Talk:Sinulog

Rejection of sovereignty
Why would Rajah Humabon want to be named after Carlos of Spain. Was this what he actually agreed to. Didn't the Rajah view himself as a king. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.63.25 (talk) 03:02, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Older
i have a good article in this website.its very useful and gives a lot of info about sinulog and other events.check this out.

http://www.travelmart.net/philippines/janevents.html

House of Habsburg
I just want to make clear that Habsburg is also spelled as Hapsburg. Spelling variations include: Habsburg, Hapsburg, Habspurg, Habsperg, Hapspurg and many more. The House of Hapsburg is also known as the House of Austria. And the Hapsburg Coat of Arms is a hawk, not an eagle. Here's my source: http://www.sinulog.ph/stories/backgrounder.html Jute 07:36, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Habsburg, like any family name, gets misspelled many ways but the spelling used by the ultimate authority on such matters (the family itself) and all official documents is always Habsburg. Most instances of the misspelling "Hapsburg" originate with British publications, but they spell many things differently. The two-headed bird is from the coat of arms of the Holy Roman Empire, not the family arms of the Habsburgs (which had a bird with a single head) who eventually became its emperors. It came from the Byzantine Empire, the heads looking east and west symbolizing the two portions of the Roman Empire with its two capitals and two emperors. It is always referred to as an eagle in its heraldry. The fact that the name Habsburg comes originally from Habichtsburg ("Hawk's Castle") may be part of what led to the confusion in the source you cite. I would be careful with that source: it also equates King Carlos I of Spain with Holy Roman Emperor Charles VI. He was Charles V, not VI. I suggest that source may not been overly careful with details.--StanZegel 14:13, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * One more thing: the coat of arms of the Hasburg as "counts of Habsburg" was not a bird at all but a red lion. Eagles appear in the coat-of-arms of the Emperor and in one of the Austrian Duchies. No hawk around.

Habsburg, Hapsburg, Hapsburgh, Habisburch, Habichtsburg
At this site, there is an explanation why the nomenclature and orthography keeps changing. It hardly needs emphasizing orthography changes with time, with the persons and nationalities of those who're spelling the nomenclature, with fashion, with idiosyncrasies. Let me quote an injunction from this site, "Today, the Austrian descendants, and most of the academic community, use the 'Habsburg' spelling.  I've opted for the 'Hapsburg' variation, one that was in vogue pre-1980 when much of the focus was on the Spanish branch of the family, for practical  reasons, namely that the domain hapsburg was available and habsburg was not.  For the purposes of this project the actual spelling of the name is secondary in importance and should not hinder the reader's understanding of the facts or arguments." --Vicente Calibo de Jesus (talk) 15:21, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * There can be no justification for opting for that horrid spelling. Str1977 (talk) 12:00, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sinulog. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090120081350/http://www.sinulog.ph/index.php/working-committee/ to http://www.sinulog.ph/index.php/working-committee/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:58, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Fact vs fiction & christianization
I think this article needs to differentiate clearly between what is fact and what is fiction. To me, the article comes off like Christian revisionist history toward a pre-existing indigenous tradition.

There is also a lot of repetition and conflicting information. I'm not familiar with this subject to feel comfortable editing it, so just pointing this out. --Pythagimedes (talk) 05:26, 16 January 2021 (UTC)