Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines

Main

Discussion

Assessment

Requests

Members

Articles
(Featured · New · Popular)

Sources

Portal

Shortcuts

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.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about the Philippines and other Philippine-related topics. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this page. You may wish to ask factual questions about the Philippines and other Philippine-related topics at the Reference desk. Please limit all discussion to topics pertaining to this WikiProject or its pages.

Start new topic

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

Pinoy Wikipedia on social media

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Wikiproject

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]