This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Sorry, but it's "coups d'état". Using "coup d'états" as the plural is tantamount to saying "states coup" instead of "state coups" in English. Check m-w.com as a reference, for instance. I've reverted the move. — Nightst a llion (?) 19:13, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
On the map, Hungary and Romania are painted light green, but they are not listed in the list of coups. Why are they marked on the map? For which coup attempts? The rise on power of the Arrow Cross in Hungary? Or its cause, the unsuccessful attempt of Horthy to withdraw from the war? Or something related to the revolution of 1956? What about Romania? Something about the 1989 revolution, considered by some to be a conspiracy of the inner circle of Ceausescu's securitate to overthrow him and remain in power? Or something earlyer, in the World War? The abdication of Michael I of Romania? Could somebody clarify it? -- V. Szabolcs 20:56, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
The Communists had control of the cabinet and legislature in 1948. They then merged with other political parties to form a unity front. This is not a coup.
Uh, why this page deleted and moved to a much less complete page? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cm205 ( talk • contribs) 03:32, 21 April 2007 (UTC).
I added several sub headings, mostly one for every decade, I did this because the list as I found it was very hard to navigate. I was looking for a single coup and it was quite difficult. Naufana : talk 06:39, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
In 1976, the dominate political faction within the Chinese Communist Party, state and armed forces were removed at gun point by an alliance of other factions. Surely this deserves mention. DOR (HK) ( talk) 04:16, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
This article needs actual dates in addition to years. Jmj713 ( talk) 20:11, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
The image File:Chile Junta001.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
The following images also have this problem:
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 14:03, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
I've reverted the Iran election paragraph; the events as described don't seem to match the definition of a coup (takeover of a state by former outsiders via control of the military etc.), and the paragraph itself is unsourced and reads like advocacy. Populus ( talk) 01:08, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
I revert it back. Iranian officials reject any coup, but huge military intervention in election, and in streets would make the claim doubtful. Just let people discuss their opinion on whether or not a coup is happenning, in discussion section —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.54.250.150 ( talk) 23:35, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Inside iran, everyone knows it was a coup [1]
Don't fight propaganda with propaganda, and especially not here please. When I read that, it jumped out as bs, seeing as I know the formal definition of a coup. A president already controls key areas of the government.. he can't grab his own power, that act is already done. 76.167.249.45 ( talk) 07:45, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Two things are being missed here: 1. The general definition of coup does not necessitate use of armed forces to change a regime. It's usually something along the line of "sudden deposition of change of government using illegal or unconstitutional means". (This is in response to Populus) In any case police riot were present in streets of Tehran during the election, and they took position inside the Ministry of the Interors while the votes were being counted. 2. It is true that Ahmadinejhad is the current president of Iran and already has the power. But what an election does is determines who the power will transfer to. If Mousavi was the elected president, then the power was to transfer to him, and using this election fraud Ahmadinejhad has grabbed power from Mousavi. (response to the previous post) Blackberry000 ( talk) 15:24, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
The proposed Liberal/NDP/Bloc coalition in Canada is composed of MP's who were elected, and is not unconstitutional by current Canadian law, so I'm not sure it qualifies as a "coup d'etat" Sebd1969 ( talk) 20:11, 4 December 2008 (UTC) seb1969
lol 67.68.19.226 ( talk) 05:34, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
The 1984 coup in Guinea is not listed. Jmoldale ( talk) 23:23, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
The section about Iran, 2008, is completely incoherent. Should be rewritten. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.52.10.99 ( talk) 23:17, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Obviously, this is debatable, as many people accept the validity of the reasoning in Bush v. Gore. However, there are certainly a number of people who have reasoned disagreements with the legality of that decision. (And before someone says "The Supreme Court said so so it can't be unconstitutional" - if I used a mind-control ray to have five members of the Supreme Court declare me King of the USA tomorrow with the rider "this ruling is constitutional", would that somehow not be a coup?)
censurethefive.org has a measured exposition of this point of view. There is no exhaustive list of legal scholars who subscribe to this view, that I know of, but there are certainly many prominent legal scholars who have penned disagreements with Bush v. Gore strong enough as to question its very legitimacy.
I don't suggest including it in the list unqualified, but I do suggest something like "A significant minority of legal scholars contest the legitimacy of Bush v. Gore, and view USA 2000-2001 as a coup." Homunq ( talk) 10:27, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Anon editors have been attempting to add the following:
“ | Italy March 5, 2010, Italian Government changed the electoral law during regional elections. It is forbitten to the Government in charge (Legge 23 Agosto 1988, n°400 Articolo 15 Comma 2 - Costituzione Italiana Art. 72 comma 4) which mandates a normal procedure of approval by the Parliament for laws concerning electoral issues.. | ” |
These edits have been reverted by a number of editors, because the event has not been described as a coup by any reliable third party source. If you wish to include this event in the list, or the see also section, please provide third party sources that describe this event as a coup. Please read wp:rs to see what a reliable third party source is.-- Work permit ( talk) 02:24, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Suggestion: split this page into 4:
Apart from better manageability (list is getting quite big) this would give a chance to actually make the earlier pages complete. At the same time, there really should be an attempt to clarify the distinction between this and List of revolutions and rebellions. I wonder also if (1864) "Troops of French Emperor Napoleon III invade Mexico and install Habsburg pretender Maximilian as Emperor." is really a "coup". Rd232 talk 11:53, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
The JFK assassination is listed as a coup here. Granted, it's a legitimate theory, but that seems more like personal speculation than concrete fact. I'm removing it unless anyone can find some previously unknown concrete evidence of this coup. [This is user Magic Flyin Lemur, but yet again I've forgotten my password and am too tired to bother fixing it tonight. I'll sign this when I get around to it]
I have a few coups to list:
260 AD: Cao Wei's Emperor, Cao Mao, had a failed coup against Sima Zhao. 249 AD: Incident at Gaoping Tombs, where Sima Yi held a coup against Cao Shuang. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.69.189.75 ( talk) 21:04, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Please list the coups d'etat in Niger, there were numerous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Calvaincool ( talk • contribs) 22:08, December 16, 2012 (edit) (undo)
Elizabeth's overthrow of Ivan VI in 1741 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empress_Elizabeth#1741_coup) and Catherine II's overthrow of Peter III in 1762 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catherine_Ii#Reign_of_Peter_III_and_the_coup_d.27.C3.A9tat_of_July_1762). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rabbit rebozo ( talk • contribs) 18:52, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
The Coup of 18 Fructidor in 1797 is often said to be the first coup d'etat. At any rate, the word originates from this incident. Yet it isn't even listed. I am skeptical about the material from ancient and medieval history. But what standard are these events are coups? A coup implies that the people of a country found out all of a sudden they were now under a new regime. Kauffner ( talk) 09:06, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Why is the american revolution mentioned as a coup d'etat?? They removed themselves from british influence, they didn't want yo take control over the british empire! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.133.247.223 ( talk) 16:40, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
List of successful coups d'état could be merged here. If the resulting combined list were made into a sortable table, it would be easy to arrange by date (as this list currently does) or country (as that list currently does). One column could also indicate which were successful, so if you were interested in one or the other type you could sort that way as well. -- Beland ( talk) 18:32, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
I've just restored material I added earlier today on U.S. backing for the March 1949 Syrian Coup. There are many, many details that might be written about the event, but the coup's sponsorship is less a detail, and more a critical piece of information answering who, what, where, when. In general, we should note international coup sponsors if they're known: that information is usually more significant than the random general chosen to launch the coup. - Darouet ( talk) 22:34, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
It may be a good idea to separate this list into successful coups and coup attempts — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.110.248.3 ( talk) 18:15, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
@ Bgwhite: In this edit you attempted to remove some vandalism, but I think you inadvertently removed some material which had been in the article for some time.
I have attempted to restore it. Please check to see if you agree.-- S Philbrick (Talk) 14:52, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
List of coups d'état and coup attempts. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 11:21, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of coups d'état and coup attempts. 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 User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 21:08, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
Biblical characters Absalom & David?-- RicHard-59 ( talk) 17:36, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
I don't know if you consider this as a coup, but should we add this? What are your thoughts? [1] Beshogur ( talk) 17:51, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
I know it's not considered a coup against him when he's not president, but when he is, it will be. Do you think of this as one, which started today when the electoral college decided who is president? Jonathan7157 ( talk) 23:07, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
An IP user added this entry on January 6, 2017. The entry has no references at all, and even if it did, the entire situation is highly debatable.
The first "sentence" features several contentious accusations and several inaccuracies:
The second sentence claims it was done illegally. Legality is evidently a very difficult concept for many people to grasp. When something is illegal, it means that something is forbidden by a law. The argument makes a reference to the way the two laws were passed in the Catalan Parliament, using a mechanism called "lectura única", roughly translated as "single reading". The mechanism is designed to pass laws that theoretically everyone in the chamber agrees on very quickly, without prolonging it with unnecessary delays. That's what it's meant for. But under no circumstances is it limited to any particular laws, it also doesn't stipulate (because of its nature) that everyone has to be voting in favor of any proposed law. The Catalan parties, Junts pel Sí and CUP used this mechanism to pass both laws on the same day, if I'm not mistaken, it took the entire day, as the parties opposed to it didn't want it approved and delayed it as much as they could. [5] [6]
You may call it a dirty trick, and I'd agree with you. But it's nonetheless legal and constitutional, as per the decision of the Spanish Constitutional Court to back the Catalan Parliament's procedure. [7] The proposed laws do not modify in any way the Catalan Statute of Autonomy, they don't need a Qualified Majority (2/3rds of the Chamber), and the Parliament's lawyers don't have any executive or judicial power, they're there to give their expert opinions and advise, their decisions are not binding, it works in the exact same way for the Spanish Senate (which also quite happily ignores their own lawyers). Yes, the same court actually suspended and later annulled both laws.
The Constitutional Court does not declare something as legal or illegal, all it deals with is whether something is constitutional or not. In this case, the two laws are clearly unconstitutional as they violate the Constitution. [8]
This effectively made them unbinding and they were even removed from the DOGC, where all approved laws are posted, a procedure that is stipulated in law and is seen as proof of legitimacy and validity.
Next comes a series of accusations that come with no accompanied proof (well, the entire entry lacks even one citation). Under the circumstances, the Catalan Government did its utmost to guarantee that every Catalan citizen could vote. There were ballot locations, envelopes, papers, writing material, personnel, time, census, etc. The was a system that prevented double-voting. But all that doesn't matter, as the subject of this entry isn't how well the referendum was managed, but whether there was an actual coup d'État here.
You can argue until you're blue in the face about Catalan independence, I'm not here to do that. I'm here to argue that there hasn't been any coup d'État by the Catalan politicians, consider my points:
I don't know if there's even any point to this, and I don't know how to use Wikipedia very well, but I couldn't just let this go once I saw this. I hope you understand and I hope I didn't mess anything up here. Ylcard ( talk) 16:39, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
References
Should the October Revolution be considered a coup? It was a small, armed, insurrection against a constitutionally-established government. - Presidentman talk · contribs ( Talkback) 02:03, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
I have added, restored, and maintained the listing identifying the claim for the presidency by Juan Guaido as a coup. It had been removed and, after being restored, edited to appear as if the question is ambiguous. I have now restored the original text, added more details, and included references to the Venezuelan constitution and supreme court ruling.
If anyone disagrees that the event that occurred in Venezuela on 23rd January 2019 constitutes an attempted coup, please lay out your argument in this talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.42.199.0 ( talk) 10:41, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
I have once again restored the listing identifying the claim for the presidency by Juan Guaido as a coup. I have also added a note about the events on 30 April 2019, as the two events are clearly related and part of the same ongoing process. Responding to the three main objections to this listing:
Given the references posted, to me it seems that the question of whether this is a coup or not moves the discussion towards the legitimacy of the references provided or the correctness of the definition of the term "coup d'etat". If you accept the definition and believe the references are trustworthy, then the matter is settled. 77.59.147.2 ( talk) 00:14, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
11:38, 1 May 2019 Jamez42 talk contribs 90,840 bytes -1,096 Undid revision 895002968 by 77.59.147.2 (talk) Stop edit warring and discuss the changes (WP:BRD). No arguments have been provided on how the 23 January is a coup attempt. Next revert will be a violation of WP:3RR
The arguments have been provided both on the article segment and on this talk page. Yet, you revert my changes without yourself providing any arguments. Could you at least please outline your objections to the arguments I have presented? 77.59.147.2 ( talk) 11:53, 1 May 2019 (UTC) I have created an account so that I can communicate better. I'm just writing this note here to say that past edits/talks from 77.59.147.2 and this account are from the same person. DrTreePirate ( talk) 12:24, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
The Tribunal was appointed by the lame duck National Assembly just days after the last parliamentary elections among several irregularities, including the violation of the period of challenges, its lack of responses and the omission of the final selection of the candidates. Not only that, but none of the justices had the years of experience or met the requirements for holding office, including lack of convictions or political affiliation. Did you know that during this appointment a member of the pro government Assembly even voted for himself?
It seems to me that the following comments refer to the events on 30 April, and not 23 January. Since I argue that the attempted coup occurred on 23 January, I have now split the conversation to separate the two dates so that we can discuss them separately. I have also removed the statement about 30 April from the main article, since there is no agreement that there was an attempted coup on that date. 77.59.147.2 ( talk) 11:36, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
@ Kendrick7: I strongly disagree with the inclusion of the recent events of Venezuela in the list. The article is already listed in the List of revolutions and rebellions article, and the above discussion is stale. Per legitimacy and per the definition of a coup, the events should not be listed as such. As I have mentioned, there are important differences between previous coups/attempts in Venezuela, as well as countries that have had coups this year, such as Sudan. -- Jamez42 ( talk) 15:23, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
References
DrTreePirate ( talk) 00:51, 3 May 2019 (UTC) It appears to me that a difficulty in our discussion so far arises from a lack of clarity in the operating definition of the term "coup d'etat" and how it relates to the facts and events. Here I will go over the definition quoted directly from coup d'état, and link the facts and events of the last few months to this definition. I'm hoping this will help bring clarity to the debate. The definition:
A coup d'état ... means the overthrow of an existing government; typically, this refers to an illegal, unconstitutional seizure of power by a dictator, the military, or a political faction.
Breaking down into the different terms:
What do you think of the above breakdown? Do you agree or disagree with the definition? How about matching the facts/events? DrTreePirate ( talk) 00:51, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
I invite any other uninvolved editor to comment on this, since @ DrTreePirate: may not always be able to respond. I personally think that such a controversial and disputed definition should not be included. Even the cited Yemen coup, which I understand has more acceptance than in the case of Venezuela, is not included in the list. -- Jamez42 ( talk) 16:22, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Some of the events listed in the page for example Mao Zedong in 1949 and the Cuban Revolution were all results of long civil wars. This would not usually qualify as coups unless there are modified definition otherwise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quangsp ( talk • contribs) 20:35, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
By all definitions, it was a plan to coup the state government of Michigan. If we can’t include the 2020 Michigan governor kidnapping plot then why have the 1933 business plot? Bruhmoney77 ( talk) 18:21, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of coups and coup attempts has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
86.58.92.26 ( talk) 08:18, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
1957 alleged Jordanian military coup attempt
The 2020 United States presidential election should be removed. It does not fit the criteria. LoneWolf1992 ( user talk) 20:02, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
Which RS say it does not fit the criteria? 97.126.60.176 ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 09:40, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
To 97*: please see my comment above in the other section about this. -- DrakeGray ( talk) 06:44, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of coups and coup attempts has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I believe it would be best to remove Donald Trump's section at the bottom of this list (for now at least), due to consensus on his Talk page about calling his actions a coup. -- 58.162.223.230 ( talk) 07:52, 21 December 2020 (UTC) 58.162.223.230 ( talk) 07:52, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. Maybe I missed it, but I see several suggestions to remove that section, but no consensus on the matter.
RudolfRed (
talk)
17:45, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
So right now in the news we're seeing the refusal to swear in John Fetterman as an elected senator. [1] [2] This constitutes a coup or coup attempt, no? Wondering about this maybe being a worthwhile addition to the article... Frojojo ( talk) 14:32, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
References
This
edit request to
List of coups and coup attempts has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Will this be updated accurately when proven there has been fraud? 67.7.90.73 ( talk) 04:56, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of coups and coup attempts has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The references listed on the page with regard to Trump 2021 do not suggest the event was coup. Please remove the entry from the list or provide an unbiased news source (not the Guardian or New York magazine which are biased political sources and the references above in the talk page don't refer to the same 6 january event listed and are used out of context)....
To delete: 2021 On 6 January, violent supporters of United States President Donald Trump, some armed, stormed the U.S. Capitol in an attempt to stop Biden's votes from being counted and him being certified as the winner, during the 2020 United States presidential election Electoral College count. Lockdown and evacuation orders were given and the session was suspended. In the violent riot that followed (referred to as "the storming of the Capitol"), one pro-Trump supporter was shot and killed by United States Capitol Police and a Capitol Police officer was assaulted with a fire extinguisher and killed by the rioters. In total, 5 people were killed in the attempted coup.[80] Both the Senate and House chambers were breached, as well as the offices of several members of congress, including Nancy Pelosi's.[81] The international community immediately reacted, with world leaders and the NATO secretary-general[82]calling for calm. Paddy O'Caithain ( talk) 21:21, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Remove the Trump 2021 event as there is no reference given that it was a coup; here's one that explains it wasnt
https://qz.com/1953602/is-america-experiencing-a-coup/
Paddy O'Caithain (
talk)
21:38, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Your other mistake is that the references given are for Trump's challenges to the election; not to the events of January. You have provided NO relevant eferences (the Guardian and New York Magazine are without doubt strongly politically biased and unashamedly so and in any event dont refer to the events of January; you may think the sources ar credible by wikipedias standards, but they dont actually refer to the events of January). you have not provided a "preponderance of sources"; you have provided actually zero. Plese delete the January 6 reference as a coup as it is not factually based. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paddy O'Caithain ( talk • contribs) 09:38, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
Also, I review the references given:
1) https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/trumps-coup-attempt-isnt-over --> this is a column. or sometime called an opinon piece, It is not a factual reference but an opinion of the writer. The clickbait headline is the only place in the article where coup is used and the article makes no attempt to support the assertion; this is an opinion by the writer and clearly so. this does not support inclusion in the list 2) https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/infighting-attempted-coup-trump-team-erupts-chaos-giuliani/story?id=74257079 ABC News]--> this article refers to the infighting withing the trump campaign, and the "coup " mentioned describes the wrestle for power amongst the campaign staff to controlthe campaign/ this does not support the inclusion of any reference to Trump actions as a coup agaisnt the US govt. this does not support inclusion in the list 3) https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/12/trumps-attempted-coup-dangerous/617447/ The Atlantic--> this article discuss Trumps wild ideas and states" But if a coup—or an attempted coup—is not in the cards, here’s what is." this does not support inclusion in the list 4) https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/12/trump-coup-sidney-powell-martial-law-michael-flynn-meltdown.html--> this article refers to a plan by Trump and only refers in the article that there is a deabte whether to clal Trumps actions a coup or not; this does not support inclusion in the list 5) https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/dec/12/donald-trump-coup-american-democracy--> this article compares Trump actions to a novel A Very Brtish Coup and quotesa Kurt Bardella
twice who works explicitly as an anti-Trump adviser. His views are polticlsa and not factual--> this does not support inclusion in the list
6) https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/12/barr-pans-trumps-coup-schemes-in-final-press-conference.html--> This article also uses a clickbait headline inclusion of the word, coup. And then the only further reference is that Trump is "coup-fancying". It makes no assertion that Trumps actions are a coup. --> this does not support inclusion in the list
I appreciate that any one can google "Trump" and "coup" but inlcuding opinons should not be wikipedia's stance. It should try to be apolitical and should avoid inflaming. I appreciate the editors have a strong view but please try to avoid expressing it in wikipedia. there is no credible source given which provide a factual basis to call Trump's actions a coup. Only one opinion is given in all of the above references by a specifically ANTI-Trumop Lincoln project advisor.
Please remove as it is not evidenced as a coup.
<<2021 On 6 January, violent supporters of United States President Donald Trump, some armed, stormed the U.S. Capitol in an attempt to stop Biden's votes from being counted and him being certified as the winner, during the 2021 United States Electoral College count. Lockdown and evacuation orders were given and the session was suspended. In the violent riot that followed (referred to as "the storming of the Capitol"), one pro-Trump supporter was shot and killed by United States Capitol Police and a Capitol Police officer was assaulted with a fire extinguisher and killed by the rioters. In total, 5 people were killed in the attempted coup.[80] Both the Senate and House chambers were breached, as well as the offices of several members of congress, including those of the Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.[81] The international community immediately reacted, with world leaders and the NATO secretary-general[82]calling for calm.>> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paddy O'Caithain ( talk • contribs) 11:52, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia's own article on coups describes one as "an illegal, unconstitutional seizure of power by a political faction, the military, or a dictator."
As the president's attempts to falsely contest the election have been conducted through legal and constitutional means such as through lawsuits and legal cases similiar to the Bush campaign in the 2000 Presidential Election, it cannot be legitimately referred to as a coup without using emotional language or misleading claims.
Attempts to overturn elections and to allege fraud rightly or wrongly such as in Trump's case are both widespread and frequent thoughout the world during and after election cycles, for example in the 2013 Kenyan general election or in the 2019 Mauritian election, or perhaps Congresswoman Stacey Abrams unsuccessful attempts to contest the 2018 gubnatorial election in the state of Georgia.
None of these instances are referred to as attempted coups by this article. as such the inclusion of these events seems to stick out like a red herring and fails to achieve either consistency nor accuracy. As such I argue the attempts of President Trump and his allies to overturn the election through false claims of voter fraud should be removed from this article. HalalSquad ( talk) 21:21, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
"Wikipedia's own article on coups describes one as 'an illegal, unconstitutional seizure of power by a political faction, the military, or a dictator.'"Please see: WP:WINARS AugusteBlanqui ( talk) 21:47, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
@ AugusteBlanqui: Here is another definition from Merriam Webster "The violent overthrow or alteration of an existing government by a small group." Trump's efforts do not fit this definition either or yet another from dictionary.com "A sudden and decisive action in politics, especially one resulting in a change of government illegally or by force.", or from ThoughtCo or the Cambridge Dictionary OR from Encyclopedia Britannica OR Definitions.net In fact it fits no definition of coup I have been able to find thus far, are all of these sources unreliable?
Even it did it would not excuse ignoring all that I had previously written on near-identical legal challenges that are not included on this page for failing to qualify as a coup d'etat. HalalSquad ( talk) 00:10, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
So above there is a discussion about the events in the United States on january 6h. It has been decided here that it was not a coup attempt. My issue is not with that determination, but with typical double standards that I have seen for years on Wikipedia. The most blatant being the rampant bandying about of the term "most ADJ in the world", when it comes to events or cultural products of the Anglo-American sphere, which is all over such articles but always purged from events or cultural articles from non Anglo-American ones, on the basis of such claim being "unsubstantiated". The same demand is completely absent from the former. But anyways, in this particular case I request the removal of the supposed four "coup attempts" in Argentina in 1987, 1988 (2), and 1989. They were not coup attempts whatsoever. This is not only the official stance of the Argentine government, but of most historians, as well as the general population which refers to the events as rebellion and not coups. This is also the view of the Wikipedia article on the rebel soldiers themselves /info/en/?search=Carapintadas . Finally, just from the general smell test, the rebel soldiers only staged insurrection from their base and never actually moved upon democratic institutions, buildings or individuals. With such overwhelming evidence, the relevant references to said events in this thread are erroneous and should be edited out immediately. 119.65.203.76 ( talk) 04:57, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of coups and coup attempts has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In addition to a prior request, I'm providing further support to please remove the 2021 Storming of the Capitol from the list of Coup Attempts - this is not a Coup. In the House of Representatives Impeachment Resolution of Donald Trump for High Crimes and Misdemeanors document it clearly states that Donald Trump was charged with "Incitement of INSURRECTION". No where in the article does it mention a Coup. Furthermore, in is response to the Storming of the Capitol event, Joe Biden, the President Elect, referred to it as an "Insurrection".
Reference: House Impeachment Resolution https://beta.documentcloud.org/documents/20449065-house-impeachment-resolution-final
Reference: Joe Biden remarks of the Storming of the Capitol https://www.wbur.org/news/2021/01/06/transcript-joe-biden-capitol-chaos
REMOVE:
2021
On 6 January, violent supporters of United States President Donald Trump, some armed, stormed the U.S. Capitol in an attempt to stop Biden's votes from being counted and him being certified as the winner, during the 2021 United States Electoral College count. Lockdown and evacuation orders were given and the session was suspended. In the violent riot that followed (referred to as "the storming of the Capitol"), one pro-Trump supporter was shot and killed by United States Capitol Police and a Capitol Police officer was assaulted with a fire extinguisher and killed by the rioters. In total, 5 people died in the attempted coup.[63] Both the Senate and House chambers were breached, as well as the offices of several members of congress, including those of the Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.[64] The international community immediately reacted, with world leaders and the NATO secretary-general[65] calling for calm. Former President George W. Bush stated, "This is how election results are disputed in a banana republic – not our democratic republic."[66]
BluePillx ( talk) 22:47, 16 January 2021 (UTC) BluePillx ( talk) 22:47, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
@ AugusteBlanqui and CookieMonster755: I notice you have been restoring the section. Please see WP:BURDEN and heed it. The section is contentious. While past sources may have referred to it that way, that seems to be changing. The burden is on those who want to add material to justify its addition given the weight found in reliable sources. ~ Anachronist ( talk) 21:50, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Why isn't the 2020 US election listed? Is it because it is an ongoing attempt? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.147.101.186 ( talk) 22:58, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
....trump. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.147.101.186 ( talk) 14:29, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Possible reputable source for coup attempt: https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/01/06/coup-america-capitol-electoral-college-2020-election/ 2605:A601:A19C:DC00:71B0:B668:5624:72B9 ( talk) 19:08, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
The 2021 storming of the United States Capitol is widely considered an attempt at a self-coup.
I have fully-protected this page due to the edit warring. Please reach a consensus on the talk page first before editing the page. GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:12, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
Just to add some rough data points, here are some Google search results. These aren't definitive by any means because they don't make any distinction about context, reliability, or what's recent or old. Nevertheless, here's what we find:
Of those searches, not only is "coup" the least prevalent result, but it's less than 15% of the total of those four tests. Unfortunately, when you try to filter by 'last 24 hours' or 'last week', the number of hits are not displayed. The same is true for other search engines.
Proponents of adding the entry back should demonstrate that "coup" predominates in reliable sources and isn't a minority viewpoint among how reliable sources describe the event. ~ Anachronist ( talk) 03:53, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
I guess Adam Kinzinger isn’t in Congress any more, because he clearly called it coup attempt. Saturdayopen ( talk) 04:50, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
So are we going to re-add 1/6 or not? Saturdayopen ( talk) 18:36, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Perhaps people here would like to participate in Talk:2021 storming of the United States Capitol#The storming was not a coup, where this is also being discussed. ~ Anachronist ( talk) 20:08, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of coups and coup attempts has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I want to add the 2021 Myanmar coup d'état
References
Donald Trump's efforts to undermine the 2020 US presidential election and false claim to have won the election was described as an attempted coup d'état by at least seven valid sources. I feel like this should be reflected on this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nekomancerjade ( talk • contribs) 03:31, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
The Trump campaigns actions are not a government. Last time I checked campaigns are not governments. Therefore there is no way that whatever is happening could be described as a coup. This language is false and hyperbolic, and I think it should be removed from this page. ( Aricmfergie ( talk) 07:37, 13 December 2020 (UTC))
Given 1) the definition Wikipedia itself uses for a coup d'état at the time of writing this, 2) That Joseph Biden has not been inaugurated, 3) the confirmed existence of dueling electors, and 4) the Trump campaign is litigating / protesting the reported election results because of alleged severe levels of fraud in key locations with the direct, circumstantial, demonstrative, and statistical evidence they have: what the Trump campaign is currently doing is NOT a coup d'etat. The contested section of the article is technically and objectively incorrect. Given 1) this allegation, 2) confirmed illegal spying on the early Trump campaign, 3) Collusion investigations / insinuations with no credible evidence, 4) impeachment proceedings on claims again without credible evidence, and 5) what the Trump campaign and supporters believe are fraudulent election reported results from systematic election + voter fraud, the Trump campaign & supporters are claiming that the coup and sedition is coming from corrupt Democrat leaders, not from them. The "safest" and most objectively sure addition to this article I believe is either a) leave it blank until after 1/20, or b) objectively state both sides' claims & reasons instead of just stating one side's claims as if it is fact. Not doing so would further tarnish Wikipedia's brand-name and further disenfranchise it as a highly biased, nonobjective, "gaslighting" resource. Given EO13848, keeping this post up on Wikipedia may also make them liable to "undesirable repercussions." -- DrakeGray ( talk) 06:42, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
This should definitely be included in the list, this was an attempted coup. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.228.207.205 ( talk) 07:59, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
On February 7, 2021, supporters of the opposition against incumbent Haitian president Jovenel Moise allegedly attempted a coup d'état. [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by SuperGuy1119 ( talk • contribs) 16:02, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of coups and coup attempts has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
January 6, 2021 - Donald Trump gathers tens of thousands of supporters, to storm the US Capitol to overturn the results of the 2020 election, with a plan that the Vice-President was supposed to set in motion but declined, and with the goal of keeping himself in power. [1]
~~CD~~ 2600:1010:B021:35AC:A1D5:90B9:64FA:7DB5 ( talk) 23:48, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
References
{{
edit protected}}
template. See above discussion.
Izno (
talk)
00:09, 3 February 2021 (UTC)With all due respect, it *was* on the page and was removed despite discussion. If we are looking for consensus, shouldn't the default state be where it was before the first edit that couldn't get consensus? Whether it "was" a coup attempt or it "might be" a coup attempt isn't a matter for people's political opinions. Trump is facing an impeachment trial for the coup attempt. That seems minimally sufficient that he is formally being charged by Congress for "Incitement of Insurrection": https://www.npr.org/sections/trump-impeachment-effort-live-updates/2021/01/11/955631105/impeachment-resolution-cites-trumps-incitement-of-capitol-insurrection 65.96.103.55 ( talk) 23:08, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
The goal was to bypass the election to put someone in power. If it succeeded it would've constituted a coup, but it didn't succeed. 2601:19B:B00:BA10:6169:DAF4:B256:60EC ( talk) 16:01, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
I am surprised the capital event is not mentioned as a coup attempt because Trump tried to block the election from being certified by using force — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.222.180.90 ( talk) 17:45, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Should it be added to the list? Tunisian president Kaïs Saïed removed the governement, suspended the national assembly, nominated alone a new government and began governing by decrees. It's already been called a (self) coup. [3], [4], [5], [6], [7].-- Aréat ( talk) 07:45, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
@ CookieMonster755: Please provide a rationale grounded in policy why you keep adding this to the list. There has never been any consensus for doing so, neither in this article nor in the list of coups by country. Most reliable sources don't refer to the incident as a "coup". Therefore, neither should we. Please refer to the archived discussions before continuing this disruption. ~ Anachronist ( talk) 05:28, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
[ [8]] is an article by a Trump Administration expert on Russia Policy who calls it a coup attempt, known as a "self coup". Academics have called it worse than a coup attempt, in that "American democracy would have ended" [ [9]], because if the protesters/insurrectionists had succeeded in taking Vice President Mike Pence or House Speaker Nancy Pelosi hostage - which they were a few feet/minutes from doing, respectively, they would have likely issued the demand that Donald Trump remain in office despite the legally certified and adjudicated election results being that Joe Biden was duly elected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Westsider ( talk • contribs) 20:05, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
Get your fake news outta here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:13f0:8110:903b:4341:124c:eb57 ( talk) 20:58, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
They were, in fact, armed with weapons such tasers, bear spray, and flagpoles that were used to beat and injure 138 police officers and likely contributed to the suicides of 4 others - the largest mass-casualty incident in the history of the DCPD or USCP. Westsider — Preceding undated comment added 20:16, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
consensus looks established here, I will link to other articles in my entry NS T429 ( talk) 17:27, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
It’s quite clear. Trump led a bunch of right wing conspiracy theorists like qAnon to storm the capitol. It is quite clear it’s a failed attempted coup. Trump was theoretically trying to take over the government and not to mention his call with Brad Raffenspurger, the Georgia Secretary of State. AsherDoodle1115 ( talk) 22:35, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
I think the January 6 riots were probably too much of a joke to really describe as an attempted coup. ~~Wikidude87654321~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikidude87654321 ( talk • contribs) 14:37, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
Colin Powell called this an attempted overthrow of the government, also known as an attempted coup. Bob Woodward: What about the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol? Colin Powell: “It was awful. [Trump] was going in there to overturn the government.” NS T429 ( talk) 19:35, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
The Eastman Memorandum provided a legal theory for the coup. "John Eastman [...] counseled him on how to retain power after losing the election." NS T429 ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:41, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
The Associated Press offhandedly refers to the event as an attempted coup.
Capitol attackers call for death of Pence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NS T429 ( talk • contribs) 20:20, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
@ NS T429: Yes, it is easy to find reliable sources that call the January 6 incident at the US capitol a "coup". Wikipedia can do that only if that is the predominant term used by reliable sources.
As a rough indication (not definitive) here's what we find among news sources (not just any sources) archived by Google:
The terms "coup" and "invasion" are the least prevalent results used by news sources. The terms "riot" and "attack" are most common.
For that and other reasons, our article 2021 United States Capitol attack is not titled "coup" either. We also have Attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election#Description as an attempted coup. Note that in neither article does Wikipedia refer to the event as a "coup".
So, if you want to include this event as a coup in this article, make your case, change the consensus. I'll say that my own personal preference is to call it a coup, but my own preference or yours doesn't matter one iota here. We go by sources. It is already established that the term is used in some sources. It is not established that it is used by the majority of sources. ~ Anachronist ( talk) 22:49, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
The quality of sources should matter more than quantity. For example, if the consensus among leading historians and political scientists is that January 6 was a coup attempt, then that is what it was. It doesn't matter if other sources refer to it as something else. AugusteBlanqui ( talk) 09:05, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
[ [10]] is a CNN Special Report by well-known U.S. reporter Jake Tapper titled "An American Coup". Westsider ( talk) 08:36, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
References
For some reason rebel group(s) winning or not winning after a civil war like the Taliban, Séléka, and CPC are being added as coups and coup attempts. They aren't. If we added all civil war and actual coups then this list would be a mile long and not be in any way helpful.-- Garmin21 ( talk) 03:46, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of coups and coup attempts has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add The January 6th 2020 Capitol attacks as an attempted coup. Thegoodguyas ( talk) 21:52, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. see above discussionsCannolis ( talk) 22:17, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
I started this thread, and am now more knowledgeable about Template:List criteria so am starting a fresh thread below NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 21:54, 17 June 2022 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
A. Per WP:SALLEAD (a guideline), this list should probably include selection criteria. The guideline says in part
We might say something about events described by "most historians" as coups or coup attempts, and also for events involving physical violence where a significant number of notable commenters have described the event in those terms. But I'm open to other ideas. B. Per WP:LISTCRIT, its ok to list alleged events with inline attribution. In relevant part this guideline says
So where historians disagree or for recent events lacking sufficient historian analysis, inline attribution allows us to include alleged coups. C. Re the title, I'd be OK changing the title to List of coups and possible coups or List of coups, coup attempts, and alleged coup attempts, if we can agree on specific listing criteria. NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 00:23, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Agree with NewsAndEventsGuy's formulation, coups or cowps are commonly disputed as a description, so in such cases the opposing views should be attributed, and chronological order is better. For example, "2022 Burkina Faso coup d'état: In late January, the Burkinabé military staged a coup against Roch Marc Christian Kaboré." has a source which isn't so definite, "Burkina Faso's neighbours have condemned what they call an attempted coup in the West African state. ... On Sunday, Defence Minister Gen Barthélémy Simporé downplayed previous rumours of the president's capture, and the nature of the unrest at large. State television, meanwhile, characterised the sound of gunfire at military barracks as the actions of a small few disgruntled soldiers rather than a widespread fight or coup attempt." The dispute should be shown and attributed inline, rather than delete the item until history books come to a consensus. . . dave souza, talk 20:35, 12 June 2022 (UTC) Strong agreement with chronological order with inline characterization. Feoffer ( talk) 04:57, 17 June 2022 (UTC) -Please add further comments in "List Criteria Part 2" thread below. NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 21:54, 17 June 2022 (UTC) |
@ AugusteBlanqui: I am sure you saw the comment in the 2021 section that reads "Please establish consensus on the talk page before adding the 6 January storming of the US Capitol". So, why do you insist on adding it to the list without establishing consensus first? Also, your argument that a charge of seditious conspiracy means that it was a coup is just your personal standard and does not matter to this list in the slightest. The only thing that matters is what most reliable sources call it. We report what reliable sources say, without WP:Undue weight, and the weight isn't on the side of sources that characterized the event as a coup. Where is the evidence that "coup" is the predominant term used by reliable sources to refer to this particular event? StellarHalo ( talk) 01:15, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
Numerous entries on the page are for "alleged coup attempts." Is an alleged coup attempt a coup attempt? It sounds as though it is only alleged, as in, some disagree with the allegation. Perhaps either all such alleged attempts should be deleted, or the 2021 American event should be listed as an alleged coup attempt, for it certainly is now alleged to be a coup attempt, by an official body at the highest level. JBriggeman ( talk) 22:03, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
In Wiki and elsewhere I've seen discussion whether the correct word to use about Jan 6 is a "coup", short for " Coup d'état". According to some who say Trump was trying to illegally stay in power, the correct word would be " self coup". [1] In my view, this debate is an erudite false dichotomy, because our article on "self coups" says in the first sentence that a self coups "is a form of coup d'état...". This is a bit like arguing whether the things in my fridge drawer are "Fruit" or "Apples" when both are true. NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 22:45, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
References
The result of the move request was: withdrawn by nominator per WP:SNOW. ( closed by non-admin page mover) GeoffreyT2000 ( talk) 03:41, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
(Withdrawn proposal pending closure) as proposer, NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 21:49, 17 June 2022 (UTC) Former heading was "Resolving listcrit"
List of coups and coup attempts → List of coups and possible coup attempts – Please place your rationale for the proposed move here. NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 15:46, 17 June 2022 (UTC) I just boldly changed the lead to try to resolve the dispute. My changes are here. If it survives, the title should be changed to include "possible" NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 09:59, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
To be included on this list, an event must be sufficiently notable that it merits its own Wikipedia article. In cases of genuine debate whether the label "coup" is applicable, this list uses standard Wikipedia policies and guidelines including reliance on what Wikipedia considers to be "reliable sources" and uses citation and attribution to present the mainstream perspectives with due weight.
This is twisting us and our readers into a hyperpretzel just to validate Jan 6 denialismThis summation has merit. Feoffer ( talk) 19:14, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
I won't mind if an uninvolved editor does a SNOW close (as proposer) but meanwhile, @ Anythingyouwant:, can you concede the consensus here? NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 19:24, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Proposer WITHDRAWS obvious SNOW close is appropriate, and I withdraw the proposal. Would someone please hat this as done? But we still have to agree on LISTCRIT if we are going to keep this list. NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 20:11, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
A couple editors above have indicated maybe supporting the addition of a new section... "Debatable events" or whatever name, for those events in the twilight like 6/1. I think it's a service to the reader to neither leave them out entirely, nor lump them in with events that are near-universally acknowledged to have definitely been coups.
Naturally, this won't serve to end arguments on our side -- whether to include the JFK thingy even in the "debatable events" etc. -- and may even increase them, who knows. But that's part of being an editor. I'm thinking here that this would be a service to the reader. What say you? Herostratus ( talk) 05:02, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Most of them are undisputed.We'd need a source for that, not editors looking each other in eyes. Feoffer ( talk) 19:36, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Sorry, but it's "coups d'état". Using "coup d'états" as the plural is tantamount to saying "states coup" instead of "state coups" in English. Check m-w.com as a reference, for instance. I've reverted the move. — Nightst a llion (?) 19:13, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
On the map, Hungary and Romania are painted light green, but they are not listed in the list of coups. Why are they marked on the map? For which coup attempts? The rise on power of the Arrow Cross in Hungary? Or its cause, the unsuccessful attempt of Horthy to withdraw from the war? Or something related to the revolution of 1956? What about Romania? Something about the 1989 revolution, considered by some to be a conspiracy of the inner circle of Ceausescu's securitate to overthrow him and remain in power? Or something earlyer, in the World War? The abdication of Michael I of Romania? Could somebody clarify it? -- V. Szabolcs 20:56, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
The Communists had control of the cabinet and legislature in 1948. They then merged with other political parties to form a unity front. This is not a coup.
Uh, why this page deleted and moved to a much less complete page? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cm205 ( talk • contribs) 03:32, 21 April 2007 (UTC).
I added several sub headings, mostly one for every decade, I did this because the list as I found it was very hard to navigate. I was looking for a single coup and it was quite difficult. Naufana : talk 06:39, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
In 1976, the dominate political faction within the Chinese Communist Party, state and armed forces were removed at gun point by an alliance of other factions. Surely this deserves mention. DOR (HK) ( talk) 04:16, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
This article needs actual dates in addition to years. Jmj713 ( talk) 20:11, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
The image File:Chile Junta001.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
The following images also have this problem:
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 14:03, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
I've reverted the Iran election paragraph; the events as described don't seem to match the definition of a coup (takeover of a state by former outsiders via control of the military etc.), and the paragraph itself is unsourced and reads like advocacy. Populus ( talk) 01:08, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
I revert it back. Iranian officials reject any coup, but huge military intervention in election, and in streets would make the claim doubtful. Just let people discuss their opinion on whether or not a coup is happenning, in discussion section —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.54.250.150 ( talk) 23:35, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Inside iran, everyone knows it was a coup [1]
Don't fight propaganda with propaganda, and especially not here please. When I read that, it jumped out as bs, seeing as I know the formal definition of a coup. A president already controls key areas of the government.. he can't grab his own power, that act is already done. 76.167.249.45 ( talk) 07:45, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Two things are being missed here: 1. The general definition of coup does not necessitate use of armed forces to change a regime. It's usually something along the line of "sudden deposition of change of government using illegal or unconstitutional means". (This is in response to Populus) In any case police riot were present in streets of Tehran during the election, and they took position inside the Ministry of the Interors while the votes were being counted. 2. It is true that Ahmadinejhad is the current president of Iran and already has the power. But what an election does is determines who the power will transfer to. If Mousavi was the elected president, then the power was to transfer to him, and using this election fraud Ahmadinejhad has grabbed power from Mousavi. (response to the previous post) Blackberry000 ( talk) 15:24, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
The proposed Liberal/NDP/Bloc coalition in Canada is composed of MP's who were elected, and is not unconstitutional by current Canadian law, so I'm not sure it qualifies as a "coup d'etat" Sebd1969 ( talk) 20:11, 4 December 2008 (UTC) seb1969
lol 67.68.19.226 ( talk) 05:34, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
The 1984 coup in Guinea is not listed. Jmoldale ( talk) 23:23, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
The section about Iran, 2008, is completely incoherent. Should be rewritten. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.52.10.99 ( talk) 23:17, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Obviously, this is debatable, as many people accept the validity of the reasoning in Bush v. Gore. However, there are certainly a number of people who have reasoned disagreements with the legality of that decision. (And before someone says "The Supreme Court said so so it can't be unconstitutional" - if I used a mind-control ray to have five members of the Supreme Court declare me King of the USA tomorrow with the rider "this ruling is constitutional", would that somehow not be a coup?)
censurethefive.org has a measured exposition of this point of view. There is no exhaustive list of legal scholars who subscribe to this view, that I know of, but there are certainly many prominent legal scholars who have penned disagreements with Bush v. Gore strong enough as to question its very legitimacy.
I don't suggest including it in the list unqualified, but I do suggest something like "A significant minority of legal scholars contest the legitimacy of Bush v. Gore, and view USA 2000-2001 as a coup." Homunq ( talk) 10:27, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Anon editors have been attempting to add the following:
“ | Italy March 5, 2010, Italian Government changed the electoral law during regional elections. It is forbitten to the Government in charge (Legge 23 Agosto 1988, n°400 Articolo 15 Comma 2 - Costituzione Italiana Art. 72 comma 4) which mandates a normal procedure of approval by the Parliament for laws concerning electoral issues.. | ” |
These edits have been reverted by a number of editors, because the event has not been described as a coup by any reliable third party source. If you wish to include this event in the list, or the see also section, please provide third party sources that describe this event as a coup. Please read wp:rs to see what a reliable third party source is.-- Work permit ( talk) 02:24, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Suggestion: split this page into 4:
Apart from better manageability (list is getting quite big) this would give a chance to actually make the earlier pages complete. At the same time, there really should be an attempt to clarify the distinction between this and List of revolutions and rebellions. I wonder also if (1864) "Troops of French Emperor Napoleon III invade Mexico and install Habsburg pretender Maximilian as Emperor." is really a "coup". Rd232 talk 11:53, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
The JFK assassination is listed as a coup here. Granted, it's a legitimate theory, but that seems more like personal speculation than concrete fact. I'm removing it unless anyone can find some previously unknown concrete evidence of this coup. [This is user Magic Flyin Lemur, but yet again I've forgotten my password and am too tired to bother fixing it tonight. I'll sign this when I get around to it]
I have a few coups to list:
260 AD: Cao Wei's Emperor, Cao Mao, had a failed coup against Sima Zhao. 249 AD: Incident at Gaoping Tombs, where Sima Yi held a coup against Cao Shuang. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.69.189.75 ( talk) 21:04, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Please list the coups d'etat in Niger, there were numerous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Calvaincool ( talk • contribs) 22:08, December 16, 2012 (edit) (undo)
Elizabeth's overthrow of Ivan VI in 1741 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empress_Elizabeth#1741_coup) and Catherine II's overthrow of Peter III in 1762 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catherine_Ii#Reign_of_Peter_III_and_the_coup_d.27.C3.A9tat_of_July_1762). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rabbit rebozo ( talk • contribs) 18:52, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
The Coup of 18 Fructidor in 1797 is often said to be the first coup d'etat. At any rate, the word originates from this incident. Yet it isn't even listed. I am skeptical about the material from ancient and medieval history. But what standard are these events are coups? A coup implies that the people of a country found out all of a sudden they were now under a new regime. Kauffner ( talk) 09:06, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Why is the american revolution mentioned as a coup d'etat?? They removed themselves from british influence, they didn't want yo take control over the british empire! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.133.247.223 ( talk) 16:40, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
List of successful coups d'état could be merged here. If the resulting combined list were made into a sortable table, it would be easy to arrange by date (as this list currently does) or country (as that list currently does). One column could also indicate which were successful, so if you were interested in one or the other type you could sort that way as well. -- Beland ( talk) 18:32, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
I've just restored material I added earlier today on U.S. backing for the March 1949 Syrian Coup. There are many, many details that might be written about the event, but the coup's sponsorship is less a detail, and more a critical piece of information answering who, what, where, when. In general, we should note international coup sponsors if they're known: that information is usually more significant than the random general chosen to launch the coup. - Darouet ( talk) 22:34, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
It may be a good idea to separate this list into successful coups and coup attempts — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.110.248.3 ( talk) 18:15, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
@ Bgwhite: In this edit you attempted to remove some vandalism, but I think you inadvertently removed some material which had been in the article for some time.
I have attempted to restore it. Please check to see if you agree.-- S Philbrick (Talk) 14:52, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
List of coups d'état and coup attempts. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 11:21, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of coups d'état and coup attempts. 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 User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 21:08, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
Biblical characters Absalom & David?-- RicHard-59 ( talk) 17:36, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
I don't know if you consider this as a coup, but should we add this? What are your thoughts? [1] Beshogur ( talk) 17:51, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
I know it's not considered a coup against him when he's not president, but when he is, it will be. Do you think of this as one, which started today when the electoral college decided who is president? Jonathan7157 ( talk) 23:07, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
An IP user added this entry on January 6, 2017. The entry has no references at all, and even if it did, the entire situation is highly debatable.
The first "sentence" features several contentious accusations and several inaccuracies:
The second sentence claims it was done illegally. Legality is evidently a very difficult concept for many people to grasp. When something is illegal, it means that something is forbidden by a law. The argument makes a reference to the way the two laws were passed in the Catalan Parliament, using a mechanism called "lectura única", roughly translated as "single reading". The mechanism is designed to pass laws that theoretically everyone in the chamber agrees on very quickly, without prolonging it with unnecessary delays. That's what it's meant for. But under no circumstances is it limited to any particular laws, it also doesn't stipulate (because of its nature) that everyone has to be voting in favor of any proposed law. The Catalan parties, Junts pel Sí and CUP used this mechanism to pass both laws on the same day, if I'm not mistaken, it took the entire day, as the parties opposed to it didn't want it approved and delayed it as much as they could. [5] [6]
You may call it a dirty trick, and I'd agree with you. But it's nonetheless legal and constitutional, as per the decision of the Spanish Constitutional Court to back the Catalan Parliament's procedure. [7] The proposed laws do not modify in any way the Catalan Statute of Autonomy, they don't need a Qualified Majority (2/3rds of the Chamber), and the Parliament's lawyers don't have any executive or judicial power, they're there to give their expert opinions and advise, their decisions are not binding, it works in the exact same way for the Spanish Senate (which also quite happily ignores their own lawyers). Yes, the same court actually suspended and later annulled both laws.
The Constitutional Court does not declare something as legal or illegal, all it deals with is whether something is constitutional or not. In this case, the two laws are clearly unconstitutional as they violate the Constitution. [8]
This effectively made them unbinding and they were even removed from the DOGC, where all approved laws are posted, a procedure that is stipulated in law and is seen as proof of legitimacy and validity.
Next comes a series of accusations that come with no accompanied proof (well, the entire entry lacks even one citation). Under the circumstances, the Catalan Government did its utmost to guarantee that every Catalan citizen could vote. There were ballot locations, envelopes, papers, writing material, personnel, time, census, etc. The was a system that prevented double-voting. But all that doesn't matter, as the subject of this entry isn't how well the referendum was managed, but whether there was an actual coup d'État here.
You can argue until you're blue in the face about Catalan independence, I'm not here to do that. I'm here to argue that there hasn't been any coup d'État by the Catalan politicians, consider my points:
I don't know if there's even any point to this, and I don't know how to use Wikipedia very well, but I couldn't just let this go once I saw this. I hope you understand and I hope I didn't mess anything up here. Ylcard ( talk) 16:39, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
References
Should the October Revolution be considered a coup? It was a small, armed, insurrection against a constitutionally-established government. - Presidentman talk · contribs ( Talkback) 02:03, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
I have added, restored, and maintained the listing identifying the claim for the presidency by Juan Guaido as a coup. It had been removed and, after being restored, edited to appear as if the question is ambiguous. I have now restored the original text, added more details, and included references to the Venezuelan constitution and supreme court ruling.
If anyone disagrees that the event that occurred in Venezuela on 23rd January 2019 constitutes an attempted coup, please lay out your argument in this talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.42.199.0 ( talk) 10:41, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
I have once again restored the listing identifying the claim for the presidency by Juan Guaido as a coup. I have also added a note about the events on 30 April 2019, as the two events are clearly related and part of the same ongoing process. Responding to the three main objections to this listing:
Given the references posted, to me it seems that the question of whether this is a coup or not moves the discussion towards the legitimacy of the references provided or the correctness of the definition of the term "coup d'etat". If you accept the definition and believe the references are trustworthy, then the matter is settled. 77.59.147.2 ( talk) 00:14, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
11:38, 1 May 2019 Jamez42 talk contribs 90,840 bytes -1,096 Undid revision 895002968 by 77.59.147.2 (talk) Stop edit warring and discuss the changes (WP:BRD). No arguments have been provided on how the 23 January is a coup attempt. Next revert will be a violation of WP:3RR
The arguments have been provided both on the article segment and on this talk page. Yet, you revert my changes without yourself providing any arguments. Could you at least please outline your objections to the arguments I have presented? 77.59.147.2 ( talk) 11:53, 1 May 2019 (UTC) I have created an account so that I can communicate better. I'm just writing this note here to say that past edits/talks from 77.59.147.2 and this account are from the same person. DrTreePirate ( talk) 12:24, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
The Tribunal was appointed by the lame duck National Assembly just days after the last parliamentary elections among several irregularities, including the violation of the period of challenges, its lack of responses and the omission of the final selection of the candidates. Not only that, but none of the justices had the years of experience or met the requirements for holding office, including lack of convictions or political affiliation. Did you know that during this appointment a member of the pro government Assembly even voted for himself?
It seems to me that the following comments refer to the events on 30 April, and not 23 January. Since I argue that the attempted coup occurred on 23 January, I have now split the conversation to separate the two dates so that we can discuss them separately. I have also removed the statement about 30 April from the main article, since there is no agreement that there was an attempted coup on that date. 77.59.147.2 ( talk) 11:36, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
@ Kendrick7: I strongly disagree with the inclusion of the recent events of Venezuela in the list. The article is already listed in the List of revolutions and rebellions article, and the above discussion is stale. Per legitimacy and per the definition of a coup, the events should not be listed as such. As I have mentioned, there are important differences between previous coups/attempts in Venezuela, as well as countries that have had coups this year, such as Sudan. -- Jamez42 ( talk) 15:23, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
References
DrTreePirate ( talk) 00:51, 3 May 2019 (UTC) It appears to me that a difficulty in our discussion so far arises from a lack of clarity in the operating definition of the term "coup d'etat" and how it relates to the facts and events. Here I will go over the definition quoted directly from coup d'état, and link the facts and events of the last few months to this definition. I'm hoping this will help bring clarity to the debate. The definition:
A coup d'état ... means the overthrow of an existing government; typically, this refers to an illegal, unconstitutional seizure of power by a dictator, the military, or a political faction.
Breaking down into the different terms:
What do you think of the above breakdown? Do you agree or disagree with the definition? How about matching the facts/events? DrTreePirate ( talk) 00:51, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
I invite any other uninvolved editor to comment on this, since @ DrTreePirate: may not always be able to respond. I personally think that such a controversial and disputed definition should not be included. Even the cited Yemen coup, which I understand has more acceptance than in the case of Venezuela, is not included in the list. -- Jamez42 ( talk) 16:22, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Some of the events listed in the page for example Mao Zedong in 1949 and the Cuban Revolution were all results of long civil wars. This would not usually qualify as coups unless there are modified definition otherwise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quangsp ( talk • contribs) 20:35, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
By all definitions, it was a plan to coup the state government of Michigan. If we can’t include the 2020 Michigan governor kidnapping plot then why have the 1933 business plot? Bruhmoney77 ( talk) 18:21, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of coups and coup attempts has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
86.58.92.26 ( talk) 08:18, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
1957 alleged Jordanian military coup attempt
The 2020 United States presidential election should be removed. It does not fit the criteria. LoneWolf1992 ( user talk) 20:02, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
Which RS say it does not fit the criteria? 97.126.60.176 ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 09:40, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
To 97*: please see my comment above in the other section about this. -- DrakeGray ( talk) 06:44, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of coups and coup attempts has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I believe it would be best to remove Donald Trump's section at the bottom of this list (for now at least), due to consensus on his Talk page about calling his actions a coup. -- 58.162.223.230 ( talk) 07:52, 21 December 2020 (UTC) 58.162.223.230 ( talk) 07:52, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. Maybe I missed it, but I see several suggestions to remove that section, but no consensus on the matter.
RudolfRed (
talk)
17:45, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
So right now in the news we're seeing the refusal to swear in John Fetterman as an elected senator. [1] [2] This constitutes a coup or coup attempt, no? Wondering about this maybe being a worthwhile addition to the article... Frojojo ( talk) 14:32, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
References
This
edit request to
List of coups and coup attempts has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Will this be updated accurately when proven there has been fraud? 67.7.90.73 ( talk) 04:56, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of coups and coup attempts has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The references listed on the page with regard to Trump 2021 do not suggest the event was coup. Please remove the entry from the list or provide an unbiased news source (not the Guardian or New York magazine which are biased political sources and the references above in the talk page don't refer to the same 6 january event listed and are used out of context)....
To delete: 2021 On 6 January, violent supporters of United States President Donald Trump, some armed, stormed the U.S. Capitol in an attempt to stop Biden's votes from being counted and him being certified as the winner, during the 2020 United States presidential election Electoral College count. Lockdown and evacuation orders were given and the session was suspended. In the violent riot that followed (referred to as "the storming of the Capitol"), one pro-Trump supporter was shot and killed by United States Capitol Police and a Capitol Police officer was assaulted with a fire extinguisher and killed by the rioters. In total, 5 people were killed in the attempted coup.[80] Both the Senate and House chambers were breached, as well as the offices of several members of congress, including Nancy Pelosi's.[81] The international community immediately reacted, with world leaders and the NATO secretary-general[82]calling for calm. Paddy O'Caithain ( talk) 21:21, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Remove the Trump 2021 event as there is no reference given that it was a coup; here's one that explains it wasnt
https://qz.com/1953602/is-america-experiencing-a-coup/
Paddy O'Caithain (
talk)
21:38, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Your other mistake is that the references given are for Trump's challenges to the election; not to the events of January. You have provided NO relevant eferences (the Guardian and New York Magazine are without doubt strongly politically biased and unashamedly so and in any event dont refer to the events of January; you may think the sources ar credible by wikipedias standards, but they dont actually refer to the events of January). you have not provided a "preponderance of sources"; you have provided actually zero. Plese delete the January 6 reference as a coup as it is not factually based. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paddy O'Caithain ( talk • contribs) 09:38, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
Also, I review the references given:
1) https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/trumps-coup-attempt-isnt-over --> this is a column. or sometime called an opinon piece, It is not a factual reference but an opinion of the writer. The clickbait headline is the only place in the article where coup is used and the article makes no attempt to support the assertion; this is an opinion by the writer and clearly so. this does not support inclusion in the list 2) https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/infighting-attempted-coup-trump-team-erupts-chaos-giuliani/story?id=74257079 ABC News]--> this article refers to the infighting withing the trump campaign, and the "coup " mentioned describes the wrestle for power amongst the campaign staff to controlthe campaign/ this does not support the inclusion of any reference to Trump actions as a coup agaisnt the US govt. this does not support inclusion in the list 3) https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/12/trumps-attempted-coup-dangerous/617447/ The Atlantic--> this article discuss Trumps wild ideas and states" But if a coup—or an attempted coup—is not in the cards, here’s what is." this does not support inclusion in the list 4) https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/12/trump-coup-sidney-powell-martial-law-michael-flynn-meltdown.html--> this article refers to a plan by Trump and only refers in the article that there is a deabte whether to clal Trumps actions a coup or not; this does not support inclusion in the list 5) https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/dec/12/donald-trump-coup-american-democracy--> this article compares Trump actions to a novel A Very Brtish Coup and quotesa Kurt Bardella
twice who works explicitly as an anti-Trump adviser. His views are polticlsa and not factual--> this does not support inclusion in the list
6) https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/12/barr-pans-trumps-coup-schemes-in-final-press-conference.html--> This article also uses a clickbait headline inclusion of the word, coup. And then the only further reference is that Trump is "coup-fancying". It makes no assertion that Trumps actions are a coup. --> this does not support inclusion in the list
I appreciate that any one can google "Trump" and "coup" but inlcuding opinons should not be wikipedia's stance. It should try to be apolitical and should avoid inflaming. I appreciate the editors have a strong view but please try to avoid expressing it in wikipedia. there is no credible source given which provide a factual basis to call Trump's actions a coup. Only one opinion is given in all of the above references by a specifically ANTI-Trumop Lincoln project advisor.
Please remove as it is not evidenced as a coup.
<<2021 On 6 January, violent supporters of United States President Donald Trump, some armed, stormed the U.S. Capitol in an attempt to stop Biden's votes from being counted and him being certified as the winner, during the 2021 United States Electoral College count. Lockdown and evacuation orders were given and the session was suspended. In the violent riot that followed (referred to as "the storming of the Capitol"), one pro-Trump supporter was shot and killed by United States Capitol Police and a Capitol Police officer was assaulted with a fire extinguisher and killed by the rioters. In total, 5 people were killed in the attempted coup.[80] Both the Senate and House chambers were breached, as well as the offices of several members of congress, including those of the Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.[81] The international community immediately reacted, with world leaders and the NATO secretary-general[82]calling for calm.>> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paddy O'Caithain ( talk • contribs) 11:52, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia's own article on coups describes one as "an illegal, unconstitutional seizure of power by a political faction, the military, or a dictator."
As the president's attempts to falsely contest the election have been conducted through legal and constitutional means such as through lawsuits and legal cases similiar to the Bush campaign in the 2000 Presidential Election, it cannot be legitimately referred to as a coup without using emotional language or misleading claims.
Attempts to overturn elections and to allege fraud rightly or wrongly such as in Trump's case are both widespread and frequent thoughout the world during and after election cycles, for example in the 2013 Kenyan general election or in the 2019 Mauritian election, or perhaps Congresswoman Stacey Abrams unsuccessful attempts to contest the 2018 gubnatorial election in the state of Georgia.
None of these instances are referred to as attempted coups by this article. as such the inclusion of these events seems to stick out like a red herring and fails to achieve either consistency nor accuracy. As such I argue the attempts of President Trump and his allies to overturn the election through false claims of voter fraud should be removed from this article. HalalSquad ( talk) 21:21, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
"Wikipedia's own article on coups describes one as 'an illegal, unconstitutional seizure of power by a political faction, the military, or a dictator.'"Please see: WP:WINARS AugusteBlanqui ( talk) 21:47, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
@ AugusteBlanqui: Here is another definition from Merriam Webster "The violent overthrow or alteration of an existing government by a small group." Trump's efforts do not fit this definition either or yet another from dictionary.com "A sudden and decisive action in politics, especially one resulting in a change of government illegally or by force.", or from ThoughtCo or the Cambridge Dictionary OR from Encyclopedia Britannica OR Definitions.net In fact it fits no definition of coup I have been able to find thus far, are all of these sources unreliable?
Even it did it would not excuse ignoring all that I had previously written on near-identical legal challenges that are not included on this page for failing to qualify as a coup d'etat. HalalSquad ( talk) 00:10, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
So above there is a discussion about the events in the United States on january 6h. It has been decided here that it was not a coup attempt. My issue is not with that determination, but with typical double standards that I have seen for years on Wikipedia. The most blatant being the rampant bandying about of the term "most ADJ in the world", when it comes to events or cultural products of the Anglo-American sphere, which is all over such articles but always purged from events or cultural articles from non Anglo-American ones, on the basis of such claim being "unsubstantiated". The same demand is completely absent from the former. But anyways, in this particular case I request the removal of the supposed four "coup attempts" in Argentina in 1987, 1988 (2), and 1989. They were not coup attempts whatsoever. This is not only the official stance of the Argentine government, but of most historians, as well as the general population which refers to the events as rebellion and not coups. This is also the view of the Wikipedia article on the rebel soldiers themselves /info/en/?search=Carapintadas . Finally, just from the general smell test, the rebel soldiers only staged insurrection from their base and never actually moved upon democratic institutions, buildings or individuals. With such overwhelming evidence, the relevant references to said events in this thread are erroneous and should be edited out immediately. 119.65.203.76 ( talk) 04:57, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of coups and coup attempts has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In addition to a prior request, I'm providing further support to please remove the 2021 Storming of the Capitol from the list of Coup Attempts - this is not a Coup. In the House of Representatives Impeachment Resolution of Donald Trump for High Crimes and Misdemeanors document it clearly states that Donald Trump was charged with "Incitement of INSURRECTION". No where in the article does it mention a Coup. Furthermore, in is response to the Storming of the Capitol event, Joe Biden, the President Elect, referred to it as an "Insurrection".
Reference: House Impeachment Resolution https://beta.documentcloud.org/documents/20449065-house-impeachment-resolution-final
Reference: Joe Biden remarks of the Storming of the Capitol https://www.wbur.org/news/2021/01/06/transcript-joe-biden-capitol-chaos
REMOVE:
2021
On 6 January, violent supporters of United States President Donald Trump, some armed, stormed the U.S. Capitol in an attempt to stop Biden's votes from being counted and him being certified as the winner, during the 2021 United States Electoral College count. Lockdown and evacuation orders were given and the session was suspended. In the violent riot that followed (referred to as "the storming of the Capitol"), one pro-Trump supporter was shot and killed by United States Capitol Police and a Capitol Police officer was assaulted with a fire extinguisher and killed by the rioters. In total, 5 people died in the attempted coup.[63] Both the Senate and House chambers were breached, as well as the offices of several members of congress, including those of the Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.[64] The international community immediately reacted, with world leaders and the NATO secretary-general[65] calling for calm. Former President George W. Bush stated, "This is how election results are disputed in a banana republic – not our democratic republic."[66]
BluePillx ( talk) 22:47, 16 January 2021 (UTC) BluePillx ( talk) 22:47, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
@ AugusteBlanqui and CookieMonster755: I notice you have been restoring the section. Please see WP:BURDEN and heed it. The section is contentious. While past sources may have referred to it that way, that seems to be changing. The burden is on those who want to add material to justify its addition given the weight found in reliable sources. ~ Anachronist ( talk) 21:50, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Why isn't the 2020 US election listed? Is it because it is an ongoing attempt? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.147.101.186 ( talk) 22:58, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
....trump. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.147.101.186 ( talk) 14:29, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Possible reputable source for coup attempt: https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/01/06/coup-america-capitol-electoral-college-2020-election/ 2605:A601:A19C:DC00:71B0:B668:5624:72B9 ( talk) 19:08, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
The 2021 storming of the United States Capitol is widely considered an attempt at a self-coup.
I have fully-protected this page due to the edit warring. Please reach a consensus on the talk page first before editing the page. GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:12, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
Just to add some rough data points, here are some Google search results. These aren't definitive by any means because they don't make any distinction about context, reliability, or what's recent or old. Nevertheless, here's what we find:
Of those searches, not only is "coup" the least prevalent result, but it's less than 15% of the total of those four tests. Unfortunately, when you try to filter by 'last 24 hours' or 'last week', the number of hits are not displayed. The same is true for other search engines.
Proponents of adding the entry back should demonstrate that "coup" predominates in reliable sources and isn't a minority viewpoint among how reliable sources describe the event. ~ Anachronist ( talk) 03:53, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
I guess Adam Kinzinger isn’t in Congress any more, because he clearly called it coup attempt. Saturdayopen ( talk) 04:50, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
So are we going to re-add 1/6 or not? Saturdayopen ( talk) 18:36, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Perhaps people here would like to participate in Talk:2021 storming of the United States Capitol#The storming was not a coup, where this is also being discussed. ~ Anachronist ( talk) 20:08, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of coups and coup attempts has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I want to add the 2021 Myanmar coup d'état
References
Donald Trump's efforts to undermine the 2020 US presidential election and false claim to have won the election was described as an attempted coup d'état by at least seven valid sources. I feel like this should be reflected on this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nekomancerjade ( talk • contribs) 03:31, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
The Trump campaigns actions are not a government. Last time I checked campaigns are not governments. Therefore there is no way that whatever is happening could be described as a coup. This language is false and hyperbolic, and I think it should be removed from this page. ( Aricmfergie ( talk) 07:37, 13 December 2020 (UTC))
Given 1) the definition Wikipedia itself uses for a coup d'état at the time of writing this, 2) That Joseph Biden has not been inaugurated, 3) the confirmed existence of dueling electors, and 4) the Trump campaign is litigating / protesting the reported election results because of alleged severe levels of fraud in key locations with the direct, circumstantial, demonstrative, and statistical evidence they have: what the Trump campaign is currently doing is NOT a coup d'etat. The contested section of the article is technically and objectively incorrect. Given 1) this allegation, 2) confirmed illegal spying on the early Trump campaign, 3) Collusion investigations / insinuations with no credible evidence, 4) impeachment proceedings on claims again without credible evidence, and 5) what the Trump campaign and supporters believe are fraudulent election reported results from systematic election + voter fraud, the Trump campaign & supporters are claiming that the coup and sedition is coming from corrupt Democrat leaders, not from them. The "safest" and most objectively sure addition to this article I believe is either a) leave it blank until after 1/20, or b) objectively state both sides' claims & reasons instead of just stating one side's claims as if it is fact. Not doing so would further tarnish Wikipedia's brand-name and further disenfranchise it as a highly biased, nonobjective, "gaslighting" resource. Given EO13848, keeping this post up on Wikipedia may also make them liable to "undesirable repercussions." -- DrakeGray ( talk) 06:42, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
This should definitely be included in the list, this was an attempted coup. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.228.207.205 ( talk) 07:59, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
On February 7, 2021, supporters of the opposition against incumbent Haitian president Jovenel Moise allegedly attempted a coup d'état. [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by SuperGuy1119 ( talk • contribs) 16:02, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of coups and coup attempts has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
January 6, 2021 - Donald Trump gathers tens of thousands of supporters, to storm the US Capitol to overturn the results of the 2020 election, with a plan that the Vice-President was supposed to set in motion but declined, and with the goal of keeping himself in power. [1]
~~CD~~ 2600:1010:B021:35AC:A1D5:90B9:64FA:7DB5 ( talk) 23:48, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
References
{{
edit protected}}
template. See above discussion.
Izno (
talk)
00:09, 3 February 2021 (UTC)With all due respect, it *was* on the page and was removed despite discussion. If we are looking for consensus, shouldn't the default state be where it was before the first edit that couldn't get consensus? Whether it "was" a coup attempt or it "might be" a coup attempt isn't a matter for people's political opinions. Trump is facing an impeachment trial for the coup attempt. That seems minimally sufficient that he is formally being charged by Congress for "Incitement of Insurrection": https://www.npr.org/sections/trump-impeachment-effort-live-updates/2021/01/11/955631105/impeachment-resolution-cites-trumps-incitement-of-capitol-insurrection 65.96.103.55 ( talk) 23:08, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
The goal was to bypass the election to put someone in power. If it succeeded it would've constituted a coup, but it didn't succeed. 2601:19B:B00:BA10:6169:DAF4:B256:60EC ( talk) 16:01, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
I am surprised the capital event is not mentioned as a coup attempt because Trump tried to block the election from being certified by using force — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.222.180.90 ( talk) 17:45, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Should it be added to the list? Tunisian president Kaïs Saïed removed the governement, suspended the national assembly, nominated alone a new government and began governing by decrees. It's already been called a (self) coup. [3], [4], [5], [6], [7].-- Aréat ( talk) 07:45, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
@ CookieMonster755: Please provide a rationale grounded in policy why you keep adding this to the list. There has never been any consensus for doing so, neither in this article nor in the list of coups by country. Most reliable sources don't refer to the incident as a "coup". Therefore, neither should we. Please refer to the archived discussions before continuing this disruption. ~ Anachronist ( talk) 05:28, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
[ [8]] is an article by a Trump Administration expert on Russia Policy who calls it a coup attempt, known as a "self coup". Academics have called it worse than a coup attempt, in that "American democracy would have ended" [ [9]], because if the protesters/insurrectionists had succeeded in taking Vice President Mike Pence or House Speaker Nancy Pelosi hostage - which they were a few feet/minutes from doing, respectively, they would have likely issued the demand that Donald Trump remain in office despite the legally certified and adjudicated election results being that Joe Biden was duly elected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Westsider ( talk • contribs) 20:05, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
Get your fake news outta here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:13f0:8110:903b:4341:124c:eb57 ( talk) 20:58, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
They were, in fact, armed with weapons such tasers, bear spray, and flagpoles that were used to beat and injure 138 police officers and likely contributed to the suicides of 4 others - the largest mass-casualty incident in the history of the DCPD or USCP. Westsider — Preceding undated comment added 20:16, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
consensus looks established here, I will link to other articles in my entry NS T429 ( talk) 17:27, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
It’s quite clear. Trump led a bunch of right wing conspiracy theorists like qAnon to storm the capitol. It is quite clear it’s a failed attempted coup. Trump was theoretically trying to take over the government and not to mention his call with Brad Raffenspurger, the Georgia Secretary of State. AsherDoodle1115 ( talk) 22:35, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
I think the January 6 riots were probably too much of a joke to really describe as an attempted coup. ~~Wikidude87654321~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikidude87654321 ( talk • contribs) 14:37, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
Colin Powell called this an attempted overthrow of the government, also known as an attempted coup. Bob Woodward: What about the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol? Colin Powell: “It was awful. [Trump] was going in there to overturn the government.” NS T429 ( talk) 19:35, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
The Eastman Memorandum provided a legal theory for the coup. "John Eastman [...] counseled him on how to retain power after losing the election." NS T429 ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:41, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
The Associated Press offhandedly refers to the event as an attempted coup.
Capitol attackers call for death of Pence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NS T429 ( talk • contribs) 20:20, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
@ NS T429: Yes, it is easy to find reliable sources that call the January 6 incident at the US capitol a "coup". Wikipedia can do that only if that is the predominant term used by reliable sources.
As a rough indication (not definitive) here's what we find among news sources (not just any sources) archived by Google:
The terms "coup" and "invasion" are the least prevalent results used by news sources. The terms "riot" and "attack" are most common.
For that and other reasons, our article 2021 United States Capitol attack is not titled "coup" either. We also have Attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election#Description as an attempted coup. Note that in neither article does Wikipedia refer to the event as a "coup".
So, if you want to include this event as a coup in this article, make your case, change the consensus. I'll say that my own personal preference is to call it a coup, but my own preference or yours doesn't matter one iota here. We go by sources. It is already established that the term is used in some sources. It is not established that it is used by the majority of sources. ~ Anachronist ( talk) 22:49, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
The quality of sources should matter more than quantity. For example, if the consensus among leading historians and political scientists is that January 6 was a coup attempt, then that is what it was. It doesn't matter if other sources refer to it as something else. AugusteBlanqui ( talk) 09:05, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
[ [10]] is a CNN Special Report by well-known U.S. reporter Jake Tapper titled "An American Coup". Westsider ( talk) 08:36, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
References
For some reason rebel group(s) winning or not winning after a civil war like the Taliban, Séléka, and CPC are being added as coups and coup attempts. They aren't. If we added all civil war and actual coups then this list would be a mile long and not be in any way helpful.-- Garmin21 ( talk) 03:46, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
This
edit request to
List of coups and coup attempts has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add The January 6th 2020 Capitol attacks as an attempted coup. Thegoodguyas ( talk) 21:52, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. see above discussionsCannolis ( talk) 22:17, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
I started this thread, and am now more knowledgeable about Template:List criteria so am starting a fresh thread below NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 21:54, 17 June 2022 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
A. Per WP:SALLEAD (a guideline), this list should probably include selection criteria. The guideline says in part
We might say something about events described by "most historians" as coups or coup attempts, and also for events involving physical violence where a significant number of notable commenters have described the event in those terms. But I'm open to other ideas. B. Per WP:LISTCRIT, its ok to list alleged events with inline attribution. In relevant part this guideline says
So where historians disagree or for recent events lacking sufficient historian analysis, inline attribution allows us to include alleged coups. C. Re the title, I'd be OK changing the title to List of coups and possible coups or List of coups, coup attempts, and alleged coup attempts, if we can agree on specific listing criteria. NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 00:23, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Agree with NewsAndEventsGuy's formulation, coups or cowps are commonly disputed as a description, so in such cases the opposing views should be attributed, and chronological order is better. For example, "2022 Burkina Faso coup d'état: In late January, the Burkinabé military staged a coup against Roch Marc Christian Kaboré." has a source which isn't so definite, "Burkina Faso's neighbours have condemned what they call an attempted coup in the West African state. ... On Sunday, Defence Minister Gen Barthélémy Simporé downplayed previous rumours of the president's capture, and the nature of the unrest at large. State television, meanwhile, characterised the sound of gunfire at military barracks as the actions of a small few disgruntled soldiers rather than a widespread fight or coup attempt." The dispute should be shown and attributed inline, rather than delete the item until history books come to a consensus. . . dave souza, talk 20:35, 12 June 2022 (UTC) Strong agreement with chronological order with inline characterization. Feoffer ( talk) 04:57, 17 June 2022 (UTC) -Please add further comments in "List Criteria Part 2" thread below. NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 21:54, 17 June 2022 (UTC) |
@ AugusteBlanqui: I am sure you saw the comment in the 2021 section that reads "Please establish consensus on the talk page before adding the 6 January storming of the US Capitol". So, why do you insist on adding it to the list without establishing consensus first? Also, your argument that a charge of seditious conspiracy means that it was a coup is just your personal standard and does not matter to this list in the slightest. The only thing that matters is what most reliable sources call it. We report what reliable sources say, without WP:Undue weight, and the weight isn't on the side of sources that characterized the event as a coup. Where is the evidence that "coup" is the predominant term used by reliable sources to refer to this particular event? StellarHalo ( talk) 01:15, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
Numerous entries on the page are for "alleged coup attempts." Is an alleged coup attempt a coup attempt? It sounds as though it is only alleged, as in, some disagree with the allegation. Perhaps either all such alleged attempts should be deleted, or the 2021 American event should be listed as an alleged coup attempt, for it certainly is now alleged to be a coup attempt, by an official body at the highest level. JBriggeman ( talk) 22:03, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
In Wiki and elsewhere I've seen discussion whether the correct word to use about Jan 6 is a "coup", short for " Coup d'état". According to some who say Trump was trying to illegally stay in power, the correct word would be " self coup". [1] In my view, this debate is an erudite false dichotomy, because our article on "self coups" says in the first sentence that a self coups "is a form of coup d'état...". This is a bit like arguing whether the things in my fridge drawer are "Fruit" or "Apples" when both are true. NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 22:45, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
References
The result of the move request was: withdrawn by nominator per WP:SNOW. ( closed by non-admin page mover) GeoffreyT2000 ( talk) 03:41, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
(Withdrawn proposal pending closure) as proposer, NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 21:49, 17 June 2022 (UTC) Former heading was "Resolving listcrit"
List of coups and coup attempts → List of coups and possible coup attempts – Please place your rationale for the proposed move here. NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 15:46, 17 June 2022 (UTC) I just boldly changed the lead to try to resolve the dispute. My changes are here. If it survives, the title should be changed to include "possible" NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 09:59, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
To be included on this list, an event must be sufficiently notable that it merits its own Wikipedia article. In cases of genuine debate whether the label "coup" is applicable, this list uses standard Wikipedia policies and guidelines including reliance on what Wikipedia considers to be "reliable sources" and uses citation and attribution to present the mainstream perspectives with due weight.
This is twisting us and our readers into a hyperpretzel just to validate Jan 6 denialismThis summation has merit. Feoffer ( talk) 19:14, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
I won't mind if an uninvolved editor does a SNOW close (as proposer) but meanwhile, @ Anythingyouwant:, can you concede the consensus here? NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 19:24, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Proposer WITHDRAWS obvious SNOW close is appropriate, and I withdraw the proposal. Would someone please hat this as done? But we still have to agree on LISTCRIT if we are going to keep this list. NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 20:11, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
A couple editors above have indicated maybe supporting the addition of a new section... "Debatable events" or whatever name, for those events in the twilight like 6/1. I think it's a service to the reader to neither leave them out entirely, nor lump them in with events that are near-universally acknowledged to have definitely been coups.
Naturally, this won't serve to end arguments on our side -- whether to include the JFK thingy even in the "debatable events" etc. -- and may even increase them, who knows. But that's part of being an editor. I'm thinking here that this would be a service to the reader. What say you? Herostratus ( talk) 05:02, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Most of them are undisputed.We'd need a source for that, not editors looking each other in eyes. Feoffer ( talk) 19:36, 17 June 2022 (UTC)