Talk:2022 Philippine presidential election

This article is written in Philippine English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, realize, center, travelled) and some terms that are used in it (including jeepney and cyberlibel) may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

A news item involving 2022 Philippine presidential election was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 12 May 2022.

Wikipedia

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Elections and Referendums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

Tambayan Philippines High‑importance

	Philippines portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tambayan Philippines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to the Philippines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Tambayan PhilippinesWikipedia:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesTemplate:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesPhilippine-related articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of 2022 Philippine presidential election was copied or moved into 2022 Philippine presidential debates with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:

May 8 to 14, 2022

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Who gets in the infobox

I've personally would've wanted 2, 3, 4, 6 or 9 people in the infobox. The way it's shaping up, it's 60-29-6-4-2-1 (bottom 5 candidates) for president, and 61-18-16-3-1.25 (bottom 5). I would've preferred the top 4 for president and top 3 for vice president. Howard the Duck (talk) 16:54, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with including top 4 for president, and we might as well include the top 4 as well for vp given the extra space. Itsquietuptown ✉️📜 23:45, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mangondato is set to win a province, and he's not in the infobox. It'll best for us to include him -- and since he's 6th, we'd include the top 6. Howard the Duck (talk) 13:06, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do we now agree on 6? Top 6 for presidents and top 6 for VP? Can we add that now? Nuwordlife0rder (talk) 09:39, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet. Mangondato wom with less than 1% of thw vote. Valentin de los Santos has around that percentage but won't get added. I'd be fine with top 4 in the president and top 3 in the VP. (To see how this works, check out the 2004 infobox.) Howard the Duck (talk) 10:39, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Moreno and Ong literally have the same vote percentages. Janbryan (talk) 21:24, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Useless trivia. Herminio Aquino get 3.24% of the vote in 2004. That's somewhere in the Isko and Doc Willie numbers, but he's not listed in the infobox as that election was seen as a 2-horse race, he did not have a picture, and didn't win a province. On the flipside, we list Salvador Laurel in the infobox in 1992 with 3.40% of the vote. He's the 7th placer, he won a province, he has a picture, and the infobox is sorta ugly as a result. Miriam Defensor Santiago got 3.42% and we include her in a 5-person infobox (there were 5 candidates), but she didn't win a province.

In 2022, the gap between #3 and #4 for vice president is wider than the one for president. In other words, the top 3 vice presidential candidates got 95.11%, the top 4 presidential candidates 97.11% (top 3 got 93.52%).

Either way, I'm OK with the top 4 in both positions. The infobox rules state the person has to have 5% of the vote to get in, but we can choose to be flexible, based on who has pictures, the number of candidates, the gap between the candidates, and so forth. Howard the Duck (talk) 23:45, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's not useless. I'm simply saying that if you're going to keep Moreno, you may as well keep Ong. I'm responding to the fact you're considering top 4 for president and top 3 for VP lol. Janbryan (talk) 23:52, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

These are separate elections with different variables. Top 4 presidential candidates almost have the same percentage as the top 3 VP candidates. Not all variables should be viewed solely on its own, but together with the other variables. (Hence I suggesting a longshot suggestion of making it top 6 because Mangondato, 6th placer, won a province, and a fairly large one at that).

Howard the Duck (talk) 00:09, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Are the results final?

I don't quite understand, the page seem to indicate it's the final results after they were canvassed by Congress, but the tables are still headed by "From 171 out of 173 certificates of canvass:", and the links at the bottom of the tables are already dead.--Aréat (talk) 00:07, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The results are final. Only 171 out of 173 COCs were canvassed because the remaining two failed to arrive on time for the canvassing, but the numbers from these COCs can't affect the overall rankings of the candidates. For the dead link, are you talking about this link? It still works. Itsquietuptown ✉️📜 01:21, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We should probably remove "171 of 173 COCs" note in both templates.

AFAIK, one of those COCs was from Shanghai which cannot hold a vote due to the lockdown. I dunno where the other one was from. Howard the Duck (talk) 13:42, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As for the links to the sources, the Senate website usually has the PDF to the "Resolution of Both Houses". Once I get access to that, that's the source we should be using. (Check out the 2016 results templates for an example.) Howard the Duck (talk) 13:43, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So in a sense it's not final until this resolution is made, right? Do you know roughly when it may be released? Is it similar for the parliamentary elections?--Aréat (talk) 23:26, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The "Resolution of Both Houses" has already been voted upon and approved when Marcos and Duterte were proclaimed winners. In 2016, the Senate released the actual resolution; this time, their website is a fubared I don't if they published it already. As this is a resolution, publication is not a requirement for approval.

For legislative electioms, the national COMELEC had the role of what Congress did here and already released resolutions for Senate and party-list elections. (You can see the vote totals on the COMELEC website and these were used as sources in the Senate per candidate and party-list result templates.) For district elections, these are done in a per provincial or city COMELEC and these usually were done a week after the elections at the very latest. The COMELEC has a separate website for local election results but they don't give out a national summary for House district elections.

They might release a list of winning candidates later on. Howard the Duck (talk) 00:13, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Marcos infobox pic

User:Itsquietuptown changed the Marcos to the one that we have been using for weeks vs the one with the presidential seal. The latter has the better view of him, and his mouth is not opened widely. I know this boils down to aesthetics but the latter is a better photo of him. Howard the Duck (talk) 11:47, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted User:Itsquietuptown replacement of the image. This was a far more superior image and keeps up with theme with other 3 pictures that look like portraits and not exactly look like candids. Howard the Duck (talk) 23:01, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding is that Marcos' image in this article's infobox should be the one without the presidential seal behind since he was not yet a president at that time? –Sanglahi86 (talk) 23:08, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't usually do WP:OSE arguments, but US presidential elections always have the winner using his US presidential portrait. We can't do that since our laws are crap. This photo is actually closer to what he looks like, as it was taken days after the election, vs. the previous one which was taken on 2018.

Also, I'd be swayed if the previous photo is a good pic of him. If we can find another photo of him that's just as a good and just as recent, we'll see. Howard the Duck (talk) 23:16, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Janbryan reverted to the photo of ~~2018~~ 2012(!!!) Marcos as a senator. Again, there's no such rule that we don't use a photo of someone in cases like that that happened a short while after the event. The difference is enormous. Janbryan's version is of Marcos as how it looked like in 2012, vs. that one he replaced it with that was taken a few weeks after the election. (You can argue his appearance didn't change much but so what?) A 2012 photo vs. a 2022 photo of someone in an article about a 2022 event is a no-contest. Howard the Duck (talk) 00:50, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox got raided

Should speak for itself, there's no way Marcos-Duterte won with over 99% of the votes, probably some diehard Marcos supporter. 49.145.13.132 (talk) 04:29, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This has been fixed, but the vandalized edits are indeed Marcosian where there are more votes for Bongbong than actual Filipinos in the Philippines. Reminds me of the 1927 Liberian general election. Howard the Duck (talk) 12:34, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Color chart

The color chart in the infobox is only for municipal results. I tried to fix that up, but was reverted by Jonesey95 because it introduced Linter errors and disappeared the color chart -- I tried this out on the previews and the color chart only shows up when you select the municipal map and not the others, so it did not disappear; no comment on Linter errors1. Can somebody check that? Howard the Duck (talk) 23:36, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can't put the legend, which uses div tags to wrap block content, inside a text parameter of {{switcher}}, specifically "Results by municipality", because that caption is wrapped in span tags. It is invalid to wrap span tags (inline content) around div tags (block content). – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:45, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So now, we have the colorkey showing up on maps where it is not relevant. How can this be fixed, then? Howard the Duck (talk) 23:50, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]