Talk:EDSA III

So what's the problem? --Noypi380 09:54, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

What problem? NPOV? I have't read it much but I have another problem: how should we name this article? --Howard the Duck 13:49, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

EDSA III was the name that stuck, since the protesters gathered in EDSA first. --Noypi380 02:32, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I thought 2001 Malacanang siege or something. The title doesn't describe anything. --Howard the Duck 11:05, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Move then? Noypi380 12:15, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Lets agree first on what name we should use. How about "2001 EDSA Revolution (April)"? (We would have to move the current 2001 EDSA Revolution into 2001 EDSA Revolution (January). --Howard the Duck 07:35, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

More PC Terms Please

"...most of whom were members of the masses..."

And by that the author means what, exactly? You have to understand that the Filipino word "masa" is used in an entirely different context and that by simply translating it one-to-one into its English equivalent would not mean the same thing. I believe there could be a more appropriate way to to describe the group of people being identified in this particular phrase.

EDSA III?

Since this one didn't work out, the "EDSA III" name is now disputed. How about 2007 Malacanang siege? But that would pertain to the night of April 30-May 1 exclusively, leaving out events on the earlier days. Any suggestions? --Howard the Duck 08:53, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Maybe just indicate that the 'name' of the event is currently disputed with a list of names that it's been called so people can search for it. The important thing is that they can find it, right? I live in the Philippines, and I hear the term "EDSA 3/III" most often but I'm not sure what else is used. mentat 1:56, 02 August 2007 (+8 GMT)

The term "EDSA III" can be used for lack of a better name (in terms of popularity and media exposure). The event was neither in the same spirit nor in the same level of success compared to the true "EDSA" events: EDSA I and EDSA II. I suggest that "EDSA III" be entered as a section under the EDSA II article.--Mendz 13:01, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

But a very large protest rally deserves an article of its own. There's no way for this to be merged to the EDSA II article. Also, nobody calls EDSA II as "EDSA Revolution of 2001", but I can't think of any replacement name. (Same for "EDSA Revolution of 1986") It was previously at EDSA Dos but it didn't provide enough description on what the article is about.

Ergo, I propose to rename these articles:

• 1986 EDSA Revolution: to People Power Revolution
• EDSA Revolution of 2001: to EDSA Dos
• EDSA Tres remains here.

--Howard the Duck 04:10, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

All three names look good. People Power Revolution is an official name for the event and its annual celebration. EDSA Dos and "EDSA Tres" seems fitting as popularized by the media at the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by E mendz (talk • contribs) 08:56, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Further more, "EDSA Revolution" will be a dab page or a discussion of the concept. I'll try to sort this out... --Howard the Duck 10:45, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Huh? I keep on referring to the first one as simply EDSA Revolution. I don't agree with making that term a sort of dab page. --seav 13:57, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, all of them are "EDSA Revolutions". Now EDSA Revolution redirects to 1986 EDSA Revolution, since the first one was "the" EDSA Revolution, although some may argue due to recentrism that the second one may have the same importance and/or impact than the first one. However, the second one was never referred to as "People Power Revolution," only 1986 has that distinction. EDSA Tres doesn't really have other names other than that, while EDSA Dos was more popularly known by that name. Ergo, EDSA Revolution may either by a dab page, a discussion of the principles of the three EDSAs or can be redirect (most likely for 1986).

Now for EDSA Revolution of 2001, there are 2 events that can claim to be "the" "EDSA Revolution of 2001]]. So either it becomes a dab page to point to the two articles, a redirect to the EDSA Revolution article about the principles/dab page; it cannot be a discussion of one event, the current article discussed on that page should be moved to EDSA Dos or any other article name, as long it's not "EDSA Revolution of 2001". As for EDSA Tres, just leave it there. --Howard the Duck 14:06, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

According to Google: (searched within quotation marks)

• "EDSA II" - 22,000
• "EDSA DOS" - 17,700
• "EDSA 2"- 28,200
• "EDSA TWO" - 145
• "EDSA III" - 1,810
• "EDSA Tres" - 573
• "EDSA 3" - 12,800
• "EDSA Three" - 54
• "EDSA Revolution of 2001" - 10

The most used are EDSA 2 and EDSA 3, but perhaps this is due to bloggers too lazy to type the word out. But I have noticed that people usually pronounce 2 as two and 3 as tres. Even scholarly articles refer to them as EDSA 2 and EDSA Tres (e.g., Ateneo's Kritika Kultura), perhaps to subtly indicate that 2 was a gathering (don't you think "revolution" is a bit pretentious?) of the English-speaking educated Manilenyo middle class and Tres was a gathering of the Tagalog-speaking urban proletariat (hmmm... I sounded like a communist there...)--Nino Gonzales 01:55, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

In addition, in terms of Google search, "People Power Revolution" trumps "1986 EDSA Revolution" by a longshot. --Howard the Duck 03:13, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

So I guess it's final? People Power Revolution, EDSA 2 and EDSA Tres (with reference to a scholarly article). These three articles would link to a dab article called the EDSA Revolution. EDSA Revolution links out to the three articles. I hope historians would contribute to the discussion of why EDSA Tres is uniquely disputed as an official "EDSA" event (perhaps in the same manner that the Filipino language article presented its own disputes).--Mendz 07:41, 20 September 2007 (UTC)