Tagalog Wikisource 
||This language has been verified as eligible.
The language is eligible for a project, which means that the subdomain can be created once there is an active community and a localized interface, as described in the language proposal policy. You can discuss the creation of this language project on this page. (See an unofficial analysis of this request.)
- Language details: Tagalog (tl ISO 639-1, tgl ISO 639-2/3)
- Editing community: Icqgirl (PN), Sky Harbor (N)
- List your user name if you're interested in editing the wiki. Add "N" next to your
name if you are a native speaker of this language.
- Relevant pages:
- External links:
|Please read the handbook for requesters for help using this template correctly.
This would be the perfect place for Tagalog literature, and their official translations from different languages and vice versa.
A Filipino version of Wikisource may be a companion for this. While tl.wikisource would contain classical writings, fil.wikisource could sport modern, published literature.
Arguments in favour 
- Support, but without the proponent's Tagalog-Filipino split. The Tagalog Wikisource can easily handle both types of texts. --Sky Harbor (talk) 09:10, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support, specifying that this is the Filipino version of Wikisource while stressing the need for another written in Baybayin.--23prootie 00:17, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- Comment We DO NOT need to distinguish the two. What exactly is the point of a Baybayin Wikisource if they can coexist in a single Tagalog Wikisource anyway? Because there is a corpus of Baybayin Tagalog text, I can see the point of coexistence in Wikisource given that it is a free repository of texts (there can be a single text, like the Doctrina Christiana, in Baybayin, the Abecedario, the Filipino alphabet and in Spanish). However, what I find utterly ridiculous is that there are few Filipino Wikimedians as it is actively editing the projects, and we have to resort to splintering the community along the basis of script simply because there is a revivalist movement which isn't even endorsed by the mainstream organizations advocating the use of regional languages. If ever, not only is this useless (since almost ALL Filipinos write using the Latin script anyway), but worthless as well (again, since almost all Filipinos write and read in the Latin script). --Sky Harbor (talk) 11:38, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Arguments against 
Other discussion 
- Florante at Laura exists at tl.wikibooks. Perhaps this can be moved to this proposed Wikisource and serve as the needed test project? --Icqgirl 14:41, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- The Florante at Laura Wikibook is supposedly a textbook which incorporates interpretations of the text. I think we can keep both in their respective places, especially as Wikibooks develops to incorporate more Tagalog-language textbooks. --Sky Harbor (talk) 05:13, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
- Currently the localisation is completely done. However I did not find a test project at Wikisource, so you should start one if you want to get the Tagalog Wikisource approved. SPQRobin (talk) 14:58, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- There are Tagalog-language texts on the multilingual Wikisource, but there's no Main Page yet. I'd make one though if I have the time and if I wasn't splitting myself between the three existing Tagalog projects, plus other responsibilities. :P --Sky Harbor (talk) 10:02, 25 September 2011 (UTC)