Talk:1954 Guatemalan coup d'état/Archive 4

sources used in the article
Not really surprising, this article is mainly based on only two books, Piero Gleijeses (1991) and Immerman, Richard H. (1982), the first one relying partly on the second one. Gabel1960 (talk) 02:40, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Hardly; it makes heavy use of many other sources. Gleijeses and Immerman happen to be the most detailed scholarly works; the other sources do not contradict them, they just do not go as deep, and so have been used less often. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:49, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * "of many other sources": You do not even cite those, but only Gleijeses and Immerman. "The other sources to not contradict them". There is enough contradiciton as to the influence of the communists on Arbenz. "They do not go as deep": One weakness of Glejeses is his disregard of economic interests and the close connections between United Fruit and key US foreign policy figures.Gabel1960 (talk) 04:41, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
 * "You do not even cite those" is nonsensical. If you want to be taken seriously, please don't use unnecessary hyperbole. If you would like to change specific pieces of content, please bring sources supporting your view to the talk page. Also, please be careful to read and cite those sources accurately; your comments above are playing fast and loose with the source material. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:07, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Who was deposed on the 20th of October 1954?
When the revolution started on the 20th of October, it led to the overtrhrow of Federico Ponce Vaides, Ubico had stepped down already. The Spanish WP-article respects this historic fact. The English article contradicts itself by naming Ubico first, and later mentioning Vaides. The 20th of October marks the beginning of the Revolution, that's why it is the national holiday in Guatemala. Kind regards, Gabel1960 (talk) 02:02, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * There is no contradiction. The overthrow of Ubico is described by the sources as being the more important event; the overthrow of Ponce Vaides is, relatively speaking, a footnote, and doesn't merit mention in the lead of this article. If you think it's implying that the GR began with Ubico's overthrow, I'm happy to discuss adjusting the wording further. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:54, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree that there is no contradiction. The article as currently written says, "The Guatemalan Revolution began in 1944, after a popular uprising toppled the military dictatorship of Jorge Ubico." And yes, the Revolution happened after that popular uprising. Why do sources say it started with the toppling of Vaides and not Ubico? I am not sure. Vaides is relatively unknown in Guatemala so it is not clear to me. But it is likely that Vaides is seen as just a figurehead and Ubico, the real power behind the throne, was toppled for real this time (as a side note, why the Castillo regime wasn't toppled as well by the population -not futilely killed- is a mystery to me). Thinker78 (talk) 23:56, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I think those are relevant considerations, but it does not reflect the use of the term in scientific research, in the understanding by Guatemaltecans, and it does not make much sense coming from a reasonable interpretation of facts to change the actual chronological order of facts. Kramer, and this as as history is seen in Guatemala today, sees a prehistory of June, the recolution in October, and the aftermath, the 10 years of spring. This makes sense. Using the word revolution uniting three different meanings (stepping back of Ubico, toppling of Vaides, and the decade of social reforms), is not really helpful.Gabel1960 (talk) 03:20, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
 * It's not using it for three things, nor is the chronology out of order. The Guatemalan Revolution is described by scholarly sources as the ten-year period between Ponce Vaides's overthrow and Arbenz's overthrow. See WP:COMMONNAME for further information; popular usage isn't particularly relevant to us, scholarly usage is. Vanamonde (Talk) 03:44, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Also, the two sources of yours that I could access don't support your point at all. They refer to "the revolution of 1944" and to the "October revolution". Not to the "Guatemalan Revolution". There was certainly a revolution (or two, depending on who is counting) in 1944; the October Revolution was what overthrew Ponce Vaides. Those terms are quite distinct from "Guatemalan Revolution" as used in English sources. Vanamonde (Talk) 03:47, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Are we looking for the word "Deposed"? Dispose is what we do to garbage.Longinus876 (talk) 17:57, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Where is the word "disposed" used in the article? Vanamonde (Talk) 21:56, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Operation PBHistory
PBHistory has a whole article, and a section in this article, dedicated to it. We should not add a lot of detail about it to the lead, when it's not what this article was about. Furthermore; PBHistory was explicitly described by historians as an attempt to document Soviet influence, which is why it is described as a "failure". The communist documents are really quite irrelevant to that description. Vanamonde (Talk) 07:11, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Additions from Jacobsen 2019
May I ask you to be a little more circumspect in your additions? I can see that you have got hold of a new source which may well be useful to this article, but it isn't enough to just add material wherever you can; it needs to be properly integrated into the existing content, and also needs to be relevant. This is a featured article, and has been through intensive peer review; as such, I would strongly encourage you to discuss proposed changes here first. Also, on some of the finer details of the coup, please keep in mind that a source such as Jacobsen, who discusses a very broad topic, may be less precise than the several sources specifically covering this coup. Vanamonde (Talk) 19:39, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , Please make an effort to follow the source formatting used in the rest of the article; it's really not complicated. All you have to do is use Vanamonde (Talk) 20:37, 2 December 2019 (UTC)