Talk:Philippine literature

	Philippines portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tambayan Philippines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to the Philippines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Tambayan PhilippinesWikipedia:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesTemplate:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesPhilippine-related articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

Literature

	Literature portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Removing the section "Classical literature in Spanish during the 19th century"

I have decided to remove this section due to the fact that it lacks any references or citations. Also, there's is a more compact mention on Philippine literature during/from the Spanish period in the History section. It just loks like a big waste of space IMO, and would be better places in the separate Wikipedia page for Philippine Literature during the Spanish period. For those who want to undo the revisions, please discuss it first in this talk page. GTALuisLopez (talk) 03:49, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish Literature

Ironically, a great amount of Spanish literature was produced after the Spanish colonial era. This was because the Americans did not suppress literature but encouraged it.

Based on my idea, Rizal showed the Filipino people how much he loved and cared about the Philippines through his literary works. If you read his novel, it may come as a shock to you. Because it is too long to read.

The Good Fight by M. L. Quezon

The link to the Good Fight is different.FadulJoseArabe (talk) 10:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

Copied from WP:RM. 199.125.109.124 (talk) 12:25, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Literature of the Philippines → Philippine Literature — Manual of style on other literature pages (See British Literature, American Literature, Chinese Literature) --Shadowjams (talk) 04:19, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why "Philippine" and not "Filipino"? --seav (talk) 15:24, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because Philippine is the adjective and Filipino is the noun. If we used Filipino it would be like saying Finn literature instead of Finnish literature. Shadowjams (talk) 19:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, Filipino is both a noun and an adjective. So, why Philippine as opposed to Filipino? --seav (talk) 04:00, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: "Philippine" connotes an official status (e.g., Philippine government, Philippine ambassador to the United States, etc.) while "Filipino" connotes a cultural/informal status (e.g., Filipino music, Filipino cuisine, etc.). So I suggest this be moved to Filipino literature instead of Philippine literature. --seav (talk) 04:06, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully, I disagree. See here (Philippine as an adjective), here (filipino as a noun, listed as an adjective with the definition as philippine), here (same), here (philippine as an adjective), and here (filipino is a noun) for my reasoning. I don't think it's particularly wrong to use Filipino as an adjective, but I think the more formal approach is to use Philippine as the noun. Obviously there should be a redirect from Filipino literature to Philippine literature.

The distinction between the native culture and the government is persuasive; are there any additional citations to that effect. Shadowjams (talk) 04:25, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll bring this topic up at the Philippines noticeboard. As a Filipino, I see both adjectives used almost interchangeably, but with some distinction on official/cultural lines. Basically, wherever the "Pinoy" adjective is used, the "Filipino" adjective can be used. I'll see if there are reliable sources/examples that can be dug up for this distinction and so that naming conventions can be established. --seav (talk) 04:37, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I've got no objection to it being the other--it's just that all the sourced I'd normally check suggest the Phillipine nomenclature. I'd easily be persuaded otherwise. Shadowjams (talk) 05:20, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CharcoalDePorkS

Your recent edits are poorly written, unsourced and unnecessary. You need not revert to them again, but you are welcome to write better. Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 16:58, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

love

LOVE IS LIKE AN MATH MINSAN MAHIRAP MINSAN MADALI MINSAN MASAYA 
MAGSAGOT NG PRBLEM SOLVING TAMA?!!! DI BA

LOVE IS LIKE A MATH--125.60.237.202 (talk) 10:35, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notable who?

How can we agree on who's notable? And how can we agree on who's NOT notable and therefore ought NOT to be included in this article's Notables list? Unless we rely on Wikipedia's standards on notability, then it's easy work---anybody who is written about (raved!) by a third-party source may be deemed notable. But if our decision in these lists are to derive from some people's opinion or research or best list, then we should cite those sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.193.143.240 (talk) 02:28, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Philippines

Gb 175.176.82.77 (talk) 09:45, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Among the period in Philippines literary which is the richest among all

None 139.135.240.222 (talk) 03:41, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]