Jump to content

Talk:Bakassi conflict/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 07:47, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Thank you for taking the opportunity to have a review here. It's my first GAN so correct me if there are some bigger issues than a user who has more experience than me. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 15:00, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Additional comments

  • A brief look at the available sourcing on this subject leads me to believe that there is more information that needs to be incorporated here for this article to be sufficiently broad per GA standards. This book, which focuses on the ICJ case, gives a good summary of what the Cameroonian authorities tried to do establish their authority and develop the region after the handover in 2006, including establishing councils and spending a significant amount of money on government projects. This source refers to the flight of 100,000+ Nigerians from the region to Nigera after a formal handover ceremony in Calabar in 2008. There's also something needing to be addressed regarding what qualifies as the "Bakassi conflict". Specifically, this article defines the conflict as an insurgency related to but distinct from the original border dispute between the two states. These two books (pages 2 & 3, respectively) from the 1990s refer to that border conflict as the "Bakassi conflict", as does this 1996 Red Cross report (page 72). There are more from this period that do the same, as well as a handful that call it that in the early 2000s, before what this article characterizes as the main phase of the insurgency. -Indy beetle (talk) 06:49, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Peacemaker67: Good point Indy some of the information were there but someone has removed them sadly. BTW do someone has any kind of idea how we should fix the naming issue? Because most sources say the 21st-century conflict is also called the Bakassi conflict any suggestion is welcome. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 18:34, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks very much Indy. A few comments from me:

  • in the first sentence, suggest "The Bakassi conflict is an ongoing insurgency"
  • Done

suggest dropping the comma from "a move opposed by many Bakassians, who consider themselves Nigerians"

  • Done
  • I think the lead should make mention of the casualties that the conflict has caused and the ICJ case
  • Done but can you have a look or the grammar is good enough?
  • A UN-sponsored→A United Nations-sponsored and link UN
  • First thing done the second one not because it is a common term.
  • link plebiscite
  • Done
  • "which the region had been administered by Nigeria" not sure what is meant here
  • Added "de facto" in the sentence.
  • "not an historical part"
  • This is a little bit debatable - I know this is more an American thing or a dated thing in English. Personally I do use "a historical" but if you speed it up then you will say "an" immediately and you'll silent the "h" or you use both of them you say "an historical" without silent "h" same with the word hyphen but that's maybe only me. Changed.
  • "It was claimed" by whom?
  • By Nigeria.
  • suggest "the resultant border of 1884 should be the official border" if that is what is meant?
  • Yes, done.
  • suggest "should representbe the official border"
  • Done
  • link President of Nigeria
  • Done
  • for Nigerian soldiers link Nigerian Army
  • "Between April 1990 and April 1991 theyNigerian forces made a number of incursions" if that is right?
  • Correct, changed.
  • what is Jabane? a region or a town etc?
  • I finally found a source who says it is a town.
  • same for Kontcha
  • Also a town.
  • Did Cameroon respond to the Nigerian incursions/actions between 1981 and 1992? The narrative seems pretty one-sided in this para.
  • Not anymore changed it.
  • "Nigeria sent 500–1,000 soldiers to the peninsula in December" when in December? And are these separate to those sent on 21 December?
  • Could be yes but I'm not sure. These claims are from two different sources, one of them doesn't say the date only the month and the size of the soldiers while another source says it was on 21 December but the amount of soldiers does not appear in that source. If you have a suggestion about how to fix this, I'm happy to change it?
  • what is Akawa? a region or a town etc?
  • No idea. I couldn't find a source who can tell us what Akwa is but I found on Google Maps the island of Akwabana and the Akwayafe River maybe Akwa is a short form for one of them but I cannot confirm it.
  • what the casualties in February 1994 when the Nigerians attacked the Cameroonians?
  • Added.
  • alledged→alleged
  • I see old English here, removed.
  • but had not deployed into the peninsula
  • Done.
  • I would move "Fighting was reported from 1995 to 2005." in front of the previous sentence
  • Done.
  • believed to have claimed 70 lifves
  • Again old English, removed.

Down to Prelude, more to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:05, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • "In 2001, the Cameroonian Army lost 13 soldiers in an attack, two killed and eleven missing what was known as a pirate attack"? perhaps "In 2001, the Cameroonian Army lost 13 soldiers in an attack, losing two killed and eleven missing, in what was described at the time as a pirate attack? Then end this sentence here and start a new one
  • Done
  • how could the BFF claim that their 2001 attack was in protest against a decision made the following year by the ICJ? This does not make sense.
  • I couldn't find any other source who can confirm the situation; I can delete some of the words in the sentence if you believe it is not necessary or vague?
  • the sentence beginning "Following the ICJ verdict" seems in the wrong place. Shouldn't it be inserted immediately after the ICJ decision? Or perhaps "a Bakassian delegation had threatened?
  • Have replaced it with "agreement".
  • "They and groups including the Southern Cameroons People's Organisation (SCAPO), BAMOSD, and MEND" as they have already been mentioned
  • Done.

Down to Main phase, more to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:02, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • some of this seems odd. 21 Cameroonians were killed but no Nigerian casualties? Was this an ambush? Otherwise the lack of Nigerian casualties seems suspect.
  • Expanded.
  • "A police officer was killed" when?
  • Done.
  • "Attacks in December 2010 and February 2011"
  • Done.
  • again Cameroonian casualties but no insurgent ones? This seems to indicate that this is a one-sided account, or the Cameroonians were incompetent.
  • I have removed it for now.

Down to Aftermath... more to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:11, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • why did the Nigerians become stateless? Wouldn't they have just become Cameroonian automatically after the cession?
  • Good question, no most of them got problems with their nationality recognition; they had a lack of identification documents. But I did add the information.
  • "and were at risk of becoming stateless" "so many of them decided to not register their children"
  • Done
  • "gained full sovereignty over Bakassi"
  • Done
  • "Cameroon subsequently dethroneddismissed two village chiefs"
  • The source uses both but uses dethroned in its title so I think it's fine.
  • Beckly is a thesis? At what level?
  • What do you mean? It was made by Beckly who is from Uppsala Universitet and he interviewed the locals on 6 different places on the island. This Google Book [1] published by Cambridge Scholars Publishing says it is a reliable source unless you mean something different?

Overall, this seems a bit light on in terms of accounts from both sides and the Bakassians themselves. I take Indy beetle's concerns seriously, and think this needs some work, not just on the points I've raised, but on Indy beetle's more general concern that there is more information that needs to be incorporated here for this article to be sufficiently broad per GA standards, and to confirm the scope in chronological terms. I'm going to place this on hold for the above to be addressed, and am happy to keep it on hold for a longer than normal period to give you time to gather additional sources and clarify the scope issue, especially as this is your first GAN. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:23, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks PM for the review I will continue in the coming days and like you said before I'm expanding the article to address Indy's comments (I almost can make a separate article about the border conflict so big is the section.) But I'm trying to make this a FAC in the near future so if you have comments to make it easier at the nomination they are always welcome. :) Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 18:34, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Just a note that I am away 8-17 December, so won't respond to any improvements until after that. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:22, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hey PM thanks for your review. I have finally addressed them and I expanded it too if you disagree with some of them or I forgot something I am happy to change it or have a look. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 17:47, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • G'day CPA-5, sorry for the delay with getting back to this. I should be able to take a look at your responses in the next few days, but I am still concerned regarding the primary topic being a long period including the 1990s, per Indy beetle's original comments. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:02, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Second run through

[edit]
Lead
  • the first sentence needs to properly reflect the scope of this article, which is the conflict from July 2006 onwards. As Indy has noted, the prior conflict in this region is also called the Bakassi conflict, so once this GAN has been closed, the article needs to be moved to Bakassi conflict (2006–present). Don't do it now, as it will cause havoc with the GAN.
  • Hmm some sources use Cameroonian–Nigerian border conflict because Bakassi wasn't the only theatre where they fought. A region close to the Lake Chad border was also disputed. I can use one of them as a secondary proper noun but just let you know I don't think that conflict is also called Bakassi conflict if there were also clashes in and around Lake Chad. I'm happy to discuss this issue if you disagree with me?
  • @Peacemaker67: Hmm, I think we can solve this by making two articles in the near future. One about the Bakassi conflict in the 90s and one about the major border conflict. And maybe if we find the sources we can make an article about Lake Chad conflict? Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 10:56, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • say when Bakassi ceded to Cameroon
  • Clarified.
  • to avoid getting a war with Nigeria→to avoid war with Nigeria
  • Done.
  • say what the ICJ decided
  • Expanded.
  • More than 50 people were killed between the start of the conflict and the transfer - this doesn't make any sense, if the conflict started on 2 July and the transfer occurred two weeks earlier, no-one could have been killed between the two events as they occurred in the opposite order. Can you clarify what is meant here?
  • Done – also I just realised it hasn't a source so I will add one in the body.

G'day CPA-5, I'm going to do this in sections, as each section is addressed I'll do the next one. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:30, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • I think the lead (once the chronological scope is added to the first sentence) should be in chronological order starting with "In 1994...", then on to 2002, 2006 then 2008 and 2009. It also doesn't make sense that the conflict was caused by events in 2008 when the conflict began in 2006. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:48, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Early years
  • "which the region had been in de facto administered by Nigeria"
  • Done
  • suggest "Cameroon claimed that the British–German border agreements in 1913 should demarcate the border between the two countries."
  • Done

More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:16, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Border conflict
  • I think the claims should be presented in past tense, ie "Nigeria claimsed that Cameroonian soldiers" and same in the next sentence
  • Done
  • link Gendarmerie for gendarmes
  • Done
  • and changed Nigeria's flag with theirs→and exchanged the Cameroonian flag for the Nigerian flag.
  • Done
  • should "when Nigerian soldiers confiscated and inspected" be "when Nigerian soldiers boarded and inspected"? It seems incongruous to describe a confiscated boat as being "inspected".
  • Changed
  • "A couple of months later in June Nigeria claims, Cameroon was annexing nine of its fishing settlements on the peninsula" doesn't make sense, reword?
  • Done
  • what is Jabane? district? region?
  • I thought I already mention that last time (town), I guess not. Done
  • repsonse
  • Fixed typo
  • Merriam-Webster says "crackdown" for this usage
  • Fixed typo.
  • 14 fishing ships→14 fishing boats
  • Done
  • On 18–19 February the Nigerian forces
  • Done
  • the whole peninsula? The whole Bakassi peninsula, or a smaller one? If the former, why single out Akwa, there must have been many other villages occupied?
  • Expanded.
  • and the village of Akwa
  • Done
  • Fighting was reported from 1995 to 2005→Fighting was reported from 1996 to 2005, as we've already established that there was fighting in 1995
  • Good point.
  • In total, the border conflict is believed to have claimed 70 lives? Is this up to 2005? Otherwise this is a strange spot to include this info.
  • The source only explains the casualties of the border conflict between the governments which ended in 2005.

More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:55, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G'day CPA-5 just checking you've seen this? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:41, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Prelude
  • suggest "In 2001, the Cameroonian Army suffered two killed and eleven missing in what was described at the time as a pirate attack."
  • Done.
  • Bakassi Freedom Fighters (BFF)
  • Ehm what's this about?
  • how can an attack in 2001 be due to an ICJ decision that occurred the following year?
  • I have deleted it for now maybe in the future there is more information about this event.
  • suggest "or leaving the peninsula and moving to Nigeria."
  • Done
  • The UN→The United Nations (UN) and link
  • Done the United Nations but I don't think it should have a link because it's an every-day common term.
  • "iIt also agreed to partly leave Bakassi and give it back to Cameroon." what does this mean? Does it mean that the Nigerians agreed to withdraw part of their civil administration from Bakassi, or from a part of Bakassi, or something else? And was it really being "given back" to Cameroon from a legal standpoint, or just being transferred to Cameroon in compliance with the ICJ decision?
  • I have reworded a little bit. A part of the Peninsula was given back to Cameroon and at the time it was legal, however the Senate describe hand over as an illegal move from the government.

More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:36, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G'day CPA-5 just checking you've seen this. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:52, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Main phase
  • "Clashes occurred in the region between suspected Nigerian soldiers' and Cameroon soldiers"
  • Done
  • "it also claimsed none of its soldiers was killed"
  • Done
  • suggest "The region was beset by both Nigerian criminals and rebels,[35] and a previously unknown rebel group called the Liberators of the Southern Cameroon claimed responsibility for some killings."
  • Done
  • "On 14 August, Nigeria officially withdrew from Bakassi, with 50 people having been killed in the previous year."
  • Done
  • suggest "This BFF action failed to impact the policies of Nigeria and Cameroon regarding the peninsula."
  • Done
  • suggest "On 6 to 7 February 2011, the rebels launched an attack at Limbe and killed two Cameroonians, wounded one, and eleven were missing."
  • Done
  • is the Bakassi Self-Determination Front the same as BAMOSD? If so, use the initialisation introduced earlier
  • Yes, and it is mentioned in the "Prelude" section.

More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:27, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Aftermath
  • "establishing their recognition"
  • Done
  • I'm not sure what you are trying to say with "These gave them a lack of identification documents" Do you mean "A lack of identification documents made a number of Nigerian..."? Or something else?
  • Does this sound better?
  • "were at risk of becoming stateless"
  • "and many of them"
  • Done.
  • suggest "Cameroon subsequently dethroneddismissed"
  • Done

Prose review completed.

  • on the image page, a link to the Facebook page is needed for verification of File:Flag of the Democratic Republic of Bakassi.png
  • On the image page it says "Based on image from the Facebook page of Bakassi Movement for Self-Determination". So it needs a link added to whatever the page is in order to verify that this is what the flag looks like. Alternatively, it might be available from another source. But it definitely needs a source. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:24, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • in the lead it says "Two rebel groups, the Bakassi Freedom Fighters (BFF) and the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND) continue to fight." but the ongoing involvement of MEND isn't supported in the body. This also applies to the infobox where MEND is listed under status.

That's me done, finally. Placing on hold for the above to be addressed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:28, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • All of them are addressed are, hopefully it's now ready for becoming a GA. Anyway it's late here so I'll go to bed and continue tomorrow if there are more comments tomorrow. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 23:32, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bakassi_conflict/GA1&oldid=942495153"