Talk:Dupax del Norte

	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.

Comments

I can't think of a reason why Mabasa, Dupax del Norte, Nueva Vizcaya should have it's own article, its history can be merged here. --Howard the Duck 05:55, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This has been done. Useight (talk) 23:20, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The request to rename this article to Dupax del Norte has been carried out.

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. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 02:06, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dupax del Norte, Nueva Vizcaya → Dupax del Norte – Adding the province name is unnecessary disambiguation especially since the municipality is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC (the municipality is actually the only topic with that precise name). The only two significant reasons to oppose this move is for consistency (almost all Philippine municipalities adopt the comma convention) and the WP:MOSPHIL guidelines. However, the MOSPHIL guidelines for place article titles no longer has consensus support, and consistency is not prioritized over the WP:PRECISE and WP:CONCISE criteria of the article titles policy as evidenced by the following successful similar RMs:

seav (talk) 04:56, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, Support per WP:UNDAB. --B2C 17:03, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Note that WP:UNDAB redirects to Wikipedia:Unnecessary disambiguation, which is neither a policy nor a guideline. It is an essay largely written by B2C. There is nothing wrong with editors creating an essay which explains their views, provided that they disclose the document's status and their own role in creating it. B2C's failure to mention his own authorship misleads others. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:24, 28 March 2014 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Dupax del Norte. 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) 21:28, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]