Talk:Exclusive economic zone of the Philippines

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Exclusive economic zone of the Philippines article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Tambayan Philippines Mid‑importance

	Philippines portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tambayan Philippines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to the Philippines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Tambayan PhilippinesWikipedia:Tambayan PhilippinesTemplate:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesPhilippine-related
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

East Asia (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Asia, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.East AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject East AsiaTemplate:WikiProject East AsiaEast Asia

Geography Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Geography To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : See Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places and Missing articles about Locations
Assess : Tag related article talk pages with {{WikiProject Geography}}. To help assess the quality and importance of geography articles, please see: Unassessed geography articles and Unknown-importance geography articles.
Cleanup : See Geography articles needing attention
Deletion sorting : Listed at Geographic related deletion discussions
Geographical coordinates : See Articles missing geocoordinate data by country
Infobox : See Geography articles needing infoboxes
Map : See Wikipedia requested maps
Notability : See Geography articles with topics of unclear notability
Photo : See Wikipedia requested photographs of places
Stubs : See Geography stubs

Apparent discrepancy re the extent of the EEZ

This article currently appears to cite this source to describe the extent of the Philippine EEZ. As far as I can see, that cited source does not desribe the extent of the Philippine EEZ. Digging around, I found this, which does describe that extent, at least pictorially, but which disagrees with the map in the article. Can anyone resolve this apparent discrepance? Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 11:45, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Exclusive economic zone of Portugal which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 06:01, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ph EEZ Map.png

Is the inclusion of the map here valid? It is claimed to show the "real EEZ" of the PH, contrary to the EEZ as per NAMRIA and official PH maps.

Ping all users who commented at Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Archive 53#Using West Philippine Sea in articles for opinions: @Chipmunkdavis, AstrooKai, Hariboneagle927, Howard the Duck, Wtmitchell, Aeonx, ChaseKiwi, and Vacosea:. Ping also the file uploader @Toto11zi:. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:03, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Added info: claimed citation of the "real PH EEZ" (as opposed to the official EEZ) is "Philippine Marine Fisheries Catches: A Bottom-up Reconstruction, 1950 to 2010 Authors: Palomares, M.L.D.; Pauly, Daniel Publishers: Fisheries Centre, University of British Colombia, Canada FRN: PH2206891 Year of publication: 2014". The uploader (Toto11zi) added it to the article last year (April 2024). Considering the contentious nature of the subject (despite not yet part of a topic strictly monitored by the ArbCom), I suggest that any map to be inserted/used in the article must be discussed first. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:13, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The EEZ claimed by the Philippines was deliberately omitted. Toto11zi tried to push that map as the sole map for this article. From what I understand, the blue lines are the extend of the non-disputed EEZ as shown by FAO but the inclusion of the nine-dash line is suspect, bluntly the nine dash is Toto11zi's own POVPUSHING. We see on page two says "Figure 1. Map of the Philippines showing the 200 nm EEZ that it may claim. Shaded area indicates parts of the EEZ being disputed by other countries (redrawn by Mr. Mike Yap from a composite of several open source maps)." Hariboneagle927 (talk) 13:39, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The map to be usable and less politically charged is to delete both the Paris Treaty lines and the nine dash line and just depict the lines shown by FAO also included that disputed sector overlapping the Spratlys which again seems to be deliberately omitted. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 13:41, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have similar suspicion on Toto11zi's WP:POVPUSHING attempts. The user heavily edited the article on Treaty of Washington (1900) in connection to the territorial dispute, moments after I added the instances of both Spratlys and Batanes in the article. One can also notice that many of the articles they edited or contributed are topics that are of great interest for China (e.g. Tibetan sovereignty debate, Annexation of Tibet by the People's Republic of China, and Succession of the 14th Dalai Lama). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 20:58, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TBH, that's the first time I saw that map. mI know there's another map that was being used. Howard the Duck (talk) 13:12, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's also the first time I've seen that map. It looks like WP:OR to me -- WP:SYN of an editor's interpretation of info from various sources into a map. I haven't looked at those sources myself to consider whether I might interpret them differently but, IMO, a deletion discussion should probably be opened for it at WP:FFD. I note that it currently appears only in Exclusive economic zone § Philippines.

On a related matter, I see that other article cites EEZ and shelf areas of the Philippines – Sea Around Us Project – Fisheries, Ecosystems & Biodiversity – Data and Visualization for an EEZ area value and that, besides that area value, that source has another depiction of the Philippine EEZ in a zoomable image labeled Select FAO area boundaries. It would probably be worthwhile to excerpt the part of that image showing the Philippine EEZ and add it, properly captioned, in both of these articles. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:38, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have now nominated the map under Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2025 July 19. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 23:32, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lead image from Openstreetmap

I note that the EEZ depicted the lead image captioned, "Exclusive Economic Zone of the Philippines" appears to differ significantly from the NAMRIA EEZ depiction just below it. As I understand {{Maplink}}, that lead image comes from Openstreet map. WP:RSP says generally that Openstreetmap may be more accurate than Google Maps for coordinates within China, but I don't think that applies here. I propose that this be removed from the article and the NAMRIA map made the lead image. Possibly, the current lead image could appear in the article body, credited more clearly to Openstreetmap. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:11, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]