Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Archive 22

Archive 15

←

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

Support, anyone?

Hello, I proposed to WikiProject Council a wikiproject that focuses to University of the Philippines. I created the basic skeleton here. Currently, there are four supporters (including me), one of us not willing to become a participant. So I am hoping that someone out here in the Tambayan who is willing to join the project. No, this is not open to UP students only, all Wikipedians are welcome. Thanks and God speed. --The Wandering Traveler^{WIKIPROJECT UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT!} 04:54, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, try posting on the UP forums, if they have one. I'm looking at peyups.com. state your case, and I think some will raise their hands. --Eaglestorm (talk) 05:40, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. That's a good idea. But it's been a long time since the site disabled registraton for new user. Anyway, thanks again.--The Wandering Traveler^{WIKIPROJECT UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT!} 06:07, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedians who are/were part of the U.P. System should have the U.P. student userbox in their pages. See this. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 10:56, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Added invitations to anyone who had the Template that hadn't already been invited.Naraht (talk) 17:16, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Georgette Sanchez

Georgette Sanchez, a filipina ballerina is already on Queue 2 for DYK.--Maverx (talk) 00:57, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Malapatan and Malungon, Sarangani Province

I'm a newbie in Wikipedia and have noticed some errors in the articles for Malapatan and Malungon, Sarangani Province. Both of these municipalities are listed as 1st class. They are not. Malapatan is a 3rd class municipality vying to be 2nd class, according to a municipal employee there. I am not sure what class Malungon belong to, just that it is not a first class municipality. I am sure of this because both of these municipalities are KALAHI-CIDSS areas. The KALAHI-CIDSS Project in Region XII do not implement sub-projects in first class municipalities. What can be done about this? Thank you for any help. :) Ceejay617 (talk) 04:37, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

You can edit those articles. For Malungo, just remove the "class clause" someone will find the correct classification later. –Howard the Duck 06:18, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Komikon

Hey anybody went to the komikon (comics convention) on Bahay ng alumni at UP today? There might be some personalities that you might want to snap a picture of. BTW WikiPilipinas was giving free papers called WikiZine. It contains some WikiPilipinas articles that are based here but has since evolved on their own. You might be interested in reading them as well. --Lenticel ^(talk) 08:20, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

it has an article here as well, which needs a lot of cleanup.--Lenticel ^(talk) 09:44, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

i was at the 2009 Komikon Summer Fiesta, you can view my coverage here †Bloodpack† 13:55, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Cool!--Lenticel ^(talk) 13:41, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Ph swineflumap.png

A new map has shown up, FYI... File:Ph swineflumap.png 70.29.208.129 (talk) 12:25, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

This map is redundant with the previous one, but at least it has a license. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 19:41, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Except this one has an inappropriate name if more than two cases show up. 70.29.208.129 (talk) 00:14, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

I took the liberty of leaving a message at the contributor's talk page. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 15:07, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Sky Harbor, can you help me to edit the Title of that image since there were 4 new confirmed cases of A(H1N1) virus. 11:02, 27 May 2009 Shin368

There's now a problem with this image. User:Shin368, creator of the image, removed the licensing information, so it is now a candidate for deletion. 70.29.208.129 (talk) 12:15, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

It might be a good idea to put a map on Commons... so it can be used in say... Spanish? 70.29.208.129 (talk) 12:18, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Also, there are three suspected cases in Benguet and one in Iloilo. Zuki, wait for your picture to be re-uploaded to Commons under a different name. In addition, do NOT remove licensing information from images, even if you want them deleted to be re-uploaded under a different name. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 12:20, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Map has been moved to Ph swineflumap.png at Commons. The two other maps may now be deleted. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 11:31, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Philippine city

Four years ago I made Template:Infobox Philippine city and Template:Infobox Philippine municipality. Today these infoboxes are looking very limited by Wikipedia's standards, and their scope overlaps with Template:Infobox Settlement which is used for most other world cities. Does anyone have some input... would it be better if we faze out the Philippine city infobox in favor using the general Settlement one? Or should we adapt the Philippine city infobox so that it uses the Settlement infobox (see the code for Template:Infobox Philippine region)? TheCoffee (talk) 17:08, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Slowly phase out the local ones and use the Infobox Settlement. –Howard the Duck 17:39, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I did not check, but is the settlements infobox flexible enough to accommodate special fields like the DOF income classification and legislative districts? --seav (talk) 00:51, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Maybe the reason is that Settlement is better than that. Wiki LGUs may help.--The Wandering Traveler^{WIKIPROJECT UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT!} 01:00, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

There's a lot of flexibility in the Settlement infobox.. a lot of space for blank fields where we can put income classification, barangays, congressional district, etc. Check out how I used it Dumaguete City. BUT I'm leaning towards reworking our local templates to use the Settlement infobox so that the placement of these fields is more standardized. The Settlement infobox has flexibility to put a "barangays" field pretty much anywhere on the template, or even not at all. TheCoffee (talk) 02:05, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

When you say "use", do you mean to pattern after or to make a wrapper template? --seav (talk) 02:18, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

This one would help. It can avoid revert war like the one in Pandi, Bulacan.--Exec8 (talk) 02:27, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

I made the wrapper template used in Tagalog Wikipedia, tl:Suleras:Infobox Philippine municipality 2, that used the same named parameters of {{Infobox Philippine municipality}} but actually calling {{Infobox Settlement}} with a lot of shoehorning. --Bluemask (talk) 03:14, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

There had been "some" "movements" in WP:TFD in which the non-Infobox Settlement infoboxes are being deleted and are being replaced with Infobox Settlement so we better begin migration. –Howard the Duck 03:42, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Seav: Yeah, I was thinking a wrapper template (I think that's what I did to Template:Infobox Philippine region)... That way the "empty syntax" to copy would be simpler, and the infobox is still flexible but not more complicated than necessary. That means making things like population and barangays a required field, and discarding irrelevant fields (like timezone1_DST). TheCoffee (talk) 04:15, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Sex Scandal vandal alert

You may have noticed that some or most the articles involved in the Halili-Kho celebrity video scandal are under attack. Please take action by reverting such trash and/or by semi-protecting it. Thanks in advance, hope that it will die down soon. -it's war time @ 14:13, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Which ones? Shrumster (talk) 08:07, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

The ones that are involved in the said scandal (the celebs and public officials involved, or example) and I don't want to edit such articles. I'm just the dispatcher. -it's war time @ 12:26, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

DRV for Masalipit

A deletion review for the recently closed AFD for the barangay article for Masalipit has been opened. The discussion is here. --Polaron | Talk 20:34, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Peer Review: Philipines

Hey maybe this article is ready for another peer review. Any thoughts?--23prootie (talk) 03:57, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

File:H1N1 Philippines Map.svg

• 
  File:H1N1 Philippines Map.svg
• 
  File:Ph swineflumap.png
• 
  File:Ph swineflumap.png

Another map has shown up...

70.29.208.129 (talk) 05:46, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

The SVG version is based on Ph swineflumap.png at Commons (image 3 renamed and corrected to reflect the non-existence of Shariff Kabunsuan and the addition of two suspected cases in Davao del Sur), only converted into a different file format. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 07:15, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Since there are readily available maps and fourteen cases (as of May 30) were reported the DOH, I suggest creating an article about that swine flu here in the Phil. I may recommend title as "2009 swine flu in the Philippines". I have a draft on my notebook but I have no time typing it here. Maybe on Monday. I have coverage of the toll as well as the documentation (I written it) of the flu when DOH first made suspicion on cases since May 1.--The Wandering Traveler^{WIKIPROJECT UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT!} 08:24, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Logo for NLRC

I've created the article National Labor Relations Commission (Philippines), but I've faced a hurdle of getting a free logo from any sources in the internet. If anyone can get the logo it's greatly appreciated. --Maverx (talk) 01:43, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Article for the sex video scandal?

I'm sick and tired of the constant media attention but the encyclopedist in me thinks that the current scandal is notable enough to deserve its own article even if you try to tone down the hype. We already have a (quite extensive) article on the Edison Chen photo scandal so maybe this should have one? (Yes, I know that the article will become a vandal target, but that's not a reason to disapprove creating the article.) For the relevant guidelines to guide your comments and opinions, see WP:NEWSEVENT. --seav (talk) 00:59, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

IMHO, a separate article concerning the event wouldnt be necessary. But the said controversy/info can be placed/merged in the Katrina Halili article. Comprehensive infos about this event can go directly to the WIKI news. And Kho is a jackass. He doesnt need an article. I bet itll only be spammed by his haters. †Bloodpack† 15:17, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

I can help, but the scandal aren't clear enough to the public. You may find news about the justice proceedings, the Senate investigation but most of it are showbiz opinions.--The Wandering Traveler^{WIKIPROJECT UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT!} 01:01, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Probably not now. I would like to start an article about Hayden Kho but I decline to do so because the topic is still hot. I guess we should wait until the issue tones down. But I would not stop anyone from making the controversial article so soon. --Jojit (talk) 01:19, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, for the same reason that Seav says about the Edison photo article, perhaps it would be good to start already-'not a reason to disapprove'. Obviously, a journalist/encyclopedist carries a lot of responsiblity in being neutral lest public opinion be swayed; and ... nobody likes it when articles become vandal (or scandal)targets. Many Americans were sick and tired of the Clinton scandal too when it was happening. Similar things are happening hither. A journalist/encyclopedist must present a neutral accurate point of view when opportunity arises and be relevant.--Jondel (talk) 02:18, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

BTW, Ive been active in the other wikis related to the Philippines. I just finished a wiki on PLARIDEL in Latin. I could not find time for the English wiki.--Jondel (talk) 02:23, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, User:flamerounin, an offline friend of mine, has a sandbox version of the article. He's a newb btw so any tips you could give him might be helpful.--Lenticel ^(talk) 05:17, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

I will be like Pontius Pilate and wash my hands clean of anything to do with the scandal. I have expressed my disdain for the scandal in almost every available channel that I can think of. That is despite Hayden Kho being my ka-probinsya. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 07:11, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

The Hayden Kho, Jr. article has already been started. - 203.87.194.142 (talk) 13:27, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

The bigger question is if screencaps are legit for Wikipedia, and no, I'm not talking about if they are appropriate, but for copyright issues. –Howard the Duck 15:29, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

If I interpret Philippine copyright law correctly, Hayden Kho "owns" the copyright to all the sex videos he made. However, a screencap may be appropriate under the guise of fair use. This leads to another question: Howard, please don't tell me you have a copy of the videos? --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 15:55, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Who doesn't? :)--Lenticel ^(talk) 17:22, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Hayden has a bad camera, and I have bad eyesight, so I can't watch them... –Howard the Duck 16:11, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

My father's friend has the HaydenCam scandal (with Katrina in it) but apparently, I can't get a screenshot from the cellphone (where he got it for some reason, I don't know how to take a screenshot from a cellphone) and I'm still a minor until November. Also, I'm on Kho's side since the girls on the videos lack attention IMHO. Let me end my message lest I violate some Wikipedia policy/guideline and real life laws. -it's war time @ 14:11, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

{{PD-PhilippinesPubDoc}} and the Philippines' law

Hi Folks, there is a discussion regarding the accuracy of this template. I think that local input would be most useful there - Peripitus (Talk) 11:33, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster ng Pilipinas

Does anyone have a picture of the ABS-CBN communications tower in QC? If so please notify me to add to the KBP article. Thanks. --Maverx (talk) 01:56, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Plagiarism

Once again, I'm calling your attention on this site. They are obviously copy-pasting (plagiarizing) content from Wikipedia without at least crediting this site and including the GFDL license. - 203.87.194.142 (talk) 09:59, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Shame on you, Secretary Durano, the Department of Tourism and, the most egregious offender of all, the Government of the Republic of the Philippines, for which we have no rights to freely use your images, yet you willingly take Wikipedia content and mask its licensing terms! --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 17:35, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

That's right, this must be Ace Durano's fault! TheCoffee (talk) 02:25, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

This is blasphemy! This is MADNESS! Too bad them ras clots behind this incident don't seem to understand their own laws; they warn us whenever we use their photos in good faith, and now they're stealing from our site? Baloney! Rhattid, if only that I could do something about it... Blake Gripling (talk) 02:34, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm much more concerned with the possible Wikipedia-RS circular references (reliable source repeats an unsourced statement in Wikipedia; Wikipedia then cites that reliable source). These circular references is hard to break without the cooperation of the reliable source. So, do we fast-track WMPH? I really think the org should be established before the year ends. --seav (talk) 02:39, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of circular references... I am convinced that this quick bio at time.com uses Wikipedia's Manny Pacquiao article as its main reference.

• Time: "Started his boxing career at age 16, weighing just 106 lb. His early fights took place in small, local venues of the Philippines."
• Wiki: "Pacquiao started his professional boxing career at the age of 16 at 106 lbs (Light Flyweight). His early fights took place in small local venues..."

There are more examples. Coincidence? TheCoffee (talk) 05:39, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

This makes us look bad. I worked in Journalism in Japan. Plagiarism is Intelectual stealing and the Journalism really treats it that way. You can just rewrite it, use different words. This is accepted, then cite sources. --Jondel (talk) 05:47, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

As far as I know, something is not considered plagiarism if it is sufficiently distinct in form from the item being copied. Plagiarism involves the verbatim copying of words and masking it as one's own. What we're discussing here now is copyright infringement, and that's not right! I'll support it only when the Philippine government repeals Section 176.

(OT: Jondel, are you fluent in Capiznon? If you are, please check the English translation of O, Capiz and see if it is correct. Thanks!) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 06:53, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Sky Harbor. I'll look at this tommorow. uh if anyone there is still interested in Spanish, pls get in touch with me. Bye /out--Jondel (talk) 09:11, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Plagiarism, as defined in the 1995 Random House Compact Unabridged Dictionary, is the "use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work." (the lead sentence of the Plagiarism article). Plagiarism is not copyright infringement. While both terms may apply to a particular act, they are different transgressions. Copyright infringement is a violation of the rights of a copyright holder, when material protected by copyright is used without consent. On the other hand, plagiarism is concerned with the unearned increment to the plagiarizing author's reputation that is achieved through false claims of authorship. (from further down in the lead section of the article)

Copyright infringement (or copyright violation) is the unauthorized use of material that is covered by copyright law, in a manner that violates one of the copyright owner's exclusive rights. U.S. law requires a copyright holder to establish ownership of a valid copyright and the copying of constituent elements of the work that are original. (info taken from the wikilinked article). -- Boracay Bill (talk) 02:28, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Sky, plagiarism is not just verbatim copying of text. Even a close paraphrasing is considered plagiarism if its unattributed. Check out this Signpost article on plagiarism: Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches. --seav (talk) 03:13, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I forgot about that. That aside, however, the issue there is to what extent is "close paraphrasing". Although there are blatant examples, for one, what if the presentation seemed innocuous, but then it was discovered that the text came from a Wikipedia article. Would that be considered plagiarism as well? --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 04:31, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, if the attribution to Wikipedia is omitted. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 01:34, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

I've seen numerous cases of Wiki-plagiarism in recent months, especially when its about Iskul Bukol and its movie. I'm so pissed. --Eaglestorm (talk) 05:09, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

It's obvious to me that it is a cut-and-paste. See the little ^[1] on the first section? Alexius08 (talk) 06:49, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

(@ Sky Harbor) I saw wikisource:Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines at Wikisource. Since the law itself, written by the government prevents the commercial use of their works without prior permission (which would not qualify as copyright-free) while labels itself as "public domain". Isn't it contradictory to the aims of public domain? If so, I'll nominate wikisource:Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines and all other works of the Philippine government posted in Wikimedia projects for deletion. Alexius08 (talk) 10:47, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Don't even think about it. Texts are completely in the public domain (meaning, no need to ask for permission) under Philippine law. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 09:00, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

So, what action will be done? - 203.87.194.142 (talk) 15:19, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Mexican Swine Flu A H1N1 2009

Surprisingly, the Spanish language version of the page 2009 swine flu outbreak by country (es:Brote de gripe A (H1N1) de 2009 por país) doesn't contain information on the Philippines... 70.29.208.129 (talk) 12:17, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Because it will have its own article ;), we're working on it. --Vrysxy! (talk) 02:49, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

2009 Book Blockade article?

Just wondering, been out of the loop for a while but do we have an article for this? Seems like something notable enough to be a part of local history. Shrumster (talk) 08:09, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

More importantly, there's no article for the Florence Agreement. I think every international treaty is notable enough, right? --seav (talk) 09:08, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I get the impression that the issue is overblown and there are many other things time would be better spent on. TheCoffee (talk) 17:02, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

For instance, we don't even have an article on the EVAT. TheCoffee (talk) 02:05, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

We don't need an article on the EVAT. That's perfectly discussed at value-added tax. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 07:16, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

(Reset Indent) I'm Baaaaaaaaack! :-D After getting disconnected from the Net for a long time, I've dumped Digitel for Globe and am now wondering... IS there now an article on this? I'm going through wiki to see what needs work and this is the first thing to catch my attention... -- Alternativity (talk) 12:32, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Pupung

Pupung is now on Prep area 1 of DYK Queue and would be set to come into queue 4 which is scheduled to come out on Wikipedia's main page at 5:21AM, 06-01-09 (Tokyo Time). --Maverx (talk) 23:52, 30 May 2009 (UTC) {{DYK talk|31 May|2009|... that the comic strip character, '''[[Pupung]]''' was based on the creator's nephew Jeff Young?}}

(the Pupung article passed, I just removed wikimarkup since it erroneously uses the DYK category)--Lenticel ^(talk) 14:09, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

The Flag of the republic of Zamboanga

I need the project team's opinion, is this the real image of the flag of Zamboanga? If the consesnsus is yes, I can create a high resolution version from photoshop. --Maverx (talk) 02:51, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Maybe. Perhaps you can do a higher (svg or png) image of the flags found here all over the site: http://www.webalice.it/paopadd/ This is where I found File:Lakandula's Flag.jpg. My self-made flag is a bit ugly, but you can find the good and exact description on it in the whole site. It would be a good help if you can provide all high resolution version of all the flags there. :) (That includes some of the excavated and captured Sulu, Maguindanao, Luzon, Lanao, and other pre-Hispanic and historic Philippine kingdoms and sultanates.) Is it possible that you too can provide photoshop images of the seals? I think we need this for elaborating Philippine kingdoms articles.--The Wandering Traveler^{WIKIPROJECT UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT!} 14:20, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Check on Political positions of Mar Roxas article

I would want to everybody check this article. First is that Mar Roxas isn't a very important political figure in world history or even in Philippine history (unless he will make noise to make his name popular. But am saying that so far he isn't a very important figure) to have an own article regarding his views. Subhas Chandra Bose has his own political view article, because he is an independence leader movement of India. Ruhollah Khomeini has his own too, of course, he is an important figure in Islamic religion, politics and history (saying that Islamic, he affected every single dominant Islamic nations around the world during his time). Saying this, first of all, I recommend the article to be written in more summarized and specific group of paragraphs subjected to be merged with Mar Roxas article. I found out that he has his own template pointing too little about him.

Another is that I recommend to delete it. I am not against him. Perhaps, it's an advocacy article. Should I add that majority of the lines were copied from the references directly? Thanks.--The Wandering Traveler^{WIKIPROJECT UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT!} 14:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Notes:

References:

Better discuss that on the talk page of the said article and advise those editors who created and/or editing the said article. Research the article first if it is deemed to be thrown at WP:AFD meeting the requirements at WP:DP. About the copyright infringement, you can remove the copyright material or you can rephrase them yourself. Piece of advise, when you go to AFD, you can't reason out a delete and a merge. ax (talk) 07:07, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree on summarising and merging it to the main article, rather than leaving a pile of cruft or something like that. Mar isn't as notable as Obama or Clinton as of now, so merge. Blake Gripling (talk) 08:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Please be advised that the creator of the article, Emperork (Kevin Ray Chua), is currently inactive, if I remember correctly. Do correct me if he isn't (there are so many inactive Filipino Wikipedians that I often lose count of who they are). --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 13:05, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Support: some of his positions did not influence the issue far enough. Most of his points of view are plain votes, and significant points of view are ones that changes the course of the situation (which may meet Wikipedia's inclusion policies). Alexius08 (talk) 11:53, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Task force for 2010 elections?

In line with this, I think we really need to identify possibly POV-pushing target articles. Monitoring these articles will become increasingly important as the 2010 election nears, especially as many of these will have WP:BLP concerns. --seav (talk) 10:04, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I actually have suspicions that there are some people editing Wikipedia that are staff members of candidates, cleaning up biographies in preparation for election season. TheCoffee (talk) 10:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, I was even contacted by a Mayor to write an article for him. They are contacting bloggers to do the advertisements.. And Wikipedia is one powerful tool they can use, too. ax (talk) 10:20, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

But, as they say, rules are rules. I guess you should remind Mr. Mayor not to do so, and tell them feds that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia (well, I'm sure you know that :p) Blake Gripling (talk) 10:40, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I actually replied "if the price is right!" Hehe. Nope, I won't even mention him in my blog. ax (talk) 10:42, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm in on the task force. ax (talk) 10:43, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm about to add relevant articles to my private watch list. Any removal or addition of text without any explanation would be reverted on sight. Please prepare a subpage that would serve as our joint public watch list. Alexius08 (talk) 11:56, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Informations that are helpful for Filipinos...

Guys and Pips and friends,

I'd like to invite everyone to contribute information, original works to publish it in Wikipedia and for those who are not original, just to make sure we have the footnotes and the permission of the owner/ publisher of the material...

Like Historical Informations, Medical and Health Informations, Research findings such as technology, engineering, medical, archeological, business and finance, banking and entrepreneurial and other fields that can motivate and inspire Filipinos worldwide.

Foundations and Groups that are helpful for actions we can do for our motherland..

Regards,

Formulax1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Formulax1racing (talk • contribs) 23:55, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and sorry, but the article you just made is nominated for deletion, since it wasn't notable enough, i.e. no major events or notable people were known that involved the school. Blake Gripling (talk) 07:00, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't understand why most of the people are saying Keep It when the article's two sentences without even a hint of an RS are what puts it down from being notable. --Eaglestorm (talk) 07:49, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Long answer, because it's been a long-honored Wikipedia rule that schools, at least at the high school level and up, are inherently notable. Short answer, Jimbo said so. Shrumster (talk) 17:09, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

2009 swine flu outbreak in the Philippines

I am writing the article now. Either grammar correction or clarification are welcome. You may also add citations to statements that require references.--The Wandering Traveler^{WIKIPROJECT UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT!} 04:07, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

File:Influenza A(H1N1) map of the Philippines as of 6 June 2009.png

A new map has shown up... File:Influenza A(H1N1) map of the Philippines as of 6 June 2009.png ... and it is different from the SVG map currently used. 70.29.208.129 (talk) 05:42, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I took the opportunity to create new article regarding the swine flu cases in the Philippines, like what I promised before. I happened to stop reading the news when our enrollment started (and it's very tiring) so maybe my data are outdated. You can check it anyway or make some revisions.

I also created new template: {{2009 swine flu outbreak in the Philippines table}}. I think the layout is bad, but it's useful anyway.

Human Influenza A(H1N1) cases in the Philippines
(By Region)

Cases		Deaths
Laboratory confirmed (DOH)	Date of las confirmation (DOH)	Confirmed deaths (DOH)
3,207 (1,709)	July 30 (July 30)	9 8
Regional breakdown‡ Confirmed cases Deaths Region I 5 0 Region II 1 0 CAR 187 4 Region III 248 0 NCR 1, 255 4 Region IV-A 251 0 Region IV-B 10 0 Region V 28 0 Region VI 7 0 Region VII 10 0 Region VIII 42 1 Region IX 1 0 Region X 19 0 ARMM 0 0 Region XI 11 0 Region XII 1 0 Caraga 13 0 Non-DOH total 1, 815 9 ‡ Figures per region is not tallied into independent news sources and DOH updates. This is a natural situation since DOH did not issued updates anymore.

--The Wandering Traveler^{WIKIPROJECT UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT!} 06:33, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

There were confirmed cases in Batangas, which are not reflected in the map. Those cases were brought to the RITM. In addition, the Ateneo postponed its orientation seminar for freshmen. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 14:50, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps we have to update images as possible. I suggest file names must be File:Influenza A(H1N1) map of the Philippines as of _______ and the date which corresponds the latest update.--The Wandering Traveler^{WIKIPROJECT UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT!} 06:49, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I am also requesting to be vigilant with the edits made on the article as well as the template (beside). Right now, somebody added Marinduque into provinces with confirmed cases, but no Marinduque confirmation coming from DOH came through.--The Wandering Traveler^{WIKIPROJECT UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT!} 07:23, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

One thing more, perhaps somebody may add to the evolution in this part. Thanks.--The Wandering Traveler^{WIKIPROJECT UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT!} 07:37, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Bring Flag of the Philippines to FA?

Since it is almost June 12 and all, would anyone be amenable to try bringing up Flag of the Philippines to featured article status? I've looked at all the list of Philippine-related Good articles that are also Top-importance and this is the one that has the most chance of achieving FA-status. It is not a controversial topic, it is pretty stable, it is easy to find more references for this, and it is a topic that almost all of us here can contribute to. Please check the Featured article criteria for more details on what more is needed. Important: Please reply at Talk:Flag of the Philippines. --seav (talk) 17:03, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I am totally into achieving this target. I did work on it in mid-2006, but my attention-span only lasted long enough to get it to Good Article. There are lots of other flag FAs (Armenia, Australia, Belarus, Canada, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Lithuania, Mexico, Portugal) and some of them aren't very long, so this is very doable. TheCoffee (talk) 05:08, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I made a quick pass through the article regularizing the cite format (to {{cite web}}, which was the format most used there) and tagging dead links. Substitute sources are available for the dead links, but someone else can pick which sources to use. Note that the FA Criteria is actually located at WP:FACR. There appears to be a lot of unsupported info in the article, so I'm guessing that criterion 1c may be a problem unless the citation density increases. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 05:56, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Review for 2009 swine flu outbreak in the Philippines

The article is almost finished so far (unless new news changes will occur). The quality scale of the article is "Start" and that it's importance is "Low". Perhaps a new review is very excellent. (Just suggesting)--The Wandering Traveler^{WIKIPROJECT UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT!} 08:31, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

xkcd considers the limitations of NPOV

http://xkcd.com/545/ --Nino Gonzales (talk) 08:46, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

2009 swine flu outbreak in the Philippines

There are serious issues with this article.

• 
  File:H1N1 Philippines Map.svg
• 
  File:Ph swineflumap.png
• 
  File:Influenza A(H1N1) map of the Philippines as of 6 June 2009.png
• File:Influenza A(H1N1) map of the Philippines as of 7 June 2009.png
  File:Influenza A(H1N1) map of the Philippines as of 7 June 2009.png

• File:Metro Manila PH A(H1N1) Map 8 June 2009.png
  File:Metro Manila PH A(H1N1) Map 8 June 2009.png

• 
  File:Age-Case graph of A(H1N1) virus patients in the Philippines (8 June 2009).png

The current maps (Manila and Philippines) are both dated, so that each time a new map is needed, either a new file is created, or the update is placed into a badly named file. If a new file is needed each time, then people will have to be extremely multilingual to update it across many different languages of Wikipedias and be correct in the wording in each language.

File:Influenza A(H1N1) map of the Philippines as of 7 June 2009.png uses a non-standard key, is the current English map, but not used in the other Wikipedias (another map is used instead).

Many images on this article are currently BROKEN. They have been deleted from Commons.

Template:Metro Manila A(H1N1 Map) as of 8 June 2009 is a dated template. This means a new page needs to be created for each updated map. This is even worse than for the image files. Why do we need a new page for each map?

70.29.210.130 (talk) 10:39, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Heads up: DYK on Dahil Sa Iyo

Just so you guys know: there's a new DYK on Imelda Marcos's favorite song. Curiously, it doesn't look like a Pinoy worked on the article, because the article's creator was someone who, interstingly enough, has the same user name as one of the co-writers mentioned in the article (supposedly the one who created an English version of the said song). Nevertheless, I've added it to the DYK list on the Tambayan main page. --- Tito Pao (talk) 02:57, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Also another heads-up on a DYK about the Overseas Absentee Voting Act of the once requested article Overseas absentee voting act of the Philippines (RA 9189) is now on queue and would be on the Mainpage tomorrow approx. 8:34AM (Tokyo time). --Maverx (talk) 03:09, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

This is live now - A fact from Overseas Absentee Voting Act appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 12 June 2009. The text of the entry was as follows: ...that the Philippines Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) spent a total of 112.71 million pesos for the overseas absentee voters in 2004?

Head's up: DYK on National Labor Relations Commission (Philippines)

This will be out tomorrow at 8:28AM Tokyo time with the hook: ... that in 2006, the NLRC’s third division had confirmed resolving 2,697 labor disputes?. This was created due to the request on the project page. --TitanOne (talk) 13:38, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

mexican flu maps

• File:Influenza A(H1N1) map of the Philippines as of 7 June 2009.png
  File:Influenza A(H1N1) map of the Philippines as of 7 June 2009.png
• File:Metro Manila PH A(H1N1) Map 8 June 2009.png
  File:Metro Manila PH A(H1N1) Map 8 June 2009.png

The current Mexican flu maps have the wrong file names. Each claims to be the 7th or 8th of June, but both contain maps for the 12th of June. 70.29.212.226 (talk) 07:57, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

The oh so vandal prone Libingan ng mga Bayani

Hm. People apparently keep trying to bury themselves or their associates, or whoever, at the Libingan ng mga Bayani. Or whatever. The frustrated shrink in me is searching for an explanation. But my point is... people keep vandalizing it by adding names that aren't supposed to be there. The latest case, I can't undo because there are too many edits to undo. And there are probably others names there from past vandalism that I haven't noticed. Is there some way we can deal with this in a more permanent way, I wonder? -- Alternativity (talk) 13:17, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Would indefinite semi-protection be overkill? It has had just 35 edits in the past year. TheCoffee (talk) 15:49, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Just have it semi'd permanently. Leaving it unprotected makes it in a dangerous position, right? Blake Gripling (talk) 06:34, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Just keep it in your watchlist. The vandalism isn't that frequent. However, I did delete the unverified dignitaries list since this is the major vandal magnet. I suggest that any list that will be added in this article should have cited entries. Uncited or questionable ones should be deleted on sight.--Lenticel ^(talk) 01:21, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I thought of that too. Just keep those who have their own articles. We don't have to list down every famous Juan, Pedro, and Jose who were buried there, right?--Eaglestorm (talk) 02:21, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

You're right. Those entries belong to their own articles.--Lenticel ^(talk) 02:30, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

(reset indent) Anyways, anybody available to offline cites? Google Books and Google Scholar doesn't give too much info.--Lenticel ^(talk) 02:30, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK on KBP

A DYK on the once requested article KBP appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 16 June 2009 with the hook ... that the Association of Broadcasters of the Philippines advocates the 18 minutes of advertising per hour rule for Philippine TV stations?--TitanOne (talk) 00:21, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Tamblot Uprising article

The section "Tamblot’s challenge" needs to be revised because it gives the impression that supernatural themes occurred as a FACT and this is bias and unscientific. Dr Gwapo (talk) 10:03, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Official portraits of Philippine presidents up for deletion (again)

See Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 June 16. --seav (talk) 02:11, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, a Wikipedia derived PD type image is a good idea. Perhaps we could obtain the service of a Wikicommons/Wikipedia artist to create these portraits. We could supply him/her with pics from the net and then had them draft it. Of course if we have a Tambayan artist then it's much much easier.--Lenticel ^(talk) 01:25, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

It still does not justify replacement. Each portrait is unique, and a Wikipedian-created portrait will certainly be different from those made by the original painter. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 04:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

We are still technically violating that painter's copyright. I think it is better if we create our own original content if possible. That's the spirit of Wikipedia:Non-free content (me in a public internet cafe).--124.217.62.210 (talk) 03:24, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it's possible to create an original portrait of, let's say, Manuel Roxas when he died over 60 years ago. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 03:36, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

We just need multiple old portraits to use as models (the official portrait + the 100 peso bill and other portraits floating in Google images). We simply need to create a portrait in a different angle or pose to avoid copyright infringement.--124.217.62.210 (talk) 04:12, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

We'd need a free portrait to base a new drawing/image so that it can be (re-)licensed freely. Or we can just use a portrait with a free license since it's quite pointless to create an image meant to be freely licensed from an already freely licensed image. –Howard the Duck 10:13, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

There's a slight problem: virtually all portraits are not freely licensed. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 17:16, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

And all portraits derived from these portraits are therefore not valid for free licenses. –Howard the Duck 17:49, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

(reset indent) I'm not sure about that Howard, I'll ask Wikipedia:Media copyright questions about this.--Lenticel ^(talk) 15:00, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

ok, posted the question here.--Lenticel ^(talk) 15:09, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

The good news is that we can base a pd portrait from multiple copyrighted ones. The bad news is that it takes someone with real talent to pull that off. I guess that we're better off salvaging images from US gov't websites rather than drafting our own until we can find a dedicated artist to create these images.--Lenticel ^(talk) 03:48, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Felicisimo Ampon

Hi guys, I haven't been here for a while... I just finished the Felicisimo Ampon article... I'm not sure what categories I can add into it.. hopefully one of you guys could add the article to an appropriate category... also, feel free to add more infos and corrections.. cheers! peads (talk) 14:52, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

You can try submitting it for WP:DYK at WP:DYKS. All you need is catchy "trivia" cited there. –Howard the Duck 14:54, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Howard, are you talking about the "pound for pound" ... I found some source but it has an anonymous author.. peads (talk) 15:14, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

It depends on you on what trivia you'd like. Just make sure the source is reliable enough. –Howard the Duck 15:25, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

OK thanks! peads (talk) 15:36, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

File:Ph AH1N1 map.PNG

File:Ph AH1N1 map.PNG

Well... someone finally created a map with a reasonable filename. Hopefully we will ignore the file with the bad filename from now on. 70.29.212.226 (talk) 07:44, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Merger of Articles

I would like to propose a merger of both Lakas-CMD article and Lakas-Kampi-CMD article.. since the Lakas CMD is the party's surviving entity.. the Lakas-Kampi-CMD article is unnecessary and should've just rename the old article instead of starting a new one.. and I think people will still called the newly merged parties as Lakas anyway rather than Kampi peads (talk) 16:55, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps we can say that Lakas-CMD was a defunct political party and make some revisions. It sould be noted that it is now "married" to Kampi. I think we should do it for Kampi article.--The Wandering Traveler^{WP: U.P. needs you!} 16:04, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I think the best way is to have both Lakas-CMD and Kampi articles as defunct political parties... then expand the Lakas-Kampi-CMD article, but mention its origin and thats of Lakas and Kampi... but I don't think its wise that we make both Lakas-CMD and Kampi as defunct parties as well.. there's a posssibility that the merger may only last for the 2010 election.. what do you think? peads (talk) 05:39, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Peads may be correct, and I agree to him. I suggest to improve LAKAS-CMD and Kampi individual articles and mention that they are married and thus gave birth to Lakas-Kampi-CMD. But we shouldn't forecast that the merger will last until 2010 only, and this may arise enquiries and kalituhan among readers if we shall not say that they are now defunct, anyway, it is easier to establish that they the parties were now merged, or to say defunct, than to expect that a split would most probably happen. --The Wandering Traveler^{WP: U.P. needs you!} 12:05, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

OK I think we can do that.. no merger of articles but rather try improving them.. and I agree not to forecast a possible split.. peads (talk) 13:02, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Keep both. We have bird and dinosaur articles so why not keep them separated? –Howard the Duck 13:05, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Images for RP Regions

I think we need blank representative maps for each Philippine regions, or more effectively, they do not only show up regional borders, but also borders among provinces within those region, as well as boundaries among municipalities/cities within those provinces within the representative maps. I want to do this, but I am not that good for making maps on the computer. Somebody's help would be greatly appreciated.--The Wandering Traveler^{WP: U.P. needs you!} 13:10, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Sulu Sultanate and others

Since yesterday, I began reading facts about Sulu sultanate and it's history, and I wonder that there is no article regarding the sultans. I also found that there is no article about the group of Sultanates in Lanao and there confederation (confederation of four states). It is surprising though, and an article about one of the 16 sultans of Lanao Farouk Sharif, and no clean ups since major information was added. I am thinking to create an article about the Lanao confederation of sultanates (entitled Sultanates of Lanao) by using the information on Farouk Sharif, but there is no inline citations and full of Muslim dreads regarding Manila policies on the sultanate system. I need help with this matter, and am drafting the page on the Lanao sultanates using that information.

One thing more, Farouk Sharif article mentioned genealogy of sultans of Maguindanao, and it seems true as of this moment. I am thinking to use them to create an article List of sultans of Maguindanao. How can I make a picture like File:Flavian family tree.png?

Anyway, I myself is not convinced with the contained information. I decided that when the classes opened, I'd go to the library to conduct full research of the biographies of Maguindanaon, Maranao (Lanao people) and Sulu sultans. I bet citations and references coming from books have feet to stand and verify here in Wiki.--The Wandering Traveler^{WIKIPROJECT UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT!`} 08:36, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, somebody finally decided to pick this up. :-D Please do tell me if I can help. I just didn't want to have to take a lead position on this. -- Alternativity (talk) 12:35, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

The four states that made up Lanao's Confederation of Four-states were: Bayabao, Masiu, Unayan, and Balo-i. --Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 12:25, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK's

Head's-up, DYK's for Jennifer Olayvar and Kelly Misa are about to come up on the main page.--TitanOne (talk) 08:54, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Which Iloilo City barangays are on which district?

The Wikipedia article did not answer this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.1.3.194 (talk) 07:45, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

If you are referring to congressional district, all barangays are included in the Lone District of Iloilo City. --Bluemask (talk) 10:42, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

He/She means the allocation of barangays under Iloilo's six city districts. Currently the only district article mentioning such allocation is Arevalo. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 12:18, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Metro Manila PH A(H1N1).png

Metro Manila PH A(H1N1).png

Well... a better named map has been created without the badly named date. Hopefully we will ignore the file with the bad filename from now on. 76.66.193.20 (talk) 05:16, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I think we really don't need MM A(H1N1) maps. The Philippine map should be enough. –Howard the Duck 06:52, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Maybe the demographics show that the Philippine map has death in MM, so we should specify which part of MM has the death toll. Perhaps it would be easier to anyone that is unfamiliar to RP geography that MM isn't comprised of a city but groups of cities instead.--The Wandering Traveler^{WP: U.P. needs you!} 15:25, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Well then you'd also need those for the colored provinces and such. –Howard the Duck 15:26, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

---

Angel Locsin 'official sites'

Please verify statements by User:ellacolmenares and User:Incomparable Ph about which site, angellocsin.com.ph and the multiply site, is the official one. Ella, a sister of Angel?, says Angel never cleared the multiply site while the other one says that is the official site (even PM'd me). Thanks.--Eaglestorm (talk) 03:50, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Incomparable Ph smells like User:Gerald Gonzalez, and is Gerald, based on his style of editing. Dunno about Ella Colmenares' claims, though. Blake Gripling (talk) 05:21, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. Kanonkas erased his PM from my TP. Given the bad grammar and the defiant language, well, if text emits a smell, Gerald's stench is unmistakeable...I even thought it was him this afternoon because his first two edits directed at the article TP and my TP's was a dead giveaway. Seriously Gerald, grow up. --Eaglestorm (talk) 13:41, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Blake, I saw this post [1] just now, which could answer your doubts about Ella C's claims. I'll try to look for other Angel Locsin-related pages and cull the multiply stuff. As for that sockmeister, I chanced upon flickr images of him in Google. hah, he looks like an ass. --Eaglestorm (talk) 13:58, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Yep, I saw at least one image of him, but do you have the Flickr link? And it is indeed true, me breda, he is a two-bit twit. Blake Gripling (talk) 14:22, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll get back to you on that. Can't access that loser's flickr profile in the office. Deserves to be salvaged.--Eaglestorm (talk) 14:08, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Philippines national basketball team

Hi guys,

I just want to know if any of you is working on something to modify the Philippines national basketball team article? or somebody trying to mess it up?... I want to make sure what happen in the article at the moment is not vandalism before I'll fix it.. just to avoid clashes between users... cheers peads (talk) 10:04, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

DYK's

Head's-up, the article Julius Babao will be shown in the main page (DYK) tomorrow at 11:41AM (Tokyo). If anyone has a free picture, please upload it for the article page. Also the articles Phoemela Baranda and Kelly Misa's made it to the top viewed article lists of DYK. Kelly's page had over 7,900 hits in July. As for Phoem's article, we can still have this rank on top although it has already over 5,800 hits. You can help by going to her article page. --TitanOne (talk) 05:42, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Hayden Kho Support Group

Can somebody review this? ax (talk) 00:06, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Afd'd.--Lenticel ^(talk) 00:47, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Needs serious attention

Shariff Kabunsuan claims some fact that actually true but was not citated. For example, the statement

“ The law establishing the province was nullified by the Philippine Supreme Court in 2008. ”

might be true, but refs are still needed. Perhaps somebody may also change the layout of the infobox actually that Shariff Kabunsuan is a defunct province then.--JL 09^{Talk to me!} 10:25, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

OT from the discussion: I hope that this is the final username that you will use. I hate bringing Tagalog Wikipedia discussions to fore here, but I don't want to see any Wikipedians be adversely affected by being in possession of more than one account. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 10:54, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm rushed at the moment; I've searched around and found the following but have not read the content:

• Wikipedia article Sema v. COMELEC.
• E-Legal Forum article: Creation of ARMM’s Shariff Kabunsuan province is invalid.
• SCOTRP decision G.R. No. 177597, July 16, 2008.

Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:46, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

CPDRC dance program

I was wondering if an article should be written about the Cebu Prison's dance rehabilitation program that Byron Garcia initiated, or whether Mr. Garcia himself should get an article. 76.66.203.200 (talk) 12:36, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

The article's section on the Thriller viral video is enough. --Eaglestorm (talk) 15:04, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

That's the wrong article for such a section... it should be in the prison article, and the Thriller article should link to it. 76.66.193.20 (talk) 12:33, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Ewan ko kung ano gusto mo! (I don't know that the hell you want!)--Eaglestorm (talk) 04:46, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

i propose redirection of and moving of Professional Regulation Commission to...

i propose redirection of and moving of Professional Regulation Commission to Professional Regulation Commission (Philippines) to better disambiguate it from the other unrelated PRC_(disambiguation) entities in other countries. i do think that this will be an uncontroversial move. Agree or Disagree? TheTechieGeek63 (talk) 07:08, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Are there any other entities called the "Professional Regulation Commission" in other countries? If there aren't any, then it doesn't need to be moved, though for consistency's sake, it can be. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 14:04, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Inaccurate article heading for the United Church of Christ in the Philippines

The article for the United Church of Christ in the Philippines is inaccurately titled as "United Church of the Christ in the Philippines. That's why when pages try to link to the article, it would result in a broken link. The correct title should be "United Church of Christ in the Philippines" Aclarado (talk) 04:09, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

You can move it if its uncontroversial, unless you can't move it yourself... –Howard the Duck 05:56, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Intsik

I'm from waray-waray wikipedia and I would love to hear from you guys regarding the use of the word "Intsik" especially those who are working on Philippine-language based wikipedia. Some Tsinoys find the word "Intsik" to be very offensive and degrading since it is very similar to the word "insect", while others do not really care. Do you think that this is not a "politically or culturally correct" word or some people are just too sensitive? Love to hear from you. --JinJian (talk) 11:08, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Just use "Tsino" or "Tsinoy" to be safe. –Howard the Duck 11:24, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't think its offensive.. I'm a Cebuano and I grow up learning the Cebuano word for a Chinese is "Intsik" and I'm a Tsinoy myself, and I don't find it offensive.. peads (talk) 11:48, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

The Tagalog Wikipedia is actively encouraging the use of the formal adjective when it comes to languages and nationalities (i.e. Tsino over Intsik, Espanyol over Kastila, Hapones over Hapon). --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 12:40, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't have a problem if "Tsinoy" is being use.. I guess its easier not to confuse people--peads (talk) 14:04, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

At cebuano wikipedia, it's also Intsek, though the Cebuano literature writers prefer Insek. We have a naming convention at cebwiki and one of these is to use the most common known name. Jordz (talk) 16:28, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

The tl wiki uses Intsik with the creator ignoring the encouragement and using the common term. ;p --Jojit (talk) 07:20, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

The article was made in 2007, well before the so-called "purification" of the Tagalog Wikipedia and the subsequent "encouragement". I may move it later when I get home as a matter of consistency, since we do have Tsinong Pilipino and Wikang Tsino. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 07:32, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I think we can use Intsik or Insek in Cebuano and Waray-Waray wikipedias since people in Visayas will always use the term Instik ot Insek when people talk about Chinese or its language.. rather than Tsino or Tsinoy, which usually being use in Tagalog and other Phiilippine language wikipedias..--peads (talk) 08:18, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't think so. Tagalog speakers use Intsik in normal conversation. I rarely hear people saying Tsino when referring to Chinese people and most Chinese does not find it offensive. Personally, I prefer that Intsik to be used in tl per this convention. --Jojit (talk) 09:57, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I hear both in normal conversation, actually. The point is that though the Tagalog Wikipedia, being the sole authoritative Tagalog-language encyclopedia (WikiFilipino in this regard is disregarded), needs to cater to everyone, there must also be an air of formality when it comes to writing its contents. The Tsino/Intsik convention is like calling someone who's Chinese a "Chinaman", which is both colloquial and outdated. At the same time, we are catering to Filipinos of Chinese ancestry who may, like what Michael said earlier, take offense at being called Intsik. Therefore, we need to use more politically-neutral and non-derogatory terms. A perfect analogy for this would be using the term Indyan for someone who's Indian, not the more common-yet-derogatory term Bumbay. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 12:33, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't think that Intsik is colloquial (but I think it's outdated). The English-Tagalog dictionary by Leo James English translates "Chinese" to Intsik/Insik and Tsino is not listed there. It is also not indicated as a colloquial word. I don't know about other English-Tagalog dictionaries if they translate "Chinese" to Tsino. Anyway, I talked to a Chinese friend and confirmed that Intsik is indeed derogatory. I guess this is an exception to the rule. So, I will not oppose to moving tl Intsik article to Tsino. Although, I might add a {{fact}} tag, asking for the source of the translation of "Chinese" to Tsino. I hope that the other Philippine-based Wikipedias would follow suit. --Jojit (talk) 14:30, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

The best way is we use "Tsino" as the main article and maybe acknowledge or mention the word "Intsik" in that article.. if somebody use the word "Intsik" in other articles, then why not have its link redirect to the "Tsino" article.. and for me, personally, I'm a Tsinoy and I don't find/see the word "Intsik" as an offensive or a derogatory term... I grow up learning the Cebuano word for Chinese is "Intsik".. I only learned the word "Tsino" in a Social Studies class back in high school, where we use the Tagalog language ... --peads (talk) 15:01, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

We use Tsinong Taipei for Chinese Taipei in Bicol Wikipedia though "Intsik" (der. Togalsik) is used. --Filipinayzd (talk) 18:16, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm a Tsinoy and I do not personally take offense on the word "Instik"; however some people are not really comfortable of that term. Since this may be a possible clash of culture, subtle it may be, it is best to use the more neutral term "Tsino". We in waray-waray wikipedia used the title Tsino (yinaknan) for Chinese (language) instead of "inintsek", but retained the term "inintsek" inside the article (at least for now); aside from the redirection of article "Inintsek" to "Tsino (yinaknan)", just like the idea of User:peads. By the way, I've noticed that major national television networks rarely use "Instik" to refer Chinese and we probable should take cue from them.--JinJian (talk) 01:53, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Just a note: the Use common names guidelines says to use the most common name used by reliable/reputable sources. So this means that colloquial terms (e.g. "Bumbay") are not necessarily preferred even if they are common. I suggest using "tsino" or "tsinoy" instead of "instik". --seav (talk) 02:42, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

The thing is "Intsik" is not colloquial and I can't find any references (i.e. English-Tagalog dictionary) for "Tsino". Most of those dictionaries translate "Chinese" to "Intsik" or "Insik". --Jojit (talk) 04:29, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Also, "Tsinoy" is colloquial. Use "Tsino-Pilipino" instead. --Jojit (talk) 06:13, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

How about this one? http://www.bansa.org/dictionaries/tgl/?dict_lang=tgl&type=search&data=tsino I'm not sure about the reliability of the site though. The word "Intsik" may come from Malay word encik (pronounced as enchik) meaning "venerable uncle" and "Tsino" comes from Spanish word "Chino". The origin of the word Intsik did not come from bad intentions but the thing is, it is not always well received by the addressee or the "Intsik" themselves. That is why, a more neutral "Tsino" would be a better alternative.--JinJian (talk) 05:09, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

That would be fine but you can specify another dictionary to make it more reliable. Gabby's Dictionary translates "Chinese" to "Intsik" and "Tsino". --Jojit (talk) 06:12, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

If I'm not mistaken the following dictionaries: Gaboy ("Gabby's Dictionary"), Sagalongos, Jose Panganiban, De Guzman, UP and New Vicassan's, all prescribe Tsino as the term for "Chinese". Whether or not Intsik is included or excluded from the definition is something I have to follow up on. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 14:26, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I think we should maintain using the word "Tsino" in the Tagalog Wikipedia but at least mention "Instik" in the article... in Cebuano wikipedia or other Visayan wikipedias, maybe use the word "Intsik".. coz it sounds weird to say the word "Tsino" in a Bisaya sentence... for example: "Ang akong lolo kay naay dugong instik" (translation: "My grandfather has a Chinese blood/My grandfather is of Chinese descent").. compare it with this one: "Ang akong lolo kay naay dugong Tsino" .. it just sounds weird to use the word "Tsino".. --peads (talk) 05:49, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

In ceb wiki, I think you should make a consensus among writers there. By the way, in tl wiki, the Tsinong Pilipino article was recently transferred to Pilipinong Intsik by AnakngAraw. Her reason: "mas tradisyonal na Tagalog"' (a more traditional Tagalog). --Jojit (talk) 06:34, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

There is an affected sector, it is not the writer, publisher or speaker but the addressee or the subject. It is better if we call, write or publish the name that are more agreeable to them rather than using our own discretion. --JinJian (talk) 08:27, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

When we say "consensus", we consult other Wikipedians or writers (in ceb wiki) to comment on the case. They can be pro or against the term. Take note that the purpose of consensus is to achieve neutral point of view, thus beneficial to the affected sector. --Jojit (talk) 08:55, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I thought we are talking for all Philippine language-based wikipedias here :D .. I'm only a member of the English wikipedia so I can't make consensus with the writers in the Cebuano wikipedia... I like the Tagalog wikipedia.. all those really deep Tagalog words.. it makes an article sounds like a poem when I read it... anyways, I'd stick with "Tsino" (Chinese) and "Tsinong Pilipino" (Filipino-Chinese/Tsinoy) if we are talking about the Tagalog wikipedia... --peads (talk) 09:13, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I believe all Philippine language-based wikipedias share the same pros and cons, the same concerns and issues regarding this topic. I am here as a contributor of waray-waray wikipedia, which is another Visayan-based wikipedia. :-) --JinJian (talk) 10:27, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

The common consensus on tl.wiki is that the Tagalog used there (a policy where AnakngAraw was instrumental in its creation) is considered the same as that of standard Filipino, and it is that Filipino that will be used as the standard for writing its contents, despite our acceptance of other Tagalog registers. When you look at the contents of the policy, though we may stress the use of "more Tagalog" terms (words which have straight Tagalog equivalents despite the prevalence of similar terms derived from other Philippine languages, Spanish or English) wherever possible, the policy does not supersede the "use common terms" guideline, which has led to quite a few conflicts between so-called purists ("Tagalog") and modernists ("Filipino") when it came to the way article titles and even whole articles were written. The main issue though surrounding the word Intsik is that though it is the most common and supposedly "more Tagalog" term per both policies, the word is still considered derogatory in certain circles, and it is this origin of derogation which places much doubt on whether or not the word should be used. Tsino, unlike Intsik, is not subject to that level of controversy. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 14:16, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

May I also add that the "use common terms" does not supersede WP:NPOV.--Bluemask (talk) 22:34, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Sulu Archipelago

Please take a look at this article. I think it needs a cleaning up. Most of the contents delve into the area's history and not about it's geography (which should be the case since it talks about the place/area). --Kleomarlo (talk) 10:01, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Although I agree it needs cleanup, there's nothing wrong if the article includes information about its history. --Jojit (talk) 01:36, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Which channels aired Samurai X?

Which Philippine channels aired Samurai X in English? I'm trying to source the English Sony dub names of Kamiya Kaoru and Myojin Yahiko. Maybe I could use an airdate and channel name in a citation? Would any channel websites state that they aired the channel and/or they used these dub names? WhisperToMe (talk) 21:09, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Studio 23 aired an English-language version AFAIK. I dunno of any other non-cable networks in the Philippines that did so. Blake Gripling (talk) 08:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I think ABS-CBN showed a few episodes in circa 2004-2005, I'm not sure though. As for cable channels in the Philippines, I'm quite sure it's broadcasted over Hero. --TitanOne (talk) 23:52, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Help needed with Sandugo

This article successfully survived WP:GAR early this year but some newbie substantially altered the article such as removing the sections on the controversy of the Sandugo site and the festival. Can somebody help clean this up? I don't think a revert to the GAR-version is warranted. --seav (talk) 08:15, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Help on DYK of the Banaue Rice Terraces

The article Banaue Rice Terraces was expanded five folds and is now on prep area 1 of the DYK queue, It will most likely be live on the mainpage at 9:00AM Tokyo time tomorrow. I ask everyone to just click or view the article so that it can top the DYK Stats. Thanks. --TitanOne (talk) 23:49, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Eva Estrada-Kalaw

Who knows in what year former Senator Eva Estrada-Kalaw was born? I can't seem to find it on the internet. I only managed to find the date of her birthday, which is June 16. Magalhães (talk) 19:19, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Anyone?, Perhaps somebody has (access to) her autobiography "A political Journey", which was released in 2008? Magalhães (talk) 08:27, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

A December 5, 1980 New York Times article lists her as 60 years old, so 16 June 1920 is as educated a guess as there can be. --Anyo Niminus (talk) 10:55, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much! Magalhães (talk) 11:38, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

1920 it is. She has an autobiography which she indicated her birthdate.

Encounter with a banned sockpuppeteer

Recently I saw the Andrés Bonifacio article had been edited for the worse by someone using IP address 122.104.185.104. We reverted each other twice and rather than risk breaking the three-revert rule I just worked on the article. At Talk:Andrés Bonifacio#Stuff I changed, I explained some of the changes from his/her last version to mine (which has since been edited further). Sadly, his/her version was rather garbled and possibly libelous if the people in the article were all still alive (Ex: he/she wrote Bonifacio shot someone at the Tejeros Assembly, when he actually didn't). The IPs in the page history used by the editor are:

• 122.104.185.104
• 122.104.186.141
• 122.104.187.65

If you look through the edit history (sorry for hogging the page with many minor changes; I can't help it) he/she keeps saying the same things, invoking WP:Cleanup and WP:Weasel words wrongly in my opinion. I think it's clear he/she is User:Orceuos (found on the page) who is a sock of User:Orsahnses (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Orsahnses/Archive). So, who gets to put a "used by suspected sockpuppeteer" template on the IP addresses? Uthanc (talk) 18:27, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I encountered the same problem and probably the same person in the Carlos Loyzaga article... he keeps changing proper terms with his own terms... his IP address(es) are:

• 122.104.185.193
• 122.104.194.58
• 122.104.187.65

I traced the IP addresses and he uses an internet cafe (Optus Internet) in Melbourne, Australia...

I also encountered another guy from Sydney, Australia who keeps vandalizing my Userpage and accusing me for being sockpuppet after I tried to negotiate in the Talk:Philippines about the Rebels in Mindanao and the so-called Peacekeepers term in the Philippines articles.. his IP address(es) are:

• 122.104.194.252
• 122.104.197.154
• 122.104.190.191

I already suspect someone with an account here and anytime soon he will vandalize my page again... --peads (talk) 21:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I think you should cross-post this to wp:ani.--Lenticel ^(talk) 02:55, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

I already reported the Carlos Loyzaga incident last week in the wp:ani but nobody bothered to reply or do something about it... about my userpage, one of the admins put some protection but once the protection is over.. sometime soon the said anonymous user will vandalize my userpage again.. --peads (talk) 05:54, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Admins and non-admins there usually gloss over non-drama magnet stuff but try to post again with a link to the archived version. I know that this is a little frustrating but I posted three different times about the same problem before getting decent admin attention. My hands are tied so I can't directly help you here as an admin.--Lenticel ^(talk) 06:16, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

OK no problem... thanks for the tip...--peads (talk) 07:10, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

According to the Orsahnses investigation page, Optus Internet is an ISP (not just a cafe) so it's not feasible to block his/her IP range. It seems pead's anon is using the same ISP. User:Vicenarian said: "122.104.0.0 - 122.111.255.255 are allocated to Optus Internet, an Australian ISP, states of New South Wales and Victoria."

Boy, did Orsahnses get on my nerves. :-P While the Bonifacio article is certainly better now, being more extensively cited with page numbers, what exactly was wrong with this? Well, attribution of statements and opinions among historians needed to be more specific - and that has been done - but I was too tired at the time to do things properly so I just reverted. Anyway his/her version was definitely more deficient. By condensing stuff too much that the result was inaccurate, he/she introduced errors I thought no Pinoy could do. For example, a statement about native soldiers who were transferred to Mindanao before they could join the rebels mutated into Bonifacio going to Mindanao. And as mentioned above, Bonifacio shooting somone when he really didn't. Libel case right there! Perplexing. Uthanc (talk) 08:22, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

about the battle of manila

hi kamusta..gusto ko sanang malaman yong dahilan nang battle of manila on feb,1899 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.94.252.79 (talk) 22:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello! First, this page isn't the discussion page for the topic "Battle of Manila", so you may want to check out the article(s) about the Battle of Manila. Having said that, do please take note that there are various articles about different "Battle(s) of Manila"...which one are you referring to? Panahon ng Kastila, panahon ng Amerikano o panahon ng Hapon? You may want to read at least the first paragraph (the lead-paragraph) of each article, you may find the one that you need. Thanks. --- Tito Pao (talk) 04:46, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

See Battle of Manila (1899), the reason is stated there. --Jojit (talk) 09:10, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

New article: Daniel Tirona

Bonifacio's best friend. Uthanc (talk) 17:56, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

submitted to DYK being almost shot twice is just too good to pass up.--Lenticel ^(talk) 02:31, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Nice. It seems you have the standard Philippine history books at hand. :-) --seav (talk) 02:33, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

favor guys

Could you pls watch Bukidnon State University and UP Sigma Rho for me. very persistent editors occasionally change the material in these articles with unsourced claims. Thanks guys. --Lenticel ^(talk) 10:10, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Photo request: Philippine Airlines HQ

Would someone mind photographing the headquarters of Philippine Airlines in Pasay City? Thank you WhisperToMe (talk) 19:29, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Philippine Airlines' headquarters is located in the PNB Building. Why do you need the picture for, though? Is this for an article on PAL Holdings, which does not exist yet? --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 01:42, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

It's for the airline itself. Airline articles typically have pictures of their headquarters, i.e. Delta Air Lines has a shot of its Atlanta headquarters and American Airlines and AMR Corporation have the photo of its Fort Worth facilities. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:46, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Mix-up in Flags of the Philippine Revolution?

Isn't the (a) Magdalo flag?

"When the revolution flared up, the Magdalo faction of the Katipunan in Cavite adopted a flag consisting of a red rectangular banner with a white K in the ancient Tagalog script in the center of a sun, represented by a white circle, with an indefinite number of rays. Later on, the rays of the sun were limited to eight to represent the eight provinces which first took up arms against the Spaniards. This flag became the first official banner of the revolutionary forces and was blessed in a mass celebrated at Imus." --- T. Agoncillo, History of the Filipino People

Did Agoncillo use circle instead of disc because the circle wasn't filled in? In fact this flag (rays are lines instead of ... pentagons?) is more similar to representations I've seen in books prior to the Magdalo group. It's also the Magdalo flag in non-Wikipedia online sources:

• http://filipino.biz.ph/history/flags.html
• http://flagspot.net/flags/ph-histo.html

The second site has a Noveleta flag (photo) which Manuel Quezon III (the columnist!) compares to the mutineer's flag .

The two flags are not identical though. Noveleta was Magdiwang territory. Perhaps Trillanes and co. mixed up their flag? In this forum thread Ambeth Ocampo is quoted:

"The symbol on armbands worn by the 'mutineers' was Andres Bonifacio's flag, yet nobody commented on the paradox in the name of the group. "Magdalo," as every schoolboy knows, was the Katipunan faction in Cavite province associated with Emilio Aguinaldo. Why not be consistent and be called 'Magdiwang' instead? During the 1897 Tejeros Convention in Cavite, when Bonifacio was asked to preside over the formation of a revolutionary government to replace the Katipunan, he pointed to this flag, explained its symbolism, particularly the pre-colonial character "Ka," which is short for 'Kalayaan.'"

To be accurate is Bonifacio's personal flag but since the Magdiwang backed him (temporarily) against Aguinaldo, I guess the Noveleta flag above could be considered his. Perhaps like Quezon, Ocampo had thought of the Noveleta flag? But according to Agoncillo the Magdalo flag was made universal (at least in Cavite) on March 17 before Tejeros on March 22, so Bonifacio may have referred to the first image. Also, both have the Ka symbol.

In short, I believe the current Magdiwang flag (image with Magdiwang in filename) is actually the (a) Magdalo flag and that Trillanes made his own flag based on the Magdiwang flag thinking it was the Magdalo flag. Or perhaps the Trillanes flag can qualify as a (conjectural) Magdalo flag. Either way a redraw or another version of the current Magdiwang flag and an svg version of the Noveleta Magdiwang flag is needed. Uthanc (talk) 21:43, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Let me ask Manolo Quezon... as soon as the Cory events are over. --seav (talk) 04:05, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of Manolo, is he still active on Wikipedia? --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 15:37, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

User:Goldenit hijacks Bannawag article.

I'm serious! Quick! Look at Bannawag, then check its history, and please revert it to the last best version po please. TheTechieGeek63 (talk) 04:16, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

 Done --Bluemask (talk) 04:28, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

3 new Maguindanao municipalities

Datu Hofer Ampatuan, Shariff Saydona Mustapha and Datu Salibo are said to have been created as per [2] and [3]. Plebiscites for the creation of the municipalities are scheduled to be conducted on August 6. We need again to keep track of the RLA's favorite past time of creating new towns. --Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 11:16, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Maybe we need to wait until July 30 when the plebiscite is already in effect, whether townsmen would like to have their separate municipality.--JL 09^{Talk to me!} 16:35, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Ehh...I hate the upcoming work for maps. Speaking of new towns: other newly-created towns, like Datu Blah T. Sinsuat, Maguindanao, still don't have locator maps. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 15:11, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

All three towns ratified. Whew! Soon Maguindanao will have the most towns of any province. --Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 01:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Carlo J. Caparas and the 2009 National Artist of the Philippines controversy

Something tells me the Carlo J. Caparas ought to be watched very carefully over the next few days, what with all the controversy and all. The Caparas article also needs a lot of work, particularly in its Bio, if anyone's interested. :-D -- Alternativity (talk) 16:33, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

FANTASTIC opportunity to Photograph living National Artists of the Philippines on Friday

Oh by the way, perhaps someone can go to the scheduled protest Friday 2PM at the Cultural Center of the Philippines ramp regarding the 2009 National Artist of the Philippines controversy? It'd be a great chance to capture images of our National Artists of the Philippines. And the controversy article could use an image depicting the protest too. :-D Virgilio Almario, Bienvenido Lumbera, Bencab! (I need help improving BenCab, btw... I lack free time.) Improved images for Eddie Romero and F.Sionil Jose! And oh, I'm sure a few artists other than the National Artists will be there, too... a chance to put images on the pages of established artists like Lourd de Veyra and Gerry Alanguilan pages, maybe even still-rising artists Jonas Diego. I'd be the first to volunteer, given it's a chance to shake some of these people's hands, but if you will recall, I live in Agoo,La Union and thus am far away from the event. And I feel miserable about not going. Sigh. But... photographers near there, don't miss the fantastic opportunity to capture our National Artists in full-color-protest action! -- Alternativity (talk) 16:49, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I apologize in advance, as I can't resist adding: Who knows, maybe even some dead National Artists will turn up, having turned so much in their graves they decide to join the protest. Wouldn't you love to have an image of, say, Lino Brocka or Nick Joaquin show up as images on your jpegs? :-D Just a thought. hehe. -- Alternativity (talk) 16:54, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm surprised Gerry Alanguilan hasn't put an image of himself on Wikipedia, as he is a Wikipedian. But anyway, if people can go, why wouldn't they take pictures (no, I cannot go tomorrow)? --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 17:06, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh. My apologies. It turns out Gerry AlanguilanDOES have an image there already. I suppose the fan in me got the best of me. hehe. -- Alternativity (talk) 18:03, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Corazon Aquino

Perhaps somebody living in Metro Manilla can make some pictures of the wake and or the funeral of former president Corazon Aquino? I see lots of copyrighted photographs on the internet with huge crowds around the coffin. It would be nice when we can add a photo to the article on wikipedia. Magalhães (talk) 13:39, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Reminds me...heads up, guys, the article on the death of Cory Aquino is also up for an AfD vote. Do make your views count, if you may. --- Tito Pao (talk) 00:52, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

By the way, I also have pictures of the scene at her home in Times St., Quezon City. I'll be uploading them soon. --- Tito Pao (talk) 00:52, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks already for those pictures. Magalhães (talk) 09:30, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Please upload to Commons! :-) --seav (talk) 04:09, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater, Captain America, and others have memorial userboxes for wikieditors to place on their userpage. Maybe we as a community can come up with a userbox for the Late Former President Aquino? --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 07:15, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I'd like a userbox, but don't quite know how to make a good one. Has anyone done this yet, I wonder? Thanks... - Alternativity (talk) 16:30, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Since there are proposals to make Cory a national hero, I expanded National hero of the Philippines, picking up where Lenticel left off. Would you believe Rizal is not the national hero legally speaking, and Cory may be the first officially declared national hero soon? Uthanc (talk) 21:07, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Amado Hernandez

Help. The article was named Amado Hernández, who happened to be moved by a user by around 2006. I am trying to revert it per Wikipedia:MOSPHIL#Names, especially that he was born 1903. You can see the edit here: [4] Please somebody may do something about this.--JL 09^{Talk to me!} 14:59, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Is there something we can do about this?--JL 09^{Talk to me!} 14:13, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Manila Standard Today

The Manila Standard Today recently redesigned their website, and all previous links to the articles in their archive now redirect to their main page. In fact they may have scrapped their old archives entirely. Ruins a lot of references. TheCoffee (talk) 02:44, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

The same thing happened with the Manila Bulletin and The Philippine Star. Star archives are now only accessible through membership, and Bulletin archives are becoming hard to find. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 02:48, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup of Death and funeral of Corazon Aquino

First things first: the AfD for the article on the death and funeral of Corazon Aquino failed. The article will be kept.

On a second, more pressing note, the article is in need of massive cleanup. What appalls me more is that the quality of English among some Filipino Wikipedians seems to be either on the decline, or is so bad that I feel like I'm reading Engrish (no offense to those with poor English to begin with). To quote a particularly shocking section of the article:

“ The public went shocked because some days before the announcement, Aquino was publicly visible doing some protest against the Arroyo government. She was known, before her confinement, to be an avid supporter of NBN-ZTE scandal star witness Rodolfo "Jun" Lozada, Jr. She is always in active attending public masses and rallies for Lozada like nine-part "Mass for Truth and Accountability" prayer since the former surfacing in February 2008. The said mass was done February 25, exactly 22 years after People Power Revolution that successfully installed Aquino to presidential power. (For more information, see Philippine National Broadband Network controversy.) Aquino was known to be the primary organizer of the "Mass for Truth and Accountability" novena. On March 23, 2008, sixth of the "Mass for Truth and Accountability" novena and the day before Kris' announcement, she was seen in attending Easter mass in St. Joseph's College, Quezon City where she thanked Lozada for "his courage and sacrifices for the campaign of truth." ”

I'll begin work on this, but my schedule is beginning to border on full. The section likewise on the funeral Mass is empty. Let's get to work! --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 15:33, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I partly wanted the article deleted just because it was so bad. Personally I'd remove the entire "international community" reactions section... it's basically dozens of variations of the same thing. See Death and state funeral of Ronald Reagan as a decent model to follow. TheCoffee (talk) 16:55, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

It's understandable. It's a reflection of the declining quality of Philippine English. However, inasmuch as I hate being brutally frank, there is one thing about the editor of that particular section of article: said user is more active on the Tagalog Wikipedia than here. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 17:24, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I've read this post just at this moment. My apologies then. I will try to become vernacular in English here as I do when I am writing to school paper and my subject papers. I hate writing sentences in haste, but still, no time to re-check it after a while. I have my sincerest apologies.Pasensya na po kung pangit ako mag-Ingles dito sa Wikipedia, and I tend to become a reflection of declining English in the Philippines. If I offended Filipino community, I have my deepest apologies. It just so happened that I never grew up seeing people speaking in English, or grew up speaking English, but am still eager to help expanding information here even though.--JL 09^{Talk to me!} 15:54, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

"His Excellency"

User:JL 09 recently added "His/Her Excellency" to the honorific_prefix field in the infoboxes of all our Philippine president articles (see, for example, Sergio Osmeña). What are your opinions on this? Personally... I don't like... doesn't feel right... kind of sycophantic, I dunno. Opinions? TheCoffee (talk) 13:31, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

It is the manner of address for a Philippine president, based upon the article that linked from His/Her Excellency, isn't it?--JL 09^{Talk to me!} 13:35, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

The Philippine president is addressed "His/Her Illustrious Excellency"? I always knew it was "His/Her Excellency", but the former actually exists? --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 13:50, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, it actually says "His/Her Illustrius Excellency" at Style - Manner_of_Address#Philippines... no reference though. But using any honorary prefix sounds silly to my ears. I notice that article also mentions honorary prefixes for US officials, but their articles don't have it in the infobox. TheCoffee (talk) 15:18, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Carlo J. Caparas Film List

I'm no showbiz fan, so I don't know much. Also, I try to edit articles only when I can manage neutrality, and my blood boils whenever I think of Caparas such that I really don't want to be too involved in shaping up his wiki entry. But I suspect some of those movies don't belong there. I've never heard of Andres De Saya... Is that series of films for real? At any rate, the upcoming Andres de Saya films are uncited. I just don't want to erase them and find out I just don't know his works. Yes, I DON'T KNOW YOUR WORKS, Mr Caparas. Apologies are in order perhaps. Yawn. (Must bring blood pressure back down, must...) -- Alternativity (talk) 04:49, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

If I'm not mistaken, Mr. Caparas is shooting that film, Andres de Saya, somewhere in central Philippines at the moment he was proclaimed as National Artist. If that is the case, then the film is in TBA.--JL 09^{Talk to me!} 15:45, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Ah. So it exists. Pardon my lack of knowledge, then. Hehe. :-D -- Alternativity (talk) 16:44, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

It's okay. It's human nature to do mistakes. :) --JL 09^{Talk to me!} 23:31, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

About Wowowee!

Removing section per WP:BLP guidelines. --Bluemask (talk) 14:18, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

regarding "about Wowowee"

Should we send it directly to the Tambayan archives, translate it (for those who want to use that statement), or expunge it? Maybe that statement has some sense, but I'll leave the decisions to you or to the admins. it's war time @ 08:47, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Either archive it, or have it purged Stalin-style, as in it will be removed permanently, as it seems potentially libelous or insulting. Blake Gripling (talk) 09:57, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Removed. WP:BLP violation. [5] --Bluemask (talk) 14:18, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Proper LGU formats

I am looking at some Philippine municipality/city articles, and I found that some of them inserted the flag of their province or their city flag. Is this the proper format for infoboxes? Example, see Angeles City, Pampanga--JL 09^{Talk to me!} 12:57, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't know anything about cities having flags... If the city really does have an official flag, the format used in Angeles City is ok. But it's not right to have province flags in city articles. TheCoffee (talk) 02:29, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment of José Rizal

José Rizal has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Malleus Fatuorum 16:39, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Freddie Aguilar

Resolved

 – Article is now semi-protected, and MeganAguilar has been blocked indef for harrasment and/or BLP violations. --Blake Gripling (talk) 10:32, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

MeaganAguilar (talk · contribs) keeps on on vandalizing the Freddie Aguilar article. Please help, I might run out of reverts for today. --Bluemask (talk) 14:08, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

That may probably have to do with Freddie's statement regarding singers like Gary V., which the folk singer cites as not being nationalistic and "monkey". I had it RPP'd and the users reported, hoping to end this issue. Blake Gripling (talk) 10:08, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Bluemask, obvious vandalism is an exception to the three revert rule, so feel free to revert your heart out. TheCoffee (talk) 14:01, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Clarissa Ocampo AfD relisted

Heads up to the tambays: the AfD on the Clarissa Ocampo was relisted, as there were not many inputs on the matter. Please feel free to add you own thoughts on the AfD. Thanks. --- Tito Pao (talk) 09:55, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Rajah Lakan Dula

I am very surprised that the talk page grew like a forum site. What can we do about it?--JL 09^{Talk to me!} 15:38, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I've added a header and a warning on the Talk page. I will be soon leaving individual user warning templates on the concerned users' talk pages. Let's hope it'll work out. --- Tito Pao (talk) 00:30, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

UPDATE: After seeing WP:PRUNE and WP:TPO, I decided to give it a go and deleted the off-topic comments (again, with the July 2009 cut-off). It's the first time I tried doing that on a talk page, so I'm expecting to get some hits on this soon :P --- Tito Pao (talk) 02:18, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Titopao. I hope that everyone may follow it. Maybe the reason why that the article has forum-like talk page is that it claims descendants of the rajah.--JL 09^{Talk to me!} 12:50, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Reaction to User:Democraticsystem?

This user uploads images that are obviously non-free (he is saying those came from this Multiply site, so he had an instinct that it came from Malacanang even though the site itself don't have specs how they got those images), editing pages about Philippine presidents (though constructive, others are not) like removing substantial information like here, incidents of changing official links to Multiply links ([6], 2, etc.) and has been involved in some cases which he/she ignored.--JL 09^{Talk to me!} 12:50, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Note, I strongly suspect User:Democraticsystem is a sockpuppet of User:Philippinepresidency. They're both heavily involved with editing articles on Philippine presidents, and the edits tend to be troublesome. TheCoffee (talk) 05:37, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

philippine youth congress in information technology (Y4IT)

You are invited to join this annual event.
For more info visit http://y4it.up.edu.ph/ --Exec8 (talk) 06:53, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

New SC Associate Justices

Mariano del Castillo and Roberto Abad were chosen to fill the two Supreme Court vacancies, I couldn't seem to find the birth date of the latter. Can anyone supply the information? --Scorpion prinz ^{(Talk | contribs)} 11:52, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

According to this article, his date of birth is May 22, 1944. Magalhães (talk) 12:43, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Religion entries in ethnic group infoboxes about Filipino migrant groups

There's a dispute about some overseas Filipino articles. Will appreciate the input of interested editors from this project at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups#Religion entries in ethnic group infoboxes about migrant groups. Thanks, cab (talk) 01:29, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

ONA and controversy question

At least two users are removing Carlo J. Caparas' name on the list. Was he, et. al. given the National Artist award? This news article says that protesters want SC to block the ceremony for the awarding. If this controversy is still on going, should we retain Caparas' name on the list, or live note that his status is still disputed (like what I did on {{National Artists of the Philippines}})?--JL 09^{Talk to me!} 22:37, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the update, put it up at the controversy page. As of now, the SC has not reversed his proclamation, so he is STILL a member of the ONA, even if he has not yet been FORMALLY conferred the honor yet. No telling how long that will be, though. I suspect there will be a need to protect or semi protect:

• Carlo J. Caparas;
• National Artist of the Philippines;
• 2009 National Artist of the Philippines controversy; and
• any forthcoming Cecilla Guidote-Alvarez article.

Although the last has not yet been the subject of vandalism or attacks. Also, that list of Caparas movies still strikes me as containing problem cases, but I have no idea whether they're legit. 1998's "Hiwaga ng Pandak"? 1994's "The Lucila Lalu Story (God, Where’s My Head?)"? And...1981's unknown? I'm afraid to touch the list except to correct blatant vandalism, I might make a bigger mess than before. -- Alternativity (talk) 02:05, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay, Carlo J. Caparas definitely needs attention and protection, ASAP. -- Alternativity (talk) 02:10, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Island Areas

Can anyone please provide a reasonable explanation for the rather dramatic increase of the island areas for Luzon and Mindanao from the official statistics found in Philippines in Figures 2005 to those found in 'Philippines in Figures 2006 and onwards?--Chris sb (talk) 15:32, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Waling-waling article

Mga ka-tambay, here's an article on the Waling-Waling. Maybe you can help flesh it out. Lenticel, is it good enough for a DYK hook? Cheers y'all! — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 08:13, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey Kurt. It's been a while. ;)

It depends on which hook you intend to pursue (overcollection or the House of Representatives), but I think it will pass DYK. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 08:43, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Yep, I went off-Wiki for about a month. Had a mild stroke. <aren't off-topic topics not allowed here? lol!> It's quite strange we didn't have an article on the "Queen of Philippine Orchids", <which btw, I neglected to put in the article...> — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 09:43, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Reminder: reward for the 25,000th Tagalog Wikipedia article

Noong ako'y nagbabasa sa mga sinupan ng Tambayan, naidaan ko ang isang pahayag ni Butch (exec8) ukol sa isang pabuya sa pagsulat ng ika-25,000 artikulo ng Wikipediang Tagalog. Sa paglapit ng bilang ng mga artikulo sa mahiwagang bilang na ito (sa kasalukuyan, humihigit-kumukulang sa 23,000 artikulo ang bilang ng mga artikulo roon), baka kailangan nating tandaan at muling ipaalala sa lahat na hindi pa ito naibawi ng orihinal na tagapagpahayag, Makikita ang mga detalye ng naibaong promo dito. Maraming salamat po.

(For the benefit of our non-Tagalog speakers, the message is as follows:)

While I was checking back at the Tambayan's archives, I passed by one of exec8's posts about a reward for whoever writes the 25,000th article of the Tagalog Wikipedia. As we reach that magic number (currently the article count is around 23,000), maybe we should remind everyone again about this promo which was not retracted by the original poster. The details of the "buried" promo are here. Thank you very much.

Well, if I wasn't a bureaucrat, I'd want that P1000 Sodexho gift certificate! :)) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 11:06, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I am worried that there will be another dump of stubs again. --Bluemask (talk) 12:03, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

There's a set of criteria to qualify. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 13:33, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, first of all, the GC has an expiration date, which is December 31, 2008. So I have no more sodexho GCs left, I used it already in my Christmas shopping. That post was almost two years ago. One thing was there were a lot of stubs which were not developed eversince. There was even one user who suspect me as a sockpuppet. But I hope it can reach 50,000 by mid-2010, I think. It is best if we develop the tl wiktionary. I bought a thick Tagalog dictionary last year in the Manila Bookfair. If lucky enough to buy it, the other Philippine language dictionary which is a little more expensive than the Tagalog one. --Exec8 (talk) 11:10, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Far from the topic: where is the venue of Manila Bookfair, until when?--JL 09^{Talk to me!} 11:47, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Read up, please. It's the subject of Manila 5. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 15:58, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

List of historical anniversaries - August 24

I would like to call the attention of an administrator to remove the part "Heroes' Day in the Philippines (2009)" at the Main Page today. It's not until next week. - 121.1.11.120 (talk) 11:05, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I think National Heroes' Day is really August 24, but due to P GMA's order (which was enacted to a law), it was transferred to August 31, for 2009. But August 31 date is not the permanent day, so the section on Main Page is not subjected for removal.--JL 09^{Talk to me!} 11:39, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Inclusion of non-related categories

User: Nasugbu batangas inserts categories like Filipino culture and Ilocano culture into cities and municipalities article. I think we need to revert them all, since it is unnecessary to insert those, especially that it comes regionalistic.--JL 09^{Talk to me!}_{msg 4 u!} 15:08, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Dispute on Eastwood City

I am currently in a slow-moving dispute with somebody who insists on adding an external link (then a citation) to what I presume is his website. What do you guys think? Is his link spammy or is it acceptable? --seav (talk) 15:42, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

It looks like a self-published website to me. Can't say it's spam, but then again it looks like a personal blog to me. I'll try leaving a user talk page warning on the said user's page. Let's see if this will work. --- Tito Pao (talk) 01:27, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Just as I expected...the user reverted, and then left a message on my talk page. I reverted the edit and posted another message :P --- Tito Pao (talk) 07:17, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Apply that site here. I did that with Starmometer. Starczamora (talk) 14:14, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Pao, I've slapped him with a uwspam3 (with additional strong language) and reverted his latest edit. What he's putting in is very POV. Just STOP already! --Eaglestorm (talk) 14:39, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the assistance. His insistence on adding that link just proves that he is spamming. I guess if he still persists, then we can add the website URL to the spam blacklist. --seav (talk) 14:50, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Hmm...let me guess. The said user in question will be back to restore the link at around 4 in the afternoon and/or 10 in the evening later. At least, that's what the User Contributions page tells me :P Maybe we can try a direct email, in case it's enabled on the user's account? --- Tito Pao (talk) 01:49, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

His last edit truly defined what he has done. "Assholes with own agendas"? That is rich! Sa wakas, nagtanda rin. --Eaglestorm (talk) 03:06, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Merging question

Do you think it is proper to merge List of Philippine provincial name etymologies to the article Name of the Philippines? Plus the demonyms used in the Philippines?--JL 09^{Talk to me!}_{msg 4 u!} 15:28, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I think they ought to remain separate. Provincial etymologies are a different matter from the etymology of the name "Philippines". --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 16:23, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Contradicting dates of Aguinaldo's presidency

The Emilio Aguinaldo article states that he was president from March 22, 1897 to April 1, 1901. However, the list of Presidents of the Philippines says that he served from May 24, 1899 to April 1, 1901. Which date should be followed? - 121.1.11.120 (talk) 06:37, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

--

I'll summarize what Gregorio Zaide, Onofre Corpuz, et. al. well known Filipino historians is saying:

Aguinaldo was elected March 22, 1897 as president of the Katipunan during the Tejeros Convention. He was absent that time because he is in the battlefield. I remember Professor Diokno's words on the orientation of the house where Tejeros convention was held, it is something like an old, small building with a known door and secret door. Anyway. But his Katipunan presidency lasted only for hours after Bonifacio's election as Interior Director when Daniel Tirona marred Bonifacio's capability as director. After this heated confrontation, Tejeros convention delegates agreed to have a revolutionary government, thus proclaiming Aguinaldo as the president of revolutionary government of the Philippines.

Zaide clearly said that Aguinaldo was initially president of Katipunan before the revolutionary government, in reference to Zaide's section saying that the convention before Tejeros, the Imus Assembly (December 31, 1896), has ended with unresolved agenda (Should the revolutionists be governed by the Katipunan or should they establish a new government?), which was continued along with the Tejeros convention. In Tejeros, they elected Aguinaldo under existing Katipunan government, but his short-lived presidency to Katipunan ended when it was changed to revolutionary government. Then the story goes on, the killing of Bonifacio, ebb tide of revolution, so on. Until 1897.

His presidency for the revolutionary government ended again when he convened the writing of Biak-na-Bato Constitution. The constitution was written and ratified by Aguinaldo himself on November 1, 1897, substantially ending the existing revolutionary government, and forming Biak-na-Bato Republic. It has no clear form of government (whether revolutionary, transitional, etc.), as Aguinaldo cabinet mandated to end the Biak-na-Bato by 1899 or some 1900. He also assumed the office the next day, November 2, 1897.

Then, goes the Pact of Biak-na-Bato, Spanish Governor-General Primo de Rivera's and Aguinaldo's dishonest agreement of payments with some sort of independence. On December 27, 1897, Aguinaldo sent himself as exile to Hong Kong, thus ending his term again as president. When he arrived on Hong Kong, (maybe around January 1898), he established a Hong Kong Junta turned to Supreme Council of the Nation Philippines and himself as the president, and was revolutionary in nature.

The junta lasted on May 19, 1898, when Aguinaldo returned to Cavite aboard American vessel McCulloch. So from May 19, 1898, he held no official title except as a war general. On May 24, 1898, he proclaimed a dictatorial government in Cavite with himself as the dictator. Then, on June 12, 1898, he announced Philippine independence in his home at Kawit, with the same dictatorial nature. The new republic was federal, and the constitution was written by Ambrosio Rianzares Bautista.

On June 23, 1898, he reclassified the government as revolutionary again and himself as a dictator, and federal structure. On January 23, 1899, the dictatorial government ended as the First Philippine Republic was proclaimed in January 23, 1899 with Malolos Constitution as basis. The First Republic ended de jure when Aguinaldo was captured in Isabela on March 31, 1901 (but Aguinaldo's term ended April 1, 1901), but ended de facto earlier on March 31, 1899 when Malolos Congress fell under American troops.

In summary, here goes Aguinaldo's political career as president:

• March 22, 1897

President of the Katipunan Supreme Council

• March 22, 1897 - November 1 , 1897

President of the revolutionary government

• November 2, 1897 - December 27, 1897

President of the Republic of Biak-na-Bato

• January, 1898 - May 19, 1898

President of the Hong Kong Junta

President of the Supreme Council of the Nation Philippines
(Don't know exactly the date, but the Hong Kong Junta name was replaced by this when the organization of the former became larger)

• May 24, 1898 - January 23, 1899

President of the Dictatorial Government of the Philippines

• January 23, 1899 - March 31, 1901

(Remember the political interregnum between the Philippine Revolution, 1896-1898 thru Philippine-American War started 1899)

President of the First Philippine Republic

(First Republic's principle ended March 31, 1901, but his term as president is until April 1, 1901)

--

Comment: There are some transitions of offices in Philippine history but are not mentioned on the presidential infoboxes, like for example, this instance occurred to Aguinaldo. Other transitions of offices/government but the head of government was retained are from the Commonwealth of the Philippines to Third Philippine Republic (Roxas was elected last President of the Commonwealth and inaugurated May 28, 1946, but was re-inaugurated again on July 4, 1946 when US announced RP independence and the start of Third Republic), Marcos' government (not to consider his first term 1965-1969, but the transitions on government. Marcos' declaration of Martial Law in 1971 -- perhaps we should start an article about Martial Law -- added the dictator title to his office, if I'm not mistaken, he become the President of the Parliamentary Republic, from 1972 to 1981 with some changes in power, then the "eternal" president of the Fourth Republic from 1981 to 1986), and Corazon Aquino transitions from the Fourth Republic until the writing of new Constitution establishing the new 1987 Fifth Republic. Should we add some new changes, then?--JL 09^{Talk to me!} 09:48, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm traveling, don't have my books handy and don't have the time to research on the net, but it seems that you're missing the period of Revolutionary Government begining June 23, 1899, between the Dictatorial Government and the insurgent First Philippine Republic. This is discussed a bit in the History of the Philippines (1898-1946) article, though the supporting cite is a dead link. I'll try to remember to fix that broken cite when I get back to the Philippines in a week or two. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:54, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Based on historians later than Zaide (whose work is pretty old), I would contest that Aguinaldo was elected president of the Katipunan at Tejeros. (Are you sure that's what Zaide says? I don't have his books). Wasn't their objective to establish a government replacing the Katipunan? According to Agoncillo, Constantino and Guerrero, from March 22, 1897 - November 1 , 1897 Aguinaldo was the president of the "Tejeros revolutionary government" (for the lack of a standard term). Since Bonifacio did not accept the office of director of the interior, some other guy was appointed. Uthanc (talk) 08:31, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I have Zaide's book at home, along with several others. I'll try to remember to see what they say about this when I get back home in a few weeks. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:31, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I dug up a couple of supporting cites working from an internet cafe:

• Author C. Duka (2008), Struggle for Freedom', Rex Bookstore, Inc., p. 167, ISBN 9789712350450. {{citation}}: |author= has generic name (help); horizontal tab character in |author= at position 7 (help)
• Dean C. Worcester (2004), The Philippines Past And Present, Kessinger Publishing, p. 144, ISBN 9781419177156.

Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 04:30, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm back from vacation. It looks like I screwed up above and provided cites not relevant to Tejeros but to a later revolutionary government with Aguinaldo as President. Anyhow, I've looked in Zaide's book and it does say that Aguinaldo was elected President at the Tejeros Assembly hosted on March 22, 1897 by Bonifacio's Magdiwang Council. It also says that Bonifacio, angered by a protest by Daniel Tirona regarding his (Bonifacio's) capability for his elected post of Director of Interior, declared the election null and void, dissolved the session, and walked out. It goes on to say, "The majority of the patriots, however, recognized the result of the election and the establishment of the new Revolutionary Government which replaced the Katipunan." The supporting cite is Zaide, Sonia M. (1999), The Philippines: A Unique Nation (second ed.), All-Nations Publishing Co., p. 245, ISBN 971-642-071-4 In a footnote, Zaide says that eyewitness accounts of the assembly can be seen in "letter of Andres Bonifacio to Emilio Jacinto, dated Limbon, April 24, 1897, cited by Carlos Quirino in his 'Historical Introductio'" in The Trial of Andres Bonivacio (Ateneo de Manila, 1963), p.6; see also Ricarte's memoirs pp.36-43 and his book The Hispano-Philippine Revolution (Yokahama 1926) pp.47-53." 05:48, 28 August 2009 (UTC)Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill)

The List of Presidents of the Philippines does include Aguinaldo's presidency (presidencies?) based on Tejeros and Biak-na-Bato, but since the "First Republic" is considered to be the Malolos Republic of 1899, his "official" term is counted from there, or so says http://www.pangulo.ph/: "The presidency of Emilio Aguinaldo is dated to his inauguration as such with the promulgation of the Malolos Constitution." Uthanc (talk) 09:03, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Hmm.. http://www.pangulo.ph/prexy_efa.php says his presidency started January 23, 1899, which was Aguinaldo's proclamation of a dictatorial government. I think we should emphasize on the "list" article the different times of Aguinaldo's presidency. I mean should we have a smaller, compressed list or a note perhaps that his presidency started de facto on the Tejeros Convention but de facto and de jure only starting the Malolos promulgation. I think, too, this is a common strife among historians, a long-time debate of Aguinaldo's presidency time (Remember that it was clear that he ordered Bonifacio's execution, but it is not clear whether the letter he sent to someone named Makapagal (also a matter of issue) brings the order to kill Bonifacio, or just torture him). We must consult a better-known historian today, because Zaide's, Agoncillo's works are relatively old, and was only edited by his family after their deaths to add recent events and change names of provinces. --JL 09^{Talk to me!} 09:24, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Check the site again - Aguinaldo's "dictatorial" presidency was from May 24, 1898 – June 23, 1898. His presidency starting January 23, 1899 was that of the First Republic. Not sure how to mention the de facto/de jure distinction, or when those terms applied, but all of Aguinaldo's terms of office mentioned in the pangulo.ph site are now in the List article, as you said. It's indeed oversimplifying to consider all his presidencies one term. Uthanc (talk) 11:30, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, all terms of office except the Hong Kong Junta. Are we to consider it a government in exile? The pangulo.ph site (which, by the way, Manuel L. Quezon III is editor-in-chief of) doesn't include it in Aguinaldo's terms of office. Uthanc (talk) 11:47, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

(Re: Events in 1897) The office to which Emilio Aguinaldo was elected at the Tejeros convention on March 22, 1897, according to Bonifacio, was “Presidente de la Republica” (letter to Emilio Jacinto dated April 24, 1897). Aguinaldo took his oath of office as President in Tanza on March 23, but apparently then decided that it would be judicious to defer his assumption of presidential powers until such time as the post-election recriminations had subsided and the dissentients (Bonifacio and the Magdiwang leaders) had been mollified or neutralized. In his communications, in early April 1897, Aguinaldo still used his Magdalo title “Pangulong Digma” rather than “Presidente”, and they still bore a Magdalo ink stamp rather than any mark of the republic. Some of his supporters, however, began to address him as “Presidente”, and undoubtedly he himself wanted to assume that position just as soon as he could overcome the challenge to his authority. Over the next two or three weeks, Aguinaldo persuaded most of the Magdiwang leaders to accept the legitimacy of his election at Tejeros, and on April 24, 1897, in the town of Naik, the cabinet (to which Aguinaldo had appointed some prominent Magdiwang figures) held its first session. Around the same date, maybe later that same day, a larger, more open meeting was held to announce that the republic conceived at Tejeros had now been born. The moment his government was in place, Aguinaldo instructed his clerks to make copies of a circular for despatch to the town presidents in all the municipalities that couriers could readily reach. Writing for the first time on notepaper bearing the rubric “Republica Filipina – Presidencia” he warned the town chiefs that any lack of support for, or even indifference to, the Government would not be tolerated. “Having been elected President of our Nation,” he informed them, “at a meeting held in [Tejeros, San Francisco de] Malabon on the twenty-second of March, I have begun from this day, the 24th of the present month, to exercise the responsibilities of the aforesaid Office.” (Emilio Aguinaldo, Circular to town presidents, April 24, 1897 [in Tagalog] [Philippine Insurgent Records, AGO 460111-197; Microfilm reel 84].)

Some two weeks later the town of Naik fell to the Spaniards, and in May and June 1897 Aguinaldo and in a sense “the Republic” trekked through the hills and backcountry before eventually, around July, establishing a headquarters in Biak-na-bato. There, on November 1, 1897, a constitution was adopted, the preamble to the Tagalog version of which has been translated as follows:-

“In Biac-na-bato on the first day of the month of November of the year one thousand eight hundred and ninety-seven, the Representatives of the people of the Philippine Islands, assembled for the purpose of modifying [upang mabago] the Constitution of this Republic of the Philippines, drawn up and proclaimed in the town of Naik, province of Cavite, on the twenty-second of March of this year, in accordance with the provisions of Decree No. 29 of current year after a long discussion, have unanimously agreed upon the following:…” (“Constitution of Biac-na-bato”, in The Philippine Insurrection against the United States, a compilation of documents with notes and introduction by John R. M. Taylor, vol. I (Pasay City: Eugenio Lopez Foundation, 1971), p.376.)

Teodoro Agoncillo has rightly pointed out that the facts in this preamble are muddled. (Agoncillo, Malolos, p.743) The leading revolutionists had been in Tejeros (San Francisco de Malabon) on March 22, and had not arrived in Naik until around April 9. More importantly, though, the preamble makes it clear that the Republic already exists, that it predates the new constitution, and that it had been in existence since it was formed in Cavite. It is not being formed at that moment, in Biak-na-bato. Why, then, Agoncillo and countless other historians have referred to a “Republic of Biak-na-bato” or a “Biak-na-bato Republic” is a mystery. Not a single official document, for sure, ever bore either of those rubrics, in either Spanish or Tagalog. (Jim Richardson (talk) 11:35, 18 August 2009 (UTC))