Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Independence Day (Nigeria)/archive3

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 14:35 12 November 2025 FACBot (talk) 23:05, 12 November 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Independence Day (Nigeria)

edit


Nominator(s): Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:32, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Independence Day is an annual public holiday in Nigeria observed on 1 October to mark the country's independence from the United Kingdom in 1960. It is observed nationwide with official ceremonies, military parades, cultural displays, and public events. The holiday's origins are linked to Nigeria's constitutional developments under British colonial administration.

This had extensive reviews in the previous nominations, and a lot has been worked on, and now a GA. I hope it now meets the FAC criteria. I will appreciate feedback. Thank you! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:32, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MCE89

edit

Some initial comments on source quality and reference formatting below. Further comments including spot checks to follow. MCE89 (talk) 10:22, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing

  • Yola (2010) appears to be a working paper that was written by an author who was a PhD student at the time. Was the working paper ever published in a peer-reviewed journal?
    • As advised by UndercoverClassisist, this seems to be the publication of a conference talk under the auspices of IFRA [fr], one of the French overseas research institutes; the author is a university academic. That would seem to meet WP:RS on the surface of it.
      • I had missed that the author was a graduate student at the time: we do allow PhD theses under WP:THESIS, but the advice there is to look for corroborating evidence of review and to prefer theses that have been cited in academic literature. I'd suggest that it would be a good idea to apply similar standards here, and to look into whether the talk was ever published in any form, or cited more widely, or whether the author ended up putting the same ideas into an unquestionably reliable source later. UndercoverClassicist T·C 17:01, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      • I agree with UndercoverClassicist. I would expect that a final version of this paper would likely have been published elsewhere, which would be preferable to cite instead. In my experience, presenting a working paper at a conference typically involves much less scrutiny than final publication in a journal (although it does vary), since it's often intended to be an opportunity to get feedback on a work-in-progress piece of research. Often the review process will just involve a panel screening your abstract, not a proper peer review of the paper itself. Unless there's any information about this particular conference's review process or evidence that the working paper has been cited elsewhere, I'd be a little hesitant to use it. MCE89 (talk) 17:48, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
        @MCE89 Does this help? , with the editorial committee here. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:25, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
        My concern is that those guidelines say the series is for "field materials and preliminary analyses", which suggests that it's for work-in-progress preliminary results rather than final research outputs. It does indicate that there is a degree of review, but doesn't make clear whether this is a proper peer review or just a working paper screening. Given that this paper doesn't seem to have been cited anywhere else and doesn't seem to have been published as a final research output in a peer reviewed journal, I'd suggest at the very least relying on it less heavily in that section. MCE89 (talk) 09:45, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
        @MCE89 Okay thank you. Should I start cutting it now or wait till you finish your spot checks? Per the cutting, I cited Yola 2010 twelve times, would having that number be a definition of what you mean by "relying less heavily" on it in that section? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:04, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The "Further reading" section is very long, and I'm not sure most of these sources would help the reader to learn more about the subject. For instance, I don’t think this relatively insubstantial article about a church choir singing for Independence Day is useful further reading. I would suggest incorporating any sources that are useful into the article as references, and cutting most or all of the remaining sources in "Further reading"
    • Done. I trimmed the section.
  • There are a few pieces of information cited to primary sources that I'm not sure are WP:DUE for inclusion. If there are secondary sources available I would suggest that they be used instead, and if not I would query whether the information should be included:
    • In Canada, the Province of Manitoba formally recognised Nigerian Independence Day in 2024, citing contributions made by Nigerians to the province. - This feels like a bit of a cherry-picked example, as it seems that many other cities/states/provinces have also taken steps to recognise the occasion. The source also doesn't quite verify the article's claim, as the citation is to an announcement that a bill to recognise the day had been introduced, not that the province had yet officially recognised the day
      • I replaced the source with a more appropriate one. Speaking of cherry picking, the paragraph actually started with "Nigerian communities abroad also commemorate the day" and I didn't mention only the Manitoba one. I have no problems with removing it entirely if you think so.
    • During the Cold War, independence anniversaries became opportunities for diplomatic signalling...analysts working for the Central Intelligence Agency described the event as emblematic of Soviet efforts to build influence among newly independent African states. - Is there a better source than this CIA report?
      • I couldn't find any other.
  • The third paragraph of the "Interruptions and controversies" section essentially recounts the views of one professor as quoted in one 2010 VoA article, which seems like potentially undue emphasis. Did this article have some kind of influence or secondary attention that demonstrates that these particular views are worthy of this level of focus?
    • I used this because the individual is a university academic, and on top of it, this piece was also televised/broadcast elsewhere; at the BBC, The Nigerian Voice.
      • This still feels like quite a lot of focus to give to the views quoted in this one particular article. The fact that he's a professor and that some quotes were pulled by other outlets doesn't really show that this merits a full paragraph of discussion under the heading "Interruptions and controversies". Were there other figures who commented on how Nigeria's development after 50 years compared to its aspirations at independence?

Reference formatting

  • Capitalisation of titles should be consistent (i.e. title case or sentence case) for sources of the same type
    • Okay, thank you so much. I maintained title case across all types of sources.
  • The main list of sources contains some primary sources that should be moved to the "Primary" section of your bibliography (e.g. the 2016 Buhari speech)
    • Done.
  • Refs 26 and 29: p -> pp
    • Done.
  • Odesanya, Nosayaba (2019a) should have a more specific date, and doesn't need the "a"
    • I am following the recommendations at Template:Sfn#More_than_one_work_in_a_year; this is also not the first time I have used sources by same author in same year.
      • Ah got it, I didn't see that there was a 2019b down in further reading. I'd still include the full date for consistency with your other newspaper sources though.
        • Done. I tagged the further reading one with |ref=none and added full dates across both.
  • Gero, David (1999): Full title needs to be in title case for consistency with other book sources
    • Done, thank you.
  • Adefolaju, Toyin; Adeyemi, Odedokun (30 June 2017): Link is dead, and missing ISSN
    • Fixed, added ISSN, and direct link to PDF instead.
  • "Nigeria Becomes Free Nation October 1, As Whole World Watches". Minneapolis Spokesman. - You haven’t included OCLCs for other newspaper sources, is there a reason one is included here?
    • Removed this one.
  • Arinde, Nayaba (7 October 2010) and Arinde, Nayaba (1 October 2009) - Inconsistent title capitalisation
    • Fixed this one too.

Source spot checks

I've listed the results of my initial spot checks below. All numbering is as of this revision. Just let me know if I've missed something when reading the sources for any of these. I'll do some final spotchecks once these have all been resolved. MCE89 (talk) 09:45, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ref 1 - Page number appears to be wrong, should be p.6 instead of p.154?
  • Ref 2 - Good
  • Ref 4 - Good
  • Ref 11 - I can’t find most of this, including the location or crowd size, on the cited pages
  • Ref 12 - The ceremony was attended by international dignitaries, including United States Vice President Richard Nixon, British Colonial Secretary Iain Macleod, and Foreign Secretary Selwyn Lloyd - I can’t see where the cited pages of ref 12 mention any of this. Ref 15 says that Nixon would be attending, but doesn't mention Macleod or Lloyd
  • Ref 14 - I can’t find this on the cited pages
  • Ref 19 - Many highlife artists operated nightclubs, hotels, and sometimes recording or rehearsal spaces in preparation for the festivities. - The source says that many artists began to run hotels and nightclubs to attract attention to their music, but I don’t think it says that they started businesses specifically in order to prepare for the independence celebrations
  • Ref 20 - Good
  • Ref 23 - Good
  • Ref 24 - On 1 October 1960, the Independence State Ball and other events in Lagos were organised as part of the national celebration. - No mention of the Independence State Ball on the cited page
  • Ref 26 - Good
  • Ref 28 - Good
  • Ref 31 - A central part of the national programme is the military parade of the Nigerian Armed Forces, followed by the ceremonial raising of the national flag. - The cited source says that the 1960 military parade and flag raising were inspiring events, but I don't think it verifies the claim that they remain a central part of the celebrations
  • Ref 31 - State-wide observances usually complement national ceremonies with parades and cultural displays, drawing large crowds. - I don't see where the source verifies this
  • Ref 32 - Good
  • Ref 38 - Good
  • Ref 42 - Good
  • Ref 43 - During the Cold War, independence anniversaries became opportunities for diplomatic signalling. - I don’t think the CIA report supports this broader claim that independence anniversaries in general became opportunities for diplomatic signalling
  • Ref 48 - Good
  • Ref 51 - Good
    @MCE89 Do we have any progress? Tysm! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:31, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Vanderwaalforces Sorry for the delay! I'm planning to do some further spot checks tomorrow. MCE89 (talk) 15:15, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Spot checks were much cleaner this time. I just found two remaining issues:
    • Ref 10 - Doesn’t look like the link goes where it should
    • Ref 50 - Confirms that Henry Okah had been detained in South Africa, but doesn’t verify the claim that he ended up standing trial on terrorism charges
    MCE89 (talk) 13:06, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @MCE89 Thank you.
    • Ref 10: I fixed the link to a static image
    • Ref 50: I quote from the source that Amid the furore over responsibility for the Abuja bombing is the leading figure in MEND, Henry Okah, whose own statements on the matter are as tangled as the government’s. In February 2008, Okah was arrested in Angola for traf- ficking arms for MEND and detained by the Nigerian Federal authorities. Under an amnesty he was released in July 2009 and took refuge in South Africa. After the Abuja bombing, South African police arrested him at his house in Johannesburg on suspicion of terror- ism and at President Goodluck Jona- than’s behest. He now faces extradition to Nigeria, where subsequent claims and counterclaims have cast confusion over the bombers’ identities and motives. Okah says his arrest on ‘‘terrorism’’ charges is part of a political plot by President Jonathan, a native of the Delta, to discredit his opponents ahead of elections in early 2011.
    Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:16, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    That quote verifies that he was arrested in South Africa for terrorism and that he was facing extradition to Nigeria, but it doesn't verify the claim that he stood trial in South Africa on terrorism charges MCE89 (talk) 02:19, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @MCE89 More quotes... ‘‘It is about these elections and the Nigerian government’s belief that I’m working on the side of the opposition,’’ he said. Okah says he received a text message from one of Jonathan’s advisors after the blasts asking him to have MEND retract its claim of responsibility for the attacks. He claims the government planned to place the blame on the Pres- ident’s political rivals from the coun- try’s predominantly Muslim north. ‘‘The President doesn’t want it to seem that his government is being fought against by people from his place,’’ he said. In evidence presented to Johannesburg Magistrate’s Court on October 21st, the prosecution alleged that the 45-year old former marine engineer had been in contact with the people who coordi- nated the October 1st bombings, This Day reported (22 ⁄ 10). Reading from an affidavit, state prosecutor Shaun Abra- hams said Okah had been in contact with Chima Orlu, one of two men wanted in connection with the bomb- ings. While in South Africa, Okah had allegedly instructed his co-conspirators to drive the cars to where the attacks would be launched. In a responding affi- davit, Okah denied his involvement in the attacks. Speaking from his cell in Johannesburg on October 17th, he called the case against him ‘‘ludicrous’’. ‘‘If I was lead- ing militant activities I wouldn’t be here in South Africa, I should be there on the ground with them,’’ he told AFP. ‘‘You can’t lead operations by phone. It’s impossible. I would have been there with them. But of course I’m not doing that. I’m more like a political leader of our struggle. ‘‘I’m a voice that the people listen to. The real fighters in the Niger Delta lis- ten to my voice.’’
    The passage refers to "Johannesburg Magistrate's Court" and "state prosecutor Shaun Abrahams", describing affidavit evidence presented there. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 05:28, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @MCE89 Does this work? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:00, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Yep that works, sorry I missed that bit. Comfortable that this passes the verifiability standard. MCE89 (talk) 17:07, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @MCE89 Tysm, I'm sorry for the pings; please, what do you think now, generally? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:24, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Pass on verifiability and reference formatting, but I think this still needs a second opinion from a more experienced FAC source reviewer to confirm that the sourcing is "a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature" and that all sources are high-quality reliable sources. MCE89 (talk) 15:15, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @MCE89 Tysm!! Do you know anyone I could ask to take a look? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:49, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Pbritti

edit

Intermittent comments will be forthcoming. ~ Pbritti (talk) 21:30, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Why not use File:NAF911 - Lockheed C-130H Hercules - Nigeria Air Force at Oberpfaffenhofen Airport (OBF) in August 1989.jpg, which depicts the aircraft involved in the accident?
  • I generally find "recently released" and similar wording to persist long after the recency has worn off. I recommend futureproofing with something along the lines "then new" or a specific date.
    • Done, thank you!
  • Per MOS:PROFESSOR, I'd advise against "Professor Kabiru Mato", especially since there's an adequate gloss that follows him name.
    • Done.
  • The quote attributed to Mato regarding the "$20- to $30-billion dollars" does not appear to be a verbatim quote and should not be attributed to him directly. I recommend paraphrasing. Perhaps this is an Engvar, but I don't believe that numbers are hyphenated, as they are not adjectival.
    • I checked again, and it is, in fact, verbatim. Did I miss something?
      • The article says "Mato said, despite the fact the Nigerian government might have spent over $20- to $30-billion dollars during the last 12 years since the beginning of civil rule in 1999, to improve electricity supply, most of the country is always in darkness." The article does not put quotation marks around that statement. It is a summary or paraphrase of something he said and should not be presented as a direct quote from him.
        • Oh, thank you so much. I understand now. I have worked on that.
  • "(serial 911)" is perhaps a tad too much detail for this article.
    • Removed.
  • I'm only finding some unreliable sources on this, but maybe you know where to look: Coffman Memorial Union seems to have hosted Nigerian Independence Day celebrations in recent years, so it's perhaps worth mentioning that continuity.
  • I'm looking around and believe that there's a good chance Sarkin Taushin Katsina is notable. I also suspect that there may be an article we can link using {{ill}}, but I don't know what languages to search.
    @Pbritti Do we have any progress? Tysm! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:32, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I have taken note of the coordinator comment below (I'm in a slightly similar situation on my own current FAC). I need to reread the article in full tomorrow and compare against other reviews, but your responses to my comments have been satisfactory. Thanks for the ping. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 02:12, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some additional comments as I do another read through:

  • "the Northern and Southern protectorates" You should repipe these to read as Northern and Southern Nigeria protectorates.
  • "followed by the Macpherson Constitution of 1951 and the Lyttleton Constitution of 1954, which established a federal structure" My understanding is that the Richard Constitution also introduced elements of a federal structure in Nigeria. This may be a good place for a semicolon to effect a clearer delineation in what these constitutions accomplished. Additionally, consider fixing those redirects that you link to so that they go straight to the relevant sections of the Constitution of Nigeria article.
  • Consider linking Prime Minister of Nigeria on first mention
  • I'm fairly surprised that "decolonization" does not appear anywhere in the background to this event. While I am greatly appreciative of how Nigerian agency is centered in this article, Nigerian independence did not occur in a vacuum and clearer discussion of who exactly the Nigerians were gain independence from would be good for readers.
  • Minor glosses of what the Union Jack is and who Elizabeth II, Nnamdi Azikiwe, and Jaja Wachuku were are probably worth considering, as not all readers will be familiar with these names and their relevance to this subject.
  • Refer to Abubakar Tafawa Balewa as just "Balewa" on second mention of him in the body.
  • "represented the United States President" specify Dwight D. Eisenhower here and link his name. In the succeeding sentence about Nixon, just call him "Eisenhower" with no title.
  • Link military tattoo, as many readers with a poor familiarity with British military culture will not be familiar with these events.
  • "and Edo as well" put a comma after Edo.

More comments may be forthcoming, but that's a start. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:13, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Pbritti TYSM, I fixed all. Regarding the decolonisation thingy, per my reply to Simongraham below, things like these belong to a dedicated article about the entire history of independence in Nigeria, not an Independence Day article. I once had a version that was criticised because it had too much focus on independence history and not the day. I added a "Main article" hatnote at the beginning of that section for a reason :) Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:03, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Vanderwaalforces: Thanks for your reply! I will take a closer look at everything once again. I apologize if you feel like reviewers give you a pendulum-like feeling with contradicting requests; I will assent to the desires of earlier reviewers and consider the hatnote good enough. I am presently leaning strongly towards supporting this as an FA. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:06, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Pbritti Oh, I missed this. Thank you so much. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 05:52, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Pbritti Sorry for the ping, lol, but any luck on a final read? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:22, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Only the most minor quibbles before I offer my support: for the source presently listed as Eisenhower 2001, you might consider using the |orig-date= parameter, as well as the url-access=subscription parameter. Otherwise, I'm pretty much on board here! ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:01, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Pbritti Done! Thank you! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:55, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Pbritti Luck? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:21, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for no immediate reply! I am going to support on prose. I am now noticing that the references are not organized in the bibliography in a fashion I am familiar with, but that is insufficient for me to feel comfortable considering this something other than FA in quality. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 03:01, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Tysm, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:32, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from simongraham

edit
  • Image review:
Young kids celebrate Nigeria's independence in 1960.png has appropriate PD tag.
Nigerian Air Force C-130 (6837681965).jpg has an appropriate CC tag.
These both pass.
I agree with the comment by Pbritti that NAF911 - Lockheed C-130H Hercules - Nigeria Air Force at Oberpfaffenhofen Airport (OBF) in August 1989.jpg could be used instead. It has an appropriate CC tag. The file notes a discrepancy in the coordinates but that is not material to this article.
I wonder if it is worth including any images of more recent celebrations. Wikimedia has NIGERIA MODELS CELEBRATION OF INDEPENDENCE.jpg and Nigerians celebrating their country's 61st independence anniversary in Mogadishu, Somalia (51539145387).jpg, both with CC licenses, although I am not sure that they are appropriate as the only examples. There may be more at the Online Archive: African Independence Days, for example. I suggest it is worth looking at this to see if any are relevant and have appropriate licenses.
  • The Times on Thursday September 29, 1960, in an article titled "First Steps Towards Balance of Payments" (accessible through the Wikipedia Library) commented that "over 100 manufacturers wll be showing their products in the "Made in Nigeria" section of the Nigeria Exhibition opening in Lagos on Independence Day." (p. 38) I suggest this is worth including.
  • There is also an interesting report of a statement from Iain Macleod after the day also in The Times, on Thursday October 13, 1960, in "Mr. Macleod's Pledge On Duty To Colonies".
  • A publication Nigeria: A Special Independence Issue of Nigeria Magazine October 1960 was produced with 232 pages plus appendices. It has this quote "Now that independence has been achieved, the main problem as it is seen by Nigerian leaders is how to encourage those elements in the history and constitution of the country that make for national unity, and how to discourage those that emphasise tribal differences and regional separation." (p. 11).
  • Suggest looking at Musa and Oyeleye's chapter titled Nigeria: Nationalism, Mass Media, and the Crisis of National Identity in Fuller's book (available on archive here), which gives a critique of the celebration of independence day.

@Vanderwaalforces: Great to see this article and the work you have done to get it to this standard. Please tell me if you would like any more on these publications. simongraham (talk) 23:32, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Could you clarify why File:Young_kids_celebrate_Nigeria's_independence_in_1960.png is believed to be PD? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:57, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • My understanding is that, in Nigeria, copyright for photographs generally expires 50 years after the publishing date so it has been in the public domain in the place of publication since 2010, and it was first published before 1964 without copyright renewal so is public domain in the US. "Cinematograph films or photographs get into the public domain 50 years after first publication. An example are the images and videos taken during Nigeria’s Independence are in the public domain because they have existed for over 50 years after they have been published." However, I am not a lawyer and am happy to be proved wrong.
When and where was it first published? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:24, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The entry in wikimedia says October 1960, which seems reasonable. simongraham (talk) 05:41, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It gives that as a date - it doesn't specify that that is a publication date, as opposed to creation. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:02, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria Speaking of the date of creation; I think it is fair enough to say these images were "created" on that same day of Independence, although based on our previous conversations, the publication date does seem to be very confusing to tell, but I see that Cartwright 1961 used some of the images in question in their publication. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:08, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree re: date of creation. Wrt publication, was this particular image included in Cartwright 1961? Nikkimaria (talk) 22:12, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria Not this particular image. Question: Would any of these independence day picture which were published in works as of that time or two/three/five years after be considered published? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:21, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure I follow - if they were published, they were published? Nikkimaria (talk) 23:00, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria I also couldn't understand what you meant. Did you not understand my question? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:19, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No - could you rephrase? Nikkimaria (talk) 23:32, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Vanderwaalforces: To clarify what you need to prove, you need evidence that the image was published publicly (in a newspaper, book, magazine) in 1975 or earlier. If the image was taken, kept in a box for decades years, published for the first time in a book in 2023, then we can't use it. ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:37, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Pbritti Ah I see. I found a radio broadcast by ARD Audiothek released in 1960 at https://www.ardaudiothek.de/episode/urn:ard:episode:a4907a3ebe3e0215/ with this image, is this sufficient?
@Nikkimaria too Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:14, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A radio broadcast wouldn't have had an image associated with it, when originally released. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:18, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Pbritti, @Nikkimaria I have removed the image, will find others that are appropriate and freely licensed so that I can add. Thank you both. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 05:51, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Simongraham Thank you sm for the comments. So, one of the major issues this article had was that it was focusing more on the general history and story of independence in Nigeria, and NOT the DAY of Independence. I worked extensively on making sure the article focuses on the Day of Independence of Nigeria and not the broad spectrum of Independence History as I think that belongs to something like an article that discusses the History of Independence in Nigeria.
I have gone ahead and added the Made in Nigeria thing from The Times' "First Steps Towards Balance of Payments" article. Please can you show me how to access ? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:27, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately the archive does not seem to be online any longer but the materials list is available. Anne Brandstetter at JGU seems to the contact; her details are linked from the webpage. simongraham (talk) 05:41, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Simongraham That so sad. I was really looking into getting of the images. But I guess if I ever get contact with her, I could always add the images? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:45, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Simongraham Do we have any progress? Tysm! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:32, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Vanderwaalforces: Conditional on the concerns raised by the other editors, I am happy to support the application. simongraham (talk) 07:30, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BorgQueen

edit

Coordinator note

edit

This has been open for more than three weeks and has yet to pick up a support. Unless it attracts considerable movement towards a consensus to promote over the next three or four days I am afraid that it is liable to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:44, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to add my support. simongraham (talk) 07:30, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild Hi there. Any updates on this, please? Tysm! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:15, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The additional support, coming from a solid review removes the imminent danger of archiving. But the nom could do with a further couple of solid reviews. I have added it to Urgents and for whatever help it may be paste below my standard boilerplate on finding reviewers.

Reviewers are more happy to review articles from people whose name they see on other reviews (although I should say there is definitely no quid pro quo system on FAC). Reviewers are a scarce resource at FAC, unfortunately, and the more you put into the process, the more you are likely to get out. Personally, when browsing the list for an article to review, I am more likely to select one by an editor whom I recognise as a frequent reviewer. Critically reviewing other people's work may also have a beneficial impact on your own writing and your understanding of the FAC process.

Sometimes placing a polite neutrally phrased request on the talk pages of a few of the more frequent reviewers helps. Or on the talk pages of relevant Wikiprojects. Or of editors you know are interested in the topic of the nomination. Or who have contributed at PR, or assessed at GAN, or edited the article. Sometimes one struggles to get reviews because potential reviewers have read the article and decided that it requires too much work to get up to FA standard. I am not saying this is the case here - I have not read the article - just noting a frequent issue.

Gog the Mild (talk) 02:02, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Gog, im an outsider and don’t have any expertise in the subject, so I won’t leave a review, but I wanted to let you know the “review it now” button on this article’s section in Urgents links to a previous FAC, not this newer one Crystal Drawers (talk) 13:09, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Crystal Drawers, thanks, my bad. Vanderwaalforces has fixed it. The coordinators much prefer at least one review to be by an editor who knows little or nothing about the topic, as a prophylactic to assumed knowledge. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:24, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild I get your point, thank you. As correctly pointed out, I am not reviewing other's works, and if that is the reason I didn't quickly get others to review mine, then I doubt I will ever bring any article to the FA process again, so that I don't give other editors the work I myself am unable to do.
Hi there. Reviewing others' work is absolutely not a requirement for nominating articles for FAC and I would encourage you to continue to submit fine articles such as this one. It was just a suggestion as to one way - among several others specified - as to how a nominator may address a shortage of reviewers. We all do what we can, any many - probably most - potential reviewers don't care much about this. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:34, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This nomination has 5 supports already and there's no issue that have been raised that I haven't tried to fix. I have seen other nominations pass with three people's reviews (and support) before now, so I am only baffled at this point. I hope you're able to tend to this one whenever you're free. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:22, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Deciding whether/when to promote is more of an art than a science. Speaking in very general terms a coordinator may be more relaxed with the 50th FAC nomination by an editor - all of which were on broadly similar topics and none of which were ever archived - with three detailed high-quality general reviews each by a reviewer who had submitted 250+ reviews with no serious issues noted, than with a first time nomination. For the latter they may, reasonably in my view, want a little more scrutiny and have a keener eye on the mix of reviewer backgrounds, the level of detail in the reviews, and the variety of perspectives with which they approach the reviews. In support of this I note the number of issues picked in Noleander's review - which was the nomination's fourth - and their closing comment. Plus coordinators are both human and are unpaid volunteers: they may not always be as quick to respond as a nominator might wish. (I speak as an editor with something of a reputation for harassing the coordinators when wearing my nominator hat.) All of that said, with Noleander and Gerda signing off this feels ready for a coordinator read through with a view to possibly closing, so thanks for the ping. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:01, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Noleander

edit
  • Lead paragr: Independence Day is an annual public holiday in Nigeria observed... That first paragraph is rather large. The Lead section should be carefully crafted to draw-in readers: it should be inviting and interesting. Large paragraphs (and overly detailed text) may cause many readers to skip the article. WP:LEAD says "The typical Wikipedia visit is a few minutes long (for all pages combined during that reading session). The lead is the first thing most people read upon arriving at an article, and may be the only portion of the article that they read. It gives the basics in a nutshell, introduces the article, and cultivates interest in reading on". Consider splitting the lead paragraphs into smaller ones.
    • I edited this and broke it into three parts; the day and how it's observed, origination and what happened that first day, and how it has been commemorated and has evolved. I am not sure how else to break this other than this. -VWF
  • Wording Preparations for the inaugural celebrations had included... the word "had" is an unusual tense that should be avoided, unless absolutely required. Can it be eliminated? The lead should simply recite things in simple past tense, and more-or-less in chronological order.
    • Oh, of course, thanks! -VWF
  • If this source is a chapter in a book, the source info should include the page number (range): Esizimetor, David Oshorenoya (2013). "The Role of Popular Music and Editorial Cartoons in Recounting the Experience of Independence in Nigeria". In Goerg, Odile; Martineau, Jean-Luc; Nativel, Didier (eds.). Les Indépendances en Afrique (in French). Presses Universitaires de Rennes. doi:10.4000/books.pur.112163.
    • The source is definitely a chapter of a book, just as I made clear from the citation. But I do not have access to the PDF of the chapter, not even with Wikipedia Library, so I had to use what I am able to–the web version. -VWF
  • The sources listed in the Sources section are not alphabetized. All top-quality articles have them alphabetized (by last name, or title, if name unknown). I thought that alphabetization is essentially mandatory guidance from the WP:MOS, but the MOS does give some options: MOS:REFERENCES says " General references should be sorted logically (for example, by subject matter), chronologically, or alphabetically. " From an FA perspective, un-alphabetized looks very messy. And there is a practical aspect: when a reader follows a cite to, say, " Nnah 2024", the reader should not be forced to scan all the sources til they find "Nnah" ... it goes much faster if alphabetized.
    • Done. -VWF
  • "Further Reading" items should also be alphabetized.
    • Done. -VWF
  • Ambiguity: Political parties including the National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons, led by Nnamdi Azikiwe (a nationalist and later Nigeria's first Governor‑General and President), and the Action Group, led by Obafemi Awolowo, articulated regional interests while pressing for self‑government What is "self government" refering to here? Self-government of Nigeria (indep from UK?) or were there 2 or 3 "regions" asking for self-government? If the latter: did they want to be independent countries? Or were they asking for a larger amount of autonomy (but within Nigeria)? And what, exactly are the identities/names of the "regions" being discussed here?
    • Fixed. I explained this now. -VWF
  • Long sentence: Nnamdi Azikiwe, who hosted a royal reception alongside Jaja Wachuku (Nigeria's first Speaker of the House of Representatives and later its first Foreign Affairs Minister) during the celebrations, later took part in the independence programme at the Race Course, where he was sworn in as Governor-General following the flag-raising event. Very hard to parse, suggest trimming and making it clearer.
    • Clarified. -VWF
  • Clarify: celebrations included mini-durbars... can "durbar" be linked to a WP article, or defined here?
  • Significance of political cartoons: In the 1950s and 1960s, editorial cartoons in newspapers... the entire paragraph is devoted to cartoons, which seems a bit out-sized. Are political cartoons particularly important form of political commentary in Nigeria? If so, can the article mention that near the start of the paragraph (with a source) ... that would help readers grasp the importance of the paragraph's material.
  • Clarify holiday movement: Sun/Monday: Section 5 of the Act stipulates that when a holiday falls on a Saturday or Sunday, it is not to be transferred to another day.[32] In practice, however, successive governments ... Most of this paragraph is devoted to leaders moving the holiday, in violation of law. But it is not explained why they are moving it, or how it benefits the leaders. Can that be explained near the start of the paragraph?
    • This is more or less something I cannot give an answer to. I am only providing the details I am finding in sources, the WHY they're being moved is not in the sources either. -VWF
  • Conclusion: I do not believe the article is FA quality now. Looking at the article history, I observe that this is the 3rd FA nomination, and also that there has not been a WP:Peer Review done. I suggest that the nominator put the article thru the Peer Review (PR) process, and have it reviewed by an FA-knowledgeable editor (perhaps one of the FAC mentors listed here). After the PR is done, it may be in a better position for FA nomination. The article is nearly ready for FAC, but not quite there yet. Noleander (talk) 04:06, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Noleander Thank you so much for commenting. I do not wish to get this through any PR, not the one I did that nobody commented on. There’s literally nothing I haven’t tried in helping this article pass FA, and I think I am getting demoralised by the processes. I managed to get it through GA, and so far so good I’m most likely close to FA-quality. I will address your comments above. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 04:54, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    You've done an outstanding job on a complex topic ... it's very high quality. You shouldn't get demoralized, sometimes doing the final bit of polishing on an article can take a while. Regarding peer reviews, sometimes no one will volunteer to do a peer review. That happens to me a lot, in those cases I hunt around and find a reviewer and I ask them to do it and they almost always say yes. i'm working on an article now, Bridge, And it went through a Good Article OK, and I thought it was great shape, but then I did a peer review and a bunch of stuff was found. I fixed it up, and I think maybe it's ready for FA... but I'm going to do a second peer review before FA, just to be sure. It can take months to get an article ready. Noleander (talk) 05:18, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Noleander BTW, I have addressed your comments above as much as I can, you can recheck. Thank you already.
    On the other hand, I totally understand your point, I in fact pinged some editors to the PR I opened but only one editor (who I didn't ping) responded. I cannot force editors to do a review, which is more reason I am happy you came by. I am just not going to take this to PR especially when I already have 3 supports to promote it.
    Thank you in advance of your cooperation. Also, I think the article you're working on is pretty generic topic, so I can imagine the amount of work you're doing to put that up to FA standard, the article is impressive! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:32, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't have time right now to make another pass thru the article, so I'll refrain from supporting or opposing. Though I do see one thing: there is a prominent quote box in the middle of the article with a quote from Eisenhower, and it seem like a generic "congratulations" message that any head of state might issue. If the article is going to have a quote box, it should be a quote that is unique and especially significant from a Nigerian point of view. Perhaps a quote from a Nigerian person that reflects the mood of the country, etc. Noleander (talk) 19:08, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Noleander No rush, I’m happy to receive your feedback when you have time. On the other hand, you’re right, I’ll just replace or remove that quote box entirely, actually. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 19:18, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Noleander Hi there. I'm sorry to bother you, I can see that you're really busy with Bridge, I can imagine the work you're putting there. If you have few minutes to spare, please take a look. TYSM! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:04, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article doesn't feel like a Featured Article ... but I am not able to articulate specific improvements. Maybe my impression is influenced by the large number of issues with the article that were corrected during this 3rd FAC; plus, this FAC was functioning essentially as a Peer Review. Weak support on prose and MOS. I have not checked images or sources. Noleander (talk) 17:21, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments and support from Gerda

edit

I planned to review long ago and finally get to it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:42, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox looks fine to me. Generally: we don't need links to current countries and their capitals, nor New York City- Also: references for one fact should be in ascending order.

Lead

Colonial era ...

  • I wonder why we have "path" here while the basic article has "road"
    • Changed to road. -VWF
  • For us unprepared readers, I'd begin with one sentence saying since when Nigeria was ruled by the British,
  • I'd prefer the section in chronology, not a 1930s mobilisation after 1950s events. Alternatively: a new paragraph or subsection for that topic.
    • I made it choronological and split the paragraph. -VWF
  • The sentence beginning "Political parties" is long and complex, - could that be said simpler?
    • I broke it into two parts. -VWF

Independence in 1960

  • Can we get to know early that what was called Race Course then has now a different name? To avoid the surprise of landing on a square when you click on Race Course.
    • I added "now called Tafawa Balewa Square". -VWF
  • Similarly: can we get a short description for highlife music? ... because I thought it's a style, but in the following sentence it's a period?
    • Highlife is indeed a genre, and the sentence "Musicians of the period" is not saying musicians of the highlife period; it's saying musicians of the Independence period.
  • The section is very long, and while the last short para about celebrations abroad matches the header, the cartoons of the 1950s ... doesn't exactly. Nor 1965 sequences.
    • How about a subsection called "Cultural expression and legacy" under this section? I just did, please check. -VWF

The final two sections look fine, but let the article end on controversies, - I wonder if there could by some more positive conclusion? I'd also like an image or two of celebrations ;)

Thank you for expanding the article! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:16, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt Hi there, thank you for finally finding time. I made edits and replied above. Kindly check, please. Tysm! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 07:54, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and per image, I couldn't find a suitable one, especially license-wise. The most appropriate images are yet to be in the public domain, which sucks, lol. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:13, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the changes! At this point, I'm ready to support for featured article. We can still discuss details:
  • Images: I think whatever good image you have of the key performers mentioned by name performing would give us some visual idea. Perhaps also look for national flags.
I like the new "Legacy" section but:
  • I think it should be a level 2 section, not really fitting under 1960, and perhaps could come at the very end.
  • Its last para: I don't know if that means 1960, then t should be moved there, or general, then the tense should be changed to the ongoing "have been also ...". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:44, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gerda Arendt Re image, can I just add the File:Flag of Nigeria.svg?
You could but every body can imagine it by the description, - that would add little. Any image with many flags? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:14, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How is File:Nigerians celebrating their country's 61st independence anniversary in Mogadishu, Somalia (51539145387).jpg? Not for the lead but for the celebrations elsewhere. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:19, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gerda Arendt Ah, thanks! I've added that one by now. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:19, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Re section, yass, I thought as much and just did that. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:07, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:14, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comments

edit
  • "with official ceremonies, military parades, cultural displays, and public events." I am not sure what "public events" adds. It strongly suggests that the previously listed types of event are not open to the public. Maybe '... and other public events'? Or '... and other - more informal - public events'?
  • "Since then, Independence Day has remained a key date". I don't think that "remained" quite works: I mean, it wasn't a key date prior to 1960 - "Since then" - so how can it have "remained" one. Suggest "remained" → 'been'.
  • Further reading: article titles - as opposed to book titles - can be in either title case or sentence case, regardless of how they appear in their original, but should all be consistently in one or the other.

Overall a fine piece of work. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:22, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Gog the Mild Fixed all, thank you. Also, thank you for your comments above, noted. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:24, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Independence_Day_(Nigeria)/archive3&oldid=1321835966"