Talk:Andrés Bonifacio

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of Tambayan Philippines, the WikiProject and notice board for topics related to the Philippines. To participate, visit the Tambayan for more information.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Google or not, if you want to be accurate, diacritics are only for accents. It is not official or accurate to use diacritcs in the name of Andres Bonifacio. This discussion and vote is invalid.--Jondel 05:41, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pieces of evidences of the Real First Philippine President

There are pieces of evidences found by Dr. Pio Valenzuela somewhere in the province of Bulacan pointing to the establishment of a national government for the Philippines. With Andres Bonifacio as its Pangulo (President), he referred to the Philippines as Katagalugan not recognizing the Spanish colonizers' name for the Philippines in honor of the then Spanish King.

See Katagalugan. I don't see any mention of A. Bonifacio. --Jondel 03:31, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

The word 'Katagalugan' was only a part of the title of the republic given by Andres Bonifacio with Emilio Jacinto and others, mostly members of the Katipunan. The papers found in Bulacan revealed that the said republic was formed in secret during the Spanish colonization of the Philippines.

[edit] I oppose the move. Correct name should be Andres Bonifacio

• Oppose Correct Filipino usage. I am Filipino, born and raised in the Philippines. You can check libraries and legal records that prove that we never use 'é' nor 'á' (special characters) in our language. The only special letters we use are 'ñ', 'ng' and 'll'. Maurice Ycaza 12:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Spanish is not a Philippine language.

More important than that, Bonifacio lived during Spanish times, when people still knew how to use diacritics properly (e.g., José Rizal), well into World War II.

Yes but this is the English wikipedia and the official current name in the Philippines should be used which does not have diacritrics.--Jondel 13:24, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

More important than that, this an English written encyclopedia. Almost all books I've seen use Andres. If the only reason was to guide the reader on how to pronounce his name, then make a spoken version of this article. --Howard the Duck 12:56, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

I understand where you’re coming from, but this has nothing to do with stress or pronunciation. To add to that, we’ve also seen a lot of books writing names as Hakkinen, Ataturk, or Miguel Lopez de Legaspi (wrong on two counts), or leaving out the ñ in place names such as Las Pinas and Paranaque. I don’t suppose these and numerous other examples justify them being emulated in Wikipedia.

[edit] This should resolve this

Click the image on the right and post here how the paper bill spelt Bonifacio's name. --Howard the Duck 15:17, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

José Rizal’s name has also been written without diacritics in peso bills and coins since the Marcos era.

But it was recommended to use an "é," while the "é" in Andrés was rarely, if ever used. --Howard the Duck 14:59, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Moved again

Consensus hasn't been reached. Why was it moved? --Howard the Duck 05:56, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree. There never was a consensus, even previously on whether to move Andrés Bonifacio to Andres Bonifacio. In fact, that action went against the majority vote.

Where was this originally placed, anyway? --Howard the Duck 06:14, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Eh, did we not do a Manual of Style for Philippine articles that addressed this? I was putting it in line with that since Bonifacio is a historical figure. --Chris S. 04:42, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] To Jondel

I see that the article has been renamed, re-renamed, re-re-renamed, then re-re-re-renamed. Personally, I have no qualms about retaining the US-keyboard-inputtable title. (We have such a policy for—even pre-1946—Filipino’s names in the Tagalog Wikipedia.) However, we should be at least consistent with this, dropping as well the diacritic from “José Rizal” if we are to do so with “Andrés Bonifacio”, or retaining the diacritic in the latter should we retain it in the former.

As for where the Katipunero’s name comes from, the name Andrés (English Andrew) comes from Spain. Consonant clusters (as in the /dr/ in the Katipunero’s name) are not native to Philippine languages; these were imported from none other than Spain.

As for the official name, there was only one way to write one’s Spanish name during the Spanish and (early) American eras, and that was correctly with diacritics.

Ok. I do wish I could see his signature or birth certificate to see if there is a diacritic or not. Anyway, I say that his name has diacritics at the US library of congresss (or is it ?) at www.loc.gov. That should be authoritive enough. Maybe Philippine textbooks and need to be corrected. Most of us (Filipinos) are used to seeing the name without diacritics. (I know, this is not the right way to write the name). I probably won't be renaming this but who knows in the future(?) somebody might rename again. --Jondel 22:44, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Birth certificates were not in existence during the Spanish era, they came into existence - and only in Manila - shortly after the arrival of the Americans. However, there are baptismal records. I've had 8 years of experience researching Philippine baptismal records from the 19th century and more often then ever, they are written with accents. You have to remember that the Philippines was a Spanish colony and Spanish was the official language hence we treat Spanish era just as we would with any contemporary individual from any Spanish-speaking country.

Furthermore, even though this is the English Wikipedia, you will find that the biographical articles of people from Spanish-speaking countries are written with accents even if the American press routinely omits them (e.g., Evita Perón vs. Peron & Thalía vs. Thalia); heck even Slobodan Milošević's name is with the usual Serbian diacritics. The compromise I laid out in the Philippine moS is based on the Japanese one. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles)#Names of historical figures. --Chris S. 05:03, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

My take: It's a case-by-case basis. Rizal scholars insist the correct form is with the diacritic. I haven't seen Bonifacio scholars yet. Did Agoncillo in History of the Filipino People use Andrés? --Howard the Duck 06:16, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

This wouldn't work due to inconsistent application; in general English-language history books usually do not indicate the diacritics of historical subjects. But yet, despite that these subjects have the diacritics included in their name. The normal Wikipedia convention apparently is to use the name in the context that it appeared for that person at that time as in the aforementioned Perón, Milošević, Simón Bolívar, or even for modern-day subjects like Hugo Chávez and Jean Chrétien. --Chris S. 08:57, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

But those people use their name with diacritics, but we don't know how Bonifacio did this. (When did Filipinos drop the use of diacritics, anyway, or did its use is widespread?) --Howard the Duck 14:07, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Being born in the Spanish era, we can safely assume he did since his contemporaries did. Diacritics were dropping during the first half of the 20th century under American rule and long after Bonifacio. Letters written by Bonifacio are available online, however he signed them And. Bonifacio. --Chris S. 17:54, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chinese??

this article is connected to the 'Chinese Filipinos' category. Is it a fact that Bonifacio is of partial Chinese ancestry and this can be correctly placed in the article or should the category simply be deleted from connection to this article as not supported by fact? Thanks Hmains 23:00, 18 August 2006 (UTC)