Jump to content

Talk:Davao City/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Reliability of Numbeo's declaration that Davao City is the 4th Safest City in the World

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Moot discussion now that User:VanHalers09 has changed the paragraph and all references. Thanks VanHalers09 for cleaning this up. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 01:56, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

I'd like to request the removal of information relating to Numbeo's declaration that Davao City is the 4th Safest City in the World. Numbeo's Terms of Use clearly states that the site "allows anyone with an Internet connection to alter its content" and that nothing found in it "has necessarily been reviewed by people with the expertise required to provide you with complete, accurate or reliable information."

The Terms of Use also states that, "No warranty whatsoever is made that any of the articles are accurate. There is absolutely no assurance that any statement contained at the website is correct or precise." Given these facts, I think we should remove any reference to Davao City being the 4th Safest City in the World, unless an independent research body comes up with more reliable, objective, and peer-reviewed results. — Lawrence Ruiz (talk) 08:52, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Lawrence Ruiz for bringing this to our attention. I strongly agree to remove any and all info related to the safety ranking. The articles in mainstream media (SunStar and Inquirer.net) are entirely based on Numbeo.com and this website clearly fails WP:RS. There is no question, it should not be used, see also WP:NOTRELIABLE. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:17, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks P 1 9 9  ✉ for the speedy response. Hopefully, changes could be made as soon as possible. -- Lawrence Ruiz (talk) 05:48, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
I would say give it another week for others to comment on this. If there will be no compelling arguments why this info should be kept by Thursday October 29, the entire paragraph will be removed. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 12:32, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Today the paragraph was changed to: "Davao City is constantly described by its residents and the national media as arguably among one of the safe cities in the Philippines", using the same unreliable references. I still think it should be removed altogether. This statement is still relying on the same flawed references, using weasel words, and not NPOV. Still no compelling arguments given here why we should keep it... -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:42, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Davao City. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:07, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Davao City. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:15, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Add inclusive years of PNP's data

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Moot discussion since User:Signedzzz wasn't able to explain why adding the years would not be neutral and it has been more than a week since his last response. Thank you. mcLovin'tosh (talk) 05:55, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

I don't consider this as "too detailed". The 2015 census and the land area have their entry in the lead, why can't we add the years where PNP's data saying Davao City has the highest number of murder and 4th in rape? Source says that their data is from 2010-2015. So can we add that simple information on the lead? Thanks.

~ mcLovin'tosh (talk) 03:26, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

No, that would not be neutral. Thw article should have a detailed section explaining the "safest city" myth, but the lead is fine as it is. Thanks. zzz (talk) 03:52, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
What makes it not neutral? the years "2010-2015" seems fine. so that means it's okay to remove the words "based on the 2015 census" in the line from the 2nd paragraph where it says "..and a population of 1,632,991 people based on the 2015 census"? that's even more detailed than adding the years where Davao City has the highest number of murder and 4th in rape.
The Guardian and Reuters whom I believe are neutral sources even state the years from the police data. how come we can't do it here? please explain how come it would not be neutral.
~ mcLovin'tosh (talk) 13:06, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

It's not neutral to add that but not add anything about where the myth started or came from. That should be obvious. WP:Competence. Also see WP:LEAD. zzz (talk) 06:44, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 February 2018

Please remove this paragraph "Davao City is described by its residents and the national media as one of the world's safest cities.[8][9][10][11][12] In reality, the city has the highest murder rate and the second highest rape rate in the Philippines, according to police data." This is FAKE NEWS. This is an insult to the people and history of Dabaweños. They can remove the president of the Philippines but they cannot sell out the truth to true Dabaweños. We have earned our peace and order the hard way and we intend to keep it at that. Silipinas1280 (talk) 09:27, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. The text is pretty terrible, but I'm not inclined to remove these two sentences on subjects that have had media coverage without further discussion. —KuyaBriBriTalk 16:21, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 February 2018

Davao City described by its residents and the national media as one of the world's safest cities.[1][2][3][4][5] Nelperago (talk) 11:59, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —KuyaBriBriTalk 16:22, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Duterte calls for press conference Monday afternoon - CNN Philippines.
  2. ^ Aerial drones eyed for Davao City disaster response - Yahoo! News.
  3. ^ "Duterte admits links to Davao Death Squad". ABS-CBN.
  4. ^ "Clean, safe Davao City is stage for Kadayawan's riot of color and dance".
  5. ^ "Open Access BPO to launch 2nd Philippine office in Davao".

Fake info from a propagandist. Who's spreading false news about our president also media here in the Philippines are biased they are paid by oligarchs.

Why this political oppositions hurt our city. You are being fooled. Why did you add this?

Are you one of the oppositions?

Davao is falsely described in the national media as one of the world's safest cities.[8][9][10][11] In reality, the city has the highest murder rate and the second highest rape rate in the Philippines, according to police data.[12][13]

Reference https://news.mb.com.ph/2018/02/13/trillanes-declared-persona-non-grata-in-davao-city/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jox 1984 (talk • contribs) 09:19, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Sources used in the article are Reuters and The Guardian. zzz (talk) 15:06, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 February 2018

On the last paragraph of the introduction or overview part which states

"Davao City is falsely described by its residents and the national media as one of the world's safest cities.[8][9][10][11][12] In reality, the city has the highest murder rate and the second highest rape rate in the Philippines, according to police data.[13][14]?"

Both sources are from statements of politicians and bias medias who are against the current president who is from Davao City. I am from Davao City. Rape and drugs are very very seldom in this city since the President Rodrigo Duterte became the mayor of Davao City. Yes, there were vigilante killings during his reign. Criminals became lesser and the city became the safest city in Philippines. Aimanpql (talk) 00:12, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

 Done Vandalism was removed along with two redlinked references. Spintendo ᔦᔭ 02:06, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 Not done for now: I will work on rewording this sentence. It has some problems, but they are solvable. Spintendo ᔦᔭ 02:15, 2 February 2018 (UTC)


The problems with this statement are that it says "Davao City is falsely described by its residents and the national media as one of the world's safest cities." It's not Davao City residents who are "falsely describing the city as safe". The only WP:RS posted for the claim statement said the people who are describing it falsely are those living in Manila: "The unusually high trust rating for Duterte in Metro Manila is believed to be a result of his record of incorruptibility and his accomplishment in making Davao City one of the world's safest cities." The belief is coming from metro Manilla — that is the only location where people are "falsely describing" the city. As far as for whom the city is not safe for, it is not everyday citizens of the town who should worry about their safety, rather, it is the city's traditionally vulnerable populations that need to worry — criminals, homeless children and those suffering from drug addiction. Again, from the statement in question's own source: "Human rights groups have documented at least 1,400 killings in Davao that they allege had been carried out by death squads since 1998. Most of those murdered were drug users, petty criminals and street children." The sentence thus needs to be reworded to better reflect the salient facts that its own references make claim to. Spintendo ᔦᔭ 02:25, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

These complaints from new accounts are baseless, and there is no valid reason given for removing the extremely well sourced material (The Guardian and Reuters). If you want to add something about the Davao Death Squad, I wouldn't necessarily object to that, if it was a in the form of a summary and not just a long quote. zzz (talk) 03:47, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
@Ziggy1985: please come and discuss this issue here, instead of repeatedly removing sourced content from the article. Green Giant (talk) 12:57, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
It's not the Guardian or Reuters data that is being disputed here. It's the claim statement in the sentence before the sentence containing the Guardian and Reuters data. That sentence makes the claim of "safest city" and it uses data which originates, according to the reference links, from Numbeo.com, a Serbian based company which utilizes data provided by its site visitors in order to determine a city's "safety" rankings. If this is what is meant by "national media", I think that needs to be clarified. Also, Numbeo's data is clearly corrupt. They arrive at their designations through "contributors" to the website. For example, a city like Paris France gets its ratings from 238 contributors. London has 404 contributors. Davao City has 889 contributors. This claim of being the worlds safest city is patently absurd, and repeating it here, if even just to show it is a false claim, is not worth the time. Listing the Numbeo data here is a bit like listing my grandmother's opinions on the world's safest cities, and then showing references which indicate her views are wrong. This may be easily done, but whats the point? Spintendo      13:30, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
See [1]. zzz (talk) 12:33, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 February 2018

89thWarrior (talk) 18:27, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

The portion of the Davao City being ranked as not a safer city is false. Please edit it and remove it. I have all the right to correct this because I am from Davao City and been living here for 29 years already. I should know more.

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:48, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 February 2018

Hi please change Davao is falsely described in the national media as one of the world's safest cities.[8][9][10][11] In reality, the city has the highest murder rate and the second highest rape rate in the Philippines, according to police data.[12][13] to Davao received a Seal of Good local Governance.

Explanation: the current statement that Davao has the highest murder rate and second highest rape rate in the Philippines is false because Davao City has received its Seal of Good Local Governance. It would not have received this award from the Department of Interior and Local Government if it had high murder and rape cases. I can even provide you an updated link from the government department called DILG. Please go to this link http://dilg.gov.ph/PDF_File/reports_resources/dilg-reports-resources-201825_7aac3eccd6.pdf and find region XI there you can find City of Davao listed. The articles from reuters were based on accusations of Antonio Trillanes IV with no corresponding evidences. Trillanes has been attacking the current administration as he is a well known propagandist and coup leader he has lead a failed coup attempt called oakwood muitny against President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo He is a also a traitor who had backdoor deals with china. Other links here:

http://www.sunstar.com.ph/davao/local-news/2018/02/13/trillanes-lewis-unwelcome-davao-city-588720

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/968794/pnp-official-defends-davao-schools-trillanes-on-crime-statistics-pnp-cascolan-trillanes-davao-lewis-persona-non-grata

http://www.sunstar.com.ph/davao/local-news/2017/11/13/davao-official-seal-award-testament-citys-good-governance-574577

Trillanes is not a credible source:

http://news.abs-cbn.com/nation/04/08/08/2-magdalo-officers-get-life-over-oakwood-mutiny

http://globalnation.inquirer.net/154094/group-presses-trillanes-for-info-on-backchannel-talks-with-china

I have provided information regarding this issue. Please thoroughly review it and change it. As it is very unfair for Davao which is just three hours away from my home.

to signedzzz have it your own way but I do not think it is necessary to include that in the description of the city it is very unbecoming of an editor; And as what I have said how can Davao receive a Seal of Good local governance if it has high murder and rapes committed? My second source refutes the claim as Camilo Cascolan who is a PNP official and a Directorate of opoerations has statistics of crime in davao city. Even if it is said by trillanes or by reuters it is still the same "claim" if you really want to include that though then put it on the "LAW AND ORDER" section not on the Description of Davao City. Look im not forcing you to remove it if you don't want to but atleast put it in the proper section and not in the description. Assyrius7 (talk) 16:07, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

It would be helpful if you placed your comments correctly, at the end of the thread. How Davao can get a Seal of Good local governance, when it has the highest murder rate in the country, is a good question. It suggests that the award is highly suspect. The WP:lead section is the appropriate place to summarise this important information. (How many other cities claim to be the safest city in the world, when they actually are among the least safe?) zzz (talk) 20:37, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
And another thing: the "safest city in the world" myth has been in the lead for years. The only difference is, now it is being debunked. zzz (talk) 20:57, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
The sources have nothing to do with Trillanes. They are purely based on national police statistics. zzz (talk) 18:22, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
to signedzzz Yes it does because he has been Spreading these lies that the medias have picked up. The description is damaging to Davao City even the Chief PNP of Davao refuted these claims. Why dont you go to davao yourself and get the statistics? This article is supposed to describe what davao is It is not supposed to be for lies. Have you read my sources? Assyrius7 (talk) [moved by Signedzzz per WP:TPO.]
The Guardian and Reuters sources used in the article do not mention Trillanes. I do not need to physically go to Davao for any reason (and I daresay I would be "persona non grata".) Your sources do not refute the PNP statistics. The fact that a Philippine Senator you don't like has also quoted the same statistics does not make them false (but it does increase their relevance). zzz (talk) 20:11, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

To signedzzz as what I have said have it your way if you question the seal then you question the integrity of the DILG which has given the awards to davao before the presidency of its former mayor Rodrigo Duterte. This award is every year FYI. and I don't think the lead section is the place to put it as it has already been stated in the law and order section of the article I am not even a davaoeño and I consider this rude and biased. But I don't care anymore have fun tarnishing the name of Davao city and The President but the truth and the opinion of the majority of Filipinos will always prevail. 83% approval rating fyi. Coming from a person from General Santos I feel safer when I visited Davao City. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Assyrius7 (talk • contribs) 20:59, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Speaking personally, I tend to "feel safe" wherever I go. zzz (talk) 21:06, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

To signedzzz Not me I don't feel safe In Manila nor would I be safe in Sulu which is much more dangerous — Preceding unsigned comment added by Assyrius7 (talk • contribs) 21:09, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

@Signedzzz: "The 'safest city in the world' myth has been in the lead for years. The only difference is, now it is being debunked." Are you implying that one of the purposes of the lead section in Wikipedia articles is to atone for incorrectly-made claims of the past? Please advise. Spintendo      14:29, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
No, that is not what I was implying. The implication is that the claim of safest city in the world is inherently lead-worthy, and the fact that it has been in the lead for several years unopposed shows that I am not alone in thinking that. zzz (talk) 18:24, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

to signedzzz You can remove the myth but why would you add something that is also unproven? it just shows how one sided you are. Davao might not be the safest city but its far from the most dangerous in the Philippines. Adding a description like that is damaging to Davao City's reputation and tourism. The guardian and reuters(because they are left wing liberals) are also highly bias to Duterte that is why they are damaging his reputation but why include Davao? If this was the case why did you not include it before? why now when Duterte id the president? It seems that the guardian and reuters know more than the chief of police of Davao? or the PNP director of operations? Even the current mayor has refuted these claims and is ready to release the statistics to the public. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Assyrius7 (talk • contribs) 20:21, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

That is not what it says in the article. zzz (talk) 06:34, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

yes it does or you cant understand it? im out of here. you are clearly one of those propagandists... no wonder wikipedia is listed as inaccurate source

 Not done: This dispute is a local Philippines matter of no consequence outside of that particular region. Spintendo      12:01, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
@User:Spintendo: can you rephrase it to a more neutral tone something like:
Davao is described in national media reports in the Philippines as one of the world's safest cities. However, the city has the highest murder rate and the second highest rape rate in the Philippines, according to police data.
As simple as that, a contradiction of national media sources and international media sources. If one says PH media is false while intl media is "in reality", that's not neutral. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.190.67.61 (talk) 13:41, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
See false balance. zzz (talk) 19:23, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Refuted

@Cemby:[2] What was "refuted"? The additional reference does not seem to be relevant. zzz (talk) 10:52, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

additional sources: www.sunstar.com.ph/davao/local-news/2017/08/02/crime-rate-davao-city-down-44-556413



this is a blog but it actually makes sense... Raw data should be analysed. It has been known to all that the Government presents data without analysis often: https://medium.com/@mig.garcia/is-davao-city-still-the-murder-capital-of-the-philippines-gotham-and-the-myth-8ff3cca60ed4 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cemby (talk • contribs) 11:30, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Reuters are using national police data, not government data. Blogs are not WP:RS. Hard to see how to analyze a murder rate so that it turns out differently. zzz (talk) 11:44, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
just an FYI thing: National Police is actually administered and controlled by the National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM) and is part of the Department of the Interior and Local Government, therefore Philippine National Police is a government-attached agency. anyway, this has nothing to do with the issue. I just can't help but notice. I'm good. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.190.67.38 (talk) 05:45, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

adding POV tag

as per WP:DRIVEBYTAG, “There is no requirement in Wikipedia policies that editors must "pay their dues" by working on an article before they can add a tag, so long as they explain the rationale for the tag on the talk page.”

REASON for TAGGING: the content of the article is obviously being disputed by multiple users vs user:zzz as per this talk page. see also WP:OWN.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Chinchinhan (talk • contribs) 23:22, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

"REASON for TAGGING: the content of the article is obviously being disputed" is a circular argument. Your actual reason for the tag: "that lead section is politically motivated written from someone in the UK". Explain. zzz (talk) 23:33, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
Quite frankly, my actual reason is "im an anti davao “safest city” myth guy but that section in the lead is written biased. how can national media can “falsely” described that and that while reuters & guardians cannot?". I'm a mythbuster myself, and nothing against you or what not, in fact I actually laud you for your contributions as a Wikipedia Editor, but when it comes to articles related to Duterte? what happened man? why is there a media bias? False balance doesnt apply here based on my analysis. We are not in a circular argument here as well. I don't care about Duterte. Also, Davao is an "okay" city but anyway let's just set those aside, those are not relevant. Going back, I'm okay with that section in the lead, it's just that you portray Philippine media as an inferior and unreliable source due to "falsely" claiming something that and that while Reuters and Guardians are superior and "INFALLIBLE". I mean i love Reuters and Guardians. They are excellent and reliable sources, but the way you wrote those lines in the lead is different. How is that? My vision is just to have that re-written, not remove that just like what other editors want. Come on man, you're better than that.
What would you suggest? Just removing the word "falsely" would imply there is some truth to the myth. "Davao has been falsely described" would be more accurate, I will add that now. zzz (talk) 05:14, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Well that's fair enough. It's better than just simply "falsely". Anyway, I suggest that the word "imprecisely" instead of "falsely" is more appropriate for that; it would still not imply there is some truth to the myth though; and "in reality" could be changed to "in actuality". That sounds more appropriate. I mean "reality" sounds more of a "fiction/fantasy vs reality" thing in the literature world if that makes sense. Well it's up to you though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.190.67.38 (talk) 05:31, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
There is no enormous shame that the national media got something wrong. I don't see it as such a big deal, just needs setting straight in the article. I can't see any way to improve on what is there now. zzz (talk) 06:43, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
I removed "in reality", because one user thought it gave them the right to edit war without having read the article etc. Anyhow, hopefully that also resolves this dispute. zzz (talk) 11:46, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Looks fine to me now. However i still suggest to have the pov tag added until disputes from other users are fully resolved. Cheers. User:Chinchinhan
One more thing, how about changing falsely to fallaciously? that might help resolve the dispute.
I've added "incorrectly" because "fallaciously" is archaic or non-standard and means the same thing.

Recently added school article and theme song of the city Tayo'y Dabawenyo

on the section Education below of it the Other tertiary institutions in the city include: pls add a recently added school article of Davao Holy Cross College of Calinan and link the article Davao Doctors' College, Brokenshire College Toril which is "Brokenshire College of Davao" and found possibly etymology source [3] if it's correct you add the ref and if it's for the template too? and Someone should put/upload the theme song of the city, source is here [4] Spaceabon (☎) 11:28, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

 Already done Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 03:44, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Created page: List of universities and colleges in Davao City‎

Since the education section was written like a list as to what Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists says, I therefore edited the education section by moving the lists of schools to List of universities and colleges in Davao City‎. My basis was to how Zamboanga City and Bacolod was written in their education section.

You may reply on this thread if you have any concerns to what I've made. You can also check the talk page of List of universities and colleges in Davao City‎ to further discuss this matter.

Thanks and good day! Bumbl_loid (talk) 04:39, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Neutrality

This article does not mention the Davao Death Squad. zzz (talk) 07:59, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Which is odd, So why not?Slatersteven (talk) 14:42, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

nPOV Dispute - Lead section

I would like to dispute once again this article, acertain to what was written by user:zzz for some reasons:

1. It might sound contradictory as to what the national media suggests that Davao City was the "Safest City in the World", one link given by user:zzz had pointed out that Davao City was given a Seal of Good Local Governance and the Most Child Friendly City for highly-urbanized city category in 2015; of which the national government is giving such recognition based on the city's performance, especially on it's law and order.

Said seal is given to a city that performed well in terms of Law and Order, Local Ordinance implementations, and Good Governance. This had been properly reviewed based on the data provided by the police reports, Commission on Audit, and the Philippine Statistics Authority. And despite to the "police data" (as what was reported by The Guardian) has shown, Davao police debunked that accusations that the crime rate of their City was high. Local police suggests that of the data they had provided, only 36% were listed as crimes, says to one reporting in CNN Philippines, and that the others are attributed to the non-index crimes.

Non-index crimes are the highest in the Philippines as what was once said here, and thus index crimes are lower in comparison. Thus, data shown by The Guardian do include the non-index crimes, and therefore should not be the basis to how safe a certain place is. (Note: The data that is implying by The Guardian is the same data that once in question by Mar Roxas, a presidential candidate back in 2016).

For further reading about the Seal of Good Local Governance, check this link.

2. As to what WP:CITSTRUCT suggests, this writing should be fall under the history of Davao City, not in the lead section. There is also a section provided under "Law and Order" I suggest it should have been written there.

If we agree to what user:zzz wrote about this article, then neither London should be tagged as "More Dangerous City than of New York" as to what The Telegraph suggests, and thus should be written this on London's lead section. Crimes in London should also be highlighted on the lead section and shall be do the same to other cities....in which I highly contradict, and therefore must be resolved here with Davao City's article. Crime in London is really high though, says The Guardian. But as for London, it had provided a special section under "Policing and crime" where it highlights the criminal statistics of the said city. This haven't written otherwise on the lead section since this had being suggested to how WP:CITSTRUCT is suggesting and thus Davao City should be written as the same.

Also, please see WP:MOSPHIL to further review the lead section. I would suggest that this should have this be removed on the lead section and instead to be written under the History, or in the Law and Order section. For somehow, I had tried this once in order to uniform the article as to what WP: MOSPHIL and WP:CITSTRUCT suggests, but user:zzz disagrees the edit as if that this article is his own, leading to a short edit war between us a few days ago. I hope he is aware about WP:OWN as one had suggested this earlier on the previous nPOV Dispute.

I also noticed that the old nPOV Dispute was removed without a proper disclosure to concerning parties. It was once suggested by user:ChinChinhan that he would use the term "fallaciously" instead of "incorrectly", but neither which has been followed.

Therefore, I would like to give concensus to this dispute to be reviewed by everyone and that the nPOV Dispute shall only be removed once conditions had met. Bumbl_loid (talk) 20:39, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

To add, I would like to also debunk the statement that the national media here had incorrectly reported Davao City as the safest city. In fact, they even highlighted the real situation in Davao City, tagging as the 4th highest in terms of index crimes. This had been reported by The Philippine Star in 2016, ABS CBN in 2015, Vera Files in 2017 (with data from 2014-2016), and GMA News in 2016.
To recall, "The Safest City" branding was tagged in Davao back in 2015. And tho unlike what was written by user:zzz, national media did their part to report the real status of the city. To what user:zzz has written, I say this may fall to the writer's point of view, in which violates the neutrality of this article. With the guidelines written at WP:NPOV, opinions should not be regarded as facts. Therefore, to tag national media being bias to their reporting about Davao, but in which was not as to what my examples had given earlier, therefore it is best to have it removed.
Anyhow, Davao City's tag as the "safest city" was been debunked as well and has been agreed to be removed from the article. On the other hand, the crime rate should better be written at the Law and Order section as it was been provided in the very beginning, and this must not even to summarized at the lead section. Otherwise, other cities with troubling crimes like of London should follow the same format. Bumbl_loid (talk) 02:58, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
The crime rate has been discussed, see above. You should suggest improvements to the London article at Talk:London. I fail to see any relevance. zzz (talk) 09:45, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
What? So you want a negative connotations to all cities in Wikipidia, even if you won't follow the any of Wikipidian standards? Futhermore, Davao Death Squad was given an article. It was even linked here.
Now I see your real intention to Davao City article. Political issues, stands or opinions isn't welcome here. Bumbl_loid (talk) 13:51, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
And neither is attacking then user, not what they say.Slatersteven (talk) 14:43, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
AS to the topic, as far as I can tell the sources say it is one of the safest, not the safest. So do we have any sources that dispute that?Slatersteven (talk) 14:53, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Slatersteven See the Law and order section of the article. zzz (talk) 14:57, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Synthesis, we can only say what RS say not what we infer them to say. To illustrate, have you tabulated all of the crime figures for all of the cities in the world?. If so , which 10 cities have lower violent crime rates then Davoa?Slatersteven (talk) 15:09, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
To be clear, are you saying you would remove the word "incorrectly" in "Davao has been incorrectly described as one of the world's safest cities in national media reports"? The word (or "falsely" or whatever) was originally added by another editor, but I thought it was fair. WP:BLUESKY zzz (talk) 15:22, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Yes, unless RS say it is incorrect we cannot.Slatersteven (talk) 15:32, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
You could be right, I have removed it. zzz (talk) 15:35, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Now it looks as though Wikipedia is allowing Numbeo as a WP:RS, unfortunately. zzz (talk) 15:43, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
I have reverted my revert. This has been stable for a while. Maybe someone else will offer an opinion. zzz (talk) 15:45, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
The Guardian ref [5] states "On the back of his claims of having established law and order in Davao, Duterte, 72, was seen as a strong man, a saviour and an antidote to the “narco” state the Philippines had apparently spiralled into. But behind the bluster the statistics don’t lie: Davao still has the highest murder rate in the country and the second highest number of rapes, according to national police data for 2010-15." Statistics don't lie, i.e. the claim is a lie. Not synth, it's there in the source. zzz (talk) 18:12, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Not really, as the claim is "the world", not "the Philippines". Also murder (and/or rape) is not the only crime looked at for safety. Thus this does not show the claims it is the "X safest city in the world" is false.Slatersteven (talk) 12:50, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
"Not really, as the claim is "the world", not "the Philippines"." Could you spell out what you mean by that. (If you are saying what I think you are saying, then I would have to disagree.) zzz (talk) 19:51, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
What it says, our article says "one of the safest cities in the world", thus (even if we accept that only rape and murder count towards that) your source only talks about its statistics with regards to the Philippines.Slatersteven (talk) 09:26, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
Yes, it says it's not one of the safest cities in the Philippines - i.e. - it's not one of the safest cities in the world. It would just confuse readers to equivocate about that. Also it's not clear to me what would be the alternative to the current lead. zzz (talk) 10:48, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
No that is OR, I can find a source that does not say tat the French won Austerlitz, that does not mean they won the Napoleonic wars. So we cannot say the claim that "it is one of the safest cities in the world" is incorrect, we have no source that says that (or even that it is incorrect for the Philippines). As it does not say that.Slatersteven (talk) 11:23, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
It's a lot simpler as I see it: I can find a source that says Napoleon died before he was 80. That does also mean that he died before he was 100. zzz (talk) 11:52, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
But the difference here is that you cannot die after you have died, you can be the safest city in the world and still have a higher murder rate then anywhere else, murder (and indeed rape) is not the only crime against the person.Slatersteven (talk) 11:57, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
You can be the safest city while having the highest murder and rape rate, in your theory, but you cannot be a vampire? zzz (talk) 12:05, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

odWhat? I am removing the claim as unsourced.Slatersteven (talk) 12:11, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Numbeo is not a reliable source. zzz (talk) 12:16, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
We are not using it as a source.Slatersteven (talk) 12:21, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
wow Signedzzz you just vanish one major contributor, because of you he left wikipedia.

Problematically Structured/Opinionated Sections

Upon editing this article, I have found many grammatical and citation issues. There are also many claims that are not cited. One example:

"There are also Indonesians, Malaysians, Koreans and Indians living in the city. ESL schools for foreigners, and export-oriented industrial parks to entice Japanese and (South) Korean firms to set up shop in the city. However, there were also some cultural conflicts in the integration of Koreans in the city, as the then-city mayor Rodrigo Duterte complained about their habit of smoking in public places."

First, where is the evidence that ESL schools were put up simply to entice businessmen to move to Davao? Second, there is something wrong with the link. There is a reference for this section, but the link appears to be broken. EngLitMajorInBilbao (talk) 22:53, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Davao City

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Davao City's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Human Rights Watch":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 01:03, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

DDS

User:103.44.234.66 please explain how the Davao Death Squad is not "directly related" to Davao. Thanks. zzz (talk) 08:23, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Dispute on Lead Article: HIGHLY SUBJECTIVE

The lead article is obviously not a fan of the president of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte, by putting in subjective words such as "Rodrigo Duterte boasts..." The article was lifted from an archive and ONE SOURCE. Regardless of the author's thoughts on Duterte, the lead article should not be subjective against the entire city or on the president. Regional media such as EDGE Davao and Sunstar Davao report the city as one of the safest (https://edgedavao.net/special-supplement/2019/03/15/davao-from-murder-city-to-one-of-worlds-safest-cities/). These articles were not cited.

It is not fair to degrade or insult an entire city or its former mayor just on the basis of one article. Isn't this racism or regionalism? Wikipedia, please be fair to have this article adjusted to objective sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ambq00 (talk • contribs) 04:22, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Davao_City/Archive_2&oldid=1131208540"