Talk:2025 Eastern Samar local elections

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. Track your hook after promotion. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Launchballer (talk) 13:38, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that neither of the endorsed Eastern Samar gubernatorial and congressional candidates ran in the 2025 elections?

• Source: Endorsement, first withdrawal, second withdrawal

• • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Bill Bray (bodyguard)
  • Comment: For the Philippines WP:SOHA

Moved to mainspace by TheNuggeteer (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 37 past nominations.

🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 05:10, 11 May 2026 (UTC).

• Comment: @TheNuggeteer: Do you know if all the election result sources are current? I noticed that the counts and dates might reflect older sources published just after the election was held, as some of them don't say the count was complete. I'm guessing this doesn't matter since it's such a small number, but can you double check that there aren't newer voting results sources that report a final count that is different? Something similar happened to the US presidential pages a while back and it took many months for them to be updated with the correct numbers reflecting the final count. Viriditas (talk) 22:47, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
  • @Viriditas: in the official (and 100% finished) COMELEC source, we see the votes are the same as the Rappler source used for all of the municipalities (although COMELEC rounded up all the percents to total to 100), so I think the votes are final. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 01:49, 23 May 2026 (UTC)
    • I think my ping failed (I did not have a signature at first). @Viriditas: another ping. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 01:49, 23 May 2026 (UTC)
  • @TheNuggeteer: Example: In the 2nd district chart section, you've got citation 23 supporting "Five board members are elected from Eastern Samar's 2nd provincial district and nine candidates were included in the ballot". The source is just a blank ballot, but I see now how it supports the statement. But I don't see how the bottom two sources (19, 20) supports the votes. Also, the numbers don't add up to 100. I see how you rounded up to 100, which is fine, but I don't see where the numbers came from in the original source. Viriditas (talk) 22:14, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
    • In the COC results source by COMELEC, go to the Region box and select Region VII and then select Eastern Samar for the province. Then scroll down until you see Sangguniang Panlalawigan. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 01:48, 23 May 2026 (UTC)
      • That didn't work, but it led me to figure it out. It's Region VIII, and the numbers are all there under Eastern Samar. I think you should probably put that info in the source, (Region VIII, Eastern Samar, etc...) Viriditas (talk) 02:05, 23 May 2026 (UTC)
        • There is for sure no new link to add, and I don't think you can put notes in-source. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 03:16, 23 May 2026 (UTC)
• Review: Moved from draft to mainspace within the allotted time period. New and long enough. Given that the style of horse race journalism is used here, it is difficult to determine neutrality for several different reasons, but nothing stands out as egregious at this time except for the use of certain quotes and allegations of corruption, which on the face of it, appear to be matter of fact. I may ask others to take a look at this point alone as it crosses over into BLP territory. No copyvio found and earwig returns clean results. Images in article are excellent and free to use. Reliable sources are used appropriately, but a random spot check of a chart left me unable to confirm the numbers (see the comment up above). The hook fact does not necessarily appear explicitly, but I was able to find it in the "Background and candidates" section ("Libanan withdrew his campaign to support his opposition... Evardone resigned his candidacy...He was substituted by his son, Ralph"). This may be slightly too esoteric for others. You are better off citing the hook in the lead section so that nobody questions it. Other than my failure to complete a random spot check and an explicit hook fact, everything looks good. Waiting for reply. Viriditas (talk) 22:36, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

• Added to the lead. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 01:57, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

• That looks nice, but remember to add a temporary link for the hook. You can remove it once the DYK is finished (or just move it elsewhere). Aside from updating your source so that others can verify the info (see the above suggestion), all we are waiting for now is an independent BLP review, which I've requested on the DYK talk page. Viriditas (talk) 02:09, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

• Pardon me for asking, but can you be more clearer on what you mean by "temporary link"? What will I link and where should I link it (hook or article)? 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 03:16, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

• WP:DYKHFC. It doesn't have to be temporary, but some people do it that way. Viriditas (talk) 04:13, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

• @TheNuggeteer: Can you repeat the source link in the lead after "Neither Ben Evardone nor Marcelino Libanan, the original candidates endorsed by Martin Romualdez, ran." That's what I meant by temporarily. It just allows others to see that that hook is sourced. You can remove it after it runs. I understand it is sourced elsewhere, but it is difficult to see that. Viriditas (talk) 00:31, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

• @Viriditas: I forgot to do this! Done. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 03:39, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

I made a separate request for another set of eyes to take a look at the BLP claims regarding corruption and public figures. I did not receive any replies. I went back and had a second look. Both appear policy compliant. I think the hook could be made slightly more interesting and I doubt we should link to gubernatorial and congressional when we are trying to send readers to the 2025 elections. I think it would read better as " ... that none of the candidates endorsed for governor and Congress in Eastern Samar ran in 2025?" But there are many ways to do it. GTG. Viriditas (talk) 21:13, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

@TheNuggeteer and Viriditas: Noting that I don't plan on promoting this as I find the hook dull; other promoters may vary.--Launchballer 14:17, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

• Offered an alt at WT:DYK to try to get something promotable. ALT2: ... that a 25-year-old won a gubernatorial election in Eastern Samar, becoming the youngest-ever governor in the Eastern Visayas region? Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:01, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

• No issues detected. GTG. Viriditas (talk) 22:08, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

GA review

This review is transcluded from Talk:2025 Eastern Samar local elections/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: TheNuggeteer (talk · contribs) 09:27, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: Bgsu98 (talk · contribs) 21:45, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia talk:Good article review circles#Circle #132. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:45, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

Comments from Bgsu98

Lead

• "Two predominant teams, the Partido Federal ng Pilipinas (PFP) candidates and the Abunda alliance, were formed." --> Recommend shuffling the phrases slightly: "Two predominant teams were formed: the Partido Federal ng Pilipinas (PFP) candidates and the Abunda alliance."

• Changed

• Why was the defeat of a two-term congresswoman notable? Was there something about her tenure that was problematic?

• I could only think of the movement against her leading to her loss, but this does not seem notable enough to add. Removed.

Background and candidates

• "Ben Evardone won under Partido Demokratiko Filipino..." --> This phrasing sounds super awkward. I assume this was his political party? Perhaps something like "Running as a candidate of the Partido Demokratiko Filipino, Ben Evardone defeated Petronilo Abuyen Jr., who ran as a candidate for the Partido Federal ng Pilipinas." The repeated use of "under" in this section just reads awkwardly.

• Done

• "He was substituted by his son, Ralph." --> Another awkward word choice. Recommend "replaced" instead.

• Changed

Campaign

• "That same day, two candidates from Eastern Samar, Abunda and councilor candidate Rex Docena, were issued show cause orders for alleged vote buying." --> That is going to require an explanation.

• By explanation, I assume you mean what "show cause orders" mean? If so, I added an extra phrase.

User:TheNuggeteer: Please let me know when you've had a chance to examine my comments. Bgsu98 (Talk) 14:21, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

@Bgsu98: I have addressed all issues you have brought up (and added alts to the infobox but I'm not sure if the parameters for alts are there). 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 14:54, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear, concise and understandable to an appropriately broad audience, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, list incorporation and table accessibility:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content: -- Images have appropriate licenses.

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, have suitable captions, and have alt text: -- Images require alt-text per new GA guidelines.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Source review

This table lists 4 random passages from throughout the article (11.4% of 35 total passages). These passages contain 4 inline citations (10.3% of 39 in the article). Reference numbers refer to this revision. Generated with the Veracity user script. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:02, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Reference #	Letter	Source	Archive	Status	Notes
Background and candidates
On October 8, 19 out of the 23 municipal mayors convinced former Vice Governor Sheen Gonzales to run against incumbent Maria Fe Abunda.
7	a	leytesamardailynews.com
Campaign
The campaign period for congress, provincial, city, and municipal officials started on March 28.
13	a	newsinfo.inquirer.net
On May 6, an opinion piece released by Charlie V. Manalo of The Manila Times said that the Ombudsman should focus on launching an investigation on Asebias, adding that in one of his rallies, Asebias allegedly said that he did not hesitate to accept money from contractors if the money was given voluntarily.
8	b	manilatimes.net
Aftermath
In his tenure, Evardone tackled the inconsistent power supply in the province through fast-tracking a Renewable Energy Code. He also made numerous changes related to agriculture, such as utilizing mechanization for farmers, crop diversification initiatives, and the creation of value-added facilities.
48	b	tribune.net.ph