Talk:Northern Mindanao Voyage Tips and guide

Contents

The Understand section currently starts with "Northern Mindanao is the peaceful, politically stable northern region ...". I doubt that. I was in CDO in January, felt safe enough & had no problems. On the other hand, I met a foreign resident who'd been there five years & was about to move north because he thought things around CDO were getting too dangerous.

Canadian gov't travel advisory has (July 2015, unchanged from January):

"Foreign Affairs ... Canada advises against all travel to ... the provinces of ... Lanao del Norte, ..., due to the serious threat of terrorist attacks and kidnapping."

Has anyone got better info? Pashley (talk) 02:58, 11 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

Some news reports like Raps filed vs Iligan City mayor, 14 others for attack on congressman sound un-peaceful. Pashley (talk) 11:38, 31 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

I toned the wording down some, not sure if it is enough. Pashley (talk) 13:04, 31 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

as Lanao del Norte has already been tagged with vfd, I think it is time for a regions overhaul. The subregions of this here page are all rather small and none even lists nine places. Most list considerably less, some only list one or two. Now I am no expert for this part of the world, but a first step might be simply combining some of the regions... Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:17, 12 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

At the moment there do seem to be few enough destinations that subregions are unnecessary. But not knowing the area, I cannot say if this is simply because articles haven't yet been written, or if the current roster of destinations is all there is. Powers ^(talk) 01:38, 13 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

Well if we are to get rid of subregions altogether, we can always recreate them at a later date or decide to have entirely new subregions with different boundaries. It appears as if somebody simply copied the administrative boundaries mindlessly, which is almost always a bad idea... Hobbitschuster (talk) 13:30, 13 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

I do know the area slightly (very slightly; I spent about 10 days there, almost all in CDO) & would not object to a re-org that reduces the number of subregions, provided province names are kept as redirects. I do not know it well enough to have an opinion on how that is best done.

At least one significant town in the region is not currently mentioned. The one I noticed was Surigao; my guess is that there are more. Pashley (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

Six years later, there are still only nine city/park articles in the whole region by my count. I think the province level articles can be rolled up into the region, unless there are objections in the next two weeks. Ground Zero (talk) 16:14, 16 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Agreed. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 17:16, 16 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Fine by me, though I think all provinces must be kept at least as redirects since they are likely search terms. I'd keep Camiguin as an article since it is a moderately popular tourist destination & the article has a fair bit of text. Pashley (talk) 22:23, 16 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Agreed but also keep Camiguin per Pashley. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 22:57, 16 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I was thinking of redirects, as is the norm for merged articles, and commenting out the existing text so that it can be restored easily if some wants to expand coverage. Camiguin is a special case because it is treated as a destination, and not as a region article with city articles below it, so it would remain as-is. Ground Zero (talk) 00:27, 17 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Seeing no objections, I will proceed. Ground Zero (talk) 21:10, 29 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

The provincial articles are now redirected to Northern Mindanao, but the existing content is commented out, so it will be easy to restore these articles if some decides to expand them. Ground Zero (talk) 22:32, 29 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Ground Zero: Salamat (this is in Cebuano, not Tagalog) :) SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 22:38, 29 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Oroquietaaerial.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:32, 16 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Around Malaybalay City.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:35, 7 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Cagayan de Oro Montage by Giojoe.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:39, 25 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Around Malaybalay City.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:18, 5 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Ikan Kekek, SelfieCity, LPfi: the given reason was "No indicated source of individual images on this montage." although technically, we shouldn't be having montages anyway. Remove or replace? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 05:35, 5 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

As you said, we don't use montages, so no point in considering keeping such a file. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:09, 5 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Would it be worth replacing the file with a non-montage though? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 06:44, 5 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Also, I don't think we need to do anything as the file is only used on Wikidata. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 06:45, 5 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Montages are problematic also on Commons. Here the creator did not specify the used files, and thus gives no credit to their authors – which is common. Even when the original author does, it happens that somebody changes some of the images without changing the description. –LPfi (talk) 07:40, 5 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

The province of Misamis Occidental is not coloured. Also, Iligan is shown on this map as inland but both text & map in the Iligan article show it on the coast.

I'm pretty much a text-only guy & won't try to fix this. Volunteers? Pashley (talk) 05:43, 30 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Pashley: SelfieCity might be able to do it if it's with Inkscape, and I might be able to do it if it requires an SVG text editor. Unfortunately, I think this one requires Inkscape. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 05:45, 30 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Looking again, I see that Iligan is shown on the coast. My confusion arose because the map colours various areas of sea, not just the land of provinces. I think that is a mistake that should be fixed.

It is also shown in a white area, not one of the coloured provinces. Pashley (talk) 22:49, 30 October 2021 (UTC)Reply