This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Details are not worth it in initial versions.

Is it millions or billions?

Is this accurate? South Sea pearls? -- Howard the Duck 13:52, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure, I'll check it out. For all i know the "South sea pearls" (perlas ng silanganan in filipino) is a self-tagged symbol of being the pearl of the orient or the jewel of south asia. -- Ninestrokes 15:22, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Students are taught of the national animal, leaf, flag, etc., but not a national gem, at least not on my student days... -- Howard the Duck 15:28, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

it seems that the south sea pearls is the national gem, here's a link to philippine department of trade and industry webpage citing: "The Philippines south sea pearl has been declared as the Philippines national gem." [1] -- Ninestrokes 15:37, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I'd consult the latest textbook on this matter. -- Howard the Duck 15:43, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

With regard to the phrase "pearl of the orient", the phrase itself appears in the Ultimo Adios (not sure though if Rizal really did coin this phrase). The first stanza reads:

Adiós, Patria adorada, región del sol querida,

Perla del mar de oriente, nuestro perdido Edén!

which, when translated to English, (from the Ultimo Adios wiki article):

Farewell, beloved Country, treasured region of the sun,

Pearl of the sea of the Orient, our vanquished Eden!

I have yet to hear or read of something that predates Rizal's usage.

With regard to the DTI article...I'm not sure about this, but I think that the best place to look for is the National Historical Institute---more specifically, I'm thinking of their Heraldry bureau, because that's the specific office that keeps tab of the national symbols AFAIK --- Tito Pao 15:44, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I was the one who added 'South Sea Pearls' as the national gem on the main Philippines article page. I saw a stamp series on eBay carrying the various national symbols, and among them were the South Sea pearls, listed as the 'national gem'. I did a bit more googling and found a couple of articles/webpages that support its official status:
Inquirer Supplements
Cadsawan Pearls
Steiner Graphics
SPC Pearl Oyster Information Bulletin
Filipino.com
American Museum of Natural History

The following even give more information on the official declaration; it was by virtue of Presidential Proclamation (not Decree, as the second resource indicates) No. 905 by President Ramos around late 1996.
Manila Times
Filipino Reporter dirrtychristian 07:30, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Given these information I googled, should the National Symbols template be changed? -- Dakilang Isagani 06:54, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I dunno, it's way better if we ask NHI first on this matter, or consult a HEKASI textbook. -- Howard the Duck 07:04, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

• Population Reference Bureau (2006): 86,300,000
• United Nations (2006 medium variant): 84,476,000
• National Statistics Office (2006 - scroll down to Demography): 86,973,000
• World Gazetteer (2006 - start of year): 85,712,221
• CIA Factbook (2006): 89,468,677

-- Polaron | Talk 22:31, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

According to a Stanford University small-sample study, about 3.65% Filipinos are partly of Spanish, Mexican or European descent.

I thought this included all Filipinos of European descent, regardless of to what degree.

Hello! I would just like to ask why "Goldilocks" was removed in the section about Filipino culture. There is a real Goldilocks fastfood/bakeshop chain here in the Philippines (just like Jollibee, Greenwich and Chowking), and it's found in most major cities in the Philippines. It also has television commercials and print ads in major TV stations and serial publications. And most children's party here in the Philippines usually have cakes that were ordered from Goldilocks. If an article (even if only a stub) needs to be created for this, I'll be happy to start researching about Goldilocks. --- Tito Pao 21:38, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

It was my mistake, going too fast on RC patrol; sorry: I fixed it. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 23:10, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Question: Why are commercial establishments are even ever mentioned here? This section should be removed and maybe place this in the Philppine Tourism sub page. This is not an online travel book, this is an online encyclopedia. This should be removed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Daimengrui ( talk • contribs) 11:36, 12 February 2007 (UTC).

The List already contains links to the four to-do tasks currently listed at the top of this page (to add sections for Communications , Transportation, Military, and Foreign Relations) and the link to the information I mistakenly thought was lacking ( Holidays). 70.112.29.65 08:10, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

That list is for maintainance (for checking on related changes), and is a wikilink dump. -- Howard the Duck 08:15, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

This cataloging policy hides information from novice users and should be reconsidered. My attempt to find a list of Philippine holidays in Wikipedia failed. I found the link to the very detailed Wikipedia desciption from a Google search. If this policy is used widely thoughout Wikipedia, I am sure that many other novice users also failed to find information that was contained within Wikipedia. 70.112.29.65 15:14, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

A link is provided at the "See also" section of this article. Also the search function w/in Wiki will be handy. -- Howard the Duck 15:43, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, there are ways to find the information, but that was not my point. Could you kindly direct me to the main discussion page on something like 'Analyzing failed Wikipedia searches: making the resource more useful?' (I couldn't find it.) 70.112.29.65 20:46, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village Pump. -- Howard the Duck 06:01, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Already been there. Done that. After more than two hours of poking about, I still can't find the relevant discussion page. If you or someone else could provide a link to the discusion page for something similar to 'Analyzing failed Wikipedia searches: making the resource more useful,' I would greatly appreciate it because I am beginning to believe that there is no such page. 70.112.29.65 09:56, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Can you state what exact phrase you entered into the search box? -- Howard the Duck 11:21, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, but once again, that wasn't my question. Does anybody know where this page is? I can not believe that such a vital page does not exist. Surely someone knows. Please, either give me a link to the page or ignore the question. 70.112.29.65 20:55, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

The page does not exist because Wikipedia no longer keeps log records of failed searches, preseumably due to funding constraints. See this wikitech message from early 2005. 70.112.29.65 10:21, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

I've previously requested and suggested at the Protection topic that experts on this should be given room for their knowledge to substantiate this article. It is quite frustrating not only for myself but for others who want to read more.

( Jonarvs 09:53, 25 November 2006 (UTC))

Why? What's wrong? -- Howard the Duck 14:46, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

There is nothing in the article that mentions the poverty in the Philippines at all. This is astonishing, considering that the Philippine Government itself states that 40% of the population is below the poverty line, and outsiders might even give higher numbers. All the pictures are of gleaming shiny cities and happy people. Is this an encyclopedia, or not?

Glencharles 15:01, 2 November 2006 (UTC)GlenCharles

Economy section, 8th paragraph:

"Income inequality remains persistent; about 30 million people lived on less than $2 per day in 2005."

Although IMHO it's not enough for me either. -- Howard the Duck 15:10, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Didn't the NSCB release a data saying that only 24%percent live below poverty?-- 203.87.196.170 13:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

The median income in the Philippines is something like American $2 a day, or about P100 (from an AP news article - I forget where). Although I think that's a per-person average - certainly the tindahans and odd jobs the kids do mean that the average household receives more than American $2 a day. 203.131.167.26 01:03, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

In response to Glencharles, I think it is insignificant to over-emphasize this issue when this is a non-fiction text, which aims to deliver unbiased information and observation. Facts over observation. This issue has been well-accounted for, to say the least.

( Jonarvs 09:49, 25 November 2006 (UTC))

Dear friends, there is a dispute on the ownership of Sabah. Please refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabah_dispute.

jbvillarante 02:12, 12 November 2006

For comparison The locator map of Comoros doesn't shade Mayotte, an island it is currently in dispute with France. -- Howard the Duck 10:25, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

We dont include it to our territory per se, but we just dont recognize that it belongs to another country either until this dispute is resolved. The one i'm proposing to change is not the location map but the provinces and regions map and the physical map where it is made to appear we have relinquished our claim on Sabah to Malaysia. So, i'm proposing that the 'MALAYSIA' text be changed to 'SABAH'. jbvillarante 05:06, 13 November 2006

For comparison also, CIA map of Comoros clearly labeled the island 'Mayotte', not 'France.' Then it is labeled 'Administered by FRANCE, Claimed by COMOROS.' jbvillarante 05:14, 13 November 2006

Or, better yet, Remove the label 'MALAYSIA' altogether. The island at the bottom of the map is not labeled 'INDONESIA' so it doesn't make sense to label the northern part of Borneo. jbvillarante 05:16, 13 November 2006

Even if we change it to Sabah, it is still Malaysia. And the reason why Indonesia isn't marked is because the island is too small ("Indonesia" won't fit). In any case, you may post at the discussion page of the map, not here. -- Howard the Duck 02:26, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I just want to reply here. I dont know why it's hard to understand... labeling it 'MALAYSIA' means that Sabah belongs to Malaysia and that there's no dispute about it. Whereas, when it is labeled 'SABAH,' the map becomes neutral on the dispute. It is the same case as Mayotte. You saw the map of Mayotte? CIA map of Comoros That's exactly what I want to happen. jbvillarante 08:38, 16 November 2006

I just want you to post here: Image talk:Ph regions and provinces.png and Image talk:Ph physical map.png. Please be guided accordingly. -- Howard the Duck 07:05, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't want to post there yet. You can't really force me to, right? I said i just wanted to reply here since this thread is already created. I can't leave your comment without reply. Alright Mr. Howard the Duck? jbvillarante 17:55, 16 November 2006

I can't force you, but nothing will happen if you continue to post here. This is about the article per se. If you want to change the maps, the discussion pages of the maps would be the way to go. The best you can do is to post there. -- Howard the Duck 10:17, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Just for the record, the Comoros (the four islands) and Mayotte were once colonized by France, just like Spain colonizing the Philippines. The French withdrew from Comoros (the three westerly islands) but still held Mayotte. Note that France per se is far away from Mayotte (which isn't the case with Sabah, Malaysia and the Philippines), so the CIA just obliged with the little note "Administered by France, claimed by Comoros", and with a different color for Mayotte from the rest of the Comoros. -- Howard the Duck 10:24, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

hmmm... that's well said.. i respect your opinion. i'll leave this now. thanks for your time reading and commenting. jbvillarante 17:55, 16 November 2006

I would like to see some recognition of the rampant corruption and poor functioning of the Philippine Government included. It's only fair. The President of the Philippines salary is set by the constitution at 50,000 PHP, or 1000 USD a month. Does anyone belive that's all she takes home? Worthless Wanderer- 15 Nov 06

Well, can you provide us with the sources and references that we can include and cite for this topic? --- Tito Pao 16:10, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Can anybody gives links. I've been itching to add corruption charges, etc. -- Howard the Duck 07:06, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

I would like to see some background data on whether the corruption here is absolutely widespread like I'm always hearing, or just highly-publicized. Another thing I've been wondering is whether it's the result of poor checks and balances, or deification of leaders. I don't have the heart to do the research, just the fingers to type this. 203.131.167.26 01:07, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

can start with a web search for the words "corruption" and "lagay" together for some background info. rampant enough that most Filipinos would be well aware of the "lagay" system (bribery system) which is practiced/initiated by both the government and the governed. started during the Spanish occupation, now it's part of the culture. it will probably not be easy to find hard data, just by the nature of the transaction.

If it's not that easy, then anyone can add data in this talk page then we can work out an acceptable version. -- Howard the Duck 06:17, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Explain the protection? Falconleaf 02:52, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Reason for the semi-protection: An anon was consistently changing figures for the religion section, diverting on what was cited. I think we can remove it now. -- Howard the Duck 06:32, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I think the site administrators can ask Filipino historians to substantiate to this article. It should only be fair.( Jonarvs 09:44, 25 November 2006 (UTC))

I don't think government historians will come here. But you can always be bold. Just be sure to cite them. -- Howard the Duck 14:50, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

15 per cent Muslim? That figure published in the government website is inaccurate. Oh, and since when did the Muslim population exceed 5 per cent? Iglesia ni Cristo and the Anglo-Catholics (Aglipayans), who consider themselves neither Catholic nor Protestants, have been unaccounted for.

This is data I have obtained from the Philippines Department of Tourism website. [2] Predominantly Christian. Catholics - 82.9% Protestants - 5.4% Islam - 4.6% Philippine Independent Church - 2.6% Iglesia ni Cristo - 2.3%

...and from the CIA World Factbook [3] Roman Catholic 80.9%, Evangelical 2.8%, Iglesia ni Kristo 2.3%, Aglipayan 2%, other Christian 4.5%, Muslim 5%, other 1.8%, unspecified 0.6%, none 0.1% (2000 census)-- Fifteencounts 12:54, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

The Muslims had consistenly complained they're undercounted; however, I'd take the gov.ph over the DOT page and the CIA page. I'd look into NSO stats later. -- Howard the Duck 05:35, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Or we can just use all the sources. "Estimates vary, but according to the CIA blah blah blah while the NSO blah blah blah " -- Chris S. 07:48, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Maybe the NSO should get its records straight. Not all sects are accounted for and majority of the acclaimed Roman Catholics are non-practioners of the belief. Maybe a statistics on that should be included.

( Jonarvs 09:47, 25 November 2006 (UTC))

This is the same as France, many are "Catholics" but like a very small fraction practice their faith, it is said that there are more tourists than parishioners at the Notre Dame Cathedral.

Again, unless someone comes up with a more credible citation than the gov.ph website (I searched at the NSO website but I can't find anything about religion there), the changes to that section (and any other section, for that matter) will be reverted. -- Howard the Duck 14:36, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Data from the Philippine Census can be found in Table 2 here. It essentially breaks down as:

• 81.04% Roman Catholic
• 5.06% Islam
• 2.82% Evangelical
• 2.31% Iglesia ni Cristo
• 1.98% Aglipayan
• 0.80% Seventh Day Adventist
• 0.55% United Church of Christ of the Philippines
• 0.50% Jehovah's Witness
• 4.95% Others

-- Polaron | Talk 14:53, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok that settles it. Change it as anyone wishes. -- Howard the Duck 15:06, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

This is a suggestion, which I hope would be considered. Even a college student could pass a more satisfatory thesis on the Philippine's history. ( Jonarvs 09:59, 25 November 2006 (UTC))

The History of the Philippines article is a featured article and was even selected to appear at the Main Page a few weeks ago. -- Howard the Duck 14:46, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I hijacked this from Hong Kong, feel free to add anything, just be sure to cite it.

Table of Hong Kong International Rankings

Date	Context	Organization	Ranking	Note
2004	List of countries by Human Development Index	United Nations	84/177	.763; Highest @ .965, lowest @ .311
2004	List of countries by unemployment rate	World Factbook	89/159	11.7; Highest @ 0.00, lowest @ 90.00
2006	Corruption Perceptions Index	Transparency International	121/163	2.5; Highest @ 9.6, lowest @ 1.8
2006	List of countries by public debt	World Factbook	21/114	72.3% of GDP Highest @ 195%, lowest @ 1.8%
2006	Index of Economic Freedom	Heritage Foundation/ The Wall Street Journal: 2006	98/157	3.23; Highest @ 1.28, lowest @ 5.00

-- Howard the Duck 15:35, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Below is a section that was obtained from the Tambayan. It might be useful for international rankings.-- Lenticel 00:00, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

---

Philippines Most Corrupt in Asia

With a score of 9.40 (10 being the most corrupt and 0 as the least), RP has bested both Indonesia and Thailand (8.03) as the most corrupt country in Asia. This statement is from the Political and Economic Risk Consultancy group.-- Lenticel 23:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

It would be good to assign a date to that citation. These things fluctuate. -- Ancheta Wis 03:22, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

According to the article in the Philippine Daily Inquirer [4], the info was released yesterday by PERC to Agence France Presse. Last year was 7.80. A chart about the corruption trends in selected Asian Countries can be seen on the front page of the inquirer today. -- Lenticel 04:14, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

more data could be found here [5]-- Lenticel 04:43, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Why am I not surprised? Anyway, which article(s) do we stick the data in? Shrumster 07:11, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

You people can also add this on Talk:Philippines, there's an international rankings section there waiting to be developed. -- Howard the Duck 09:34, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't there be a section discussing media of the country? Newspapers, television and radio stations, etc? -- Jolomo 16:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

They're under the "Communications" section w/c is under in development. -- Howard the Duck 07:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

About Spanish language in Philippines

  
http://www.geocities.com/kaibigankstil/

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.97.241.59 ( talk) 18:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

This should go at Spanish language in the Philippines, the article is so loooooong already, and other important sections aren't even added. Note that this article is should be a summary only. -- Howard the Duck 08:49, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

The National Sport of the Philippines is not Sipa. It was changed by the Philippine Congress in 2002. House Bill 5284 which was authored by Rep. Juan Zubiri of Bukidnon, Philippines. The Bill declared Arnis as the National Sport of the Philippines. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jpgarciamd ( talk • contribs) 04:51, 11 December 2006 (UTC).

We need sources. -- Howard the Duck 07:23, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Howard, as for the Bill per se, I have no problem with this since bills and republic acts are public documents, and the next best thing to do is to contact the Senate website and find out if they have linkable online copies of these. However, my problem with making the Zubiri Bill as the basis for arnis as the national sport is that it is still only a bill. A bill is not yet a law, and thus it is not enforeceable until it passes all readings in the Lower House (House of Representatives, also known as the Bastusang Batasang Pambansa) and in the Upper House (the Senate). So, Jpgarciamd, I'm sorry to say this: arnis is not yet the national sport of the Philippines even if you can show us a copy of the Zubiri Bill. The fact that it's still a House Bill since 2002 means that both Houses of Congress are still deliberating whether it should be enacted into law. It's best to wait for both houses of Tongress Congress to finally pass and enact this bill into a law (like, say, Republic Act No. XXXX); then, that is the right time to consider Arnis as the Philippines' national sports. --- Tito Pao 18:58, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Exactly, a bill has to become an act before it is a law. -- Howard the Duck 07:07, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Since someone tagged the infobox for lack of sources, let's try to pool our resources together. I've found this website from the NCCA. It names the national tree, national flower and national bird but---take note---no specific national hero.

With regard to national hero/heroes, there is a sub-page that gives an interesting (and, by the way, official) explanation of why no name was mentioned as the National Hero (apparently, there is a legal basis for this). (Take note, however, that this sub-page about national heroes has a 2002 copyright, so we'll need additional and more current information about this topic). --- Tito Pao 19:03, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

An updated textbook will be enough, IMHO. -- Howard the Duck 07:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

My wife and I were extraordinarily interested to hear the report by a Researcher at the University of Oxford (delivered during a torrential tropical storm in Avarua) into his orignal research. This was partly because my wife (born in the Mountains to the west of Bais City) is always asked by the māori electoral candidates in New Zealand elections whether they can rely on her vote and she recognises many similarities between the Māori language and that of her childhood.

I'll be able to provide the citation when I find my old diary and get his 'phone number, but I've added this paragraph:

"Interesting research conducted at Oxford University and in Rarotonga in the Cook Islands during the last 5 years into the maternal (or Mitochondrial) DNA component has revealed that many of the inhabitants of Oriental Negros are related to the Māori of New Zealand." Gaimhreadhan 00:31, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I've found a few references so I'm off to educate myself on how to cite them properly in Wikipedia:

1. Underhill P, Passarino G, Lin AA, Marzuki S, Cavalli-Sforza LL, Chambers G (2001a) Maori origins, Y-chromosome haplotypes and implications for human history in the Pacific. Hum Mut 17:271–280| PubMed
2. Underhill PA, Passarino G, Lin AA, Shen P, Mirazon Lahr M, Foley RA, Oeffner PJ, Cavalli-Sforza LL (2001b) The phylogeography of Y-chromosome binary haplotypes and the origins of modern human populations. Ann Hum Genet 65:43–62 | PubMed
3. Underhill PA, Shen P, Lin AA, Jin L, Passarino G, Yang WH, Kauffman E, Bonne-Tamir B, Bertranpetit J, Francalacci P, Ibrahim M, Jenkins T, Kidd JR, Mehdi SQ, Seielstad MT, Wells RS, Piazza A, Davis RW, Feldman MW, Cavalli-Sforza LL, Oefner PJ (2000) Y-chromosome sequence variation and the history of human populations. Nat Genet 26:358–361

might take me a week to find that pesky phone number, though... Gaimhreadhan 02:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Removed this from the article: "Interesting research conducted at Oxford University and in Rarotonga in the Cook Islands during the last 5 years into the maternal (or Mitochondrial) DNA component has revealed that many of the inhabitants of Oriental Negros are related to the Māori of New Zealand." Not backed up yet. Or does it have to be mentioned in the article, IMO, although it fits well in Ethnic groups of the Philippines and Demographios of the Philippines. -- Howard the Duck 01:34, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Besides the Muslims being possibly undercounted, I feel the Chinese are also undercounted. "2%"? I feel there is a lot more than 2% Chinese. Philippines looks as if it does not have as many Chinese as the other countries in Southeast Asia, but that's because it is being made to look as if it does not have as many Chinese as its neighbors. There so many Chinese in the Philippines and they have had major contributions in the country's history. Everywhere you go in the Philippines, especially Manila, Cebu, Davao, etc., there many establishments run by ethnic Chinese. I would say that the Chinese are somewhere between 3.5-9%. I have seen some sources that state that the Chinese comprise 9%. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.161.92.188 ( talk) 02:14, 17 December 2006 (UTC).

17,500,000 Chinese is the Philippines is a lot already, IMHO. -- Howard the Duck 03:06, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Wrong decimal point, 2% is about 1.7 million :) I think the total number of people with Chinese ethnicity in the Philippines might actually be more than that -- Edward Sandstig 14:50, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

They appear to be numerous since they're prominent. Also, we should be following sources, unless one source debunks it. As of now I haven't seen one. -- Howard the Duck 14:55, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, unless any sources can be provided pointing out otherwise, we leave it as is. Was just thinking out loud, though admittedly most of my experience in the Philippines is limited to the larger cities. -- Edward Sandstig 20:31, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

there aren't 17 million chinese people, it is more 1.7 million, even though it doesn't sound alot, most Cebuano's are Chinese- Cebuano mestizo (especially in bohol, my mum's side is Chinese- cebuano) but it sounds right to me, even though it isn't alot it is most likely correct Australian Jezza 06:05, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I also notice that CIA now left out Buddhism in the religious population profile of the Philippines. another possible undercounting. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.161.92.188 ( talk) 02:16, 17 December 2006 (UTC).

I temporary removed the following sentence fragment since it seemed a bit awkward to place it in the intro:

, (although written and spoken competence in English among the overwhelming majority of poor Filipinos has been decreasing in recent years due to the abandonment of English medium free primary education. ^[1], The Philippines shares this doleful characteristic with the Republic of India and both claim to have the second largest population of English speakers). ^[2]

I looked at the languages section, but I'm a little too tired to figure out a proper way of inserting it there. Anyone have any suggestions? -- Edward Sandstig 20:28, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I was going to insert this but "doleful" is POV. Perhaps the Japanese are very sad. -- Howard the Duck 23:31, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Not sure if the "Languages" section would be a good place to insert it. In most encyclopedias, the "Languages" sections would only enumerate and elaborate about the languages of a country and often include user statistics. To such extent allowed, we can write that English is part of the educational curriculum, and that many (if not all) can understand and can communicate (if not proficient) in English. But to write something about the decline in English usage---or, for that matter, about any Philippine language---might be out of place here. Then again, I may be wrong --- Tito Pao 23:38, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

English proficiency isn't going down, i would say, because more children in the philippines can actually speak english well, (even tho they don't know it fluently) Australian Jezza 06:03, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

In my ongoing efforts to try to include every country on the planet included in the scope of a WikiProject, I have proposed a new project on Southeastern Asia at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Southeastern Asia whose scope would include the Philippines. Any interested parties are more than welcome to add their names there, so we can see if there is enough interest to start such a project. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:44, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

• This is a photogrpah of a map displayed in the Shipweck Gallery of the West Australlian Maritime Museum , it's a copy of an origial 1595 dutch map of the region, think maybe it could add something to some of the Philippines articles. Gnangarra 02:10, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

The picture of boracay's palm trees is in the wornd place... that should be somewhere... not in the economy! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.148.97.69 ( talk) 14:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC).

Shouldn't Filipinas be the Filipino word for Philippines? The UP Diksyunaryong Filipino cites that. Pilipinas now seems tagalog anyway. -- Fifteencounts 05:44, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I would agree. But we would need consensus first from Filipino Wikipedians. If you don't know yet, we hang out at WP:Pinoy. Berserkerz Crit 12:01, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Not WP:Pinoy but WP:TAMBAY -- seav 15:36, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

It would depend on the government, not the UP dictionary. For now they are using Pilipinas. So the article should respect that. However, I would not mind putting the two names side by side. -- Chris S. 21:28, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Filipinas, I think, may be retained for historical purposes since it was the name that the country was known as before the 20th century. I'm not sure about justifying the use of this name based on the UP Dictionary since I'm not clear how widely used is the dictionary (it only came out a little after the turn of the century/millenium). I agree that whatever name is being used in the government's official communication must remain official (that is, "Pilipinas") and must be retained in the article. --- Tito Pao 21:36, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

no, in the philippines, there is no official "f" in tagalog, so for accuracy, it's pilipinas --pilipina4ever

Officially, there is now. The revised Filipino alphabet has 28 letters, including the letter "f". It's being taught now from grade school to college. --- Tito Pao 22:47, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, there are still only 26 Tagalog letters, Titopao is mentioning the Filipino language alphabet. I think Filipinas is the Spanish and Filipino translation, while Pilipinas is the Tagalog translation. -- Howard the Duck 10:54, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

That is also correct. In the current grade school and high school curriculum, "Ñ" and "NG" are considered separate letters. --- Tito Pao 12:32, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually pilipina4ever mentioned Tagalog, Tagalog and Filipino are supposedly two different languages. The kids learn Filipino, not Tagalog. -- Howard the Duck 08:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

The official languages are English and Filipino. Please do not list Spanish as it is no longer an official language. If you must mention that it used to be put the information where it belongs. In the history section.

Somebody keeps insisting that Spanish is official in a misguided effort to reinstall the language.-- Jondel 04:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

As if adding Spanish in the official languages achieves anything hehe. -- Howard the Duck 06:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Spanish is no longer an official language, but it was official for over 400 years: from 1565 (first Spanish settlement in the islands) to 1987 (Cory Constitution abolished it). JRB (Feb. 2007)

I've noticed that the culture section seems to have a Western bias. I mean it does not show some of our affinites with are Asian neighbors in regards to indegenous peoples as well as our traditonal beliefs, superstitions and practices.-- 23prootie 21:59, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I guess we just have to admit that we Filipinos are heavily Westernized and Colonial Mentalized. I think that it really reflects what Filipino culture is... -- user:Matthewprc 12:34, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Cultural colonization of the Philippines deserves a topic of its own, but don't think that this is a recent phenomenon. A refresher on Philippine history will reveal that, in the beginning, it wasn't something that native Filipinos accepted by consent; a policy of divide-and-conquer in the early years of Spanish colonization destroyed almost everything that we would now consider as traditional or ethnic culture. The Westernization of our culture has been with us much, much earlier than the American Occupation, and the quest for a truly Filipino culture has been part of the social debates before the Revolution. Let's not forget that in raising this question, we are raising the same questions that our forebears have asked themselves; as it seems, everything was the same as it was. --- Tito Pao 05:42, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

The only Asian influence that I know of is the recent Koreanovela/Asianovela craze... -- Howard the Duck 06:36, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Please refer to Prof. Teodoro Agoncillo's history textbook A History of the Filipino People (widely available in most bookstores natiowide and usually used as a text book in most high schools and colleges). In the first few chapters, you'll find out what exactly were the Asian influences in Filipino culture. It includes not only Chinese influence, but also Arabian and Indian. --- Tito Pao 13:23, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

But that was eons ago, by this time the Asian influences are just F4. -- Howard the Duck 13:35, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

You are referring to what should be correctly defined as popular culture. But culture is more than that. As currently defined in the article,

Culture (from the Latin cultura stemming from colere, meaning "to cultivate"),
generally refers to patterns of human activity and the symbolic structures
that give such activity significance. As such, it includes codes of manners,
dress, language, religion, rituals, norms of behavior such as law and morality, and systems of belief.

It not only speaks of fads and passing fashion, but also of the way of living. You would not only speak of "high culture" and "popular culture" but of everyday culture that would be normally defined as Filipino culture: the food, the language (and the words, including those that were influenced by foreign borrowings), the supersitions peculiar to us, the value systems and beliefs, traditions etc. In other words, what has been with us before F4, before The Beatles, before Elvis Presley and way, way before that. However, we can make a good case on what aspects of our culture (not popular culture) are becoming endangered because of the recent influences; that deserves a different discussion on its own. --- Tito Pao 13:51, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I guess I was referring to "high culture", as you put it. -- Howard the Duck 14:03, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

From Philippines#History (version as of 09:12, 8 February 2007 (UTC), [6]), second paragraph:

The ancestors […] settled in northern Luzon around 2500 BC. […]. Muslim […] traders made contact with the Philippines during the course of the next thousand years […].

There's obviously some mistake here.-- GrafZahl 09:12, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I changed it to Arab. -- Howard the Duck 02:08, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey the Philippine template on the bottom of the page is not expansive enough, unlike his one:

so I'm going to temporay use this one:

— 23prootie 18:23, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

On second thought, I just use this one:

–— 23prootie 18:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

If you'd ask me, I'd rather have no navigational templates at the bottom since everyone would then add his or her own pet topic making it looooooooong. -- Howard the Duck 02:34, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Am I the only one who finds it strange that Filipinos call thier own country in thier own language, Pilipinas after the name of a foregn man, king Philip II of Spain, the one who declared himself master over them? Jidan 17:34, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

For some reason, it doesn't seem too strange. The original Filipinos were the Spanish/Mexican conquerors living in the Islands. The masses always want to be called something 'important' sounding...they chose 'Filipino' since they want to be connected to Spain/Mexico. Talk to any Filipino and they'll tell you their great-great-great grandfather was a Spaniard. They think the Phillipines is a province of Mexico! haha... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.188.195.191 ( talk) 20:12, 15 February 2007 (UTC).

The original Filipinos were the Spanish/Mexican conquerors LOL, there was of course some inter-marrige, but still, ohter than thier religion (christanity) there is no resemblance between the spaniards and the filipinos. I would like to hear the opinion of a Filipino. Jidan 23:40, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually the anon was correct, the term "Filipino" during the Spanish era was reserved for people with Spanish parents who were born are the Philippines. The natives weren't "Filipinos"; they were called "indios." -- Howard the Duck 01:03, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Interesting, but those inter-mixed "Filipinos" could have noway out numbered the natives. Filipinos look like thier nieghbors in indonesia, malaysia. The arabs ruled spain for 800 years, and yet spain and thier natives are not called Arabinos or Al-Walidos (after Al-Walid I), etc. And the inter-marriges there was thousands time larger than spaniards with the natives of Philipine, due to geographic and immagration reasons. Jidan 01:21, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes but take note that the Arabs weren't colonized by Westerners for 300 years; and until Jose Rizal's banishment to Dapitan, the Indios (natives) weren't united and identified themselves with their mother provinces, not with the entire country, only after Rizal's banishment did the Indios began calling themselves Filipinos, and the term "Filipinos" and "Philippines" stuck, the natives Filipinos were too disunited to think of a new name. (Actually, this is offtopic already; we shouldn't be talking about the article's subject, but with the article per se.) -- Howard the Duck 01:31, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I see what you mean, thanks for explaining to me. I hope you guys find a native name. I think, since the rice farmers of northern Luzon had the first concept of territoriality in what is today "Philipine" and also the largest island, calling it Luzon would be a nice comprimse. Anyway, thanks man :) Jidan 01:51, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

It's up to the President or future President to change the country's name. Maybe I will when I become one. lol. Berserkerz Crit 13:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

There was before a proposed constitution in 1913 by Artermio Ricarte that proposed changing the name of the country to Rizaline Islands and its citizen called Rizaline. — Scorpion prinz 07:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Reply: You guys are crazy. Period! Leave the name alone. Changing the name won't change anything, just grow up will you guys and do not be an idiot. Stick to facts!!! -- Gonzalo 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I don't think it's stupid to ask a perfectly good question like why our country is named as such. I for one am one of those who think that changing the country's name is good, all the better to assert our real identity. But again, this is a task best left to future Presidents. Berserkerz Crit 12:56, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

"Why not just call it "Magagandang mga Pulo" to ripoff Sri Lanka, lol. BTW, we should stop this already, the original person who asked the question had a legit reason though. -- Howard the Duck 02:47, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Reply: To User:Berserkerz Crit, changing the name won't resolve anything. The name Filipinas was named for a reason. Why fixed something, when there is nothing wrong with it. If future presidentS are going to change anything, I think they should change their attitudes and behaviours toward's Government corruptions and make the country a better place.. -- Gonzalo 4:34 pm , 21 March 2007 (UTC)

And replying doesn't resolve anything. -- Howard the Duck 05:39, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Reply: Well, I'm just making an opnion that's all. Your intitled to your opinions. PeacE :) !!! Gonzalo 4:40 pm (UTC)

But this is not the place to do that. -- Howard the Duck 05:49, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Reply: Sorry! = Let's all live in Peace! :) -- Gonzalo 5:12 pm, 21 March (UTC)

(resetting indent) Just a correction: the President is not the person in authority to change the country's name. According to the Constitution of the Philippines (if I'm not mistaken, it's under the article titled "Transitory Provisions"), any change to the conutr'y name must be passed in a national referendum. Which means that, a legislation calling for one such referendum must be passed by Congress and approved by the entire voting populace. In other words, in the hands of the Filipino people =) --- Tito Pao 07:23, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

But the initiative to change the name would not come from any legislator, it would start with the President. He will, like other presidents in the world, present a legislative agenda for Congress and his allies. If changing the name is not a priority of the President, it will never materialize to the point of a referendum. Berserkerz Crit 13:27, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I'd think it'll come from the people. If there's no clamor from the people to have the name changed, the President would have no reason to include it in the legislative agenda. Also, I think it's on the article about General Provisions, not sure though. -- Howard the Duck 13:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

As Titopao said, it is a legislative act. Legislation has two paths, congress-led (normal legislation) or people-led (initiative). Now any congressman or person can file a bill or initiative for such a change in name but it will not move without the weight of the President behind it (to move his allies to support it, or if he doesn't want to change the name, veto it). Berserkerz Crit 14:06, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I think whatever mode they'd use, if it is approved by the Prez, the people still have to vote in a plebiscite. -- Howard the Duck 14:08, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes yes yes but that's not my point. It won't come to that if the President doesn't make it happen. Berserkerz Crit 15:16, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Not all the time, especially if the president and Congress belong to two different parties/coalitions; in that case, the president's "legislative program" is useless since it'll most likely be ignored. -- Howard the Duck 15:24, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Philippines should be left as PHILIPPINES! The Philippines' Filipinos represent mixes of culture true, but that's what the name represents. So what if it IS the name of King Phillip? It's not why, us, Filipinos cherish the name! It's because of our culture that we have made! Our mixed culture, our mixed ancestry. It's what makes us, us! FiliPinoy1992 04:30, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

See I told you how contentious the issue is :p -- Howard the Duck 06:34, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Isn't the English version of "Lupang Hinirang" is "Land of the Morning"? Although I'd agree "Chosen Land" is the English translation of "Lupang Hinirang", I wonder which is more suitable to state in the infobox although to the best of my knowledge, "Land of the Morning" isn't official. -- Howard the Duck 09:44, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Having been privy to the discussions on the Lupang Hinirang article, here's the real score: Land of the Morning was, in fact, the official translation by a law during the Commonwealth period. Its "official" status was superseded by subsequent legislations, notably a republic act ratified during the Ramos administration (to be precise, in 1998. That act, of course, made the Lupang Hinirang (in its Tagalog translation) the official and legally canonical version (in fact, the entire lyrics are on the text of the law itself), but it didn't specifically outlaw Land of the Morning as the legally "official" English translation. Chosen Land, on the other hand, is original to Wikipedia and is a literal line-by-line translation of the original Spanish lyrics ("tierra de amores"---but come to think of it, "de amores" is not the same as "chosen"..."beloved" is more like it). If you'd ask me, though, I'd still choose Land of the Morning because it's the historic English version that obtained legal status. --- Tito Pao 07:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

why does it say that filipinos are descentdances from INDONESIANS!? didn't the austronesian peoples(who native filipinos are) come from Taiwan and southern china?? it seems a big weird to say that we are of 'indonesian' descent when it isn't the corect term! austronesian or malay would better much better... just my opinion.... so i changed it back to what it used to say Australian Jezza 07:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

That was the old theory, dunno if it was officially debunked... -- Howard the Duck 10:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello everyone! You may want to go to Latin cultures an participate in the article and discussion. There are a lot of disputed statements... The Ogre 12:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC)