Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Igbo people/archive1


 * 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 not promoted by SandyGeorgia 00:26, 31 January 2009.

Igbo people

 * Nominator(s): Ukabia (talk)

I'm nominating this article for featured article because I've listed this article for featured article status because It has already been passed for Good article status and it looks as if it's good enough to be featured. Ukabia (talk) 23:57, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - given the large numbers of questionable sources, as well as concerns that, given the number of sources that have google books links to snippets but don't give page numbers, that most of the sources have only been consulted in snippet view, which can lead to problems with not seeing the full context of the work.
 * What makes the following reliable sources?
 * http://www.joshuaproject.net/index.php
 * should it be removed? because it's used on some other ethnic group pages. It could be replaced with citations from ethnologue, is that more reliable? -- Ukabia (talk) 00:20, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I have put this source on Reliable_sources/Noticeboard to see whether it is reliable or not. -- Ukabia (talk) 14:30, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Joshua Project is not involved in primary ethnic peoples research. Rather Joshua Project seeks to compile and integrate ethnic peoples information from various global, regional and national researchers and workers into a composite whole. We are deeply grateful to the sources below who have provided data to Joshua Project.Data Sources
 * So Joshua Project has been categorized as unreliable on the Reliable sources notice board. I have replaced this with these sources:
 *  Ukabia (talk) 17:41, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * http://www.saintsimons.com/ebolanding/
 * replaced with 
 * http://www.qub.ac.uk/schools/SchoolofEnglish/imperial/imperial.htm
 * replaced with: 
 * http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/cultural/oldworld/africa/igbo.html (Note the bottom, which says "Though this page has been carefully researched, the author does not claim expertise on the Igbo)
 * replaced with: 
 * http://www.earthrights.net/
 * replaced with: 
 * http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/cultural/aging/roles.html
 * replaced with:  Ukabia (talk) 19:33, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * http://africanhistory.about.com/od/slaveryimages/ig/Slavery-Images-Gallery/IndigenousSlavers001.htm (current ref 57, lacking a publisher also)
 * replaced with: 
 * http://books.google.com/books?id=Cnlib9U6nPoC&dq=&source=gbs_summary_s&cad=0 it's published by iUniverse, a self-publishing company.
 * replaced: 
 * http://www.upress.state.ms.us/books/513 (it's a book blurb on the publishers site.) Also lacking a publisher (current ref 75)
 * replaced with: 
 * http://www.nathanielturner.com/
 * igbosinvirginia.htm it's a book review
 * replaced by original book:  Ukabia (talk) 00:31, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * http://www.wowessays.com/dbase/af1/nyv151.shtml (Is this not a buy a paper site???)
 * replaced by two: , 
 * http://www.biafraland.com/Ironsi's%20death.htm
 * replaced with: 
 * http://www.africamasterweb.com/BiafranWarCauses.html
 * replaced with: 
 * http://books.google.com/books?id=YM_8P7O_VDEC (Also published by iUniverse, a self-publishing company)
 * replaced by other sources including this: . Ukabia (talk) 18:51, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * http://www.africanancestry.com/testimonials/index.html
 * Their company was featured on the PBS show African American Lives. The website had provided the DNA geenaology of the celebrities on that show, as well as off it, this page shows the responses gotten from African American celebrities on viewing their results and finding out their geneaology. PBS have also given it as a recommended internet resource, for African Americans trying to trace their genealogy, on this page on their website. PBS described the site as "The leading online web community for genealogical research; includes both free and paid-subscriber-only resources for beginner and veteran genealogical resarchers." Ukabia (talk) 13:42, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Their company was featured on the PBS show African American Lives. The website had provided the DNA geenaology of the celebrities on that show, as well as off it, this page shows the responses gotten from African American celebrities on viewing their results and finding out their geneaology. PBS have also given it as a recommended internet resource, for African Americans trying to trace their genealogy, on this page on their website. PBS described the site as "The leading online web community for genealogical research; includes both free and paid-subscriber-only resources for beginner and veteran genealogical resarchers." Ukabia (talk) 13:42, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 03:27, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I removed your strike throughs, generally at FAC the person who makes the comment/concern strikes through when they feel the issues is resolved. I changed them to little "dones" after the statement so you can keep track of what you've done. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:57, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, to determine the reliablity of the site, we need to know what sort of fact checking they do. You can establish this by showing news articles that say the site is reliable/noteworthy/etc. or you can show a page on the site that gives their rules for submissions/etc. or you can show they are backed by a media company/university/institute, or you can show that the website gives its sources and methods, or there are some other ways that would work too. It's their reputation for reliabilty that needs to be demonstrated. Please see Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches for further detailed information. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:59, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Given the large number of references and the large number of queries here, could I ask that when a source is replaced that a note be made here saying what the new source is? Ealdgyth - Talk 23:48, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Comment - The articles references can be easily improved. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.19.66 (talk) 14:09, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Also, there are quite a few MoS issues. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 23:54, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Oppose on criterion 3 Hopefully these issues can be resolved quickly. Awadewit (talk) 22:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * File:Ikenga Igbo god.JPG - The image description says "Igbo god" - can we be more specific?
 * Done. Ukabia (talk) 07:04, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * File:Igboland.png - Please fill out the "Summary" tag for this map and include a reliable source for the information.
 * Done. Ukabia (talk) 07:00, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Please add a description of the map. Awadewit (talk) 00:15, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. Ukabia (talk) 20:35, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * File:Flag of Biafra.svg - What makes FOTW a reliable source?
 * Done, with . -- Ukabia (talk) 17:36, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Regretful oppose. Forget the niceties of the "MoS"; this has a long way to go. I've just gone through the introduction; there was a lot amiss even there. I then noticed that the previous edit (without summary and by some IP) had made the single change of "3000" to "6000", thus forming the sentence According to several sources, from 6000 BC to 500 AD, the Igbo people evolved over a long period in Igboland through waves of migrations. Quite aside from the question of 6000 versus 3000, the single source adduced (which doesn't itself cite any source) says nothing about waves of migrations, or indeed anything whatever about what happened between c. 3000 BC and c. AD 850. Which is hardly surprising because this source is a brief chronology to accompany a study guide for a novel. WP disapproves of tertiary sources; this looks like, oh, let's call it a quaternary source (something that the author probably derived from tertiary sources); it doesn't say what it's claimed to say, it is singular, not plural as implied; and it's summarized in a sentence that points out that 2,500 (or 5,500) years is "a long period". The sourcing is rough, the writing is rough, the whole thing is rough. It's an honorable draft that needs a lot more "person-hours" before it can be a featurable article. Morenoodles (talk) 10:11, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * PS I've looked more closely at that source, which does have a lengthy excerpt from a scholarly book published in 1976, and have rewritten accordingly. However, the paragraph of our article proceeds to cite a web page that adds an even earlier stage and comes close to repeating the material cited via the book on Things Fall Apart; it might be better just to cite the later source, except that this is within this website, which (despite being valuable in its own way, and hosted at a reputable university) doesn't cite its own sources and, with its concentration on art and culture, hardly seems the last word in physical anthropology, genetics, archaeology. etc. Morenoodles (talk) 11:17, 28 January 2009 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.