Archive 30

Archive 31

Archive 32

Archive 33

Archive 34

Archive 35

→

Archive 40

Merge request here. Templates {{Pasta}} and {{Chinese noodles}} have been proposed to be merged into {{Noodle}}. --Cold Season (talk) 22:42, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

I have noticed that the Picture Perfect section of the Manila Bulletin (see [1] [2]) regularly runs photo contests. Maybe next year Wiki Loves Monuments Philippines [3] can team up with them if somebody knows somebody. Just an idea -- worth what you paid for it -- absolutely nothing. --Iloilo Wanderer (talk) 10:56, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Pitch the idea to Namayan; he's the project manager for Wiki Loves Monuments in the Philippines. :) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 00:34, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

image:Faculty and First Daughters of Charity, Colegio de la Inmaculada Concepcion de la Concordia (Manila).jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.92.181.39 (talk) 04:09, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

I heard this from a Facebook group, but the news either way is not good. Kgargar, who in real life is a field scientist, is currently being held by the AFP on suspicion of being a member of the New People's Army (link here) after being caught in the crossfire of an armed excursion of the 67th Infantry Brigade of the Philippine Army and the NPA in Cateel, Davao Oriental, where he was doing field work. News of his detention have made it to local (Davao-based) media such as the Sun.Star Superbalita Davao (link here).

Without painting the military in a negative light here, what should we do? --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 10:18, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't think it's our place to do anything. That Kalikasan that you linked to seems like one of those militant groups allied with the NPA. The fact that their defending him makes me suspect that the military's suspicions are not unjustified. TheCoffee (talk) 21:36, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

I agree that it would be inappropriate to drag Wikipedia into this at this point (or at all, for that matter, except perhaps to report events of encyclopedic interest in relevant articles). For some more info, see this, and for some advocacy already underway by others see this. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 22:58, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

As the show went kaput just recently, well, is anyone else here up to the task of sprinkling some more info about the show, like whatever lewdness scandals Willie got into or the aforementioned cancellation? Blake Gripling (talk) 09:13, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Anyone here know as to who's maintaining the Pekepedia servers? Things are kinda' stale there and it's been littered with spam/junk registrations. I'm thinking about having extensions like Bad Behaviour and Akismet installed, but since I don't have server access to it, well, you know. Blake Gripling (talk) 03:58, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

I believe it's Howard who's maintaining the server. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 03:28, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm not connected to this project. –HTD 03:31, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Then who? As I said it's stale and given the current events and topics that are worth satirizing or parodying, 'tis best if we give that site a new life and stuff. Blake Gripling (talk) 09:07, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Howard, the archives don't lie. ;)

If not Howard though, then ask Starczamora. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 15:45, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Nothing in the archives states I'm maintaining the server, let alone contribute there :P –HTD 19:27, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Like Howard, I don't have access to Pekepedia's servers. Starczamora (talk) 16:01, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

You might try starting with http://www.whois.com/whois/pekepedia.net Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 22:53, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

The legal custodian of the Pekepedia server, if my memory's right, is Uncyclopedia. Uncyclopedia has Un-Meta, the un-version of Meta, so I presume you can go there and request for permissions the way you normally would on Meta for small, inactive projects. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 13:18, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Can an administrator take a look at User:Philipandrew, please. The user seems to be new and a bit hypernationalistic in his edits, and is engaging in rather blatant sockpuppetry to bolster his arguments in Talk:List of Filipino inventions and discoveries. The accounts were all created within the same day, all of them give barnstars to Philipandrew and all of them make the same mistakes in English (e.g. "Specially").

I've tried to warn him several times in an effort to avoid him getting banned, but he doesn't seem to listen. Despite the headaches he's caused in the past few days, I'm still AGF-ing and hoping he can still contribute positively on Philippine-related topics in the future. Maybe he'll listen to an administrator. But yeah, those sockpuppets need to be killed in the meantime.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 19:15, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

At the moment I'm more concerned about the appalling state of Filipinos' English fluency. Is this really how ordinary Filipinos now speak English? Por Diyos, por santo!

However, I notice that a lot of the rhetoric coming from a number of editors on that page (and not just Philipandrew) is that there seems to be the need to compete with other countries in terms of what we've made, because anything less means we've succumbed to colonial mentality. While such a line of argumentation is valid, it is also highly problematic. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 00:53, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

By God, he says he's been editing here since 2006? I'm here since 2011 only, but I got to say that my "notable works" are much better than his "notable works" (you may check it yourself). His English is not good, and his so-called notable works is not even B-class to reckon with. And if there are more editors out there like him, that is a threat to the efficiency and reliability of articles concerning the Philippines. Also, while there is a point that we need to compete our achievements with others, we have to be impartial with issues like this. The Philippines is a relatively young country. I think I said enough. Arius1998 (talk) 02:06, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

The "other" editors in that talk page are mostly his sockpuppets. His first edit is also from August 2012, not 2006. But yeah, mostly I just want someone with a banhammer (and thus more likely to be taken seriously) to talk him out of the sockpuppet theatre he's currently engaging in.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 05:20, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello. Since the map of Isabela is now updated with the official one from the NEDA and Provincial Government, is there anyone here who can update also the individual map of each municipality based on the updated map? Thanks! jmarkfrancia (talk) 08:35, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi guys, can you help us expand the 2013 Bohol earthquake article? --AR E N Z O Y 1 6A•t a l k• 14:01, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't have the time or the patience mental-emotional capacity for totally rewriting Tarlac–Pangasinan–La Union Expressway right now, although I suppose I could probably get to it in the next month or two. Some of you might want to take a crack at it? I find it disorganized, in many places written like a promo piece, and often internally redundant - largely because it has grown in small increments as sources about construction updates became available over the years. So. For your consideration, folks :D - Alternativity (talk) 19:08, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

There's an editwar going on RE the Academy's official establishment and there's this so-called "military expert" trying to be a king over there. I know there's a research paper made by an alumnus about the Academia Militar's establishment but the "expert" and another idiot's trying to revert it back. I've seen bullrings that have the year changed to 1898. --Eaglestorm (talk) 15:07, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

I regret that I cannot make any of the pictures in this album on Flickr public domain as they have only recently been recovered from storage and are family property, but I would appreciate help identifying some of the locations shown, perhaps some of the people. My grandfather was in the US Army and served in the Musical Corps as well as in the medical corps, work that included him serving as photographer. Many of these are casual pictures, others appear to be portraits of notable individuals and personages, Filipino and American. I have identified one picture as being that of Manila Cathedral but while looking through other church articles here on Wikipedia, there are so many in the Philippines I'm a bit overwhelmed. Some of the non-church photos may be identifiable by style of clothing or a bit of landscape or the style of roof. Some pics are scenics and are just plain remarkable - grandpa was a good photographer - this one has a church or monastery building in the background that probably was a military target in times afterwards (because of size and fortifiable location?) and no longer stands. some appear to be ceremonials of some kind, others glimpses of Filipino life and upper class society. I could keep on commenting on some to get your interest, but easier at this point to refer to to the gallery again and ask you to add comments. This one, though, is my favourite and this one is of my grandfather, Endre Johannes Cleven. Help identifying the locations and whatever else in these images would be greatly appreciated....next time I go to the Philippines I'd like to visit the places he was at. 70.68.136.193 (talk) 04:37, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Any interested editors/contributors? - AnakngAraw (talk) 04:22, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello there! The above Afc submission will soon be deleted as a stale draft. Reading through the text, it appears that the person has been involved in many notable activities, but the draft has almost no references. Should this draft be kept and improved? Or should we let it go? —Anne Delong (talk) 22:58, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Lots of stuff but all weaseled up. In addition, those testimonials add no value. --Eaglestorm (talk) 08:09, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll let it go. —Anne Delong (talk) 12:56, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Since the 10th anniversary of the Tagalog Wikipedia is coming up, it's probably appropriate for me to talk about this. It would probably a good idea to promote and encourage editing of Philippine language Wikipedias. It's true that most Filipinos can understand at least some English, but it would also be a good idea to build our own Wikipedias. The Tagalog Wikipedia could use some more love (most of its content is short or hasn't been updated in a while, and it currently only has around 20 featured articles). The Cebuano and Waray-Waray Wikipedias could also be promoted more (right now they're bigger than the Tagalog Wikipedia but have less active editors). Any thoughts? Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:24, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

There is a confluence of factors as to why the Philippine-language Wikipedias are faring significantly less well than the English Wikipedia, all of which are beyond the control of the community at large. These include the way education in the Philippines is structured, cultural perceptions about the utility of Philippine languages in such a setting, and the lack of Wikipedians proficient enough in their regional tongues (or even the national language) where they'd be comfortable contributing to the regional projects. Given that English is the preeminent language of the Philippines for a setting such as Wikipedia, it's already given that we have a very, very steep uphill climb when it comes to generating acceptance, let alone awareness, of the 8+ Wikipedias in the languages of the Philippines.

That being said, however, I believe that not all hope is lost on the Philippine-language projects, but we must concede that it will take a very long time before any Philippine-language Wikipedia will make it anywhere near the English Wikipedia's comprehensiveness, let alone its quality levels. We can do all the promotion work in the world, but if people don't want to contribute to it, then we have to focus on the sources of the problem. A discussion on the future of the Tagalog Wikipedia is something that I'd like to see come December 1, if you are coming. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 13:31, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Can I ask an administrator to please undelete File:Some Editions of the Bannawag Magazine.jpg and change the license to {{non-free magazine cover}}. Drop a note on my talk page so that I can place a fair-use rationale and restore it on the Bannawag article. Thanks --Bluemask (talk) 02:01, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

@Bluemask: Done. :) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 23:46, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Got it. FUR placed (I hope it is appropriate) and restored in article. --Bluemask (talk) 04:04, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I have something like here, a table template actually (see here) which I think we can put in the articles of the storms involved. What do you think? Chitetskoy (talk) 17:47, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

• There already is a table at Typhoons in the Philippines#Deadliest Cyclones. I don't think it is necessary to have a rankings table in each individual typhoon article. Moreover, they are already linked with Template:Retired Philippine typhoon names. So, seems like overkill to me... -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 20:57, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
  • I mean a template where such tables can embedded on the typhoon articles where it is listed? Chitetskoy (talk) 21:19, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
    • Yes, I know what you meant. Still think it is redundant and template overkill. Sorry. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 16:40, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
      • Are there any articles where such a proposed template will be useful? If we'd be adding such a template to all of the "Top <arbitrary number> deadliest typhoons", we could've just used {{Retired Philippine typhoon names}}. I know the 2 lists aren't identical, but the at least retired typhoon names are not exactly "arbitrary". –HTD 17:07, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi, everyone. The tenth anniversary of the Tagalog Wikipedia is in two weeks and we would love to invite you guys to celebrate this momentous occasion with us! Visit our page for the celebration, leave a message on our guestbook, and join us for a meetup on December 1! :) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 08:39, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

The meetup details have been confirmed here: Wikipedia:Meetup/Manila 19. I really hope you guys can attend! :) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 05:48, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Article name: Escolta Street (Escolta, Manila)

Topic: Reviewing of article for finalizing from authority.

To whom it may concern,

I would Wikipedia Tambayan to review and go through the article regarding the Escolta Street in Manila for further publishing to make the article sufficient, productive and ready to be official for public common knowledge and historical government topics. I kindly ask to rate the topic for level of importance and correct licensing of correct information displayed within the article.

For further notice please contact my user at Parker Phy for continuous discussions.

Thank you,

Parker Ellis

FYI, I gave an assessment on that article. --Jojit (talk) 11:31, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

The Iloilo International Airport article could use some additional comments. Over at Talk:Iloilo International Airport I have been in a discussion with another editor about whether the article should even mention the name "Santa Barbara Airport". I argue that the article should mention the name since that name is common, even if inaccurate, and can be seen in histories of World War II and in Lonely Planet guidebooks. User:Tumandokkangcabatuan argues that it is a "lie" that should not be spread by Wikipedia. I have proposed a solution. Other editors comments are needed I think if we are to reach a WP:Consensus. See Talk:Iloilo International Airport#Create a section to discuss the name. --Iloilo Wanderer (talk) 05:11, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

I haven't seen the article yet as I comment but if the sources will be provided in the article, I think that will solve the issue. Also, if the said user thinks that it is a "lie"; we can use "according to lonely planet" or "according to World War II journals" and then state your sources. With this way, it will be up to the reader to determine if it is a lie or not by following the sources. Verifiability and consensus go hand in hand. --Jojit (talk) 10:46, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Greetings! I have recently opened a requested move discussion at Talk:Charice Pempengco, regarding a page relating to this WikiProject. Discussion and opinions are invited. Thanks,Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 05:24, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Dear editors: The above abandoned submission at Afc was declined for improper referencing - it had many incorrectly titled references to the organization's own web site and nothing else. I have fixed that up and resubmitted it. However, when I checked the template at the bottom of the article, I found that there are many similar articles for other years, and none of the ones that I checked have any references at all. This is a widely reported award, and the references for 2011 were easy to find. If anyone is looking for a project, improving the referencing on the other years would be a worthy task; otherwise, they may end up tagged or even deleted, as this one almost was. Thanks! —Anne Delong (talk) 14:06, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

I think we better keep an eye on this user and his/her sockpuppets - the user's mostly a nuisance, with his/her modus consisting of copy-pasting content from showbiz articles into a new yet similarly-named page for no apparent reason, and creating hoaxed pages about a certain child actress named "Andrea Villegas‎" or some other made-up BLP, complete with cutpasted text and poor grammar. For that I promptly filed a SPA complaint against him, but I do need some backup on this issue should he spawn some more alt accounts. Blake Gripling (talk) 07:56, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

FYI, this new stub is up at WP:AfD. Bearian (talk) 16:54, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Any thoughts on this one? An ABS-CBN news report mentioned the firm, along with Intel, launching a $400 netbook some six years ago, but there doesn't seem to be any more third-party coverage about them, other than a few other news items. Blake Gripling (talk) 02:48, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello! Can I request if someone can peer review this Philippine-related article? The nomination is here. Cheers! FairyTailRocks (talk) 14:24, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Took me an hour to add more material, but worth it. --Eaglestorm (talk) 03:32, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi guys. Who would like to help me bring the Manila Metro Rail Transit System article to current FA standards? I'm currently compiling sources on the project's history, but I'd like to ask for other people who want to help me with improving the article since I'm also caught up improving the bank articles being nominated for deletion. The FAR is here. Thanks! :) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 02:44, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

As one of the claimants to the Spratly Islands, the Tagalog version of the Spratly Islands article should definitely be expanded. The corresponding articles in Chinese and Vietnamese Wikipedia are extensive and detailed, not a stub like in Filipino Wikipedia. Nguyễn Quốc Việt (talk) 04:46, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

95% of Wikipedia traffic in the Philippines is directed to the English Wikipedia. I'd love to see an expanded Tagalog version of the article in question, but we don't have enough Tagalog Wikipedians working on the project to begin with. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 06:56, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

I wonder where you got the statistics that 95% of Wikipedia traffic in the Philippines is directed to the English Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.92.60.115 (talk) 01:40, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Here, then scroll down to "Philippines". Also, correction: 92% of traffic goes to the English Wikipedia, not 95%. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 04:20, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello po,Sorry po if this might not be on the correct talk page, I don;t really don't know where to begin.I'm from pampanga and I wanted to create a article about the re enactment of Crucifixion in the Philippines. However I getting challenges in putting them all together in be be a Valid Article , Can someone help me out putting the words together.

Here's my work in progress page link, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kixzer/Crucifixion_in_the_Philippines

Thanks in advance Kixzer Franz710 ^(talk) 20:03, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Kixzer. Your article was already approved for creation and may now be found at Crucifixion in the Philippines. However, continue staying here in the Tambayan: new Filipino faces are always a plus! :) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 05:48, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Sky Harbor ^(talk) , relatively new in terms of creating new articles here, glad that there are a lot of people to collaborate to in making the articles worth posting. I still also need alot of things that I need to know. Any Pinoy Wikipidians in Pampanga for possible meet up let me know and post it here. Thanks.Kixzer Franz710 ^(talk) 13:26, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Have you tried the Kapampangan Wikipedia? --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 13:30, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

I did :) Sir Sky Harbor ^(talk) However the I not really that good in reading/understanding the dialect ( i know Kapampangan but seems that when I read the page , I usually find my self clueless. ) So I'm more on finding Tagalog/English speaking wikipedians based in Pampanga, whom I can collaborate toKixzer Franz710 ^(talk) 16:26, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Kixzer (and all other Wikipedians in the Philippines), feel free to join our unofficial Facebook group here. Also, I will suggest you message Wikipedians like Leeheonjin, Katimawan2005 and Val2397 directly. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 06:43, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Kixzer since I was mentioned by our fellow Sky Harbor, I am ready to entertain your concerns. Nevertheless, I am also encouraging you to contribute competent articles on Kapampangan Wikipedia, aytie? --Lee Heon Jin^(talk) 12:28, 02 February 2014 (UTC)

Mayap a aldo keko ngan :)Leeheonjin and Sky Harbor , Yes I am now active (except on my off) in creating articles for https://pam.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kixzer starting with the Beatles, being assisted Val2397 , I haven't heard from Katimawan2005 yet. I am now focus in adding pages in the test Kapampangan Wiktionary page in https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex/Wt/pam/ I just can't seem to find a proper dictionary template for it, so that my pages will be seamless,organized and won't have future conflicts. I want to start the pages right so there will be minimal edits, so once it get live , It would be hard adding new pages. I don't know how to add templates / special pages in the test page like example Index Page , Categories and the Main Page https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wt/pam/Pun_Bulung there are alot of errors in the links. BTW thanks for the assistance. --Kixzer Franz710 ^(talk) 15:06, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Since you mention you are ready Leeheonjin I really need assistance on the Kapampangan Wiktionary,

I am having problems if the word haves many meaning in the Kapampangan language, Example of this is the Enlgish word if , The equivalent of the English word ‘if’ that links two clauses together has many forms in the Kapampangan language, depending on its context:

Example:

NUNG ‘if’ (denoting condition): Milúb ka NUNG mamáyad ka.

You may enter if you pay (the entrance).

PATIÉ ‘if’ (denoting consequence): Patén daka PATIÉ é ka memáyad útang.

They will kill you if you don’t pay back your loan.

PÁNGA ‘if’ or ‘when’: Alâ néng útang PÁNGA memáyad ya.

He will remove all his loans if he pays.

PÓTANG ‘if’ (‘soon after’): Ibúlus da né PÓTANG memáyad né.

They will set him free if he pays.

Any suggestions? list of these Kampangan Words can be found here --Kixzer Franz710 ^(talk) 15:27, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

This has been deleted twice before and has been rejected at AFC several times in the past couple of months. Why don't these people ever learn?--Eaglestorm (talk) 13:40, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians, perhaps you can spare 5–10 minutes of your time to answer this thesis questionnaire regarding "The Significance of Wikipedia's Editing Process to its Published Articles as Perceived by Selected Local Contributors. -- Namayan (talk) 01:53, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Done. Although I must say I feel some of those questions need to be rephrased, and at least one of them needs to be reexamined in terms of the range of answers allowed. Anyway. Hope my filling up the form was helpful. - Alternativity (talk) 19:30, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Following on this, I've created a {{data Philippines}} template, and plan to start using it in articles. If anyone has objections or comments, please speak up here or on the template talk page. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 12:26, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks for creating the template. Can we use a more authoritative reference for land and water areas than another WP article? -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:14, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

One hopes so -- eventually. I'll address this on the template talk page. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 02:49, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Could the data be taken from https://www.wikidata.org ? Androoox (talk) 19:44, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

It doesn't look like that's what Wikidata is for. See Wikidata:Introduction Also see Philippines on Wikidata. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 04:58, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

A couple of weeks ago, I created Template:Data Philippines. Here, I used info from there in the Philippines article. The calculation of population density figures there seemed overly messy and complicated, so I created the {{Data/popdens}} template (I have not yet added info on that to {{Show data}}, but I plan to do that soon). Today, here, I redid the density bits in the Philippines article to use {{Data/popdens}}.

I jumped the gun a bit on that last edit to the Phillippines article because this edit to the Luzon article caught my eye today. I have not calculated a current population figure based on 2010 population figures and growth rates given in the 2010 Census and Housing Population source cited in the article to verify the replacement figure, but it strikes me that the availability of this supporting source invites supplementing {{Data Philippines}} with additional Data templates for Philippine Regions, Provinces, and Municipalities (similar to subnational units in the Netherlands -- see links for entries under N in Category:Data templates). I'm not interested in tackling this myself right now (but might be, as I get time). I thought that I would mention this here in case others are interested. This looks like a natural for a stepwise approach -- first the regions, then the provinces, then the cities, then notable municipalities.

However, there is some messiness here which I think needs explanation and, possibly, consensus.

• I used area figures from the CIA Factbook in the {{Data Philippines}} template, explaining that choice here. I think that it's probably best to reconsider that choice. The NSO List of Provinces gives land area figures for provinces regions, and gives population figures matching the 2010 Census and Housing Population source mentioned above. It might be better to use provincial land area figures summed from the NSO List of Provinces as regional and national land areas. One difficulty here is that NSO list does not include the National Capital Region (NCR), and I don't know whether or not the NSO included the NCR area as part of the area of one or more of the provinces.
• The provincial population figures in the NSO List of Provinces do not sum up to regional totals given in the 2010 Census and Housing Population source, apparently because the latter also includes cities in the regions.
• The Data templates use a figure named popinc to calculate today's population from a base figure. {{Data Philippines}} uses the 2010 national census figure as a base and a popinc figure calculated from info at the Philippines' population clock. Data templates for subnational entities would also need a popinc figure. The 2010 Census and Housing Population source gives "Population growth rate" figures which could be used to calculate these.
• The Data templates expect separate total area and land area figures. {{Data Philippines}} currently uses figures from the CIA Factbook. The NSO List of Provinces source gives land area figures for the provinces, but does not give total area. We ought to come up with a consensus position on what to do here. One solution would be to use the NSO's land area figure for both land area and total area in the Data templates (the total at the national level is higher than the CIA Factbook's total area figure).

I come up with the following regional and national figures:

Region	Population[[4]	Land Area[[5] (hectares)
National Capital Region	11,855,975	missing
CAR - Cordillera Administrative Region	1,616,867	1,942,203
REGION I (Ilocos Region)	4,748,372	1,301,260
REGION II (Cagayan Valley)	3,229,163	2,822,883
REGION III (Central Luzon)	10,137,737	2,201,463
REGION IV-A (CALABARZON)	12,609,803	1,687,331
REGION IV-B (MIMAROPA)	2,744,671	2,962,087
REGION V (Bicol Region)	5,420,411	1,815,582
REGION VI (Western Visayas)	7,102,438	2,079,418
REGION VII (Central Visayas)	6,800,180	1,588,597
REGION VIII (Eastern Visayas)	4,101,322	2,325,110
REGION IX (Zamboanga Peninsula)	3,407,353	1,682,291
REGION X (Northern Mindanao)	4,297,323	2,049,602
REGION XI (Davao Region)	4,468,563	2,035,742
REGION XII (Soccsksargen)	4,109,571	2,233,730
REGION XIII (Caraga)	2,429,224	2,147,835
ARMM - Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao	3,256,140	3,351,142
National figures	92,337,852a	34,226,276

a. Population counts for the regions do not add up to the national total, which includes 2,739 Filipinos in Philippine Embassies, Consulates and Mission Abroad.

Comments or discussion would be welcome. Is there a better place to discuss this? Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 03:14, 10 February 2014 (UTC) Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 03:14, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

This all sounds like good stuff to me. If we have data templates on the city/municipality articles, would that mean it would simplify (or possibly automate) the updating of population figures every with new data whenever there's the every-5-years census? The updating of data for the 2007 and 2010 censuses was pretty spotty. TheCoffee (talk) 18:22, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

I would fully support data templates in the way they are used for the Netherlands. A (semi-)automated process or bot would make that a fairly easy job. I have already been working the last few years to update PH provinces and municipalities to create consistent formatting, add reliable sources, and add the 2010 population (all of Luzon and Visayas regions done!). I have been using NSO for areas and the 2010 census for population. In answer to the points above:

• As for areas, I have spent a lot of time updating tables like Provinces of the Philippines and List of primary local government units of the Philippines. I have been using NSO as the authoritative source but found some very questionable info there, see for instance Talk:Lanao del Sur#Area. Same for Maguindanao, Sulu, and Tawi-Tawi. So I had to decide on another reliable source (see footnotes 24, 34, and 36 at Provinces of the Philippines).
• For population, we should only accept the census as the authoritative source. The data at census.gov.ph is complete (like this spreadsheet). Yes, the NSO List of Provinces includes cities.
• I agree with using the Philippines' population clock as a source for current national population, but it should be clear that this is a calculated or projected number. For any sub-national entity (region/province/LGU) I recommend not using estimates because they are unreliable and probably often original research (and I have consistently been removing them when I see them, that's why I reverted this Luzon edit).
• I have not found any source that clearly shows total and land values. I likely doesn't exist.
• As for your Region table above, just compare it to Regions of the Philippines which matches your population numbers above but not the area. Especially ARMM is way off, I'm sure for the same reason as I mentioned in the first bullet above.

Appreciate your work. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 22:33, 14 February 2014 (UTC)