Talk:Ilocos Region

Hidden Comments
Check out the edit page of the article. I put a lot of hidden comments there. The article is full of flaws. I fixed some of it already, though not all. Oh, and BTW, ILOCOS REGION is a misnomer -- the Pangasinenses do not like Region I to be named as Ilocos Region. Too biased. Maong latay Northwestern Luzon Region, anto? The maybe misnomer may be due from Marcos being Ilocano and that Region I was named under or during his administration. Marcos was biased, so I think. Could someone add it as a trivia in the article?

Ilocos is an ethnocentric and does not represent the Pangasinan people (Toon Pangasinan).
"Ilocos" is an ethnocentric term predominantly used and promoted by the Ilocanos. There are other ethno-linguistic groups in the region such as the Pangasinan and the Bolinao. The ethno-neutral term would be "Northwestern Luzon Region".


 * Wikipedia doesn't deal with ethnoneutral term if an official term is used. Ilocos is the official term, so that will be used. Anything else, even if it's offensive, is not allowed. For that, you should consult your local politicians. --Chris S. 16:21, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

The term "Ilocos Region" may be the de-facto term for the geographic region. But it seems that there is no law designating the province of Pangasinan into "Ilocos Region." If there is no such law, then I do not understand how the term can become official. If the legal basis is unclear, then the use is alegal. But it is clear that the use of the term is immoral.

on neutrality
Bluemask undid the entry: "The term Ilocos Region promotes the wrong notion that all the residents of Region 1 are Ilocanos." in the article page "Ilocos Region". It is a fact that a lot of people get the impression that the inhabitants of Ilocos Region are Ilocanos. It is even taught in some textbooks in the Philippines. I do not understand how the entry should be deleted, when it is an important fact. I am a Toon Pangasinan. There are countless of times that I am mistaken for an Ilocano because I come from "Ilocos region". This is a fact. Anyone can easily make a survey in the Philippines and ask "who are the inhabitants of Ilocos Region?" and if they answer Ilocano, then ask them "why they think so?".

I do not understand how other entries could be allowed such as: "The region is also rich in crafts, with renowned blanket-weaving and pottery. Their burnay pottery is well known for its dark colored clay." There are premises hidden in the entry that can be seen from the words "renowned" and "well known". These descriptions are assumed to be facts; but they are not facts, they are only being presented as facts. If these are assumptions, and you are strict with the guidelines of the wikipedia, then these should be edited as they are not based on a third person research. 218.221.37.101 09:20, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * It's the name of the region. Wikipedia only follows how the government names their regions. -- Howard  the   Duck  07:41, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Then, rewrite the article. In addition, a couple of things that can be done is to remove the repetition. Referring over and over and over again to how Pangasinenses are part of the region.

For example, you could add paragraph that starts with... "Although, the region termed the Ilocos Region, per "citation here", ... Then continue about the Pangansinenses." Joemaza 01:32, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Ilocos Region. 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:
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6DpMOBTiK to http://www.nscb.gov.ph/activestats/psgc/listprov.asp
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130928012059/http://www.census.gov.ph/sites/default/files/attachments/hsd/pressrelease/Population%20and%20Annual%20Growth%20Rates%20for%20The%20Philippines%20and%20Its%20Regions%2C%20Provinces%2C%20and%20Highly%20Urbanized%20Cities%20Based%20on%201990%2C%202000%2C%20and%202010%20Censuses.pdf to http://www.census.gov.ph/sites/default/files/attachments/hsd/pressrelease/Population%20and%20Annual%20Growth%20Rates%20for%20The%20Philippines%20and%20Its%20Regions%2C%20Provinces%2C%20and%20Highly%20Urbanized%20Cities%20Based%20on%201990%2C%202000%2C%20and%202010%20Censuses.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:33, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Languages in regional articles
Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 03:05, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Ilocos Region. 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.nscb.gov.ph/activestats/psgc/listreg.asp
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nscb.gov.ph/activestats/psgc/listprov.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110429190752/http://www.nscb.gov.ph/activestats/psgc/listcity.asp to http://www.nscb.gov.ph/activestats/psgc/listcity.asp

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:03, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Revolts
Hello, I'm a little confused on the part where it says "Pangasinans in the south who were the last to stand against the Spaniards" I have tried to read and find reliable sources, but can't seem to find one. I may be looking at the other side of the internet but if there's no credible source (it's also stated that it needs to have a better source), maybe we can have this part removed? - --Wjddml (talk) 03:23, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
 * See WP:CHALLENGE. Any text can be challenged and removed if it is lacking reliable references (although we don't need to ref-bomb a paragraph for each obvious and easily verifiable statement). If you really think that this particular statement is wrong (especially after doing research yourself), just be bold and remove it. Alternatively, you can add  after the sentence to see if anyone else can provide a reliable source, and then remove it if no reference has been added after a few weeks. Regards, --  P 1 9 9   ✉ 13:25, 1 September 2021 (UTC)