Interesting links regarding this controversy
There's a few sites that have discussed about this theory of hidden Argentine casualties that are interesting to read and have more context:
Phillips' old blog, and the genesis of his theory before it developed into a book.
George Ganitis is an Australian student that lived for a while in Argentina and was maybe the first to publicly air his doubts about the validity of this theory. This article centers more on Phillip's academic claims than on the theory itself.
A new Wikipedia contributor named 'Real History Man', with a writing style suspiciously similar to Phillips, tries to insert the conclusions of The First Casualty into the article covering the Argentine Landing.
"Based on the above, and on the information in this thread on AN/I, I have removed from this article the information that is based on Ricky D Phillips' The First Casualty, on the grounds that the author is not an accredited expert on the subject, despite describing himself as a "military historian" (but providing no information on his bona fides), and therefore the book is not a reliable source. (Yes, the edit itself is based on a news story, but the news story only exists because of the claims made by the book. It is not an independently verified source for the verifiability of what is in the book.) The prima facie evidence for this is clear, but if User:Real History Man wishes to dispute it, the place to do so is on the Reliable Sources Noticeboard, not here. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:32, 10 July 2017 (UTC)"
The Army Rumour Service (ARRSE) is the unofficial forum of the British Army.
This extensive thread started on April 2017 and contains the interventions of several British soldiers that served in the islands, a few war veterans including Mark Gibbs, one of the Royal Marines involved in the events of April 2nd 1982, Phillips himself and myself as Tramin. The discussion gets more intense after the appearance of RDP at the Falklands/Malvinas Conference at Manchester University.
"They [NP8901] were also, of course, not handled that well in terms of consideration for gallantry awards. Keith Mills received a DSC for his command of the South Georgia defence, while Mike Norman’s MiD was for his efforts upon returning to the islands in charge of a company of RM, several of whom had a score to settle. Mike Norman explains how this came about - at least the explanation he was given - and it does seem to me rather daft that a valiant rearguard action didn’t gain at least an MC/DSC and an MM as a sign of recognition for NP8901 as part of the overall Falklands Op Honours and Awards. Yes, we lost that bit of the war, but defeat’s never been an obstacle to awards (Dunkirk; Crete; Imjin River and, err... South Georgia)
RDP has not only run with this too far, but has tripped over his own feet and face-planted. He gives the impression, on occasion, that he is more interested in promoting himself than the story of NP8901; I’m not sure that’s his intention, but his defense here, and his failure to moderate his claims elsewhere has led to him putting down his spade and firing up the JCB to go entirely against Healey’s Law of Holes.
As I think I said, or at least intimated, pages and pages ago, the oral history element of his book deserves credit. Ironically, had he left it at that and then done a conclusion to the effect that memory of what NP8901 did has faded, argued that the party should have received some form of recognition in the honours list, and expressed the hope that his book would give the defense of Stanley, and more importantly the defenders themselves, a firmer place in the historiography, he’d have done his reputation as a military historian far more good. I would go as far to suggest that he might well have influenced a mainstream publisher into getting him to do a book on another part of the war (say an oral history based account of Wireless Ridge, or Two Sisters, drawing on interviews). If that had done well - and I think it’d have done well enough - he could have found himself the author of a respected trilogy or more of oral histories of aspects of the war by 2022, and the go-to historian for the 40th anniversary coverage. As it is, he’s just picking up more and more criticism of his approach.
He may very well be used as a textbook on university courses, but it’ll be as part of a ‘what results when you get 2+2 to add up to 6.984 as a result of being seduced into thinking the story is bigger than it really is’ seminar (currently the role fulfilled by Denis Winter’s work on Haig for military historians)"
Burns is an awarded journalist that was the first to discuss publicly what he witnessed in the Manchester Conference.
"Thankfully the navy man [referring to Jonty Powis, navigator of HMS Conqueror] had the courtesy not to refer to dead floating Argentines as ‘Erics’ (sic) ,a term invoked by another speaker who had not fought in the war, and had no academic qualification but who still presented himself as a leading Falklands War historian while unashamedly promoting his book as the definitive account of the resistance put up by British marines on the first day of the invasion.
This speaker found himself upsetting several other delegates including the war’s honoured official historian Sir Lawrence Freedman who challenged his claims of exclusivity, failing to provide supportive evidence, and simply making factual errors."
The official account of the FM37 Conference by organizers Alexander Clarke and Louise Clare.
"The next day began early again, the first panel was kindly chaired by Professor Freedman, but due to transport issues was comprised only of a PhD student, Jade White and the author of a book about the Falklands War, Ricky Phillips – this was different as most panels had had four members, so it enabled the chair to allow for a more free flowing question and answer session after each of the papers rather than them being handled as a group as every other panel received. Both papers were well prepared and provided interesting perspective, although the other conference organiser, Dr Alexander Clarke, was very happy he was in the next panel and back to standard group question taking as it meant he could dive off at points and help with conference stuff."
Phillips' account of the FM37 Conference, clearly differing from other accounts.
"I left knowing it had gone incredibly well, and the main hall was all handshakes and congratulations. Professor Stephen Badsey, Major Mike Seear, Commodore Mike Clapp, Dr Alex Clarke, Jade White, Grace Livingstone and several others all said they thought it was exceptionally good. I left chuffed. By now, I needed the coffee. Job done."