Talk:Cagdianao

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

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Cagdianao, Dinagat Islands. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:31, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Cagdianao, Dinagat Islands. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.dilg.gov.ph/municipalities.php
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140903080930/http://president.gov.ph/gov_at_work/ira-shares-for-lgus-jump-by-37-5-in-2013/ to http://president.gov.ph/gov_at_work/ira-shares-for-lgus-jump-by-37-5-in-2013/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nscb.gov.ph/activestats/psgc/default.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:42, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 20 March 2020

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Moved as proposed. BD2412 T 20:00, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cagdianao, Dinagat Islands → Cagdianao – The municipality is the only topic of the name "Cagdianao", and I believe the addition of provincename is not needed. Although it is added for consistency and WP:MOSPHIL purposes, we can now safely assume that this is a highly unnecessary disambiguation, as preciseness and conciseness prevail over others. Evidences: successful moving of the following municipalities' Wikipedia pages:

Aparri - Ref. Talk:Aparri
Banaue - Ref. Talk:Banaue
Barlig - moved by veteran Filipino Wikipedian @Seav:
Dingalan - Ref. Talk:Dingalan
Kalibo
Lambunao - moved by Seav
Midsayap (the page I moved) - relatively little or no opposition
Polomolok - through a successful request (Ref. Talk:Polomolok)
Pulilan - moved by Seav
Talaingod

Although we follow United States' method of having recognized administrative division as the required disambiguation, this required disambiguation is due to the United States having no unique placenames. There's two Harrisburg Cities in Pennsylvania and Illinois, and there's dozens of Centervilles, including Centerville Cities of Iowa and Missouri.

Request made by: JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:44, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per WP:MOSPHIL: "A municipality should be suffixed by the name of the province in which it's located." Also oppose per the criterion of consistency, since all others in the category follow the convention and the nom doesn't give a sufficient rationale for why this one in particular should be exempted. (And BTW, the US does have many unique placenames: Missoula, Hazardville, Bothell, Bone Gap, etc.) ╠╣uw [talk] 18:03, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The shorter title better meets the criteria enshrined in the article titles policy (WP:AT) since it is obviously more WP:CONCISE yet still WP:PRECISE (no other topic has the same title). And to address Huwmanbeing's objection, policies like WP:AT should be given more weight over guidelines such as MOS:PHIL. And this requested move is based on years of precedence. See the list below of successful move requests for other Philippine municipalities that have been initiated over the past several years that have removed the province name from their article's titles. (Only one move request, for Balangiga, ended with no consensus to move.) These move requests, as well as many other uncontested similar page moves over the same period by numerous editors (see list below for a sampling), clearly show that the title without the name of the province is the clear consensus position. —seav (talk) 02:33, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- All successful move requests (WP:RM) (since 2014):
  - Talk:San Jose de Buenavista#Requested move 9 January 2020
  - Talk:Polomolok#Requested move 24 December 2019
  - Talk:Bacolod-Kalawi#Requested move 2 October 2018
  - Talk:Limasawa#Requested move 11 November 2015
  - Talk:Sapian#Requested move (June 2014)
  - Talk:Maayon#Requested move (June 2014)
  - Talk:Miagao#Requested move (June 2014)
  - Talk:Larena#Requested move (April 2014)
  - Talk:Banayoyo#Requested move (April 2014)
  - Talk:Narvacan#Requested move (April 2014)
  - Talk:Vintar#Requested move (April 2014)
  - Talk:Dingalan#Requested move (March 2014)
  - Talk:Dupax del Norte#Requested move (March 2014)
  - Talk:Dupax del Sur#Requested move (March 2014)
  - Talk:Santa Praxedes#Requested move (March 2014)
  - Talk:Pagudpud#Requested move (March 2014)
  - Talk:Aparri#Requested move (March 2014)
  - Talk:Banaue#Requested move (January 2014)
  - Talk:Sagada#Requested move (January 2014)
- Examples (not exhaustive) of uncontested WP:BOLD page moves throughout the years:
  - 2019: Midsayap by User:JWilz12345
  - 2018: Maragondon by User:HueMan1
  - 2017: Dasol by User:Exec8
  - 2016: Gumaca by myself
  - 2015: Barotac Nuevo by User:Hariboneagle927
  - 2015: Maripipi by User:RioHondo
  - 2015: Noveleta by User:MidasHotel20
  - 2015: Cainta by User:Shhhhwwww!!
  - 2014: Apalit by User:Bikeroo

(Comment by nom) As a reinforcement to my stand on using provincename as "unnecessary disambiguation," I found a justifiable essay by @Born2cycle: - User:Born2cycle/Unnecessary disambiguation. Using three Ontario incorporated settlements as examples - Welland (illustrated in the user's essay), Thorold, and Port Colborne. This might be Canadian situation, but both the United States and Canada have very similar toponym characteristics, despite the differences of MOS for both countries.JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:58, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per the nom and Seav. The guidance for municipalities at MOSPHIL should to be reconsidered and WP:IGNOREd for now because it contradicts CRITERIA, particularly WP:CONCISE and WP:PRECISE - the current title is “overly precise”. —В²C ☎ 07:02, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy move per nom and above. (Someone has to revise MOS:PHIL as soon as possible) —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 07:45, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: hueman1 has started a discussion at MOS:PHIL: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Philippine-related articles#Revisiting the comma convention for article titles of municipalities. —seav (talk) 10:54, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(Further comment by nom) I can also notice that only articles of incorporated settlements in USA, Japan, and Australia use comma convention "always." Articles of incorporated settlements with unique toponyms in most other countries typically drop their comma convention, be it famous, noteworthy, or not. Examples: Canada's (again?) Penticton and Pitt Meadows (oh Pitt Meadows' population is on par with most of our municipalities), Algeria's commune Tindouf, France's commune Casteljaloux, Italy's commune Isernia, Greece's municipality Ioannina, Poland's city Rybnik, South Korea's city Sokcho and town Pyeonghae, Thailand's thesaban's (municipalities) Phetchaburi and Loei, Zambia's city Solwezi, and many, many more. I won't give any more examples because I might overpower the discussion. And as per @HueMan1:, the WP:MOSPHIL should be revised, yet it's better to have a thorough discussion about this revision.JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:05, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding Japan and Australia, please see my response to your similar message on the ongoing discussion at MOS:PHIL. TL;DR: the mandatory addition of unnecessary Japanese prefecture names and Australian state names in article titles is no longer enforced. —seav (talk) 10:57, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I think as a result of User:Exec8 getting pinged above, he then did a copy-and-paste move from "Capas, Tarlac" to "Capas" ([1] and [2]). This means two things: (1) I assume Exec8 supports the current move request in principle based on his action and his previous 2017 move from "Dasol, Pangasinan" to "Dasol" ([3]). (2) The aforementioned copy-and-paste move of Capas should be cleaned up by an admin because it fragmented the edit history per WP:BEFOREMOVING. —seav (talk) 11:08, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The copy-paste move has been reverted and there is now a proper move request: Talk:Capas, Tarlac#Requested move 21 March 2020. —seav (talk) 10:49, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support the plain name is both WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and WP:COMMONNAME. And besides, Cagdianao has been associated longer with Surigao del Norte, its province for almost 50 years until it was annexed to Dinagat Islands created just recently (2006). So there are also references to it by its former address, Cagdianao, Surigao. It's time we update the mos.--RioHondo (talk) 11:21, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 17:05, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Emperork (talk) 22:14, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support we do not disambiguate for consistency, WP:ATDAB gives Chicken v Turkey (bird) for example. Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:18, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.