Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of rulers of the Philippines


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Editors should continue to discuss through normal channels how best to resolve or develop this in relation to other related lists. postdlf (talk) 15:44, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

List of rulers of the Philippines

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Per WP:OR The article is misleading the readers that there had been a state named Philippines before 1521 or the rulers of those small ancient kingdoms governed the whole territory that is now the Philippines. Moreover, the Heads of state and government of the Philippines already provides the accurate list of rulers of the Philippines since its establishment only in 1565. The leaders of individual historical states and polities prior to its establishment meanwhile are at List of recorded Datus in the Philippines. RioHondo (talk) 07:56, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. RioHondo (talk) 08:11, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. RioHondo (talk) 08:16, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. North America1000 08:42, 6 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete.I really don't care actually. I am just watching these two people fight. One of them is a bit too much though. Talk:List of rulers of the Philippines. Shhhhwwww!! (talk) 21:02, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * See WP:NOREASON. North America1000 12:41, 11 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom and OR. Parts of it could be split up to make smaller lists, e.g. List of sultans of Sulu. There are already lists in Tondo (historical state) and Sultanate of Maguindanao. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:32, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment. Yes, I believe their respective articles contain their own lists of rulers already.--RioHondo (talk) 01:53, 9 July 2016 (UTC)


 * comment i don't think theirs a WP:OR violation here since its sources  had a free copyright issue since it had a elements of copy edit and not confusing since it had a indicating time header (Pre-colonial), (Revolutionary) (up to the Contemporary Era which is up to president) (&#123; ᜉ᜔ ᜀ᜔&#124; ໑ &#125; P.A.-II  (talk) 05:21, 9 July 2016 (UTC))
 * Yes i read the sources, and they do not say that those datus, sultans etc had ruled the Philippines. And like most of your other contributions, you just deliberately implied them to fit your own version of Philippine history. Per WP:OR, original research includes analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to reach or imply a conclusion not stated by the sources .--RioHondo (talk) 05:35, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment' no it has sources and does not violates the non-free content policy (NFCC) theirs no vandalism and hoaxes on this article and theirs nothing to be eager Its Should NOT to be called "My own" ! since i just reading it i don't own history, And Wikipedia Should be a good Ideals for new Information that's why it grows as a wikipedian our duty is to add new information as a free Encyclopedia As long we have reliable references and Sources to be site,  if we doing some Ultra -mainstream here then we should be renamed this Wikipedia the "Republished" encyclopedia. And You just still not getting my point yet. I No hoax no Vandalism, no reason to be eager to Be a Deletionist jihad. (&#123; ᜉ᜔ ᜀ᜔&#124; ໑ &#125; P.A.-II  (talk) 09:39, 9 July 2016 (UTC))
 * Yes, this is the "republished Wikipedia" not the wikipedia for new and revolutionary ideas.--RioHondo (talk) 02:45, 10 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Whoah Watch your mout! theirs no violation the non-free content policy (NFCC), And this is a Free Encyclopedia - (And sounds like you edited my comments here)? (&#123; ᜉ᜔ ᜀ᜔&#124; ໑ &#125; P.A.-II  (talk))  —Preceding undated comment added 05:47, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep, but reduce duplication with other lists and probably rename. Sorry, but while I accept that we probably don't need the almost complete duplication of List of Presidents of the Philippines (a "See also" link would do as well), lists are accepted as useful navigational aids, and I am rather failing to see any insurmountable problems with the rest of this list (which then effectively reduces to the pre-colonial states, the Moro sultanates that remained independent for much of the Spanish period, and the short-lived but effectively independent states during the transition from Spanish to American rule). The title can be read, as the nominator does, as a claim that the people listed ruled over a state effectively identical with the present-day Philippines - but it can equally be read just as claiming to be (as it is) a list of rulers of states which were historically within what we now know as the Philippines archipelago (and don't seem to have an alternative name for, but no doubt would have one if the Spanish had never arrived). And while a change of title would be advisable (particularly if we remove the presidents from this list), we do have a number of articles with similar inclusion criteria that never seem to have been questioned - List of Indian monarchs or List of rulers of Wales, for example. PWilkinson (talk) 20:32, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment Actually, a complete duplication of Heads of state and government of the Philippines as pointed out above, which already includes all the rulers of the Philippines, except those "pre-colonial rulers" which ruled only in their respective small kingdoms before the archipelago had been united. And the short-lived state is also there, as the first republic is officially recognized. The sultans continue to this day but not even the present one is considered a "ruler of the Philippines" so this is WP:OR. Its all listed at List of sultans of Sulu, and the rest at List of recorded Datus in the Philippines and their respective polity articles where they belong. E.g. the "rulers" of the Kingdom of Tondo are at Tondo (historical state) not under Tondo the incorporated area.--RioHondo (talk) 23:40, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Comment ''The article is misleading the readers that there had been a state named Philippines before 1521 or the rulers of those small ancient kingdoms governed the whole territory that is now the Philippines. Moreover, the Heads of state and government of the Philippines already provides the accurate list of rulers of the Philippines since its establishment only in 1565.''

here s the point So i propose the Renaming of the Article instead of deleting since i think the title is the more confusing.
 * We all know that the Philippines was formed by your ancestor in 1521, as you stated, You cannot say its accurate but incomplete list,
 * Kingdoms and City-states, Are formed by The Ancestors of the Modern filipino itself since they are native in the philippines, and living in the philippine archipelago, they deserve to be called Filipinos or Pre colonial Filipinos or Early filipinos in some books, this is the topic you start, Rullers are not monarch itself it can be apply to any High officials who's Ruling a Country, Kingdom or a Polity,

and it has an element of Basic copyediting with free form of Copyrights on references so its not violated. (&#123; ᜉ᜔ ᜀ᜔&#124; ໑ &#125; P.A.-II (talk) 12:46, 11 July 2016 (UTC))
 * And Dont do a table turn for Wiki policies since your complains are The article is misleading the readers that there had been a state named Philippines before 1521 it clarifies on you my point Since then Complete table of history none other that Philippines exist during early modern as you stated


 * Ps And I think you Pointing the countries Philippines (By name) not by People who already live in the archipelago which is the point.and if you pointing out by name, then the Philippines article or the history of the philippines should be  remove the Pre-colonial /Classical history itself since you pointing out the naming of the Philippines in 1521 and and As you said Mindanao was Formed in 1560's or something Your e WRONG it was named after Maguindanao  (which is the largest sultanate in covers the Mindanao and the Visayas  or Bisaya was comes In precolonial word in sanskrit Sri- Vijaya itself its no not on your statement that it was named by spanish authorities. (&#123; ᜉ᜔ ᜀ᜔&#124; ໑ &#125; P.A.-II  (talk) 13:01, 11 July 2016 (UTC))
 * also, you just trying to tell that the Rulers of the Philippines are the Governor generals during the spanish era it will contradict again to the Pre colonial part. (&#123; ᜉ᜔ ᜀ᜔&#124; ໑ &#125; P.A.-II  (talk))  —Preceding undated comment added 13:09, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Again, WP:NPOV and WP:OR. I am certainly not as interested as you in the storytelling of this period. I am only after RS-based writing and mainstream historiography from widely accepted sources and versions as discussed in the Tambayan Philippines. I suggest you just improve the List of recorded Datus in the Philippines because this article as it stands is OR and contradictory to Heads of state and government of the Philippines.--RioHondo (talk) 13:51, 11 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Note. I have transferred all the relevant pre-colonial lists to List of recorded Datus in the Philippines where they belong, in order to avoid duplication, confusion and contradiction with Heads of state and government of the Philippines--RioHondo (talk) 17:12, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Talk:List of rulers of the Philippines. Shhhhwwww!! (talk) 07:02, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 07:40, 14 July 2016 (UTC) I propose a compromise, let's follow a format of List of Burmese leaders where dedicated articles are listed instead. Something like this.

This is a list of rulers and office-holders in the history of Philippines.

Heads of state
 * Presidents

Deputy heads of state
 * Vice Presidents

Historical
 * Prime Ministers
 * Governor-General (colonial)
 * Leaders of Revolutionary states (consolidated list of presidents/rulers of revolutionary states of the Philippine Revolution such as Negros Republic, Zamboanga Republic, etc.)
 * Rajahs, Datus, and Sultans
 * Sulu Sultanate

In short, I find the article duplicates content already found in other articles.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 10:44, 17 July 2016 (UTC) Suggestion renaming or revising the Article. the User RioHondo just rushed the copy paste the Article to make a Contradictions so the deletions are applied, but take a considerations and it was also based on the sources from the Philippine history itself WP:STICKTOSOURCE (&#123; ᜉ᜔ ᜀ᜔&#124; ໑ &#125; P.A.-II (talk) 01:16, 23 July 2016 (UTC))
 * Comment. This would actually mean merging it to Heads of state and government of the Philippines. Im okay with redirecting it to that article too, and add the historical individual state leaders in that article, but make clear also that they are not 'rulers of the Philippines'.--RioHondo (talk) 08:29, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep but prune. I suspect that List of rulers in the Philippines would be more accurate, since many of the people were rulers of dependent states during the colonial era (and subsequently).  The List should have a narrative section that makes clear that the Philippines became a Spanish colony, rules by a governor under the King of Spain (with cross-reference to the relevant list.  Presidents and Prime Ministers, since the 1890s, of the whole country should similarly be in separate cross-referenced lists.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:11, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment As i observing the both article List of recorded Datus in the Philippines and this article we discuss, I find a Flow Because of a thing, the name it self ... In all Archipelago in the philippines, the Datus are considered a leader but only a small Polity (villages) But their are many titles held for a Monarchs in the hilippines,Which is ...Lakan , Hari , Huangs and Raha (rajah)'s so it will contradict from the list of datus since these are the SO many titles not Only Datus so i stated on as Rulers of the Philippines, (since there are Philippine archipelago) i pointing the people of philippines not by the name as i told previously. so in short they are not only Datus of a Small polity as a sterotypist stated  Not a Mainstream but another form of Misconception
 * Keep even if not confidently, but at least attempt to improve and, if not, we can talk about this again. SwisterTwister   talk  06:58, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Question. Which article do we keep, this or Heads of state and government of the Philippines? The problem here is duplication of content as pointed out in the nom, aside from wrong article title.--RioHondo (talk) 08:33, 24 July 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.