Talk:Dapitan Kingdom

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles

Tambayan Philippines Low‑importance

	Philippines portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tambayan Philippines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to the Philippines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Tambayan PhilippinesWikipedia:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesTemplate:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesPhilippine-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

[Untitled]

created article Kedatuan of Dapitan please don't delete

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because the article / topic actually existed. I already have all the related citations including books and historical files. I still need more time to write it. --BhlJRama (talk) 11:35, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@BhlJRama: I strongly recommend to check WP:HISTRS. Quite a number of references are inapt as sources for WP. –Austronesier (talk) 13:54, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Could quotes from the most reliable sources be posted here? CMD (talk) 14:32, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm it seems that he mixed some valid sources with spurious ones. Some of his sources include academic works like the ones published in De La Salle University and some primary sources from Jesuit and Recollect Missionaries as well as Spanish era chronicles. It's just a matter of filtering the good sources from the bad. Rene Bascos Sarabia Jr. (talk) 05:45, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Added information that is supported by more reliable sources

The earlier version makes mentions of wild claims without it even being supported properly by sources. I decided to just rewrite it all instead. For example, the year 1272 as the founding year of the Dapitan Kingdom was not even mentioned in the Hector Santos source. The only mention of 1272 is this:

No dates are given for any of these important Eskaya milestones. Whenever dates are mentioned, it is not clear what calendrical system they are referring to because the dates are inconsistent with any other calendar that we know of. They are also inconsistent relative to other dated events in their accounts. For instance, Jesus Christ was supposed to have been born in 677 and the reign of Sikatuna was supposed to have began in 1272. These dates are obviously inconsistent with everything we know about Sikatuna and Jesus Christ.

Not only that, but at least one source is a web site with no academic sources provided (and thus with very questionable content) such as this. Pinging Austronesier and Glennznl. Stricnina (talk) 08:40, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Stricnina, this was overdue. The only right approach for such a dubious mess is WP:TNT, which you have correctly applied here. –Austronesier (talk) 10:47, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Austronesier: There will be more work to be done here. For example, a proper secondary source discussing the historiography and the historians behind the "Dapitan Kingdom" would be helpful. I only have this so far. Who was this local historian called Tirol mentioned in that paper? It would be interesting to find which is history and which is legend regarding this polity. Stricnina (talk) 15:29, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's Jes B. Tirol. –Austronesier (talk) 16:28, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Stricnina: Thank you for your efforts. Are there any tasks you could use help with? --Glennznl (talk) 09:56, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Glennznl: I wanted to do some fact-checking regarding the "Spanish Conquest" part since that is the part that I have not modified. But I think the more important task here is to find out more about the historiography of the Dapitan Kingdom, i.e. finding sources that talk about who's who in the writing of the history of this "Dapitan Kingdom", like what Athena G. Vitor did in their paper (which is available in academia.edu). And then dedicate a section for that. Stricnina (talk) 14:21, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]