Contents

Talk:Nigerian Civil War

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Nigerian Civil War article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 365 days

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on January 12, 2008, January 14, 2020, and January 14, 2024.

This  level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: African / Cold War This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  African military history task force Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989) Africa Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Nigeria Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nigeria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Nigeria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NigeriaWikipedia:WikiProject NigeriaTemplate:WikiProject NigeriaNigeria articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Igbo Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Igbo, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Igbo related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IgboWikipedia:WikiProject IgboTemplate:WikiProject IgboIgbo articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

Bruce Mayrock was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 03 July 2014 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Nigerian Civil War. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

This article is written in Nigerian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realize, travelled, centre) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Another discussion about the Nigerian civil war 102.88.34.106 (talk) 16:31, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Korieh reference links to the official version, which is a paid-for copy. It would be useful to include a link to the author's free version, at https://epublications.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1145&context=hist_fac Bendel boy (talk) 09:06, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Kunkuru: I am not going to reply to the thread on my talk page because your grievance is with the content in this article, not an inquiry about myself. The onus is on you to explain beyond an edit summary as to why the claim is unsubstantiated. To make sure we are on the same page, the claim is not that it is widely accepted that there was a genocide in Biafra. The claim is that an NGO, the International Committee on the Investigation of Crimes of Genocide, stated that they believed there was a genocide in Biafra. So what did you want me to know? You wrote:

Your first paragraph is conceding to my point that your new primary source, the NYT article, does not substantiated your change in wording to "Biafra made a formal complaint of genocide against Igbos to the International Committee on the Investigation of Crimes of Genocide, which concluded that there wasn't evidence of a genocide nor starvation."

Your point that Korieh self-referenced in their article is fair. We should definitely look into their original source or discard their citation altogether since it may be dubious. So why not use the source you provided that notes the gap in Korieh's work?

On page 9 the author writes, "The Senegalese and Tanzanian presidents (Leopold Senghor and Julius Nyerere) also labelled the Nigerian policy as 'genocide', though it should be noted that most African governments opposed the Biafran move to secede." And what does the citation next to it say?

'Pressure on Lagos to Accept Ceasefire', The Times, 10 April 1968. In 1968, the 'International Committee for the Study of the Crimes of Genocide', a Paris-based unofficial organisation of lawyers from several countries, determined that genocide was occurring in Nigeria. Cronje, The world and Nigeria, pp. 277–8.

So the claim that one organisation, the International Committee for the Study of the Crimes of Genocide, believed there was a genocide in Biafra, is also substantiated in the counter source you gave.

If you think this Wikipedia article is implying that there is a general acceptance that there was a genocide in Biafra, which is what I think your actual grievance is, then provide counter sources and add a new sentence to the article, much like how the author of your counter source did. Do not change the words of an organisation to your own. Yue🌙 20:31, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this change: Special:Diff/1160724824/1160803356. Patrick Anwunah, former Quartermaster-General and Chief of Logistics at Biafran Defense headquarters, writes in his 2007 memoirs cited in the References that it was not only northerners and westerners who saw the coup as benefiting the Igbo. Some Igbo/southerners also saw the coup this way:

p. 112: "Unfortunately as well, illiterate southern traders in the North created a lot of provocation by jubilating over the murder of politicians and military officers in the Coup of 15 January 1966".

p. 130: "Unfortunately, many southern or Igbo traders in the North and East seemed to have liked the Coup of 15 January 1966 whilst at the same time many northerners seemed to have liked the counter-coup revenge and the pogrom."

p. 328: "The Igbos failed as a people to disassociate themselves from the bloody killings of 15 January 1966. What the Igbos did or failed to do, fuelled the fears and suspicions that all Igbos supported the Coup of 15 January 1966. In actual fact, some Igbos liked the coup whilst others did not."

Dieter.Meinertzhagen (talk) 22:08, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Prof. Murray Last quotation in the "Persecution of Igbo" section of the article also records the support of some Igbo for the coup of 15 January 1966.

Dieter.Meinertzhagen (talk) 22:21, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why were the nations that supported either side removed from the table and the flags of the various mercenaries nationalities removed? I can see no reason to remove this information other than possibly a bias. 83.77.119.21 (talk) 13:57, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The "supported by" nations were removed from the infobox in this edit in accordance with this RfC. From what I have seen of the editor's work, the editor is very scrupulous and I very much doubt that they are motivated by bias.

The flags of the various mercenary nationalities were removed starting in a series of edits starting here. The editor (@Helioz9:) would be better able to explain why than I can, but if I understand their intent correctly, it is that where the mercenaries came from, or where they lived when they weren't on a mercenary contract, is irrelevant; what matters is that they were fighting for Biafra at the time of the war.

Dieter.Meinertzhagen (talk) 19:16, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A flag indicating their respective nationalities is far more useful than the flag of Biafra for them, they were never citizens of Biafra in any case. 83.78.32.184 (talk) 23:28, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The RfC notes that the infobox can still feature the "Supported By" section if there is consensus to do so. I believe it is necessary to list the supporters of the war since most reliable sources discuss the significant impact of foreign countries involved in the war. My rationale behind listing the Biafran flags on the mercenaries was the fact that they were literally enlisted in the Biafran military (despite being described as "mercenaries"). Some flew for the Biafran Air force (such as Jan Zumbach and Carl Gustaf von Rosen) and some commanded the Biafran 4th Commando Brigade. Helioz9 (talk) 09:51, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox is for belligerents. Let's not return this infobox to the literal meme that it used to be. Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 20:59, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]