Talk:Philippine Commission
Tambayan Philippines Mid‑importance | |||||||
| |||||||
 | United States History Low‑importance | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
Bold textipinanganak si jose rizal noong may 18 charrrrrrrrrrrrr ==4 July 2007 changes== I noticed today that this page seems to discuss just the Second Philippine Commission. My understanding is that the Schurman Commission was the First Philippine commission and the Taft Commission was the Second Philippine Commission. I have edited the page to break it up into separate sections about First and Second Philippine Commissions, and I've recast some previous sections as subsections inside of the section about the Second Philippine Commission.
As I was doing this, I noticed that info on this page disagrees with info on the Taft Comission page. The Taft commission page discusses a session not mentioned on this page, and ithis page discusses sessions not mentioned on the Taft commission page. Is there anyone out here who knows enough about this to straighten this out? My suggestion would be to merge the info on the two pages, verify the accuracy of the merged info (citing the sources used in that verification), move the details to the Taft commission page, and summarize the highlights of Taft Commission page in the Second Philippine Commission section on this page. -- Boracay Bill 05:03, 4 July 2007 (UTC)mmgg,sad.agd,hadasdauaiwgenwoweunasd/uqwqdgdsdtityadsnkgasd,astbusitaspsjsanyga,ym,osgsjhtwakflp ≈wqdgykasaysduwq
Do we need this article?
Do we need this article when there are already two other articles on the two very distinct Philippine Commissions? I would suggest that we (a) merge the information from this article into their respective articles and then (b) redirect this page to the Taft Commission article adding a hatnote to the Taft Commission article directing people to the First Philippine Commission article if they were looking for that. I suggest (a) because this seems to be largely duplicate information and because the two Philippine Commission are connected by their name but not by their function. I suggest (b) because the Taft Commission was around for decades, was the most important of the two commissions, and is best known and therefore I suspect that most who link here intend to link to the Taft Commission article. --Iloilo Wanderer (talk) 10:09, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
- I see that a number of other mainspace articles currently link to this one ([1]). Most of them probably mean to link to the disambiguation page between the 1st and 2nd commissions. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 02:34, 11 March 2015 (UTC)]
- I agree that most of the links probably do intend to link to the Taft Commission since that was the one that was around for decades and it had real power. It passed laws and set up institutions.
- So, there are now two proposals:
- (1) to redirect this page to the Taft Commission page adding a hatnote or other link directing people to the First Commission and
- (2) turning this page into a simple disambiguation page.
- I still prefer option (1) since I think that the Second/Taft Philippine Commission is a much more significant body and references about are more common than the First Commission. Comments? --Iloilo Wanderer (talk) 05:18, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:57, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
Meeting place
It met in Baguio, but where in Manila did it meet? Howard the Duck (talk) 20:43, 12 August 2021 (UTC)