File talk:Detailed SVG map of the Hispanophone world.svg

Spanish is cooficial in more places, such as Spain and places of the US. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 139.47.105.212 (talk) 17:57, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Brazil Official Language

The official language of Brazil is Portuguese and not Spanish. Brazil is a Lusophone (Portuguese-speaking) country. Adalberto A. Silva (留言) 12:03, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Color schemes (if any) to highlight Philippines

This is once again a discussion on how to highlight places on a world language map given how tricky the situation can be with languages of such scale. Hopefully this will be a bit easier this time around as it involves just one country, Philippines. Less than 0.5% of the population speaks the language and it's not used in administrative settings nor is an unofficial secondary language on the scale of say, French in Algeria or Spanish in the Southwestern United States, or used as a working language in professional sectors such as medicine. I initially would not include it based on my experiences of living and working in the country but upon some research and reading, it seems that there is evidence of some cultural presence in niche circles in the country that might allow for it to be included. For the record, this is addressing standard Spanish, not Chavacano.

We see on the maps for German and French, that in places where the language is culturally significant or is recognized as a minority language but not so much to the scale of being de facto official, the standard has been to place a dot or square on a country, provided that it is backed up by credible sources before said additions. Highlighting a country in its entirety is misleading, as it gives viewers an impression that they can get by everywhere and in practically every situation there.

So, what are some proposals if Philippines should be included? If it should be, I think a dot similar to how French has them on Indochina per consensus on WP-fr is appropriate given how French is still used in professional and some administrative settings like court and government websites. Even then, this is still a much bigger presence than Spanish currently has in Philippines. I'm not in favor of squares as with the minority depictions on German, but that's just me being picky on aesthetics. Another would be to include a category like the Dutch language map for 'some knowledge persists/historical language', although I also think that is a bit controversial since we want to show current usage.

Kwamikagami has done an excellent job cleaning up these maps for accuracy and fostering discussions on how to depict challenging situations, so I'm tagging them for their opinion. Double sharp has provided a good criteria on when a place should be included on a map for cultural purposes and how. Sky Harbor has provided sources for Spanish in the Philippines and will probably have some other proposals. So how to depict Philippines without highlighting the whole country if it's to be included here? - Moalli (留言) 06:07, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

First, thank you for the tag, Moalli, but before I get on with responding to the rest of the comment I'm going to correct you on the numbers you're citing. Okay, less than 0.5% of the population speaks Spanish proficiently, and that is attested in the data points that we have. That much is not in dispute. However, if we include Spanish speakers who don't speak the language fluently, or are learning the language, or may be semi-speakers (Lipski says there's a large but unknown-in-terms-of-actual-numbers contingent of Spanish semi-speakers in the Philippines), the number does go higher to anywhere between 1-3% depending on the source. And if we remove percentages from the equation and get into actual large numbers, that's still at least 1-2 million people, which is not an insignificant number. (This doesn't even include Chavacano speakers, which the Instituto Cervantes includes in some of its counts.)

Now, on with the show here. I must note for everyone here that I'm only one of a handful of Spanish-speaking Filipino Wikipedians, so this topic for me is deeply personal given what the language has been put through over the last 125 years. There is a reason why I reverted the dot change (and even Kwamikagami's change removing the country entirely, to which I have no idea where they've "fostered discussions on how to depict challenging situations" regarding this situation specifically either here or on the English or Spanish Wikipedias, but correct me if I'm wrong), and to that end I'll give four:

• First, the map legend which points to secondary languages specifically says it shows countries or states (as in the case of the U.S.) with "more than 20% Spanish speakers or large cultural influence)". Note the use of "or", not "and", so it makes no sense to insist on "and" as a wording. How do you define "large cultural influence" for the purposes of this map? I would define it as the language having a continued cultural presence, whatever form that may look like, and that people are still interfacing with the language at some level. While most Filipinos no longer speak Spanish, they nonetheless still interface with the language on a regular basis, the language continues to have some form of constitutional status, and there is a recognition on both sides of the language spectrum that Spanish influence continues to linger and be influential even if I agree with Virum Mundi's point on the Spanish Wikipedia that "knowing and using a lot of Spanish words does not mean you necessarily know how to speak Spanish". Now I'm a bit loath to use the Philippine languages or Chavacano in defense of Spanish's continued influence in the Philippines, but if Spanish linguists and even Philippine political leaders (notably former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, who said as much in 2011 en español) have attested to that continuing influence using those languages as their data points, why won't we?

• Second, the data shows that Spanish is still spoken nationwide, not just in Manila. Academics like Lipski, Quilis and Steinkrüger have noted the language's national spread, with Spanish-speaking communities found in major cities throughout the Philippines (Cebu, Davao, Zamboanga, Bacolod, etc., all on different islands) although the largest community is in the capital. I reverted Moalli's previous edit (and I would do so with the current revert but won't do so out of respect) because "Highlighting it entirely when it's not used in administrative settings or as the secondary language is blatant misrepresentation and POV-esque" also flies in the face of the way the country is currently depicted, with a pale blue dot over Manila in a color that blends into the grey that the rest of the country is depicted in (implying Spanish has no influence, which is even more obvious when you zoom out) as if Spanish-speaking Filipinos don't exist outside the capital. That too is also misrepresentation, and I find it rich that someone who has fewer ties to the Philippines than I do and with no ties to the community of Spanish-speaking Filipinos that actually exists is trying to police how much Spanish we actually speak or how much influence the language actually commands.

• Third, I bristle at Moalli's suggestion that highlighting an entire country "gives viewers an impression that they can get by everywhere and in practically every situation there". It bears repeating that the legend already implies this (the Philippines is/was colored as a country where Spanish is a secondary language, already implying that you can't "get by everywhere and in practically every situation there" to begin with), so I don't think that is the impression our readers get. Rather, our readers get the impression that while the language is spoken there, it is merely a secondary language which is subordinated by English and Filipino in terms of official status. Removing the country entirely, or worse implying as much while leaving a practically invisible blue dot over the capital as how the country is currently treated, only makes it worse by implying that Spanish is dead in the Philippines when it isn't. The fact that at the very least an autochthonous national-level dialect of Spanish still exists is proof that the language's influence is more widespread than the map is implying.

• Finally, this issue is not limited to this map. Moalli, for some reason, claims that the Philippines shouldn't be depicted at all in any map that touches Spanish as a subject. So even in linguistic maps, which are supposed to be divorced from the number of speakers the language has, their position is that the Philippines shouldn't be there at all, never mind that we speak a distinct dialect of Spanish for starters.

To be clear, my position is that the Philippines must be included in Spanish language maps, but accurately depending on the type of map and what kind of data point it is talking about. On the English Wikipedia, there already is a consensus to depict the Philippines on a case-by-case basis depending on the type of map, and this is the type of consensus I hope to get and continue to aspire to as well on the Spanish Wikipedia and here on Commons. For this map specifically, the best way is to highlight the country in its entirety given the current map's treatment of Spanish-speaking countries, but if treating it with one color is "too inaccurate" (which I hope it isn't given the way the legend is written) then at least showing the country in stripes or something more accurate to the academic record than a tiny dot covering the capital (which the current map treatment doesn't even call for) would be similarly appropriate. At any rate, such is better than the country being removed entirely. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 08:41, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi Sky Harbor, should a language map really reflect speakers who are not at least proficient though? That is more of a geographical distribution map like this one for French or for Arabic. There is a reason why major languages have a proportional cap, because otherwise the number of countries highlighted will skyrocket, especially with English given that practically every country will have at least 1% of the population having learned the language or being semi-speakers, including places with no deep cultural connection to English. Or better yet, U.S. states highlighted to include people who learned Spanish in high school and can introduce themselves and ask where the bathroom is and have state benefit material printed in Spanish. That being said, I was initially opposed to including the Philippines at all on maps given first-hand experience and accounts from meeting numerous people born and raised there stating that Spanish is not present in daily life nor did they encounter it outside loanwords. My sentiments appear to be shared by many others on WP-es. However, I've looked at the sources you provided and did some reading on my own and am not 100% against having it on Spanish language maps now. However, it should accurately depict the scope of usage.

First off, the category we currently have as secondary or cultural is fine and is similar to ones used on other global languages. What is an issue is, why should the Philippines be given special treatment when in places where a language is cultural but only a minority/used in certain settings like court be completely highlighted? For instance, German has played an important cultural role in the Czech Republic and continues to do so, plus there are still native speakers of the language there. The country is depicted with a square on the German language map and I don't see any editors clamoring for the country to be completely colored in like Namibia, where German is actually used in national institutions and permeates in daily life despite not being official. What is your definition of daily interface? We don't want to include creoles or loanword usage as that is not accurate use.

Second, the dot was placed on Manila because it seems that when cultural/significant languages that are not de facto official are included on maps, the dot or square is placed on the largest city or region where speakers are or the capital. Such is the case for French in Laos with Vientiane and German in Czech Republic with Prague even though significant numbers of speakers reside outside those cities. Is there a better location that you would propose for the dot situation? The color for the legend when used as a dot does inhibit visibility though. I might think of other proposals later and hopefully others will chime in to get this discussion further along. - Moalli (留言) 17:40, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

If the Philippines, why not Western Sahara? Or Kansas, which was once part of New Spain and where children learn Spanish in school? I appreciate that Sky Harbor has learned some Spanish and feels that it's part of their cultural heritage, but the same is true of hundreds of other languages in nearly all the countries of the world, and we don't usually show them on language maps. For the geographic distribution of Hebrew, should we color in every country in the world that has a Jewish population? Or for Armenian, all countries that host members of the Armenian diaspora? I've seen maps for e.g. Tagalog where the majority of the world is shaded as Tagalog-speaking, because of immigrants in those countries. Or for Fijian Hindi, with Australia and New Zealand colored as Hindi-speaking countries. Personally, I don't see how such presentations benefit the reader. For English, not only would we need to color in every country in the world as Anglophone, but arguably also Antarctica and the high seas. That's what I fall back on as a sanity-check when someone wants to increase the representation of their language on a map: what would the map look like if we were to apply those same criteria to English? Kwamikagami (留言) 01:21, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Kwamikagami. I disagree with your characterization of the issue on two points:

• First, you're making it seem like Spanish is totally foreign to the Philippines (and perhaps also Western Sahara, which I've also pointed out elsewhere but that's something I don't have the experience nor the expertise to comment on so I won't) when it isn't. I would get not including Kansas since that part of the United States is not historically Spanish-speaking nor is there a history of rooted communities in the area that did (unlike, let's say, French in Missouri), but Spanish is actually deeply rooted in the Philippines. To this day, we not only have actual Hispanophones who are descended from families that have spoken the language in the country for generations, but also Hispanophone cultural output, a Hispanophone press and a long history of using Spanish in government and society in spite of the language losing official status only around 35 years ago: something that, WP:RGW notwithstanding, the community has felt and continues to feel is a mistake. Keep in mind that you will not find Hispanophones in the Philippines unless you know where to look, as up to around 20 years ago the language was stigmatized by non-Spanish speaking Filipinos who were hostile to the idea of two Filipinos speaking Spanish in public.
• Second, to continue from the first point I bristle at your characterization of me learning Spanish as being "true of hundreds of other languages in nearly all the countries of the world". This would be true if Spanish was just some other foreign language like French or German, but it bears mentioning that Spanish is very much a Filipino language given how deeply rooted it is in spite of the current small number of speakers relative to the total population. My own interactions with the Spanish-speaking community in the Philippines affirms this, in fact. That said, tthere is a specific confluence of historical, social, cultural and political circumstances that led to the decline of Spanish in the Philippines (think Israel and Hebrew, but in reverse) that led us to this point to begin with, yet despite all efforts to stamp the language out the language nonetheless survives to the present day and there are still Filipinos both within and outside the Philippines who speak it. Studies have shown that of the current new generation of Filipino Spanish speakers, there are people within this group who study Spanish not to be closer to Spanish or Latin American heritage, but to Filipino heritage, given that for over three centuries the country's primary vehicular language of government, administration, history and culture was Spanish. You're making it seem like people are learning a foreign language devoid of cultural context when, in fact, people are learning the language fully aware of the cultural context that it carries for the very country we belong to.

To respond to Moalli's points earlier on the map and the sentiment of Spanish Wikipedia editors, I offer two points:

• First, most Spanish Wikipedia editors will not have the opportunity to interact with a Filipino Wikipedian who has a full command of Spanish and edits the Spanish Wikipedia (as far as I know, we're only two who edit regularly: myself and Pare Mo) given that the vast majority of Filipino Wikipedians edit only in English, and so I make it a point to engage with Spanish Wikipedians on the issue because I think they ought to know (as you've come to know, and to that my props to you) that we as a community do exist and we also deserve the visibility given to other Spanish dialects. If the regional government of Madrid can say "All accents belong in Madrid" and include the Philippines while they're at it, why can't the Spanish Wikipedia? I've been engaging with Spanish Wikipedians both on- and off-wiki on this issue on-and-off for nearly a decade now, and we're getting there but it does take time. I hope I can continue making inroads for the benefit of Spanish-speaking Filipinos who deserve some form of representation.
• Second, I do think this discussion is healthy and I look forward to coming to some sort of resolution, but I do offer a counterpoint: the map currently used to showcase the Sinosphere on Wikipedia highlights the Philippines as a country with a significant Chinese-speaking minority (a minority that I also belong to), although Chinese Filipinos are only around 1.3 million people. While there are no accurate numbers that I know of for Chinese speakers in the Philippines, if we look at proportions this is roughly the same number as Spanish speakers if we look at the broad view of the numbers for both languages. This is not to necessarily say that the Sinosphere treatment is better, but if we're looking at raw numbers it does seem fairer than Spanish speakers only being represented by a tiny dot. (At least I'm fine with stripes, El Mono Español's dot patterns, a distinct color or some other distinguishing characteristic that affirms your point that the language isn't widely spoken, but given the circumstances let's see what sort of compromise we can get at. There are editors who have taken a far harder line than I do on this issue and they've already turned off Spanish Wikipedians as it is with edit-warring over this map. I don't intend to repeat that nor would I want to jeopardize the community's good graces by taking that hard line.)

I look forward to continuing engagement on this matter and getting buy-in wherever I can, but I sincerely hope this has been a learning experience for everyone. More information is always better than less, and at least on this issue we now have significantly more information available than we did previously which I hope can help make informed decisions that will be agreeable to everyone. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 21:23, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Sky Harbor, while I agree with the facts you've presented about there being a continuous presence of Spanish in the Philippines, it's important to note that these maps need to reflect the actual usage of these languages accurately. Now that you've pointed out the flaw on the Sinosphere map, I guess that one is also another one that needs addressing. It appears that it's based off the overseas Chinese population (and maybe influence?) rather than actual language use. And for the record, as Kwamikagami noted, we should not be inflating speaker figures. Non-proficient speakers and learners that would push the figure of Spanish-speakers in the Philippines to about a million should not be counted. If WP doesn't do that for other languages and countries, again, why should the Philippines get special treatment? Why don't we highlight most U.S. states then given that a significant amount of Americans have simply learned Spanish or are exposed to Spanish (but don't use it in daily life)? Or most countries of the world for English given that at least 1% of the population in many nations might have some knowledge of English and English language media proliferates in daily life?

It's not just the Spanish map that has seen edit warring and misrepresentation. During the discussion for cleaning up another language map, user Double sharp provided a great criteria to address places where a language is not official but still secondary or culturally significant. To quote "When I read such language maps, honestly the questions I'm most interested in are: if I go there, (1) will the signs be in language X? (2) will a significant number of people generally understand me if I speak to them in language X? (3) do people naturally speak language X to each other, or do they just learn it for school and chatting up foreigners? (4) even if (1) and (3) aren't true in most regions, might they be true for a region where a linguistic minority is concentrated?"

Given this criteria, a dot presence already seems generous for the Philippines (and some other places on maps like German). Is there a city or region where Spanish is a significant language in the Philippines, meaning that you can just travel there as an outsider and use the language and not have to hunt down a speaker or speaker community? Is it a daily working language in some professional sectors like law or engineering, or compulsory language for students of those professional sectors? Are there domestic government websites in Spanish? Are there national or regional free-to-air TV networks or print newspapers with the medium in Spanish? These contemporary situations are what would be current cultural influence building from historical influence. From living and traveling there, I didn't encounter any of these nor from interactions with natives. But again, I don't like using first-person accounts for discussions.

I understand you feel strongly about the Philippines being represented for Spanish. However, how does the average non-Hispanophone Filipino look at this, given that they are in the majority? It's one thing to present facts and advocate for something in one's community. It's another to inflate something that verges on WP:POV (not accusing you of it, but just saying). - Moalli (留言) 23:07, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

The Chinese map needs work too indeed. It colours in Kyrgyzstan, even though the Dungan are only about 1% of the population (and as you just noted, a 1% threshold would end up with the whole world coloured as Anglophone), and they don't even think of their language as Chinese (per doi:10.1080/02549948.1977.11745054; indeed, they often cannot understand Gansu and Shaanxi Mandarin, and it seems that only the scholars did). Meanwhile it doesn't colour in Wa State where Chinese is the de facto official language. Saying more would take us off topic (though I do think we should start a separate discussion on that one as well), but at the very least, I suggest that this shows that we shouldn't use it as a guide for how things ought to be coloured. Double sharp (留言) 02:51, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

I started a discussion on the Chinese map at File talk:Map-Sinophone World.png. Double sharp (留言) 03:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Again, I am a bit loath to use Philippine languages and Chavacano to defend Spanish in the Philippines, but to respond to Moalli here if we're using Double sharp's criteria (and, mind you, this is informal criteria; if you're intent on making this uniform for all languages you might as well have a huge discussion about it given the various nuances you three are intent on glossing over) they do apply to Spanish in the Philippines as well:

• There are Spanish-language signs in the Philippines, especially in Zamboanga City and to a lesser extent in Cavite. As I mentioned previously, the Instituto Cervantes considers Chavacano speakers to be Spanish speakers, albeit partially, but Spanish speakers will generally understand signs written in Chavacano. For example, this is the sign that greets you when you arrive at the airport, and it is the same in both languages. This Global Voices article also has images of signs in Chavacano, which for the most part the average Spanish speaker will understand. (From what I know, Spanish speakers have an easier time understanding Chavacano than the other way around.)

• I won't answer the second criteria since the answer is already obvious unless you're in a Chavacanophone area or you found the community of Hispanophones (many of whom like myself have congregated online thanks to social media).

• There is still generational transmission of Spanish in the Philippines, and the language is still used by the community which is the crux of this entire argument. For example, Roman Catholic Masses in Manila are normally only offered in Tagalog/Filipino and English, but there is one church (the church of my high school) that still offers a Spanish-language anticipated Mass every Saturday, and there is at least one Spanish-medium Evangelical church which, coincidentally enough, also offers Spanish classes. Non-Hispanophones are at least still taught some Spanish by the media: just recently, a post went viral on counting in Spanish, not coincidentally during Buwan ng Wika (Filipino Language Month), which shows that the language remains culturally relevant in the present day even in an indigenized Filipino context. There are entire cultural institutions and markers that wouldn't exist if the language was merely some other foreign language people learn: everything from the Philippine Academy of the Spanish Language to our two remaining Spanish-language press outlets (the Revista Filipina and La Jornada Filipina) to the continued existence of Spanish-language literary output that is consumed by both Filipinos and other Hispanophones is proof that the language continues to exist and be spoken by its community of speakers – a minority in our own country, yes – despite the confluence of historical circumstances that brought us to this very moment.

I don't get this insistence among some Wikipedians, whether it be the three of you or a number of Spanish Wikipedians, to treat Spanish in the Philippines as if it's a totally foreign language in this country when to us it is very much a Philippine language, deeply rooted in our country and no less foreign than English is despite its current lack of official status. Now I understand Japanese, German, French, Korean, etc. being totally foreign to the Philippines, but Spanish? The average non-Hispanophone Filipino could probably care less, but we've seen time and again that non-Hispanophone Filipinos are encouraging their compatriots to learn Spanish (as evidenced here). Furthermore, Hispanophone Filipinos are just as Filipino as they are and their opinions on the language that they themselves speak matter too.

I completely get the issue of POV pushing and the waves of mad Hispanistas wreaking havoc on the Spanish Wikipedia, and I sympathize and wholeheartedly agree with their lack of sympathy for those who want to insist that every single corner of the world from Alaska to Antarctica has a majority of Spanish speakers or has the language as official, but I'm very glad I'm not one of them. That being said, this fixation on holding back the tide ends up leaving Hispanophone Filipinos caught between a rock and a hard place because while you insist that illustrating the Philippines with a tiny dot on this map is already generous and going beyond that is POV pushing, I'd argue that the opposite is also true, especially when specialized literature on Spanish linguistics (like the Ortografía normativa del español) continues to include the Philippines in this space, and professional linguists have also noted the same. To my knowledge, the Philippines is the only place in the world where a colonizing power stamped out the previous colonial language in favor of their own with the success that it did (unlike Mauritius with French or Namibia with German), yet the language is still here, spoken by a significant number of people who do so in various corners of the country despite efforts from non-Hispanophones to stamp it out or to render it irrelevant. I'm not saying color the Philippines as if a majority speak it, but at the very least let's consider either that the wording in the legend was already appropriate to begin with or let's find ways how we can improve it to better illustrate all possible scenarios, and if there are issues with coloring the entire country in a single solid color then let's come up with some solution that does justice to the current situation and that hopefully will also deter more POV pushing (as we saw earlier today on the English Wikipedia) from users who may be far less open to compromise than I am. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 18:24, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

I am not arguing that Spanish is a totally foreign language in the Philippines given that you've already provided sources that it continues to be used and transmitted. What I don't get is your insistence to treat the situation uniquely versus other countries and maps. As noted, German continues to be used in the Czech Republic in a manner similar to what you described in the Philippines, same thing with French in Laos (and with a greater presence in both situations). Both places are not shaded or striped but only indicated with a square or dot and there haven't been complaints about that. As for creoles, we want to cover the actual language. Some signs in the French Creoles of the Caribbean can be understood by standard French speakers, so should we color those islands as though standard French is spoken there? There are churches (note, plural) in Cairo where mass is still celebrated in French and French is the medium in many Egyptian schools; should Egypt be considered Francophone as it was back before the mid-20th century? Korean uses a Chinese-based counting system, and much of the language has integrated Sino-rooted vocabulary; let's stipe in Korea on the Sinophone map in that case.

I do appreciate the fact that you are not one of those raging Hispanistas and have been open to discussion (as well as not creating an entirely new category to reflect "historical usage", whatever rubbish that is used to indicate; Spanish is still present in the Philippines anyway). However, again, why is the Philippines to be given special treatment? I don't know about others, but I don't mind having the Philippines included on the map. What I do see as a problem is giving special status versus the way other countries are mapped when cultural status is shown. For consistency's sake, if we're not going to map most or certainly not all of the country, and scattered speaker populations mean that a specific region is practically impossible to highlight, this seems like the feasible way to highlight the Philippines and not exclude it. - Moalli (留言) 05:59, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

I know I made this point previously, Moalli (and I apologize for replying just now; I started a new job and now have less time to dedicate to the Wikimedia projects), but it bears repeating. Why am I asking for the Philippines to be treated as its own sui generis case?

• First, I will need to point out what Rafael Rodríguez-Ponga, former chair of the Instituto Cervantes, said about the Philippines belonging in this space: Filipinas es "un país hispanohablante, aunque de forma claramente parcial" (The Philippines is "a Spanish-speaking country, albeit clearly in a partial form"; Cuadernos hispanoamericanos, p. 55). In no other country was there a systematic effort to stamp out a language that was already rooted that had actually been successful, and we do a disservice to Wikipedia readers and the existing community of Spanish speakers in the Philippines if we continue to minimize the language's presence in this country. A tiny dot, as I mentioned previously, does not accurately reflect that the country (and I presume here the country in its totality) is considered to be "partially" Spanish-speaking.
• To extend that first point further, German was never an official language of the Czech Republic. French was never an official language of Laos. Spanish however was an official language of the Philippines until 1987, and I would argue Spanish was far more rooted in the Philippines than German in the Czech Republic was or French was in the former French Indochina. There is a reason why Rodríguez-Ponga notes that the Philippines is "partially" Hispanophone as I mentioned earlier, and that is because for much of the country's history it was in a manner that the Czech Republic wasn't with German nor the former French Indochina was with French. During the time that East Timor was a part of Indonesia, would you have considered the country Portuguese-speaking? This is closer to that parallel.
• Finally, I would argue that the way current language maps of Spanish illustrate the Philippines do not take into account the specific historical, cultural and social circumstances behind the language's continued survival in the country. While I'm glad that you've had a change of heart and now believe that the Philippines should be on maps of the Spanish language, does that mean now that the Philippines can be treated as such on the maps illustrating voseo or seseo the way other Spanish-speaking territories are?

I agree that there needs to be a better way to show the situation, but the tiny dot you're so insistent on is not the way to do that. Maybe a bigger dot? Stripes or dot patterns (the dot pattern might fit better here if we're going to stick with illustrating the Philippines with a dot)? Expanding the definition of what a "minority" is so it can be colored appropriately? We're getting there, but I hope we can do better because Spanish speakers in the Philippines, as I've said time and again, deserve better. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 00:16, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

I could add more information on why the Spanish language is one of the languages of the Philippines, and why it is not a language that we can label as "historical" (since it cannot be said to be a dead language in the country), since there are still native speakers, as well as a sizeable number of speakers with a proficient level, but I think @Sky Harbor has provided more than enough and valuable information.

There is just one thing I would like to add as I think it has gone overlooked. The present Constitution of the Phillipines, in its Article XIV (the same one that re-designated Spanish as an optional auxiliary language), stipulates that the Government shall provide the people of the Philippines with a Spanish-language translation of the Constitution. This is a degree of legal recognition that, for example, the French language does not have in Cambodia (and yet the country is marked on the map in the French language article, with a bigger dot).

In this case, even if we can come to an agreement (which I am not opposed to) not to highlight entirely the Philippines on the map (we can use a dot instead), that does not justify the unilateral addition of that extremely tiny dot (which, above all, violates WP:ACCESSIBILITY).

In addition, we have to keep in mind that territories such as the U.S. state of Maine are entirely highlighted (not with a dot) on the French language map, even when the recognition of the French language in that U.S. state is similar or lower to that of Spanish in the Philippines. There should be uniformity in the criteria applied, as this is the only way to guarantee neutrality.

Having said that, I want to say that I am totally open to dialogue, as I believe that this is the key to improve the articles and their maps, and I do consider that this map requires changes, but until a consensus is reached, the status quo of the content should be respected. Salvabl (留言) 21:32, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm fine with a dot being placed on the Philippines to represent cultural status as we see on the French and German maps, even though its actual use in contemporary times is far less than French in Cambodia or German in Hungary. I suggest using this map as a basis, but of course without Antarctica, and without Western Sahara as that has spurred controversy. The dot placed on Manila seems to be bad positioning given geographic location and color scheme, so maybe on Zamboanga?

I want to ping Kwamikagami and Double sharp again to have their opinions on this inclusion since they've helped fix issues on language maps earlier. - Moalli (留言) 07:21, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

It is appropriate that you have mentioned the French language map, as I think it is a good reference to try to achieve more neutrality in the information regarding both languages.

I am not opposed to marking the Philippines with a dot. However, it would be more consistent to keep the current highlighting, considering that on the French language map, the U.S. state of New Hampshire is entirely highlighted. What is the reason for that? If the reason is that, apart from the fact that a residual minority still speaks French in that U.S. state, the French language has "some degree of officiality"; then we should note that the Spanish language is covered in the current Constitution of the Philippines, and certain rights are granted (such as providing the people of the Philippines with a Spanish-language translation of the Constitution) and it is also defined as a language that has a unique place "in the development of Philippine history and culture" in the DO 46, s. 1987 (which makes it mandatory to provide Spanish language courses in all schools that offer courses in any foreign language).

This information should be taken into account to decide whether the Philippines should be marked with a dot on the Spanish language map, like Vietnam (where French has no official recognition at all) is on the French language map, or should remain entirely highlighted as New Hampshire is on the French language map, even though the "degree of officiality" of the French language in that U.S. state is similar or lower than that of Spanish in the Philippines.

I proceed to ping users @Sky Harbor, @Snowmanonahoe, @MarkH21, @Austronesier and @JrBooyah so that they can share their opinions on this matter. Salvabl (留言) 14:42, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Now that you mention it Salvabl, I do wonder why New Hampshire is fully colored in on the French map. The usage of French there is nowhere near the scale as in Maine and is similar to the "optional" status of Spanish in the Philippines. I would definitely argue for it to be changed to a dot as well if we're going to reflect the extent of language usage. While there is no officiality of French in Vietnam, I would say its usage there is much more prominent than Spanish in Philippines as French remains a working language in some fields of administration and professional sectors like medicine and the cultural influence is still strong (mainly in the south where its officiality was longer). Even then, I would say it should remain indicated with a dot, as should New Hampshire for French and Spanish for the Philippines. - Moalli (留言) 07:09, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Since I've been pinged, here's my two centavos. The caption says "Map of the countries of the world where Spanish is widely spoken"; unless we're talking about changing the caption, I don't see why the Philippines should be anything but white on the map. The threshold for light blue is 20%, or the language being culturalmente importante. The former is obviously not fulfilled, and the cultural importance of Spanish is a thing of the past. Spanish left a heavy impact on the lexicon of the local languages, but itself has little presence in public life. Major literary works like Rizal's Noli and Fili were written Spanish, but in modern school curricula, the original version is hardly ever read.

The decline of Spanish has mixed reasons, more of a demographic than a deliberately suppressive nature. The map should reflect reality and not serve to w:WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. –Austronesier (留言) 13:42, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

100% agree with Austronesier. And I remember everyone here that, in Wikipedia and Commons, we are just supposed to present existing informations, like they appear in major sources of reference on the matter like the Cervantes institute, not differently because we think it should be different for personal reasons. El Comandante (留言) 14:32, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Since I've been pinged, I want to share my disagreement with both Austronesier and El Comandante with respect to their points.

Number one, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, we have to ask what is "culturally important" for the purposes of this map? Spanish is not "a thing of the past" in the Philippines, given that we still have Filipinos who speak it natively, we still produce cultural output in it, there is still some press output (at least one literary magazine, at least one news website), and it is the single largest foreign language that isn't English which is taught in the public school system, among other things. I would argue that the language very much is culturally important, especially if you happen to belong to the minority of Filipinos who happen to still speak Spanish (to which I belong and, I presume, Austronesier does not).

No one here is denying that the influence of Spanish has declined greatly in the Philippines, and part of that is because of the language being suppressed (for reference, here's a letter from prominent Spanish Filipinos asking President Warren G. Harding to please stop suppressing Spanish) as much as it was simple demographics. But it is absolutely untrue that the language is "dead", and our maps ought to reflect that. If Spanish was totally dead in the Philippines, then why does the Constitution mandate that it be promoted anyway, for example? What do you do about the fact that we have our own native dialect of the language, which this map does not do a good job of reflecting? Modern studies have shown that more Filipinos are taking up Spanish, some of whom are doing so to reconnect with our history. Are those things not "culturally important" enough for you? There's a reason why I am fine with showing the map in a manner that reflects the unique circumstances as to how the Philippines lost the language, but showing the country as totally gray does an injustice to the Filipinos who to this day are trying to keep the language alive, whether non-Spanish-speaking Filipinos happen to care or not.

As for El Comandante, I'll gladly point out that I addressed the IC's reports in the article on Philippine Spanish. Given that the number of Spanish speakers varies widely, I hesitate to trust only the IC's numbers given that they themselves have caveated their figures for the Philippines: for example, the only native speakers are Spanish citizens (not entirely true, as addressed in other numbers cited elsewhere in the article), and Chavacano speakers are included in that figure too (where they shouldn't be, and aren't in those other numbers cited elsewhere in the article). I agree that we should use reliable sources, but given that the numbers vary widely and reliable sources have said that the Philippines is considered at least a partially Spanish-speaking country, a statement made by the former Secretary General of the Instituto Cervantes, why should that be discounted?

Finally, to address Salvabl's points: I think either a dot or a highlight (as I mentioned earlier) is fine, provided that the map accurately shows the situation regarding the language in the Philippines. A single dot doesn't help given that the literature points to Spanish being spoken beyond Manila and Zamboanga. If the idea is to show dots as a way of showing small communities, the country in a dot pattern I feel is a useful compromise between highlighting the country and showing it as a single dot. Ultimately for me I am not partial to a particular solution, only that graying the Philippines as if Spanish doesn't exist in the country is totally and completely out of the question. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 16:26, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Sky Harbor : this map uses a legend corresponding to a set of data (unclear) and a scale (global), and if you want to create another one, with a different legend and another name, you can (as long as you can back it up with a source showing a similar map with the same kind of legend, data, scale). Here, with this legend, and with less than 20% of spanish speakers in Philippines, it just can't be. El Comandante (留言) 16:51, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Not "widely spoken" (and thus remaining white) does not mean "totally dead" nor "Spanish doesn't exist in the country". It means not widely spoken. –Austronesier (留言) 17:02, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

The Spanish-language caption of this map is "Mapa de los países del mundo donde se habla español" (it means: "Map of countries in the world where Spanish is spoken"). In this case, there is no such restriction. The caption of this map should be fixed and uniform for all languages. I think the most appropriate would be "Spanish language in the world" (like the caption on the map of the French language).

Apart from that, many language maps include highlighted countries where the language is not widely spoken (Namibia in German language map, Laos in French language map, Luxembourg in Portuguese language map, etc.). The map of the Spanish language should not be an exception, as it would imply a lack of neutrality. Salvabl (留言) 21:26, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Salvabl : again, this map uses a legend that implies Philippines can't be included (far less than 20% of spanish speakers). If you want to create a map with another legend that could include more countries, just create it and upload it under another name (again : as long as you can back it up with an external reliable source showing a similar map with the same kind of legend, data, scale). El Comandante (留言) 14:31, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

With all due respect, Austronesier, that is not the only thing the map implies. You're also implying by greying out the Philippines that Spanish is also a foreign language in this country when, in fact, it isn't. If you think all the map suggests is that the language just isn't widely spoken, I beg to disagree.

When I point out that greying out the country is pretty much akin to saying "Spanish doesn't exist in the country", that is because I am mindful of how our readers will perceive the data they are receiving. When we tell people in articles about the Spanish language that "oh, the Philippines speaks Spanish too, complete with its own unique dialect", and we present information to them that is backed up by reliable sources to make that point, I would expect the images to correspond to what we're saying. But when the map (or maps) at the very top of the article doesn't show that, that produces a disconnect between the text and the images they see. This, ultimately, does a disservice to our readers when we should be consistent with the information we are serving them.

As I have said before: obviously don't color the Philippines in a way that suggests most Filipinos speak Spanish. That is blatantly false. But I would also caution against swinging to the other extreme, where we treat Spanish in the Philippines not as a Philippine language, but as a foreign language beyond the group of countries currently colored on the map. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 03:18, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Sky Harbor : what do you not understand or agree in the fact that your proposal does not match with the legend used in this map? The name of the file is not the only thing we must take into account and respect from the creator and uploader of this map. El Comandante (留言) 14:31, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Philippines has been highlighted on this map most of the time, and already was when it was uploaded. Apart from that, the map legend does make it possible for the Philippines to be highlighted, since it reads "Minority language (more than 20% Spanish speakers) or cultural language", similar to the map's legend of the French language, which reads "States where it is a culturally important language".

We can discuss whether to keep the Philippines entirely highlighted or to use a dot, but to turn it entirely gray would be contradictory to the map's legend; and it would be a lack of neutrality in relation to other maps of other languages. In articles such as "Official languages of the United Nations", we can find the Detailed SVG maps displayed together, and it is necessary that there is neutrality in the criteria applied. Salvabl (留言) 15:13, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Again, this map is addressing standard Spanish, not Chavacano. Chavacano is a cultural language in Philippines. Spanish is no longer a cultural language in Philippines.

We can't compare with other Commons maps : please remember that we must refer exclusively to external sources.

El Comandante (留言) 15:59, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

I never thought about the Chavacano language in this discussion for a single moment. This map is about the Spanish language, and claiming that Spanish is not a cultural language in the Philippines is the same as claiming that French is not a cultural language in Vietnam.

In both cases, yes, they are cultural languages in those countries. Salvabl (留言) 17:17, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Again, we can't compare with other Commons maps : please remember that we must refer exclusively to external sources. Don't you know that, as Wikipedia is not a reliable source for Wikipedia articles, so it is for maps in Commons? El Comandante (留言) 00:36, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

All the information provided by @Sky Harbor (although there may be missing stuff) in this discussion is more than enough to illustrate that Spanish is a cultural language in the Philippines.

And, apart from that, the Philippine government described Spanish as a language with a unique place "in the development of Philippine history and culture" through DO 46, s. 1987 (the one that makes it mandatory to provide Spanish language courses in all schools that offer courses in any foreign language). Salvabl (留言) 01:11, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm fine with either the Philippines being included or excluded on the map. There is still some cultural influence in contemporary times as provided by sources given by Sky Harbor. However, one could also argue that the cultural influence is nowhere near the scale as French in Vietnam or German in the Czech Republic. In these countries, daily government business is conducted in these target languages (albeit mostly in select fields such as diplomacy and internal affairs involving Francophone partners in Vietnam and as a minority language in the Czech Republic), there is national media in these languages, and in the case of Vietnam, French is still a de facto working language in key professional fields like medicine and law.

On the contrary, the Philippine government does not use Spanish as a working language at all and while it may be an optional language in the constitution, there has been little to no attempt to promote the language by the institution unlike Vietnam has with French or German with the Czech Republic. In a similar fashion, East Timor also designates English as "working language" in its constitution but from what I've come across, it's practically nonexistent in Timorese society outside maybe English classes at school and why it's not highlighted on the English language map.

That being said, if the Philippines is to be included, I believe a single dot should be used and no special pattern. In the examples provided of Vietnam and the Czech Republic, speakers of the target language are scattered nationwide but the dot (square in German's case for Czech Republic) is placed on the area where the highest concentration of speakers are, namely Saigon in Vietnam and Prague in the Czech Republic. Such indication still highlights the fact that a language's presence is significant in a country although not to the scale as one that is fully colored. - Moalli (留言) 08:23, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Moalli, I would caution you against minimizing the efforts of the Philippine government to use and/or promote the language in the Philippines. Filipino diplomats, for example, do use Spanish as a working language when they are working with Hispanophone partners, similar to how Vietnam uses French, even though not all Filipino diplomats know Spanish. The government is actively soliciting for the expansion of the Spanish language program in public high schools. I don't think this is the Philippine government doing 'nothing' now per your view, is it?

While I agree that more can and should be done to promote the language in the Philippines on the part of both government and private actors, I don't agree with your assessment unless your barrier to meet the promotion argument is inordinately high. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 00:15, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Offered, but not mandatory. In many countries on our English map, English must be offered in school even though it's not mandatory. We don't shade them in as anglophone. Note that on our francophone map, Vietnam is not shaded in despite the cultural influence of French in that country, which is at least as great as the Spanish influence in the Philippines. This map is for *speakers* of the language. For speakers, we need a cut-off %age-wise, or else we'd have to shade in the entire globe -- after all, Spanish is spoken in Antarctica and on the high seas.

As for referring to other Commons maps, of course we can. We cannot use them as sources, but we can use them for consistency between articles. Having a cut-off of 5%, or 20% or whatever is just a convention, not a claim of fact that requires a source, and so can be anything we choose -- including our long-standing convention of being consistent between languages. Kwamikagami (留言) 02:53, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

The most important thing is that the same conditions be applied to the different languages. Does the Spanish language need to be spoken by over 20% of a territory's population to be highlighted on the map... but other languages do not need even 5%? That would be a lack of neutrality, or more accurately, bias.

Apart from that, I would like to know where is the consensus here to turn the Philippines entirely gray on the map... You, in the edit summary, stated that you have reverted the map to its previous status quo. If the reason for doing this is because there is no consensus now.. there was no consensus either (but a unilateral action carried out by you) when on August 6, 2023 you unhighlighted the Philippines. Prior to that date, the Philippines was always highlighted on this map since its upload.

At that time you wrote "no longer sig cultural influence", but it is natural to think that there may be users who do not agree with something like that taking into account that the Philippine Government defined Spanish as a language that has a unique place "in the development of Philippine history and culture" through DO 46, s. 1987 (the one that makes it mandatory to provide Spanish language courses in all schools that offer courses in any foreign language), isn't this a clear promotion of the Spanish language?

In any case, I would like to let you know that I am totally open to dialogue, and I would like to be able to reach a consensus (I am sure it can be achieved). I support marking the Philippines only with a dot and not highlighting it entirely, because I think it is more accurate, but please, let's abstain from unilateral actions without consensus. Salvabl (留言) 16:45, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

KwamikagamiThis notion of consistency between documents on Commons doesn't seem consistent to me.

Firstly, because it would mean that if tomorrow I upload maps of language use limited to countries where the language is spoken by more than half the population (just because I feel like it, because it seems logical to me, without necessarily being a recognized specialist in the field), then this would create an opposable precedent, likely to impact choices on all other maps of this kind. Nonsense, isn't it?

Secondly, because you can't harmonize or average all maps. That's not how epistemology teaches us that knowledge in general is built, and, consequently, it's not what the recommendations of Wikipedia and Commons advocate.

Finally, because the legends, data and standards used in the maps are the synthesis of the knowledge of specialists, and not a simple random aggregation based on the prejudices, partiality, interests and claims of anonymous individuals, as we are here. This is why it seems to me absolutely essential, in the case of persistent disagreement between contributors (and even in general, to avoid wasting hours in vain in this type of debate), to base our maps on existing maps, or at least clearly identified and verifiable datasets, and whose authors' reliability is recognized.

So let's compare external maps of spanish speakers across the globe (from reliable sources) and see if they include Philippines or not, based on what datasets and according to what choice of legend.

Salvabl I don't know if you're familiar with the en:WP:3RR rule, but you've just broken it.

El Comandante (留言) 21:42, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

We have consensus that the maps should have consistent criteria, and loose consensus on what those criteria are. If you wish to change that consensus, then sure -- start a discussion on doing so. Kwamikagami (留言) 01:34, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello Kwamikagami. I didn't see your message until after I posted my previous message. I also just saw that you reverted the content of the map again. There is not enough consensus to unhighlight the Philippines. And if you say that there was no consensus in the first place to highlight it, I will tell you that if you want to unhighlight the Philippines on the map there should be a valid consensus supporting that change in order to implement it, not doing it unilaterally. The Philippines has always been highlighted on the map, since this map was uploaded to Commons, it only changed when you modified it without prior consensus. Therefore, I cordially request that you revert your last edit in this file, and wait until this dispute is resolved. Please, do not seek to enforce unilateral, non-consensual changes. Salvabl (留言) 02:19, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I would like to start by addressing the last thing you stated about an alleged violation of en:WP:3RR by me. I did not perform more than three reverts within a 24-hour period. And I also have not performed more than 4 reverts outside of the 24-hour period. Ergo, I have not broken that rule. I have performed 3 edits which consisted in reverting the map to its previous status quo before a unilateral change that (intentionally or unintentionally) modified the map without prior consensus.

In any case, it is interesting that it is not the user who performed that change who is here accusing me of violating rules that I have not broken; but you. If you take a look at this file's history, you will see that there have also been other users who have also performed 3 reverts, and nobody has said anything about it (and nothing should be said, since no rule has been violated).

Leaving all previous aside, I agree with you in basing these language maps on pre-existing maps from authoritative/reliable sources. I firmly believe that in cases like this, which can easily generate conflict, the consensus from users can generate biased content. I bring a map from the article about Spanish language in the Encyclopædia Britannica (see here). Salvabl (留言) 01:45, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Well, this map is just wrong (as a lot of Britannica's content) : Spanish language is definetely not "widely spoken" in Philippines. This one, from the Cervantes institute is much better, for example (but the data are from 2022, not 2023). I suggest we create a map using the same legend (maybe replacing the absolute number of speakers by percentages of local population, and maybe not only for native speakers, but for all speakers, that could be discussed) but based on the data from Cervantes Institute's last report. It could be the easiest and best option. El Comandante (留言) 13:34, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

With all due respect, El Comandante, I am more inclined to trust Britannica than you. While I agree that Spanish is no longer widely spoken in the Philippines, I nevertheless do not appreciate the way you are intent on minimizing not only the influence of the language in this country ("this" because I am currently in the Philippines as opposed to being abroad), but also the current community of speakers that we do have. Whether you like it or not, Spanish is still spoken in this country as it has been for the last 500 years, and Spanish-speaking Filipinos — the ones most affected by whatever proposal is ultimately adopted — are intent on making sure that remains the case and that we remain seen despite efforts to minimize the language's impact and influence, whether it be by wider society through its indifference or by supposedly "neutral" foreign actors like yourself.

That said, I have reservations with using the IC's report, largely because of caveats in the way they count Spanish speakers. Keep in mind that numbers of Spanish speakers in the Philippines vary widely, depending on the source and the data point you're looking at. The report itself specifically caveats its estimate for the Philippines three ways:

1. First, it only counts Spaniards in the Philippines (the INE's count, which is based on Spanish Embassy statistics) as native speakers, never mind that there are native Spanish speakers who are not Spaniards nor are Spanish citizens.
2. Second, the total includes Chavacano speakers. The IC considers Chavacano speakers to be "partially fluent" in Spanish, so if the intention is to separate the two this estimate won't be useful.
3. Third, the IC's count excludes Filipinos who studied Spanish in universities before 1986, when it was still mandatory. That is around three million people, and I reckon some portion of that number would have at least some command of Spanish. Lipski has noted that Filipinos of that era can still reasonably approximate a conversation in Spanish, so it's not as if everyone who went through the university system can't speak Spanish at all despite learning it. This doesn't even include Filipinos who studied Spanish when it was also part of the basic education system (up until ~1970).

Given the wide variance in data points, I imagine it would be difficult to illustrate the Philippines if we do so only quantitatively, which is why I insist on this map specifically that the Philippines be included because it is a cultural language. As I've previously said, the criteria for the lightest shade of blue on this map is that it's either spoken by a minority or it has cultural influence. Again, or, not and. Yes, Spanish speakers in the Philippines are a minority but nevertheless, the language commands in my view enough cultural influence that it deserves to be included, though as to how it ought to be illustrated is one that we can debate about. (I personally don't like Moalli's insistence on a dot, for example, but I'm open to any proposal that doesn't minimize us nor the language in this country, nor render us invisible like the dot that is in the most recent version of this map. If said dot can be rendered in a way that adequately addresses those concerns, even though this map was not originally designed with a dot in mind, then I would have no reason to oppose.)

It bears repeating since I think it has been a while since I last said this: I am intent on vigorously opposing any proposal that removes the Philippines entirely from this or any other map that illustrates Spanish-speaking countries that will ultimately make it on Wikipedia or anywhere else said map is displayed. Unless the map has a specific reason for why the Philippines shouldn't be included (e.g. this map of countries which have Spanish as an official language, which clearly the Philippines does not), maps that show countries with established Spanish-speaking communities or dialects/variants of the Spanish language absolutely must include the Philippines. Your proposal, well-intentioned as it may be, is one that I cannot support, especially as it flies in the face of not only data points that I've provided but even the view of the IC itself (that the Philippines is "a Spanish-speaking country, although clearly in a partial form"). Full stop. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 17:50, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

1. « I am more inclined to trust Britannica than you » : well, you shouldn't. It's just been proved a lot of times that Britannica, as all tertiary sources, like Wikipedia, can't be trusted (just read the article en:tertiary source or take a look at en:Wikipedia:Errors in the Encyclopædia Britannica that have been corrected in Wikipedia). That's why Wikipedia policies insist on the importance of supporting our edits with external secondary sources, and reliable ones (i.e. from specialists quoted by other specialists, like the IC really is). What you personnally think of the Britannica or the IC is not a valid point.
2. « Spanish is still spoken in this country as it has been for the last 500 years » : no, it's definitely not now as it was before, the data from all sources is clear, the proportion of Spanish language speakers in Philippines has decreased a lot in the last century. (just take a look at en:Spanish language in the Philippines). The statement that you live there and know people who speak spanish is not a valid argument, it's just a en:hasty generalization (a fallacy based on insufficient evidence, on just a very limited personal experience).
3. « I am intent on vigorously opposing any proposal that removes the Philippines entirely from this or any other map that illustrates Spanish-speaking countries » : well, that's just a highly disruptive behaviour that can lead you to a block or ban, according to Wikipedia and Commons rules.

El Comandante (留言) 20:54, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

First, you do not need to patronize me: I know how to advocate for change without being disruptive. I’ve been on Wikipedia long enough (well before you made your account, in fact) to not need lectures on policy or how to behave on-wiki from you. If you think I’m being disruptive in asking for appropriate representation given that I am a Spanish-speaking Filipino, and one of the few that happens to actively edit Wikipedia, that says much about why you have consistently failed to actually engage the facts I bring up to justify why the Philippines should be included on these maps. At least everyone else here, in spite of my disagreements with them, have at least bothered to do so, and I thank them for putting up with me.

Also, the fact that you’re not engaging with me in good faith in spite of the data points I had provided since this discussion began to prove that Spanish is a cultural language in the Philippines — which is backed up by a plethora of reliable sources as you asked, which are both used in the article you referenced and in the Philippine Spanish article — speaks to your seriousness and sincerity in tackling this issue. If you’re going to moralize to me about how I’m wrong, then at least do so by engaging my ideas rather than projecting or complaining about my supposed behavior. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 06:17, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

While I'm open to the idea of including the Philippines on the map, I'm also perplexed as to why Sky Harbor is so adamant on giving the country special treatment that pushes upon POV. No other users have made objections to Vietnam or the Czech Republic being portrayed as a dot or square on the French and German language maps respectively and those languages are much more present and influential in present times than Spanish is in the Philippines. Millions of Vietnamese have also studied (or are presently studying) French in secondary and higher education and it continues be used as a working language in certain professional sectors domestically, yet I don't see anyone pressing for the country to be striped, dotted, etc. A dot in a more visible and visually notable location? Sure, but nothing else more. - Moalli (留言) 06:37, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

I believe I said in the comment you’re responding to that while I personally don’t agree with the dot, I don’t see a reason to oppose it if the concerns I mentioned can be addressed with it. If a prominent dot can address those concerns, then I will be all for it even if it’s not what I personally want, because ultimately for me what matters is representation. Isn’t that what compromise is about? --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 07:06, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I believe the consensus agreed to by all is that the Philippines should not be highlighted entirely as on the initial version of this file as that is misleading. The issue seems to be whether or not there is enough cultural influence of the language for it to be considered significant in the country rather than it making the 20% threshold as a significant minority language, in this case as a dot. I'm impartial to either the inclusion of the country or leaving it out because once again, while there is proof of its cultural presence in the modern day, it's not at the scale found in Vietnam for French or German in the Czech Republic where there is daily usage in government and by key sectors. While there is a law that makes Spanish be taught in schools, very few schools offer the language in the Philippines and it's an elective at that rather mandatory or is widespread, something akin to the "working language" status of English in East Timor (which is not highlighted on the English map). If the Philippines is to be included, it should be as a dot only. - Moalli (留言) 07:37, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with changing the criteria to include the Philippines, but then we'd need to do the same with Spanish spoken elsewhere in the world (e.g. US states) and with the French, English and Arabic maps. In how many countries does Arabic have a similar status to Spanish in the Philippines, that we'd need to add those countries? And if we did that to the English map, people would object that we're trying to bury other languages under English, as they have in the past when we had lower inclusion criteria. We can't have loose criteria for Spanish and strict criteria for English just because you want to include the Philippines on this map -- what we do for one country, we have to do for all, and what we do for one language we have to do for all. Kwamikagami (留言) 07:45, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I prefer the use of a dot instead of highlighting the Philippines entirely on the map, but we have to keep in mind that even if there is sufficient consensus to not highlight the Philippines entirely, that does not mean that there is sufficient consensus to turn it gray entirely. I think the dot option is the most appropriate since it is similar to what is used for Laos in the map of the French language; and we also have to keep in mind that even if in Laos the percentage of French speakers is higher than the percentage of Spanish speakers in the Philippines that does not mean that it is more relevant. There can be a language spoken by 2 million people in a country like India, and represent a very low percentage of the country's population, but still constitute a significant/sizable minority. Salvabl (留言) 03:55, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Please checkout my proposal at File:El español en el mundo 2023 (Anuario del Instituto Cervantes).svg. El Comandante (留言) 16:31, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I have to admit that it is an elegant solution, as it at least provides uniformity in the data shown to readers, since the information (as well as the speakers figures presented in Wikipedia) comes from the Cervantes Institute. It also reduces the difference in neutrality between the different language maps. For example, in the French language map... Quebec is highlighted in the darkest color. The reason for this is because in that territory French is the majority language; however, English is co-official. Now, if we look at Bolivia on this map, despite being a territory where Spanish is the majority language (where also, like Quebec, there are other co-official language-s), it is not highlighted in the darkest color. The reason for this is that the map has been more focused on language officiality than on the actual linguistic distribution. Finally, although I don't love the idea of using a map in which the Philippines is totally unhighlighted, the data is in accordance with Cervantes Institute, and at least it opens the door to, if the Spanish teaching programs in the Philippines are successful and general interest in the language increases, being able to highlight on the map sizable Spanish-speaking populations of more than 500,000 people. Salvabl (留言) 04:31, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

This is a good representation for geographical distribution, but I think we should keep the standard format of maps portraying official status and significant/cultural presence to be in line with other languages like English, German, and Arabic. Some of the countries highlighted 'significant minority' where over 500,000 speak Spanish actually have very small share of the population that speak it and thus, the language itself is not present or influential in society such as Germany or Canada. Perhaps a better category would be 'notable minority'? It also gives the impression that those said countries might be considered Hispanophone, which is definitely not the case. Nevertheless, I believe it's a good map to indicate speaker population similar to this one for native English speakers or total French speakers, both as share of population. - Moalli (留言) 06:48, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

I don't get the impression that anyone here is willing to just read the sources and compare the maps and external data sets frequently quoted by specialists and then work to produce a map as I did from the latest Cervantes Institute report, in order to provide objective information rather than just cherry-picking anything that might validate the preconceptions with which everyone has come into this discussion. I therefore prefer to abstain from continuing to waste time in vain in these sterile debates which, it seems to me, are still only at the beginning of a long litany of POV-pushing. All the best to you. El Comandante (留言) 10:15, 29 December 2023 (UTC)