User talk:Dmwibotete

April 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Dinuguan with this edit, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. N/A0 22:23, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Bagoong. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. A520 | Talk me away! 19:51, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Bagoong

Hello, I noticed your edit summary in the article for Bagoong. Let me just explain further why I deleted majority of the text in it.

1. Bagoong were not 'invented' by Lorenzana. It's a common enough Southeast Asian food item that its origins can safely be said to be much much older. Nor is it a purely Ilokano dish. The fact that your "origins" also lean to a specific manufacturer is suspect. Please remember that Wikipedia can not be used for promotion. Please read WP:Conflict of Interest.
2. None of your references make any sense whatsoever. References are meant to prove the information written. You add references to say where you read it not to simply prove existence. When you say that "they crossed the bridge" you should provide a references saying they crossed the bridge, not simply link a picture of the bridge. Please read WP:Verifiability.
3. The tone of your writing is not neutral and/or subjectively written. Please see WP:NPOV and WP:Peacock. To put it in simpler terms: a huge part of the text sounds like you are selling something or writing a diary.
4. And finally. I'm also Filipino, so I do know a bit more of the subject than you think. If you believe my deletion of a large part of the text was inappropriate, you are welcome to raise the subject in Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines. Thank you. --Obsidi♠n^Soul 20:11, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Bagoong Pioneer

1. I don't know why you say 'invented'; why don't read it correctly! It specifically says that the Lorenzanas did not invent it. If you know how to comprehend, it says they were the pioneers in large scale production. It even mentioned other Asians who manufacture similar products. If you know other pioneers, write it! You are encouraging, disrecpectfulness by saying:'Holy Kamote.'
2. Don't be arrogant. Garum is even mention and referenced, so your message does not compute.
3. That story came from a book written by a daughter of the late Felipe Lorenzana. It is a very old out of print edition. I have, I'm sure a copy of that page. The main reason, this article is not referenced good, is most of the editors are not professional Wikipedians and just part time contributors. Maybe you have all the time in the world doing these things and are well versed on WIkis!! But please don't be a 'big head' if you know what I mean.
4. You can say that I am like Pigafetta here (no pun intended);writing history. I know pretty well the product. Being Filipino, if you know of other large scale pioneers, you should contribute it in writing here too. But you are acting as the accuser, judge and the jury, all in one. Where is your NPOV? As you can see you have deleted about 7000 bytes in one stroke, work done by many conntributors which was in progress for many years now. Being a Filipino, you should be the last person to destroy or deny Filipino legacy or heritage. I don't really know your beef! I know of other manufacturers but they are not pioneers. If you know some who are, feel free to write about it.
5. You seem to be practicing the 'Filipino Crab' mentality! That's why other Asian countries are leaving the Philippines practically in the mud. If you don't know what that means, let me know.

Dmwibotete (talk) 04:11, 2 May 2011 (UTC) (fixed your formatting)

You have no references proving the claims of having pioneered it. period. The information inserted is controversial and promotional, if no sources can be given, anyone can delete it at any time. The information has been there for years, if it was really that noncontroversial you would have found references proving it already. It is Wikipedia Policy, nothing you or me can do anything about.

And what do you mean 'not referenced good'? The article was not referenced at all. All you had were random external links about a hospital ('finest in northern luzon!'), a painting of a farmer (by Amorsolo?), and a link to a bridge. None of which substantiate your claims of Lorenziana having pioneered it.

I did not think it was truthful and having no third party references at all, I exercised my right in deleting it. Pilipino ako, responsibilidad ko ring maging matapat sa mga articles tungkol sa Pinas. Kahit na part time contributor ka lang, you are still bound by the policies of Wikipedia. If you can provide the references from reliable and neutral sources, I'll reinstate them myself, otherwise no.

Verifiability, as I already said, is one of the core policies of Wikipedia. Please please please read it. I am not linking text for decoration.

A story from a book by the subject counts as a primary reference and is thus unreliable by default because of the conflict of interest involved. Let me make an example. If I start a company, write a book about how my company was so deeply historical, well-respected, and pretty much awesome all around, would you believe me? Of course not. What if I write a book about myself claiming that I was royalty, would you also believe me? No, right? Doesn't help that the story itself was subjective and completely unencyclopedic.

The text you have written was also colorfully praising of the company to the point that I suspect that you have very close ties to it and would benefit from promoting it. Hence my reaction of 'Holy Kamote'. Your name having 'botete', in it doesn't escape me either. Besides, why else would you be so agitated at the removal? I retained the most important stuff about bagoong, yet you only seemed distressed that I deleted the part of it about a specific company.

As for me seeming like the judge and the jury, as I said, I strongly recommend that you take it up to Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines if you want. Arguing with me is rather useless, I'm only one editor and like everything else, I will bow to consensus. If more filipino wikipedians agree with you, I won't trouble you further. In fact, I urge you to do it. See what others think.

also... di malaki ulo ko! grrrr >:[ --Obsidi♠n^Soul 05:29, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

A Compromise

Ok I have expanded Bagoong again almost back to its original length. This time correctly referenced. If you would like to help expand it further, I would very much welcome it. A section discussing pioneering companies of mechanization of the bagoong production in the Philippines would also not be out of place, so we can even restore Lorenzana again.

But, if and only if you can provide me with good references we can get the information from. Otherwise we can make wild claims about it and no one would be the wiser. That really is the most important thing - a good, reliable source. I'll even help ensure that the text remains neutral and fix formatting or whatnot. Without it, I still can not let you restore the Lorenzana information though.--Obsidi♠n^Soul 08:40, 2 May 2011 (UTC)