Talk:List of coups and coup attempts

2005 Kyrgyzstan

Kurmanbek Bakiev overthrew Askar Akaev

Niger

Category:Niger

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)

2020 Michigan kidnapping plot

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)

2020 US Election

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)

By whom? Beshogur (talk) 23:06, 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.

• Over 20,000 National Guard troops to provide security against inauguration threats in Washington (USA Today)
• Yes, It Was a Coup Attempt. Here’s Why. (Politico)
• What Do We Call What Happened on January 6th? (Cline Center for Advanced Research, U of IL)
• No, it’s not a coup — It’s a failed ‘self-coup’ that will undermine US leadership and democracy worldwide (Brookings)Calmecac5 (talk) 20:11, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

The 2020 US Presidential Election

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)

Can you provide here? Beshogur (talk) 07:41, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Beshogur, see Talk:2020 United States presidential election‎#Coup and Disputes surrounding the 2020 United States presidential election results#"Coup" verbiage for sources and discussion. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:38, 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 is original research. Provide reliable sources for your argument. 97.113.140.165 (talk) 01:27, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 December 2020

86.58.92.26 (talk) 08:18, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

1957 alleged Jordanian military coup attempt

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 14:28, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

US election

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)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 December 2020: Remove Donald Trump

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)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{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)

Again, please see Talk:Donald Trump. Specifically this consensus: Talk:Donald_Trump/Archive_128#Attempted_Coup_By_Experts? --58.162.223.230 (talk) 01:08, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

 Done None of the sources given described it as a coup or attempted coup, so I went ahead and removed it. Seagull123 Φ 14:20, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Hey Seagull123, if the need is for sources, here’s The New Yorker, ABC News, The Atlantic, New York Magazine, The Guardian ,New York Mag (diff author)... Innisfree987 (talk) 17:15, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

@Innisfree987: I didn't say it couldn't ever be included, just that the sources that were used when I removed it didn't mention the word "coup" - and so an obvious case of WP:OR which needed to be removed. I'm not going to pass a judgement on whether it should be included (obviously with sources) or not, as I don't have an opinion on it - I'll leave that up to other editors. Seagull123 Φ 17:42, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Seagull123 Have now updated the section to comply fully with your picky, but not-unreasonable, request to use references that include the word coup, I find it immediately reverted by User:Beshogur. It is beginning to appear that removing this section is a political action, and ask for your assistance in getting it protection from vandalism. Ethnic laundry (talk) 15:05, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

@Ethnic laundry: it is not a "picky" policy, please read WP:OR and WP:V - Wikipedia only states what reliable sources say about a subject, so saying something that is not cited in reliable sources is original research, which isn't allowed in Wikipedia articles. Furthermore, please don't accuse me and @Beshogur of "persistent vandalism" as you did in your edit summary here. Seagull123 Φ 16:46, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Refusal to seat John Fetterman

So right now in the news we're seeing the refusal to swear in John Fetterman as an elected senator. 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

Semi-protected edit request on 8 January 2021

Will this be updated accurately when proven there has been fraud? 67.7.90.73 (talk) 04:56, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Jack Frost (talk) 05:58, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 January 2021

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)

 Not done for now. While I do agree with the view expressed in that source, I disagree with your hand-waving dismissal of sources considered reliable by the Wikipedia community. WP:RSN is the place to go if you want to build consensus for deprecating those sources for use on Wikipedia. There are a preponderance of sources (given in a section above) that describe the event as a coup, and one source that doesn't. It would violate WP:UNDUE to remove the text based on that one source.

From my point of view, it's hard to describe the event (as well as Trump's prior attempts at hanging onto his office) as a "coup" on Trump's part while he is still President. I don't believe that a coup includes the prevention of a transition of leadership; rather, a coup is a forced transition of leadership. If the bulk of the reliable sources change their stance (and it looks like that may be happening), then removal of the text from this list article would be justified. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:10, 10 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)

Trump Legal Proceedings

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)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 January 2021

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)

 Done, but not just for the reasons provided above. I declined the previous request above, but I accept this one. There is a clear trend in RS to move toward other terminology such as "insurrection" or "riot" rather than "coup". I'll add that although Google search results aren't great evidence, there are still about 2X the results for "capitol insurrection" more than "capitol coup". Over at Talk:2021 storming of the United States Capitol, there is discussion about changing "storming" to "insurrection" with some participants advocating "riot" but nobody there is considering "coup". Therefore, I think it's about time to remove the entry from this article about coups. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:07, 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)

Again, @AugusteBlanqui and CookieMonster755: stop warring. Yes, many reliable sources describe it as a coup, but apparently many more reliable sources describe it as something else. You have not met WP:BURDEN combined with WP:UNDUE to include this incident in this list. I suggest taking a survey of recent coverage in reliable sources and see what they say. Also look at the sources that called it a 'coup' and determine if they still call it that in subsequent coverage. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:56, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Anachronist I am not warring and haven't edited it in days, so don't accuse me of waring. It's insulting and rude. cookie monster (2020) 755 03:28, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

@CookieMonster755: You are correct, I apologize. I meant to ping @Saturdayopen: in my previous comment, who has been edit-warring. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:41, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Article protected

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:

• "capitol coup" - 136 million hits (as of 01/31/2021 it shows a paltry 13.5m hits)

     *clicking on the first video result, the Washington Post while comparing it to Coups of the past concluded that this event lacks critical elements of a Coup d'État or Self Coup (involvement of military), and landed on the term "Insurrection"...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/politics/was-the-attack-on-the-us-capitol-an-attempted-coup/2021/01/28/ffd543a7-130c-4dff-8240-3d1330877c60_video.html BluePillx (talk) 18:57, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

• "capitol invasion" - 217 million hits
• "capitol insurrection" - 279 million hits
• "capitol riot" - 372 million hits

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)

Are you kidding me with that rational? Google searches? It’s one thing to use Google searches to justify not having 1/6 be titled US coup d’etat or something like that. But not calling the event a self-coup, period? That’s still 136 MILLION hits! Saturdayopen (talk) 04:33, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Did you fail to read my disclaimer at the beginning? And do you have any better data? Members of the US government, who were the targets of the riot, don't call it a coup. Most sources seem to call it something else. Because its inclusion in this article is contentious, the the burden is on you to provide support for inclusion based on the weight given to 'coup' in the reliable-source coverage. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:42, 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)

Quantitative search hit justification is ridiculous. We need to see what the dozen or so experts--historians and political scientists--are calling it and take guidance from them. Separately, anyone know when the Parler archive will be searchable? I'd love to look at what it indicates about brigading POV on Wikipedia. AugusteBlanqui (talk) 09:34, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Yes, it's ridiculous. All it is is a rough indication, not conclusive. More extensive work is required to show that a preponderance (not a minority) of mainstream reliable sources currently refer to the incident as a coup. That burden has not yet been met. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:08, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

So are we going to re-add 1/6 or not? Saturdayopen (talk) 18:36, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

I like to point out that @User:Yilku1 was the one to delete 1/6 without discussion. Saturdayopen (talk) 19:10, 23 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)

Buddy, stop acting like you’re neutral on this issue. You’re very clearly against calling 1/6 a coup. Saturdayopen (talk) 20:22, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

I am neutral. I don't particularly care one way or another. I merely responded to two edit requests above, the first time declining to remove the section, and the second time agreeing to it based on the rationale. How is that not neutral? You, however, clearly have an axe to grind in your insistence on keeping it in. And you haven't yet met the burden for including it. Wikipedia isn't the place to push your point of view, and your point of view appears to be a minority view based on how reliable sources are characterizing the event. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:33, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Very random standards in this article: Argentina 1987, 1988, 1990 insurrections were not coup attempts

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 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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)