Wikipedia

Talk:Eduardo V. Manalo

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Emico (talk | contribs) at 15:03, 21 June 2005 (→Emico's edit shows POV). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Latest comment: 20 years ago by Onlytofind in topic Unauthorized
Learn more about this page

This page was voted on for deletion at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Eduardo V. Manalo. The final result was Keep. --Deathphoenix 03:32, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This article is biased

  • The insinuation that the INC negotiated a deal with Arroyo is a clear indication of the author(s) bias.

Source not cited

    • IP 192.55.49.97 seem to belong to Intel Corp

NetRange: 192.55.32.0 - 192.55.81.255 OrgName: Intel Corporation OrgID: NTLS Address: 2200 Mission College Blvd, P.O. Box 58119 City: Santa Clara StateProv: CA PostalCode: 95052-8119 Country: US

      • Emico, is there a reason why you are so concerned about obtaining the IP addresses of anyone who posts something not to your approval?
  • The actual paragraph in the book "The Fall of Joseph Estrada: The inside story", pages 226-227:

[QUOTE]The plotters were closely monitored by the military and police agents. Three hotels - EDSA Shangri-La, Richmonde Hotel, and Galleria Suites - were used by the opposition as war headquarters at the height of the protests. Five rooms, including the presidential suites, In Shangri-La, four rooms in Richmonde, and several rooms on the 18th and 29th floors of the Galleria Suites were booked. Lacson, Honasan, Enrile, former First Lady Loi Ejercito and JV Ejercito had a room each at the Galleria suites, which was right behind the EDSA shrine. Opposition leaders said, however, the rooms were used, not as command centers to plot against the government, but as sanctuary to the tired leaders of the protest movement.

Honasan and Lacson, according to the military agents, were on top of the tactical planning for the rallies, the aborted negotiations with government, and the siege of Malacanang.

Room 1801, the presidential suite on the 18th floor of Edsa Plaza Shangri-La was reserved on April 29 by one Meloy Trinidad, vice-president for administration of the Antonino Group of Companies with office address in T.M. Kalaw corner Jorge Bocobo, Manila. The group of Honasan, Lacson, Maceda, and Enrile checked in at 7 p.m. and left 3 a.m. the following day. Seen with them at the hotel was INC deputy Executive Director Eduardo 'Eddie Boy' Manalo, son of Minister Manalo. He was reportedly invited to sit in at the negotiations between the administration and the opposition. [/QUOTE]

  • Hmm. He was reportedly invited to sit in the negotiations between administration and opposition. Is this the reason why he is being linked to EDSA III? For all I know he was asked to help and I don't see anything wrong with that. Tilting the issue to make it appear as if he was part of the plot smacks of blatant disregard for NPOV. Ealva 16:14, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • It is undeniable that INC has played a big part in EDSA 3. 70% of the crowd were INC members and CNN reported that members were being encouraged by the INC leadership to join [1]
    • That, my friend, is called "speculation". So what if 70% of the crowd are INC members? We were there because we felt our votes have been disrespected and it was our chance to express our anger. I am not suppressing your POV, but you also have to understand that this is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper. You back your statements with proof, not speculation. Ealva 22:16, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[QUOTE]One member of the INC told CNN that followers are being encouraged to join the pro-Estrada demonstrations.[/QUOTE] This being said, I think that it smacks of pretense denying the fact that Eduardo Manalo just happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. Police saw him with the plotters, and the Wiki article says just that: "he figured in a rebellion plot." It did not say he plotted a rebellion. 192422212

  • Your statements happen to be good for a newspaper, not an encyclopedia. Why are you so desperate to link him with the plot? For the sake of argument that he does figure in the plot, your references do not prove that he does. Your accusation of "pretense" does not do anybody good, it just proves that you cannot back your arguments with proof. Ealva 15:36, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

As to the credibility of the book and author, it was named the Manila Critics Circle's National Book Award- Journalist of the Year, as well as Book Development Association of the Philippines' Gintong Aklat Award. 192422212

  • Newspaper report, Philippine Daily Inquirer, May 7, 2001, Analysis

[QUOTE]Authorities have identified the hotel rooms and suites in which Enrile, Honasan, Jamby Madrigal, Panfilo Lacson, Maceda and Eddie Manalo, the son of INC head Bishop Eraño Manalo, met during three days of the rallies. They know the hotels used, the time they met, the false names used in booking the suites.[/QUOTE] 192422212

    • And what did they talk about? For all we know, EVM might have been asked to help solve the impasse. This accusation does not merit mention in an encyclopedia. Ealva 16:24, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • I think it does. It's one of the reason this encylcopaedia article even exists. It's the only singular act Eduardo Manalo has done that has significance that merits the existence of this article. I believe this article was voted on for deletion before on whether Eduardo Manalo is significant as to merit the article. This part of the article shows that he is indeed significant and played a big role for the country's second largest Christian denomination in the Philippines. Deleting this part of the article, Eduardo Manalo is just someone who used to be a HAM enthusiast, and it doesn't say anything significant. 192422212
      • I am only for you providing factual information in this article. What good is this article if it contains lies? Your arguments mean that it's ok to take out the general information and just leave the EDSA III accusation. Again, Doronilla's book and the news articles only state that he was involved in talks with the administration and opposition. Why did you come up with having him involved in the plot? I would have it that you edit the section to be more truthful than the entire section taken out. Ealva 22:16, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • This has been retracted by the newspaper, although the retraction cannot be found on the net anymore. This is what's left out there, from Malaya on jan 6, 2005.

[QUOTE]The position of ambassador to France, which is currently being held by career officer Hector Villaroel, has been promised by the President(Arroyo) to Inquirer columnist Amando Doronila.[QUOTE] --Emico 15:08, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

      • There was no retraction I know of. You can post a reference if you have. So what if Amando Doronilla has been promised the position as ambassador to France? Wasn't the deal of Arroyo with Manalo was the position of Ambassador to Canada to Artemio Tuquero?

"The Fall of Joseph..." page 236 [QUOTE]The National Security Council meeting in Malacanang was held next day. Senate President Aquilino Pimentel proposed a dialogue between the government and Manalo after hearing from Mendoza that INC members made up at least 70% of the EDSA 3 crowd. Some Cabinet members opposed the idea, but the president sided with Pimentel. She sent him, Speaker Feliciano Belmonte, and Justice Secretary Hernando Perez to the INC headquarters. Even before the dialogue with the INC leadership was over, Net 25 and DZEC, which had been covering the rally round-the-clock, had gone off the air without warning or explanation.[/QUOTE] The deal (page 237): [QUOTE]INC sources also said that Macapagal-Arroyo had promised to Appoint former Jusice Secretary Artemio Tuquero, a respected and ranking member of the INC, to a suitable government post. As of this writing,...Tuquero also has been nominated as ambasador to Canada.[/QUOTE]

Unauthorized

Latest comment: 20 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Preliminary POV Edits

  • removed cult reference to INC
  • removed references to nepotism
  • AFAIK, he is not the AsCII president (that should be Efren Tercias)
  • I've never heard AsCII downplay its connection with INC (I should know, I'm an AsCII member)
  • created "Political Influence in the Philippines" (for lack of a better title) section and marked as section POV

The new section badly needs POV edits. The accusations that EVM held secret negotiations with Arroyo to avoid charges should go in the absence of proof. No proof likewise was given equating Defensor's "courtesy call" to INC's support for Arroyo in the elections. Anybody care to do these? Ealva 02:50, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • I've already added two sources, from ABS-CBN News and the Philippine Inquirer about Defensor's phone call and the INC's endorsement of GMA's candidacy. I would like to hear everyone's opinions regarding those links, and if they suffice for that section.--Onlytofind 22:43, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Still, the "courtesy call" being associated with the decision to support her during the election is a POV. Politicians "visit" (swarm?) INC locales during elections, but do not always get the support. Ealva 03:51, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • The Inquirer and PCIJ have been at odds with the INC, with the INC suing the former for libel, and the latter publishing an article about INC's "business interests" (which turned out to be a mistake [link to Bienvenido Santiago's response in manilatimes.net can't be found anymore]). I could hardly call those sources as "proofs". Ealva 03:51, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • It's common practice for the press to be at odds with influential organizations and people. Both PCIJ and the Inquirer have enough reputation as reputable news sources in order to be linked to and quoted. I would like to see a result as to the verdict of each case, and if any of the stories were retracted, which would show who's necessarily correct in each case and if they are truly biased or not. Also, wouldn't the INC have sued for libel already over the two stories linked to if they found it unfactual?--Onlytofind 07:40, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • While they both have quite a reputation, I do not believe they are impartial (afaic, wrt the INC). I also don't think you should equate the libel case against Inquirer with the PCIJ articles, since the case involves serious allegations of hiding an alleged coup leader. Ealva 21:25, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)


Because there isn't a dispute over a specific part of this article, only it's lack of sources, who feels the {{DisputeCheck}} template should be used instead? This template reads: "This article requires attention because it may contain inaccuracies. A Wikipedian has nominated this article to be checked for accuracy. Currently there may not be a specific dispute, but the content may need discussion on the talk page. --LBMixPro(Speak on it!)

  • Done. The tag fits the article's status better. Ealva 05:37, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • And the absolute authority for it's accuracy is the subject of the article. --Emico 14:53, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • That's not necessarily true. Do you think if Richard Nixon had authority over the Watergate article that it would be NPOV?--Onlytofind 03:12, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Defamation

Onlytofind, unless you can provide sources for your 'rebellion' allegation, do not use wikipedia to defame another person. --Emico 14:52, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

According to Emico's edit here, the site referring the book isn't a good enough resource. I agree. I don't even see reference to the INC in that webpage. In order to really warrant the refrence being here, I'd like to see the actual ___location of where the allegation of Manalo's involvment in the book The Fall of Joseph Estrada (ISBN 9712711544). If we find the actual paragraph and page number, then we have a more clearer look at whether or not the author alleged it. --LBMixPro(Speak on it!) 20:16, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)

  • Emico, I have not made repeat reversions of the article as you wrote at the WP:RFAr. I have only made one edit to emphisize the statment from The Fall of Joseph Estrada is an allegation and should not be considered as fact. If you look at the article's history -- other than minor edits which do not effect content -- the latest edits have been between you and Onlytofind. --LBMixPro(Speak on it!) 05:06, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
  • I can provide the pages in the book. I will go through the book today. The article in the inquirer giving reference to the rebellion link is now dis-archived but I can provide the date. I will edit as needed. 192422212 - DONE

As to the credibility of the book, it was named the Manila Critics Circle's National Book Award- Journalist of the Year, as well as Book Development Association of the Philippines' Gintong Aklat Award. 192422212

      • Emico, stop your baseless allegations. I was not the one who wrote that Eduardo Manalo figured in EDSA II as you can obviously see. Just as anti-INC bias is not tolerated here, neither is your pro-INC bias, and lack of objectivity between both sides. I already have evidence that most of your edits are borderline vandalism, and being so, I will revert them when necessary.--Onlytofind 20:59, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
        • Who died? --Emico 21:03, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
          • I dunno. You tell me.--Onlytofind 04:04, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Removal of GMA support POV

The allegations that the courtesy call of GMA to EVM resulted in the INC's support is a POV violation. I have removed it. Ealva 21:39, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Political Influence Removal

I suggest that the political influence section should be removed:

  • aside from issues stemming from INC's unity doctrine (which in turn results in criticisms about block-voting), I have never heard of EVM himself engaging in politics. No press statements, radio or TV interviews, no nothing. I'm quite surprised how he got into the political picture at all.
  • Jaime Cardinal Sin became openly involved in Philippine politics, is an outspoken critic of Marcos and Estrada (among a few), and is a major figure in EDSA I and EDSA II, yet he was even hailed as a hero. EVM did nothing of those sort, yet this section implies as if his influence is that significant as putting an obviously biased statement. Ealva 05:18, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • I totally removed the section. The quote on Doronilla's book has been tilted to make it appear as if EVM is part of the EDSA III plot. Ealva 16:18, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Emico's edit shows POV

He has claimed that the author was "biased against the INC," but has no proof to back it up, and relies on a quote with absolutely no source (could he have made it up himself?) He has included the personal statement While I have the utmost respect for Doronila’s opinions and writing style, I am afraid that in this particular case, his analysis is biased in favor of his personal interests. And EDSA II happened five years ago- why would Doronilla be writing about it five years later? That's stacking the facts and using personal opinion. Those are obvious violations of Wikipedia rules, and shows the intention of Emico to tilt this article towards personal opinion.--Onlytofind 20:47, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • Clarification for everybody: The dispute is whether EVM is involved in the EDSA III (not EDSA II) plot. I think whoever vandalized the politics section is desperately trying to link EVM with EDSA III by misquoting Doronilla.
Ealva 04:25, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • I don't think the politics section was vandalized. I merely provides a source, as the original article already has this. [2]

192.55.40.96 23:56, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • The original article has been vandalized from the start, and your providing a "source" (which really isn't) only vandalized it more. I am very inclined to delete the section as it stands now, but you and 192422212 (whoever that is) can do this community a favor but making it NPOV before others delete it. Ealva 05:07, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • Vandalize means defacing an original. An original cannot be vandalized to begin with. 192.55.40.96 08:43, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • You still have a chance to make it NPOV before others delete it. Ealva 15:04, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)


Since no other journalist, local or foreign collaborated Doronilla's claim, we need to explore his motivation for making such claim for the sake of NPOV. --Emico 15:03, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Do allegations belong in an encyclopedia?

"Manalo allegedly figured". Does an unproven allegation belong in an encyclopedia? In a forum, certainly, but NOT in an encyclopedia. The other mistake: "local newspaper reports (Philippine Daily Inquirer, May 7, 2001),". I don't know if anyone noticed, but "reports" is plural and the source quoted is singular. But either way, did the book quote its source? No. Making allegations without the requisite proof is simply wrong, and those allegations certainly don't belong here. One last note: "One member of the INC told CNN that followers are being encouraged to join the pro-Estrada demonstrations." That, people, is called hearsay. If what one unnamed, unidentified person says is to be taken as fact in an encyclopedia, there's a real problem! PROVABLE FACTS, NOT ALLEGATIONS AND HEARSAY, people!--gcessor 12:46, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Eduardo_V._Manalo&oldid=15584898"