Talk:Clark Freeport and Special Economic Zone

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

It was proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved. result: Withdrawn. ed. put'r there 05:22, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply ] Links: current log • target log This is template {{subst:Requested move/end}}

• Clark Freeport and Special Economic Zone → Clark, Philippines
• Clark, Philippines → Clark, Philippines (disambiguation)

– As per

Note:

ed. ^put'r there 20:40, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

• Comment: Since Clark Freeport Zone is just one of Clark's four districts, Clark Freeport Zone ≠ Clark. Instead of moving this article to Clark, Philippines, why don't we create a new article for it in its general sense? —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 05:32, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Actually, this Clark Freeport zone AND Special Economic Zone administered by the BCDA covers all those subdistricts and developments and so it isnt "just one of Clark's four districts." It is all of those that the BCDA manages in that area surrounding Clark AB/Intl Airport in Pampanga and Tarlac.;)--RioHondo (talk) 07:53, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@RioHondo: "Clark consists of four main districts, the Clark Freeport Zone, an existing mixed-use complex established in the 90s; Clark Global City, which will serve as the primary business district; New Clark City, a 9,450-hectare greenfield development inside the Clark Special Economic Zone..." — an excerpt from the BCDA's website. The Clark Freeport Zone is different from the Clark Special Economic Zone. I'm not sure if all of the four districts are part of the Clark Special Economic Zone, though. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 08:43, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Then that would have to be reflected in the pertinent articles. I am only going by what I read in those articles. Hariboneagle927, kindly address this data issue and the precise coverage of the BCDA Clark Freeport. Thanks--RioHondo (talk) 08:47, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: To make things clear, the article is meant to cover what the general area known as "Clark" which covers four districts, as well as the Clark areas which does not fall under any other district as per the NGAC brochure.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 09:04, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Hariboneagle927: But this article is meant for the Clark Freeport Zone which is located within the general area called Clark. Just like what I said, instead of moving this article to Clark, Philippines, why don't we create a new article for it in its general sense? —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 09:12, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Freeport and the Special Economic Zone have been merged a long time ago. This is what i thought the move to Clark, Philippines entailed. That all those districts under either Freeport or SEZ (which are supposedly all BCDA owned or managed properties) would be housed in one article. Is there any district or property not belonging to either freeport or SEZ anyway?--RioHondo (talk) 09:20, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HueMan1: the Clark Freeport Zone (CFZ; generally in the former location of the base) and the Clark Special Economic Zone (CSEZ) are two different areas indeed, but the two together is occasionally referred to as the "Clark Freeport and Special Economic Zone" (CFEZ) (the current article name). In the past though this article was known as "Clark Freeport Zone" but the article on its current sense already covers Clark in the general sense.

Alternatively, this could be reverted to just cover the Clark Freeport Zone, but the BCDA declaration considering the airport itself, and Clark Global City as distinct areas than the freeport zone complicates the matter. Any suggestion on how to handle this if we go with this route?Hariboneagle927 (talk) 09:23, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Hariboneagle927: We can start drafting the new Clark, Philippines article and decide which works the best along the way. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 10:03, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Until the article scope has been addressed, a new article would be unnecessary and this RM would still be valid. Overlap in material is what we are trying to avoid here. Please revisit the lead sentences of the article, specifically the claim regarding the combined freeport and SEZ as covering the entire area known as Clark in the PH that the BCDA manages.--RioHondo (talk) 10:10, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

—hueman1 (talk • contributions) 11:29, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ignoring the four districts (which is likely more for marketing/branding purposes than administrative) the visual representation above is mostly accurate.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 11:50, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I suppose we can also narrow down the scope along the lines of defined political or administrative jurisdiction. To prevent this article from branching out to all areas named Clark in Central Luzon, we can focus on the actual govt definition of Clark. So what is Clark according to the Clark Development Corp? What are the LGUs that comprise the Metro Clark Advisory Council? Those unorganized areas, where are they? Are they located in any one of the constituent LGUs that form Metro Clark/MCAC? We need to know the limits of this Clark area or metro area, because we all know even places outside Metro Manila call their places Manila like the New Manila International Airport in Bulacan or the Brent International School Manila in Biñan.--RioHondo (talk) 12:05, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There's gotta be a definition somewhere, right? If they're inconsistent, we can add a definition section (like the one in Mega Manila). —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 12:19, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, i actually saw one a while ago and that's where i got the idea of the Clark Devt Corp and Metro Clark Advisory Council. It appeared to me that the CDC regularly holds dialogue with the MCAC, in the same fashion as the MMDA with our Metro Manila Council. The mayors of Angeles, Bamban, Mabalacat and Capas are active members of that council. Maybe Hariboneagle927 can investigate this further. The area of Clark was actually defined in the BCDA charter/RA7227, but further investigation is needed to see if San Fernando, Porac and Magalang is included in Clark also. The goal is to convert this loosely defined Freeport and the Special Economic Zone into an area that is more or less contiguous with the presentday administrative area of the Metro Clark Advisory Council/CDC.--RioHondo (talk) 13:30, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Further comments Anyway, as i was saying early on, moving this freeport and special economic zone to the plainname

1. Both the Freeport and SEZ zones are contained in the US military reservation handed over to BCDA, which mentioned Angeles, Capas, Porac and Mabalacat.

2. The SEZ was established in those areas with the CDC as governing body.

3. The SEZ added Bamban in an amendment.

4. The 4,400 hectare Freeport was set aside covering the Clark Main Zone leaving the SEZ with 28,041 hectares.

5. The Metro Clark Advisory Council was formed out of this same area of Angeles, Bamban, Capas, Mabalacat and Porac.

6. The total area of the combined freeport and SEZ is 337.65 km2.

7. The total area of Metro Clark (the 5 LGUs of MCAC combined) is 1,085.82 km2.

8. The 337.65 km2 combined area of Freeport and SEZ are distributed into parcels across the 1,085.82 km2. Metro area.

So have we decided on the scope of the artricle at plainname Clark, Philippines? Would it be just the scattered freeport and ecozone across 5 municipilites or the larger metro area that contains all these fragmented zones collectively known as Clark? The current article infobox lists all the 5 LGUs that make up this metro area but only the total area of the freeport and zone is indicated. Also, what was the basis for the map? It looks like the freeport and ecozone are contiguous, but in reality is it? I am looking at this map from SCAD.gov.ph and it shows on page 29 that the CSEZ is actually interrupted between Bamban and Capas by the Bamban poblacion and barangays among the others.--RioHondo (talk) 14:53, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I see, there seems to be a conflict on the defined borders of the CSEZ/CFZ. As per the map on page 29 (or Page 42 of 209 in the pdf file) if we only consider the areas in orange (Special Economic Zone) and Pink (Freeport Zone), the two areas are indeed non-contigous but they are labeled as "LGU Designated/Proposed Land Use". However when we take the areas hatched with a diagonal line it roughly matches with the current map. The map is based on CDC Geographical Information System's (GIS) map [1] excluding the "US Military Reservation" which in the SCAD map lists as CSEZ sub-zone. I'm leaning on this page to just cover the Freeport and SEZ, or possibly just withdraw the move and keep the status quo (at least in regards to the article name) to avoid potential confusion with the Metro Clark area.

Hariboneagle927 (talk) 21:32, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn my support vote then. Yea, i think given what we know now, this "Clark Freeport and SEZ" and the term "Clark area" being not entirely synonymous, it is better we keep the articles at their current locations. "Clark area" it turns out is more applicable to the metropolitan area surrounding them, and that is why there are several establishments outside of this Freeport & SEZ that are also named Clark. If a separate article on this metro area is to be produced, that's the more ideal candidate for the plainname at

Metro Angeles as a redirect. Alternatively, Clark, Philippines can remain as a disambiguation page with the metro article at Metro Clark.--RioHondo (talk) 08:38, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Withdrawing the move tr as well. As for Metro Clark, are there any source which could be used for the scope of that metro area.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 09:47, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.