Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Detailed Philippine presidential and vice-presidential election results from 1946 to 2004 province by province
Line 525: Line 525:
== Detailed Philippine presidential and vice-presidential election results from 1946 to 2004 province by province ==
== Detailed Philippine presidential and vice-presidential election results from 1946 to 2004 province by province ==


Those who have a copy of the detailed Philippine presidential and vice-presidential election results from 1946 to 1998 province by province, you can post the detailed presidential and vice-presidential election results to their respective Wikipedia articles or you can also give a copy of the detailed Philippine presidential and vice-presidential election results from 1946 to 1998 province by province to my e-mall address: josephs_dagreat@yahoo.com. Thank you.--[[User:Joseph Solis in Australia|Joseph Solis in Australia]] 10:32, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Those who have a copy of the detailed Philippine presidential and vice-presidential election results from 1946 to 1998 province by province, you can post the detailed presidential and vice-presidential election results to their respective Wikipedia articles or you can also give a copy of the detailed Philippine presidential and vice-presidential election results from 1946 to 1998 province by province to my e-mall address: josephs_dagreat@yahoo.com and then I will the one to post to their respective Wikipedia articles. Thank you.--[[User:Joseph Solis in Australia|Joseph Solis in Australia]] 10:32, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 10:33, 15 June 2007

Shortcuts

WT:TAMBAY - WT:PINOY

Discussion

Start new topic

Archives

00 | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10


Quick counts

Are the quick counts necessary to be shown here? Philippine general election, 2007 --Scorpion prinz (Talk | contribs) 09:51, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Only the NAMFREL ones were included at the previous elections, although I'd recommend other quick counts for the early days, when we get official results we can discard them except NAMFREL. --Howard the Duck 13:12, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So let's nominate those other templates for deletion then? --Scorpion prinz (Talk | contribs) 15:50, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Who created those anyway? It won't be needed anyway in the long run. --Howard the Duck 16:01, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Other than the NAMFREL quick count tally, no, no and a big, big NO. In the articles about US elections, do you see any of those exit polls by CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS and Fox TV? In the recently-concluded French elections, do you see other similar unofficial counts other than from the government? --- Tito Pao 01:37, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well those elections get to have their victors announced within a week; ours are within a month. --Howard the Duck 02:44, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Let's just remove all other quick counts other than NAMFREL, it's the official citizen's arm sanctioned by COMELEC. --Scorpion prinz (Talk | contribs) 06:32, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm in favor but not now. Maybe after a week we can remove ABS-CBN's, PPCRV's and GMA's quick counts, but for the time being when there are no numbers released yet it'll give an idea where we're at. --Howard the Duck 06:37, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rizalninoynapoleon added an announcement on the Tambayan's main page that says "Philippine Senator Richard Gordon has asked Tambayan prevent deletion of the media quick counts which must tackled immediately". Is this true? I tried looking this up at news websites but I was unable to find this. --- Tito Pao 06:03, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm reverting it unless he can provide a source. TheCoffee 07:07, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Excerpt from the email he sent to me is with Titopao which is the valuable information therefore we will end proposals to delete the media quick counts Rizalninoynapoleon 16:07, 15 May 2007
For everone's benefit, I'll reprint the quoted email here:
Mr. Lopez i have noticed the 2007 elections page of WIKIPEDIA 
of the regards to the quick counts, i am asking if you can tell 
your group known as the TAMBAYAN PHILIPPINES to tell its members 
to stop their proposals of deletion since it is against the 
Amending Modernization Act and against the right to information.
I hope so action this as soon as possible. Sincerely yours: Sen.
Richard Gordon
Personally, if you ask me, since the Wikimedia office and the Wikimedia servers are located in the US, and since we are bound by the TOS of WP and its policies and guidelines, we must first decide on a consensus. If the entire Tambayan community has a consensus to not include the quick count results, then we have to disagree with Sen. Gordon and have the quick count results deleted from the article since Wikipedia is technically covered by US laws (by the laws of the State of Florida, if you want to be very specific). (Unless Sen. Gordon makes a call to Wikimedia Foundation office and the WMF office takes office action, that is.) Or, as a compromise, we can have links to each quick count's website since this information tends to change by the minute (or at least by the hour). But if the community decides on including the quick count results, then I have no objections. --- Tito Pao 08:23, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
ADDENDA I took a look at the text of the Amendment to the Election Modernizations Act and I was unable to find the exact information that Sen. Gordon is referring to. Any references to the word "Website" refers to the COMELEC's website and not to other websites such as Wikipedia, and all other references refer to local publications. Or maybe I was also misreading everything? For additional resources, I also tried to look up at a list of election offenses, as summarized by a lawyer-blogger in one of his so-called "blog lectures" (this isn't allowed under WP:A, but it gives us a good summary of current election violations). I have also posted a related question for opinions by disinterested parties. Thanks. --- Tito Pao 08:28, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Neverthless, there should stay up to the point when they do not update their figures. If they start using NAMFREL's numbers then that's the time they should be taken down. The quick counts can be seen on other websites and the page history anyway. --Howard the Duck 10:56, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tambayan i am asking you let the quick counts to stay for they are valuable information though partial and unofficial besides TEAM Unity deputy spokesperson Tonypet Albano is criticizing the media quick counts who knows if there will be electoral fraud this can be used as evidences, so think over -- Rizalninoynapoleon 15:28, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I for one doubt that we have to oblige with that resolution. We go by WP rules and US laws, and user consensus. I swing towards removing all counts except the official (comelec) and the namfrel unofficial quick count (the only accredited citizen's arm). But in the meantime we can use the media quick counts until Namfrel comes up with a more definitive quick count. Berserkerz Crit 11:27, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We go by consensus. So regardless of what Sen. Gordon has told you (or, for that matter, I don't care if it was PGMA herself), we'll stick with the consensus: only the COMELEC and the NAMFREL count should survive. Per my suggestion, we may only link to the other quick counts. --- Tito Pao 11:55, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia doesn't conduct its own count anyway so if the media outlets stop issuing updates to their counts, there's nothing to report so it'll be removed in the long run. --Howard the Duck 13:48, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
With regard to this supposed email from Senator Gordon, i don't think Philippine jurisprudence covers wikipedia, since the server is not in the Philippines. It's like forcing me to pose the results of all the media quick counts in my personal website, if I posted the NAMFREL quick count results. One unofficial quick count would suffice, so as not to confuse non-Filipinos. Perhaps we can just have under the See also section a link to the media quick count websites. --Scorpion prinz (Talk | contribs) 14:39, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not to demean Senator Gordon but I find it laughable that he thinks Philppine law is enforceable here in Wikipedia. Although I do commend him for even knowing Wikipedia. Berserkerz Crit 15:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There appears to be a lot of misunderstanding about law. While I have no idea about the specific law in this case nor am I an expert on law, I'm pretty sure any countries' laws can cover whatever it wants to. For example, court decisions in Australia (and I believe several European countries) have held that people can be held responsible in Australian courts for libeling an Australian via the internet even if they themselves don't live in Australia (see Slander and libel). This is an area of law with a great deal uncertainty (you might want to look at decisions regarding swastikas and the like in European countries too). Anyway, my point is it's possible that the law will apply to wikipedia. As the wikipedia servers are located in Florida and so is the foundation, enforcing them may be difficult. But for example, a court could order the servers be blocked in the Phillipines. And if any of the wikimedia foundation members were to ever visit the Phillipines perhaps they could be arrested. Any assets the foundation may have in the Phillipines could be seized. I'm not saying any of this is likely to happen (I don't think it is) or that we should obey what the Senator alleged said. I think we should just make a decision as we normally would and not let the e-mail influence us either way. I'm simply pointing out that the idea that the law doesn't apply to wikipedia because the servers are located in Florida is flawed. Someone who actually knows the law could perhaps better explain whether it's likely or not but in absence of that it's silly to say it surely doesn't because it may. BTW, is there any reason to assume this e-mail is genuiene? It seems awfully informal and sloppily written for a request from a Senator... Nil Einne 17:25, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Rizalninoynapoleon makes things up anyway (see Template talk:Philippine elections), and in the long run, when nobody cares anymore, the quick counts will be taken down, even by GMA and ABS-CBN. NAMFREL does keep a record of their counts though. And I think even ABS ended their media count already and instead would be relying on NAMFREL's, and eventually, COMELEC's numbers; GMA would sure to follow suit by tomorrow. --Howard the Duck 18:17, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Point taken, I'm currently writing an email to Sen. Gordon (the email address can be found here) to settle the matter. But honestly speaking, I was also thinking along those lines since I can't verify anything related to WP on the Election Modernization Act. And I'm still for sticking to consensus, in spite of anything. --- Tito Pao 22:13, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(resetting indent) As if this wasn't enough: apparently, the COMELEC requested TV networks to stop conducting "unauthorized" quick counts. (This is just an initial report, but I'm sure a more definitive report will follow.) Nevertheless, this is what I and other editors have been saying all along: these unofficial (and "unauthorized") quick counts are unencyclopedic and do not deserve space on WP. If the COMELEC itself disputes these quick count's authority or validity, then so must we. In the meantime, I haven't received a reply from Sen. Gordon's email address, but as soon as I got a response, I'll let you know. --- Tito Pao

Slightly OT - Hmm...'unencyclopedic'. That's the perfect word that applies to these unofficial and unsanctioned counts that certain media outlets have been conducting. Sigh. If only the electorate were familiar with Wikijargon. Shrumster 05:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There are suggestions at Talk:Philippine general election, 2007 to rip off an article containing both the GMA and ABS-CBN counts. Let your voice be heard there. --Howard the Duck 05:51, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update on the alleged email from Sen. Gordon

Just want to let everyone know about this...after all the brouhaha over this email that was supposedly sent by Sen. Richard Gordon, Rizalninoynapoleon has recognized that the email is a fake. However, the response he gave me was very vague...did someone inform him? did he receive another email? did he contact Sen. Gordon? (And, as other fellow Wikipedians might have put it, did he even make up this one?)

Regardless of whatever anyone wants to say about this, this latest development leaves some questions lingering in my mind:

  1. First, by recanting something that others view as his fabrication, what is he trying to prove? That he could come up with something to prove his point and flout consensus?
  2. Second, since he himself acknowledged that the email is a fake, was he aware of the possible legal consequences of his actions, especially that this involved the name of a public official, let alone a nationally-elected public official? Or was he even thinking carefully before he acted?
  3. Third, did he even take steps to verify his sources? Right from the start, there were doubts about the email, in both form (i.e. the sloppily-written language) and substance (the email made Sen. Gordon look like he didn't know what he was talking about, or that he didn't even bother to consult his legal researchers). Having now said that he "found out" that the email was a fake, he should at least given Sen. Gordon's office a call---hell, even a Grade One student can Google the phone number and email address of senators and congressmen. At least, as far as I can remember, Ate P took steps to contact Cong. (soon-to-be) Sen. Chiz Escudero's staff, who provided additional published references.

Rizalninoynapoleon want me to "end" this issue "as soon as possible." Sorry, I can not just let this pass just like that. Sorry na lang ba? Because, after all, everyone is entitled to the truth. What you sow, you reap...now go and face the music --- Tito Pao 01:21, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ADDITIONAL UPDATE. Senator Gordon's office has spoken. Please see this: http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o238/titopao/gordon.jpg (I've obscured some details to protect the privacy of my contact; however, Chris S., Ate P and Bolanon can confirm that I do have a GMail email address. Thanks --- Tito Pao 01:35, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Se I told you that guy makes up things. --Howard the Duck 01:40, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, we all know that...except that, this time, Sen. Gordon's staff now knows about this, too. (I hope his media handlers didn't.) That is a problem. And look what this guy did to us >=( --- Tito Pao 03:23, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Such behavior should not be tolerated. -- • Kurt Guirnela •Talk 04:41, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I second that one. And his edits must be closely monitored for veracity. --Scorpion prinz (Talk | contribs) 12:45, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all, what action will Wikipedia take against that fake e-mail? Just curious since I know Louis Pawid and Dick G. personally. Thanks! Ivanhenares 15:43, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
None that I can think of for now, since there's nothing similar to a Penal Code here on WP (in the very literal sense). However, since this is just another incident of catching Rizalninoy's hand in the cookie jar (and it almost becomes a pattern), the consensus so far is that anything that he says or edits should be scrutinized and monitored closely (even if it's true), especially some of his edits compromise the more important policies on Wikipedia. --- Tito Pao 00:41, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pinoy Wiki Roll-Call

Who: Wikipedia Contributors, Administrator(s), Readers
What: First Informal Meeting
Where: Kenny Rogers, SM Megamall Building A, Mandaluyong City, Metro Manila
When: May 20, 2007 1:00 PM
How (to participate):

1) Post responses on this forum
2) Yahoo Group: PhilWiki

--Exec8 09:48, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Coming

  • Present! --seav 11:46, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now (Present)! Berserkerz Crit 20:19, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not withstanding any unforeseen circumstances, I will be present =) --- Tito Pao 01:06, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure. If I get there after church and not be lost in the process. Kelangan me libreng bucket meal muffin ha! (joke) --Lenticel (talk) 01:47, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Present Ü --Scorpion prinz (Talk | contribs) 01:53, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per his comment below, Kgargar will be coming. Please feel free to delete this line if this is not the case. Thanks! Please see below =) --- Tito Pao 03:21, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per his comment way, way up, Jojit_fb will make it. Please post all your confirmations on this section instead of elsewhere. Thanks. --- Tito Pao 08:30, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sorry, I didn't see this. Anyway, I will be there. --Jojit fb 12:21, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Present--Jondel 12:44, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Damn, buti na lang nakita ko 'to before Sunday. :P I'll try to make it. Shrumster 05:26, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hopefully you can make it...it would be our first reunion in...dang, I can't remember! It must be almost eleven years? =P (For those who don't know...Shrumster was my classmate in grade school :) --- Tito Pao 05:28, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • No Internet at the house (as in yes, I'm in Manila now) but yes, I'll go. Keep me in touch with my cell (available on my user page). Can someone print the Articles of Incorporation from Meta (and all the other stuff I need)? --Sky Harbor 07:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not coming

  • I will not be coming but I will help in whatever way I can. For those who believe in prayer, I'll pray for you :) --Bentong Isles 11:59, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • But I will be there in spirit. ^_^ TheCoffee 03:45, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sira kasi yung bangka ko, eh. ;-) --Chris S. 01:25, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unable to attend - venue too far away from Bacolod City. =) To your success! -- • Kurt Guirnela •Talk 01:31, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • May I know kung ano-ano ang mga agenda sa pagti-tipong ito? I won't be able to join you pero mas maganda siguro kung naka-post din ang ditalye para magkaroon din ng ideya ang ibang hindi makakadalo (pwede rin kaming makatulong, kahit pinansyal, joke). Fddfred talk 09:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Most of it were already mentioned above. In particular, the meat of the conversation will be about the proposal to incorporate the Philippine chapter of the Wikimedia Foundation. --- Tito Pao 11:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unable to attend currently on vacation in New York, but I really wish I could come... too bad... anyways maybe I could go if there's another one. -chris^_^ 13:24, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sana ay maging matagumpay ang pagtitipon ninyo. (Mula sa Tagalog Wikipedia) --Mananaliksik 04:29, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wish I could, but I'm currently hibernating. Buena suerte con vosotros! (oops this is a late post hahaha. Better late then never!) --Weekeejames 15:49, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response from exec8

I hope this would push through this time. I am expecting 5 in attendance but if would go higher, the better. There are things to talk about and doing this at 1:00pm is good since some would go from Prayer Meetings and Masses while others have work to do the following day. I pose a challenge to you. The first one who shook my hand libre, my treat. --Exec8 09:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm...okay, call ako jan. If you ask me to be there at 1pm, I can make it there earlier than anyone else (i.e. not later than 30 mins. before the time). Problem is, how do we know it's you? ;-) --- Tito Pao 11:58, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should append to our "present" signatures what we will wear or look like or distinct recognizable feature. Berserkerz Crit 15:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'll bring a paper with a wikipedia logo on it. --Exec8 21:06, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'll wear a yellow shirt, blue jeans, a pair of sneakers and---take note of this---I have long hair =) If any one of you can't recognize me by that, then I don't know what ;-) --- Tito Pao 22:09, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey someone bring a camera and upload a pic or two for the rest of us. :P TheCoffee 23:31, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We still have no response from Sky Harbor, his presence is important. --Exec8 05:44, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going already (as long as nothing goes wrong and my dad lets me because I have to pack for Singapore the next day). --Sky Harbor 07:20, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by Kgargar

Sana maging matagumpay itong First Informal Meeting ng Filipino wikipedians. See you people! Kgargar 00:27, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Just so that we'll have an accurate head count, could you please sign your name on the list above? Thanks! :) --- Tito Pao 01:41, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some questions

  • What will be our agenda there?
  • How long would the meeting last?
  • Should we contribute for a group meal or eat individually or eat before the meeting (I talked my family into coming due to the job fair and as a family outing so baka mauna na kami kumain)?
  • Who will bring the camera (I don't have one)?
  • Asan na muffin ko?

P.S.

for those who have no jobs yet (like me), there is a job fair at the megatrade hall 1. So bring your resume, para may kasama ako hehe.--Lenticel (talk) 07:53, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AFAIK:
  1. Matters pertaining to the establishment of the Wikimedia Foundation, Philippine Chapter (prolly the priority topic)
  2. Copyright matters (re fair use)
  3. Article Standards
  4. Wikiproject Philippines (on the Tagalog Wikipedia and elsewhere)
Other topics can also be discussed when we're there, but for now these are the three items that always come up. --- Tito Pao 08:40, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Pinoy Wikimeetup - roundup

Since we have more than five Wikipedians who have indicated their interest in showing up tomorrow, I'd decided to make a round-up of the details for this meeting:

DETAILS

  • WHO: Wikipedia Contributors, Administrator(s), Readers
  • WHAT: First Informal Meeting
  • WHERE: Kenny Rogers, Ground Floor, SM Megamall Building A, Mandaluyong City,Metro Manila. However, per, Exec8, if Kenny's is fully packed, we'll just meet up there and then look for another place, as this is an informal meeting.
Not a lot of people should be having coffee at that time, starbucks and seattle's best are just nearby. --Scorpion prinz (Talk | contribs) 10:30, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • WHEN: May 20, 2007 1:00 PM

COMING

  1. Berserkerz Crit
  2. Exec8
  3. Kgargar
  4. Jojit_fb
  5. Jondel
  6. Lenticel
  7. Scorpion prinz (Would be coming around 1.30pm)
  8. seav
  9. Shrumster
  10. Sky Harbor (Might be late, but hopefully not too late)
  11. And yours truly, Tito Pao ;-)

NOT COMING

  1. Bentong Isles
  2. Chris S. - is abroad and, per his comments, his boat is broken :)
  3. Fddfred
  4. Kurt Guirnela - is in Bacolod
  5. Mananaliksik
  6. Pikdig / chris^_^ - in New York
  7. TheCoffee ("but I will be there in spirit ^_^")

AGENDA

  • Matters pertaining to the establishment of the Wikimedia Foundation, Philippine Chapter (prolly the priority topic)
  • Copyright matters (re fair use)
  • Article Standards
  • Wikiproject Philippines (on the Tagalog Wikipedia and elsewhere)
  • Other matters

I'll try to bring a print-out of the related posts/discussions related to these agenda. Please feel free to bring your own notes, as well as anything that you think can help us with our discussion.

(And per Lenticel, please feel free to bring your own resumes in case you want to come to the Inquirer Jobfair ;-)

If there's anything that I missed, or if you'd like to add your name to the list of people who will or will not attend, or if you want to add another possible agendum for the meet-up, please let me know...I'd like to include it in my notes.

Thanks and see you very, very soon! (",) --- Tito Pao 05:27, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok i'll bring a camera. Do we need to discuss 501 Pesos + VSOP?, if you know what I mean. --Exec8 11:38, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*The* meet-up

'guys hindi ko kayo nakita. Naiinis na kasi yung nanay ko so kelangan kong maagang umalis. I stayed in Kenny Rogers until about 1:30 but I did not see any Wikipedian :(. Anyways, the jobfair was OK. I hope you had a great time. —Lenticel (talk) 07:08, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's okay, since we're still keen on convoking a second meet-up, after about a few months. We decided that the rest of the discussion should be continued online first so that everyone else who have expressed their interest to help establish Wikimedia Philippines. --- Tito Pao 08:14, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to thank seav, Berserkerz Crit, Jojit_fb, Jondel, Tito Pao from attending the kenny rogers meeting and to Scorpion prinz and Sky Harbor from catching up in the starbucks meeting. The meeting was lengthy but its meaty. We are actually seated near the entrance of kenny rogers in Ground Floor, Mega Building A from 1 to 3pm and inside starbucks at around 3pm onwards. As expected we wore our designated shirt colors. There was a wikipedia logo in our dining table. --Exec8 12:20, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks also for the lunch, Exec8. By the way, here are some of the pictures in the meet-up. It’s nice meeting you all guys. I hope that we will be able to established Wikimedia Philippines. --Jojit fb 14:05, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Can someone reserve the org name for me? A person has to be at least 18 to register a name. You can register at the SEC website; just remember that we are classified as a foundation. --Sky Harbor 16:07, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So sorry about missing the meeting. I uh...kinda woke up at 3pm. :P Shrumster 18:09, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the lunch, too! :-) --- Tito Pao 08:14, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Can someone add a caption on the image description page so I can tell who's who? Thanks. :D TheCoffee 03:09, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I did :) --- Tito Pao 08:24, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Isang matagumpay na pagbati sa lahat ng dumalo sa isang Makasaysayang Katuparan kahapon! Isa ito sa una at marami pang hakbang tungo sa inyong mabuti at malinis na adhikain para sa mga Pilipino sa buong mundo. Mabuhay Kayo! Fddfred talk 04:04, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, masakit yung tyan ko, kaso, libreng Ribs, ice cream, etc! Miraculously I was healed! (at nagutom- foodtrip :D !! ) Thanks Exec8!--Jondel 11:54, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
More pictures. Thanks Exec8 for the lunch! :) --seav 00:06, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please accept my apology for not making it there. I look forward to hearing the minutes. Kgargar 03:42, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Di ako photogenic. Hehehe. --Scorpion prinz (Talk | contribs) 05:12, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to everyone who attended. It was nice meeting you. More power to us and to the fruition of a Philippine chapter of Wikimedia. Berserkerz Crit 15:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nice pics. Kakainggit! haha! Sige di bale, next time... Jondel, ikaw pala yun? Di ba taga Japan ka? :D --Weekeejames 15:57, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
'os ko! ang babata n'yo pa pala mga iho! one reason why i didn't join the meeting kase noong kapanahunan ko wala pang istarbaks at sumisikat pa lang noon si kenny rogers. Mabuhay kayong lahat! Fddfred 05:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Argh... just saw this... why did this have to happen at the height of my project crisis? :-P Took a look a the pics... did anyone else notice that there is no chick female person among us (or am I just not visiting WP:PINOY often enough)? This might make our articles prone to a macho systemic bias... hehe --Nino Gonzales 08:15, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Anong nangyare kay Ate Pinay? May naman chick naman dito ah! :D --Weekeejames 14:33, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sad that I just saw this! :-( Wish I'd known. Unfortunately, though, I'm based in La Union so I wouldn't have been able to go anyway. It would have been great to meet you guys. Alternativity 04:57, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism on Alan Peter Cayetano

I noticed that the Inquirer ran a brief news report about this on their website. Just so that you may know, I have made a protection request for this article. Thanks! --- Tito Pao 06:02, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That was fast...it's now protected (until 5/23)! =) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Titopao (talkcontribs) 06:51, 16 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Data on Philippine legislative districts

Anyone has a copy of the dataset used to produce the articles on Philippine legislative districts? --Bentong Isles 11:30, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

COMELEC has just proclaimed that Fr. Eddie Panlilio (YEHEY! To end jueteng in Pampanga) as the new Governor of Pampanga. Howard, Scorpion and Others today is a day to end corruption and poverty and i ask that Among Ed should have a page he deserves it. Don't you second the motion rizalninoy 23:42, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a web discussion forum. --Howard the Duck 05:54, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non sequitur. Whatever your misgivings about Rizalninoynapoleon, it does not invalidate his suggestion that Panlilio should have a Wikipedia article. (Remove all the opinionated cruft and you get a simple request.) I, for one, thinks that the priest is now notable enough to deserve a Wikipedia article. --seav 21:16, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Policy say we should avoid talk pages from becoming discussion forums (read the first sentence). As for a page, governors are notable, even big city mayors are. --Howard the Duck 08:25, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you believe Father Panlilio should have an article, then write it. Be bold! --Sky Harbor 08:21, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You can get info from his website http://amonged.org/ Ivanhenares 15:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Made the article's skeleton. Would appreciate it if some important fields in the infobox are filled up. --Lenticel (talk) 03:58, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've added some stuff, mostly paraphrased from the official(?) website. Please feel free to add more :) --- Tito Pao 04:32, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"New" proposal for the Tagalog Wikinews

The Tagalog Wikinews proposal has been refiled since the old proposal was closed in a "supposed" reform of the system. You may support the new proposal here. By the way, I need more contributors! --Sky Harbor 01:41, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(maaari po bang ihayag din ninyo ito sa Tagalog Wikipedia? salamat po). Can you please announce this also in Tagalog Wikipedia? Thank you.--Mananaliksik 13:16, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I will announce the new proposal, pero sana naman hindi sinarado yung orihinal. --Sky Harbor 14:59, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WMPH by-laws

The initial by-laws of Wikimedia Philippines are now available! You can view them here. Be sure to add on stuff and comment! --Sky Harbor 02:16, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Sky Harbor, I saw your invitation at the Tambayan de los Chavacanos at the Chavacano Wikipedia. The Wikimedia Philippines page is great. I have translated the page to Wikimedia de las Filipinas. Great job! Hope this will push thru. Have you registered the foundation yet? --Weekeejames 14:40, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As much as WMPH is my "brainchild" of sorts, I cannot register it. First, I have to be 18 or older (that's why we have the incorporators). Second, I need community commitment. Finally, we are P998,000 short with respect to working capital. Thanks for the translation though, although unless you intend to translate the documents into Chavacano, you should link them to the English versions first, especially since we only keep one member list. --Sky Harbor 06:25, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New Philippines

Sorry, I couldn't help it. Texas was supposed to be the New Philippines. I know there are more appropriate places to mention this.--Jondel 06:15, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I think this would make a good article, provided we can get more sources and references for this. =) --- Tito Pao 08:47, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A Palau traveler's guide, referred to the islands as Nueva Filipinas (includes Caroline Islands) too. --Scorpion prinz (Talk | contribs) 11:17, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very intersting. There are still other priorities as of now like translation of Bomburza. Then I 'll see if I can work on an article.--Jondel 06:03, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia: Where do we go from here?

Now that we agreed to setup the organization, Where do we go from here? Let's discuss. You can also visit the Pinoy Wikimedia Talk. --Exec8 10:30, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I need help to for my new page List of political clans in Philippines

I just bought a new book called Rulemakers made by the PCIJ it contains a list of political clans who were legislators from 1898 - 2007. I need help in making my article by making tables. Please help Rizalninoynapoleon 04:22, 27 May 2007 (UTC) Rizalninoynapoleon[reply]

It's not new, I have mine for 2 years now. --Scorpion prinz (Talk | contribs) 17:59, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not in favor of the article since it the list will never end. What about just a section about political dynasties in the Politics of the Philippines. --Scorpion prinz (Talk | contribs) 07:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Parokya article needs cleaning. Also, the sub-articles have a lack of information. I realize this is not a top priority, but it would be appreciated if someone knowledgeable about the band would contribute in some way. I unfortunately don't know enough to help myself. -KingpinE7 21:27, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He's done it again.

Just take a look at this article. I couldn't find the original, though, but it does read like it was another copy-paste operation like what he did to the Tessie Aquino-Oreta and the Prospero Pichay articles. If someone can help me pinpoint the original article, I"d really appreciate it. Thanks! --- Tito Pao 07:39, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I scoured the net finding the verbatim for that one but I couldn't find it. --Howard the Duck 02:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh... Kinausap ko na siya sa talk page nya. Matigas talaga ulo--Lenticel (talk) 07:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Completion of by-laws (and other WMPH stuff)

In order to get Wikimedia Philippines moving forward, we need to get two things done:

  1. Inspect the (now-completed) Bylaws and comment
  2. Inspect the Articles of Incorporation for anything inconsistent, and if ready, vote to approve or not. If approved, I will forward it to the Chapters committee.

Please do participate in the processes! To vote on whether to support or oppose the Articles of Incorporation, go here. --Sky Harbor 02:34, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To add on: a new participants' list is available here. Those who signed on my old list have been moved to the new one (well, sort of). Feel free to sign up! --Sky Harbor 06:21, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At a glance, the article looks like it was lifted from the official website. patingin naman oh. I know the we have some copyright problems with GMA stars lately.--Lenticel (talk) 07:42, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I'll be placing a tag shortly on this article, and I'll make sure that it's on my watchlist. I'll try to edit this later once I'm home. --- Tito Pao 01:29, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As you may have noticed by now---the article got speedied, and also the editor who did this it temporarily blocked. Hope someone will write a better article that's defnitely not copyvio'ed as this one. --- Tito Pao 14:25, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

President of the Philippines

The title of the President of the Philippines should be left blank as most Filipinos do no recognize the present presidency to be the legitimate one.

Go tell that to Al Gore. --Howard the Duck 13:49, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not the place to "proclaim the truth," or your version of it. LOL at the Gore comment... Manbearpig, I'm so serial!Sandtiger 20:40, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Affixing "Metro Manila" to City Addresses

I can't find a specific reference, but isn't it improper to add "Metro Manila" to city names, e.g.

Marikina City, 
Metro Manila, 
Philippines

Well not really improper, but a bit syntactically awkward?? I believe adding Metro Manila is only required for Municipalities (San Juan, Navotas, and Pateros) but city addresses can be written as

Marikina City, Philippines

I remember having this discussion with my teacher when we had to make the transition from using "Marikina, Metro Manila" to "Marikina City, Philippines." If this is the case then some articles need to be fixed (List of shopping malls in the Philippines, for one).— Sandtiger 20:40, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Time Magazine even uses "Manila, the Philippines" on its letters to the editor section. With that said, all of the cities in MM are HUCs, and HUCs' naming convetion is to omit the province. --Howard the Duck 06:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not necessarily: check Postal addresses in the Philippines. Adding "Metro Manila" to city postal addresses is acceptable by Philpost. --Sky Harbor 10:35, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Er... Pardon me, but what's an HUC? This particular argument naming convention is something I've been wondering about since High School. :-D Alternativity 05:00, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
HUC stands for Highly Urbanized City. --Sky Harbor 07:23, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I personally add "Metro Manila" to my Las Piñas address especially if I'll add "Philippines" at the end. I'd like to hear what other Metro Manileños think. --seav 14:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've addressed mail to my great-uncle in Pasay as:

blah blah ST.
Pasay City
1300 METRO MANILA
PHILIPPINES

--Chris S. 03:03, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Threat of AFD

Quezon Avenue MRT Station is being threatened with AFD because there are no references for it (meaning that it is not notable). I highly doubt there is any literature on MRT stations for one thing. What should I do? --Sky Harbor 06:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are other train stations threatened too? The MTV Ink magazine I have may save the day, lol. --Howard the Duck 06:53, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All the information of Wikipedia is supposed to be based on reliable sources, so if there's no literature at all on MRT stations then that's a problem. I notice on the talk page you say the article is written based on actual experience of riding the system. That would make it a perfect example of Wikipedia:original research. TheCoffee 08:15, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not necessarily: I can cite the MRTC website for certain things (ridership statistics, perhaps?), but I think it's wait-and-see time. Worse, it's already under AFD. --Sky Harbor 07:35, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update: The AfD Debate was closed. The result of the debate was a keep. Thanks. --- Tito Pao 22:47, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD on Jessie Castillo

Jessie Castillo has just shown up on AfD. The nominator seems to believe that the mayor is not notable. Unfortunately, there are few sources. Would it be possible for someone to add a few reliable sources to this? I'm not in the Philippines and can't find much online, but I strongly suspect that a mayor of a city of 300,000 people is highly notable. The AFD is here. --Charlene 10:25, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO, not all mayors are notable. Although Bacoor may be a big town, it dunno if being mayor of a place is enough. Where do we draw the line, anyway? I'd rather abstain on this one... --Howard the Duck 14:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update The AfD debate has closed. The result was no consensus; hence, it may be nominated again in the future (if ever). Thanks. --- Tito Pao 22:48, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{TFD}}

Template:Philippine quasi-legislatures I nominated this template for {{TFD}}, apparently there's only 1 item in it. Other editors would rather have "experts" share their opinion before acting on it. --Scorpion prinz (Talk | contribs) 21:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kopong-kopong and Mahoma

Ok don't get me wrong, I'm just really curious about these two "icons" but I can't find good sources for them. Googling would only bring up Filipinos saying Panahon pa yan ni Kopong-kopong or 19Kopong-kopong pa yan.

There is a theory (from an internet forum) that Mahoma is the Spanish term for the prophet Mohammed. Since the Philippines have a Muslim background prior to the Spanish colonization, it might be concluded that the Spaniards use the term the "time of Mahoma" to characterize our "primitive" lifestyle and the term stuck. Sadly I don't have hard sources.

I have no idea who or what kopong-kopong is (alter ego of lapu-lapu?).

Anthropology and culture-inclined people, care for a challenge and research them?--Lenticel (talk) 02:10, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, "Mahoma" refers to the prophet Mohammed. The implied reference in the phrase panahon pa ni Mahoma was the introduction of Islam in the Philippines, which was in the 15th century. The implication is that if an information or a piece of news exists noong panahon pa ni Mahoma, it is so old that no one was old enough to remember (so to speak). My source for this was that four-volume uber-compilation of Filipino trivias aptly named "Pinoy Trivia" (by Bong Barrameda, who is credited as a consultant on the ABS-CBNgame show Game K N B?, but I can't remember which volume). As for "kopong-kopong"...I don't have an idea...I'll try looking it up if it exists in any dictionary. --- Tito Pao 02:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm familiar with the kopong-kopong or 19 kopong-kopong it all means "antiquity". --Scorpion prinz (Talk | contribs) 09:49, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. But how did it come to mean "antiquity" in the first place? Try as I might, I can't come up with phonetic associations of kopong-kopong to any Filipino word indicating antiquity. (Kahapon is rather far fetched.) "Panahon ni Mahoma" and "Panahon ni Limahong" can be traced to specific people and specific events, from way back. It seems likely this phrase evolved in a similar manner. Hehe. A challenge indeed. But I seriously doubt anyone will ever find a documentable reference for the origin of this phrase. Alternativity 04:51, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's a colloquial jargon. --Scorpion prinz (Talk | contribs) 13:13, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Donations

I know this may seem a bit odd to ask here, but who here is willing to donate anything to our chapter-in-formation (Wikimedia Philippines)? Donations will be accepted in cash or in kind. I'm ready to donate a mobile phone so the org can have a permanent telephone number (until we get a landline of course). --Sky Harbor 14:14, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1K --Scorpion prinz (Talk | contribs) 21:51, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Minimum of 1k, hopefully I could give more --- Tito Pao 22:10, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm considering some office supplies (and if I can, some money as well). I wonder who can solicit donations for the org to third parties? --Sky Harbor 04:56, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I can donate computer parts (hard drive or memory or modem or whatever) and accessories or whatever if we need such for a start. Lemme know. I'll donate my cash when I get a new job :D Weekeejames 15:14, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If we ever get a computer (functioning or otherwise), we need a regular office computer and a server. MediaWiki is best installed on a Linux-run server, so I will try to procure a copy of Bayanihan Linux 2006 from the guys at the DOST's Advanced Science and Technology Institute (ASTI). For a regular office computer, we either get a functioning computer (Windows, Mac or Linux), or we build one ourselves. --Sky Harbor 02:36, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it difficult to be a Filipino for a Pangasinan?

Most of the inhabitants of the Philippines learned that Pangasinan province is in Ilocos region. They also learned that inhabitants of the Ilocos region are Ilocanos. According to this education (propaganda), the inhabitants of Pangasinan province are Ilocanos. This appear in elementary textbooks approved by Department of Education, which is an arm of the Philippine government.

The inhabitants of Pangasinan province right now are mostly Pangasinans and Ilocanos. The forefathers of Ilocanos were migrants from Ilocos Norte and Ilocos Sur in the 19th century due to drought experienced in those areas. Before this period, the Ilocanos were not inhabitants of Pangasinan province. For humanitarian reasons, the Pangasinans accepted them and did not drive them away. The term Pangasinan refers to the location and to the people, who are original inhabitants of the location.

The Philippine government decided to include Pangasinan province into the Ilocos region. By doing this, the Philippine government ignores a separate ethno-linguistic group in the Philippines. Until this is not corrected, it is difficult for a Pangasinan to become a Filipino, because the concept of "Filipino" ignores his being Pangasinan. What could the government do? It could continue to ignore the Pangasinan people. Or it correct the name of the region it belongs to, such that its name becomes "Northwestern Luzon Region". Or it removes Pangasinan province from the region it presently belongs to.

I have studied for a long time outside the Philippines. I could not be proud to be a Filipino, because being Filipino rejects the Pangasinan in me. How can anyone be proud to an oppressive concept? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.41.222.3 (talkcontribs)

Do not use Wikipedia as a messageboard/forum or a blog. Leave your gripes elsewhere, but not here. We're building an encyclopedia here. Thank you --- Tito Pao 05:29, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Tip: Try consulting your congressman or a senator from your place. Tell him/her of the problem and let him do something about it. Wikipedia can't force the government to do anything... and that's what the Congressmen and Senators do, not build more basketball courts. --Howard the Duck 06:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let's get something featured

It has been nearly a year since we had a new Philippine-related Featured Article. How about getting Flag of the Philippines up to FA-status? There are already 9 other featured flag articles to follow the lead of-- most recently, Flag of Portugal and Flag of Armenia. In fact, the Armenia article got featured even with just 16KB of content and only 15 sources. The text of RA 8491 alone is enough to give us a lot of content on our flag. So, anyone care to join me? No need for structured outlines and division of labor, I think... just successive improvements that should bring us progressively closer to perfection. :D TheCoffee 06:23, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea! Can we also add Lupang Hinirang to this list? Ate P originally initiated efforts to make this one a featured article, but for some reason there weren't any new follow-ups. I was working on a few sheet musics and an arrangement that I was intending to release to the public domain (yes, I'll be recording my voice on it, too ;) --- Tito Pao 06:33, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm trying to get Philippine National Railways to FA status, but I have nothing on rolling stock and station layout, or even incidents and accidents. --Sky Harbor 06:41, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
May I suggest that we make a featured article on an endemic plant or animal species. We don't have a Phil. flora or fauna featured article yet. A nice start would be the Carabao or the Philippine Tarsier.--Lenticel (talk) 06:16, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, we can also work on the tarsier article. Ate P did most of the work and had it nominated for GA status, so I think we can improve on her work and help make it FA. Maybe we can also ask Shrumster to review the article; although he's a marine biologist, I think he has the basic expertise in general biology, his critiques will be very much appreciated. --- Tito Pao 06:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We should, Shrumster and I worked on the Tamaraw article for GA or FA status, (postponed as of now due to lack of online info and free pictures). --Lenticel (talk) 09:30, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tagalog Wikipedia

(Ipinababatid sa lahat ng gumagamit ng Wikipedia, na ang Tagalog Wikipedia ay umabot na sa mahigit 6,000 mga pahina.)

The Tagalog Wikipedia already reach more than 6,000 pages. --Mananaliksik 13:31, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ay, salamat. Anong artikulo ba ang ika-6000 artikulo? --Sky Harbor 14:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Maaring ang artikulong tl:San Isidro, Davao del Norte ang ika-6000 na artikulo. --bluemask (talk) 15:27, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Melba Padilla Magay, Evangelical Anthropologist, Author,and CEO of ISACC - Notable?

Hi guys. I made a wiki a few days ago on Melba Padilla Maggay, the anthropologist, author, and President and Founder of the Institute for Studies in Asian Church and Culture (ISACC). I did not immediately cite sources, and frankly there aren't that many websites mentioning her which aren't directly connected to ISACC, and she's not very well known outside of Evangelical protestant circles. In the Evangelical community, however, Dr Maggay is rather well known, since her books are widely published by OMF Lit.

Well, someone questioned the notability of the article. I've since attempted to beef it up, but I've no idea if what I've done is sufficient. I would appreciate it if you could look at it and give me feedback? Thanks. Alternativity 14:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Better err on the side of caution; let's look at it on the perspective of the Filipino community or, in her religious community, the wider Evangelical community (say, on the national and maybe the international level). Honestly, I haven't heard of her, nor have I found enough G-hits to her name that could help boost the notability. --- Tito Pao 22:44, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kguirnela's user page under attack

Just a heads up for the rest of the Tambayan...our fellow editor Kguirnela's user page and talk page are being subject to a repeated vandalisms from a single user/many users who's now using different IP addresses (probably hopping from one Internet cafe to another) to vandalize his user page (about five or six, as of my last count). This stemmed from an argument about a link that was repeatedly removed from the Bacolod City article, for which the original anon IP account was warned and eventually banned for 24 hours. Malas lang ng vandal because I've bookmarked Kurt's user page (as with many others), and Kurt's user page always comes up each time I refresh my watchlist. However, I may not always be around, as I may be away from home, out of the office or commuting. So may I ask everyone else to please lend him a hand in case this very resourceful anon comes back again; feel free to re-revert any vandalisms on his user page. Thanks. --- Tito Pao 07:45, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd prefer that Kurt's user and talk pages be locked for the time being. I think an admin would understand the circumstances. --Sky Harbor 08:36, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I know. When I wrote that one, I was on my way home, and I was expecting some retaliatory reverts (and apparently, it did happen). At any rate, I filed an WP:RFP myself, hope it gets acted upon soon. --- Tito Pao 09:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Voting extensions

Voting on the WMPH Articles of Incorporation has been extended until June 14. Unfortunately, no one (and I mean no one) voted in the original time period. Please do participate so I can forward the document to the Chapters committee. You may vote here. --Sky Harbor 02:49, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Voting has been extended to June 21, 2007. I need three more signatures (majority here is 50% plus one). --Sky Harbor 12:14, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to Gnome Week

For those interested...there is a current campaign for all the Wikignomes out there (you know who you are ;-) If you are interested, just visit the page, and then sign up as one of the volunteers (I signed up myself, btw). Thanks! --- Tito Pao 05:05, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Translation

I guess this is the place to ask what the description ("Bahay kubo ng mga T'boli") means that is added to this image on tl.wikipedia. I have uploaded the image to commons by the way (see here). I know that Bahay kubo means Nipa hut and T'boli are a people on Mindanao. Magalhães 13:42, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It means A T'boli nipa hut or literally, A nipa hut of the T'bolis. --Sky Harbor 14:38, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that's not very exciting ;) Magalhães 15:41, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget to remove the apostrophe. It should just be Tboli. --Chris S. 03:05, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. Okay. I will do. Magalhães 09:04, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alcala street?

I tried looking for Alcala street on the Manila map. Does anyone know in which district it could be? Perhaps it doesn't exist now, but it existed in 1906 (from a birth certificate). --Chris S. 05:00, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it doesn't exist anymore or its name has been changed. --Howard the Duck 05:10, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

idea

I am not sure whether it already exists, but it might be a nice idea to set up a project to create articles about dates and years with Philippine related topics. What I mean: Perhaps it is nice to create pages like 12 June, but then only for Philippine events, births, deaths, holidays etc, for example 12 June in the Philippines. The same for year pages like 1898. It would then be possible to link to these pages from Philippine related articles in stead of the general date or year links. Magalhães 12:32, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Err, is this timeline what you have in mind?--Jondel 12:48, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why is the graph in reverse order? — Sandtiger 13:00, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No that's something different. These articles would replace the normal articles about each day and year. So for example: 12 June in de Philippines in stead of 12 June. In the article would be place to list all important Philippine events, births death of Philippine actors, politicians, sports people, etc etc, Philippine holidays and other significant events. It would never be possible/appropriate to include all of this information in the general date page or in the timeline. Magalhães 13:04, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I see. Is this a precedent? Do they have this for other countries? It might be appropriate for very significant days but not for let's say an obscure councilman's birthday,etc.--Jondel 13:10, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think, instead of starting 366 new articles, it would be better to just add more Philippine-related information to the existing date articles. TheCoffee 13:21, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
How about 2003 in the Philippines, all the way up to 1521 in the Philippines? That'll be nice. Or maybe adding more dates in this page. --Howard the Duck 13:30, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I did not know that some year pages already existed. That's nice! Let's make more of them. I feel that there might also be a place for dedicated date articles for the Philippines. The disadvantage of adding all the info to the existing date articles would be that there will be way too much information and information you are not looking for. An advantage of special Philippine date pages would be that you can add information about locally famous people more easily than on the general page. I had this idea when I was reading a review of the Philippine-related articles on the Dutch Wikipedia in a magazine. One of the comments was that the links to dates and years led to arcticles with information which was mostly about other parts of the world. Magalhães 13:47, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was planning to make a "On this week" section at Philippines portal, but if time comes each day has more than 5 events, it can be made into a "On this day" section, then I'll split that page into monthly summaries. --Howard the Duck 13:50, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That might be another good option. The only disadvantage is that you can not link it in a normal article when using a date somewhere. Magalhães 14:38, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not again?

Here he goes again...I'm currently exchanging emails with 'the Manolo Quezon III, and it looks like I have found something (and, I guarantee, the information I got from MLQ3 is very, very interesting). Once my correspondence is finish, I'll let you on in (and e-mail the others as well). Thanks --- Tito Pao 04:25, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What can I say is... Happy Birthday J.P. Rizal! on June 19. --Exec8 04:49, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Heheheh...LoL, you didn't wikify that one, so I did it ;-) --- Tito Pao 04:58, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MLQ3 confirmed that he did get to talk to rizalninoy, but it appears that he was misunderstood. You can read a quote of the response at Howard's talk page. As for the "interesting" bit...I've decided to keep it to myself in the meantime. Thanks --- Tito Pao 06:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The question now is what category you put Batasang Bayan. --Howard the Duck 07:23, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've had enough. I'll leave this to the admins. --- Tito Pao 08:14, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, what needs to be dealt with? User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 08:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'll leave my comments on your talk page then. Please hang on for a moment. Thanks! --- Tito Pao 08:27, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
People here have a very liberal (to put it mildly) understanding of what the WP:NPA policy is for. --Howard the Duck 08:45, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anon with bad grammar is deleting a lot of info from the Visayans article

I wish he or she would just talk about the deletions (clean-up according to him/her) first...

See the history page:

  • (cur) (last) 09:16, 12 June 2007 58.106.133.177 (Talk) (12,145 bytes) (I clean this up for valid reasons, pls. do not mess it up again! O.k. have some common sense for godness sakes. Why does'nt people ever used common knowledge and facts. It's very simple.)
  • (cur) (last) 09:10, 12 June 2007 58.106.133.177 (Talk) (12,143 bytes) (added expand category. This article does not need to many bullshit statements such as redirect article:See Visayan language blaa blaa. related ethnic groups blaa blaa. Keep it simple.)
  • (cur) (last) 09:02, 12 June 2007 58.106.133.177 (Talk) (12,114 bytes) (What happen to this article? It was cleaned up for valid reasons. Now it's all messed up again. Do not be an idiot Chris Sundita. Your revert actions seems biased. What's wrong with you?)
  • (cur) (last) 04:39, 12 June 2007 Nino Gonzales (Talk | contribs) (14,385 bytes) (the anon made some deletions which lessened the quality of the article, i think.)
  • (cur) (last) 00:43, 12 June 2007 Christopher Sundita (Talk | contribs) m (12,128 bytes) (Undid revision 137423652 by 58.106.130.158 (talk))

I don't usually pick on people's grammar, but this guy is really acting like a jerk. Guys, please help in keeping the article jerk free. --Nino Gonzales 05:07, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The dab note at the top is incredibly long. Either Bisaya becomes a dab page, or someone creates Bisaya (disambiguation). --Howard the Duck 05:46, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Detailed Philippine presidential and vice-presidential election results from 1946 to 2004 province by province

Those who have a copy of the detailed Philippine presidential and vice-presidential election results from 1946 to 1998 province by province, you can post the detailed presidential and vice-presidential election results to their respective Wikipedia articles or you can also give a copy of the detailed Philippine presidential and vice-presidential election results from 1946 to 1998 province by province to my e-mall address: josephs_dagreat@yahoo.com and then I will the one to post to their respective Wikipedia articles. Thank you.--Joseph Solis in Australia 10:32, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]