volcanoes, because I believe all the information we want to present about them is already there in the main list (List of volcanoes in the Philippines). (Admittedly this is only there for a few inactive volcanoes so far.) How would having a third list help? -- Avenue (talk) 07:36, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Adding all Inactive Volcanoes to list

Phivolcs has 355 volcanoes in their inactive list.

I've put most of the rest of the inactive Batanes volcanoes into the Batanes section of the wiki list. It gives an idea of how the wiki list would be swamped if all the inactive volcanoes were added to the existing list.

Personally I'd prefer to compile a separate list for inactive volcanoes without the eruption date column, but I invite comment for the next 2 weeks on this topic.

Gubernatoria (talk) 15:19, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

There being no comment, I'll now remove the inactive Batanes volcanoes from this list and finish the Inactive Volcanoes of the Philippines list. Gubernatoria (talk) 04:03, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Potentially Active Volcanoes

The Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology has three separate lists for volcanoes in the Philippines: Active, Potentially Active, and Inactive.

The Inactive volcanoes of the Philippines wikipedia list is now complete (although it needs extensive additional information). The Active volcanoes in the Philippines list is also now complete. Comment is invited for the next 2 weeks on renaming this list Potentially Active volcanoes of the Philippines and removing from this list the active volcanoes already in the Active list.

Gubernatoria (talk) 01:29, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

There being no discussion, I'll now remove the active volcanoes in this list, ensure they are in the Active list, and rename this article Potentially Active volcanoes of the Philippines. Gubernatoria (talk) 13:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of potentially active volcanoes in the Philippines. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120213164000/http://www.phivolcs.dost.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=60&Itemid=115 to http://www.phivolcs.dost.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=60&Itemid=115
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131202225225/http://www.phivolcs.dost.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=59&Itemid=116 to http://www.phivolcs.dost.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=59&Itemid=116

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:30, 1 January 2018 (UTC)