Talk:Bioko

Fernando Po

I was carefully keeping Fernando Po separate because there is philatelic and colony info that doesn't make any sense to include with Bioko, but I guess that wasn't clear enough, sigh. Stan 21:46 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)

• The fact that the island was formerly known as "Fernando Po" or "Fernando Pó" to most of the world must be stated in the lead. No dispute about its present name, or about the title of the article; but one cannot edit out history like that. --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 01:46, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Queen Mary I instead of Mary II

Actually, it was the Queen Mary I who signed the treaty ceeding Fernando Po to Spain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.241.142.136 (talk) 01:50, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

What is this flag?

Where is this information comming from? Never heard of this separatist flag. Is it from the Bubis tribe? North, or south? Is this flag from a group close to the capital city? TTLightningRod 19:31, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

There's absolutely no info on this article about this separatist movement. What are their goals? To separate a part of the island or the whole island from EQ? That would bring up a pretty interesting scenario in regards to EQ's capital if the separatist movement does succeed. 01:32, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Popular Culture?

What is "pop culture" about Richard Francis Burton...?

they probably mixed him up with Richard Burton the 20th century movie actor 93.219.178.54 (talk) 19:22, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

2017

I really don't see how including relevant mentions of major occurrences in notable works (not mere glancing mentions) is any different from mentioning on the Bruges article that the movie "In Bruges" is set there... AnonMoos (talk) 17:33, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Entymology

The word is now correctly spelled Etymology in this section, but it does not deal with the term Bioko which is the topic. It only records the native name Otcho and the European preferred form Fernando Po. If not native or European, then what is the origin of the term Bioko?

---

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.127.103.200 (talk) 23:12, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

There is a section with this label but the word does not exist. The nearest word is "Etymology" but it doesn't really apply to this section.Librarian16 (talk) 21:06, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Bubi people

The article says that 58% of the island's population (124,000) are Bubi people. This means there are approximately 71,920 of them. But the article on the Bubi people itself seys there are 64,000 of Bubi people in the whole Equatorial Guinea. What is more, the second article says: "Over time, the influence of the Bubi has greatly diminished, and some sources claim that they are now a minority upon the island, as well as in the nation of Equatorial Guinea itself." I suppose, it is a hard to estimate, but we should be consequent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.20.78.236 (talk) 12:57, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Between the decades long communications embargo in Equatorial Guinea; the ethno-political root of post-colonial politics; the attempts today's EG government takes to subdue accusations of human rights violations made by Amnesty International against the Bubi people and political prisoners (which they are able to play off very will since they are now the wealthiest country in Africa, the president is the head of the African Union, and are allied with the United States); and the admixture and plural national, cultural, racial and ethnic identities of modern-day Bubi descendants (among other things) it's hard to get correct, true, numbers. Some of the information is distorted, some of it is incorrect. But the stats, and other information, on Bubi people is hard to come by. The ethnic group has been highly manipulated. During the post-colonial war that lead to the independence, most (if not all) Bubi written and preserved archives, artifacts, of their own history were confiscated and burned/destroyed - many times on site. I am of Bubi descent and know that the main opposing ethnic group, during the mid-1900's swiftly invaded the island, not just politically, but socially (genetically). As was done by the Krio people the century before, they used methods of social engineering to dominate the bloodline of the indigenous people. Many of today's Bubi are also Fang. A relative of mine, who is old, thinks that it's most of them - they go by the facial features as well as some of the present surnames within their family and the rest of the current ethnic group. Only a couple of villages have remained purely Bubi, but they are small in number. During the previous decade (2000-2010) many Bubi succumbed to adverse affects from medical assistance offered through humanitarian aid, much of which was coming from America. The medicines administered were tainted and caused massive deaths, especially among the youth. This was done with the permission of the current leader, and the deaths went unaddressed.

I believe this is one item that Thatcher took issue with in trying to over throw Nguema. I've tried contacting someone at the official cultural site for the Bubi, but I got no response. I don't even think the site, or the cultural organization, is run by the Bubi people.

IMO - any stats published by the Spanish government would, also, be skeptical, since the country abandoned the Bubi during post-colonial conflict, leaving them prey to the Fang ethno-political stronghold. The Bubi wanted allegiance with Spain so that Bioko would remain theirs and they would have their own country, identity, separate from the Fang and Rio Muni. This is a fact not highlighted my the main stream, but it's a truth that affects how statistics, history, supposed are published regarding the Bubi People. During the past 60 years, while the Bubi suffered and further decreased in number under the Obiang/Nguema family leadership, the Spanish government did nothing to intervene or protest. Not even the British government intervene, who in 1865 imposed a cease of slave-trade to and from Bioko Island (which was once a British military port), and again in 2003 with the attempted coupe. The motives in both cases was peace to secure the trade of, and profit from, the island's natural resources. The Bubi people were never truly a concern of the Europeans. The Krio people were brought in to penetrate and weaken the population, since the Europeans could not do this alone. During the colonial era the Bubi were part of the top intellectual/literate societies in Africa. During the early 1900s Spanish Guinea was the most literate, and one of the wealthiest nations in Africa, most of this advancement existing on Bioko Island. The Fang people, during this time, experience none of this wealth. During this time the bells of Marcus Garvey, Black American civil rights began to sound on the African continent. The Bubi began moving to reclaim Bioko Island as theirs again, separate from the Spaniards (the West). This is when the Spaniards vacated and instigated the existing ethnic conflict, laced with politics, between the Bubi, Fang, as well as the Efik people of Nigeria.

Also, Amnesty International began report on the human rights violations in the country right around the time the country's off-shore resources were discovered.

In the end, I find that no one really cares about the TRUE plight of the Bubi in the past century. Sometimes, not even Bubi descendants, themselves, will properly address/fight to reveal the truth of their people as it might interfere with their own progression of wealth, status, etc. But, unfortunately, since a lot of the information has been erased, most don't even know what to fight for, where to begin, or if it's even worth it. The Bubi people were initially very protective of their island and people. The colonist brought in populations whom they formed some familiarity with. The colonist used their friendly, docile, nature to manipulate and destroy them. And it's been a downhill struggle ever since. All their history texts, artifacts, are destroyed. People of other identities or ideals, intermarried/assumed their names and postured as if they were authentically Bubi. Most modern descendants have a lot of plural identity/mixture. Their government manipulates numbers at their convenience, and there is no checks-and-balances within the country leadership/power structure. And, suddenly, their government is favored in the world for their corruptly acquired wealth off of the rightful homeland of the Bubi people. Most of the wealth gained from Bioko Island resources have gone to Europeans, Americans, Krio and Fang; but not Bubi people themselves.

Yet, there's supposed to be accurate statistics for Bubi people? Bab-a-lot (talk) 10:54, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

second largest island in Africa?

According to List of islands by area, this is probably the second largest island in Africa. While that is probably notable, the continents are not mentioned in the list and List of islands of Africa does not have areas or rankings. That could mean it needs a source which says the fact. 82.141.126.28 (talk) 15:34, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bioko. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120107111405/http://www.geographical.co.uk/Magazine/William_Owen_Sep07.html to http://www.geographical.co.uk/Magazine/William_Owen_Sep07.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:37, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

How & When Transferred by Spain?

I presume it is mentioned in the article, but I swear I missed it a few times. This is a reflection of my reading, or perhaps it to be mentioned more prominently. --PaulinSaudi (talk) 19:00, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

5th paragraph of history mentions the Treaty of El Pardo (1778). Stan (talk) 23:50, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks. --PaulinSaudi (talk) 16:31, 12 June 2022 (UTC)