Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines

 

 

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

Wikipedia Meetups

May 2024 +/-
Auckland 22	May 4, 2024 (2024-05-04)
Leeds 6	May 4, 2024 (2024-05-04)
London 204	May 12, 2024 (2024-05-12)
US Mountain West online	May 14, 2024 (2024-05-14)
Bay Area WikiSalon	May 16, 2024 (2024-05-16)
Oxford 100	May 19, 2024 (2024-05-19)
San Diego 111	May 20, 2024 (2024-05-20)
Montreal: Canadian Centre for Architecture edit-a-thon	May 22, 2024 (2024-05-22)
BLT Office Hours	May 26, 2024 (2024-05-26)
June 2024 +/-
Exeter	June 8, 2024 (2024-06-08)
London 205	June 9, 2024 (2024-06-09)
BLT Office Hours	June 23, 2024 (2024-06-23)
Bay Area Wikipedians	June 13, 2024 (2024-06-13)
Full Meetup Calendar • Events calendar on Meta For meetups in other languages, see the list on Meta

Meetups have so far been held in eleven areas in the Philippines:

• Manila (Metro Manila)
• Cebu
• Naga
• Lingayen
• Tacloban
• Calbayog
• Palo
• Catbalogan
• Catarman
• Guiuan
• Borongan

Interactive events

• Chat via Chatroll
• Group Chat via RumbleTalk
• Web stream via Livestream

See also

• Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines
• Wikimedia Philippines

External Link

• Meetup page of Waray Wikipedia

2014 Asian Beach Games host no more

Its now official. Philippines has been stripped hosting the 2014 Asian Beach Games in favor of Thailand. News website

Corazon_Aquino

A certain newbie editor's been deleting pictures of the funeral and asserting that she was never elected. Probably some Marcos-style revisionism at work. Can anybody protect this? Given it's the EDSA anniversary, people are bound to mangle this. --Eaglestorm (talk) 13:24, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Then why wasn't there a repition of election in 1986? --Bone1234 (talk) 13:33, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

The thing about the 1986 election was, that it was such a fraud that neither candidate could claim s/he won. I don't know if you can get my point. --Bone1234 (talk) 13:34, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

And you must also see, that she came to power through an uprising but never had an election conducted again later that year. In the 1986 election itself, she couldn't really claim being elected. Fraud election would normally be repeated again, but in this case it was not. And Aquino didn't dare to stand in election. --Bone1234 (talk) 13:36, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

As someone who expanded Philippine presidential election, Bone1234 has a point -- we don't really know who won in 1986. It'll be better to say that "she assumed power after Marcos fled" or something to that effect. Marcos was still a pretty popular person even in 1992 when Danding and Imelda won some 28% of the vote.

It may even be valid to state she assumed the Presidency by national acclaim. That requires moral authority, which historical circumstance handed her, as she certainly would not have sought the office had she been given the choice of office or husband. --Ancheta Wis (talk) 13:59, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Well sure, this can go, if cited. The whole gist of her ascension to power was via revolutionary means as she did not use the constitution (which was on the most part "in operation" via unconstitutional means). –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 14:43, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

The results of the February 1986 elections became moot in March 1986 when a new government was installed through "a direct exercise of the power of the Filipino people assisted by units of the New Armed Forces of the Philippines."[1]. Some might dispute "the Filipino people" there. Perhaps "some Filipino people" would be more correct, but that's not what the official source I linked says. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:47, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Hence, that doesn't nullify the fact that she has never been elected through elections. --Bone1234 (talk) 01:12, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I gotta say I agree with Bone, the article can't simply say that she was 'elected'. TheCoffee (talk) 01:27, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

How about 'selected, rather than elected (as the constitution had been abrogated). As the political process stabilized, it became possible to return to constitutional norms in elections going forward.' --Ancheta Wis (talk) 01:37, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

The "became president after claiming victory in the 1986 election, after the People Power Revolution, and when Marcos fled from power" is the easiest way forward. People Power wasn't in the constitution and being "selected" is vague. Selected by who? From what power? –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 16:57, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

It can be disputed if Corazon Aquino was properly elected, but it would also be wrong to dismiss the relevance of the snap elections of 1986. She became president because people felt she was robbed in the election indicated by things such as the NAMFREL count and the walkout of COMELEC canvassers. If Corazon Aquino had a claim to leadership of the country it stemmed from the legitimacy she drew from the contested elections. None of the other actors involved were able to usurp her position because of it. Lambanog (talk) 03:37, 27 February 2011 (UTC) At least it is recognized that she is not the first elected female (formally) head of state - elected in classical sense. (The real first power woman of Asia was Indira Gandhi from the South Asian subcontinent - and for some time in the 1970s she even ruled in dictatorial manner! --Bone1234 (talk) 10:59, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Indira Gandhi wasn't head of state -- she was head of government (incidentally, she was elected by the Lok Sabha and not by the Indian people directly). With that said, the best solution is to say that Aquino assumed power after the People Power Revolution that overthrew Marcos from power. See List of Presidents of the Philippines#Notes for a rather good-enough explanation. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 13:16, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Okay, Aquino might be the first female president in Asia, but to claim she was first female head of state in Asia is a bit adventurous when you think about the long history of Asia. --Bone1234 (talk) 13:57, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

You may want to see List of elected or appointed female heads of state. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 14:01, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Looking at that, already Sükhbaataryn Yanjmaa beats Aquino. So, you don't even have to look back that far. --Bone1234 (talk) 14:05, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

But she was an acting head of state. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 00:56, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

(misplaced above) So what's the point of this discussion again? –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 14:10, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Last time I checked, there was supposedly no problem describing how Aquino ascended into power. Unless I'm missing/missed something. I dunno why how we got into this discussion. Originally it was about the 1986 election, then it came to the first elected head of state anywhere. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 16:54, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

as stated above, it was about boner's assertions that she was never elected in the first place, then it spiraled to being "who's the first Asian woman to be head of state?" But then again, this could be one of my wikinemeses - bilang na yan sa isang kamay lang (I could count them with one hand)- studying my contributions and trying to butt in.--Eaglestorm (talk) 00:05, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Where's the supposedly bad article on where these statements are stated? 03:21, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

People, it would be better to have this discussion directly related to article content on the talk page of the article, and not on this sidebar talk page. A Filipino Wikipedia Cabal (or several of them, crosspurposed) would be a Bad Thing™ Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 12:09, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't think that just because we're talking about an article here necessarily presupposes the existence of a Filipino Wikipedia cabal. After all, this noticeboard exists as a discussion space to improve articles on the Philippines. I'd like to see a resolution to this problem though: while I'm of the opinion that perhaps Corazon Aquino was "elected", I think we will need to come to a consensus on this. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 03:15, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

I have a great suggestion: "She was chosen by God, the Almighty Father/Mother." (uni-gender mode) Since the Filipino people are said to be faithful ones, that can go. --Bone1234 (talk) 03:52, 4 March 2011 (UTC) BTW: What does "tambayan" mean? (Just curious) --Bone1234 (talk) 03:55, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Being chosen by God? that's what her eldest daughter Ballsy said. try again. and since you're not Filipino by even asking the meaning of tambayan, I suggest you get on out of here and stop trying to muddle subjects you don't even know about. --Eaglestorm (talk) 04:12, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

of course, Filipino people want development aid but shout at the money givers when they say things they don't like to hear for whatever reason. No wonder why Filipino people remain poor: craving for money but doing nothing. that is typical Filipino. --Bone1234 (talk) 06:35, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Bone1234 the answer to your question is on the project page. You are currently viewing the discussion page. Lambanog (talk) 06:21, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

"and since you're not Filipino by even asking the meaning of tambayan, I suggest you get on out of here and stop trying to muddle subjects you don't even know about. " I don't have to be told by you, what I have to do, Eaglestorm. --Bone1234 (talk) 12:32, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

You don't want to be told what to do? Meh, your arrogance doesn't work either. You think you can just waltz in here and try to railroad what you want in the article, thinking you know better than we do? Nobody wants such types clouding the project, and unfortunately, you're one of them. Hah, no wonder you got a user warning. --Eaglestorm (talk) 13:20, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

And you think, non-Filipinos don't have the right to know anything about the Philippines? --Bone1234 (talk) 12:36, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Well of course you do, but you're barging your way into controversial territory without even knowing the full story behind it and being excessively confrontational about 'facts' that seem to have an underlying motivation. Because frankly, the tone of your posts and the changes you want to make all do sound like you're a Marcos supporter. It would have been okay if you were Filipino (my parents are Marcos supporters, I'm apolitical) because then at least you'd know a little more about what actually happened here, but you're not. Please remember that we grew up with all this, having someone tell us that 'this happened not that' is like having a neighbor butt into a family matter. The not being elected point is a valid argument but 'Chosen by God' is unencyclopedic and only highlights your lack of knowledge of our country, Wikipedia, and the cultural significance of the events surrounding the 1986 revolution. And I don't have to tell you that this:

"of course, Filipino people want development aid but shout at the money givers when they say things they don't like to hear for whatever reason. No wonder why Filipino people remain poor: craving for money but doing nothing. that is typical Filipino."

is incredibly condescending, self-righteous, insulting, and does nothing to argue your point. Please don't filter our culture, values, history etc. through yours. Here's a hint, the 'aid' you people always brag about giving to third world countries always come at great cost. I mean sheesh, we're talking about Marcos here! LOL. A dictator installed by whom again? Oh, you get the point, just please don't troll this board. And for what it's worth, tambayan can be roughly translated to "loitering place", it is the equivalent of the informal noun "hang-out". --Obsidi♠n^Soul 16:38, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

I LOLed the "chosen by God" thing anyway, but since apparently that was said by Ballsy, so... whatever. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 16:44, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

I think she meant Noynoy being president 25 years after the EDSA revolution. And frankly, I think that's a rather literal translation of it. Because I know when my parents say plano ng Diyos it would really have the equivalent implied weight of when westerners say 'It was fate/destiny' and not the vaguely messianic literal translation of 'God's plan'. I really should watch TV again. But meh, couldn't care less about our politics and the trapos nowadays. And yeah transplanting this discussion into the article's talkpage would be far better to attract more neutral (not necessarily Filipino) viewpoints on how she came into power.--Obsidi♠n^Soul 21:08, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

I will not taint this noticeboard with my political views vis-à-vis the current President, but there will be cases that plano ng Diyos can be translated as "God's plan". It depends on context. In the context of Ballsy saying that her brother's ascent to power ay plano ng Diyos, I'm more inclined to believe that her use of the phrase straddles both interpretations. If you look at how Noynoy supporters claim how their president ascended to power, they claim that it was both his destiny and God's plan that he be in power to supposedly rid the Philippines of the "evil" that was his predecessor. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 23:31, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Someone claiming the divine right of kings mayhap? Lambanog (talk) 03:06, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Haha, fair enough. As I said - trapos. :P Just to clarify though, when I say 'trapos'* I mean all of the crazies: pro- and anti- <insert Noynoy/Erap/Marcos/Gloria/FPJ/Brother Mike/whatever-they're-bickering-about-nowadays here>, not just the ones in power now. Bleurgh.--Obsidi♠n^Soul 10:23, 5 March 2011 (UTC) *(for Bone1234: derogatory term, both from the Spanish trapo meaning 'rag' and an acronym for 'traditional politician')

From my side: EOD. --Bone1234 (talk) 11:13, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Some editors here are not Filipino, of multiple ethnicity, or nationality, FYI. Everything was fine, until you started name-calling. So yeah, EOD.--Obsidi♠n^Soul 12:34, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Obsidian, what's EOD? the noob editor's naivete and crass comments about the Philippines is no different from other Filipino-bashers...and his edit summaries? If he thinks it's not worth talking to Filipinos (probably never saw or met one in his entire life, wherever in the world he may be), ba't nandito ka pa, gunggong (why are you still here, idiot)? --Eaglestorm (talk) 13:20, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

(EC-ed) End of discussion, I believe. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 13:33, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Eaglestorm, EOD is geek-speak for "End of Discussion". I for one, would welcome the "End of Text" so that we can give this thread a decent secondary burial in the archives of this talk page. --Ancheta Wis (talk) 13:38, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Just read the whole discussion, I think we're just being trolled. Shrumster (talk) 06:35, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Could someone recap the discussion? This could be submitted at BJOADN's current state, wherever that is. The outburst came out of nowhere, unless there a discussion took place some place else that incited him/her to do that. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 19:53, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

People Power Movement in the Main Page

Aside from this bickering, everyone's efforts should transfer on how to make the People Power Revolution article go into OTD a few hours before the day ends in UTC (around 8am tomorrow). –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 14:04, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

This is the wrong place to post such a request. --Bone1234 (talk) 14:31, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Nope, this is the right place to look for help. Read and understand WP:RWNB. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 14:35, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

List of Tayong Dalawa episodes part II

Somebody made another article just for the fun of it, and the content's not even about TD. --Eaglestorm (talk) 01:58, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, it contained non-notable fancruft. It's the same user who created the Minsan Lang Kita Iibigin page. Let's see what he/she does in the future. -- Joaquin008 ^(talk) 16:56, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Filipino America, or not?

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List_of_Filipino_Americans#Tim_Tebow. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:17, 5 March 2011 (UTC) (Using {{pls}})

Article with original research?

Filipino and Filipina role portrayal in TV/movie/film/media in the U.S. I'm wondering what are everybody's comments regarding this new article? Zollerriia63 (talk) 06:43, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm on the fence, but I don't think essays work in WP.--Eaglestorm (talk) 00:06, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Well... breaks WP:NPOV and then breaks it some more. Some incidents are at least notable nationally (the American Housewives incident, the Manny Pacquiao taunting, etc.), but the tone of the article is simply too loaded. It doesn't quite cover everything even. Alec Mapa, for example, isn't mentioned, and he does skits portraying his Filipino heritage as well (humorously but still in a positive light). Gene Cajayon's opinions in the documentary The Slanted Screen, etc. Or the fact that Filipino extras (often asked to portray some backwater stereotypical Asian dude) always seem to get away with cursing onscreen with the American audience none the wiser to it. Remember The Rock? That was friggin hilarious. Another one I can't remember offhand was a Filipino extra portraying a Chinese soldier who said straight-faced onscreen: "Pagod na pagod na ako. Kanina pa kami dito" (I'm very tired. We've been here [shooting this scene] for hours) in place of a supposedly Chinese dialogue. There are historical portrayals as well, dating back to when America was still grappling with suddenly finding itself the colonial ruler of the Philippines. Most notably The White Man's Burden by Rudyard Kipling and opposition to his portrayal of Filipinos and imperialism in general by Mark Twain and Henry James. Anyway I'm drifting, but yeah, article is one-sided, incomplete, and too POV. It's a rant basically.--Obsidi♠n^Soul 03:08, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Filipino/Filipina writers

Today being International Women's Day, there is a discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_March_7#Category:Filipina_poets concerning the naming of categories for people from the Philippines. Input welcome, --JN466 03:18, 8 March 2011 (UTC)