Talk:List of Sultans of Sulu
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on 15 December 2006. The result of the discussion was keep. |
 |
This page was previously nominated for deletion.
Please see prior discussion before considering re-nomination:
|
This a fork from Sultanate of Sulu, which is also in need of a cleanup. --Noypi380 10:08, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
- Sultanate article is now clean, but this list still needs improvement. I noticed that the original writer of this text was trying to clarify the real sultans from the imposters. I hope more clarification be done soon, so that more revisions can continue.
Uhm,Confused.Realy confused.PLEASE SOMEONE CHANGE THIS!(I would if I could keep track) but from this mess I can hardly tell who the curent (and if there is one) Sultan is. New Babylon.
Contents |
[edit] philippine's islamic history of the sultanate
maybe if we could account for philippine's islamic geneology of the peoples of sulu, the history of the sultanate may be cleared. is there anybody in the department of asian studies or philippine studies of the university of the phillippines, or ateneo or siliman - who can help cite the sultanate properly in wikipedia? after all this is still philippine in heritage - mrs.f
[edit] Neutrality, cleanup and sources
This article has no sources / references for the moment, and certainly needs some (half of the article consists of maybe, allegedly, ...). If this can't be done, the article fails verifiability and original research policies and should be deleted.
The article is also absolutely not written according to the Manual of Style, and includes too much bold, complete sections in all caps, etcetera. This is not a reason for deletion, but the cleanup tag should only be removed once those two problems are solved.
Most importantly, the article is not written according to WP:NPOV. From point 29 on, the article is more concerned about who should and shouldn't have been sultan than with who actually was sultan. This is not a neutral point of view, certainly not when no sources are given. Syaing things like that court decisions are mistakes are serious, certainly when it is about who should rule a country (or part of a country), and can be very inflammatory. Wikipedia (its articles and editors) should not take posityion in such disputes, but give all positions in such a dispute in a neutral way, by using reliable third party (secondary) sources. This means that such statements about what should or should not have happened should always be in the form of "newspaper X says on that date that Y should have happened" and "Court Z decided that A was correct". Care should be given to the presentation of both sides, even if your sympathy lies with only one of them. Fram 08:42, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- Hmmm. What about nominating this for deletion instead? Can't find any source on the list of sultans, and if there really is none, then wikipedia can't invent it. What do you think? --Noypi380 03:23, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
- I'm waiting with this nomination until the work on the article has stopped. I hoped that by explaining that sources etcetera are needed, someone would make the effort of adding them. If there are indeed no sources, or none are given soon, I'll nominate it. I can't and won't stop you of course if you want to delete it now already, I'm just trying to be patient for once (I'm usually nominating for deletion on sight :-) ).
REGARDING SULU SULTANATE
How come that the contributor of the list of sultan of sulu always tends to promote only their line, they are always put their name and gridges that they must be the original and the nxt line in siccession accroding to their law, Why do they jsut create their own SULTANTE and put them in BASILAN where the AbuSayaff and other Terosrist is Hiding, Maybe from there they can get afull army of Bandits and a full support of the Forest Anilmals, They sucks and this Raja Bunso thinks that he is the real and only SULTAN that must hold the power over SULU. Build yoiyur own castle and create your own sultanate, nobody is preventing you, just leave alone the History. If you are a good leader, people of Sulu themselves will do it and will proclaim you.
I'm going to try to clean this up some today. So, if you're an admin about to delete this per the AfD request, give me a few hours, please? Deltopia 14:02, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Actual Sultan of Sulu
Hi all, just wanted to mention that there is an actual reigning Sultan of Sulu. I'm not an expert on Sulu history and don't claim to know anyone of Sulu royal descent. I just wanted to share the information that I found on http://www.royalsulu.com. It's a pretty detailed website that shows the genealogy, policies, curriculum vitae, and other information about the current Sultan. It also provides a section on fake sultans and the current sultan's legitimacy. While I know that the information provided on the website may be disputed, the Philippine government and media tacitly acknowledge HM Sultan Fuad Kiram I as the Sulu sovereign (as shown by his government backed negotiations with the Abu Sayef group for release of hostages, and his television profile interviews). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jmlp (talk • contribs) 23:46, 2 February 2007 (UTC).
This "Sultanate" is being used in a 419 e-mail scam going around. This is most likely an attempt to generate false information on the web for people to find when 'researching' the Sultan after being contacted via spam email.
[edit] =
There is confusion in the sultanate of sulu because there are so many impostors in the heir of the very first Sultan Kiram. According to recent news and archives I personally saw with my own eyes, it is Sultan Rodinood Julaspi Kiram II who is the true Sultan of Sulu. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.97.248.153 (talk) 11:01, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
