Talk:Philippines/Archive 2

message: "Colony" and "protectorate" are both not quite correct, but not totally incorrect either.  The correct legal definition of the status of the Philippines in United States law is that the Philippines was a "United States unincorporated territory in the form of a commonwealth."  Language in the introductory text was changed to reflect that legal definition.  --Gerald Farinas 17:14, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Intro paragraph

message: Article size should remain small according to Wikipedia standards. Some details had been deleted and they have to be transferred to other articles. Certain subjects such as Shopping and Night Life that only contain information specific to Metro Manila should be written in those articles, not in the Philippines article. Such information regarding the Economic Society of Friends may be transferred to the History of the Philippines. --Wng
:I don't see much about shopping and night life in other articles about other cities and probably should be deleted.--Jondel 04:04, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Size and Specifics/Details 

message: This is very hard to verify due to lack of historical evidence. But the Chinese knew of the Philippines. There are also Hindu empires that existed which included the Philippines. It is possible that Magellan was in the Philippines (1506- 1511)as a squire with the Portugese  before reaching it from the west. This was when the Portugese where searching for the Spice Islands.--Jondel 06:48, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: My oposition is for the article to state that the Spanish (or any other European nationality, or Ethiopians, or Turks, for that matter...) "discovered"  the Philippines. The Philippines were a part of the KNOWN Old World. Thus, European "discovery" of something they already knew existed is an oxymoron. Having said that, even in events where it can be said that Europeans "discovered" lands that they [Europeans] didn't previosuly know existed even if these land were in fact inhabited by people (such as the Americas), discovered is always used in quotation marks (""). Al-Andalus 07:04, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Before 1521

message: To! Al-Andalus!, How's it going dude!! "The Dutch explores", did not reach the East Indies, until "1595". The Portuguese led by ( Vasco Da Gama ), were the "first" Europeans in the "East Indies" in "1497" which was in the period of the late 15th century and founded East Timor. Then followed by the Spanish in "1521" in early 16th century, during Magellan's circumnavigation of the world.  The Portuguese and Spanish were the first Europeans in "East Indies", not the Dutch!, SORRY dude !!. The Dutch followed 74 years after the the Porto - Spanish conquest!, right after hearing the news in Europe. It say's in the Encyclopedea!! Just wondering?, Why is it called 14 century?, when infact the Indies was discovered in the late 15th century. The Spanish reach the Philippines in early 16th century, which is the year 1500s'. cool, thanx!!
:Thank you to the annoymous contributor. I've just realised my mistake, that you have so kindly pointed out. Yeah, the Portuguese did arrive to the Indies first in the's 1400's, as you said. My mistake was to call the "1400's" the "14th Century" when it it is in fact the 15th Century (just like the 2000's is the 21st Century). It slipped my mind to add one hundered years when converting hundred's (the fourteenhundreds, into it's equivalent century, the fifteenth century). I twas an honest mistake. Thanks for noticing it. Al-Andalus 09:29, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dutch in the Indies