Misplaced Pages

Talk:Coup d'état: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 23:16, 14 August 2022 editAnythingyouwant (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Template editors91,258 edits Large deletion of material: +← Previous edit Revision as of 23:36, 14 August 2022 edit undoSideswipe9th (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers11,284 edits Large deletion of material: ReplyTag: ReplyNext edit →
Line 103: Line 103:
:The content was UNDUE and you need to gain consensus on talk..]] 22:51, 14 August 2022 (UTC) :The content was UNDUE and you need to gain consensus on talk..]] 22:51, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
::I do have consensus because the sole solitary comment at this talk page section other than my own is your weak euphemism for ]. If you can’t name a single reliable source that disagrees with what these authors have written, then there cannot be an undue weight issue.] (]) 23:05, 14 August 2022 (UTC) ::I do have consensus because the sole solitary comment at this talk page section other than my own is your weak euphemism for ]. If you can’t name a single reliable source that disagrees with what these authors have written, then there cannot be an undue weight issue.] (]) 23:05, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
:::You quite clearly do not have consensus because two editors, of which I was the second ({{diff2|1104233597|revert 1}}, {{diff2|1104420831|revert 2}}, {{diff2|1104429017|revert 3}}), have reverted this addition.
:::I think I was pretty clear in my edit summary. The content seems ] as it is primary research, not secondary. The conclusions are drawn based on Google ngrams search, using the English 2012 and Spanish 2012 corpora, which consist of works published between 1800 and 2012 ( of the PDF), and contrasting those results against the incidence of coup attempts reported by Powell and Thyne.
:::Accordingly, due to its nature as a primary source, we need secondary coverage of it to assess its weight. Stating that a source is undue is not the same as saying ]. UNDUE is part of the ], and arguments citing UNDUE are policy compliant, as they are formed on the basis of how content is related to other works published in the same area. IDONTLIKEIT meanwhile is largely an opinion of the editor about the content itself, and not the contents relationship to other pieces of work.
:::The list of 21 citations provided will help with assessing weight and whether or not the work by Marsteintredet and Malamud represents the mainstream view in this area, though it seems odd that the journal itself only lists of the by others. That will take time though, and it is wholly inappropriate to restore the content while that takes place. ] (]) 23:36, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:36, 14 August 2022

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Coup d'état article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 12 months 
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconPolitics High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconMilitary history: Technology
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
B checklist
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
  1. Referencing and citation: criterion not met
  2. Coverage and accuracy: criterion met
  3. Structure: criterion met
  4. Grammar and style: criterion met
  5. Supporting materials: criterion met
Associated task forces:
Taskforce icon
Military science, technology, and theory task force
Media mentionThis article has been mentioned by a media organization:
  • Charles Joseph Scarborough (1 December 2020). "Morning Joe". MSNBC. Retrieved 1 December 2020. Just so people who think this, to call this a coup is hyperbolic, or an attempted coup, you just look at the definition in Misplaced Pages: it says, "Typically, it's an illegal, unconstitutional attempt to seize power by a political faction". Definition of a coup. Of course, if he's already in power, it'd be an "autocoup".

Coups do not require violence to be considered coups

The lead should not contain often with use of violence due to the fact that coups and coup attempts do not always happen via violence. Violence may be used but is not required to be considered a coup, therefore it is unnecessary in the lead. Mechanical Keyboarder (talk) 05:10, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

That's why it says often, because it is often, but not always done via violence. However, it happens via violence often enough that it is necessary in the lede. - Aoidh (talk) 20:36, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Role of foreign influence only very tangentially hinted at.

I came looking for the term for a coup which is largely or wholly a foreign operation. So many recent and historical examples flood my mind I feel examples are unnecessary. This a sort of "medium-soft" to "medium-hard" power projection which can be so effective, particularly against a much smaller nation, that it is in the front pocket of all significant powers (although its reputation has become rather tarnished of late).

So simply put, would someone with actual expertise in the study of coups d'etats, which is most of those reading these words, please email me the answer to my question concerning terminology, and also expand the article to include what may in fact be the very most common sort of coup, these days? Thank you all kindly for your good work. crawkn@gmail.com

Crawkn (talk) 13:49, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

RFC about coups and coup attempts

An RFC has started related to this matter. See Talk:List of coups and coup attempts#RFC: How should we deal with alleged coups and alleged coup attempts?. Anythingyouwant (talk) 04:47, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Large deletion of material

Today, User:‎Sideswipe9th removed a considerable amount of material from this article without any talk page discussion, here's a diff. The cited source is authored by scholars in the pertinent field, in a peer-reviewed journal. And here's the edit summary: "This seems WP:UNDUE, as it is primary research by two political scientists and does not seem to be widely cited by other sources." Here's the removed material, without the footnotes:


As of 2019, coups were occurring less frequently than in previous decades. Yet, the term “coup” was occurring more frequently in both academic and non-academic contexts, especially in conjunction with an adjective like “soft” or “parliamentary” or “electoral” or “slow-motion”.

This development has been linked to a more general linguistic phenomenon: when instances of a concept become less frequent, the understanding of that concept expands to cover more cases. Political scientists Leiv Marsteintredet and Andrés Malamud, who have studied this general phenomenon as it applies to the particular word “coup”, caution that, “labeling an event as a coup may generate political actions of grave consequences such as the withholding of aid, the suspension from international organizations, the triggering of international sanctions, and even foreign military intervention.” They assert that the constitutive elements of a “coup” are summarized in the definition provided by Powell and Thyne who wrote in 2011 that a coup occurs when “the military or other elites within the state apparatus…unseat the sitting executive.”

Here's the main source: Marsteintredet, Leiv and Malamud, Andrés. “Coup with Adjectives: Conceptual Stretching or Innovation in Comparative Research”, Political Studies Vol. 68(4) 1014–1035 (2020).

This is scholarly material from a reputable secondary source. Blanking it all is inappropriate. If people would like to find scholars who have a different position, any such scholars can be cited too. The authors of the deleted material are reputable scholars:

  • Leiv Marsteintredet, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
  • Andrés Malamud, Institute of Social Sciences, University of Lisbon, Portugal

As for the journal, the lead of its Misplaced Pages article says this: "Political Studies is a peer-reviewed academic journal covering all areas of political science, established in 1953 and published quarterly by SAGE Publications on behalf of the Political Studies Association." This particular article has already been cited many times by scholars in this field, even though this particular article was published relatively recently (2020), including by the following:

  • "Narratives of Executive Downfall: Recall, Impeachment, or Coup?" by A Pérez-Liñán - The Politics of Recall Elections, 2020 - Springer.
  • "Polêmicas sobre a definição do Impeachment de Dilma Rousseff como Golpe de Estado" by DE Martuscelli - Revista de Estudos e Pesquisas sobre as Americas 2020.
  • "Checks and Balances: The Concept and Its Implications for Corruption" by L Da Ros, MM Taylor - Revista Direito GV, 2021 - SciELO Brasil.
  • "Brazil's Stealth Military Intervention" by K Akkoyunlu, JA Lima - Journal of Politics in Latin America, 2022.
  • "Identity Politics and Libraries in Brazil", MS thesis by G. Kunze. Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, 2022.
  • "Reinventing our understanding of the Left-Right political dichotomy: the case of Argentina" by S Halle, Honors Thesis, University of Arkansas - 2022.
  • "The new wave of takeovers occurring in democracies" by S Larsson, Master Thesis in Political Science, Umea University, Sweden - 2021
  • "Contested, violated but persistent: presidential term limits in Latin America and sub-saharan Africa" by Charlotte Heyl and Mariana Llanos. Democratization 29.1 (2022): 1-17.
  • "Beyond the Rubber-Stamp: Essays on Parliamentary Bodies Under Authoritarianism" by JG Waller - 2022 (Doctoral dissertation, The George Washington University).
  • "The Will of the People" by Yanina Welp in In The Will of the People: Populism and Citizen Participation in Latin America. De Gruyter, 2022.
  • "Hybrid Warfare: A Dramatic Example of Conceptual Stretching", National Security and the Future by T Solmaz (Volume 23, No. 1, 2022.).
  • "The rise of far-right in Latin America: Argentina, Brazil and Chile in comparative perspective" by R Guerra Molina, R Badillo Sarmiento - Revista republicana, 2021.
  • "The rise of far-right in Latin America: Argentina, Brazil and Chile in comparative perspective" by René GUERRA MOLINA and Reynell BADILLO SARMIENTO, Rev. repub. 2021.
  • "The Trump Self-Coup Attempt: Comparisons and Civil–Military Relations" by D Pion-Berlin, T Bruneau, RB Goetze - Government and Opposition, 2022.
  • "A Coup At the Capitol? Conceptualizing Coups and Other Antidemocratic Actions" by Powell, J. M., Ben Hammou, S., Smith, A. E., Borba, L., Kinney, D. H., Chacha, M., & De Bruin, E. (2022). International Studies Review, 24(1).
  • "El golpe que no fue. La última crisis estatal en Bolivia y los límites del concepto de golpe de Estado." by Franz Xavier Barrios Suvelza, Revista de estudios políticos 191 (2021): 185-214.
  • A raíz de los acontecimientos en Bolivia referidos a la renuncia del Presidente Evo Morales a fines de 2019, se ha desatado una polémica internacional sobre si lo sucedido puede …
  • "Supervivencia de los gobiernos y régimen político en la Argentina" by Abal Medina, J. M., Calvo, E., Ajmechet, S., & Ratto, M. C. (2022), Revista SAAP, 16(1), 13-39.
  • "Crisis político institucional en Brasil: la paradoja entre un modelo de desarrollo pétreo y el ascenso social (2003-2016)" by Natalia Raquel Razovich. Facultad de Ciencia Política y Relaciones Internacionales, 2020 (BS thesis).
  • "ASCENSO DE LA ULTRADERECHA EN LATINOAMÉRICA: ARGENTINA, BRASIL Y CHILE EN PERSPECTIVA COMPARADA" by René Guerra Molina, and Reynell Badillo Sarmiento. Revista republicana 31 (2021): 165-189.
  • "Trump și tentativele anulării alegerilor prezidențiale din 2020" by D. Pavel (2021). . Polis. Journal of Political Science, 9(1 (31)), 87-106.

I will note that I consider the deleted material especially valuable as the main cited scholarly article was published in 2020, before events of 2021 made this whole thing a hot potato. Anythingyouwant (talk) 22:36, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

The content was UNDUE and you need to gain consensus on talk.. SPECIFICO talk 22:51, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
I do have consensus because the sole solitary comment at this talk page section other than my own is your weak euphemism for WP:IDONTLIKEIT. If you can’t name a single reliable source that disagrees with what these authors have written, then there cannot be an undue weight issue. Anythingyouwant (talk) 23:05, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
You quite clearly do not have consensus because two editors, of which I was the second (revert 1, revert 2, revert 3), have reverted this addition.
I think I was pretty clear in my edit summary. The content seems undue as it is primary research, not secondary. The conclusions are drawn based on Google ngrams search, using the English 2012 and Spanish 2012 corpora, which consist of works published between 1800 and 2012 (note 2, page 19 of the PDF), and contrasting those results against the incidence of coup attempts reported by Powell and Thyne.
Accordingly, due to its nature as a primary source, we need secondary coverage of it to assess its weight. Stating that a source is undue is not the same as saying "I don't like it". UNDUE is part of the NPOV policy, and arguments citing UNDUE are policy compliant, as they are formed on the basis of how content is related to other works published in the same area. IDONTLIKEIT meanwhile is largely an opinion of the editor about the content itself, and not the contents relationship to other pieces of work.
The list of 21 citations provided will help with assessing weight and whether or not the work by Marsteintredet and Malamud represents the mainstream view in this area, though it seems odd that the journal itself only lists 6 citations of the by others. That will take time though, and it is wholly inappropriate to restore the content while that takes place. Sideswipe9th (talk) 23:36, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
Categories: