Talk:List of reportedly haunted locations in the Philippines

Image of Clark Air Base Hospital
To all Wikipedians/Wikimedia Commons photographers: I'd like to request to take a freely-licensed photo of Clark Air Base Hospital (at least its façade). Would be nice if the weather in the photograph is cloudy or overcast.

As much as possible the photos must be at Wikimedia Commons. Thanks! JWilz12345 (talk) 16:18, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 19 March 2020

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: page moved as per consesus. Hemant DabralTalk  02:14, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

List of haunted locations in the Philippines → List of reportedly haunted locations in the Philippines – To harmonize its name with other related articles having such names. Notably: List of reportedly haunted locations in Canada, List of reportedly haunted locations in China, List of reportedly haunted locations in Mexico, and List of reportedly haunted locations in Romania. I say that I contributed this article when I was still an IP, through Articles for Creation process way back mid-2016, and it got passed. The title that I used was "List of reportedly haunted locations in the Philippines," but for some reason it was moved to this title "List of haunted locations in the Philippines" claiming that all of places here are "obviously not reportedly," per User:Alice Zhang Mengping in Sept. 2016. Now for the sake of harmony with its related articles, it shouldbe moved back to its original title, or have "List of reportedly haunted locations in x" (x=region or country name) moved to "List of haunted locations in x" (exempli gratia: "List of haunted locations in China" or "List of haunted locations in Mexico"). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:40, 19 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose - its WP:SKYISBLUE knowledge to most people that "haunted" places are not actually haunted, so removing "reportedly" is WP:CONCISE. Using "reportedly" in the title violates WP:NPOVTITLE and WP:COMMONNAME as most sources do not describe these places as "reportedly haunted"...  but rather just "haunted". The other lists should be the ones to remove "reportedly".  Its the same situation as how we don't like to make "List of notable xxxxxx" pages, and instead just "List of xxxxxx". -- Netoholic @ 22:43, 19 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment and leaning to close this request: In this case, then I would make a mass request for all related lists to remove "haunted" word in their titles. The problem is, where or how can I do this mass request (request in the case of two or more articles)? Addition: If policies allow, I request the available administrators to close this request and I hereby discontinue this request.  JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:22, 20 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Addendum: Besides, I have my support for  only for article titles of Philippines municipalities such as Pulilan, Aparri, Echague, Sultan Dumalondong, and Lambunao, and User:Seav's conciseness and preciseness point of view over consistency is becoming more favored. Also, removing "reportedly" somehow reduces the number of bytes in articles with links to such paranormal articles (thereby slighlty reducing their sizes). So if policies allow, may some admin move to close this request as not done? Thanks. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:32, 20 March 2020 (UTC)


 * For references this is the "list" of the related lists (too redundant in my wording? hehe) which have been under "reportedly" wording in their titles since I first visited them (when I was not yet an IP editor and later a Wikipedian contributor) circa October 2015 (except those created between 2016 and 2019):
 * List of reportedly haunted locations
 * List of reportedly haunted locations in Canada
 * List of reportedly haunted locations in China
 * List of reportedly haunted locations in Colombia
 * List of reportedly haunted locations in France
 * List of reportedly haunted locations in India
 * List of reportedly haunted locations in Mexico
 * List of reportedly haunted locations in Romania
 * List of reportedly haunted locations in South Africa
 * List of reportedly haunted locations in Thailand
 * List of reportedly haunted locations in the United States
 * Reportedly haunted locations in the United Kingdom
 * Reportedly haunted locations in Scotland
 * And if I can remember California and Pennsylvania have these type of list of "reportedly" haunted places, as so this quality article about haunted places in Washington, DC.


 * I might also need the thoughts of (who I contacted a long time ago regarding paranormal articles) about this. User:LuckyLouie sorry for disturbing you hehe. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:09, 20 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose Per Netoholic. "Reportedly" haunted does not sound any more or less legitimate than "haunted". The vast majority of people will not have their opinions on ghosts changed by Wikipedia, so a "reportedly" is not necessary.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 06:57, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Yes, this article title should be consistent with List of reportedly haunted locations in the United States and the others like it. Since haunting by spirits of the dead is a belief not universally held by all people and a WP:FRINGE claim that is not accepted by mainstream science, an NPOV title is very appropriate. It's not about changing people's minds or making things sound less legitimate, it is simply to be neutral, as a serious encyclopedia should be. - LuckyLouie (talk) 12:26, 20 March 2020 (UTC)


 * my response above was because I got swayed by 's opinion hehe JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:06, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
 * - WP:NPOVNAME states that we should call topics "as evidenced through usage in a significant majority of English-language sources". The vast majority of sources used for this list and others do not use the phrase "reportedly" - they state them quite plainly as "haunted places".  The use of "reportedly" is Wikipedia editorial insertion not based on the majority of sources, and its use implies discredit to the notion of them being haunted. That simply is not necessary to anyone who doesn't believe in hauntings, but is biased against the minority of readers that do believe in it. -- Netoholic @ 13:13, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I crossed out my responses because I then realized the WP:FRINGE. I don't know which must prevail: WP:FRINGE or WP:Conciseness and WP:NPOVTITLE in such paranormal geographic articles like this. So I'm again cancelling my proposal to have this discussion closed very soon., perhaps I also need the help of one user who participated ina past discussion in which we were also part of: JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:31, 20 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Support The WP:BLUE argument regarding the title does not hold up. There are people, quite a few, who believe in such things. We cannot state in wiki voice that any place is haunted. Whether or not this falls under FRINGE is debatable, but the current title certainly represents an endorsement of sorts that such places are in fact haunted. That's a no no per NPOVTITLE. The title needs to be brought in line with the others noted in above comments. This should also apply to any other similarly misnamed pages. -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:37, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per all the other pages named like this. I don't see how you violate NPOV by using "reportedly" in the title---all hauntings must have been reported, or else we wouldn't have heard of them! Axem Titanium (talk) 20:00, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Ping: Mentioning some Pinoy users or users with extensive contributions and knowledge on Philippine-related articles, for their inputs about this:, , , , , and . Sorry to disturb all of you 😔 JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 00:00, 24 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Support to align with other related articles. Besides, saying that these places are haunted by omitting the word "reportedly" establishes the belief of a few that these are indeed haunted places. — Emperork (talk) 00:50, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Support because I myself have yet to confirm if those places are really haunted as what I have been reading in reports.--RioHondo (talk) 10:53, 29 March 2020 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of reportedly haunted locations which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 03:18, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of reportedly haunted locations which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 03:17, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:27, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Manila film center.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:36, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Old Davao, Philippines Airport.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:08, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * 2811Starmall Alabang Muntinlupa 03.jpg