Talk:List of sultans of Sulu

message: This a fork from Sultanate of Sulu, which is also in need of a cleanup. --Noypi380 10:08, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: 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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noypi380 (talk • contribs) 05:06, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: 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 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.212.127.6 (talk) 07:33, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Be bold in editing the articles yourselves. :) --Noypi380 01:02, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  philippine's islamic history of the sultanate 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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 :-) ). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fram (talk • contribs) 05:02, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality, cleanup and sources

message: 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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.212.124.120 (talk) 06:16, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: REGARDING SULU SULTANATE

message: 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)
thread_title: Clean up

message: 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)
thread_title:  Actual Sultan of Sulu 

message: When Sultan Pulalun (son of Sultan Jamalul Kiram-I of Muwalil Wasit) signed the presented Spanish protocol Treaty in allowing the Spanish to lived in the Sulus then transferred his seat to the hinterlands; two British Subjects, Baron Von de Overbeck and Alfred Dent came to the Sulus to ask to Lease North North Borneo from the Sulu Sultan,wherein Jamalul Agdam presented himself as Sulu Sultan Jamalul Alam (naming himself after Brunei Sultan Jamalul Alam-II).  Convinced, the two British Subjects proceeded to have Jamalul Alam signed the Lease Treaty that late afternoon of around 6pm, and left at mid-night without heeding to their verbal agreement of off-loading the Arms and munitions in the morning of the next day. 
Sultan Pulalun did in-fact wrote a letter of revocation to the the said Leased. However, the British North Borneo Company of the two British Subjects moreover did not heed to the said revocation. Considering the times and the weak empowerment to state sovereignty prior to the establishment of the United Nations Organization, Sultan Pulalun could not do anything. Sultan Pulalun's Prince, Maharaja Adinda (Prince Heir apparent)Taup undermined when Jamalul Alam was succeeded by Badar'uddin-II, the aupposed son of Alam, as Sultan of Sulu. 
Moreover, Alimu'ddin, Harun Ar-Rashid and Amirul Kiram Awal-II were contesting each other that each is the true succeessor to the Throne,the Spanish government in Manila instead proclaimed Harun Ar-Rashid was the Sultan of Sulu, wherein Alimu'ddin was forced to have retired in Tawi-Tawi and was referred to tauntingly by the Spanish as "El Viejo de Tawi-Tawi" Meaning the Old Man of Tawi-Tawi.  However, with the fiercesome Amirul Kiram Awal-II, the latter with his followers forced Harun Ar-Rashid to have left and went to South Palawan where he died.      
Amirul Kiram Awal-III was then proclaimed by his direct followers,as Sultan of Sulu in the reigning name as Sultan Jamalul Kiram-II presented as the son of Sultan Jamalul Kiram-I (Muwalil Wasit). So, why did Sultan Pulalun proclaimed his Prince Maharaja Adinda taup in 1859 before even the 1861 Jamalul Alam (Agdam)?  and why can not the present kirams claim Sultan Pulalun as a Kiram?  wherein claiming Sultan Jamalul Alam-Kiram, Sultan Badar'uddin-Kiram.  
Amirul Kiram Awal-II of Sultan Jamalul Kiram-II had no Adinda or Prince and was childless, and when He died on June 7, 1936, there was a controversy of who would be recieving the Lease treaty payments of North Borneo. The British High Court at Jesselton(Kota Kanibalu)North borneo-Sabah wherein Chief Justice Macaskie ruled in 1939 favored, if any, Kiram heir.  It took 21 years later in 1957 when uncannily a claimant-Ismael kiram went to claim the lease payments. Ismael Kiram and five other relatives were awarded the lease payments as "Private Heirs" to their supposed predecessor, the 1884-1915 Sultan Jamalul kiram-II who died in 1936, and Sovereignty as "Sultan" was not in issue. However, the present Kirams claims to be Sultans, all of its family heirs. When in-fact its successions should have been from Sultan Pulalun, his highness' Maharaja Adinda.
www.royalsultanate.weebly.com , see resolution.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.62.90.152 (talk) 04:32, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: THE BROKEN LINEAGE BY USURPERS:

message: Please do not merge the articles "Pretender", especially the section was separated to distinguish who were the sultans that had sovereignty over the area. According to the description of the sultan in the article, the last sovereign sultan to rule the sultanate ceded his powers to the United States in 1915 through Carpenter's Agreement, then finally on 1917 which essentially ended the sultanate when Sulu became a province, added by different defeats of the sultanate in Bud Bagsak, Bud Dajo, etc. 
So: how come that the there are sultans after 1917? Jamal ul-Kiram II year span on the article ended by 1936 because he never abandoned the throne, only his political powers were surrendered to US. Well, if we analyze this, the sultan had only symbolic powers from 1917-1936, and the line of sultans ended de jure on the death of Jamal ul-Kiram II. Please refrain from adding facts from the websites of Esmail Kiram II and the like, news sources are better accepted here. I am not saying the content of Kiram II is a hoax, but remember, this is a very serious issue in the Philippines.--JL 09 q?c 00:06, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modifying the article. 

message: I re-added those Sultans listed in the list of Sultans of the Provincial government of Sulu, that has been online for 7 years. I deleted the “Datu” title used in the list of Sultans since 1980. There is no fundament to deny them the title Sultan just because other branches or families deny their rights to be Sultans. They are listed as Sultans on government lists and websites since many years. The headship of many Royal houses is disputed by rival claimants. Wikipedia lists them as pretenders, not as self styled heads of royal houses as such wording reflects rather a personal opinion. Wikipedia is an encyclopdia, not taking any side or judging the claims of one side or another. It simply collects and presents all information of public interest, trying to show an understandable reflection of the situation, including all parts of the story. This includes information showing both sides of the medal and often information disliked by the entity in question.
While there is clear evidence regarding the line of succession in the Kiram family, now, this does not alter the situation that occurred due to the involvement of the government and the need to include it in the description.
Information should not be withhold nor manipulated to support the one or other side. They should be stated as they appear and then be explained if necessary to make the public understand the context.
“Husband of Dayang Dayang Piandao and recognised Sultan of Sulu by Japanese Government.”, makes Amirul Umara a Sultan from 1937-1950, not a pretender.
“Paduka Mahasari Maulana al Sultan Esmail D. Kiram is proclaimed new sultan of Sulu and North Borneo at the Sulu State College upon the recommendation of the Ruma Bichara and the Council of Datus.
Paduka Mahasari Maulana al Sultan Esmail D. Kiram is proclaimed new sultan of Sulu and North Borneo at the Sulu State College upon the recommendation of the Ruma Bichara and the Council of Datus. He is the 37th in an unbroken line of succession beginning with Sharif-al-Hashim in 1450.”
This entry from the National Historical Institute of the Philippine government and his listing in the list of Sultans of the Provincial Government make him eligible to be listed as Sultan, not as Datu.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by About the Sultan (talk • contribs) 12:22, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rival branches 

message: Please before someone will edit this page discuss it here! RDAndrew (talk) 13:05, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I am about to remove statements in the most recent edit about "de facto" recognition. I do not see citations that support this and I am not even sure what it means. The previous edit before this was correct, and citing a source documenting that there is no clearly recognized sultan. This was already dealt with over at Sultanate of Sulu. --Brian Z (talk) 01:47, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

text: Actually on second thought, I will propose this page for deletion or merging with Sultanate of Sulu. This entire page seems to be biased toward making a claim about the validity of one person's claim to the throne. --Brian Z (talk) 01:51, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notice 

message: When Sultan Pulalun (son of Sultan Jamalul Kiram-I of Muwalil Wasit) signed the presented Spanish protocol Treaty in allowing the Spanish to lived in the Sulus then transferred his seat to the hinterlands; two British Subjects, Baron Von de Overbeck and Alfred Dent came to the Sulus to ask to Lease North North Borneo from the Sulu Sultan,wherein Jamalul Agdam presented himself as Sulu Sultan Jamalul Alam (naming himself after Brunei Sultan Jamalul Alam-II).  Convinced, the two British Subjects proceeded to have Jamalul Alam signed the Lease Treaty that late afternoon of around 6pm, and left at mid-night without heeding to their verbal agreement of off-loading the Arms and munitions in the morning of the next day. 
Sultan Pulalun did in-fact wrote a letter of revocation to the the said Leased. However, the British North Borneo Company of the two British Subjects moreover did not heed to the said revocation. Considering the times and the weak empowerment to state sovereignty prior to the establishment of the United Nations Organization, Sultan Pulalun could not do anything. Sultan Pulalun's Prince, Maharaja Adinda (Prince Heir apparent)Taup undermined when Jamalul Alam was succeeded by Badar'uddin-II, the aupposed son of Alam, as Sultan of Sulu. 
Moreover, Alimu'ddin, Harun Ar-Rashid and Amirul Kiram Awal-II were contesting each other that each is the true succeessor to the Throne,the Spanish government in Manila instead proclaimed Harun Ar-Rashid was the Sultan of Sulu, wherein Alimu'ddin was forced to have retired in Tawi-Tawi and was referred to tauntingly by the Spanish as "El Viejo de Tawi-Tawi" Meaning the Old Man of Tawi-Tawi.  However, with the fiercesome Amirul Kiram Awal-II, the latter with his followers forced Harun Ar-Rashid to have left and went to South Palawan where he died.      
Amirul Kiram Awal-III was then proclaimed by his direct followers,as Sultan of Sulu in the reigning name as Sultan Jamalul Kiram-II presented as the son of Sultan Jamalul Kiram-I (Muwalil Wasit). So, why did Sultan Pulalun proclaimed his Prince Maharaja Adinda taup in 1859 before even the 1861 Jamalul Alam (Agdam)?  and why can not the present kirams claim Sultan Pulalun as a Kiram?  wherein claiming Sultan Jamalul Alam-Kiram, Sultan Badar'uddin-Kiram.  
Amirul Kiram Awal-II of Sultan Jamalul Kiram-II had no Adinda or Prince and was childless, and when He died on June 7, 1936, there was a controversy of who would be recieving the Lease treaty payments of North Borneo. The British High Court at Jesselton(Kota Kanibalu)North borneo-Sabah wherein Chief Justice Macaskie ruled in 1939 favored, if any, Kiram heir.  It took 21 years later in 1957 when uncannily a claimant-Ismael kiram went to claim the lease payments. Ismael Kiram and five other relatives were awarded the lease payments as "Private Heirs" to their supposed predecessor, the 1884-1915 Sultan Jamalul kiram-II who died in 1936, and Sovereignty as "Sultan" was not in issue. However, the present Kirams claims to be Sultans, all of its family heirs. When in-fact its successions should have been from Sultan Pulalun, his highness' Maharaja Adinda.
www.royalsultanate.weebly.com , see resolution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.62.90.152 (talk) 20:37, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: THE BROKEN LINEAGE BY USURPERS:

message: Being WP:Bold I removed the entire history section.  This is a "List of…" article. Discussion of history are better suited to the main article, in this case the Sultante of Sulu. Given the delicate nature of this topic having two discussions of history seem to unnecessarily complicate matters.  Better have one discussion of the article and is the best it can be -- the Sultanate article -- and then have this be just a list. --Iloilo Wanderer (talk) 12:20, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed history section 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on List of sultans of Sulu. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://sulu.gov.ph/Profile.asp?mode=sultanate
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130513130126/http://www.royalsulu.com/ to http://www.royalsulu.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:55, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on List of sultans of Sulu. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151017015534/http://www.gov.ph/1915/03/22/memorandum-carpenter-agreement-march-22-1915/ to http://www.gov.ph/1915/03/22/memorandum-carpenter-agreement-march-22-1915/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130308101100/http://www.kln.gov.my/web/guest/home?p_p_id=101_INSTANCE_Yt06&p_p_lifecycle=0&p_p_state=normal&p_p_mode=view&p_p_col_id=column-3&p_p_col_pos=1&p_p_col_count=5&_101_INSTANCE_Yt06_struts_action=%2Fasset_publisher%2Fview_content&_101_INSTANCE_Yt06_urlTitle=press-statement%3A-meeting-with-the-secretary-of-foreign-affairs-of-the-philippines-h-e-albert-f-del-rosario-on-4-march-2013-kenyataan-akhbar%3A-pertemuan-dengan-setiausaha-luar-filipina-t-y-t-albert-fl-del-rosario-pada-4-mac-2013&_101_INSTANCE_Yt06_type=content&redirect=%2Fweb%2Fguest%2Fhome to http://www.kln.gov.my/web/guest/home?p_p_id=101_INSTANCE_Yt06&p_p_lifecycle=0&p_p_state=normal&p_p_mode=view&p_p_col_id=column-3&p_p_col_pos=1&p_p_col_count=5&_101_INSTANCE_Yt06_struts_action=%2Fasset_publisher%2Fview_content&_101_INSTANCE_Yt06_urlTitle=press-statement%3A-meeting-with-the-secretary-of-foreign-affairs-of-the-philippines-h-e-albert-f-del-rosario-on-4-march-2013-kenyataan-akhbar%3A-pertemuan-dengan-setiausaha-luar-filipina-t-y-t-albert-fl-del-rosario-pada-4-mac-2013&_101_INSTANCE_Yt06_type=content&redirect=%2Fweb%2Fguest%2Fhome
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:54, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Recently, I have discovered some seals used (personally) by the sultans of Sulu, most of which were documented at Annabel Teh Gallop's book, maybe some of the contributors here want to use it as the replacement for each sultans image. Mhatopzz (talk) 03:46, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sultan seals from sulu