Talk:Biafra

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Nigeria Biafra is within the scope of WikiProject Nigeria, a collaborative attempt to improve articles related to Nigeria. Please participate by editing the article or visiting the project page for more details.
If you nominate a Nigeria-related page for deletion, please list it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Nigeria.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.


This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former Countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of now-defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (FAQ). Add comments

An event in this article is a January 12 selected anniversary

Contents

[edit] Miscellaneous

Removed from Biafra:

There have been recent efforts to recognise and restablish Biafra as an independent nation.

Of value if verifiable, including dates, names, and "efforts" that are meaningful. Mere idealistic or nationalistic bluster, otherwise in contrast, is of no interest. (--Jerzy(t) 23:53, 2004 Mar 7 (UTC) , made clarifying edit, & added retroactively sig he forgot at 11:27, 2004 Feb 15 (UTC))

Although there were a few PoV slips and proofreading failures (and tho this sort of reworking of another nation's template is probably better done on Talk and pasted in later), i think there has been a good contribution made to the stubby article. Thanks to User:Vital component for the work. --Jerzy(t) 23:53, 2004 Mar 7 (UTC)

  • Additional cleanup is still required on this article. Some unsourced statements require adequate references (e.g. the likelihood that millions of Biafrans died) and effort is still required to ensure NPOV (e.g. was the picture of the starving child directly connected to Biafra?). Ajisekanla (talk) 16:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
  • The picture is indicative of the plight of the hundreds of thousands who starved, in what has frequently (though with much dissent, amidst much controversy) been described as genocide. The starving child tells the story: Nigeria couldn't stop Biafra on the battlefield, so they blockaded it. I want to get around to working on the article at length, at some point. DBaba (talk) 03:55, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Map

The map is largely unreadable for me, outside the Biafra section, but more importantly, it bears a copyright notice (which i can't read), appears to be the one at [1]] whose conditions prohibit us, even before GFDL issues. Removed as Copyvio. --Jerzy(t) 23:53, 2004 Mar 7 (UTC)

[edit] Rising Sun

The Page history of Biafra discloses that the country table was begun by copying in the country table for Japan (and after that was reverted, by copying in that for Iceland). Clearly, many individual boxes within the table have had their contents replaced with Biafra info. It may be mere coincidence that the national anthem of Biafra was "Land of the Rising Sun", and that Japan's (Japanese) name means "Land of the Rising Sun". I removed that title, perceiving that other information inapplicable to Biafra survives in the table, and inferring that the anthem was actually Japan's. I see that it is not Japan's, and was Biafra's, so i erred in replacing it with the note

(to the tune of Finlandia Hymn)

--Jerzy(t) 18:10, 2004 Mar 10 (UTC)

[edit] Reversion

I am about to revert the last edit to Biafra as a whole, because

  • it reversed, without offering any explanation, changes that i explained by reference to well-established WP standards,
  • it was sufficiently indiscriminate to recapitulate an obvious and unarguable earlier error: I corrected the link Presidents of Iceland List of Presidents of Iceland (which appeared in a context whose obvious meaning was "other presidents of this country can be found by following this link") by substituting "Biafra" for "Iceland"; the edit i am reverting put back "Iceland", and
  • the editor in question has made 12 edits on this article without a single character of summary, and without ever posting on this talk page, despite concurrent editing by others.

In the hope of encouraging this editor to engage in this editing as a responsible colleague (instead of recklessly, as described above), i intend to explain my additional edits on Biafra more thoroughly for a while.

--Jerzy(t) 18:10, 2004 Mar 10 (UTC)

[edit] March 10 edits

  • I replaced the entry
Official language - unknown
by
Languages - Igbo, English, ...
which has been in turn replaced by
Official language - Igbo and English
  • Besides the facts that
  • my proper disambiguation of the language names is not kept, and
  • following "Official language" with the names of two languages is nonsense,
  • the editor's change of heart from "unknown" to two and only two languages needs explanation before going into the article
My version (implying that whatever may be the case about the official language(s), if there were any (a question of fact), both languages were surely sued used there) is accurate (partly by virtue of not making an implicit claim of completeness) and obvious in light of the history of Nigeria.
  • I attempted to interpret the muddled "Capital" entry by explicitly indicating one formal capital, and several de facto capitals. I'm going to wipe this out, since the same muddle has reappeared. Let's discuss on talk what you're trying to communicate, and how to express it in table.
  • I previously removed "Land of the Rising Sun" from the "national anthem box", but i am editing that box to the combined entry
Land of the Rising Sun (to the tune of Finlandia Hymn)
I have made no study of WP handling of similar situations with other countries, but i note that while they are rare,
they do fit in conveniently in the format used usually for less information,
they make information that would be likely to be overlooked in the body text of the article easy to quickly locate for readers with that specific interest, and
therefore i conclude that Biafra is an example of a more general case, of a tune of the anthem of one country being a patriotic tune (earlier or later) of another, and that this is well dealt with by the text above.
  • I have further thots, which i will share as soon as practical.

--Jerzy(t) 18:10, 2004 Mar 10 (UTC)


  • I trust that the following edits to the table are adequately justified by their summaries:
    • 18:34, 2004 Mar 10 . . Jerzy ("(no international TLDs existed in its time)" (table))
    • 18:31, 2004 Mar 10 . . Jerzy (Wipe out garbage applicable only to Iceland re areas)
If i am mistaken in that assumption, plz ask me a question.

--Jerzy(t) 19:11, 2004 Mar 10 (UTC)

  • I am editing the following sentence in 'graph 1:
During its existence, it was recognised by only a few countries.
reflecting the contradictiont between it and the table info (only Turkey), by making it vaguer, to ensure its accuracy. I think we need documentation before being more specific.

--Jerzy(t) 19:28, 2004 Mar 10 (UTC)

  • One of the worst sins of this horrible sentence
The secession in the country's former Eastern Region, home to most of Nigeria's 8 million Igbo (or Ibo) people, followed mass killings of Igbo migrants living in northern Nigeria (May, September 1966) after a short-lived bloody coup attempt by Igbo army officers the previous January.
is "the country's" where it could mean either Nigeria's or Biafra's. My guess is the first, but those knowing better should speak up.
The phrase
Nigeria's former Eastern Region
in the same sentence is ambiguous as to when it stopped being the E.R. - with the secession, or earlier? I assume the first, but those knowing....
That sentence also attempts to tell the story backwards, and i've recast it.
  • Sounds as if
    • the "Chief of Staff" was Ojukwu,
    • the deep raids west were probes against Nigeria rather than defensive measures toward being left alone, and
    • the elephant in the living room is that Effiong and the rest of the formal apparatus of government were window dressing for Ojukwu's hope of using Biafra as a power base for ruling Nigeria, now that the Igbo officer corps had blown its chances of ruling via a coup.
That's PoV, but the contemporary and modern assessments of it should be documented.

--Jerzy(t) 20:54, 2004 Mar 10 (UTC)

[edit] March 11 edits

  • I notice i failed to comment on my version of the "Independence" box, which was not new today, but does in effect revert a new version by the other major editor of Biafra. That box is special in that Biafra is a former country (at most) and the table design is aimed at independent countries. IMO the use of the table is desirable, and requires adaptations. Specifically:
    • It makes no sense to document there its becoming independent, and fail to note its loss of independence.
    • The use of the word "annexed" is outrageous:
      • Annexation is a very specific legal term, which could be documented if it occurred in the legal sense, but will not have been done by Nigeria bcz it's legal position will have been that there was no independence but only a rebellion that took 3 years to suppress -- that legally Biafra never left off being part of Nigerian territory.
      • Using "annex" in a sense other than its legal sense is inherantly confusing, and can serve no purpose except the PoV one of creating confusion, or of asserting the PoV that its reincorporation into Nigerian apparatus of governance was international aggression.
    • The discussion of international recognition in that box is not what it was intended for (since it is unsuitable for any country with more than a handful of recognitions), and just a distracting way of presenting information that is already included effectively in the intro 'graph.

--Jerzy(t) 00:40, 2004 Mar 11 (UTC)

[edit] Apartheid

The article states that South Africa recognized Biafra as a soverign nation, "however that country's support of apartheid discouraged wider recognition by other African nations that might otherwise have been sympathetic to the Biafran cause." Not being too familiar with the Biafran conflict (I was 12 years old when the civil war ended), I'm unsure whether "that" refers to South Africa (which practiced -- not supported -- apartheid), or Biafra. Can someone clarify this point? -- llywrch 03:37, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)


biafra never supported apartheid

[edit] Leland Shapiro

I can't find any reference to this on the Internet other than links to this article itself. This sounds dodgy to me; I marked it with a Fact template.

-- Krolco 17:57, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Even if the Leland Shapiro guy is real, what would be it's relevance? Delete, it's vanity --dalegrett 15:20, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

The idea of Leland Shapiro is a continuation of the falsehood and propaganda for which Nigeria is noted.I wonder how all this lying Nigerians can expect the nation to make any meaningful progress?

[edit] Legacy

I have had to edit the Biafran section to remove historically incorrect propaganda especially the one claiming that the Igbo was seeking acess to the sea. Post-war politics nothwithstanding, it is common knowledge that the Ikwerre who inhabit Port-harcourt are Igbos. Before the civil-war, the Ikwerre never assumed any other identity outside their Igbo identity, thus it would be wrong for anybody to propagate such lies that acces to the sea was a factor in declaring Biafra. http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=ibo

The other lie is the claim that the oil wealth was a factor in declaring the war. We all know that at the time the Biafran war was fought, crude oil was not yet a factor in the economies of the different regions. The minorities were included in Biafra because they were part of the Eastern region. Contrary to the lies being peddled here, many amongst the minorities also supported Biafra, afterall Major General Phillip Effiong the vice-president and last Head of state of Biafra was from present day Akwa Ibom state.

The war has since ended. These Nigerian propagandists should please leave Biafra alone and concentrate on how to mend the failed state and sinking ship that Nigeria has become.


I wonder how anybody in their right mind can talk of Nigeria, when fellow Nigerians were killed in the North for a cartoon published in faraway Denmark. Nigeria is not sacred. It was only put together by the British as part of the ploy to make it unworkable, given its obvious contradictions. In the last few years many nations including the former Soviet union and others have disintegrated. If Nigeria does not get her acts right, her break-up will be just a matter of time. The secret is that even the Nigerian leaders do not beleive in Nigeria, that is why they have spent more time wrecking the place.Propagandists should please get a life!



A lot of the things in legacy are just 'other bad things that happened in Nigeria', mostly not even anywhere near Biafra. I think the gist of them is that the Muslims and the Christians don't get along, but I consider that a bit too tenuous. I'm going to delete them. 75.181.153.246 04:18, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Good idea, I support this action. Thee things listed really had no relation to Biafra's legacy. (By the way, welcome to Wikipedia.) Picaroon (t) 04:26, 9 August 2007 (UTC)