Jump to content

Talk:History of the Philippines (1946–1965)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Proposed mergefrom Philippine independence

[edit]

I propose that Philippine independence be merged into this article. Unless there is opposition, I plan to do this merge within the next few days. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 01:38, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Having seen no objection, I did the merge. I eliminated some introductory material from the very beginning of the Philippine independence article. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 03:20, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quotes

[edit]

WP:V says: "All quotations [...] should be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation." Since none of the quotations in the Quotes subsection of the American recognition of independence (1946) subsection meet this requirement, I have supplied supporting sources for two of the three quotes, but I could not find supporting sources for the third quote. I've moved that third quote here.


I did find some similar source-supported Beveridge quotations:

  • "..., the Philippines are ours forever, and Cuba ought to have been ours, ..." BEVERIDGE ON EXPANSION; Indiana Senator Replies to Democrats' Arguments., The New York Times, September 26, 1900 (second half of seventh paragraph).
  • "Mr. President, the times call for candor. The Philippines are ours forever, "territory belonging to the United States," as the Constitrltion calls them. And just beyond the Philippines are China's illimitable markets. We will not retreat from either. We will not repudiate our duty in the archipelago. We will not abandon our opportunity in the Orient. We will not renounce our part in the mission of our race, trustee, under God, of the civilization of the world. And we will move forward to our work, not howling out regrets like slaves whipped to their burdens, but with gratitude for a task worthy of our strength, and thanksgiving to Almighty God that He has marked us as His chosen people, henceforth to lead in the regeneration of the world." Congressional Record: Senator Albert J. Beveridge on Expansion, thisnation.com, 9 January 1900 (From Congressional Record(56th Cong., 1st Session) Vol XXXIII, pp.705, 711) (archived from the original on 2004-12-24).

-- Boracay Bill (talk) 06:03, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relvance of quotes questioned

[edit]

Are the quotes (from the early 1900s) relevant to this page (titled History of the Philippines (1946–1965))? -- Boracay Bill (talk) 06:13, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 19 November 2015

[edit]
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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Good arguments form both supports and opposes, votes roughly split. This is probably worth revisiting at some point and, if anyone does, I would recommend leaving some notes at various relevant wikiprojects to try an increase participation. Jenks24 (talk) 12:18, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]


– The current format of the articles is messy, with each incarnation of the republic spread throughout multiple articles instead of just one for each incarnation. The current standard for past country articles is to readjust the boundaries for each article to have each incarnation on a separate article (e.g. France: Third Republic, Fourth Republic, Fifth Republic, etc.), but this is not currently being used for these articles. When renamed, this article will have information detailing the Third Republic merged from History of the Philippines (1965–86), while that article will be renamed for the Fourth Republic. A new article will be created for the martial law period named "Philippines under martial law (1972–81)" and will contain information formerly located at the proposed Fourth Republic page. The page detailing the history of the Fifth Republic will also be renamed as such (no information will need to be moved or merged for this rename). Nick Mitchell 98 (talk) 04:26, 19 November 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 11:47, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Update: After having looked at the talk page for History of the Philippines (1965–86), I have found that several people have attempted this change in the past, but either there were no responses (proposal in 2014), or the consensus was unclear (original proposal in 2011). It may be worth looking at these arguments for moving the pages as well. Nick Mitchell 98 (talk) 04:33, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. Not "messy" at all, but intuitive, logical, very easy to comprehend, and robust. These three fit well in the series of articles listed at Category:History of the Philippines by period. Counting state-type by incarnation is almost jargon by an in-crowd. It may be very common by those connected, but to others it is unintuitive and too easily leads to disagreements on definitions. Suffixing historical articles by date range is an excellent way to title. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:51, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The nominator has a well thought out proposal. Dividing up the chronology up by republic is fairly common, and obviously better than arbitrary years. H. Humbert (talk) 10:18, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The original titles imply that the articles contain mostly historical narrative, while the proposed titles imply that these are articles on past, no-longer existing sovereign states and therefore should contain more detail like any sovereign state article would. —seav (talk) 12:51, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on History of the Philippines (1946–65). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:13, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 December 2020

[edit]
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 discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not move, self-close, I understand the arguments of other editors; since Ferdinand Marcos is in cleanup, merging of some information is suggested as well. Separate articles for the country and history was suggested.PyroFloe (talk) 14:32, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]


– According to the official gazette website about the third republic stated here, the Third Republic ended when Martial Law was lifted and the Fourth Republic started in 1981. "Official Gazette" is the official publication journal of the Philippine government, and is managed by the Presidential Communications Operations Office which is a pretty legit source of the History of the Philippines since its the official government website. I seek your opinion about this particular renaming move I petition, if no substantial amount of opposition replies here, then I'll probably proceed with the change by January 2021. If the renaming gets approved, we will split Marcos' presidential term into two halves (1965-1981) and (1981-1986), I also suggest a change of these three articles: (1945-1965), Under Ferdinand Marcos, and (1986-present) into the Third, Fourth, and Fifth republics respectively.

Please write "oppose or support" whether or not you support this renaming. PyroFloe (talk) 04:45, 4 December 2020 (UTC). PyroFloe (talk) 04:44, 4 December 2020 (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.
[edit]

This article only covers the history since 1946, when American troops left and the country became independent. However it would be useful to have links to articles about the colonial and precolonial history of the islands, as well as the master article, History_of_the_Philippines. Flameoguy (talk) 20:02, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are links in the navigation template at the bottom of the article, and currently also in a sidebar template. Where were you looking for the links? Would a See also section serve? CMD (talk) 02:59, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

When the Korean war began

[edit]

In 1953, in his second term, the Korean War began at The Quirino Administration (1948–1953) is strange because it began in 25th June 1950 and ended in 27th July 1953. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bletilla (talk • contribs) 07:32, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:52, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed renaming and merging of contents

[edit]

To be consistent with the contents of Philippine Republic, this article should be renamed into History of the Philippines (1946–1972) and include the first and second terms of Ferdinand Marcos as these are still part of the Third Republic. History of the Philippines (1965–1986) is too broad and portions of it should be divided/merged into:

—Sanglahi86 (talk) 13:45, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reorganizing to bring the Third Republic history together has been proposed before, and has merit. I wouldn't split up martial law and Fourth Republic though, as that makes the various timeframes in the series even more lopsided (not to mention how short this article is currently). CMD (talk) 14:54, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with CMD that the Martial Law and Fourth Philippine Republic eras cannot be separated. Not just because of scale issues but because the declaration of the 4th Republic is acknowledged by many mainstream historians as just a means for the perpetuation of Marcos'grip on power. I do think there's a strong argument for subsuming 1946 to 1972 under Third Philippine Republic, and then having 1972-1986 under an umbrella term like The Marcos dictatorship (a widely used periodization), although common practice is still to date that term all the way to '65. For the moment, I'm fine with either of those, but not with elevating 1981-1986's status as a separate "Fourth Philippine Republic" period, even if it used that name on paper. - Batongmalake (talk) 03:02, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:History_of_the_Philippines_(1946–1965)&oldid=1216808529"