Talk:Jabidah massacre

Inconsistency

"There has never been an official count, and different sources number the victims from 11 to about 200." but at the introduction of the article, the max number is set to 68. I think the wikipedia article needs to be consistent with the numbers it shows, it can not be to show two different numbers in the same article. One number should be shown, with source citations, and additional sources could then be provided. As it is right now, this is confusing ... 84.112.136.52 (talk) 10:12, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Hmm... It seems that I am responsible for that (See [1]. Please also see the explanatory note in the article linked just following "11 to about 200.") All the sources mentioned in that note except one put the upper limit of the estimated number massacred at around 60 persons. The 200 figure comes from this source cited in the note. I'll leave discussion of whether or not the 200 figure merits further clarification or exclusion to others, as I'm no expert on this subtopic of Philippine history (and please do observe WP:DUE re this). I do note in passing that the figure of 200 is mentioned elsewhere in the article as the total number of those recruited for the program (supported by this source cited in the article). Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 06:55, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

In Nur Misuari's authorized biography by Tom Stern he describes how many Muslims believed that up to 400 were killed, though Nur Misuari's presentations showed that 68 were killed. It says so on page 33. Rigoberto Tiglao counters Misuari's claims by pointing out how Misuari has never even produced a list of names of those killed. Tiglao believes that this is evidence that points out that even Misuari himself is either unsure of his claims, or is just making them up. Will add this soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brownbiker (talk • contribs) 15:51, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

NPOV

"This second phase of the training turned mutinous when the recruits discovered their true mission. It struck the recruits that the plan would mean not only fighting their brother Muslims in Sabah, but also possibly killing their own Tausūg and Sama relatives living there"

The wording in the above section should be made more neutral.Some unsourced parts should probably be removed since the topic is highly controversial.--Catlemur (talk) 21:55, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Hmmm... I see that the wording to which you object is cited to, and is supported by, this source. That source appears to have been published in 2002, predating the initial version of this article which appeared in 2008. It looks to me as if this ought to be treated as a WP:DUE issue. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:19, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Removal of material re Rigoberto Tiglao

This edit caught my eye. The edit removed some content from the Refutation section (which I have since reformatted), saying "RV Whitewashing". I don't want to get into the middle of an edit war over this, but it looks to me as if WP:DUE argues for the inclusion of the removed material. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:39, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Removal of Locsin material from Refutation/Contradictions section

Hi! I have removed this entry from the said section because it has been fact-checked by a news organization as false. Also, it was Pro-Marcos lawyer Larry Gadon who made the claim that Locsin made the claim, not any recorded instances by Locsin himself:

According to Marcos loyalist lawyer Larry Gadon, Teddy Boy Locsin, a former reporter of the Philippine Free Press which was shut down during martial law, reportedly said that Senator Benigno Aquino, Jr. directed him to invent and write false reports about the incident to frustrate the plans of President Marcos to occupy Sabah by peaceful means to benefiting on the territory rich resources and oil.

This is the fact-check that the statement was a hoax -> HOAX: Teddyboy Locsin ‘forced to falsify’ report on Jabidah Massacre upon Ninoy’s order Locsin himself tweeted in 2016 that it was authorized by an officer in the defunct Philippine Constabulary.

Regards, -Object404 (talk) 07:19, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

References

Peripatetic NPOV-tags

I had a hard time to match the NPOV tags to the section Talk:Jabidah_massacre#NPOV further above. Initially, a tag was placed at the top of the article[2] by User:Catlemur in June 2015, but dated "March 2015" (I guess a copypaste typo from the {{Use mdy dates}}-tag). It was then frivolously changed in Nov 2018[3] to "March 2018" by an IP, and divided over diverse sections[4] by User:Koakaulana, without changing dates.

@Koakaulana and Catlemur: Do the present tags still meet your original intentions? It seems that at least Jabidah_massacre#International_reactions is pretty much free of issues. –Austronesier (talk) 20:36, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

@Austronesier: Looking at the sections where there are tags, I think those sections are generally controversial, rather than NPOV per se. Since they explain their sources, I don't actually think they're NPOV. - Batongmalake (talk) 03:08, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Statement attributed to Mr. Tiglao

I have edited a statement attributed to Mr. Tiglao. The column in which the statement appeared was fact checked by e-Boto / Tsek.ph. Tsek.ph is supported by media organizations and academics. Their statement identified Mr. Tiglao's statement as false. Edit is here should anyone wish to review the edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jabidah_massacre&diff=1105052695&oldid=1103195795 - Crisantom (talk) 09:45, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

That WP:BOLD edit has been reverted; see WP:BRD Perhaps this point needs expansion re the differing viewpoints, and citations supporting expanded details. See WP:DUE, part of WP:NPOV. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 10:29, 20 August 2022 (UTC)