![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
I would just like to question the change to this page as a disambiguation page. It seems that when you talk about "Manila" it almost always refers to the capital. If you look at the articles in Wikipedia, most of them refer to the capital. — seav
Sorry if this seems to be out of topic. I'm Mozilla Firefox user, and the official website of Manila requires me to have Internet Explorer installed, how do I overcome this problem? - w3bu53r
Anyone familiar with this university, please offer your opinions at Talk:University of Santo Tomas, regarding a long slow-motion edit war. -- Curps 00:11, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
One problem is how to tackle the subject of Manila as opposed to the other cities and municipalities in Metro Manila. Manila is tightly integrated to the rest of the metropolis, that discussion of some topics might also apply unchanged to other suburbs. -- seav 15:07, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
Here's a sampling of how other encyclopedias have organized their "Manila" articles.
MSN Encarta (1993+)Introduction
Population
Economy
Urban Landscape
Education and Culture
History
|
Columbia Encyclopedia (6th Ed)
|
Encyclopædia Britannica (online)
|
World Book Encyclopedia (1992)Introduction
The city
History
|
Isn't it NAIA is at Paranaque/Pasay? If then, should we remove it from the article? Circa 1900 11:26, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Although the Infobox is elegantly designed and informative, why not try adding some colors and revising font styles to make it more attractive? -- User:Matthewprc 9:00, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Please forgive me if I offend anyone, but I stumbled across this article and the images here were a bit of a mess. I removed some pics, moved others and changed the size and placement of some. Certainly the article looks a great deal neater now. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 15:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
That stereo image is too small to view on the page and too big to view when you click on it. If someone who knows how to do that sort of thing were to arrange the size such that the two images of a central object (like the cart in the foreground) appeared about 55mm apart, we would be able to view the scene in stereo. - Pepper 150.203.227.130 08:11, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
is at Pasay City, not Manila. -- Howard t he Du c k 04:07, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
agreed Daimengrui 02:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Commerce talks about malls and nightlife. Shouldn't commerce talk about trade and you know... money in general. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.60.243.85 ( talk • contribs)
To be added when a climate section is ready.
Month | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | Year |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Avg high temperature°C | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 33 | 32 | 31 | 30 | 31 | 30 | 30 | 30 | 31 |
Avg low temperature °C (°F) | 21 | 22 | 22 | 24 | 25 | 25 | 24 | 23 | 23 | 23 | 23 | 22 | 23 |
Avg precipitation (cm) | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 12 | 26 | 40 | 36 | 34 | 19 | 13 | 6 | 197 |
Source: Weatherbase |
-- Howard the Duck 13:03, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Tokyo | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Climate chart ( explanation) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Manila wikipedia article was mentioned in the currently-airing episode of Veronica Mars — Random8322007-01-24T02:17:38 UT C(01/23 21:17EST)
Manila, being the capital and historic center of history and trade going on during the Spanish Empire naturally allowed Spanish to be the official language. There was no English yet - this only came later on in the mid-1900s with the Americans who overdid it there as their agenda. Spanish (and even broken Spanish) was in fact spoken, not by the majority, but it was used everyday and understood regularly like it was another dialect. There were even publications and radio in Spanish. Its population of those who had it as their native tongue was never majority, but put the whole population of then-Manila together, and most people had Spanish as their second or third language or had some knowledge of it, even throughout the country. This went all the way to the 50s or 60s.
It's been a while since I was here, but doesn't the Education section seem a little "too much"? -- Edward Sandstig 18:04, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
How about schools that are rich in history and excel in both in their academic and athletic programs? I would say the schools are La Salle, San Beda, Letran, UST, FEU, UE, Mapua, and San Sebastian. All are celebrated in UAAP/NCAA and have been proven in their academic programs plus each has its own rich history in relation to the city of Manila.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.101.145.37 ( talk • contribs) 02:48, 23 May 2007 (UTC).
UP is in Dilaman though 67.101.145.37 05:43, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
I removed two comments added by Jeremyinstanton ( talk · contribs), since the article's page isn't the place for adding comments. Sources still need to be provided for the estimates of war-dead from the Philippine-American war and American carpet-bombing causing more casualties than the fleeing Japanese, otherwise, I'll rework them tomorrow, since the request for citation was added almost a week ago. -- Edward Sandstig 21:29, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Pasay or Manila? -- Howard the Duck 04:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Unless someone gives a reason why the NPOV tag should stay it shall be removed. -- Howard the Duck 07:47, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Since when? -- Howard the Duck 00:38, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
I encourage everybody to participate in this meeting. Please post your replies to Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Manila 2 -- Exec8 06:00, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
I believe we should use the real name of the Vice Mayor of Manila, which is Francisco Domagoso, or Francisco "Isko Moreno" Domagaso because:
1. It is the name he used in his Certifacate of Candidacy for Vice Mayor in the May 2007 elections; 2. It is the name he uses in official communications and transactions in the City Hall; 3. It is the name the Official website of Manila uses in the [ Office of the Vice Mayor page].
In his Certificate of Candidacy, Vice Mayor used his screen name "Isko Moreno" only as his nickname. Unlike Joseph Estrada or FPJ na gumamit ng kanilang screen names bilang official names in their Certificate of Candidacy at sa mga official transactions. Angeles624 18:20, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Ptolemy in his world map mentions Maniola(no wiki article). This may have been the ancient name of the Philippines and Manila. Maniola is now a species of butterflies. -- Jondel 04:10, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Lately two anons had been reverting each other for the top photo. What gives? If you people don't stop I'll petition this article to be semi-protected. -- Howard the Duck 02:48, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
I have noticed some misstatements of fact in this article. For example raja means king in Sanskrit. Not 'Muslim community leader'. If Tondo, Manila was referred to in the Laguna Copperplate Inscription in year 900 (822 Saka Era, a common Hindu calendar of Southeast Asia) then how does this fit with the statement about the 13th century Manila. If Manila existed at least 2 centuries earlier, then the sentence needs to be reworded.
Some sentences marked Original Research are not logical either. 'So severely beaten that ... breastworks' fails to follow. I suggest getting rid of the words 'so' and 'that', because the words imply a logical connection. A citation wouldn't hurt, either. Otherwise, those sentences ought to be removed from the encyclopedia. -- Ancheta Wis 10:21, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
I tagged it because it really needs clean-up especially the lower portion stashing list of stuffs. Thank you. -- βritand&βeyonce ( talk• contribs) 05:50, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
there are far too many lists in this section, that make this a travel guide or a directory. WP:NOT#DIR I propose removing and only keeping most notable examples as per WP:LIST Michellecrisp ( talk) 06:53, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
===Hospitals===
Manila has both public sector hospitals and private sector hospitals, and many are keen to become involved in
medical tourism. However, to date very few have been subjected to
international healthcare accreditation, whether of American, British or Australian origin.
Manila offers a wide range of accommodations ranging from top-rated de-luxe hotels to more affordable universal lodges. Most of these accommodations are located within Roxas Boulevard overlooking Manila Bay, or in the districts of Ermita and Malate. Manila's hotel accommodations are 20 to 30 minutes away from the international and domestic airport.
The cosmopolitan atmosphere and cultural diversity of Manila is reflected in the number of places of worship scattered around the city. The freedom of worship in the Philippines, which have existed since the creation of the republic, allowed the diverse population to build their sacred sites without the fear of persecution. People of different denominations are represented here with the presence of Christian churches, Buddhist temples, Jewish synagogues, and Islamic mosques.
*Basilica Minore de San Lorenzo Ruiz (Binondo Church)
*Basilica Minore de la Immaculada Concepcion (
Manila Cathedral)
*Iglesia de la Parroquia de Santo Niño (Pandacan, Manila)
**Rizal Memorial Basketball/Boxing Stadium
===Museums===
*
La Loma Cemetery
*
Manila North Cemetery
Can anyone direct me to a map of Manila City showing the boundaries of the Districts? I've searched and searched and can't find one. Intelligent Mr Toad ( talk) 05:06, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Why is this map NOT LINKED to the relevant articles on Filipino elections? I have just spent several days constructing a similar map by painstakingly assembling district maps from various sources, and now I find there was one here all along, but not linked to anything. This is VERY ANNOYING. Intelligent Mr Toad ( talk) 07:04, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
why is this section included? it is rarely included in any city article? hardly something you would look up for in an encyclopaedia? Michellecrisp ( talk) 05:32, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Is way too long. Michellecrisp ( talk) 05:12, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
It should be interesting to mention that Manila is also a color in Spanish (Castillan).
Manila (color) is brown-yellowish.
Citing Everything ( http://everything2.com/title/manila%2520envelope ):
It comes from the Manila envelopes are called such because they were originally made of a coarse brown paper called Manila paper. Manila paper, in turn, was made of Manila hemp, or what the locals call abaca. Abaca is a plant that is native to the Philippines, and its fibers are used as raw material for a wide variety of products, including the aforementioned paper, rope, and textile.
-- ...RuineЯ| Chat... 20:13, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
120°98′W it isn't philippines-- 212.118.33.194 ( talk) 06:11, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Just curious... I distinctly recall this page used to have a skyline pic -- using the same daytime image we use for the Manila meetups. Is it possible that was accidentally removed in the effort to weed out vandalism? Alternativity ( talk) 10:52, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Can someone please add a section describing the weather and climate?
Thanks
That is Makati City's skyline, the right one can be found in here. I live in Manila, some section of the article is a bit inaccurate. Please insert some referrence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.69.204.252 ( talk) 11:15, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Los Angeles is not a siter city of Manila. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.106.123.124 ( talk) 07:54, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Manila itself is not the financial centre of The Philippines despite the location of the BSP. Makati has a higher and a more active economy when it comes to finance. Themanilaxperience ( talk) 05:10, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Look in Tagalog Wikipedia and there are references about the sister cities of Manila. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.92.174.79 ( talk) 10:47, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
In Tagalog Wikipedia, Manila is listed as one of the Nomination for Featured Article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.106.123.124 ( talk) 11:52, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Let it be known that the whole Luzon Empire article has been identified as a fringe theory at best, a hoax at worst...This is getting frustrating. - Alternativity ( talk) 14:09, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
It is said on the article Bank of the Philippine Islands that it's headquarters is located at Makati. But when I went to Quiapo, I saw their headquarters near Isetan and an LRT Station. -- 124.106.123.124 ( talk) 08:35, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
I saw the map and it doesn't include Laloma Cemetery. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.106.123.124 ( talk) 10:23, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
-- 124.106.123.124 ( talk) 09:56, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
I see the edition currently sold at book stores and La Loma is within Caloocan. – Howard the Duck 04:29, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
A lot of the introduction really needs to be in other sections, such as the name of Manila in an "etymology" section because that paragraph discusses the origin of the name or the history info on the bottom of introduction. It goes too much into depth considering that this is the introduction section where it supposed to be at a glance. I'm going to move some of this information to their appropriate sections. I'll undo my changes if anyone objects. Elockid ( talk) 14:21, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Hey guys, should we add this event in the history or geography climate?
Here's some vids:
-- 119.92.161.175 ( talk) 13:39, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Bruneian intervention in the Philippines is a hoax how come this lies are written here silly nonsense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.54.68.114 ( talk) 05:30, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Re this edit, "Doesn't seem right" didn't seem like a solid reason for revert, even if the reverted edit was unsupported. I did some googling and edited the article a bit so as not to specify whether it was Quezon, MacArthur or both who issued open city declaration (the sources I checked varied, but most said MacArthur). The date of the declaration mentioned in various sources also varies from 24 to 26 December—FWICS, the declaration was issued at 7:30 AM Manila time on Wednesday December 24, 1941, which would have been about 7:30 PM the same date Eastern Standard Time (or later, depending on Daylight Savings). Perhaps it didn't get announced in the US until 26 December due to announcement and news cycle delays. Perhaps some authors use date of report in the US rather than date of announcement in Manila. Anyhow, see [4] (I'll cite that in the article), [5], [6] (actually, look at the top of page 27), [7], [8], [9].
This probably needs to be cleaned up, clarified, and better sourced in this and other articles and conformed between articles (e.g., I see that the Battle of Manila (1945) article says that the declaration was in 1942, etc.). Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 19:25, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
(added) It looks like I may have opened a can of worms here regarding the date. I see on looking further that most sources I can find on the web say that Manila was declared an open city on 26 December (without mentioning the timezone used for that). The source I cited, though, is very detailed and says that the declaration was released to the press in manila on 24 December. I've now found another source, " Defenseless Manila Blazes", The Evening Independent, St. Petersburg Florida, December 27, 1941. The lead story continues as " Manila Blazes" on page 2, and a few paragraphs in says,
While Tokyo remained silent on the assault, German radio asserted that "the Japamese military does not recognize that Manila is to be treated as an open city."
The broadcast gave the flimsy explanation that "because the decision was taken by General MacArthur without consultation with the civilian population," the Japanese could not agree to an open city designation.
There appeared to be no legitimate excuse. The city had been srtripped of its anti-aircraft defenses. All American troops and marines had long since withdrawn, in accordance with Gen. Douglas MacArthur's designation of the city as "open"to save the populace from further suffering. Unmovable military stores in the city had been destroyed and U.S. Army headquarters had been moved outside the city.
While Tokyo had given no word regarding General MacArthur's proclamation, the Japanese-controlled Saigon radio said yesterday that as from Dec. 25 Japan was considering Manila as an "open" city.
(emphasis added). Also see [10] dated Thursday December 25. Page 125 of this book says, "The morning papers of December 26 announced that that General MacArthur had proclaimed Manila an open city in a declaration dated December 24." (timezone not mentioned, but apparently Manila) Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:01, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
(updated) I emailed the Library of Congress about this, asking whether a copy of a primary source (the declaration itself, a dated record of same, a dated press release copy, etc.) might have survived. They responded with suggestions about where to look. As I am not suitably located to look at the suggested sources, I'm mentioning their suggestions here. They said:
Such records are more likely to be in the National Archives than in the Library of Congress. Please consult:
http://www.archives.gov/publications/lists.html#special
http://www.archives.gov/research/arc/topics/philippine/glossary.html
http://www.archives.gov/research/arc/topics/philippine/
The Macarthur Library in Norfolk would also be helpful: http://www.macarthurmemorial.org/archives.asp
Also, as a related aside which does not apply to the above, I've seen several instances of edit warring over a one-day separation on dating events which occurred in the Philippines. In most cases, such one-day disparities can be explained by the international date line -- e.g., events taking place in Manila in the afternoon of 1 January, even if reported immediately in New York or London, will probably be dated with the 31 December date in those locations, and vice versa. One example of how confusing this can be concerns this report of the peace protocol between Spain and the U.S. having been signed at 4:23 in the afternoon Washington D.C. time on 12 August, 1898, vs. the timing of the Battle of Manila which began with naval artillery bombardment at 9:30 AM Manila time on 13 August. It is reported in Wikipedia and elsewhere that the Battle of Manila took place after the peace protocol signing due to the communications lag between Washington and Manila (Dewey and Merritt didn't learn of the signing until 16 August Manila time). As I figure it, the battle did take place after the signing, but only by a few hours. The 4:23 PM 12 August signing in Washington would have been at 4:23 AM 13 August Manila time. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:46, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
I've seen some city articles, like New York City and San Francisco, that clearly splits nearly all of its sections into subsections (thus the note regarding Splitting into Multiple Articles), and I believe that I am up for the challenge to reorganize and expound more on what Manila is all about because it can really be improved and expounded further on what the city is all about. I might also need to provide some connections to Metro Manila as a whole as well because Manila, in essence, is part of a greater metropolis, thus I would like to experiment connecting the two areas and make it into "connecting" articles. -- wishfulanthony (talk) 22:47, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
An IP user: 222.127.119.208 keeps on reverting my edits and made the history section longer when there is a main article for it. He is helping in the sense of still vandalizing the page. We must follow WP:Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:Article size and over rules in Wikipedia. --DragosteaDinTei 15:09, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
I notice that in the listing of the various neighboring cities, "City" is being added to the name of each. Aside from Quezon City I think this is unnecessary and adds clutter. My own view is that people don't add "City" in their day-to-day conversations about Navotas, Mandaluyong, Makati, San Juan, etc. I will remove "City" from them if there is no objection. Lambanog ( talk) 03:22, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
I really think the article needs some reorganization. The History section must come first, as it is much shorter than the section on Subdivions/Districts, and per Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cities#Article-structure_guidelines. Gabbyshoe ( talk) 22:24, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Done As per
Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/Guideline.
Harel (
Not what you think?)
09:24, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
The article needs to be splitted into multiple articles to reduce its size and I did it but why do it had to be reverted back to the longer version? I have organized that section and that is what is needed in the History section. I've reverted it back to my last edit. There's already a main article for it. Harel ( Not what you think?) 14:26, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
The "Places of Interest" section needs to be modified. Specifically the list of landmarks needs to be removed or pruned heavily. Places and landmarks in the list should be moved to relevant sections and then talked about in the text. The universities listed should go under education. The cemeteries moved under religion. Government buildings should be placed in the "Government" section. Museums probably belong in a "Culture" section. If the the locales are not notable enough to be included in text then they should be cut from the article. There seems to be too much focus on churches and landmarks.
I notice there isn't much discussion on the various districts. More detail could go into describing Malate for example and how it differs from Tondo. I don't see Plaza Lawton mentioned by that name; a notable omission since it is a bus terminal destination. I don't see Manila Central Post Office mentioned either. Tutuban and Divisoria are quickly passed over. Is NAIA in Manila? Asian Hospital and St. Luke's aren't in Manila proper. The main Iglesia ni Cristo church in Quezon City likewise doesn't seem to belong. Mentioning the PICC, CCP, and Coconut Palace are right on the border with Pasay might make more sense. Addresses shouldn't be included in the description of places. Too specific for this article and reads too much like a travel brochure.
The article is light on facts and figures and references. What is its income? Average age of population? Literacy? Educational attainment? Percentage breakdown of population by ethnicity? Health statistics? Crime rate? Public services? Susceptibility to typhoons? Flooding? Fault lines? Lambanog ( talk) 17:16, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
The is no subsection about this topic. I guess noboby cares about Manila's environmental problems (littering, smoke belching jeepneys, etc.) 120.28.126.204 ( talk) 04:09, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Gunkarta seems intent on adding the following line: "Among the large cities in Southeast Asia, Jakarta and Manila are still lack of urban public transport services due to the long development of road networks that accommodate mostly the private vehicles."
Problem with it is that to anyone familiar with Manila traffic it looks patently false. It is hard to claim there is lack of urban public transport service. If anything there is too much and traffic comes to a crawl because of it. Because of Manila's unique public transport organization, it actually has the one of if not the highest concentrations of public transport vehicles in the world. The line as phrased is therefore wrong and misleading. Lambanog ( talk) 16:12, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Among the large cities in Southeast Asia, Jakarta and Manila are still lack of urban public transport services due to the long development of road networks that accommodate mostly the private vehicles. [1] ( Gunkarta ( talk) 16:33, 13 May 2010 (UTC)).
![]() |
Let me chime in since I am the one who originally removed the sentence. I removed it for one simple reason: It doesn't belong in an encyclopedia article. Of course Manila has traffic problems. It is a major city. Every city of a similar size has traffic problems. Saying so doesn't tell you anything about Manila qua Manila. What is important for the transportation system is what exists now and what is unique, in particular jeepneys, FXes, sikads, tricycles, and the LRT and MRT. Whether Manila's traffic is worse than Quezon City, Jakarta, or Los Angeles and what could be some of the causes and solutions is relevant to a public policy debate, not an encyclopedia article. -- Bruce Hall ( talk) 05:24, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
I've deleted the sentence "Private automobiles are common within the city with almost all of its households having automobiles." because it is not true. I've been to the dumpsites in Tondo and none of the thousandss of families in and around there own private cars. Further, according to the LTO there are only about 2m registered cars, UVs, and SUVs in all of the Philippines which is less then the total number of households in Metro Manila, which was 2.1m ten years ago. There was another 3.2m registered "MC/TC". Considering that many households have more than one car and that Manila is poorer and less car-friendly then other less dense, more suburban Metro Manila communities, I would guess that the number of Manila households with cars is significantly under 50%, hardly "almost all", and probably close to a small minority. Here's the LTO's stats - http://www.lto.gov.ph/Stats2009/no_of_MV_TypeMode_LTO2009.html and http://www.lto.gov.ph/Stats2009/no_of_MV_Registered_LTO2009.html -- Bruce Hall ( talk) 07:34, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Here, it lists that the demographics are various religions. Following the citation link leads me to a random suspect travel site that lists the various distribution to being various religious orientation but showing Malay heritage instead of just religion. For this reason, I'm removing both the citation and that statement in the article until a more credible source can be found. Nexxie ( talk) 12:38, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Apparently, the image in the infobox frequently changes. There are two images, which one should we pose as the infobox pic.?
The left image or the right one?
Harel ( Not what you think?) 03:18, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
--Can you please backup your sources that say Maynila was ruled by Emperors and not "mere chieftains"? This claim is unfounded unless you can backup a source so we can check if its credible or not. I dont think you're doing a favor to Philippine History by injecting Nationalism. That's being intellectually dishonest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.55.202.104 ( talk) 13:49, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Article is too long. These are some of the longer sections that need to be trimmed:
– HTD ( ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 08:16, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
The Cultural Center of the Philippines and Coconut Palace, is not part of Manila, these structures are already part of Pasay City, if you want to include these structures as a point of interest, you can improve or develop the article Metro Manila, that serves as the seat of government of the Philippines. As a Filipino, i want the World to recognized that Metro Manila is the Capital city and Manila is only a distict, If any of you disagree with me, i have reasons to give, to prove my statements. 121.54.2.91 ( talk) 16:31, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
I've increased the min thread age from 90days to 120 days. The talk page is becoming too short. Moray An Par ( talk) 11:20, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
The info re in the Capital of the Philippines in the {{ Succession box}} templates in the External links section of this article appears to contradict info in that other article. I've placed {{ Contradict-other}} templates in both articles pending resolution of this apparent contradiction. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 05:49, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
This article bares almost no resemblance to the city of Manila, at least not the city I have visited. No smog, no poverty, no traffic congestion. This is propaganda. FixMacs ( talk) 22:51, 6 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by FixMacs ( talk • contribs) 22:47, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
I would just like to question the change to this page as a disambiguation page. It seems that when you talk about "Manila" it almost always refers to the capital. If you look at the articles in Wikipedia, most of them refer to the capital. — seav
Sorry if this seems to be out of topic. I'm Mozilla Firefox user, and the official website of Manila requires me to have Internet Explorer installed, how do I overcome this problem? - w3bu53r
Anyone familiar with this university, please offer your opinions at Talk:University of Santo Tomas, regarding a long slow-motion edit war. -- Curps 00:11, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
One problem is how to tackle the subject of Manila as opposed to the other cities and municipalities in Metro Manila. Manila is tightly integrated to the rest of the metropolis, that discussion of some topics might also apply unchanged to other suburbs. -- seav 15:07, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
Here's a sampling of how other encyclopedias have organized their "Manila" articles.
MSN Encarta (1993+)Introduction
Population
Economy
Urban Landscape
Education and Culture
History
|
Columbia Encyclopedia (6th Ed)
|
Encyclopædia Britannica (online)
|
World Book Encyclopedia (1992)Introduction
The city
History
|
Isn't it NAIA is at Paranaque/Pasay? If then, should we remove it from the article? Circa 1900 11:26, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Although the Infobox is elegantly designed and informative, why not try adding some colors and revising font styles to make it more attractive? -- User:Matthewprc 9:00, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Please forgive me if I offend anyone, but I stumbled across this article and the images here were a bit of a mess. I removed some pics, moved others and changed the size and placement of some. Certainly the article looks a great deal neater now. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 15:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
That stereo image is too small to view on the page and too big to view when you click on it. If someone who knows how to do that sort of thing were to arrange the size such that the two images of a central object (like the cart in the foreground) appeared about 55mm apart, we would be able to view the scene in stereo. - Pepper 150.203.227.130 08:11, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
is at Pasay City, not Manila. -- Howard t he Du c k 04:07, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
agreed Daimengrui 02:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Commerce talks about malls and nightlife. Shouldn't commerce talk about trade and you know... money in general. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.60.243.85 ( talk • contribs)
To be added when a climate section is ready.
Month | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | Year |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Avg high temperature°C | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 33 | 32 | 31 | 30 | 31 | 30 | 30 | 30 | 31 |
Avg low temperature °C (°F) | 21 | 22 | 22 | 24 | 25 | 25 | 24 | 23 | 23 | 23 | 23 | 22 | 23 |
Avg precipitation (cm) | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 12 | 26 | 40 | 36 | 34 | 19 | 13 | 6 | 197 |
Source: Weatherbase |
-- Howard the Duck 13:03, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Tokyo | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Climate chart ( explanation) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Manila wikipedia article was mentioned in the currently-airing episode of Veronica Mars — Random8322007-01-24T02:17:38 UT C(01/23 21:17EST)
Manila, being the capital and historic center of history and trade going on during the Spanish Empire naturally allowed Spanish to be the official language. There was no English yet - this only came later on in the mid-1900s with the Americans who overdid it there as their agenda. Spanish (and even broken Spanish) was in fact spoken, not by the majority, but it was used everyday and understood regularly like it was another dialect. There were even publications and radio in Spanish. Its population of those who had it as their native tongue was never majority, but put the whole population of then-Manila together, and most people had Spanish as their second or third language or had some knowledge of it, even throughout the country. This went all the way to the 50s or 60s.
It's been a while since I was here, but doesn't the Education section seem a little "too much"? -- Edward Sandstig 18:04, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
How about schools that are rich in history and excel in both in their academic and athletic programs? I would say the schools are La Salle, San Beda, Letran, UST, FEU, UE, Mapua, and San Sebastian. All are celebrated in UAAP/NCAA and have been proven in their academic programs plus each has its own rich history in relation to the city of Manila.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.101.145.37 ( talk • contribs) 02:48, 23 May 2007 (UTC).
UP is in Dilaman though 67.101.145.37 05:43, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
I removed two comments added by Jeremyinstanton ( talk · contribs), since the article's page isn't the place for adding comments. Sources still need to be provided for the estimates of war-dead from the Philippine-American war and American carpet-bombing causing more casualties than the fleeing Japanese, otherwise, I'll rework them tomorrow, since the request for citation was added almost a week ago. -- Edward Sandstig 21:29, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Pasay or Manila? -- Howard the Duck 04:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Unless someone gives a reason why the NPOV tag should stay it shall be removed. -- Howard the Duck 07:47, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Since when? -- Howard the Duck 00:38, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
I encourage everybody to participate in this meeting. Please post your replies to Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Manila 2 -- Exec8 06:00, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
I believe we should use the real name of the Vice Mayor of Manila, which is Francisco Domagoso, or Francisco "Isko Moreno" Domagaso because:
1. It is the name he used in his Certifacate of Candidacy for Vice Mayor in the May 2007 elections; 2. It is the name he uses in official communications and transactions in the City Hall; 3. It is the name the Official website of Manila uses in the [ Office of the Vice Mayor page].
In his Certificate of Candidacy, Vice Mayor used his screen name "Isko Moreno" only as his nickname. Unlike Joseph Estrada or FPJ na gumamit ng kanilang screen names bilang official names in their Certificate of Candidacy at sa mga official transactions. Angeles624 18:20, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Ptolemy in his world map mentions Maniola(no wiki article). This may have been the ancient name of the Philippines and Manila. Maniola is now a species of butterflies. -- Jondel 04:10, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Lately two anons had been reverting each other for the top photo. What gives? If you people don't stop I'll petition this article to be semi-protected. -- Howard the Duck 02:48, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
I have noticed some misstatements of fact in this article. For example raja means king in Sanskrit. Not 'Muslim community leader'. If Tondo, Manila was referred to in the Laguna Copperplate Inscription in year 900 (822 Saka Era, a common Hindu calendar of Southeast Asia) then how does this fit with the statement about the 13th century Manila. If Manila existed at least 2 centuries earlier, then the sentence needs to be reworded.
Some sentences marked Original Research are not logical either. 'So severely beaten that ... breastworks' fails to follow. I suggest getting rid of the words 'so' and 'that', because the words imply a logical connection. A citation wouldn't hurt, either. Otherwise, those sentences ought to be removed from the encyclopedia. -- Ancheta Wis 10:21, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
I tagged it because it really needs clean-up especially the lower portion stashing list of stuffs. Thank you. -- βritand&βeyonce ( talk• contribs) 05:50, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
there are far too many lists in this section, that make this a travel guide or a directory. WP:NOT#DIR I propose removing and only keeping most notable examples as per WP:LIST Michellecrisp ( talk) 06:53, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
===Hospitals===
Manila has both public sector hospitals and private sector hospitals, and many are keen to become involved in
medical tourism. However, to date very few have been subjected to
international healthcare accreditation, whether of American, British or Australian origin.
Manila offers a wide range of accommodations ranging from top-rated de-luxe hotels to more affordable universal lodges. Most of these accommodations are located within Roxas Boulevard overlooking Manila Bay, or in the districts of Ermita and Malate. Manila's hotel accommodations are 20 to 30 minutes away from the international and domestic airport.
The cosmopolitan atmosphere and cultural diversity of Manila is reflected in the number of places of worship scattered around the city. The freedom of worship in the Philippines, which have existed since the creation of the republic, allowed the diverse population to build their sacred sites without the fear of persecution. People of different denominations are represented here with the presence of Christian churches, Buddhist temples, Jewish synagogues, and Islamic mosques.
*Basilica Minore de San Lorenzo Ruiz (Binondo Church)
*Basilica Minore de la Immaculada Concepcion (
Manila Cathedral)
*Iglesia de la Parroquia de Santo Niño (Pandacan, Manila)
**Rizal Memorial Basketball/Boxing Stadium
===Museums===
*
La Loma Cemetery
*
Manila North Cemetery
Can anyone direct me to a map of Manila City showing the boundaries of the Districts? I've searched and searched and can't find one. Intelligent Mr Toad ( talk) 05:06, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Why is this map NOT LINKED to the relevant articles on Filipino elections? I have just spent several days constructing a similar map by painstakingly assembling district maps from various sources, and now I find there was one here all along, but not linked to anything. This is VERY ANNOYING. Intelligent Mr Toad ( talk) 07:04, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
why is this section included? it is rarely included in any city article? hardly something you would look up for in an encyclopaedia? Michellecrisp ( talk) 05:32, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Is way too long. Michellecrisp ( talk) 05:12, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
It should be interesting to mention that Manila is also a color in Spanish (Castillan).
Manila (color) is brown-yellowish.
Citing Everything ( http://everything2.com/title/manila%2520envelope ):
It comes from the Manila envelopes are called such because they were originally made of a coarse brown paper called Manila paper. Manila paper, in turn, was made of Manila hemp, or what the locals call abaca. Abaca is a plant that is native to the Philippines, and its fibers are used as raw material for a wide variety of products, including the aforementioned paper, rope, and textile.
-- ...RuineЯ| Chat... 20:13, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
120°98′W it isn't philippines-- 212.118.33.194 ( talk) 06:11, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Just curious... I distinctly recall this page used to have a skyline pic -- using the same daytime image we use for the Manila meetups. Is it possible that was accidentally removed in the effort to weed out vandalism? Alternativity ( talk) 10:52, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Can someone please add a section describing the weather and climate?
Thanks
That is Makati City's skyline, the right one can be found in here. I live in Manila, some section of the article is a bit inaccurate. Please insert some referrence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.69.204.252 ( talk) 11:15, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Los Angeles is not a siter city of Manila. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.106.123.124 ( talk) 07:54, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Manila itself is not the financial centre of The Philippines despite the location of the BSP. Makati has a higher and a more active economy when it comes to finance. Themanilaxperience ( talk) 05:10, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Look in Tagalog Wikipedia and there are references about the sister cities of Manila. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.92.174.79 ( talk) 10:47, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
In Tagalog Wikipedia, Manila is listed as one of the Nomination for Featured Article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.106.123.124 ( talk) 11:52, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Let it be known that the whole Luzon Empire article has been identified as a fringe theory at best, a hoax at worst...This is getting frustrating. - Alternativity ( talk) 14:09, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
It is said on the article Bank of the Philippine Islands that it's headquarters is located at Makati. But when I went to Quiapo, I saw their headquarters near Isetan and an LRT Station. -- 124.106.123.124 ( talk) 08:35, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
I saw the map and it doesn't include Laloma Cemetery. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.106.123.124 ( talk) 10:23, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
-- 124.106.123.124 ( talk) 09:56, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
I see the edition currently sold at book stores and La Loma is within Caloocan. – Howard the Duck 04:29, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
A lot of the introduction really needs to be in other sections, such as the name of Manila in an "etymology" section because that paragraph discusses the origin of the name or the history info on the bottom of introduction. It goes too much into depth considering that this is the introduction section where it supposed to be at a glance. I'm going to move some of this information to their appropriate sections. I'll undo my changes if anyone objects. Elockid ( talk) 14:21, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Hey guys, should we add this event in the history or geography climate?
Here's some vids:
-- 119.92.161.175 ( talk) 13:39, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Bruneian intervention in the Philippines is a hoax how come this lies are written here silly nonsense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.54.68.114 ( talk) 05:30, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Re this edit, "Doesn't seem right" didn't seem like a solid reason for revert, even if the reverted edit was unsupported. I did some googling and edited the article a bit so as not to specify whether it was Quezon, MacArthur or both who issued open city declaration (the sources I checked varied, but most said MacArthur). The date of the declaration mentioned in various sources also varies from 24 to 26 December—FWICS, the declaration was issued at 7:30 AM Manila time on Wednesday December 24, 1941, which would have been about 7:30 PM the same date Eastern Standard Time (or later, depending on Daylight Savings). Perhaps it didn't get announced in the US until 26 December due to announcement and news cycle delays. Perhaps some authors use date of report in the US rather than date of announcement in Manila. Anyhow, see [4] (I'll cite that in the article), [5], [6] (actually, look at the top of page 27), [7], [8], [9].
This probably needs to be cleaned up, clarified, and better sourced in this and other articles and conformed between articles (e.g., I see that the Battle of Manila (1945) article says that the declaration was in 1942, etc.). Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 19:25, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
(added) It looks like I may have opened a can of worms here regarding the date. I see on looking further that most sources I can find on the web say that Manila was declared an open city on 26 December (without mentioning the timezone used for that). The source I cited, though, is very detailed and says that the declaration was released to the press in manila on 24 December. I've now found another source, " Defenseless Manila Blazes", The Evening Independent, St. Petersburg Florida, December 27, 1941. The lead story continues as " Manila Blazes" on page 2, and a few paragraphs in says,
While Tokyo remained silent on the assault, German radio asserted that "the Japamese military does not recognize that Manila is to be treated as an open city."
The broadcast gave the flimsy explanation that "because the decision was taken by General MacArthur without consultation with the civilian population," the Japanese could not agree to an open city designation.
There appeared to be no legitimate excuse. The city had been srtripped of its anti-aircraft defenses. All American troops and marines had long since withdrawn, in accordance with Gen. Douglas MacArthur's designation of the city as "open"to save the populace from further suffering. Unmovable military stores in the city had been destroyed and U.S. Army headquarters had been moved outside the city.
While Tokyo had given no word regarding General MacArthur's proclamation, the Japanese-controlled Saigon radio said yesterday that as from Dec. 25 Japan was considering Manila as an "open" city.
(emphasis added). Also see [10] dated Thursday December 25. Page 125 of this book says, "The morning papers of December 26 announced that that General MacArthur had proclaimed Manila an open city in a declaration dated December 24." (timezone not mentioned, but apparently Manila) Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:01, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
(updated) I emailed the Library of Congress about this, asking whether a copy of a primary source (the declaration itself, a dated record of same, a dated press release copy, etc.) might have survived. They responded with suggestions about where to look. As I am not suitably located to look at the suggested sources, I'm mentioning their suggestions here. They said:
Such records are more likely to be in the National Archives than in the Library of Congress. Please consult:
http://www.archives.gov/publications/lists.html#special
http://www.archives.gov/research/arc/topics/philippine/glossary.html
http://www.archives.gov/research/arc/topics/philippine/
The Macarthur Library in Norfolk would also be helpful: http://www.macarthurmemorial.org/archives.asp
Also, as a related aside which does not apply to the above, I've seen several instances of edit warring over a one-day separation on dating events which occurred in the Philippines. In most cases, such one-day disparities can be explained by the international date line -- e.g., events taking place in Manila in the afternoon of 1 January, even if reported immediately in New York or London, will probably be dated with the 31 December date in those locations, and vice versa. One example of how confusing this can be concerns this report of the peace protocol between Spain and the U.S. having been signed at 4:23 in the afternoon Washington D.C. time on 12 August, 1898, vs. the timing of the Battle of Manila which began with naval artillery bombardment at 9:30 AM Manila time on 13 August. It is reported in Wikipedia and elsewhere that the Battle of Manila took place after the peace protocol signing due to the communications lag between Washington and Manila (Dewey and Merritt didn't learn of the signing until 16 August Manila time). As I figure it, the battle did take place after the signing, but only by a few hours. The 4:23 PM 12 August signing in Washington would have been at 4:23 AM 13 August Manila time. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:46, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
I've seen some city articles, like New York City and San Francisco, that clearly splits nearly all of its sections into subsections (thus the note regarding Splitting into Multiple Articles), and I believe that I am up for the challenge to reorganize and expound more on what Manila is all about because it can really be improved and expounded further on what the city is all about. I might also need to provide some connections to Metro Manila as a whole as well because Manila, in essence, is part of a greater metropolis, thus I would like to experiment connecting the two areas and make it into "connecting" articles. -- wishfulanthony (talk) 22:47, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
An IP user: 222.127.119.208 keeps on reverting my edits and made the history section longer when there is a main article for it. He is helping in the sense of still vandalizing the page. We must follow WP:Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:Article size and over rules in Wikipedia. --DragosteaDinTei 15:09, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
I notice that in the listing of the various neighboring cities, "City" is being added to the name of each. Aside from Quezon City I think this is unnecessary and adds clutter. My own view is that people don't add "City" in their day-to-day conversations about Navotas, Mandaluyong, Makati, San Juan, etc. I will remove "City" from them if there is no objection. Lambanog ( talk) 03:22, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
I really think the article needs some reorganization. The History section must come first, as it is much shorter than the section on Subdivions/Districts, and per Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cities#Article-structure_guidelines. Gabbyshoe ( talk) 22:24, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Done As per
Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/Guideline.
Harel (
Not what you think?)
09:24, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
The article needs to be splitted into multiple articles to reduce its size and I did it but why do it had to be reverted back to the longer version? I have organized that section and that is what is needed in the History section. I've reverted it back to my last edit. There's already a main article for it. Harel ( Not what you think?) 14:26, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
The "Places of Interest" section needs to be modified. Specifically the list of landmarks needs to be removed or pruned heavily. Places and landmarks in the list should be moved to relevant sections and then talked about in the text. The universities listed should go under education. The cemeteries moved under religion. Government buildings should be placed in the "Government" section. Museums probably belong in a "Culture" section. If the the locales are not notable enough to be included in text then they should be cut from the article. There seems to be too much focus on churches and landmarks.
I notice there isn't much discussion on the various districts. More detail could go into describing Malate for example and how it differs from Tondo. I don't see Plaza Lawton mentioned by that name; a notable omission since it is a bus terminal destination. I don't see Manila Central Post Office mentioned either. Tutuban and Divisoria are quickly passed over. Is NAIA in Manila? Asian Hospital and St. Luke's aren't in Manila proper. The main Iglesia ni Cristo church in Quezon City likewise doesn't seem to belong. Mentioning the PICC, CCP, and Coconut Palace are right on the border with Pasay might make more sense. Addresses shouldn't be included in the description of places. Too specific for this article and reads too much like a travel brochure.
The article is light on facts and figures and references. What is its income? Average age of population? Literacy? Educational attainment? Percentage breakdown of population by ethnicity? Health statistics? Crime rate? Public services? Susceptibility to typhoons? Flooding? Fault lines? Lambanog ( talk) 17:16, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
The is no subsection about this topic. I guess noboby cares about Manila's environmental problems (littering, smoke belching jeepneys, etc.) 120.28.126.204 ( talk) 04:09, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Gunkarta seems intent on adding the following line: "Among the large cities in Southeast Asia, Jakarta and Manila are still lack of urban public transport services due to the long development of road networks that accommodate mostly the private vehicles."
Problem with it is that to anyone familiar with Manila traffic it looks patently false. It is hard to claim there is lack of urban public transport service. If anything there is too much and traffic comes to a crawl because of it. Because of Manila's unique public transport organization, it actually has the one of if not the highest concentrations of public transport vehicles in the world. The line as phrased is therefore wrong and misleading. Lambanog ( talk) 16:12, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Among the large cities in Southeast Asia, Jakarta and Manila are still lack of urban public transport services due to the long development of road networks that accommodate mostly the private vehicles. [1] ( Gunkarta ( talk) 16:33, 13 May 2010 (UTC)).
![]() |
Let me chime in since I am the one who originally removed the sentence. I removed it for one simple reason: It doesn't belong in an encyclopedia article. Of course Manila has traffic problems. It is a major city. Every city of a similar size has traffic problems. Saying so doesn't tell you anything about Manila qua Manila. What is important for the transportation system is what exists now and what is unique, in particular jeepneys, FXes, sikads, tricycles, and the LRT and MRT. Whether Manila's traffic is worse than Quezon City, Jakarta, or Los Angeles and what could be some of the causes and solutions is relevant to a public policy debate, not an encyclopedia article. -- Bruce Hall ( talk) 05:24, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
I've deleted the sentence "Private automobiles are common within the city with almost all of its households having automobiles." because it is not true. I've been to the dumpsites in Tondo and none of the thousandss of families in and around there own private cars. Further, according to the LTO there are only about 2m registered cars, UVs, and SUVs in all of the Philippines which is less then the total number of households in Metro Manila, which was 2.1m ten years ago. There was another 3.2m registered "MC/TC". Considering that many households have more than one car and that Manila is poorer and less car-friendly then other less dense, more suburban Metro Manila communities, I would guess that the number of Manila households with cars is significantly under 50%, hardly "almost all", and probably close to a small minority. Here's the LTO's stats - http://www.lto.gov.ph/Stats2009/no_of_MV_TypeMode_LTO2009.html and http://www.lto.gov.ph/Stats2009/no_of_MV_Registered_LTO2009.html -- Bruce Hall ( talk) 07:34, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Here, it lists that the demographics are various religions. Following the citation link leads me to a random suspect travel site that lists the various distribution to being various religious orientation but showing Malay heritage instead of just religion. For this reason, I'm removing both the citation and that statement in the article until a more credible source can be found. Nexxie ( talk) 12:38, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Apparently, the image in the infobox frequently changes. There are two images, which one should we pose as the infobox pic.?
The left image or the right one?
Harel ( Not what you think?) 03:18, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
--Can you please backup your sources that say Maynila was ruled by Emperors and not "mere chieftains"? This claim is unfounded unless you can backup a source so we can check if its credible or not. I dont think you're doing a favor to Philippine History by injecting Nationalism. That's being intellectually dishonest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.55.202.104 ( talk) 13:49, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Article is too long. These are some of the longer sections that need to be trimmed:
– HTD ( ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 08:16, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
The Cultural Center of the Philippines and Coconut Palace, is not part of Manila, these structures are already part of Pasay City, if you want to include these structures as a point of interest, you can improve or develop the article Metro Manila, that serves as the seat of government of the Philippines. As a Filipino, i want the World to recognized that Metro Manila is the Capital city and Manila is only a distict, If any of you disagree with me, i have reasons to give, to prove my statements. 121.54.2.91 ( talk) 16:31, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
I've increased the min thread age from 90days to 120 days. The talk page is becoming too short. Moray An Par ( talk) 11:20, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
The info re in the Capital of the Philippines in the {{ Succession box}} templates in the External links section of this article appears to contradict info in that other article. I've placed {{ Contradict-other}} templates in both articles pending resolution of this apparent contradiction. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 05:49, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
This article bares almost no resemblance to the city of Manila, at least not the city I have visited. No smog, no poverty, no traffic congestion. This is propaganda. FixMacs ( talk) 22:51, 6 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by FixMacs ( talk • contribs) 22:47, 6 October 2011 (UTC)