Talk:Philippine peso

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of the WikiProject Numismatics, which is an attempt to facilitate the categorization and creation of accurate and formal Numismatism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join and see a list of open tasks to help with.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.

	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.

Contents 1 Japanese pesos 2 Re: Japanese pesos 3 Copyright status 4 "Very major" revisions 5 Dollar Sign and Peso Sign 6 P or PHP? 7 The Phillipine Peso 8 Japanese Yen in the Phillipines 9 Philippine PISO? 10 1 sentimo 11 Requested move 11.1 Survey 11.2 Discussion 11.2.1 For the love of everything good 12 Lack of Concensus 13 Fair use rationale for Image:Philippine Peso Bills.jpg 14 Peso/Piso again (2007 Nov) 15 Centimo or Centavo 16 Fair use rationale for Image:PHP 10 BagongLipunan.JPG 17 Fair use rationale for Image:PHP 100 BagongLipunan.jpg 18 Fair use rationale for Image:PHP 2 BagongLipunan.JPG 19 Fair use rationale for Image:PHP 20 BagongLipunan.jpg 20 Fair use rationale for Image:PHP 200 Quezon.jpg 21 Fair use rationale for Image:PHP 5 BagongLipunan.jpg 22 Fair use rationale for Image:PHP 50 BagongLipunan.jpg 23 Fair use rationale for Image:PHP 500 Roxas.jpg

[edit] Japanese pesos

Nothing about the pesos backed by the Japanese government during the occupation? --Error 00:16, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC) Why were some Japanese Pesos printed with serial numbers, and some had NO serial numbers? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.21.4.3 (talk) 20:26, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Japanese pesos

Nope. The "Mickey Mouse" money was never backed by the Japanese Occupational government. Exactly like the pesos used now, the Mickey Mouse banknotes are nothing more than IOUs by the government, to be paid in the future from the collection of taxes.

Example 1: I have no money, so I go to the store with an IOU of ten pesos for a can of sardines and the shopkeeper agrees. Now that just means that the shopkeeper can come back to me to collect. Also, that shopkeeper can exchange that IOU for something else. Let's say ten pesos worth of soap. Now the soap seller has the IOU. etc. This is all fine and good, but sooner or later someone out there is going to collect on that ten peso IOU, and if I don't have any money, then that IOU is worthless and gets "demonitised."

Sound exactly like what we have right now, right? Lots of debt. So the thing is we should just pay up, right? Nope. Unfortunately, due to interest, there is no physical way to pay off the debt.

Example 2: The Bangko Sentral prints fifty two one peso bills or coins, then divides the money into four bundles of thirteen. The BSP lend four people thirteen pesos and ask for one peso interest after one week. (Meaning each person should pay fourteen pesos after one week.) As collateral in case they cannot pay up, they give the BSP the titles to their houses.

Now it doesn't matter how they trade or work or what... there is in existence only fifty two pesos. That means if one person fulfills his obligation to pay the fourteen pesos, then at least one person has lost his house.

In short, total amount in existence: fifty two pesos. Amount that needs to be paid: fifty six pesos.

--El Caudillo 04:00, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright status

Just in case people want to know about the copyright status of Philippine currency, Philippine currency is in the public domain under Section 176 of the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines since it qualifies as a work of the Philippine government.

For more information, please see the article on Philippine copyright law.

--Akira123323 13:02, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "Very major" revisions

An anonymous user has deleted much of the history section of the article. I wonder why this was done and whether the material is worthy of reentry into this article.

The deleted information includes:

• Philippine currency in the pre-colonial era
• More information on Spanish pesos
• More information on the peso fuerte ("BPI pesos")
• Laws on the peso during the American era
• Philippine pesos during the American era
• World War II pesos
• The peso to 1960

Before the revisions, I was also going to add sections on the peso during the Marcos era and the peso today. Anyway, consensus would be very much appreciated.

--Akira123323 13:15, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's been reverted. Hopefully something like that (the deletions) don't happen again, but then again it can happen at any time. --Akira123323 08:41, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dollar Sign and Peso Sign

Before there were any so-called "dollars", the sign called in some countries the "dollar sign" ($) originally signified the Spanish peso. I read somewhere that the Filipinos used an S with one bar for their peso but with two bars for the US dollar. In any event, the use of the P as the symbol is recent and should be marked as such, with the date it became standard. --Sobolewski 16:41, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] P or PHP?

My high school teacher said that we should not use the peso sign we ordinarily used as it is the symbol for the Mexican peso, and most companies advertise their products using the PHP sign, which is more appropriate. Which is better, PHP or the old sign?

Correct peso sign is shown in the article. According to Unicode, the Philippine peso sign is only used in the Philippines. The Mexican peso uses the $ sign. Only reason PHP has widespread use is some fonts lack the proper peso sign. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wng (talk • contribs) 12:31, 29 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] The Phillipine Peso

If the Phillipines were under the United States as a Territory since 1898,why would the United States give the Phillipines its own currency(The peso)in 1902,when they could have used the United States Dollar as their currency? For Example,Puerto Rico is a commonwealth that is part of the United States(although it is outside of the 50 states) and it uses the United States dollar. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.226.245.131 (talk • contribs) 00:04, July 9, 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Japanese Yen in the Phillipines

If the Japanese annexed the phillipines into their empire as a Territory during WWII,why did they continue using the peso,instead of the Japanese Yen? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.226.245.131 (talk • contribs) 00:08, July 9, 2006 (UTC)

To answer both of your questions above: A territory that does not have the ultimate sovereignty or under occupation does not necessarily use the "motherland"'s or the occupier's currency. There are numerous example today and in the past.

Today

• Bermuda, an overseas territory of the U.K. uses Bermuda dollar, which is actually pegged to US dollar at par

Past

• During WWII, Japan issued many "currencies" that were supposed equal to occupiees' original currencies, such as Malayan dollar, and the same thing happened in Indonesia as well. In fact, these currencies depreciated very quickly against their respective original currencies.

--Chochopk 01:16, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Philippine PISO?

Okay, I can understand you seeing that as rambling and being off topic. But to say that it's a false sense of nationalism is very quite naive. Maybe I was being a little too excessive and extreme on the topic and not explicating my self correctly. I was just trying to explain how much of our culture was hidden. Although, there are still a great amount of tribal groups still present today, I believe that with-out the invasion of the Spanish that our country would have a lot more original cultural practices. There's so much that the Spanish took away from us and it would have been nice to see what those things were played out in today. I'm not sure how familiar you are with "Philippine History", but you should probably dig a little deeper into what you were taught in school and perhaps you will find what was really going on. Many people are just blind sided by the facts because they're too busy trying to imitate the oh-so popular American lifestyle. Mabuhay! By the way, the word "peso" my friends, is Spanish for weight. Peso is not an English word. Therefore the correct way would be "Philippine Piso", because it's the romanization for the Tagalog way of spelling it. Also, take a look at what "Dove1950" stated because it is very correct. "The main reason that both peso and piso are used is because peso was written when the main language on the currency was either Spanish or English. It is now Filipino, hence the use of piso. As the local name is the Filipino one, that is the name we use for the article title but, within the article, the name on the currency is reflected when discussing the different historical periods." Dove1950 14:51, 29 March 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.212.5.36 (talk) 10:51, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll ignore the alternative history speculation because that's out of the scope of this talk page and address instead the etymology discussion. "Peso" was originally from Spanish, but it does not mean that it can never become part of English. (There's a hundred or more words in English that came from Spanish.) There's plenty of evidence on this page that indicates that "peso" has already long ago entered the Philippine English dialect. Therefore, it's not wrong to say that "peso", as in the "Philippine peso", is correct (Philippine) English. Since this is the English Wikipedia, "Philippine peso" is the appropriate name for the article's name. --seav (talk) 12:05, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

This is an example of a false sense of nationalism, and much of the rambling is quite off-topic, by the way. --seav (talk) 01:54, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Why not be uniform and replace PISO with PESO. That's the right term anyway. PISO is the filipino term, therefore it should be connected with a filipino modifier. In this case, the modifier is English, so PESO is more appropriate. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.87.184.22 (talk) 14:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC).

I agree. It should read "Philippine Peso" in English, not "Philippine Piso". Can we request this to be changed back? Or what is the reason for calling it "Philippine Piso"? This is the English Wikipedia, so the title must use the proper English name. --Wng 12:38, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

The main reason that both peso and piso are used is because peso was written when the main language on the currency was either Spanish or English. It is now Filipino, hence the use of piso. As the local name is the Filipino one, that is the name we use for the article title but, within the article, the name on the currency is reflected when discussing the different historical periods.
Dove1950 14:51, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

We have already established that the Filipino spelling is "Piso" and the English spelling is "Peso". This is, however, an English encyclopedia, so the title should be "Philippine peso" regardless of what language is found in the coins or banknotes. Also, financial institutions, English-language publications, etc. all use "Philippine peso". English is an official language in the Philippines and when using English, the spelling has always been "peso". The Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (www.bsp.gov.ph, Central Bank of the Philippines) does use the spelling "piso" when referring to the banknotes and coins, such as "100-piso note", "1-piso coin", etc. probably to confirm that the coins and banknotes are marked "piso" (without English). However, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas spells the word "peso" in other contexts (as found in their website). If we really want to use the Filipino term, then the title should then be "Piso", not "Philippine Piso" (as this is neither correct in Filipino nor in English). However,

in other Wikipedia articles, the guideline is to use the English name (e.g. Philippines is used, not "Pilipinas"; Germany is used, not "Deutschland"). In order to follow the more widespread use, I believe the proper title should be changed back to "Philippine peso". --Wng 23:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Am changing this article's title to Philippine peso. The issuer of this currency, Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (Central Bank of the Philippines) spells it "peso" when writing in English [1]. The oldest bank of the Philippines spells it "peso" [2]. The largest bank in the Philippines spells it "peso" [3]. The ISO 4217 standard also says "peso". The Yahoo! currency page has Philippine peso as an option [4]. So does the Bloomberg L.P. [5]. Aside from the banknotes and coins that does say "piso" and it has been acknowledged as the correct Filipino spelling, everyone else uses "peso" when writing English. Therefore, it should read "Philippine peso", unless the English Wikipedia will switch to the

Filipino term, which would then read "Piso ng Pilipinas". -Wng 11:22, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I am reverting the change detailed above. None of the arguments are relevant, as this currency's name is obviously piso as shown by the exclusive use of this name on the coins and banknotes. That others choose to translate the name from Filipino to Spanish (not English) is irrelavant. Furthermore, in the above discussion, no concensus was reached and a change cannot therefore be made unilaterally.
Dove1950 12:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

This has not been changed unilaterally, as I am not the first who changed the title, and am not even the one who opened this topic. But the relevant issue is Filipinos overwhelmingly use the spelling "peso" (and consider this the correct English spelling) rather than "piso". Yes, peso is of Spanish origin, but "peso" remains the preferred English spelling as evidenced by all the web sites (they are all written in English), including the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas. Perhaps the burden of clarifying the term "Philippine piso" should be with you, as no such term can be found anywhere on the web except here. "Piso", yes! "Philippine piso", can't find anywhere! It is not only the banknotes and coins that matter, but the business and financial documents in the Philippines overwhelmingly use "peso". Why is the renminbi article not titled "Chinese renminbi" or "Chinese yuan"? I am not arguing that renminbi is incorrect as that's what the Chinese call them, but the banknotes and coins themselves also DO NOT

have renminbi written on them (whether in Chinese characters or the Latin alphabet). I won't mind if you change it to Chinese Yuan though, as that's what a lot of people also call the currency in English. Why is the New Taiwan dollar titled as it is? Yes, the Taiwanese people and everyone else will call it that when communicating in English, but that is not what is written on their banknotes. There is nowhere that says it's "new" whether in Chinese or any other language on the Taiwanese currency. If you insist that what is written on the banknotes and coins are what should be followed, the New Taiwan dollar should then also be titled "Chinese Yuan", or more specifically, it's the yuan of the Republic of China, issued by the Bank of Taiwan. --Wng 16:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

You chose a poor example as the article Chinese yuan does exist in order to bring together all the various yuan. I've now moved renminbi to Chinese renminbi as this was inconsistent with the standard we have accepted for numismatic articles. I'd personally like to address the issue of New Taiwan dollar but have not got round to it yet. If you want to change the standard away from what has been established, please put forward the proposal on Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics/Style. If you insist that the burden of proof is on me, let me prove it. The currency is from the Philippines (hence the word "Philippine") and it is called the piso in the local language (hence the word "piso").
Dove1950 16:41, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics/Style says:

• If the currency is listed at ISO 4217, use the name given there.

In fact, the currency is listed in that ISO, as the "Philippine Peso".[6] Therefore, if we follow the relevant guideline, the article would be titled "Philippine peso". -Will Beback · † · 20:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

To further quote "It has not yet been decided if there should be some exceptions to this rule, or if the country name should be added in cases where ISO 4217 does not list it. Feel free to discuss this on the talk page. Note that two exceptions are already in use, Aruban florin and Lebanese livre." Please go ahead and discuss.
Dove1950 22:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

The burden of proof is on the editor wishing an exception. The general naming convention says, in a nutshell:

• Generally, article naming should prefer what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature. Wikipedia:Naming conventions

Even in the Philippines the currency is referred to as the "peso" in English. -Will Beback · † · 23:33, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

The piso is called the piso on the currency. That is the most significant factor when dealing with "recognition". That some people choose to translate when speaking a foreign language is not very significant.
Dove1950 11:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Can you show English-language sources which refer to the currency as the "piso"? There are plenty that refer to it as the "peso". This is the English language Wikipedia, not the Tagalog version. -Will Beback · † · 17:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Certainly:

• http://www.guardianfx.com/information/asia/philippines.html
• Chester L. Krause & Clifford Mishler (1991). in Colin R. Bruce II: Standard Catalog of World Coins: 1801-1991, 18th ed., Krause Publications. ISBN 0-87341-150-1. 
• Albert Pick (1994). in Neil Shafer & Colin R. Bruce II: Standard Catalog of World Paper Money, General Issues, 7th ed., Krause Publications. ISBN 0-87341-207-9. 

Dove1950 19:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. On the other hand, here are sources that refer to the "Philippine peso":

• http://www.bsp.gov.ph/statistics/sdds/exchrate.htm Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas
• http://www.bsp.gov.ph/financial/forex.asp Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas
• http://quote.yahoo.com/m5?a=1&s=USD&t=PHP
• http://wwp.greenwichmeantime.com/time-zone/asia/philippines/currency.htm
• http://business.inquirer.net/money/topstories/view_article.php?article_id=59500
• http://www.adb.org/Documents/News/2005/nr2005166.asp Asian Development Bank
• http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/02/19/bloomberg/sxforex.php International Herald Tribune
• http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/biz/archives/2007/02/14/2003349009 Taipei Times
• http://www.newyorkfed.org/fxc/phpweb.html New York Federal Reserve
• http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapacific_business/view/244324/1/.html
• http://english.people.com.cn/200507/22/eng20050722_197731.html People's Daily (China)
• http://www.porsche.com/pap/_philippines_/ Porsche
• http://www.pnb.com.ph/losangeles/ Philippine National Bank
• http://ifcln001.worldbank.org/ifcext/pressroom/ifcpressroom.nsf/PressRelease?openform&8FCC6311C5BFC83C852569760058CB5A International Finance Corporation
• https://www.wellsfargo.com/per/intl_remittance/philippines Wells Fargo Bank
• http://www.philippinenews.com/news/view_article.html?article_id=c76b4a874dc66572e90dcb2a77230784 Philippine News
• http://www.philippineembassy-usa.org/events/ebulletin_16-28_feb06.htm Philippine-US embassy
• http://www.philippineconsulate-sf.org/news07_25.htm Philippine Consulate, SF
• http://www.gppb.gov.ph/cgi-bin/issuances/files/Guidelines%20on%20Foreign%20Denominated%20Bids.pdf Philippine government agency
• http://www.vba.va.gov/bln/21/Foreign/philscouts.htm U.S. Veterans Bureau
• ftp://ftp.bir.gov.ph/webadmin1/pdf/14242ruling03_04.pdf PHILIPPINES DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE BUREAU
• http://www.immigration.gov.ph/srrv_info.php Philippines Immigration Bureau

And so on. Even the goverment of the Philippines calls it a "peso" when using English, as do the major banks, including the centralbank. So do U.S. government agencies and banks. -Will Beback · † · 19:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

But take a look at {{crown}}, these currencies are spelled like krone, krona, koruna, etc. They all derive from what means "crown". But how come these articles are spelled in their respective languages, not "crown"? Why is it that people say "1000 yen" not "100 yens" with the "proper" English grammar? --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 00:13, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

"Peso" is not an English word. It is the word that the Philippine banks use for the currency when writing in English. The primary guideline says to use the ISO preference, which is also "peso". -Will Beback · † · 00:39, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Maybe it's time to rename this back. We are abiding by Wikipedia guidelines that specifically state article naming should prefer what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize. And "peso" is the spelling used when writing in English, whether in the Philippines, in the USA, and other places. Since the guidelines of using the ISO preference is also there, why are we trying to create another exception? We do not need to repeat the argument that it is indeed "piso" printed on the coins and banknotes, but that Filipinos distinguish "piso" as the Filipino spelling and "peso" as the English spelling should be enough justification that we use the English one in this encyclopedia. For numismatics articles, we should also abide by the guidelines set forth by Wikipedia as a whole. The title of the article regarding the Philippines is not Pilipinas, and it should follow that the title here is Philippine Peso. The crown has been distinguished in its various spellings in the ISO standard, so this

discussion does not follow that path. Rather, it follows that the New Taiwan Dollar should have its name changed as there is no "New" written on the coins and banknotes, and it should be called "Yuan" instead of "Dollar" as that is what is written as well. However, we all know it as the NT Dollar, so why change the name to make it more ambiguous and confuse everyone? This is an English encyclopedia, and unless all those exchange rate boards, the Wall Street Journal and other respectable publications, the Central Banks and other financial institutions will change their terminology, I think it is best that we follow the general English usage. --Wng 01:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Please think a little before moving this article again. This is an encyclopaedia. What matters is accuracy, not commonly held misconceptions. As you pretty much admit, no one is arguing that the name of the currency isn't piso, so simply let that stand. If others choose to write the name peso, they are forty years out of date and should follow Wikipedia's example. We mustn't let Wikipedia perpetuate the Anglicization of the information on the internet.
Dove1950 11:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Allow me to add my two sentimos' worth. I am a Filipino and I typically communicate in writing both in English and in Filipino. When doing so in English, we (Filipinos) use the term 'peso' to refer to our currency; when writing in Filipino, we use the term 'piso'. That's it, and that's all there is. -- Kguirnela 15:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I'll add mine as well (I am Filipino, reside in the Philippines, and speak English, Filipino and some Spanish). As far as I know, the Filipino terms piso and sentimo are coterminous with the English terms peso and centavo and (increasingly in modern usage) cent (amusingly, not centimo, but it was in historical usage) as far as how they are used today. Wherever you go, you will almost always never encounter anyone saying piso or sentimo in English usage; it will almost always be peso and centavo/cent. As far as I'm concerned, piso and sentimo are restricted to Tagalog and Philippine languages, but certainly not in English. Therefore, the article should be renamed back to Philippine peso. --Sky Harbor 21:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad to see that there is clear agreement that the local name in the local language is piso. As this is by far the most important name for the currency, this is the name that Wikipedia ought to use for the article title. If you look at the article text, you can see that peso is by no means ignored. If you can back up your statement on the frequency of use in the Philippines when speaking English, perhaps this fact ought to be included in the text. Either way, since 1967, the name of this currency has been piso and we should not be Anglicizing it, thus obscuring the real name.
Dove1950 14:37, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

What these contributors indicate is that "Peso" is the termed universally used when speaking in English. This is the Enlgish Wikiepdai so that is the important factor. "Peso" is no more anglicized than "piso". Both are foreign words. But you cannot seriosuly contend that the Philippine governemnt, the Philippine national bank, the U.S. Government, U.S. banks, and other sources are all incorrect about this. -Will Beback · † · 22:24, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

We already have consensus that we will use ISO 4217. I see no need to create a further exception, one that is not even used by the Philippine government and Philippine banks. The title should be "Philippine peso" in all articles. --Wng 11:20, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm also in favour of "piso", as this is the correct name of the currency. —Nightstallion (?) 19:02, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I would like to reiterate that Filipinos do not consider "piso" as correct English usage, and "Philippine piso" is an even weirder combination of English and Filipino that is unheard of in the Philippines, even when one speaks Taglish. In the Philippines, almost all business and financial documents are in English and they all say "peso". Ironically, it is also the Filipino Wikipedia community that is supporting that this article should be named "Philippine peso". We, Filipinos, distinguish between "peso" when writing in English, and "piso" when writing in Philippine languages. BUT a lot of us write in English rather than the local languages, so "peso" is actually the more common spelling. The Swiss franc is known as the "franc" in French and Romansh, as "Franken" in German, and as "franco" in Italian. No one says that "franco" is incorrect in Italian, but "franco" may be considered incorrect in French, German, or English. It's the same with the Philippine peso. That the Central Bank of the Philippines

chose to print only "piso" but not "peso" did not change the fact that English is still recognized as an official language in the Philippines and Filipinos continue to use "peso" in English and Taglish. In other currencies, English or French may be printed, but this does not mean that they are official languages in those countries either. Anyhow, we changed this to "Philippine peso" in compliance with two guidelines: the Wikipedia guideline that article titles should be in English and the numismatics guideline to use ISO 4217. Unless both rules no longer apply, I don't think we need a poll to determine what the article title should be. --Wng 12:39, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Still no concensus, so I have again reverted. I've also clarified what happened in 1967, in case anyone was unsure. In reponse to Wng's points, it is indeed ironic that the Filipino Wkipedia community should object to their own language being used for something from the Philippines.
Dove1950 10:19, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

How do you count the consensus on this page? It seems that we've had new editors come in and express opinions and that there is essentially a consensus towards "Peso". "Consensus", in Wikipedia terms, doesn't mean "unanimous", but usually means having a "supermajority" or preponderance of opinion. If there isn't one we can make a request for comment (WP:RfC. For a page move, we should really follow the "request for move" procedures. WP:RM. I see roughly four ediotrs favoring "peso" and two editors favoring "piso". Note also that the user who moved the article to "Piso" sought a consensus for the change.[7] He just did it as part of a set of wholesale changes, probably without attention to the specifics. There's no consensus to support that change. --Will Beback · † · 11:34, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Like Will Beback, I would like to know what exactly is consensus on this page? And why is your preference of calling it "Philippine piso" which no Filipino, American, British, Canadian, or Australian uses, be the title before a "consensus" is reached? Editors who prefer "peso" are in the majority and are following the general Wikipedia guidelines as well as the numismatics guidelines. Those who prefer "piso" are in the minority, not following the general Wikipedia guidelines, and not even following the numismatics guidelines. Perhaps you are right that it was indeed in 1967 that the coins and banknotes had Filipino words printed on them, but that is a non-event. It's not a Republic Act or a Presidential Decree that said the peso will henceforth be called piso in English. What is next? Are you going to change Philippines to Pilipinas, because, yes, that's what's printed on the coins. Or do you want to change Swiss franc to Helvetian Franken first? It's probably time to request mediation regarding this

matter. --Wng 22:58, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

My two centavos: it is absolutely stupid and ignorant to say in a conversation "Hey dude, I bought this hamburger for twenty pisos," your partner would roll over the hot summer street laughing and peeing in his pants if that ever happened.

With that said, If anyone really insists of using "piso" on the article title, I'd say instead of "Philippine," use "Filipino," like "Filipino piso", or else, just use "Philippine peso," every encyclopedia, book, newspaper, tabloid and porn film uses "Philippine peso," not "Philippine piso" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Howard the Duck (talk • contribs) 07:19, 26 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] 1 sentimo

According to the central bank [8], the 1 sentimo is still in circulation. Can whoever removed it from this article substantiate this?
Dove1950 12:57, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

This article has been renamed from Philippine piso to Philippine peso as the result of a move request. Anyone moving the article in the near future will be doing so against consensus, and such a move is likely to be treated as vandalism. Discuss controversial changes before making them. Contrary to Berserkerz Crit, I would contest that waiting for an impartial admin to close the discussion would probably have been very wise indeed. --Stemonitis 08:30, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lack of Concensus

This is an appallingly ignorant move. The "reference" that is being discussed above holds no water as it is written in English. The corresponding Filipino text was not quoted, presumably because it uses the term piso, simply reinforcing the point already made that the term peso remains common when writing in English. It does not change what's written on the currency, nor does it change the fact that Filipino is the national language, not English. The comment of Stemonitis is very accurate and I hope Berserkerz Crit will admit that he/she jumped the gun. In the mean time, I will do what I can to ensure the accuracy of this article even if its title is currently unalterable.
Dove1950 16:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Ten "supports" to three "opposes" is a fairly clear consensus. Please don't move assocated articles to "piso" to spite this decision. -Will Beback · † · 18:05, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Note: There is no national language, only "official languages". --Howard the Duck 02:48, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me, Filipino is the national language but English is the language used on law, so all laws that are created in English, which would be transliterated into Filipino and other languages. If a conflict arises between the transliterations, the English text would prevail, at all times. --Howard the Duck 05:55, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

That is correct since it is the original language of the law, etc., although I am aware of two laws involving Nueva Ecija that were written during Aquino's time in Filipino (so their official transliterations are either Nuweba Esiha or Nweba Esiha; I prefer the former). But yes, virtually all legislation is in English, and as such, it prevails at all times over the translations. --Sky Harbor 15:38, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Philippine Peso Bills.jpg

Image:Philippine Peso Bills.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Peso/Piso again (2007 Nov)

first thread below taken from User talk:Dove1950.

I see you're still not convinced that the name of the currency in English is "peso". Yes, the word written on the banknotes and coins is "piso" but that's because the language used on the banknotes and coins is Filipino. That does not support your assertion that the name of the currency in English is "peso". See [10]. That's as good as any source stating that the name of the currency in English is "peso". --seav (talk) 17:12, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

You restarted this debate, since the opening line of the article had been static since April until your recent edits began. Just for the record (though I know you'll ignore this on your past track record) I am not saying that the English name is piso, I am saying that the Filipino name is piso. If you actually read the article and looked at my edits of it you'd see that that has been my position all along. While you're at it, you might read your own edits and at least correct the error in your reference to Tagalog.
Dove1950 (talk) 17:50, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

If you're insisting on the staticity of the opening line of the article, you should remember that it has been "peso" first since the article was started in 2003, until your insistence on "piso" early this year. So the fact that it has been "piso" since April holds no water for me. And you're going against the result of the discussion on Talk:Philippine peso by changing "peso" to "piso" when you edited the article on November 15 (with the slightly misleading "Rearranged" edit summary). Anyway, the change to highlight "peso" in the first sentence just brings it in line with Wikipedia's Manual of Style. For instance, we have

Germany, officially the Federal Republic of Germany (German: Bundesrepublik Deutschland...

and not

Bundesrepublik Deutschland (German) or the Federal Republic of Germany...

which is the format you are reverting to. Anyway, thanks for pointing out my "language" error. But you should've fixed it instead of reverting. --seav (talk) 02:07, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

On November 14 (not 15), I made no changes to the opening line. I rearranged the article somewhat and replace peso with piso where appropriate, mostly in the picture titles. If you actually look at the article history, following the "vote" on the title, a half-way house was tacitly agreed to, where-by the title would be incorrect but the text correct. This satisfied everyone until you upset the apple cart a few days ago.
Dove1950 (talk) 15:28, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

To clarify, your edit was on November 15 in my time zone (UTC+8) and my mention of that edit was meant to point out your changes from "peso" to "piso" and was not meant to point out the first sentence.

The discussion about the first sentence was just to explain my succeeding edit after that November 14/15 edit of yours. In addition to modifying the first sentence, I edited the article so that when referring to the currency, "peso" is used, while "piso" is used to refer to the individual banknotes and coins. That edit of mine is actually bringing the article in line with the consensus (or "vote") last April 2007, so I don't think I did any upsetting of apple carts. I hope I have made my comments and intentions clear.

Here's a follow-up question: If you are "not saying that the English name is piso" as you mentioned above (which implies that you agree that the English name is "peso") then why are you saying that the article's title is incorrect? The Wikipedia Manual of Style says that the article's title should be in English, preferably the most common name in English. --seav (talk) 05:15, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

The numismatic style is clear that we should use local names. The Manual of Style actually links to Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics/Style, so the two are in no way in conflict. There are two very good reasons why we use local names. First, it aids identification for a reader not familiar with the subject. Second, it is the proper form. Remember that many currencies have alternate names sometimes used in English, e.g., "crown" for krona/krone/koruna, "pound" for livre/lira/pfund, "penny" for pfennig/penning/denier, etc. If we start demanding that "English" names are used in titles, we rapidly get into ridiculous situations.
It is vital that this encyclopaedia starts to become more systematically organized. A style has been agreed by those who are working on the currency articles and it should be stuck to so as to decrease the chaotic nature of Wikipedia. With regards the piso, we can all see what's written on the coins and banknotes, its piso. When the English language was used on the currency, the name was peso and the article reflects this. Continuing to use a name which was changed forty years ago is what's incorrect. No "vote" can change what's written on the coins, so unless you plan to scratch out the all the "I"s and carve in "E"s on the coins, it's going to remain piso. Also, don't forget that peso is not an English word but a Spanish word. What's the English translation? Weight. Go ahead, change the article title to Philippines weight!
Dove1950 (talk) 10:42, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Here are your arguments and my rebuttals:

• Use the local language according to Numismatics MoS. Rebuttal: We are on the English Wikipedia and English is an official language of the Philippines (together with Filipino). So using the English translation is not conflicting. English is a local language.
• It aids in the identification for a reader not familiar with the language. Rebuttal: piso is mentioned prominently throughout the article in my version and explained sufficiently in the first paragraph. So reader is still well informed and the subject is still clearly identified.
• Proper form. I'll counter you with Republic Act No. 7653, a Philippine Law written in English: It says "The Peso. — The unit of monetary value in the Philippines is the 'peso,'" Now that's proper form: for English. Yes, what's written on the banknotes/coins is proper form but it does not mean that that is the only proper form. For the Philippine peso, "Piso" is the proper form in Filipino.
• Peso is not English but Spanish. So what? Etymologies are interesting knowledge but they don't dictate language usage. Hundreds of thousands of words in all languages have meanings/usage different from their original roots.

I'm reverting your changes back until you can provide convincing arguments. --seav (talk) 23:08, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

It is my impression that the compromise we agreed to previously is that we call the individual coins and bills "pisos", as that is what is writtn on them, but that we call the currency as a whole the "peso". Is there a problem with that? Why are we fighting over this again? ·:· Will Beback ·:· 23:39, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Ask Dove1950; all I'm doing is following that agreed compromise. --seav (talk) 00:02, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Am I the only one who thinks WP:NC supersedes Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics/Style? In this case, the use of "Philippine peso" is far and away the most prevalent usage; the numismatics project should also change their style guideline as it should only "follow" not supersede the general Wikipedia guidelines. --Howard the Duck 02:48, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I personally do not know whether WikiProject-specific style guidelines can supercede the Wikipedia-wide MoS. I'm not aware of any such discussions. But I agree that the Numismatics naming conventions as it currently stands need to be amended. I've written a comment on appropriate talk page. --seav (talk) 04:34, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

No Wikiproject guideline should supersede the general guideline it should be following.

Is the common usage in any way relevant to this discussion? Because in every conversation I've had, and having been born here, I've lived in this country for 28 years, the use of Piso in an English sentence is a specific reference to to the Php1.00 coin. (There is a piso on the floor. Pick it up.) Every other use of Piso in a supposedly English sentence is ungrammatical as far as english is concerned, and is actually acceptable only because it is taglish, which, unlike English, mind you, is not an official language of the Philippines. Perhaps this should make it clear: since English is a legally recognized official language of the Philippines, Peso is a local name for the Philippine currency. Piso is another local name for the currency. We are choosing here between two words that are both local names. I therefore believe that "Use the local language according to Numismatics MoS" is not a relevant guideline in this case.Alternativity (talk) 05:43, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I've never heard of the sentence "There is a piso on the floor. Pick it up," either a person says it in Tagalog "Kunin mo yung piso" (pick up the one-peso coin) or "Pick up the coin" (especially used in private schools with a speak English policy). In any case, the most prevalent name to denote the Philippine currency in English is peso. --Howard the Duck 06:03, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Let's start with the question of precendence as to guidelines. To quote Wikipedia:Naming conventions, "Naming conventions are a list of guidelines on how to create and name pages. These are conventions, not rules carved in stone. As Wikipedia grows and changes, some conventions that once made sense may become outdated or otherwise inappropriate." It then goes on to list Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics/Style which states "Use the local name for the denomination even if there is an English translation". If you want to claim that both peso and piso are local forms, then it is clear that the article should use the more common, i.e., piso, and should not try and impose an anglophone bias.
Those who claim that piso cannot be used in an English sentence appear to be in conflict with others who think it can be. No doubt it took time for peso to be accepted among English speakers, who may have originally used a name like dollar. The point is that there is no prohibition on using terms which originate in other languages and we should respect the decision of forty years ago to change the name of the currency to piso.
Dove1950 (talk) 14:47, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

First, yes, the project-wide MoS is a guideline and is not set in stone. So is the Numismatics guidelines: it is also not set in stone. So why insist on "Philippine piso" as per Numismatics guidelines as if it were set in stone?

Second, you say that we should use the more common form if there are more than one local form for currency names? Whoa. Is that a made-up guideline? I would think that since there is no Numismatics guideline that says to use the "more common local form", then we can use a project-wide guideline: Use English. And you can't give me Wikipedia's Use Common Name since it says there (in a nutshell) that "except where other accepted Wikipedia naming conventions give a different indication, use the most common name of a person or thing that does not conflict with the names of other people or things." So you only use Use Common Name as a last resort. Furthermore, who says that "piso" is the more common name? Did you pull that out from the air? I'll slap you with a [citation needed] for that.

Third, "anglophone bias"? On the English Wikipedia? Are you kidding me? The fact that this is the English Wikipedia means that anglophone bias is the norm. We have Germany not Deutschland and Ferdinand Magellan not Fernão de Magalhães. We prefer the English form since that what most English readers would expect and only defer to the local name in very, very special cases. "Piso" is not a special case. If you say that this "use English" norm is incorrect or pandering to the dumb people, then we already have the original names in the local languages (and even in the non-Latin alphabets) in the very first sentence of their respective articles. The fact that we show the name in non-Latin scripts is already far more than what majority of other encyclopedias are doing.

Nope, your arguments are still not convincing. --seav (talk) 02:49, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Don't tell me a WikiProject "style guideline" supersedes the Wikipedia guideline it is supposed to follow. It's like saying the USA PATRIOT Act supersedes the U.S. Constitution - it simply doesn't make sense. When a WikiProject "style guideline" conflicts with a Wikipedia guideline, we are bound to follow the Wikipedia guideline, which points for "peso" being more frequently used against "piso" in the English language. It doesn't matter if "piso" can be used in English, what matters is if what name is used more frequently in English.

It'll be interesting to note what term the Philippine government uses for official dealings (read: not website listings, etc.) like when writing to the World Bank. --Howard the Duck 01:51, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Go find me a local - someone who lives in the Philippines - who uses the term Piso in an English sentence. Who, may I ask, are these "others who think it can be"? I've never heard it done, except in error. It's never done because it's just plain grammatically incorrect to do so. Any gradeschool student would instantly correct you if you were caught saying "ten pisos". (Unless you had just forked over ten Piso coins (meaning 10 pcs x Php1.00) and you were talking about the individual coins, not the currency - but that is so far-fetched.) Of course, that's if the kid were smart and polite. Otherwise the kid would make fun of you. That's how incorrect it is according to local usage. The decision you are referring to is the decision to use the Filipino language as the language on the bills and coins - a decision, mind you, made by the Central Bank of the Philippines (BSP) and by the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP), both of which have continued to use the term Peso, and which have never (except in error) used Piso in an English sentence. Every single BSP and GRP document since the decision you refer to, from my University of the Philippines Payslip to my Social Service Membership Form to the 2007 Budget bill, serves as a reference to prove that Peso is the proper way to refer to the Philippine currency in an English sentence. The Komisyon sa Wikang Filipinowill tell you the exact same thing. Alternativity (talk) 17:17, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Centimo or Centavo

What is the evidence that the subdivision of the peso was called the centavo between 1864 and 1903? The coins have "C^S DE PESO" on them, which the catalogues give as centimos rather than centavos. In the absence of any contradictory evidence, we ought to follow the catalogues.
Dove1950 (talk) 14:47, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Centavo is the more-frequently used name in English. For example, when you want to know your remaining balance in mobile phones, the voice-over says, "You have 15 pesos and zero centavos." --Howard the Duck 01:52, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

So, you have no evidence as I requested. In that case, revert.
Dove1950 (talk) 14:19, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

So you don't have an evidence it is the most commonly used name in English. In this case, revert the revert (actually taken care off).

One example of the use of peso and centavo in a non-Philippine website. Notice the absence of the words piso and sentimo. --Howard the Duck 16:01, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Now please read what I wrote at the begining of this section. "What is the evidence that the subdivision of the peso was called the centavo between 1864 and 1903? The coins have "C^S DE PESO" on them, which the catalogues give as centimos rather than centavos. In the absence of any contradictory evidence, we ought to follow the catalogues." If you know nothing of the subject in question, just say so and we can get the article right.
Dove1950 (talk) 20:27, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't know about the past, but currently the word "centavo" is used to refer to subdivisions of the Philippine peso when writing in English. That's evidenced by easily available sources.[11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] ·:· Will Beback ·:· 21:20, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Why dig up the past when the present English users use "centavo" predominantly? If you don't know WP:NC then there's no need for this section at all. --Howard the Duck 03:07, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

(re-indent) I think this is a valid question. While it's quite certain that the name of the currency has been "peso/piso" almost ever since its creation, the subdivisions could be another matter. --seav (talk) 03:34, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

This will be very confusing to the reader, it's like changing Prince to the "The Artist Formerly Known as Prince" to the Prince article when he was known as "The Artist Formerly Known as Prince" for a time. What could be done is to have a table on what the currency was called on the coins per se during its respective eras. --Howard the Duck 03:47, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, either this is just a name change (like the Prince example) or something intrinsic changed (like Joy Division to New Order). If the "centimo" of old is meant to be the very same thing as today's centavo (which I feel it is, but I have no citation for that), then I would agree with using centavo. --seav (talk) 04:57, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

"Why dig up the past"? Because this is an encyclopaedia and therefore, the article should be complete and not just focussed on recent history. To be clear, at present, all the evidence points to the following chronology for the names of the currency units as used on the currency:

1864-1903: centimo and peso

1903-1967: centavo and peso

1967-: sentimo and piso

We are having what ought to be a separate discussion regarding which names to use when referring to the currency (we are agreed that we use the names written on the currency when referring to the individual coins and banknotes) but my question is regarding the use of the name centimo between 1864 and 1903. The coins have "C^S DE PESO". Krause & Mishler's catalogue and this website [22] interpret this as centimo but this is being changed to centavo in this article. My question (for the third time) is, does anyone have evidence that contradicts what's in the catalogue?
Dove1950 (talk) 23:26, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Let me ask a historian acquaintance of mine by e-mail. He's interested in heraldry and vexillology and probably in numismatics as well. --seav (talk) 02:41, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I look forward to your friend's response.
Dove1950 16:50, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Call it centavo on that era. Add the table you've created to the article; we don't call the same things by different names, as is the one found in Prince (musician): he's not called The Artist Formerly Known as Prince during the time he was known by that name. And this edit changed peso/centavo->piso/sentimo throughout the article not only on use from 1864-1903 (LOL).

Here's a crash course in English as it's used in the Philippines: Read Gloria Arroyo's 2007 State of the Nation Address and look for the word "piso;" it is only used when the president was speaking in Filipino (Compare 2006 when the president used "peso" when speaking in English). --Howard the Duck 02:50, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Howard, what evidence have you got for the subdivision of the peso being called the centavo during that period? I'm very disappointed that you can't understand this simple question. I'm also amazed that you can't read the evidence you yourself quote. That edit categorically did not change all instances of peso and centavo to piso and sentimo. It changed centavo/peso to sentimo/piso after 1967. There's no call for lies anywhere in Wikipedia.
Dove1950 16:50, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

You don't understand either, don't you? It means it doesn't matter what it is called at that time, just call it as peso/centavo for all instances but add a simple table at the history section chronicling how the currency was called, and the obligatory "piso" and "sentimo" in the lead. This is like a variation of WP:ENGVAR: you won't use "color" and "colour" and "Prince" and "The Artist Formerly Called as Prince" on the same article -- same as here, you won't use two or more "English" names (piso/peso and centavo/centimo/sentimo) on the same thing. --Howard the Duck 08:45, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

P.S.: I didn't say you changed it for all instances: I said "throughout", those are 2 different things. As I've said "peso" should be the boldfaced word since it is the most commonly used name. --Howard the Duck 08:47, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I find that an unacceptable idea. Essentially, you are saying that (assuming it was called the centimo) we should call it the centavo because it's "easier". It's not easier, it's wrong. Consider the following examples. The real was the subdivision (¹⁄₁₀) of the Colombian peso before 1853, then the name changed to the decimo. Your attitude would have us use only the name decimo with a single line to note the earlier name. Similarly, the Egyptian pound was subdivided into 1000 oshr el qirsh (literally one tenth of a qirsh) before 1916, then into 1000 milliemes after. Again, you'd ignore the earlier name except for a single sentence. These are (I would be so bold as to presume) currencies you know very little about. Consequently, such an arrangement would be confusing to you. Now put yourself in the position of someone unfamiliar with the peso/piso. Your method would be far more confusing than simply accepting that the name of the subdivision changed and to use the appropriate name for the period under discussion.
Would you say that the Beatles were a skiffle band? Of course not, the Quarrymen were, despite sharing three members. I hope this diversion into pop helps you see the point as you are perhaps more familiar with pop than currencies.
Dove1950 (talk) 21:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

If we can put together a table with the historical and official names for the currency and denominations than that'd be great. But that wouldn't change the verifiable fact that the subdivisions of the Philippine currency are called "centavos" when speaking or writing in English. Since that is the most commonly-used term, that is the term we should use for this article. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 22:03, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

IMHO the only place where "piso" would be appropriate is to describe the banknotes and coins (like the ones used in the captions). Any other use would be silly. --Howard the Duck 15:55, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I fear you are getting the priorities for editing entirely wrong. This article should reflect the realities of the subject, not what terminology is "commonly used". That's why, in both cases we've been discussing, what's written on the currency is paramount. If "C^S DE PESO" did stand for "centimo de peso" and we say that the peso was subdivided into 100 centavos, we're lying. I'm quite happy to use a table, but as an addition to the text, not a contradiction.
Dove1950 (talk) 22:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

The current usage is that the peso is divided into centavos. If this were the Tagalog WP we might say that the piso is divided into centimos. Oddly enough though, even the Tagalog WP calls them "centavos".[23] The reality is that everyone, except for numismatists, calls them "centavos". ·:· Will Beback ·:· 22:31, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

You mean the current English usage is centavo and Filipino is sentimo. Centimo de peso (note the "C") appears to have been the subdivision between 1864 and 1903. Please don't confuse the issues. I agree that it is odd that the English names suddenly pop up in the list of coins in the Tagalog Wikipedia. Someone should probably change that.
Dove1950 (talk) 16:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

"Centavo" isn't an English name. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 21:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

If centavo isn't English then neither is peso. Both obviously came from Spanish but were used when English was the language used on the currency. I'm a bit unsure what your point is.
Dove1950 (talk) 20:58, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:PHP 10 BagongLipunan.JPG

Image:PHP 10 BagongLipunan.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:39, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:PHP 100 BagongLipunan.jpg

Image:PHP 100 BagongLipunan.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:39, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:PHP 2 BagongLipunan.JPG

Image:PHP 2 BagongLipunan.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:39, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:PHP 20 BagongLipunan.jpg

Image:PHP 20 BagongLipunan.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:39, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:PHP 200 Quezon.jpg

Image:PHP 200 Quezon.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:39, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:PHP 5 BagongLipunan.jpg

Image:PHP 5 BagongLipunan.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:39, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:PHP 50 BagongLipunan.jpg

Image:PHP 50 BagongLipunan.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:40, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:PHP 500 Roxas.jpg

Image:PHP 500 Roxas.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:40, 26 November 2007 (UTC)