Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia, but please take more care before making mass categorization changes to multiple articles. Several editors have reviewed the edits and many of them have been reverted. Be sure to use the edit summary and cite references for why articles should be included in categories, especially when it is not obvious. — MrDolomite • Talk 04:05, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Note copied from User talk:94.96.159.173 as that IP was used to make the exact same categorization edits. — MrDolomite • Talk 04:05, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not make statements attacking people or groups of people. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding ((hangon)) to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ScottyBerg (talk) 18:55, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Guys! What's wrong about writing on Cronyism in the Philippines? Should I write an article first about this, before I create a list if cronies?

The problem is that calling someone a "crony" is a personal attack upon them, and we can't frame Wikipedia articles in that fashion. I'll post for you a "welcome" message describing the requirements for articles, as it may clarify things for you. ScottyBerg (talk) 19:34, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Bootkinero, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type ((helpme)) on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! ScottyBerg (talk) 19:35, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I saw you create Operation Big Bird a couple of days ago and nominated it to be on the frontpage as a Did You Know listing. Please see Template_talk:Did_you_know#Operation_Big_Bird. Good luck. ----moreno oso (talk) 10:20, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think you did a good job. However, looking at your talkpage, remember always to use the neutral point of view. Also, look at my recent copyedit of the article. You used the present tense when all the events are in the past. I have to go and perhaps you can finish it off. Also, don't abbreviate titles, use the title or honorific only once and please don't overlink the wikilinks. It is very important to use your own words and cite where you found your material to prevent either WP:NOR or a copyvio. ----moreno oso (talk) 11:02, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much Morenooso for the tips on the wikipage editing. My apologies as well, as I am still new in creating and editing in wikipedia. I've been only a reader of articles, but never bothered contributing until recently. I hope you wouldn't mind checking on my articles every now and then to ensure the neutrality. Mabuhay ang Bansang Pilipinas! Bootkinero (talk) 11:16, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you go back and copyedit this article again? Michael de Guzman's has a small "d" and it should appear as per even your citation, BELIEVE IT OR NOT: THE FACTS, THE BACKGROUND AND PROCESS OF THE GREATEST LOOT IN HISTORY. I really have time today to review your article as I have several of mine to pump out. Also remember in your copyedits to spell out words/titles as per WP:MOS. It looks sloppy to have too many nonstandard abbreviations. ----moreno oso (talk) 14:40, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please remove your comment from the DYK nom. That is a cited fact and makes it appear as if we are in disagreement.----moreno oso (talk) 14:45, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally it is unusual for a nominated editor to comment unless specifically asked for a comment. I have the page under Watch and will be contacted if there is a problem with the nomination. Your comment effectively negates the whole nomination. The citation is neutral and balances your article with a reliable source.----moreno oso (talk) 14:48, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Morenooso! Thanks again for the comment. Please note that when a Filipino surname which contains "de" or "de los" prior to the actual name one usually spells the "de" starting with a capital letter if the said name is mentioned without the first name. (i.e. De Los Santos, De Los Reyes, De Villa, etc.) You might want to check the newspaper articles and other publications confirming this. However, if the given name or first name appears, one may write "de" or "de los" in small letters. (i.e. Roman de Jesus, Jennifer dela Cruz, etc.) Bootkinero (talk) 15:03, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

noted on the DYK talk. I thought it was a question. I shall remove it. Bootkinero (talk) 15:03, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The double cross is mentioned in one of your cites too. There always was a chance for him to skip town with the money. Even his motivation and ability to get Marcos' authorization is in doubt. On the caps and other issues, I have been editting here for awhile and am Hispanic too. In the old days, what you said is somewhat true but inaccurate. Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(capital_letters)#Mixed_or_non-capitalization is just one section that tells editors how to deal with small letters like "d". I can't spend any more time with your article and trying to get you to do copyedits. The copyedits I recommended are all standard Manual of Style edits. The approving nominating admin will review your article. If it looks incomplete, needing cleanup, or for lack of better words, "sloppy" it will not get approved. I have 13 DYKs in the last month and got my first DYK in April. I have researched nominations and know what I am doing. I will get another DYK credit within two days. ----moreno oso (talk) 15:16, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the timeline, you need to use past tense, i.e., "denied" versus "denie" which you just used. All these things are finished items and in the past. It is incorrect to use the present tense. Please go back over the entire timeline and change the tense as per my recommendation. Otherwise, there is a good chance your article will receive a Cleanup tag from another editor, most likely the DYK reviewing admin, who will also not recommend the DYK. Please work with me. I have no more time to help you. Please review every recommendation I made and do them. #1 remove your comment. Admins look at the DYK page all the time. They will form a negative opinion seeing your comment. ----moreno oso (talk) 15:31, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Remove means "remove entirely with no comment." Your edit summary should only state, "Removed comment." ----moreno oso (talk) 15:33, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again Morenooso. I've checked Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(capital_letters)#Mixed_or_non-capitalization, and it clearly holds on to the convention that a Proper name is and must be spelled with a capital letter, which is also the same as what we read in publications all over the Philippines. Filipino family names that have the Spanish article "de" are considered as part of their Surname, and thus spelled with a starting capital letter. I hope this settles the issue. Bootkinero (talk) 15:39, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• You are on your own to edit the article as you see fit based upon the above comment. I will now cease my edits.----moreno oso (talk) 15:47, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I finally understood the DYK page, Morenooso. Sorry for the confusion there. I already removed the comment. Cheers! Bootkinero (talk) 15:41, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, "removed comment" meant "leaving no comment at all" You now still have a comment there. Any admin worth with half a brain will review the history to see what the "removed comment" was. The DYK nom should only have the nomination by the nominator and then comments by the reviewing admins. I was pretty clear about that but you're still not following my advice and I really cannot spend more time on this. Either you will do and trust me or the nom will sink because of Manual of Style errors. ----moreno oso (talk) 15:52, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Ok, got it already. Totally removed everything from my post on the DYK. Bootkinero (talk) 16:15, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please only include names on this page which have there own WP article to show notability as per WP:NLIST Codf1977 (talk) 16:13, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, noted. I'll delete those that have no links. However, what about those names I am planning to create wikipages? Mostly these men are political and military figures in the Philippines? Bootkinero (talk) 16:15, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Create the page for them first, then add the link on this page. Codf1977 (talk) 16:23, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copy that. I shall do so. Bootkinero (talk) 16:24, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On June 9, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Operation Big Bird, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 06:03, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:14, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Camp Marcelo Adduro is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camp Marcelo Adduro until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. BIG BURLEY 19:53, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Florentino Das, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Cerebellum (talk) 01:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

Camp Atienza (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Aqueduct

List of places named for Douglas MacArthur (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Papua

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:45, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by JavaHurricane was:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

An improvement in the tone would result in passage.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Jose Gozar and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Jose Gozar, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "((Db-g7))" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

JavaHurricane 07:37, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JavaHurricane! Thank you! I shall edit it to bring it to a more neutral tone and eliminate the peacock statements. Cheers, Bootkinero 10:20, 10 May 2020 (PST).

Hello, Bootkinero! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! JavaHurricane 07:37, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sulfurboy was:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

This reads like a memorial page and not a formal, neutral, dispassionate wiki article.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Jose Gozar and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Jose Gozar, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "((Db-g7))" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Sulfurboy (talk) 03:45, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jose Gozar, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Sulfurboy (talk) 13:13, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sulfurboy!

Thank you for the accepting the article. I will be adding some more articles on Philippine Military History, as well as World War 2 in our region. Appreciate your help here.

Cheers! Bootkinero (talk) 01:04, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Calapan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Distinguished Service Cross

Philippine Army Air Corps (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Far East Air Force

Single-handed sailing (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Hall Island

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:57, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Philippine War Crimes Commission, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:49, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:28, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. You may not know me but I just started out in Wikipedia. May I ask something? How did you create the wikipedia page about the Philippine War Commission? I want to learn how did you find such topic and the references too. I am amazed and I like your writing style.--Kurigo (talk) 02:50, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

== Hi Kurigo! Thanks for sending a message. Wikipedia is quite tricky. One has to understand that it really is a compedium of verified knowledge. It's not the first source, or self-written. Here's where you can start learning: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Your_first_article --Bootkinero (talk) 02:43, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Eagleash was:

This appears to be a duplicate of another submission, Umiray-Angat Transbasin Project, which is also waiting to be reviewed. To save time we will consider the other submission and not this one.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Please do not create duplicate submissions as this can cause confusion and take up the time of other volunteers. Please develop the item in draftspace. The sandbox draft should probably be deleted. This can be requested by adding ((Db-g7)) to the top of the mark up. This will produce a deletion notice; usually effective within a few hours.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Bootkinero/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to User:Bootkinero/sandbox, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "((Db-g7))" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Eagleash (talk) 19:27, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Eagleash ! I will resubmit the article. Got confused about the duplication part. --Bootkinero (talk) 02:35, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Eagleash was: This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: There is little if any, point in re-submitting without adressing the issues identified. This sandbox draft is a duplicate of an item in draftspace which is the preferred location. Please develop that item and request deletion of this one as previously noted.

Eagleash (talk) 04:44, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eagleash! Sorry, how do I delete the other entry? Is it the one in my sandbox? -- Bootkinero (talk) 07:27, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, yes, keep the item in draft and develop it there. As advised both in this thread and above the sandbox ought to be deleted; see above again, add ((Db-g7)) to the top of the source. This information was also left at the sandbox – please check messages left via AfC as they often contain information which is of assistance. Thank you. Happy editing. Eagleash (talk) 09:59, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eagleash! Oops! I requested for the deletion in the Draft, and left the one in the Sandbox. Can I submit the one in the Sandbox now? --Bootkinero (talk) 01:51, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cronies of Ferdinand Marcos, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page GSIS.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bootkinero! I appreciate the work you recently put in at Ferdinand Marcos' cult of personality. However, I would advise being a bit more careful every fact you put in is explicitly stated in the source. Even if a statement or assessment is implied by the source, its presence in Wikipedia may be questioned, and the resulting debates can be quite a headache. As is, I don't think your source in "global reputation" is quite adequate - I know because I've been struggling to find a good source myself. But I will try to add what I can to shore up the sourcing of the section. If you have any questions, I think Wikipedia:Reliable_sources is a good reference. But I shall also try to answer any additional questions you might have (once I'm online. hehe.) Please keep up the good work! - Chieharumachi (talk) 03:24, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I really need help here. After cursory searching, I find no credible sources making the claim that "Marcos stood up to America," much less a reliable source refuting it with facts. The logic of your paragraph is sound (although a bit unneutral per Wikipedia Neutrality rules), but I can't find sources that actually elevate the discourse to an academic or journalistic level. Maybe you have references I don't? I know there are plenty of sources demonstrating Marcos' subservience to American foreign policy. But none refuting (or even asserting the existence of) a revisionist narrative of Ferdinand being anti-US. Help? - Chieharumachi (talk) 03:39, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Chieharumachi! I think among Filipinos it is common knowledge and very much present in Social Media sites that Marcos apologist would portray Marcos as the strongman who stood up against global superpowers. Here are samples of them found in YouTube. There are countless of memes on Facebook today as well portraying the strongman as such. How do we document this phenomenon? Bootkinero (talk) 03:54, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, I've been asking lots of people and institutions to write and publish articles covering contemporary revisionism, but... nobody feels ready to do so. :S VeraFiles and Rappler seem to be the ones most actively doing so, but the coverage is a bit piecemeal. Ultimately I think this is a part of history that is still "being written," so Wikipedia rules tie our hands. There are many many facts that can't be added to that page in particular, because the rules don't allow them yet. (That said, if you know any Media historians? Maybe encourage them to write and publish?) - Chieharumachi (talk) 04:36, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Or perhaps you would have a way to access [article]? I have no idea how good a reference it is, but it sounds like it should have some good stuff. - Chieharumachi (talk) 04:39, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok! Let me dig more on the global reputation that Marcos supporters are espousing. Bootkinero (talk) 05:20, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bootkinero! I was just wondering. Since you seem to have a lot of skill managing to scrounge up government sources and evaluate their use, would you be willing to watch and maybe make your own improvements at Proposed dams in the Kaliwa River watershed? Lots of edits recently, some of which are good and some not so much. And the article is very technical, so I feel maybe it would be right up your alley? Thanks, - Chieharumachi (talk) 19:36, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yup Chieharumachi count me in. Actually, I took notice that there has been a confusion between Kaliwa Low Dam and Laiban Dam here in Wikipedia. Those two are not one and the same. They are separate. How do we unlink Laiban Dam from the page titled Proposed dams in the Kaliwa River watershed? Also, I want to create maps and renderings for these projects. I have some maps made by MWSS and ADB, but can I use those to upload in Wikimedia Commons? Any tips how I can make those? Thank you! Bootkinero (talk) 05:39, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think you can do that if the map was made by MWSS itself, since it's a government agency. You can't do that for maps made by the ADB. Hm. As for Laiban Dam -- my point of confusion is, isn't Laiban still inside the Kaliwa Watershed? Actually I think Laiban Dam used to be a redirect to Kaliwa Low Dam, and then it got redirected to Proposed dams in the Kaliwa River watershed. I think if it's really a separate thing, the best solution would be to expand the Laiban Dam redirect into its own article. I'm not sure, though. Will wait for your thoughts on whether Laiban is in the Kaliwa Watershed. To be honest, I've been confused about which is which, and that confusion has only grown since they decided to continue calling the 2019/2021 Chinese dam the "New Centennial Watersource" dam. I often have difficulty which proposal exactly is being discussed, only being able to guess because of the date. (Well, that and the fact that the details about the Chinese dam have not exactly been forthcoming.) - Chieharumachi (talk) 15:45, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK, you're partly right there. If it is watershed, then yes, Laiban Dam and Kaliwa Low Dam would share this. It would be the same as Angat and Ipo Dams. However, both projects are distinct from each other. A projected coverage of the man made lakes if both Laiban and Kaliwa Low Dams are constructed is found HERE. That map however is low resolution so it's hard to appreciate their exact location. To appreciate the twin dams with Kanan River Dam, and Agos Dam, you can see the report from the DENR - Environmental Management Bureau HERE. My thoughts, I think it would be better to expand Laiban to its own article. I want to get that going once I am done with my work on the 21st Division and Gen. Mateo Capinpin. So for uploading the maps, I can just snip these from the reports and just use "Philippine government work" in Wikimedia Commons? Cheers!Bootkinero (talk) 21:49, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Huh. Yes, if you think the article gives an impression that the two dams are the same, then that's something we should fix, both in the text and in terms of giving Laiban Dam its own article. My fear with giving Laiban Dam its own article is that I haven't found many sources, which makes me concerned it might not pass WP:VER and WP:Notability. Maybe we should look into it, again, though, yes. Meantime, I will try to rewrite Proposed dams in the Kaliwa River watershed to make things clearer. - Chieharumachi (talk) 02:42, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Edit performed for now. To add: based on spot.ph reference, it seems the Marcos, Ramos, and Arroyo administration projects all referred to a "Laiban Dam" within the Kaliwa watershed, with the Aquino III administraton being the first one to propose phased construction in two sites. But I don't want to emphasize this because I'm also afraid the article may be a bit loose about distinguising between the two dams. Anyway, that's what I've done so far. Perhaps we can use the new section as a repository of sources, once we have enough of which we may be able to expand it into its own article. :D - Chieharumachi (talk) 03:12, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok! I agree with that plan. Let's just work on the Watershed for now until there is enough literature for both dams. Bootkinero (talk) 05:03, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:08, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Balara Filters Park

added links pointing to XIV Corps, Sierra Madre and Battle of Manila

6th Infantry Division (United States)

added a link pointing to Cordillera Mountains

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:33, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Balara Filters Park, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages XIV Corps, Sierra Madre and Battle of Manila.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:37, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Philippines v. China into Spratly Islands dispute. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted ((copied)) template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 12:28, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this. I'll keep this in mind. Bootkinero (talk) 00:29, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]