Template talk:Latin America coup d'état

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Latin America (Rated Template-class)
WikiProject icon This template is within the scope of WikiProject Latin America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Latin America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Template  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

Date[edit]

I was wondering, why the coups listed here start in 1945? Even if we skip the periods of anarchy, war and/or state organization of the XIX century, coups in South America are not a phenomenon of the Cold War. Many of them predate the end of WWII, and even the war itself. And more, even if we left aside the periods of independence or civil wars, anarchy and/or state organization, we can still find notable coups in the XIX century.

Perhaps a better idea would be to list here only the successful coups, and move the failed attempts to a list of all of them. Unlike successful ones, where we can easily set that "X coup is the end of this government and the begin of that other one", failed attempts need to be placed in more detailed context, and a list would help with that purpose better than a navbox. MBelgrano (talk) 15:54, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I think that makes sense. I was thinking something similar myself. So start from 1900, and have another template for pre-1900? Rd232 talk 16:15, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Agree with the division successful/unsuccessful.
But I found difficult to establish a valid criteria for the "starting date" of the template. Military coups are common since the 1930s, but do we have to include previous "inside palace" coup d'états?. There are plenty of them. Furthermore, going back the turn of the century, how can we distinguish between (modern-sense) coup d'états and XIXth-century (civico-)military "rebellions", when Latin American States were not at all well-established? Salut, --IANVS (talk) 04:32, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
A similar issue arises at List of coups d'état and coup attempts vs List of revolutions and rebellions (see talk page of the former). I suppose one answer would be to follow the article names, on the assumption that the article names are based on sources within them. But it would really help to have some kind of guidance to help with consistency; or at least some kind of summary of what is usually (on WP) called a coup, what a rebellion, etc. Rd232 talk 07:48, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
As far as consistency is concerned, using whichever term is most common in material written about the subject is the way to go. Making up our own definitions may provide some consistency, but it also makes it more confusing if someone is looking for an event with a certain name and we rename it to match particular criteria. Also, a coup versus a rebellion can easily be defined as the same thing or totally different things depending on the perspective and individual opinion. It's better to just stick with the names for events used in the references, people expect to find those names, and we don't have to bother creating definitions that only apply to articles on wikipedia. --Xaliqen (talk) 15:46, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Ye-es, but if we could have some kind of guidance on what things are usually called by reliable sources, it would help, eg with organising lists. Rd232 talk 20:55, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
A Jstor search might help (or similar search of scholarly publications). That way, if an event has multiple names, we could easily determine which one is the most common in scholarly materials. --Xaliqen (talk) 18:04, 18 December 2010 (UTC)