Re: Naming of cities, saints. We can follow the names used in PSGC as it is considered standard by the NSO. I would like to site examples from Laguna [1]: Calamba is named City of Calamba and Sta. Cruz is named Santa Cruz. Alternate forms can become redirects. - Bluemask 14:01, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Official Name (PSGC) Semi-official Name Popular Name City of Manila City of Manila Manila Quezon City Quezon City Quezon City Pasay City Pasay City Pasay City Kalookan City Caloocan City Caloocan City of Makati Makati City Makati City of Malabon Malabon City Malabon
I think all the cities and municipalities should be named using their popular name followed by province (i.e. Talisay, Negros Oriental). That's how all the US city articles are named, even the very biggest ones ( New York, New York). BUT maybe we can make an exception for the cities in Metro Manila and those classified as Highly Urbanized Cities-- for those we should just use their popular name ( Makati, Quezon City, Bacolod). And of course, use redirects liberally. -- TheCoffee 05:03, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I must clarify that we use the popular English names of the cities, not just any "popular" name (Manila is more popularly called locally as Maynila). As for unusual names (I've changed the wording on the article btw) like Island Garden City of Samal, I think we can ignore those since its like saying "Big Apple City of New York". When I was still in Davao, we call the municipality of Samal as "Samal" while referring to the island as "Samal island." There's also the fact that Philippine cities/municipalities are classified according to different levels/standards (Metro Manila cities, Davao City are among the class A, being independent from any provincial administration). -- Chinfo 06:58, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
How about a template for cities/municipalities? Should it follow the sectioning of the province template? I've been working on Valencia, Negros Oriental and followed the province template closely. TheCoffee 07:50, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Also, I found this site (in Chinese, for some reason) that has information apparently from the 2000 census. Perhaps I could make a program to parse this information and generate stub articles for all the cities/municipalities, as I made for the towns in Negros Oriental (see Amlan, Negros Oriental). The Philippines' own Rambot. :) TheCoffee 07:50, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Is tourist attractions part of the province page format? A lot of the provinces don't seem to have that section. TheCoffee 17:22, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hello. I'm a member of the Version 1.0 Editorial Team, which is looking to identify quality articles in Wikipedia for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing articles using these criteria, and we are are asking for your help. As you are most aware of the issues surrounding your focus area, we are wondering if you could provide us with a list of the articles that fall within the scope of your WikiProject, and that are either featured, A-class, B-class, or Good articles, with no POV or copyright problems. Do you have any recommendations? If you do, please post your suggestions at the listing of all active Places WikiProjects, and if you have any questions, ask me in the Work Via WikiProjects talk page or directly in my talk page. Thanks a lot! Tito xd( ?!? - help us) 18:37, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 15:29, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Just checking: the current article on Bohol refers to the LGU Bohol Province, right? It is not the article on Bohol Island which should be a different article...Please clarify. Thanks! Guest818 17:22, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 20:44, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
I've looked on the project page and in some of the linked articles, but there doesn't appear to be a project banner for this WP. -- BrokenSphere 22:34, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
I find it a bit strange that there's a WikiProject for LGUs and not one for the Philippines as a whole, but that's neither here nor there...
A Southeast Asian task force within the Military History WikiProject has finally been created. If there is anyone here who is interested in the subject - stretching from the origins of civilisation up through today - I invite you to please come and lend your support, questions or comments, here. No serious responsibilities or obligations connected to signing up, only another way to meet one another, to work together to expand and improve Wikipedia's coverage of these subjects. Thank you. LordAmeth 06:15, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Greetings! I came across Department of Public Services while doing some categorization work. I did a bit of cleanup on it, but I don't have enough knowledge of the Philippines to assess its notability or context. So, if someone could take a look at it and see how it fits in with other barangays, that would be most awesome. Thank you! Rtucker 00:14, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello together, I am translating articles about Philippine-LGU to German-WP. Some of those articles are simple copies of official LGU webpages. I´d like to know, if content of these pages is 'work of the Philippine Government' according to Philippine copyright law and therefore utilizable in terms of GFDL. Thank you! -- 83.242.61.187 20:26, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
...
Most of these Links are down at the moment, however their content is available in Google-Cache. --
83.242.60.57 10:19, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Location maps, seals, etc. should be available in Incubator. -- Filipinayzd 22:48, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
As discussed in the PhilWiki Chat and on Tambayan page, this page will be revived to focus on the new NSO/Census data. Philippines is the 12th most populous nation. -- Exec8 ( talk) 19:33, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
The 5th Philwiki Chat centered on the need to complete all LGU articles.
The project will involve two phases:
I hope we join together to complete this project just like NAIA-3 (almost done but on hiberation mode). -- Exec8 ( talk) 15:42, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Click to see Image -- Filipinayzd ( talk) 02:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Actually I'm making it with Inkscape (same software I used for the POSS pdf's) right now, and I gotta say the images are very cool. I'm currently working at the Ilocos region. -- Felipe Aira 11:14, 4 July 2008 (UTC) Here is a sample. Do you like it? -- Felipe Aira 12:34, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
The map (under construction); I'll be uploading updates continuously
You need to check new municipalities in the ARMM region as well. Yeah we know its erratic -- Exec8 ( talk) 06:14, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
New Municipalities in the ARMM Region include:
Revised map should be created for:
Exec8, I am basing my maps on existing Wikipedia maps that are used on infoboxes of municipalities, and I am just simply redrawing them, and putting them altogether. In the case of new/resized/divided/partitioned/whatever Mindanao municipalities, I can see that there are still no Wikipedia maps, available, so I'll just try to find ones from other sites. And also Exec8, I publish all my original images, except photography, under the public domain at Wikimedia Commons, as part of my advocacy for the Commons.
And lastly, I am sorry for not responding as fast these weekends, all PLDT connexions here at (most of) Dasmarinas were cut off due to some man stealing the PLDT cables. And as such, I wasn't able to create maps during these weekends (where I have the most free time and no school work) so progress was slowed down.
The provinces of Abra, Ilocos Sur, Ilocos Norte, Apayao and Cagayan are already done; and you might notice that the image on the right now includes those provinces, if it doesn't refresh your cache. That's a high resolution image (2568 x 3876). And people, what do you think would be the best resolution for the Philippine map (all provinces)? The higher the resolution, the more detailed it is, but there's a bad side on to it; the file's bigger, and of course a pain in the neck for those with slooow connexions. Currently, I am working on Batanes. -- Felipe Aira 10:06, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Also, you might get the extrapolation problem with your methodology: when you end up doing Tawi-Tawi, it might become out of scale with Batanes. -- seav ( talk) 00:25, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Just added the provinces of Pangasinan, Nueva Ecija and Tarlac, and also bodies of water as requested. -- Felipe Aira 13:35, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
While I am working with Zambales, I noticed that something in the Ph locator maps are conflicting one another. On the right shows Subic, Zambales. Look at Pampanga's coast line. In the following two maps, Pampanga's coast line seems to have been smoothed with it's entire features removed entirely. Google Maps confirms that the map on the right is the correct one. Any motions on correcting the tens of locator maps of Pampanga and Bataan towns and cities, which are wrong? -- Felipe Aira 07:17, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Personally. I have discover Geolocation error too. In the municipality of Lebak, Sultan Kudarat. I check it with Google Earth it was pointed to the mountains. Point to the municipal hall and update the geolocation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Lebak,_Sultan_Kudarat#coordiante_error
Guides to help you correct.
Error update: I found an error on how 2 Municipalities of Bulacan are bounded. This is the boundary between Calumpit, Bulacan and Pulilan, Bulacan in which the boudary between the two of them has a significant space between them that makes the illusion that there is a municipality between them. -- Felipe Aira 13:03, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Is there any chance we're going to be able to have a map that details geographical features, such as mountains and peaks and rivers and lakes? Or perhaps we can have a collection and directory of Sattelite images relevant per location? Useful for such articles as Marikina River or Mount Sembrano -- Alternativity ( talk) 15:54, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Ok final question: do you wish me to create geographical maps of the Philippines? If yes, that's no problem; I'll be happy to do it. However I cannot promise that it will be on this year, and I may only start working on it on December, since I expect to finish my map on mid-September. And if so happens, I'll just get NASA's since theirs are public domain. -- Felipe Aira 08:29, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Can we have it represented by at least small dots on the map? -- Scorpion prinz ( Talk | contribs) 19:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
I guess you can just remove that "lake" between Malabon, Caloocan and Manila.-- Scorpion prinz ( Talk | contribs) 09:17, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Luzon island is almost complete. Bravo Felipe!. Paki sunod ng Mindanao. -- Filipinayzd ( talk) 19:11, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
The "peninsulas" of Pagbilao, Quezon are actually islands. -- seav ( talk) 02:07, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Yung "lakelets" near San Miguel Bay (Camarines Sur), Bicol river yun. The cut-off channel created two islets within the River. -- Filipinayzd ( talk) 17:39, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
I propose we start moving them to <cityname>, <province>; we'd only use <cityname> City if it is an not within the jurisdiction of any province (such as Angeles City). Even cities from Manila should go to <cityname>, Metro Manila except Quezon City. Ergo Naga City, Camarines Sur goes to Naga City while Naga City, Cebu goes to Naga, Cebu. -- Howard the Duck 03:47, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
For reference, look at the first section above #Naming conventions. Let's use WP:UCN as our guideline: While we generally use "Makati" in normal speech, a cursory look at news articles tend to go with "Makati City". The same thing can be found for many other cities. So I personally think that "Makati" is colloquial, "City of Makati" (the official name) is too formal, and "Makati City" makes a good compromise. -- seav ( talk) 16:21, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
P.S. I actually dislike the "City, State" U.S. convention. The guideline now for U.S. cities is to remove the state for certain internationally-recognized cities as designated by the AP Stylebook. Hence we have: New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Miami, New Orleans, etc. instead of New York, New York; Chicago, Illinois; Los Angeles, California; etc. - seav ( talk) 16:30, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Will this change naming conventions for the Science City of Muñoz and the Special Science and Nature City of Los Baños? -- Alternativity ( talk) 05:42, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
One thing I'd like to mention is that not adding the province name does not imply that the city is independent. I'm in favor of leaving out the province name if it's not needed for disambiguation purposes. -- seav ( talk) 07:14, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Note: Baguio City is named as "Baguio" in print encyclopedias. It'll be OK for me if the HUCs/ICCs whose names do not need disambiguation be rendered in the <City name> format. Basically, this is my proposal:
– Howard the Duck 12:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
For an example of how they are supposed to look, see List of venues played by the Philippine Basketball Association. – Howard the Duck 16:38, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
We discussed the LGU naming convention somewhat in the Philwiki Chat 8. There's a sort of tentative agreement that maybe we should drop the province name in all city and municipal article titles if they don't need it for disambiguation purposes. This is based on the Use common names guideline. For instance, why Puerto Galera, Oriental Mindoro instead of just Puerto Galera since that's the only Puerto Galera there is? Take note that this only concerns how articles are named or titled. The name/title is there to succintly identify the subject of the article and is not there to give additional information (such that it is a part of such and such province).
The "subdivision, larger division" naming convention was adopted following the U.S. and Canadian conventions. But the U.S. and Canadian conventions appears to be in the distinct minority. Almost all other countries don't follow the comma naming convention and I suggest we do the same for the Philippines.
There's the argument that the comma convention makes things nice and orderly, but there seems to be no other reason for doing it than for consistency's sake. -- seav ( talk) 01:59, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
– Howard the Duck 04:04, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Do we have consensus or even an agree-to-disagree-but-it's-ok status? -- seav ( talk) 05:47, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
-- seav ( talk) 02:39, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
As for the titles of city articles there are two distinct questions:
-- seav ( talk) 02:50, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Help! A dedicated editor is adding what looks like reams of Original Research to this page, which is already way too long! Can some of you drop by and help out in patrolling so that the additions don't get too far out of hand. I would like to begin to pare back the length of this article by making subsidiary articles out of the content, but the esteemed editor, Jjarivera, is adding and editing without pause for reflection, it seems. Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Basilan&action=history. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis ( talk) 22:13, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I proposed to WikiProject Council a wikiproject that focuses to University of the Philippines. I created the basic skeleton here. Currently, there are four supporters (including me), one of us not willing to become a participant. So I am hoping that someone out here in the Tambayan who is willing to join the project. No, this is not open to UP students only, all Wikipedians are welcome. Thanks and God speed. -- The Wandering Traveler WIKIPROJECT UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT! 05:01, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
I'd appreciate someone looking at Barangay kapasigan council pasig city, which I came across at WP:DEP. I know just enough to figure out that this has something to do with Pasig City, but I have no clue how to figure out the correct title for the article. If someone could move it to the right place and add a bit of context, I'd appreciate it.-- Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:47, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
The Tagalog Wikipedia is short of articles, we need to expand the Tagalog Wikipedia as Tagalog is our Native Language. I hope some of you would atleast contribute 1 article or a 2 so it would help the Tagalog Wikipedia boost. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnMarcelo ( talk • contribs) 11:25, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
The Local Government Unit Wikiproject is on display at the 11th National Convention on Statistics (NCS) on October 4 to October 5, 2010. This will be a good opportunity for collaboration and resource sharing. -- Exec8 ( talk) 16:29, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
I am for simplification of the article names for Philippine cities and municipalities. I suggest that instead of being the rule, adding the words “cities” for Philippine cities and “provincial names” after Philippine towns, should only be used for disambiguation and for other very compelling reasons only.
Adding the word “city” is like adding academic title/s to a person’s name, which sometimes, I find rather distracting. Let me give a little bit of exaggerated example: Instead of using Juan de la Cruz, DHSc, PhD, DPS, EdD, DEng, EngD, PDEng as the article name, a simple Juan de la Cruz will do just as fine or even better. In addition, the provincial name after the settlement name (e.g. <municipalityname>, <provincename>) should not appear that it is only intended for “towns” not for "cities".
I believe that there are already clamors for the elimination of the word “city” from the article names of Philippines cities and I hope this time there will be some actions in response toward them. I suggest we focus first on the issues for cities, then probably discuss the issues for municipalities later. As for those needing disambiguation, we have to collaborate to find the most appropriate article names for them.
I am suggesting the following: (See WP:NCGN#Disambiguation as my basis for most of my suggestions)
1. As general rule -> eliminate the word “city” from the name of the Philippine cities except those needing disambiguation
2. For those having special title aside from the word “city”
3. Cities with the same name with a province or region (the word “city” should be retained)
4. Cities/Municipalities with the same name as other local cities/municipalities (regardless if it is highly urbanized, independent or component city)
Additional
5. Capital cities/municipalities with the same name with that of another local non-capital city/municipality. The capital city or municipality need not have the provincial name attached to it since it is the preferred
primary topic; while the non-capital municipality/city should include the provincial name.
6. Local city name is the same with that of other foreign municipality but no other local city/municipal with the same name (Version 1)
7. Local city name is the same with that of another foreign municipality; and name is also the same with at least one Philippine municipality or city
8. More than two provincial capitals with the same name
I hope that we can reach consensus regarding this matter. -- JinJian ( talk) 11:43, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
Okay, I have to agree with HTD to cross the bridge when we get there. Some people already have trouble accepting the <cityname>, <province name> format even for component cities.
Although Lapu-Lapu in Cebu has no same name with another foreign or local municipality; it has the same name with a very known personality Lapu-Lapu. The later can also be considered as the primary topic. It is better for Lapu-Lapu City to be in this category since according to current guidelines, 'Places are often disambiguated by the country in which they lie, if this is sufficient.
-- JinJian ( talk) 05:38, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Comment on Alaminos: There is an Alaminos, Laguna, so Alaminos City's "grouping" is incorrect. -- seav ( talk) 00:52, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
Here's another point. HTD advocates for removing the "City" so that there won't be any need for renaming when the status of the LGU changes. While I agree that "City" is unnecessary, it's not because I buy into the stability argument. Please take note that there is no naming guideline that says that we consider stability of the article title. But there is a guideline that says we should use the common name for the subject, and only disambiguating as necessary. -- seav ( talk) 03:49, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
I'm not in favor for the renaming. Note that the <Cityname> <City> has a legal and political basis. HUCs for example are at the same level and separate from provinces. The current naming of our cities here lent an air of political correctness and gives an air of formality. Differentiating a city from a municipality will be fuzzy and may become misleading for our readers. Almost all activities of the LGU concerned use the <Cityname> <City> format; using the <Cityname> only in casual conversations and in print media is done for brevity. Jordz ( talk) 08:33, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
Seems like i do not agree on removing the "City" on titles of Philippine cities. It becomes confusing because some might mistake them as a municipality. Acquiring a cityhood status has a legal bases, and is on the law that a city name should still bear the suffix CITY wherever it may be posted. So i guess, it applies on the Wikipedia articles, that they should retain the City on their article names. jmarkfrancia ( talk) 10:20, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Requests for page moves have already been made. See
After the move, then there's a need to update templates (I mean all of them) that are affected by this event.-- JL 09 q? c 06:49, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
Can anyone add the templates (the ones that appear on the right side) for the Manukan, Zamboanga del Norte page? Sorry, I'm new to this. -- Ed558 ( talk) 12:46, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
Its called infobox. Yea I done your request. I keep the watch the page too. See it now. [[Manukan, Zamboanga del Norte]
Bonvallite ( talk) 11:41, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
I notice that the are different compare to some city or municipality. Any standard that we can copy?
I use the infobox code below
{{Infobox settlement | name = | native_name = | official_name = | settlement_type = | motto = | image_skyline = | image_alt = | image_caption = | image_flag = | flag_alt = | image_seal = | seal_alt = | image_shield = | shield_alt = | nickname = | image_map = | map_alt = | map_caption = | pushpin_map = | pushpin_label_position = | pushpin_map_caption = | coordinates_type = region:PH_type:city | coordinates_display = inline,title | coordinates_footnotes = | subdivision_type = [[List of sovereign states|Country]] | subdivision_name = {{flag|Philippines}} | subdivision_type1 = [[Regions of the Philippines|Region]] | subdivision_name1 = | subdivision_type2 = [[Provinces of the Philippines|Province]] | subdivision_name2 = | subdivision_type3 = [[House of Representatives of the Philippines#District representation|District]] | subdivision_name3 = | established_title = Founded | established_date = | parts_type = [[Barangay]]s | parts_style = para | p1 = | leader_party = | leader_title = [[Mayor]] | leader_name = | leader_title1 = Vice-Mayor | leader_name1 = | area_total_km2 = | population_total = | population_as_of = | population_density_km2 = auto | population_demonym = | elevation_m = | blank_name_sec1 = [[Cities of the Philippines#Classification|Income class]] | blank_info_sec1 = [[Municipalities of the Philippines|1st class municipality]] | timezone = [[Philippine Standard Time|PHT]] | utc_offset = +8 | postal_code_type = [[List of ZIP codes in the Philippines|ZIP Code]] | postal_code = | area_code = | website = | footnotes = | blank_name_sec1 = Spoken languages | blank_info_sec1 = }}
As for population
{{Philippine Census | title= Population Census | 1960= | 1970= | 1975= | 1980= | 1990= | 1995= | 2000= | 2007= | estimate= | estyear= | estref= }}
Bonvallite (
talk) 10:51, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
I just noticed an inconsitency in the map of Isabela, especially on municipality-locators map on Wikipeida articles of its municipalities. It is really different from that map in the official website of Isabela province. Take a look at this photos, and see the difference between two maps. jmarkfrancia ( talk) 10:30, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
I'd like to point out a few things. The GIS-ready maps from PhilGIS (based on GADM) are known to be inaccurate, but they're free and are reused in a lot of places. Also, practically all of our LGU maps are sorta traced from the maps available from mapcentral.ph, which may also be inaccurate. I actually have a suspicion that mapcentral.ph uses the same sources as GADM. My experience is that we really need to do extensive research to determine the real boundaries of cities and municipalities. I'm betting that Isabela is not the only province with an inaccurate map. -- seav ( talk) 18:46, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Re: Naming of cities, saints. We can follow the names used in PSGC as it is considered standard by the NSO. I would like to site examples from Laguna [1]: Calamba is named City of Calamba and Sta. Cruz is named Santa Cruz. Alternate forms can become redirects. - Bluemask 14:01, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Official Name (PSGC) Semi-official Name Popular Name City of Manila City of Manila Manila Quezon City Quezon City Quezon City Pasay City Pasay City Pasay City Kalookan City Caloocan City Caloocan City of Makati Makati City Makati City of Malabon Malabon City Malabon
I think all the cities and municipalities should be named using their popular name followed by province (i.e. Talisay, Negros Oriental). That's how all the US city articles are named, even the very biggest ones ( New York, New York). BUT maybe we can make an exception for the cities in Metro Manila and those classified as Highly Urbanized Cities-- for those we should just use their popular name ( Makati, Quezon City, Bacolod). And of course, use redirects liberally. -- TheCoffee 05:03, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I must clarify that we use the popular English names of the cities, not just any "popular" name (Manila is more popularly called locally as Maynila). As for unusual names (I've changed the wording on the article btw) like Island Garden City of Samal, I think we can ignore those since its like saying "Big Apple City of New York". When I was still in Davao, we call the municipality of Samal as "Samal" while referring to the island as "Samal island." There's also the fact that Philippine cities/municipalities are classified according to different levels/standards (Metro Manila cities, Davao City are among the class A, being independent from any provincial administration). -- Chinfo 06:58, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
How about a template for cities/municipalities? Should it follow the sectioning of the province template? I've been working on Valencia, Negros Oriental and followed the province template closely. TheCoffee 07:50, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Also, I found this site (in Chinese, for some reason) that has information apparently from the 2000 census. Perhaps I could make a program to parse this information and generate stub articles for all the cities/municipalities, as I made for the towns in Negros Oriental (see Amlan, Negros Oriental). The Philippines' own Rambot. :) TheCoffee 07:50, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Is tourist attractions part of the province page format? A lot of the provinces don't seem to have that section. TheCoffee 17:22, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hello. I'm a member of the Version 1.0 Editorial Team, which is looking to identify quality articles in Wikipedia for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing articles using these criteria, and we are are asking for your help. As you are most aware of the issues surrounding your focus area, we are wondering if you could provide us with a list of the articles that fall within the scope of your WikiProject, and that are either featured, A-class, B-class, or Good articles, with no POV or copyright problems. Do you have any recommendations? If you do, please post your suggestions at the listing of all active Places WikiProjects, and if you have any questions, ask me in the Work Via WikiProjects talk page or directly in my talk page. Thanks a lot! Tito xd( ?!? - help us) 18:37, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 15:29, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Just checking: the current article on Bohol refers to the LGU Bohol Province, right? It is not the article on Bohol Island which should be a different article...Please clarify. Thanks! Guest818 17:22, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 20:44, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
I've looked on the project page and in some of the linked articles, but there doesn't appear to be a project banner for this WP. -- BrokenSphere 22:34, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
I find it a bit strange that there's a WikiProject for LGUs and not one for the Philippines as a whole, but that's neither here nor there...
A Southeast Asian task force within the Military History WikiProject has finally been created. If there is anyone here who is interested in the subject - stretching from the origins of civilisation up through today - I invite you to please come and lend your support, questions or comments, here. No serious responsibilities or obligations connected to signing up, only another way to meet one another, to work together to expand and improve Wikipedia's coverage of these subjects. Thank you. LordAmeth 06:15, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Greetings! I came across Department of Public Services while doing some categorization work. I did a bit of cleanup on it, but I don't have enough knowledge of the Philippines to assess its notability or context. So, if someone could take a look at it and see how it fits in with other barangays, that would be most awesome. Thank you! Rtucker 00:14, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello together, I am translating articles about Philippine-LGU to German-WP. Some of those articles are simple copies of official LGU webpages. I´d like to know, if content of these pages is 'work of the Philippine Government' according to Philippine copyright law and therefore utilizable in terms of GFDL. Thank you! -- 83.242.61.187 20:26, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
...
Most of these Links are down at the moment, however their content is available in Google-Cache. --
83.242.60.57 10:19, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Location maps, seals, etc. should be available in Incubator. -- Filipinayzd 22:48, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
As discussed in the PhilWiki Chat and on Tambayan page, this page will be revived to focus on the new NSO/Census data. Philippines is the 12th most populous nation. -- Exec8 ( talk) 19:33, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
The 5th Philwiki Chat centered on the need to complete all LGU articles.
The project will involve two phases:
I hope we join together to complete this project just like NAIA-3 (almost done but on hiberation mode). -- Exec8 ( talk) 15:42, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Click to see Image -- Filipinayzd ( talk) 02:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Actually I'm making it with Inkscape (same software I used for the POSS pdf's) right now, and I gotta say the images are very cool. I'm currently working at the Ilocos region. -- Felipe Aira 11:14, 4 July 2008 (UTC) Here is a sample. Do you like it? -- Felipe Aira 12:34, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
The map (under construction); I'll be uploading updates continuously
You need to check new municipalities in the ARMM region as well. Yeah we know its erratic -- Exec8 ( talk) 06:14, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
New Municipalities in the ARMM Region include:
Revised map should be created for:
Exec8, I am basing my maps on existing Wikipedia maps that are used on infoboxes of municipalities, and I am just simply redrawing them, and putting them altogether. In the case of new/resized/divided/partitioned/whatever Mindanao municipalities, I can see that there are still no Wikipedia maps, available, so I'll just try to find ones from other sites. And also Exec8, I publish all my original images, except photography, under the public domain at Wikimedia Commons, as part of my advocacy for the Commons.
And lastly, I am sorry for not responding as fast these weekends, all PLDT connexions here at (most of) Dasmarinas were cut off due to some man stealing the PLDT cables. And as such, I wasn't able to create maps during these weekends (where I have the most free time and no school work) so progress was slowed down.
The provinces of Abra, Ilocos Sur, Ilocos Norte, Apayao and Cagayan are already done; and you might notice that the image on the right now includes those provinces, if it doesn't refresh your cache. That's a high resolution image (2568 x 3876). And people, what do you think would be the best resolution for the Philippine map (all provinces)? The higher the resolution, the more detailed it is, but there's a bad side on to it; the file's bigger, and of course a pain in the neck for those with slooow connexions. Currently, I am working on Batanes. -- Felipe Aira 10:06, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Also, you might get the extrapolation problem with your methodology: when you end up doing Tawi-Tawi, it might become out of scale with Batanes. -- seav ( talk) 00:25, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Just added the provinces of Pangasinan, Nueva Ecija and Tarlac, and also bodies of water as requested. -- Felipe Aira 13:35, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
While I am working with Zambales, I noticed that something in the Ph locator maps are conflicting one another. On the right shows Subic, Zambales. Look at Pampanga's coast line. In the following two maps, Pampanga's coast line seems to have been smoothed with it's entire features removed entirely. Google Maps confirms that the map on the right is the correct one. Any motions on correcting the tens of locator maps of Pampanga and Bataan towns and cities, which are wrong? -- Felipe Aira 07:17, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Personally. I have discover Geolocation error too. In the municipality of Lebak, Sultan Kudarat. I check it with Google Earth it was pointed to the mountains. Point to the municipal hall and update the geolocation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Lebak,_Sultan_Kudarat#coordiante_error
Guides to help you correct.
Error update: I found an error on how 2 Municipalities of Bulacan are bounded. This is the boundary between Calumpit, Bulacan and Pulilan, Bulacan in which the boudary between the two of them has a significant space between them that makes the illusion that there is a municipality between them. -- Felipe Aira 13:03, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Is there any chance we're going to be able to have a map that details geographical features, such as mountains and peaks and rivers and lakes? Or perhaps we can have a collection and directory of Sattelite images relevant per location? Useful for such articles as Marikina River or Mount Sembrano -- Alternativity ( talk) 15:54, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Ok final question: do you wish me to create geographical maps of the Philippines? If yes, that's no problem; I'll be happy to do it. However I cannot promise that it will be on this year, and I may only start working on it on December, since I expect to finish my map on mid-September. And if so happens, I'll just get NASA's since theirs are public domain. -- Felipe Aira 08:29, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Can we have it represented by at least small dots on the map? -- Scorpion prinz ( Talk | contribs) 19:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
I guess you can just remove that "lake" between Malabon, Caloocan and Manila.-- Scorpion prinz ( Talk | contribs) 09:17, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Luzon island is almost complete. Bravo Felipe!. Paki sunod ng Mindanao. -- Filipinayzd ( talk) 19:11, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
The "peninsulas" of Pagbilao, Quezon are actually islands. -- seav ( talk) 02:07, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Yung "lakelets" near San Miguel Bay (Camarines Sur), Bicol river yun. The cut-off channel created two islets within the River. -- Filipinayzd ( talk) 17:39, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
I propose we start moving them to <cityname>, <province>; we'd only use <cityname> City if it is an not within the jurisdiction of any province (such as Angeles City). Even cities from Manila should go to <cityname>, Metro Manila except Quezon City. Ergo Naga City, Camarines Sur goes to Naga City while Naga City, Cebu goes to Naga, Cebu. -- Howard the Duck 03:47, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
For reference, look at the first section above #Naming conventions. Let's use WP:UCN as our guideline: While we generally use "Makati" in normal speech, a cursory look at news articles tend to go with "Makati City". The same thing can be found for many other cities. So I personally think that "Makati" is colloquial, "City of Makati" (the official name) is too formal, and "Makati City" makes a good compromise. -- seav ( talk) 16:21, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
P.S. I actually dislike the "City, State" U.S. convention. The guideline now for U.S. cities is to remove the state for certain internationally-recognized cities as designated by the AP Stylebook. Hence we have: New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Miami, New Orleans, etc. instead of New York, New York; Chicago, Illinois; Los Angeles, California; etc. - seav ( talk) 16:30, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Will this change naming conventions for the Science City of Muñoz and the Special Science and Nature City of Los Baños? -- Alternativity ( talk) 05:42, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
One thing I'd like to mention is that not adding the province name does not imply that the city is independent. I'm in favor of leaving out the province name if it's not needed for disambiguation purposes. -- seav ( talk) 07:14, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Note: Baguio City is named as "Baguio" in print encyclopedias. It'll be OK for me if the HUCs/ICCs whose names do not need disambiguation be rendered in the <City name> format. Basically, this is my proposal:
– Howard the Duck 12:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
For an example of how they are supposed to look, see List of venues played by the Philippine Basketball Association. – Howard the Duck 16:38, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
We discussed the LGU naming convention somewhat in the Philwiki Chat 8. There's a sort of tentative agreement that maybe we should drop the province name in all city and municipal article titles if they don't need it for disambiguation purposes. This is based on the Use common names guideline. For instance, why Puerto Galera, Oriental Mindoro instead of just Puerto Galera since that's the only Puerto Galera there is? Take note that this only concerns how articles are named or titled. The name/title is there to succintly identify the subject of the article and is not there to give additional information (such that it is a part of such and such province).
The "subdivision, larger division" naming convention was adopted following the U.S. and Canadian conventions. But the U.S. and Canadian conventions appears to be in the distinct minority. Almost all other countries don't follow the comma naming convention and I suggest we do the same for the Philippines.
There's the argument that the comma convention makes things nice and orderly, but there seems to be no other reason for doing it than for consistency's sake. -- seav ( talk) 01:59, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
– Howard the Duck 04:04, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Do we have consensus or even an agree-to-disagree-but-it's-ok status? -- seav ( talk) 05:47, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
-- seav ( talk) 02:39, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
As for the titles of city articles there are two distinct questions:
-- seav ( talk) 02:50, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Help! A dedicated editor is adding what looks like reams of Original Research to this page, which is already way too long! Can some of you drop by and help out in patrolling so that the additions don't get too far out of hand. I would like to begin to pare back the length of this article by making subsidiary articles out of the content, but the esteemed editor, Jjarivera, is adding and editing without pause for reflection, it seems. Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Basilan&action=history. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis ( talk) 22:13, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I proposed to WikiProject Council a wikiproject that focuses to University of the Philippines. I created the basic skeleton here. Currently, there are four supporters (including me), one of us not willing to become a participant. So I am hoping that someone out here in the Tambayan who is willing to join the project. No, this is not open to UP students only, all Wikipedians are welcome. Thanks and God speed. -- The Wandering Traveler WIKIPROJECT UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT! 05:01, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
I'd appreciate someone looking at Barangay kapasigan council pasig city, which I came across at WP:DEP. I know just enough to figure out that this has something to do with Pasig City, but I have no clue how to figure out the correct title for the article. If someone could move it to the right place and add a bit of context, I'd appreciate it.-- Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:47, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
The Tagalog Wikipedia is short of articles, we need to expand the Tagalog Wikipedia as Tagalog is our Native Language. I hope some of you would atleast contribute 1 article or a 2 so it would help the Tagalog Wikipedia boost. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnMarcelo ( talk • contribs) 11:25, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
The Local Government Unit Wikiproject is on display at the 11th National Convention on Statistics (NCS) on October 4 to October 5, 2010. This will be a good opportunity for collaboration and resource sharing. -- Exec8 ( talk) 16:29, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
I am for simplification of the article names for Philippine cities and municipalities. I suggest that instead of being the rule, adding the words “cities” for Philippine cities and “provincial names” after Philippine towns, should only be used for disambiguation and for other very compelling reasons only.
Adding the word “city” is like adding academic title/s to a person’s name, which sometimes, I find rather distracting. Let me give a little bit of exaggerated example: Instead of using Juan de la Cruz, DHSc, PhD, DPS, EdD, DEng, EngD, PDEng as the article name, a simple Juan de la Cruz will do just as fine or even better. In addition, the provincial name after the settlement name (e.g. <municipalityname>, <provincename>) should not appear that it is only intended for “towns” not for "cities".
I believe that there are already clamors for the elimination of the word “city” from the article names of Philippines cities and I hope this time there will be some actions in response toward them. I suggest we focus first on the issues for cities, then probably discuss the issues for municipalities later. As for those needing disambiguation, we have to collaborate to find the most appropriate article names for them.
I am suggesting the following: (See WP:NCGN#Disambiguation as my basis for most of my suggestions)
1. As general rule -> eliminate the word “city” from the name of the Philippine cities except those needing disambiguation
2. For those having special title aside from the word “city”
3. Cities with the same name with a province or region (the word “city” should be retained)
4. Cities/Municipalities with the same name as other local cities/municipalities (regardless if it is highly urbanized, independent or component city)
Additional
5. Capital cities/municipalities with the same name with that of another local non-capital city/municipality. The capital city or municipality need not have the provincial name attached to it since it is the preferred
primary topic; while the non-capital municipality/city should include the provincial name.
6. Local city name is the same with that of other foreign municipality but no other local city/municipal with the same name (Version 1)
7. Local city name is the same with that of another foreign municipality; and name is also the same with at least one Philippine municipality or city
8. More than two provincial capitals with the same name
I hope that we can reach consensus regarding this matter. -- JinJian ( talk) 11:43, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
Okay, I have to agree with HTD to cross the bridge when we get there. Some people already have trouble accepting the <cityname>, <province name> format even for component cities.
Although Lapu-Lapu in Cebu has no same name with another foreign or local municipality; it has the same name with a very known personality Lapu-Lapu. The later can also be considered as the primary topic. It is better for Lapu-Lapu City to be in this category since according to current guidelines, 'Places are often disambiguated by the country in which they lie, if this is sufficient.
-- JinJian ( talk) 05:38, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Comment on Alaminos: There is an Alaminos, Laguna, so Alaminos City's "grouping" is incorrect. -- seav ( talk) 00:52, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
Here's another point. HTD advocates for removing the "City" so that there won't be any need for renaming when the status of the LGU changes. While I agree that "City" is unnecessary, it's not because I buy into the stability argument. Please take note that there is no naming guideline that says that we consider stability of the article title. But there is a guideline that says we should use the common name for the subject, and only disambiguating as necessary. -- seav ( talk) 03:49, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
I'm not in favor for the renaming. Note that the <Cityname> <City> has a legal and political basis. HUCs for example are at the same level and separate from provinces. The current naming of our cities here lent an air of political correctness and gives an air of formality. Differentiating a city from a municipality will be fuzzy and may become misleading for our readers. Almost all activities of the LGU concerned use the <Cityname> <City> format; using the <Cityname> only in casual conversations and in print media is done for brevity. Jordz ( talk) 08:33, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
Seems like i do not agree on removing the "City" on titles of Philippine cities. It becomes confusing because some might mistake them as a municipality. Acquiring a cityhood status has a legal bases, and is on the law that a city name should still bear the suffix CITY wherever it may be posted. So i guess, it applies on the Wikipedia articles, that they should retain the City on their article names. jmarkfrancia ( talk) 10:20, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Requests for page moves have already been made. See
After the move, then there's a need to update templates (I mean all of them) that are affected by this event.-- JL 09 q? c 06:49, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
Can anyone add the templates (the ones that appear on the right side) for the Manukan, Zamboanga del Norte page? Sorry, I'm new to this. -- Ed558 ( talk) 12:46, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
Its called infobox. Yea I done your request. I keep the watch the page too. See it now. [[Manukan, Zamboanga del Norte]
Bonvallite ( talk) 11:41, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
I notice that the are different compare to some city or municipality. Any standard that we can copy?
I use the infobox code below
{{Infobox settlement | name = | native_name = | official_name = | settlement_type = | motto = | image_skyline = | image_alt = | image_caption = | image_flag = | flag_alt = | image_seal = | seal_alt = | image_shield = | shield_alt = | nickname = | image_map = | map_alt = | map_caption = | pushpin_map = | pushpin_label_position = | pushpin_map_caption = | coordinates_type = region:PH_type:city | coordinates_display = inline,title | coordinates_footnotes = | subdivision_type = [[List of sovereign states|Country]] | subdivision_name = {{flag|Philippines}} | subdivision_type1 = [[Regions of the Philippines|Region]] | subdivision_name1 = | subdivision_type2 = [[Provinces of the Philippines|Province]] | subdivision_name2 = | subdivision_type3 = [[House of Representatives of the Philippines#District representation|District]] | subdivision_name3 = | established_title = Founded | established_date = | parts_type = [[Barangay]]s | parts_style = para | p1 = | leader_party = | leader_title = [[Mayor]] | leader_name = | leader_title1 = Vice-Mayor | leader_name1 = | area_total_km2 = | population_total = | population_as_of = | population_density_km2 = auto | population_demonym = | elevation_m = | blank_name_sec1 = [[Cities of the Philippines#Classification|Income class]] | blank_info_sec1 = [[Municipalities of the Philippines|1st class municipality]] | timezone = [[Philippine Standard Time|PHT]] | utc_offset = +8 | postal_code_type = [[List of ZIP codes in the Philippines|ZIP Code]] | postal_code = | area_code = | website = | footnotes = | blank_name_sec1 = Spoken languages | blank_info_sec1 = }}
As for population
{{Philippine Census | title= Population Census | 1960= | 1970= | 1975= | 1980= | 1990= | 1995= | 2000= | 2007= | estimate= | estyear= | estref= }}
Bonvallite (
talk) 10:51, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
I just noticed an inconsitency in the map of Isabela, especially on municipality-locators map on Wikipeida articles of its municipalities. It is really different from that map in the official website of Isabela province. Take a look at this photos, and see the difference between two maps. jmarkfrancia ( talk) 10:30, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
I'd like to point out a few things. The GIS-ready maps from PhilGIS (based on GADM) are known to be inaccurate, but they're free and are reused in a lot of places. Also, practically all of our LGU maps are sorta traced from the maps available from mapcentral.ph, which may also be inaccurate. I actually have a suspicion that mapcentral.ph uses the same sources as GADM. My experience is that we really need to do extensive research to determine the real boundaries of cities and municipalities. I'm betting that Isabela is not the only province with an inaccurate map. -- seav ( talk) 18:46, 5 September 2012 (UTC)