Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Hateless (talk | contribs) at 21:42, 24 February 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

It is most Filipinos are already gotten pissed of her (NPOV). Since 2001, poverty in the Philipines was not resolved. Another reason is the issue of Charter Change, specifically the change of form of government from Democratic-Republic into a Federal Parliamentary system, in which it is not a solution of poverty and corruption. Darth Narutorious 06:35, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

In fairness to the President, she did numerous programs and projects (like MRT and North Luzon Expressway) since 2001 to uplift the poor. She also created more than 1 million jobs and attract foreign investors to invest in the Philippines. She made stronger diplomatic ties between nations (like the United States of America, where President Bush was warmly welcomed. The Philippine media labeled him as ang pinakamakapangyarihang tao sa balat ng lupa (the most powerful man in Earth). Darth Narutorious 13:41, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

She's not really a nice lady, but a cold, calculating politician who has not come clean about her involvement in the election scandal, and faces opposition by many of the common Filipinos. I'm part-Filipino, and many pf my friends and relations that I've talked to in the Philippines this past night are scared that she will try to usurp power. The worst thing is that there wasn't really anyone to choose from in the last election, her main opponent, Fernando Poe, did not even finish high school. After the Hello Garci incident, confidence in the Philippines from investors was shaken and if she goes further to consolidate power, she might risk losing her support from the U.S and Japan.--Folksong 17:13, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

More information, please

For an article that's linked to the main page, it sure is missing the obvious question of "why is this happening?" ekedolphin 06:47, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I added a section regarding causes of the coup, which was already linked to, but certainly needed to be in this article. User: thechosenone021

Thank you! Darth Narutorious 14:57, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

This article is blatantly biased towards the anti-GMA factions. This is obviously a plant by some leftist. A more neutral standpoint, please.

Be bold. Your opinions will be NPOV violations. However, opinions of pro-GMA factions are not. Be sure to quote them directly Howard the Duck 15:46, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's entry

The Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo article has similar information as this. So, what will happen? I'm tired of editing BOTH of them! Haha... Darth Narutorious 07:22, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Does anyone have a count on how many people have died?

No one died in the incident, but many were arrested (especially rallyists and leaders). Many were injured by the Police by hitting them. Some vehicles (like jeepneys) were confiscated even though it is not part of the rally. Darth Narutorious 10:33, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Go People Power!

-- Миборовский 10:19, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Really? Again?

Yes, again! -- Миборовский 13:18, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't think so... Darth Narutorious 13:41, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Puwersa ng Masa!--Folksong 17:16, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

??? Darth Narutorious 17:25, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Picture

Are there any pictures that don't look like someone took a photo of their television? Capitan Obvio 13:31, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Title is not NPOV

The word "alleged" needs to be inserted into the tilte. So far this "coup" is only an allegation dispensed by the government in order to justify its assault on democratic rights. If the title isn't changed, I will consider adding a neutrality tag to this article. 207.6.31.119 17:44, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but that's not going to happen. All of the major news sources are saying "coup attempt" none add the 'alleged' qualifier. If you can bring in a verifiable source that questions whether or not it happened then feel free to do so... but, most news sources are referring to this as a coup attempt and it'd be original research to add "alleged". gren グレン 20:05, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

After looking through some news articles on the net, I see that the majority of them seem to have a schizophrenic presentation of this story. On the one hand, the titles of the articles assert that a coup attempt has indeed happened, but on the other hand, if you read the first two or three lines of these same articles they all call it an alleged coup. I notice that the wikipedia article does the same. 207.6.31.119 20:27, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

That's a common problem with newspapers, as headlines are written by copy editors and not the writer of the articles themselves. Generally copy editors are constrained by space and time to come up with a headline and can get things wrong, although the worst offenders seem to sensationalize as well. Personally, I think the proper thing to do is do what the NY Times did and headline Arroyo's state of emergency, not the alledged coup. I'll recommend Misplaced Pages do that as well and move this article to 2006 Philippines state of emergency. Most of the information pertains to the state of emergency primarily and how it dovetails into both the alleged coup and the separate but coincidental People Power commemorations, which would make it a more accurate title as well. hateless 21:42, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

There really isn't much anyone can do about this; the major news outlets are POV, period. Wiki conventions on using the most common referents are conflicting with wiki conventions regarding NPOV. This happens a lot for news articles. To play devil's advocate, including the word "alleged" could be construed as supporting POV that the event should be labeled as other than a coup.

the devil's advocate is wrong here, "alleged" is not POV when the only source of information of this coup is from Arroyo. As for news outlets being POV, if you want to argue no outlet is NPOV, even by those who profess and strive toward NPOV, then you'd by extension argue Misplaced Pages can never be NPOV, which makes the whole argument moot. The NPOV model on Misplaced Pages about the same as the one in journalism, so if you want to fault journalism you fault Misplaced Pages and its NPOV policy as well. hateless 21:42, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Information

Okay, maybe there was a real threat, but the article is a little to definite that it really happenned. But the title is fine.

PS. How did you get this up so fast? Theonlyedge 21:09, 24 February 2006 (UTC)