Talk:mangubat

mangubat
Supposedly English, but then says it is something else. Badly formatted. SemperBlotto (talk) 12:27, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Has a Wikipedia entry, now much curtailed and flagged for Wiktionarification, but historically long and rambling, with an edit history dating back several years. One of the sources cited in the present Wikipedia entry,, does not contain the word "mangubat", but refers to "mangubas" as a Bisayan (= Visayan, I presume) word for sea expeditions involving pillage. Google Book Search sources say that "mangubat" is some kind of shaman or medicine man, also in the Philippines. I guess there may be some variation in or uncertainty about the spellings. 217.44.208.136 02:36, 27 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I've tried to improve it by adding the medicine-men sense. Equinox ◑ 03:04, 27 June 2015 (UTC)


 * (edit conflict) If you look at the original Spanish version here, you'll see that it really is "mangubat". I'm guessing that the s in the Gutenberg version is a typo or other error. There's quite a lot of linguistic diversity in the Philippines, so having the same spelling turn up in two different languages with two unrelated meanings would hardly be surprising.
 * More to the point at hand, the Wikipedia article used the words as a coatrack on which to hang a variety of early accounts of the lifestyle, appearance and culture of the Visayan people, among other things, and to give excerpts of (non-English) texts containing the word itself. This was severely pruned and tagged for moving to Wiktionary. It looks to me like the creator of the Wiktionary article (who spent some time back in 2013 on the Wikipedia one) is trying to recreate the Wikipedia article here.
 * The big problem is that this isn't an English word. I've looked through all the Google Books hits for the word, and all but the shamanic-healer ones you mentioned seem to be for Mangubat as a surname. The only "English" use seems to be the translation of a Spanish passage that only mentions the word, saying that it's Visayan. Nor does it seem to be used much in any other language- I suspect that the passages cited in the earlier versions of the Wikipedia article are pretty much it.
 * In addition, judging from the footnotes in the sources, it's probably a phrase of two separate words that was mistakenly written as a single word in the Spanish text, and as such is no doubt SOP.
 * I would definitely delete this as an English term and rfv it as whatever language the Wikipedia cites are in. The shamanic-healer sense is unrelated, and might be added if the few hits on Google Books are solid enough. Whatever we do, we have to make sure that it doesn't end up as a coatrack article like the Wikipedia one was. That's bad enough for an encyclopedia- for a dictionary, it's criminal. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:31, 27 June 2015 (UTC)


 * RFD closed: out of scope of RFD. WT:RFV for a Visayan word created instead. --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:14, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

RFV discussion: June 2015–February 2016
Visayan word entered to mean "to raid for pillage and booty" in. --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:12, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 03:49, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

mangubat(shaman) or mangubat(visayan)
Please note that this article was originally created for mangubat (visayan and old tagalog) term for "wars for plunder" not for mangubat (shaman or traditional doctor) a term only used by Tausog people in the Philippines that numbers 1% below of the entire Philippine population.