Wikipedia

Talk:Prime Minister of the Philippines

Latest comment: 4 years ago by Wtmitchell in topic Prime Minister office assertions prior to 1978 appear problematic

These are links to verify the validity of the info in this page. Pls refer to these before you make your revisions, since this could be controversial.

Also, Virata and Laurel had an overlap in February 25-26, 1986, because of the revolution going on, so there are no issues there because of the conflicting nature of de facto and de jure at that time. There was also a presidential overlap between Jose P. Laurel and the government in exile for years, not only a couple of days, during WW2. --Noypi380 17:58, 22 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Reverted to bluemask's copy, I made a mistake eh. --Noypi380 09:50, 25 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Small reorganization, --Noypi380 12:24, 27 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

Excellent work! Gareon 09:54, 31 July 2005 (UTC)GareonReply

Thanks Gareon! :-) -Noypi380 08:57, 1 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

Image copyright problem with Image:Cesar EA Virata.jpg edit

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The image Image:Cesar EA Virata.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:57, 17 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Request for information re creation of the office of Prime Minister of the Philippines in 1899 edit

Latest comment: 4 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion

This article currently asserts: "The President of the Council was also equivalent to a prime minister as he headed up the secretaries, or ministers that advised the President of the Republic.", citing Guevara, Sulpicio (1972). The Laws of the First Philippine Republic (The Laws of Malolos), 1898-1899. Manila: National Historical Commission. p. 82. I used to have a copy of this book but I'm currently in the U.S. and I left that copy in the Philippines. Because of this, I don't currently have access to it. Would someone who has access to this book please be so kind as to quote here the relevant text whereby the office of Prime Minister of the Philippines was created by Aguinaldo? Thank you. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 08:21, 12 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

Is the First creation (1899) section of this article WP:original research? It says, "The President of the Council was also equivalent to a prime minister as he headed up the secretaries, or ministers that advised the President of the Republic.", citing the source linked above. Does that source support the assertion that the President of the Council was also equivalent to a prime minister? If not, can another reliable source which does support this assertion be cited? See also this earlier version of the article, and other earlier versions; I haven't had much time to research this, and I am not currently well situated to search for supporting sources. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 08:45, 14 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

Removal of the First creation (1899) section edit

Having seen no discussion above, I have WP:BOLDly removed this section in this edit. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 10:16, 18 June 2019 (UTC) After some research, I've reverted this removal with a minor edit and the addition of a couple of supporting sources. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 10:55, 18 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

Prime Minister office assertions prior to 1978 appear problematic edit

Latest comment: 4 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

INSERT: Please consider this section withdrawn. My error. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 09:09, 17 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

Sections above provide some breadcrumbs along the trail of my concerned thinking about this. The present introductory material on this talk page provides a couple of external links to verify the validity of the info in this page with instructions to refer to these links before making revisions. One of the links navigates to http://islandphilippines.com/politics.htm, which has link rotted. The http://islandphilippines.com is a defunct domain and, as far as I can see, articles there were never never reliable sources, but let's leave that aside for now. An archived copy of the linked web page from 2004 can be seen here. That archived copy says: "All constitutions provided for a President but one also provided for a Prime Minister in addition." The constitution which did provide for a Prime Minister, of course, was the THE 1973 CONSTITUTION : AS AMENDED IN OCTOBER 16-17, 1976, ON JANUARY 30, 1980, AND APRIL 7, 1981. None of the other constututions, as far as I have been able to find, provided for a Prime Minister. Asserting that the Philippines had a Prime Minister, then, without support for that assertion from a cited reliable source would be original research. That would apply to this article and to other Wikipedia articles as well.

The Wikipedia article titled Prime Minister says, "A prime minister is the head of a cabinet and the leader of the ministers in the executive branch of government, [...]}". That is supported (somewhat) by sources cited in the Etymology section of that article. This and similar thinking might provide supporting logic behind an assertion that some of the post-Spanish Philippine insurgent governments had a de-facto prime-ministerish post, as some or all of them had a formal or informal post for the head of, or president of, the Cabinet. I've pretty much come to the conclusion that this thinking is not sufficient to support an assertion that these governments had a Prime Minister post -- even a de-facto one.

Based on this, I am thinking of removing assertions to the effect that such a post existed from relevant Wikipedia articles. If you object to such removal, please discuss this below. If you know of sources supporting the assertion that these early insurgent governments had a Prime Minister post, de-jure or de-facto, please cite them. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 15:43, 15 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

I have found some assertions re a Prime Minister post or title in articles other than those mentioned above. I have not done more than glance at most of these articles, but some of them might need editing if this change is made. I have placed notifications re this discussion on these talk pages:

Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 15:38, 16 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hi there! Let me try to clarify. Are you proposing that there should be a separate article for "Presidente del Consejo de Gobierno", the post Mabini occupied? - Koakaulana (talk) 01:38, 17 July 2019 (UTC)Reply
Hi. Thanks for responding. No. I see in article 73 here that the office of President of the Cabinet did exist in the Malolos government. I was uncomfortable with the support for the notion that this office was the de-facto equivalent of a Prime Minister office. I've taken a second (or third or fourth) look this morning at some of the material I had looked at previously, though, and I conclude that I need to do an Emily Litella on this whole idea and say "Never mind". I've been doing this in spare minutes alongside a lot of other things that I was paying more attention to, and I've apparently misread or misinterpreted things I had looked at previously. This looks like my major error here, and I apologize for causing all of this hubub. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 09:09, 17 July 2019 (UTC)Reply
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Prime_Minister_of_the_Philippines&oldid=1202605840"