Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines

 

 

 Main Discussion Assessment Requests Members Articles
(Featured · New · Popular) Sources Portal

This is the discussion page of Tambayan Philippines, where Filipino contributors and contributors to Philippine-related articles discuss general matters regarding the development of Philippine-related articles as well as broad topics on the Philippines with respect to Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects. Likewise, this talk page also serves as the regional notice board for Wikipedia concerns regarding the Philippines, enabling other contributors to request input from Filipino Wikipedians.

Start new topic

Philippine English vocabulary entries criteria for inclusion

Philippine English vocabulary contains several entries that are unsourced. As the page was previously tagged as possibly having original research, I added citations and also new entries. A new editor has also been active in adding new entries, though several were unsourced. I had contacted him about citing sources, and he added sources for some new entries he added like in this revision. However, I am unsure if a mere mention of the term in the source (like in the MMDA source in the revision above) constitutes inclusion in the Philippine English vocabulary article. For the entries I added, the terms were explicitly specified as terms used in Philippine English. Maybe you could give some suggestions on the criteria for inclusion of entries? Sanglahi86 (talk) 07:57, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

If there was such a thing as WP:CRINGE I think it would apply to pekpek shorts for as long as a decent ref can’t be found. Borgenland (talk) 09:18, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

You may want to look at Talk:Philippine English vocabulary#Criteria for inclusion, which I believe didn't reach a meaningful conclusion. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:53, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

A major concern is also WP:LASTING as some may only be in vogue for a few years before being forgotten as jeje. Hopefully Eyyyy does not meet the same fate. Borgenland (talk) 15:27, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Eyyyyy is almost exclusively used in Tagalog. Are we sure it is being used in English? Howard the Duck (talk) 18:29, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

I sometimes hear that in my community, especially some conyos. Though ofc that would still be WP:OR pending a decent source. Borgenland (talk) 01:45, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

This does sound like code-switching. Undoubtedly, "eyyy" is a Tagalog expression. Howard the Duck (talk) 02:18, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

I have exhausted all efforts to find reliable sources for the remaining unsourced entries, but could not find any to support its explicit inclusion in Philippine English vocabulary. "Imeldific" is well-cited as part of the PhE lexicon; however, the terms "Yellowtard" and "Dutertard" doesn't expressly include it and is not cited by a scholarly article. I am also unsure if "QC" should be included despite wide usage; if it is retained, maybe other city acronyms like IGaCoS might be arbitrarily added in the future. Some unsourced entries might need to be removed; hoping anyone would help. Sanglahi86 (talk) 14:29, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Just made WP:BOLD removals of uncited there. Borgenland (talk) 14:46, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the bold removals. The article looks much cleaner now. Sanglahi86 (talk) 16:38, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, before the major changes there, I have added these following terms: minus one, stock knowledge, warfreak. Now they're gone, but these are quite common PH-specific words that deserve mention. Any source for those? TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 10:16, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

I'll try finding some sources for those terms so I can add them to the list. Sanglahi86 (talk) 11:09, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

I tried finding scholarly articles to be used as references for those terms, but could not find any. I'll leave it to others to find some reliable references. Sanglahi86 (talk) 11:29, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikiproject

Would anyone be interested in joining a sub project of WP:Anthropology on oral tradition? Kowal2701 (talk) 19:40, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Reviving TF PH History

I personally think it's a long time coming that we revive the history task force. I'm noticing some activity in this project recently and there's no shortage of things to do PH history-wise. If there's enough support, we can start clean, have a new to-do list, maybe even drum up interest with an edit-a-thon or something. What does everybody else think? NyanThousand (talk) 06:41, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Surprised that I was unaware of this TF while I was building up articles. Do sign me up. Borgenland (talk) 07:35, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

I'd be willing to help. Ganmatthew (talk • contribs) 19:59, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Nice! With CMD that makes four. I'm going to change the status of the TF and add your names. I'm thinking we should start with cleaning house and getting things in order. Sort out to-do lists, make sure scope is well-defined, that sort of thing. NyanThousand (talk) 15:49, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm in. - Chieharumachi (talk) 02:16, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks to everybody showing interest! I've started a discussion in the TF talk page about scope and tasks so feel free to chime in! NyanThousand (talk) 03:17, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Quezon City's "City Districts"?

Quezon City has six legislative districts (the "official" districts). However, in the Wikipedia page of Quezon City, the "City Districts" section lists non-legislative 'districts' and instead areas based on its history (Cubao, Diliman [Quadrangle], Projects 1-7, New Manila, La Loma [and other sitios], etc.) The six legislative districts are listed in "Geography#Barangays and congressional Districts".

I'm planning to edit the articles in a way that the "City Districts" section is an unofficial classification of barangays (city areas of Quezon City), while we recognize the six legislative districts as the "political districts". It can be through adding just an introductory paragraph at the "City Districts" section.

Posting here so I can gather some consensus or feedback on what's better to do.

Side Note: Is "congressional district" the right term or is it "legislative district"? RFNirmala (talk) 10:46, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Just like most of Manila's non-legislative districts (Tondo, Malate, etc.), most of QC's districts are former Spanish era towns that were consolidated into one larger town during the American period. I think it is not proper to call them as "districts" in the modern day, but probably "neighborhoods" or "places", although the word "district" has been used by WP:RS to refer to these.

Legislative districts can refer to a district drawn up for porposes of representation to a legislature: congressional districts are for the House of Representatives. QC also has city council districts, and these are coextensive with congressional ones so it can be used interchangeably. Howard the Duck (talk) 11:04, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Tried adding it in this edit. There's also a Wikipedia section of "Districts" on the nonlegislative districts here in the Philippines (historical districts).

If anyone crosses by this, I found this as a useful reference for Quezon City's history: Pante, Michael D. (2019). A Capital City at the Margins. Maybe for further reading of the Wikipedia page? RFNirmala (talk) 04:37, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

We should highlight them more than the legislative districts. In fact, many of them probably deserve their own pages. I will argue that those districts are in fact more notable in themselves than many "official" (e.g. legislative) districts, precisely because they produce their own cultural footprint. Surely Diliman and Cubao, at least, produce enough literature and art to be notable enough to merit their own Wikipedia page. Arguably the cultural contributions of Diliman and Cubao come somewhat independently of the administration under Quezon City Hall. (And I'll actually have a similar argument for Teacher's Village and Katipunan.) - 02:14, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Possible socking

Did we have a user who had to be blocked for contentious editing on Philippine TV? I recall being in conflict with a crappy editor (whose name I can't recall) who tried to POV push their way by demanding that their be untouchable for "not being vandalism" in 2023 and now I have this newbie editor making undiscussed moves to Jhoanna (singer) and having [1] similar edit summaries to the account I discussed. Borgenland (talk) 02:53, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Notice of Move discussion

Not sure if I'm doing the template right, but a move discussion in ongoing on Talk:Jhoanna (singer). Interested editors are invited to participate. Borgenland (talk) 03:44, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

UP Diliman Units

Hi, I noticed that some of the various colleges, institutes, schools, and sattelite campuses of the University of the Philippines Diliman have wikipedia pages while some of the others do not. A fellow editor has explained to me that this is often a notability issue but to me, it is a bit strange that the UP Diliman College of Science has a page while, say, the University of the Philippines Diliman College of Social Sciences and Philosophy or the UP Diliman Extension Program in Pampanga (which is quite nearly its own entity in Clark, with a history different from the Diliman campus) do not. I would like to work on this, but need clarification about the reasons some units are notable while some are not. So I am seeking discussion? - 01:58, 8 August 2024 (UTC) F72mabalacat (talk) 01:58, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

I think WP:UNIGUIDE is your guide. Most universities are notable, but individual units of a university aren't presumed notable so the WP:GNG prevails. —seav (talk) 06:32, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Images of National Scientists

Hello, I've noticed quite a number of articles of the National Scientists of the Philippines don't use the official photos from NAST. For guidance I've uploaded a chart, taken from the pdf file of NAST's 2018 annual meeting featuring every official photos of National Scientists from 1978 to 2014. It's outdated I know but some of these photos has already been uploaded in Wikimedia Commons and has been used in some of the biographies here in English Wikipedia.

Link: https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Official_portraits_of_the_National_Scientists_of_the_Philippines_(1978%E2%80%932014).png AsianStuff03 (talk) 12:15, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

I wonder if there are high-resolution versions of the portraits available from NAST so we can upload those instead of having to crop the PDF multiple times. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 14:53, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

The unedited photos can be found from their official website here. You can find them in their respective profiles. I have uploaded some of these such as those of Juan Salcedo, Jr. and Gregorio Zara but many of the photos hasn't still been uploaded in Commons. AsianStuff03 (talk) 22:48, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 9 August 2024

Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines → Wikipedia:WikiProject Tambayan Philippines – WikiProjects start with the "WikiProjects" prefix. This is also what the lead sentence uses in this project page. Gonnym (talk) 10:13, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

I can't find the last RM, but this has definitely been proposed before. Anyone know where that was? CMD (talk) 11:26, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

• Comment. This may be a controversial and probably unpopular opinion, but why not just move it to Wikipedia:WikiProject Philippines? HueMan1 (talk) 12:21, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

  I support this proposal for standardization and simplicity. Sanglahi86 (talk) 12:31, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

• Agree Neutral based on feedback from Sky Harbor below. I understand the prestige of the page being under the Tambayan Philippines title for almost 20 years now and I agree it could be nice to keep the name as it is. If in any case it would be required that the WikiProject be suffixed to the page's name, I remain supporting the version raised by HueMan1 and with same reason as Sanglahi86; standardization and simplicity. Markoolio97 Markoolio97 (talk) 15:56, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

  The current name adds a bit of flavor, I don't see the value in going generic for the sake of it. CMD (talk) 14:05, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

• Hi, folks. I need to add a bit of context here as to why this is "Tambayan Philippines" and not "WikiProject Philippines". This WikiProject actually started off as the Philippines noticeboard, and the WikiProject came afterward. There was an attempt to move this to "WikiProject Philippines" back around 2006 or so alongside instituting a proper WikiProject, but it was unsuccessful and the WikiProject elements of this board came a bit later after that discussion which, among others, led to the banning of a user from the English Wikipedia. Something that I regret happened on here and I wish will never again happen here.

That being said, I don't see the utility in moving the name of the project. This place, its WikiProject features notwithstanding, is first and foremost a noticeboard and gathering place for Filipino Wikipedians. I think it's important that while we as a community continue to move ahead and grow, we must do so with respect to some of our most cherished traditions which tie us together. The name of this project, if you ask me, is one of them, and for that I must respectfully vote Oppose. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 15:00, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

This might possibly be the earliest suggestion to move to WikiProject Philippines as mentioned above Markoolio97 (talk) 15:23, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

In case anyone asks the user referred to as "Akira123323" is me. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 15:30, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose removal of the T-word. Although I honestly sometimes omit the T-word when categorizing articles out of laziness, I find it useful in searching for my home project. Although Wikipedia is supposed to be a sober encyclopedia I don't think this has to mean we have to be ultra-conformist as regards to the naming standards, especially since there is nothing disruptive to it. On a personal note, it also makes visitors less scared to visit the project once they get to know the meaning of it. Borgenland (talk) 16:53, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose. Is there an actual policy or guideline violation here? I scanned WP:PROJGUIDE and it doesn't say anywhere there that WikiProject names must start with that prefix. This proposed move seems like a move for the sake of unnecessary consistency and also in the project namespace for which we should be less pedantic compared to mainspace. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. —seav (talk) 17:03, 9 August 2024 (UTC)