Talk:Culture of the Philippines/Archive 1

Archive 1

Language

Where do I find a list of Languages of the Philippines with number of speakers? -- Error 22:34, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC) -- World Almanac (for languages with >1m speakers —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.131.113.154 (talk) 09:07, August 21, 2007 (UTC)

No mention of their movies?

Are Filipino movies mentioned anywhere else? I'll make a stub mention here. Gronky 17:31, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Culture

Can someone please enumerate the myths regarding Philippine culture, such as the myth of the Barong Tagalog as a slave shirt?

Culture

I think you should have types of food that contains to their culture. 207.69.138.137 16:35, 14 February 2007 (UTC) Alexis —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.69.138.137 (talk) 16:34, 14 February 2007 (UTC).

The entry on the acceptance of homosexuality in the country is clearly biased and in itself contradictory. The entry should be reviewed for accuracy, clarity, or be completely removed. How could it be "widely accepted" when the strong "Roman Catholic religion" or Christian values/doctrines (a widely practiced religion or belief) condemns it? reference entry --112.202.14.205 (talk) 21:51, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Belief section

Ninuno, or the ancient ancestors, were the people who taught Filipinos/tagalogs who will be in the future; they believed in the supreme God. The last statement "they believed in the supreme God" is very confusing. Does it apply to Ninuno or Filipinos/tagalogs or both? Also this section needs to be cleaned up a bit so that its chronological order is seamless. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Getonyourfeet (talk • contribs) 11:48, 22 February 2007 (UTC).

Comment

• Un-academic. Rigged with biases. An abuse of freedom of speech. Irresponsible. A total waste of time.

• Some sections has no relevant content especially the arts, culture and music section. Other sections contain confusing generalization or are very confined to limited information. I suggest historians from our universities to spend some time fixing this article. The world is reading this article to know about our culture. Please give this article the sufficient information for everybody's sake. UST, UP, PLM, La Salle, Ateneo, can you read this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.217.41.28 (talk) 07:56, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

• I agree with all the above....AND what the heck is Kut-Kut? Is there such a thing...where are the artifacts?

Request expansion for arts, culture and music

I know it's been along time since the television, movie, music section has been updated but it does need to be filled up or consolidated. I see a lot of potential like examples of Filipino comedy and game shows and romantic videos. Try to provide a teaser into larger section. — 6etonyourfeet^\t\c 05:12, 26 September 2007 (UTC) WHAT I DONT NO THAT —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.212.112.144 (talk) 04:42, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Changes to lead section

I've made some cleanup changes to the lead section:

• Changed "The culture of the Philippines reflects the complexity of the History of the Philippines through the blending of pre-Hispanic indigenous civilizations and the culture of Spain and Mexico, imparted during Spain's 333 year colonial rule of the islands, mostly from Mexico City, the capital of the Viceroyalty of New Spain." to "The culture of the Philippines reflects the complexity of the History of the Philippines through the blending of the culture of pre-Hispanic indigenous civilizations with characteristics introduced via foreign influences." and broke the paragraph after this introductory sentence.
• Continued in a new paragraph: "Spanish colonization of the Philippines, governed from Mexico, lasted for more than three centuries, thus there is a significant amount of Spanish-Mexican influence in many facets of the Filipino custom and tradition."
• Changed "Hispanic influence are most visible ..." to "Hispanic influences are most visible ...". Alternatively, it could be "Hispanic influence is most visible ...".

• Changed "Most of the present celebrated religious traditions ..." to "Most of the presently celebrated religious traditions ..."
• Changed "... mixture of both Roman Catholic, Pagan and indigenous religious rituals" to ... "mixture of Roman Catholic, Pagan and indigenous religious rituals"
• Changed "As an example, each year, towns from around the country hold major festivities known as Barrio fiestas which commemorate the patron saints of each town, villages or regional districts." to "As an example, towns from around the country annually hold major festivities known as Barrio fiestas to commemorate local Catholic patron saints."
• Changed "The festival season is celebrated with church ceremonies, with street parades (in honor of the patron saints." th "The festival season is celebrated with church ceremonies and with street parades in honor of the patron saints." and broke the paragraph after that sentence.
• Removed sentences which read "Many Filipino customs are of Indian origin. Among them are the following: placing a sampaguita flower garland around the neck of a visitor upon his arrival and departure as a symbol of hospitality and friendship; before marriage, a groom gives a dowry to the bride's parents and renders domestic services to his future in-laws; when the guests throw rice on the bride and groom after the wedding; and when a childless couple goes on a pilgrimage to a holy shrine, believing that the god of shrine will grant their prayer for fertility. A perfect example of this is the 'Sayaw sa Obando'." — I don't understand what this is trying to say.
• Changed "American influence are evident in the use of English language and contemporary pop culture such as fast-food, music, movies and basketball." to "American influences are evident in the use of English language and in contemporary pop culture characteristics such as fast-food, music, movies and basketball."
• Changed "The Southern island of the country where most of the followers of Islam are located, celebrate their own customs and traditions." to "The people of Mindanao, the southern island of the country where most of the followers of Islam are located, celebrate their own customs and traditions."
• Changed "While Chinese Filipinos living in the country also follow their own cultural production." to "Chinese Filipinos living in the country also follow their own cultural production."

-- Boracay Bill (talk) 01:12, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Corruption, Crab Mentality, Melodrama, Soapboxing, Class segregation and Ignoring Road Rules

These five attributes are DEFINITELY an ingrained part of the culture, as all Filipinos grudgingly would have to admit, however there's no mention about them in the article.

BTW some countries may not recognise education qualifications from any Filipino (especially in the health and engineering fields) because apparently you can buy your piece of paper over there if you have cash and or you know someone. I'm not saying it doesn't happen anywhere else but it happens more in the Philippines. Signal Buster (talk) 15:55, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

That does happen everywhere else. Human nature and all that. Let's ignore Wikipedia's rules and make a drama out of this.--Anss123 (talk) 19:13, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

On the contrary, I think their medical certifications are quite well accepted - especially coming from a country of their wealth.

As for melodrama, if you watch their television programs, this is not too unlike Spanish or Japanese culture (Filipinos themselves often complain about their celebs "over acting" on TV).

If you have more specific comments, I'm up for discussion, but to what you've written, I can only say I generally disagree that those are Philippine cultural traits. --Gronky (talk) 20:36, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

There is no place for racism here. Crab mentality removed. EVERY nation on Earth has this trait. Because there are short sighted assholes ready to shit on everything just about everywhere. How about we focus on the nobility, art, and beauty of this culture?

Outline

I propose that the time has come to review the very outline of this article to reflect a more systematic discussion of Philippine culture, rather than the current hodgepodge of themes. Mind you, the current article is informative, but it seems to jump from topic to topic randomly, with no apparent rationale behind the discussion. Suggestions for how to improve it? I for one think input from Philippine psychology, and from the way anthropology and sociology texts are organized... thoughts? -- Alternativity (talk) 18:09, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Far too much use of the term "tribe"

You guyes really need to be careful of your use of this term and take note that not all of the ethnic groups were tribes, for example, the kingdom of luzon is what is now known as Pampanga, but back then, it was an ancient thalassocratic state, a kingdom, not a tribe. Look it up.--Mangacha (talk) 01:11, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Filipinos as "Primitive Tribes" descended from Malay people?

I smell racism here, primitive? what do you call a people using porcelain wares and wearing silk garments from China way ahead of it's time than Europeans? primitive? get your facts straight! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.54.42.146 (talk) 11:58, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Evaristo26 02:25, 10 April 2013 (UTC)== Filipinos are NOT Melanesians by descent! ==

Okay, if this was still 2009 and if I still believed that Filipinos are Pacific Islanders; yes this lie that "Melanesians settled in the Philippines"" would make me happy. But is it 2009? Do I still believe that Filipinos are Pacific Islanders? No I do not, and I'm right to do so. Because, the earliest settlers of the Philippines came from Taiwan and Africa's Madagascar. The Negritos. Somebody needs to change that statement, because the original Filipinos were not Melanesians! How could Melanesians even be called Melanesians, if they were at the Philippines first? The only real way that Filipinos and Melanesians could have some correlation, is the other way. Is that the Philippines was settled first by Negritos and then later south into Indonesia and Melanesia.

Once again, the original Filipinos originated from Yunnan China, same place of origin for Vietnamese, Malays, Cambodians and much other Southeast Asian cultures. Even before that, the original Filipinos were Africans from Madagascar.

Filipino culture, is from a Malay backboard. Not to say, as culturally well-done as Malaysia or Indonesia's cultures, who better preserve their Malay backgrounds. But Philippine culture has lots of Malay origin and background due to historcal interactions between the ancient Filipinos and ancient Malays. PacificWarrior101 (talk) 03:59, 14 March 2012 (UTC)PacificWarrior101

It's not the Melanesian who first settled in the Philippine Islands but rather the Negritos who were from Africa or Australia and then followed by people from mainland Asia. If Melanesian first came in the Philippine Islands, so where did they really originated? I think it's the other way to explain it, that the first settlers from Melanesia or the Pacific Islands are from the Philippines or Southeast Asia.--Evaristo26 02:25, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

[Here], I removed the reason for the dispute from the article, along with the {{disputed}} tag. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 09:52, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Cutlery

In the article Montreal–Philippines cutlery controversy there is a wikilink to this article regarding our usage of cutlery. However, in this article there is no mention of how cutlery is used by Filipinos, and the RS used to support the content is this article and video from CTV Television Network; additionally there is this book. Should this content be here or in the Filipino cuisine article?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:29, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Culture of the Philippines

Philippines has a Hispanic culture, which means it has already a combination of blend of Asiatic/Malayo-Polynesian and Spanish/Mexican culture. The introduction should not be written in that way, since Hispanic is already a combination of Spanish and native culture, and that's the culture of the Filipino people. Philippines has a hispanic culture(Filipino Christians which accounts 93% of the Philippine population) with some minorities practicing Malayo-Polynesian cutlure (Ifugaos, Muslim Filipinos, etc. which accounts 7% of the population). Filipinos nowadays can't even identify which part of their culture is Spanish influece and Asian influece, which is the result of the blending of culture which is the majority is Spanish influenced.

I don't know that there is an existing single Malayo-Polynesian culture but I know that there is an existing Malayo-Polynesian language family. Malayo-Polynesian cultures vary from region to region and is very diverse. Some cultural similarities they have I think is the use of different sizes of boats and the mummification in the highland areas.

Filipinos might have Malayo-Polynesian influences but it only contributes to a very small percent of the Filipino culture. Since Spanish friars and Spanish ecnomenderos have made great efforts in order for Indios(native Filipinos) to leave their beliefs of the anitos and praising the trees and the sun. --Evaristo26 03:33, 10 April 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evaristo26 (talk • contribs)

Social classes

Should a section about the social classes that exist in the Philippines be included in this article? There is a great deal written about this, so it should be given some weight.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:46, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Culture of the Philippines. 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/20120701082957/http://www.philippinealmanac.com/2010/07/528/the-cultural-influences-of-india-china-arabia-and-japan.html to http://www.philippinealmanac.com/2010/07/528/the-cultural-influences-of-india-china-arabia-and-japan.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090210010329/http://www.mb.com.ph/issues/2005/02/20/OPED2005022029082.html to http://www.mb.com.ph/issues/2005/02/20/OPED2005022029082.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.asianweek.com/2008/09/02/maharlika
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://globalnation.inquirer.net/mindfeeds/mindfeeds/view/20080902-158208/Maharlika-Reconsidered
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111005035941/http://cct.georgetown.edu/research/thesisdatabase/Kay%20Martinez.pdf to http://cct.georgetown.edu/research/thesisdatabase/Kay%20Martinez.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:19, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Addition of more broad information,

I recently added information about the Culture of the Philippines during the Archaic era (Pre colonial culture), Because this article are only covered the Colonial culture brought by Spaniards and Americans , Some of these pre colonial methods and customs are Still in existence , practice and in used by the modern day Filipinos , (JournalmanManila (talk) 03:08, 1 April 2017 (UTC))

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Culture of the Philippines. 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/20070411032053/http://www.manqala.org/wiki/index.php/MancalaGames/Sungka to http://www.manqala.org/wiki/index.php/MancalaGames/Sungka
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070704025832/http://psyche2.entclub.org/articles/57/57-026.pdf to http://psyche2.entclub.org/articles/57/57-026.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080831104927/http://www.ncip.gov.ph/resourcesdetail.php?id=1 to http://www.ncip.gov.ph/resourcesdetail.php?id=1

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:44, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Culture of the Philippines. 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/20070928142522/http://lists.ilps-news.com/pipermail/info-bureau/2004-July/000401.html to http://lists.ilps-news.com/pipermail/info-bureau/2004-July/000401.html

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:10, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Mano po(bless).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:06, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

"Changed the facts"

This edit, with an edit summary saying, "Changed the facts", caught my eye. Looking at recent editing history, I see what looks like a migration in crediting of cultural antecedents from [[Eastern culture|East]] and [[Western culture|West]] to [[Pacific culture|Pacific]] and [[Western culture|West]], from Chinese culture to Malay culture, and from Chinese traders to Malay traders. Without more study than I have time for right now, I'm wondering if this past cultural history in the Philippines without WP:POV and whether (per WP:LEAD) it is a good WP:NPOV introduction to the article and a summary of its most important contents. Perhaps someone with more time presently available than I have could look at this. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 14:55, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:

• Filipino Mano.jpg
• Filipino Painting 2 Letra y Figura.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:10, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Panderetas Dance.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:54, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Article needs more focus on geography and indigenous technologies and crafts

The lead goes straight to cultural influences and completely ignores the formative elements that arise from basics like geography and natural history. There has to be a way to fix that. Will start reading up on the matter. - Batongmalake (talk) 14:49, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@Keroscene777 and Glennznl: Hi. Thank you both for your recent edits. I feel strongly about several things that are missing from the lead, and some things that I feel are over simplified. First of all, two missing things: an emphasis on how the culture was shaped by geography, and the fact that there were indigenous cultures which existed on the islands of the archipelago long before the influence of the west, or by the rest of the east. Second, the article also uses several terms, such as "nation", "tribe", and "state" in a way that is very general, and which makes it sound like the modern meanings of these words (i.e. modern nations, modern tries, and modern states, with all their 21st century political implicatins) apply to the cultures of the archipelago. I feel these were all deleted or added, respectively, with Keroscene777's latest edits. Maybe we can discuss this? Also, a number of important local and scholarly references seem to be erased, or at least de-emphasized. Maybe we can discuss? - Batongmalake (talk) 15:15, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

There is a separate section "Indigenous groups" (in the idiosyncratic sense that the term has in Philippines). Which apparently means that all other sections are meant to be about Christian Lowlanders. "Performing arts" gives ample proof of this problematic approach. –Austronesier (talk) 18:53, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

@Austronesier: I very strongly agree. The current article treats IPs as excluded cultures. Badly needs fixing.- Batongmalake (talk) 02:02, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

@Batongmalake: Yes, I don't really understand Keroscene777's first edit which deleted some text/sources, as no edit summary was given. I don't really follow your first point on culture shaped by geography, but I do agree that the article has quite a heavy emphasis on anything of foreign origin. This could be mitigated by bringing up multiple examples of the different ethnicities of the Philippines per cultural subject. --Glennznl (talk) 22:02, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

@Glennznl: Well, as the section lower down says, archipelagic geography, topography, and physical location reated a unique environment within which the culture evolved. The archipelagic nature of the land defining the design and economic structure of early settlements, the topography shaping local economics and mythology, and the physical location placing these cultures within a nexus of regional trade. One could add climate, actually. But my point is that these things certainly shaped human culture more than any human social factors - indigenous or foreign - did. - Batongmalake (talk) 02:00, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

If there are no objections from the group, I'd like to address the foreign focus (and outdated "East and West" paradigm) by restoring the following:

"The culture of the Philippines is characterized by cultural diversity, with multiple ethnic groups brought together in a shared Filipino national identity shaped by the geography and history of the Philippine archipelago, and through centuries of interaction with neighboring cultures, colonial powers,(BARINGER REFERENCE WAS HERE) and in more recent times, the global community.."

I can align that better with the existing text by replacing "interaction" with "trade," although I think that might be a case of oversimplification/overreach.

I should also note that the Baringer quote, from the everycultures website, triggers a notification that Wikipedia has it on their ban list. The citations here really need to be more academic; the page reads like a chirpy tourist booklet at times.- Batongmalake (talk) 02:46, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

In addition, I'm bothered that the article has a modernist slant, and mentions nothing about Philippine cultural development after the American colonial period, despite significant cultural developments (such as the rise of Filipino Psychology and the establishment of the Cordillera Autonomous Region and Bangsamoro) in the post-independence period. - Batongmalake (talk) 02:56, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

I would disagree that a focus on the modern is an issue. This article should be a present-tense article covering culture as it is today. There is certainly a need for a better synthetic overview of culture (also needed on the main Philippines page), but delving into specific historical developments is likely best covered within more specific articles. CMD (talk) 03:25, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis:Oh, I'm afraid I may have expressed myself wrong. By modernist, I meant roughly the 1950s through the early 1970s. Locsin and Mañosa and Edades and all. I meant that as an art/aesthetic term, not in the common sense, which is why I was careful to say say "modern." When I said modernist, I meant that I felt the current tone is somewhat... behind the contemporary period. We are, after all, wherever postmodernism has left us in its demise. - Batongmalake (talk) 10:03, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Noted, apologies for misunderstanding. As for a direct comment on your proposed text, I think it is good except for the location of the shared Filipino identity mention. That identify emerged long after geography and history and most of the centuries of interaction occurred. CMD (talk) 10:14, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: May I try again? I was trying to express the very concern you are raising, but I'm afraid my original phrasing may have buried it. Here's my attempt to clarify the time factor:

The culture of the Philippines is characterized by cultural diversity.(UNDP REFERENCE) Although the multiple ethnic groups of the Philippine archipelago have only recently established a shared Filipino national identity,(Scott, 1994) their cultures were all shaped by the geography and history of the Philippine archipelago,(Jocano, 2001; Jocano 2003) and by centuries of interaction with neighboring cultures, colonial powers.(Junker, ; Scott, 1994; etc) In more recent times, Filipino culture has also been influenced through its participation in the global community(Abad, 2020).

Is this Any better? (For easier reference: this is meant to replace the first two sentences, which currently read "The culture of the Philippines is a combination of cultures of the East and West.[1] Filipino identity was created primarily as a result of pre-hispanic cultures, western colonial influences and foreign traders intermixing and gradually evolving together.") - Batongmalake (talk) 16:49, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Certainly an improvement on the current first sentences. Ideally this would be well covered in the body so we wouldn't need all the sources in the lead, but this article definitely isn't at that point yet. CMD (talk) 17:25, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more. But there's a lot to be done, and some of it being in the lead, I figured that might be a good place to start. - Batongmalake (talk) 18:16, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Overlap with Arts in the Philippines

This article has considerable overlap with Arts in the Philippines. Apart from the fact that that page is totally overkilled with images, it is the main summary page for artistic expression in the Philippines, and should remain so. Having such a page, "Culture of the Philippines" naturally cannot stay as art-focused as it is now. I have noticed this because of this edit[1]. While Batongmalake's addition is a short and descent summary, it is actually more needed in Arts in the Philippines (where only a very dense statement is found in the subsction "Painting") than here.

As a linguist who also has studied bits of cultural anthropology for education and research, I support to present a wider understanding of culture. The reference to Filipino Psychology is a good start, although the section header is probably misleading for people not familiar with Enriquez's approach, which is quite anthropological in the context of global terminology. –Austronesier (talk) 14:05, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

I do support shortening the arts section, although my feeling is that that in this article, the section should speak more about the part the art played in cultural development, and vice versa, which is what I was aiming for in the edit you raised, Austronesier. I take your point, though. As for Filipino Psychology, I agree that the edit was hamfisted. It was sort of all I was capable of, given the time and a lack of thorough understanding of Filipino Psych. But I felt it had to be put there, if only as a seed for an improved discussion. Hm. Perhaps we should discuss next steps? - Batongmalake (talk) 14:49, 25 October 2021 (UTC)