This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about
television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can
join the discussion.
To improve this article, please refer to the
style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
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
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the
project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Actually AGB-Nielsen omits Batangas as part of "Mega Manila" but the Philippine Information Agency considers it a part of "Mega Manila". --HowardtheDuck09:26, 10 January 2008 (UTC)reply
But "Mega Manila" isn't actually a place. I've yet to see a person tell me, "I live at Mega Manila." The audition commercial was for auditioners, not for encyclopedia readers, so we ought to use the correct terms for things such as this. --HowardtheDuck08:22, 11 January 2008 (UTC)reply
I think the network prefers to use "Metro Manila" than "Pasay". Anyway Metro Manila should be used since the auditions does not concern Pasay only but the whole metropolis. Also, people outside the metropolis, like the people in the provinces and other countries don't usually distinguish cities within Metro Manila.
23prootie (
talk)
09:16, 17 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Nor are Clark auditions are for people at Clark Air Base per se (in fact it seems there is little residential area within the air base itself, or so it seemed when I went there) so we won't use "Clark" when referring to auditions held there (instead we use
Angeles). That's why I'd rather have the building + address (e.g.,
Cultural Center of the Philippines,
Pasay,
Metro Manila* (*can be excluded)) so Wikipedia can be accurate. --HowardtheDuck11:34, 17 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Regions aren't written in address, except for "Metro Manila." I'll be reverting it. Before doing revisions, make sure there's consensus first. --HowardtheDuck07:31, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
The case of Metro Manila should make it enough to add regions, and since provinces are added to some but not in others, it's more practical and inclusive to use regions to avoid mix-ups.-
23prootie (
talk)
07:47, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
I suggest you read
cities of the Philippines (see also {{Philippine cities}} and the case of highly urbanized (HUC) and independent component (ICC) cities; all cities in the Metro and some other cities are HUCs and ICCs -- in this case they don't belong to a province and therefore, the province name should not be part of the address. All other cities and municipalities should append the province name after the city/municipality name. In fact appending "Metro Manila" to an address is now only applicable to
Pateros, Metro Manila since it's the only municipality left.
Not really. You'd only append "Metro Manila" or "M.M." if you'd also append "Philippines". And that'll apply the policy consistently of not appending the next highest LGU (in fact Metro Manila is not even an LGU). See
WP:MOSPHIL#Cities. --HowardtheDuck08:08, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
In common speech, Pasay is in
Manila. I mean, I've never heard anyone say they're Makateño, Pasigeño, or Pasayeño because they all say they're Manileño. And as far as global perspective is concerned, people in rural areas understand Manila as Metro Manila. And most people outside the country don't distinguish individual cities in the
metropolis.-
23prootie (
talk)
08:10, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Fortunately, Wikipedia is not common speech. Wikipedia has to be correct. That's why we'd use Pasay, or Mandaluyong (if it was held at Megamall) or Quezon City (if it was held at North EDSA). Manila still is not Metro Manila. If they abolish the different LGUs and appoint one mayor and council for all of Metro Manila then perhaps we can do what you want. And you grossly underestimate the "never heard anyone" thing. Ever been to beauty pageants? Contestants blurt out "I'm ______ of Pasig City!" not "I'm ___________ of Metro Manila!" or even "I'm _________ of Marikina, Metro Manila!" If beauty pageant contestants can be correct, why can't Wikipedia? --HowardtheDuck08:17, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
You have to consider that those pageants were held within Metro Manila so the are aware of the different cities/municipalities inside the metro. Those, however, who live outside the metropolis may or may not be aware of this.-
23prootie (
talk)
08:45, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
But common practice should also be considered. Anyway. The chart remains correct even if my edit is added, it's just more inclusive and more descriptive. Don't you find it redundant and messy using
Batangas City, Batangas in the same space?-
23prootie (
talk)
08:23, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Read (for the 2nd time)
WP:MOSPHIL and
cities of the Philippines:
Batangas City is a component city of
Batangas, ergo "Batangas City, Batangas" is perfectly correct. "Pasay City, Metro Manila", despite being "common practice" is incorrect, same for "San Fernando, Pampanga" while other cities are either HUCs or ICCs so they're left by themselves. And about common practice, the region name is almost always never used when writing address, as I've explained above, which you refuse to accept. --HowardtheDuck08:28, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
While using Batangas City, Batangas and San Fernando, Pampanga individually may work out, in the chart they don't and they just look out of place compared to the other cities. Anyway, the regions are included because they best describe the origins of the possible qualifiers. Besides, my edit is still valid desapite being incorrect in your perspective.-
23prootie (
talk)
08:45, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
English Wikipedia is a GLOBAL WIKIPEDIA, not a PHILIPPINE-CENTRIC WIKIPEDIA. By the way, it doesn't look out of place. It seems you merely want to make it fanboy-purtee.
Starczamora (
talk)
08:46, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
It is still an encyclopedia article if Metro Manila is included since it is the region where Pasay is located so technically auditions are also held there. and how could it not be a guide, it's an encyclopedia, hello!
23prootie (
talk)
08:58, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Encyclopedias are different from guides. Encyclopedia aims for FACTS, not TIPS. If Wikipedia is a guide, there would have been an overflow of unnecessary information such as song lyrics (which is not allowed in Wiki).
Starczamora (
talk)
09:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
But it still does not stop it from acting like a guide. And I think your misleading me. If we're debating about the validity of using regions in this article then they definitely should be used to avoid inconsistencies since all cities in this country are part of a
region.-
23prootie (
talk)
09:12, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Using Pampanga ang Batagas with their respective component cities is messy and inconsistent with the other cities so i suggest using regions.
23prootie (
talk)
09:15, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Again, it is an official rule that Wikipedia is NOT a guidebook. If we find an article that acts like a guide, we have to correct it. Also, like Howard the Duck said, we have to differentiate between Batangas as a PROVINCE and Batangas as a CITY. If it looks messy to you, then it's your opinion.
Starczamora (
talk)
09:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
I've seen your user page and since you and I are both Filipinos, we can't be accurately sure that our views in this article are representative to global persepective so I suggest you should consider which is more understandable to foreigners, and in my view most people around the world, with the inclusion of Overseas Filipinos, believe that Pasay is just a part of
Metro Manila.
23prootie (
talk)
09:21, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Here we go again. It looks like you aim to force in anything Manila into the article, but unless Pinoy Idol auditions are to be held in...say SM Manila, then we will have to put Manila there. However, as stated countless times, putting Metro Manila into the table is unnecessary.
Starczamora (
talk)
09:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Is including regions helpful to the reader? No. We don't say, "
Boston,
Massachusetts,
New England," don't we? Same here, we can omit regions, since regions are not, or should I say, need not be, included in the address. Also, the addition of regions will deviate the purpose of this section, to show the number of "gold passers."
I personally think that "
Pasay,
Metro Manila" is better. Not many people know the individual cities and municipality that comprise Metro Manila (heck, even people from Metro Manila don't know that Las Piñas, where I live, is part of NCR). So appending "Metro Manila" (not "Manila") to "Pasay" would serve to inform that there's an audition in the vicinity of Manila. --
seav (
talk)
03:09, 25 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Fine, I'll agree on that. I just cringe to see those regional names (see the tables above) and the fact 23prootie can't wait for a couple of minutes for replies. --HowardtheDuck03:28, 25 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Season 1 issue
I was putting the word Season 1 in Pinoy Idol, but it seems Howard the Duck and Nanami Kamimura is not agreeing on it. I tried to put it because many are confused whether it is the second season for Philippine Idol or not. That's why I put the word Season 1. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Celester Mejia (
talk •
contribs)
10:18, 9 February 2008 (UTC)reply
I think, whether there will be a second season or not, the word Season 1 shall be included because we're giving information so the data must be complete.
Celester Mejia 2:35, 10 February 1008 (UTC)
We'd only split a "Season 1" when a "Season 2" is announced, actually not even announced, if there are auditions already. Since Season 1 and Pinoy Idol is coterminous, there's no reason to add a "Season 1" header. --HowardtheDuck13:59, 10 February 2008 (UTC)reply
Regional issue revisited
Hey, besides cities the
American Idol (season 7)#Regional Auditions also lists states so I guess this article should follow suit. Now, I know that we don't have any states and we have provinces but I don't agree in using them. Using provinces might make that list look redundant (ex. Cebu City, Cebu; Batangas City, Batagas; etc...). They are also not unversal since Pasay isn't in a province so I propose using regions instead.
I would also like to point out that yes Davao City, Davao Region might look redundant but not as repeatedly redundant as the example stated above. And the regions are also different from American regions such as
New England since they are mandated by either the legistration or the adminstration so they act more like states than merely cultural regions.
23prootie (
talk)
09:09, 24 February 2008 (UTC)reply
The discussion above has clearly showed that showing the "region" is nescessary at least for one city (Pasay) because genrally there are some people who are unaware where it is. Anyway if the article should follow a "worldwide view" then "Metro Manila" should be added since most people around the world believe that any part of Metro Manila is simply "Manila" as certain news reports have stated in the case of Makati. Aso, I thought you have agreed in Adding Metro Manila.
23prootie (
talk)
10:07, 24 February 2008 (UTC)reply
Qoute:":Fine, I'll agree on that. I just cringe to see those regional names (see the tables above) and the fact 23prootie can't wait for a couple of minutes for replies. --HowardtheDuck03:28, 25 January 2008 (UTC)reply
I dunno why "
Metro Manila" wasn't there anyway since I was fine with that already. Anyway, I'll be adding it. But please, don't add other regions' names. Mind you, American "regions" are also used by the federal government mostly for stats. --HowardtheDuck10:11, 24 February 2008 (UTC)reply
The Audition Dates
I think the dates of the auditions shall be included in the article. First of all, you deleted the table I made for the Auditions:
Now, you wanted to write the Audition section into paragraph form. How can we identify how many qualifiers made it? And I do hardly believe that it is better to write it in bulleted form or in table format.
Celester Mejia 10 March 2008, 09:17 (UTC)
The table above would only make the article too long with unnecessary information. We try to keep the article as brief yet factual as possible so we could submit this for
WP:GA (which
Philippine Idol has already achieved).
Starczamora (
talk)
03:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)reply
This should be cleared up. Philippine Idol and Pinoy Idol are two different shows so technically GMA is searching for the first "Pinoy Idol" while Mau Marcelo is the first and only Philippine Idol. I have yet to see a report saying GMA or FremantleMedia doesn't recognize her as the first Idol franchise winner. --HowardtheDuck05:09, 14 April 2008 (UTC)reply
But have they said that she's not the first "Philippine Idol"? They're probably avoiding the issue so that part should be cleared up. GMA hasn't confirmed or denied that they did not recognize Mau Marcelo as the first local Idol series winner. --HowardtheDuck12:59, 14 April 2008 (UTC)reply
I think every well-informed person knows that the two shows are different so Raymond is correct in saying that they're looking for the first "Pinoy Idol", now if he or anyone else from GMA or FremantleMedia said that Mau isn't the first local Idol series winner then that's worth mentioning. --HowardtheDuck04:20, 17 April 2008 (UTC)reply
I hope you don't mind (I know Wikipedia isn't a forum, but I have to bring this up), but speaking of Philippine Idol, did you know Jefferson Gayo, a Cebu auditioner from Philippine Idol is also one of those who passed in the Pinoy Idol Cebu auditions. If he gets through the semi-finals, we must take note of his Philippine Idol audition. Also, on a related note, Miguel Mendoza is now a possible finalist on the second season of Pinoy Dream Academy. -
上村七美 (Nanami-chan) |
talkback |
contribs09:39, 14 April 2008 (UTC)reply
On this issue, I think
this article has to be clarified with a GMA explanation, like a press release or something. Or if we can't find a corresponding "answer" article, the text should be edited to say that "Mau feels she wasn't recognized" or something to that effect since GMA per se hasn't gave a definite answer to the issue. --HowardtheDuck15:53, 15 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Before arguing anything, please consider that artist who originally sang the song involved should be the artist listed, unless the program itself mentions the artist (especially one who sang a cover of the song). Example:
"
Angels (
Robbie Williams) ← The original artist; don't change his name with that of another artist (such as the one who sang the cover).
This entry should focus on Pinoy Idol. Articles about to Philippine Idol must be given least importance in this entry due to the fact that Pinoy Idol is a different franchise from the latter and proper crediting, significance and importance must be given.
Webwires (
talk)
06:00, 4 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Still I don’t get your point on how you run this site. My edited versions were more encyclopedic rather than your version. It’s like reading Philippine Idol instead of Pinoy Idol. For your information, Pinoy Idol is different from Philippine Idol why compare it or worse reedit the entire entry into a comparison article?
Before you decide that my version is merely an ad version rather than encyclopedic in nature, try reformatting the writing you have done in this entry… check Auditions sections… why use “the following cities” and include Batangas “City”, Iloilo “City” and Cebu “City”?
Giving too much importance on Philippine Idol rather than on Pinoy Idol. Is this how you define accurate information?
Resources? Where’s the resources on the following:
The 2008 Beijing Olympics song "Ready to Fly" by Amy Pearson was used extensively throughout the audition and theatre phases of the competition.
Auditions in Naga were canceled for unknown reasons. (Placed resources mark with no valid information
About Transition from Philippine Idol:
Articles copied from other websites such as Philippine Entertainment Portal and Philippine Daily Inquirer.
Try editing GMA Network entry and put ABS-CBN on its lead article. What will be the result? If you created this entry and other wikipedians are not allowed to reedit your works then this is not a free encyclopedia.
Policies? Childish guy? Then answers the point I have raised above then I will rest my case.
To my fellow wikipedians, don't focus too much on limited entries and resources such as this. There are a lot of articles in the Tambayan Philippines that needs rewriting. But if the nature of your work here reedits the works of others that will only suit you then there’s something wrong with you people.
Webwires (
talk)
11:42, 4 July 2008 (UTC)reply
What about
WP:VERIFY,
WP:SOURCE,
WP:NPOV and
WP:NEU on GMA Network article, Survivor Philippines, Pinoy Idol? I don't want to argue with you but you forgot some Wikipedia Policies like
WP:DR,
WP:DISPUTE and
WP:DISENGAGE for posting Childish guy. Also you forgot
WP:DR#Discuss, use talk page first before reediting an entry. And also,
WP:DBF,
WP:FANATIC on:
Respect common standards.
Don't over-guard articles.
Don't be too certain.
Don't be zealous to the point other goals are lost.
Violating policy? Can you enumerate it? As far as I’m concerned and AFAIK I got 3RR warning from you and the other wikipedian for reediting my works on Pinoy Idol. I tried to be more objective but you choose to decide without consulting other Wikipedian Policies and you have the nerve to tell me about policies here. I know I need to read a lot of policies and memorize it but as a general rule of netiquette I’m doing what others and I think what is right. I know that what’s rights for me is wrong for you or vice versa but be civilized in reediting articles. We’re not getting paid here. I can put userboxes in my user page as much as I want and pretend I know everything.
Webwires (
talk)
12:08, 4 July 2008 (UTC)reply
From the lead article, down to section articles: Transition from Philippine Idol, Pinoy Idol Extra, and Production. AFAIK, this is the only article I found on wikipedia up to this date that two different entities discussed in one piece of writing. Same with Philippine Idol entry. Pinoy Idol should focus on Pinoy Idol and any Philippine Idol information must have the least importance or significance in this entry, which is irrelevant to the latter and vice versa. The only common denominator for both of them is, they are franchisee of Idol.
Webwires (
talk)
12:34, 4 July 2008 (UTC)reply
In an encyclopedic point of view, Pinoy Idol is the second season of Philippine Idol (no matter how GMA Network tries to downplay it). And just like in articles on sequels, second seasons, and similar subjects, references to the first one are inevitable. Also, I just read Webwire's edit on Pinoy Idol and, oh my gods, it DOES look an advertisement/ press release (a complete violation of
WP:ADVERT. Please bear in mind that as an encyclopedic article, the history section (also known as Transition from Philippine Idol, should be placed after the lead.
Starczamora (
talk)
13:25, 4 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Oh my God? Is this how you want to control wikipedia? Look at your writings. I edited my entry on Pinoy Idol with similarity with Idol series. If the tone and the manner I wrote the articles violates wikipedia policies I guess we should accept the kind of writings you made. I’m not that fluent and I’m not that grammatically correct but I beg to disagree with you. You are not doing your assignments, Pinoy Idol is under WikiProject Idol series articles and I never read or encountered any Idol entries comparing Idol franchise to another franchise or having a subsection of Pinoy Idol on American Idol!
Wait, you are not doing your assignment again… articles on sequels, second seasons? AFAIK other users contested the articles using “Season 1” READ:
Season 1 issue so why put Philippine Idol on Pinoy Idol when Season 1 on Pinoy Idol is irrelevant to this point?
History? Then we should rewrite Pop Idol and put subsections of all Idol articles because all Idol franchises are spin offs from Pop Idol.
About violating
WP:ADVERT completely as what you have pointed out, I ask you, explain to me what’s WP:ADVERT. AFAIK and as far as I’m concerned, user violates WP:ADVERT when he or she wrote articles “that are solicitations for a business, product or service, or are public relations pieces designed to promote a company or individual.” You want policies to be observed but own your own you forgot the proper procedure. Come on, is this fair? What about db-spam, proposed deletion or listing them on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion.”
In reference to WP:ADVERT, it states clearly “on some occasions, the content can be removed temporarily on the basis of a suspected copyright violation,” Did I violate copyright infringement and revert my edits? “Since the text is often copied from another website and posted anonymously,” What about “Transition from Philippines Idol”? Check Philippine Entertainment Portal and Philippine Daily Inquirer.
Again, WP:ADVERT states “when an article on an otherwise encyclopedic topic has the tone of an advertisement, the article can often be salvaged by rewriting it in a neutral point of view.” Did he or she rewrite the article? No, he or she decided to revert it and accused me of violating WP:ADVERT without checking the policies first?
AFAIK there’s nothing wrong with the tone of my writings. If “This is Pinoy Idol” and the first few sentences in my edits violates WP:ADVERT then he or she should rewrite it not revert it to the portion that suits him or her. Or use the User Talk Page for a discussion unfortunately, he or she decides and others lambasted me with such adjectives.
Webwires (
talk)
15:31, 4 July 2008 (UTC)reply
You may not notice it, but yes, there is a problem with the tone of your edits in this article. It sounds
fanatical and like a
press release. Please remember that Wikipedia is first and foremost an encyclopedia, and since Philippine Idol is part of its history, the Transition from Philippine Idol section (which is technically the History segment) should be put after the lead.
Starczamora (
talk)
15:35, 4 July 2008 (UTC)reply
WP:ADVERT is clear enough. But accusing me of another policy violation that’s too much. There’s a lot of works to be done in Tambayan Philippines. A lot of policies violated on Pinoy Idol entry. I have raised important issues. Consistently ignoring others comment because for a fact that the entry suits you and no other wikipedian can edit it. I have read previous discussion from other entries. I will not waste my time arguing with you people. You want wikipedia, it’s yours.
Webwires (
talk)
15:45, 4 July 2008 (UTC)reply
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on
Pinoy Idol. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about
television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can
join the discussion.
To improve this article, please refer to the
style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
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
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the
project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Actually AGB-Nielsen omits Batangas as part of "Mega Manila" but the Philippine Information Agency considers it a part of "Mega Manila". --HowardtheDuck09:26, 10 January 2008 (UTC)reply
But "Mega Manila" isn't actually a place. I've yet to see a person tell me, "I live at Mega Manila." The audition commercial was for auditioners, not for encyclopedia readers, so we ought to use the correct terms for things such as this. --HowardtheDuck08:22, 11 January 2008 (UTC)reply
I think the network prefers to use "Metro Manila" than "Pasay". Anyway Metro Manila should be used since the auditions does not concern Pasay only but the whole metropolis. Also, people outside the metropolis, like the people in the provinces and other countries don't usually distinguish cities within Metro Manila.
23prootie (
talk)
09:16, 17 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Nor are Clark auditions are for people at Clark Air Base per se (in fact it seems there is little residential area within the air base itself, or so it seemed when I went there) so we won't use "Clark" when referring to auditions held there (instead we use
Angeles). That's why I'd rather have the building + address (e.g.,
Cultural Center of the Philippines,
Pasay,
Metro Manila* (*can be excluded)) so Wikipedia can be accurate. --HowardtheDuck11:34, 17 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Regions aren't written in address, except for "Metro Manila." I'll be reverting it. Before doing revisions, make sure there's consensus first. --HowardtheDuck07:31, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
The case of Metro Manila should make it enough to add regions, and since provinces are added to some but not in others, it's more practical and inclusive to use regions to avoid mix-ups.-
23prootie (
talk)
07:47, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
I suggest you read
cities of the Philippines (see also {{Philippine cities}} and the case of highly urbanized (HUC) and independent component (ICC) cities; all cities in the Metro and some other cities are HUCs and ICCs -- in this case they don't belong to a province and therefore, the province name should not be part of the address. All other cities and municipalities should append the province name after the city/municipality name. In fact appending "Metro Manila" to an address is now only applicable to
Pateros, Metro Manila since it's the only municipality left.
Not really. You'd only append "Metro Manila" or "M.M." if you'd also append "Philippines". And that'll apply the policy consistently of not appending the next highest LGU (in fact Metro Manila is not even an LGU). See
WP:MOSPHIL#Cities. --HowardtheDuck08:08, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
In common speech, Pasay is in
Manila. I mean, I've never heard anyone say they're Makateño, Pasigeño, or Pasayeño because they all say they're Manileño. And as far as global perspective is concerned, people in rural areas understand Manila as Metro Manila. And most people outside the country don't distinguish individual cities in the
metropolis.-
23prootie (
talk)
08:10, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Fortunately, Wikipedia is not common speech. Wikipedia has to be correct. That's why we'd use Pasay, or Mandaluyong (if it was held at Megamall) or Quezon City (if it was held at North EDSA). Manila still is not Metro Manila. If they abolish the different LGUs and appoint one mayor and council for all of Metro Manila then perhaps we can do what you want. And you grossly underestimate the "never heard anyone" thing. Ever been to beauty pageants? Contestants blurt out "I'm ______ of Pasig City!" not "I'm ___________ of Metro Manila!" or even "I'm _________ of Marikina, Metro Manila!" If beauty pageant contestants can be correct, why can't Wikipedia? --HowardtheDuck08:17, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
You have to consider that those pageants were held within Metro Manila so the are aware of the different cities/municipalities inside the metro. Those, however, who live outside the metropolis may or may not be aware of this.-
23prootie (
talk)
08:45, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
But common practice should also be considered. Anyway. The chart remains correct even if my edit is added, it's just more inclusive and more descriptive. Don't you find it redundant and messy using
Batangas City, Batangas in the same space?-
23prootie (
talk)
08:23, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Read (for the 2nd time)
WP:MOSPHIL and
cities of the Philippines:
Batangas City is a component city of
Batangas, ergo "Batangas City, Batangas" is perfectly correct. "Pasay City, Metro Manila", despite being "common practice" is incorrect, same for "San Fernando, Pampanga" while other cities are either HUCs or ICCs so they're left by themselves. And about common practice, the region name is almost always never used when writing address, as I've explained above, which you refuse to accept. --HowardtheDuck08:28, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
While using Batangas City, Batangas and San Fernando, Pampanga individually may work out, in the chart they don't and they just look out of place compared to the other cities. Anyway, the regions are included because they best describe the origins of the possible qualifiers. Besides, my edit is still valid desapite being incorrect in your perspective.-
23prootie (
talk)
08:45, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
English Wikipedia is a GLOBAL WIKIPEDIA, not a PHILIPPINE-CENTRIC WIKIPEDIA. By the way, it doesn't look out of place. It seems you merely want to make it fanboy-purtee.
Starczamora (
talk)
08:46, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
It is still an encyclopedia article if Metro Manila is included since it is the region where Pasay is located so technically auditions are also held there. and how could it not be a guide, it's an encyclopedia, hello!
23prootie (
talk)
08:58, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Encyclopedias are different from guides. Encyclopedia aims for FACTS, not TIPS. If Wikipedia is a guide, there would have been an overflow of unnecessary information such as song lyrics (which is not allowed in Wiki).
Starczamora (
talk)
09:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
But it still does not stop it from acting like a guide. And I think your misleading me. If we're debating about the validity of using regions in this article then they definitely should be used to avoid inconsistencies since all cities in this country are part of a
region.-
23prootie (
talk)
09:12, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Using Pampanga ang Batagas with their respective component cities is messy and inconsistent with the other cities so i suggest using regions.
23prootie (
talk)
09:15, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Again, it is an official rule that Wikipedia is NOT a guidebook. If we find an article that acts like a guide, we have to correct it. Also, like Howard the Duck said, we have to differentiate between Batangas as a PROVINCE and Batangas as a CITY. If it looks messy to you, then it's your opinion.
Starczamora (
talk)
09:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
I've seen your user page and since you and I are both Filipinos, we can't be accurately sure that our views in this article are representative to global persepective so I suggest you should consider which is more understandable to foreigners, and in my view most people around the world, with the inclusion of Overseas Filipinos, believe that Pasay is just a part of
Metro Manila.
23prootie (
talk)
09:21, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Here we go again. It looks like you aim to force in anything Manila into the article, but unless Pinoy Idol auditions are to be held in...say SM Manila, then we will have to put Manila there. However, as stated countless times, putting Metro Manila into the table is unnecessary.
Starczamora (
talk)
09:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Is including regions helpful to the reader? No. We don't say, "
Boston,
Massachusetts,
New England," don't we? Same here, we can omit regions, since regions are not, or should I say, need not be, included in the address. Also, the addition of regions will deviate the purpose of this section, to show the number of "gold passers."
I personally think that "
Pasay,
Metro Manila" is better. Not many people know the individual cities and municipality that comprise Metro Manila (heck, even people from Metro Manila don't know that Las Piñas, where I live, is part of NCR). So appending "Metro Manila" (not "Manila") to "Pasay" would serve to inform that there's an audition in the vicinity of Manila. --
seav (
talk)
03:09, 25 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Fine, I'll agree on that. I just cringe to see those regional names (see the tables above) and the fact 23prootie can't wait for a couple of minutes for replies. --HowardtheDuck03:28, 25 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Season 1 issue
I was putting the word Season 1 in Pinoy Idol, but it seems Howard the Duck and Nanami Kamimura is not agreeing on it. I tried to put it because many are confused whether it is the second season for Philippine Idol or not. That's why I put the word Season 1. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Celester Mejia (
talk •
contribs)
10:18, 9 February 2008 (UTC)reply
I think, whether there will be a second season or not, the word Season 1 shall be included because we're giving information so the data must be complete.
Celester Mejia 2:35, 10 February 1008 (UTC)
We'd only split a "Season 1" when a "Season 2" is announced, actually not even announced, if there are auditions already. Since Season 1 and Pinoy Idol is coterminous, there's no reason to add a "Season 1" header. --HowardtheDuck13:59, 10 February 2008 (UTC)reply
Regional issue revisited
Hey, besides cities the
American Idol (season 7)#Regional Auditions also lists states so I guess this article should follow suit. Now, I know that we don't have any states and we have provinces but I don't agree in using them. Using provinces might make that list look redundant (ex. Cebu City, Cebu; Batangas City, Batagas; etc...). They are also not unversal since Pasay isn't in a province so I propose using regions instead.
I would also like to point out that yes Davao City, Davao Region might look redundant but not as repeatedly redundant as the example stated above. And the regions are also different from American regions such as
New England since they are mandated by either the legistration or the adminstration so they act more like states than merely cultural regions.
23prootie (
talk)
09:09, 24 February 2008 (UTC)reply
The discussion above has clearly showed that showing the "region" is nescessary at least for one city (Pasay) because genrally there are some people who are unaware where it is. Anyway if the article should follow a "worldwide view" then "Metro Manila" should be added since most people around the world believe that any part of Metro Manila is simply "Manila" as certain news reports have stated in the case of Makati. Aso, I thought you have agreed in Adding Metro Manila.
23prootie (
talk)
10:07, 24 February 2008 (UTC)reply
Qoute:":Fine, I'll agree on that. I just cringe to see those regional names (see the tables above) and the fact 23prootie can't wait for a couple of minutes for replies. --HowardtheDuck03:28, 25 January 2008 (UTC)reply
I dunno why "
Metro Manila" wasn't there anyway since I was fine with that already. Anyway, I'll be adding it. But please, don't add other regions' names. Mind you, American "regions" are also used by the federal government mostly for stats. --HowardtheDuck10:11, 24 February 2008 (UTC)reply
The Audition Dates
I think the dates of the auditions shall be included in the article. First of all, you deleted the table I made for the Auditions:
Now, you wanted to write the Audition section into paragraph form. How can we identify how many qualifiers made it? And I do hardly believe that it is better to write it in bulleted form or in table format.
Celester Mejia 10 March 2008, 09:17 (UTC)
The table above would only make the article too long with unnecessary information. We try to keep the article as brief yet factual as possible so we could submit this for
WP:GA (which
Philippine Idol has already achieved).
Starczamora (
talk)
03:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)reply
This should be cleared up. Philippine Idol and Pinoy Idol are two different shows so technically GMA is searching for the first "Pinoy Idol" while Mau Marcelo is the first and only Philippine Idol. I have yet to see a report saying GMA or FremantleMedia doesn't recognize her as the first Idol franchise winner. --HowardtheDuck05:09, 14 April 2008 (UTC)reply
But have they said that she's not the first "Philippine Idol"? They're probably avoiding the issue so that part should be cleared up. GMA hasn't confirmed or denied that they did not recognize Mau Marcelo as the first local Idol series winner. --HowardtheDuck12:59, 14 April 2008 (UTC)reply
I think every well-informed person knows that the two shows are different so Raymond is correct in saying that they're looking for the first "Pinoy Idol", now if he or anyone else from GMA or FremantleMedia said that Mau isn't the first local Idol series winner then that's worth mentioning. --HowardtheDuck04:20, 17 April 2008 (UTC)reply
I hope you don't mind (I know Wikipedia isn't a forum, but I have to bring this up), but speaking of Philippine Idol, did you know Jefferson Gayo, a Cebu auditioner from Philippine Idol is also one of those who passed in the Pinoy Idol Cebu auditions. If he gets through the semi-finals, we must take note of his Philippine Idol audition. Also, on a related note, Miguel Mendoza is now a possible finalist on the second season of Pinoy Dream Academy. -
上村七美 (Nanami-chan) |
talkback |
contribs09:39, 14 April 2008 (UTC)reply
On this issue, I think
this article has to be clarified with a GMA explanation, like a press release or something. Or if we can't find a corresponding "answer" article, the text should be edited to say that "Mau feels she wasn't recognized" or something to that effect since GMA per se hasn't gave a definite answer to the issue. --HowardtheDuck15:53, 15 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Before arguing anything, please consider that artist who originally sang the song involved should be the artist listed, unless the program itself mentions the artist (especially one who sang a cover of the song). Example:
"
Angels (
Robbie Williams) ← The original artist; don't change his name with that of another artist (such as the one who sang the cover).
This entry should focus on Pinoy Idol. Articles about to Philippine Idol must be given least importance in this entry due to the fact that Pinoy Idol is a different franchise from the latter and proper crediting, significance and importance must be given.
Webwires (
talk)
06:00, 4 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Still I don’t get your point on how you run this site. My edited versions were more encyclopedic rather than your version. It’s like reading Philippine Idol instead of Pinoy Idol. For your information, Pinoy Idol is different from Philippine Idol why compare it or worse reedit the entire entry into a comparison article?
Before you decide that my version is merely an ad version rather than encyclopedic in nature, try reformatting the writing you have done in this entry… check Auditions sections… why use “the following cities” and include Batangas “City”, Iloilo “City” and Cebu “City”?
Giving too much importance on Philippine Idol rather than on Pinoy Idol. Is this how you define accurate information?
Resources? Where’s the resources on the following:
The 2008 Beijing Olympics song "Ready to Fly" by Amy Pearson was used extensively throughout the audition and theatre phases of the competition.
Auditions in Naga were canceled for unknown reasons. (Placed resources mark with no valid information
About Transition from Philippine Idol:
Articles copied from other websites such as Philippine Entertainment Portal and Philippine Daily Inquirer.
Try editing GMA Network entry and put ABS-CBN on its lead article. What will be the result? If you created this entry and other wikipedians are not allowed to reedit your works then this is not a free encyclopedia.
Policies? Childish guy? Then answers the point I have raised above then I will rest my case.
To my fellow wikipedians, don't focus too much on limited entries and resources such as this. There are a lot of articles in the Tambayan Philippines that needs rewriting. But if the nature of your work here reedits the works of others that will only suit you then there’s something wrong with you people.
Webwires (
talk)
11:42, 4 July 2008 (UTC)reply
What about
WP:VERIFY,
WP:SOURCE,
WP:NPOV and
WP:NEU on GMA Network article, Survivor Philippines, Pinoy Idol? I don't want to argue with you but you forgot some Wikipedia Policies like
WP:DR,
WP:DISPUTE and
WP:DISENGAGE for posting Childish guy. Also you forgot
WP:DR#Discuss, use talk page first before reediting an entry. And also,
WP:DBF,
WP:FANATIC on:
Respect common standards.
Don't over-guard articles.
Don't be too certain.
Don't be zealous to the point other goals are lost.
Violating policy? Can you enumerate it? As far as I’m concerned and AFAIK I got 3RR warning from you and the other wikipedian for reediting my works on Pinoy Idol. I tried to be more objective but you choose to decide without consulting other Wikipedian Policies and you have the nerve to tell me about policies here. I know I need to read a lot of policies and memorize it but as a general rule of netiquette I’m doing what others and I think what is right. I know that what’s rights for me is wrong for you or vice versa but be civilized in reediting articles. We’re not getting paid here. I can put userboxes in my user page as much as I want and pretend I know everything.
Webwires (
talk)
12:08, 4 July 2008 (UTC)reply
From the lead article, down to section articles: Transition from Philippine Idol, Pinoy Idol Extra, and Production. AFAIK, this is the only article I found on wikipedia up to this date that two different entities discussed in one piece of writing. Same with Philippine Idol entry. Pinoy Idol should focus on Pinoy Idol and any Philippine Idol information must have the least importance or significance in this entry, which is irrelevant to the latter and vice versa. The only common denominator for both of them is, they are franchisee of Idol.
Webwires (
talk)
12:34, 4 July 2008 (UTC)reply
In an encyclopedic point of view, Pinoy Idol is the second season of Philippine Idol (no matter how GMA Network tries to downplay it). And just like in articles on sequels, second seasons, and similar subjects, references to the first one are inevitable. Also, I just read Webwire's edit on Pinoy Idol and, oh my gods, it DOES look an advertisement/ press release (a complete violation of
WP:ADVERT. Please bear in mind that as an encyclopedic article, the history section (also known as Transition from Philippine Idol, should be placed after the lead.
Starczamora (
talk)
13:25, 4 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Oh my God? Is this how you want to control wikipedia? Look at your writings. I edited my entry on Pinoy Idol with similarity with Idol series. If the tone and the manner I wrote the articles violates wikipedia policies I guess we should accept the kind of writings you made. I’m not that fluent and I’m not that grammatically correct but I beg to disagree with you. You are not doing your assignments, Pinoy Idol is under WikiProject Idol series articles and I never read or encountered any Idol entries comparing Idol franchise to another franchise or having a subsection of Pinoy Idol on American Idol!
Wait, you are not doing your assignment again… articles on sequels, second seasons? AFAIK other users contested the articles using “Season 1” READ:
Season 1 issue so why put Philippine Idol on Pinoy Idol when Season 1 on Pinoy Idol is irrelevant to this point?
History? Then we should rewrite Pop Idol and put subsections of all Idol articles because all Idol franchises are spin offs from Pop Idol.
About violating
WP:ADVERT completely as what you have pointed out, I ask you, explain to me what’s WP:ADVERT. AFAIK and as far as I’m concerned, user violates WP:ADVERT when he or she wrote articles “that are solicitations for a business, product or service, or are public relations pieces designed to promote a company or individual.” You want policies to be observed but own your own you forgot the proper procedure. Come on, is this fair? What about db-spam, proposed deletion or listing them on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion.”
In reference to WP:ADVERT, it states clearly “on some occasions, the content can be removed temporarily on the basis of a suspected copyright violation,” Did I violate copyright infringement and revert my edits? “Since the text is often copied from another website and posted anonymously,” What about “Transition from Philippines Idol”? Check Philippine Entertainment Portal and Philippine Daily Inquirer.
Again, WP:ADVERT states “when an article on an otherwise encyclopedic topic has the tone of an advertisement, the article can often be salvaged by rewriting it in a neutral point of view.” Did he or she rewrite the article? No, he or she decided to revert it and accused me of violating WP:ADVERT without checking the policies first?
AFAIK there’s nothing wrong with the tone of my writings. If “This is Pinoy Idol” and the first few sentences in my edits violates WP:ADVERT then he or she should rewrite it not revert it to the portion that suits him or her. Or use the User Talk Page for a discussion unfortunately, he or she decides and others lambasted me with such adjectives.
Webwires (
talk)
15:31, 4 July 2008 (UTC)reply
You may not notice it, but yes, there is a problem with the tone of your edits in this article. It sounds
fanatical and like a
press release. Please remember that Wikipedia is first and foremost an encyclopedia, and since Philippine Idol is part of its history, the Transition from Philippine Idol section (which is technically the History segment) should be put after the lead.
Starczamora (
talk)
15:35, 4 July 2008 (UTC)reply
WP:ADVERT is clear enough. But accusing me of another policy violation that’s too much. There’s a lot of works to be done in Tambayan Philippines. A lot of policies violated on Pinoy Idol entry. I have raised important issues. Consistently ignoring others comment because for a fact that the entry suits you and no other wikipedian can edit it. I have read previous discussion from other entries. I will not waste my time arguing with you people. You want wikipedia, it’s yours.
Webwires (
talk)
15:45, 4 July 2008 (UTC)reply
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on
Pinoy Idol. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.