Talk:2021 Sudanese coup d'état

October 24

 * Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/military-forces-arrest-senior-civilian-figures-sudan-al-hadath-tv-2021-10-25/
 * Associated Press: https://apnews.com/article/middle-east-africa-sudan-arrests-omar-al-bashir-c8d027c0a9e250fcb5a595bdc987d282
 * The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/25/sudan-coup-fears-amid-claims-military-have-arrested-senior-government-officials
 * Axios: https://www.axios.com/sudan-abdalla-hamdok-coup-house-arrest-bda88865-8574-4bdc-9ee4-16a94afa1004.html
 * BBC: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-59033142
 * Bloomberg: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-10-25/sudanese-gov-t-officials-detained-group-sees-apparent-coup
 * New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/25/world/africa/sudan-protests.html
 * Netblocks (internet outages): https://netblocks.org/reports/internet-disrupted-in-sudan-amid-reports-of-coup-attempt-Q8ov93yn
 * Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/10/25/sudan-coup-attempt-khartoum/

--Posted by Pikamander2   (Talk)  at 04:48, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Al Jazeera has been useful too: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/10/25/sudans-abdalla-hamdok-under-arrest-report Scaramouche33 (talk) 07:27, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Do any of the refs confirm whether events occurred on the 24th (Sunday) vs the 25th (Monday)? Currently the article states that events began on the 24th, but other than the protests I think the military started the coup on the 25th. - Indefensible (talk) 00:38, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 25 October 2021

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: page moved. Indefensible (talk) 16:14, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

October 2021 Sudanese coup d'état attempt → October 2021 Sudanese coup d'état – The October coup that happened in Sudan is successful, resulting the dissolution of the government and the transitional Sovereignty Council. Another option would be 2021 Sudanese coup d'état (without month) since it was the only successful coup that occured in Sudan in 2021. (NOTE: The previous page moved was conducted, so discussion about the latter (removing month or not) begun separately) 36.77.94.37 (talk) 11:06, 25 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Support 2021 Sudanese coup would be the best title IMO Scaramouche33 (talk) 11:30, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Support October 2021 Sudanese coup d'état, as it has been confirmed to be successful. Oppose 2021 Sudanese coup d'état for title, as there was an attempt last month, so the month is relevant to the title (and helps differentiate between the two). Joseph2302 (talk) 12:24, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Support Coup is clearly succesful. --Termina2232 (talk) 12:49, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * 2021 without October is better.--Panam2014 (talk) 18:38, 25 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Support what proposed. —Sundostund (talk) 13:42, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Support move to October 2021 Sudanese coup d'état - As it stands, the coup appears to have been successful. If the situation suddenly reverses, then the title can be changed back. --Posted by Pikamander2   (Talk)  at 13:47, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Support 2021 Sudanese coup d'état.--Panam2014 (talk) 14:23, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * That title is confusing as their was a coup attempt last month- yes it wasn't successful, but it's still more confusing to a casual reader than including October in the name. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:25, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily. September was coup attempt and October is a successful coup (see 1983 Upper Voltan coup d'état attempt and 1983 Upper Voltan coup d'état). Charles Essie (talk) 16:08, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Technically true, but I think that including the month would make it more explicit and less likely to be confused with the other (failed) attempt. --Posted by Pikamander2   (Talk)  at 16:44, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * The example above is massively ambiguous, and shouldn't be used as precedent for these articles. Adding the month makes it easier for someone to easily distinguish the two events. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:19, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Support speedily removing "attempt" from the title. I think it'd be best for someone to WP:SNOW remove "attempt" while discussion over removing/keeping "October" continues. <b style="font-family:Trebuchet MS"><b style="background-color:#07d;color:#FFF"> Vanilla </b><b style="background-color:#749;color:#FFF"> Wizard </b></b> 💙 21:20, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Support - there's no evidence that the coup has been successful - there appears to be massive resistance. Getting obedience from civil servants, teachers, doctors, and the general public after decades of Sudanese popular-level experience in organising civil disobedience is going to be incredibly difficult. But it was definitely a coup rather than a coup attempt, no matter whether it lasts only a day or two or a few weeks, and it hasn't failed yet. Boud (talk) 23:11, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Moved per support votes above. Discussion on removing "October" is still open. - Indefensible (talk) 23:22, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * See: Talk:October 2021 Sudanese coup d'état. - Indefensible (talk) 16:13, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Images
Can we add a few images to the article? Al Jazeera has some pics of the protests but I'm not sure if we can use them: https://www.aljazeera.com/gallery/2021/10/25/thousands-protests-as-pm-officials-detained-in-sudan Scaramouche33 (talk) 15:12, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Al Jazeera website says "© 2021 Al Jazeera Media Network", so they wouldn't be permitted on Wikipedia, unfortunately. Hopefully someone will release some images under a Creative Commons licence. <b style="color:#0033ab">Joseph</b><b style="color:#000000">2302</b> (talk) 16:27, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Elephant Trunk Revolution?
IP 195.122.250.196 has added the alternative name "Elephant Trunk Revolution" a couple of times. I don't see any reliable sources in English referring to it by that name. This seems to have come from something on es.wiki, and seems to be to just be a made-up/incorrect translation (after all, Khartoum can be translated as "elephant trunk" ). Would be good to hear what others think about this alternative name. <b style="color:#0033ab">Joseph</b><b style="color:#000000">2302</b> (talk) 15:14, 25 October 2021 (UTC)


 * If local Arab news outlets used such a name for the coup, then Al Jazeera would have at least mentioned it. So it's probably a mistranslation Scaramouche33 (talk) 16:21, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Requested move to "2021 Sudanese coup d'état"
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;">
 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: no consensus. 14 against the move as premature per WP:CRYSTAL, 5 in favor, and a few suggesting we wait. I don't want to prevent this from being revisited in a few weeks time, but it is also clear that this is essentially a consensus in favor of not yet. Revisit once 2021 has ended. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Shibboleth ink  (♔ ♕) 12:37, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

October 2021 Sudanese coup d'état → 2021 Sudanese coup d'état – Since there is another coup in September, this article should not be renamed to just "2021 Sudanese coup d'état". PS: "2021 Sudanese coup d'état" could be created as a disamb page.--Johnson.Xia (talk) 01:02, 26 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Support. The other one was a coup attempt, so it's no ambiguous, and this one is also more notable as it resulted in a change of government. A hat note can be added to link to the September attempt. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 08:30, 26 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Support The military has dissolved the government and it's unlikely they'll hand over power back to the civilian leaders. 2021 Sudanese coup would be the best title IMO Scaramouche33 (talk) 11:30, 25 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose 2021 Sudanese coup d'état for title, as there was an attempt last month, so the month is relevant to the title (and helps differentiate between the two). <b style="color:#0033ab">Joseph</b><b style="color:#000000">2302</b> (talk) 12:24, 25 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose removing October - it's too crystal-bally to speculate that this coup will last longer than a few weeks, if it even lasts a few days. So far it has not even got to 24 hours since dawn 25 Oct in the Sudanese time zone. The Sudanese had their October 1964 Revolution and their 1985 Revolution and while they've been patient with the military following their 2019 Revolution on the understanding that the military would hand over leadership midway during the transition, they haven't stopped protesting and organising over the past two years. There's no point dropping "October" now, and then having to put it back in in a month or two. We can see in 2022 whether this event becomes just the temporarily more successful out of two attempted 2021 coups or rather if the coup becomes long term with the masses of civilians being frightened into subservience. The 1991 Soviet coup d'état attempt only lasted about a week. Keeping October helps in reducing confusion with the September attempt. Boud (talk) 01:42, 26 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Support WP:SNOW MoonlightVector <sup title="Talk page" style=";position:relative;left:6q">Talk page  15:00, 26 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose - I believe that it would be best to keep the month in the title to help remove any ambiguity. --Posted by Pikamander2   (Talk)  at 15:42, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Opposing @Pikamander2, Supporting move.
 * Opposing @Joseph2302: The is article is about the "complete" and the "succeeded" attempt of the military authority. An additional information may be added later, but this article should remove the 'October' from the title.
 * Support - as mentioned above. Utkarsh555 (talk) 16:35, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Move to 2021 Sudanese coup d'état and September 2021 Sudanese coup d'état to 2021 Sudanese coup d'état attempt for consistency. Coup d'état and Coup d'état attempt are the only distinctions needed. Charles Essie (talk) 17:40, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Boud. Mgasparin (talk) 18:39, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose - I'm going to make the argument that it's WP:CRYSTAL in the current political environment to assume there won't be another coup in Sudan before the year is out. The situation is extremely fluid, best to use the more specific name for now. User:力 (power~enwiki,  π,  ν ) 18:41, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Wait until the end of the year Another coup may come before the end of the year. Heythereimaguy (talk) 18:42, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - seems evenly split right now so no consensus to move yet. Leaning more towards supporting personally though, especially if things drag into November. - Indefensible (talk) 18:44, 26 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Support one coup d'état. --Panam2014 (talk) 18:53, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * What if another one happened anytime soon? TolWol56 (talk) 23:59, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
 * If it happens this year, this article would be reverted to the current title & the new one be titled November/December 2021 Sudanese coup d'état. Jim Michael (talk) 07:23, 30 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose There is a long tradition, not only on Wikipedia but also among historians, to refer to the month and year of a coup d'etat or coup attempt. This is especially true where there was another coup or coup attempt that same year, see the October Revolution in Russia as an example.  We even use this for months that no longer exist (remember, remember, the 18th of Brumaire).
 * The disambiguation page should be for the 2021 Coup d'Etat, with links to the September and October coup pages.
 * It is possible that in the future this coup may be the only one that's remembered. If that should come to pass, then at that time it may make sense to reconsider.  It may come to pass that we have a November or December coup.  My crystal ball has broken and the warranty has long since expired, so it seems to me that we should take the most parsimonious step and have a disambiguation page with links to the September and October pages for the time being. Hyperion35 (talk) 20:05, 26 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose for now Current title is clunky and I'd support changing it if not for the similar September article. The difference between a "coup" and an "attempted coup" is mostly in the eyes of the beholder, but we could make a strong case that until more time has passed, this October event is still an "attempted coup" itself. Thadeuss (talk) 20:50, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment. On behalf of al-Burhan, we should, in principle, consider the title October 2021 Sudanese rectification of the path of transition, since according to him, there was no coup. To some extent, he may actually be right that there was no coup, in the sense that so far there's no sign of the civilian population being willing to recognise the would-be coup, and he's going to have to compromise with the civilians just as the military had to in 2019. In any case, al-Burhan's would-be title doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of gaining consensus here - he's having difficulty being taken seriously. Boud (talk) 21:17, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose for the reasons previously stated but also if ambiguity in any form can be avoided then we should do it, I cannot see the harm having the month in the title, it is not misleading in anyway and is accurate; better to be too specific than ambiguous. Abcmaxx (talk) 00:34, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Moved without consensus . Boud (talk) 05:29, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I've reverted the move. Elli (talk &#124; contribs) 05:32, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Boud (talk) 05:40, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose Too early to determine. — Mcguy15  (talk, contribs) 22:39, 28 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose We can't predict on the length of the coup d'état. It could be over by the end of the month (however unlikely) or it could resolve itself early in November. Let's avoid predictions, or implied predictions EcheveriaJ (talk) 17:50, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose Should wait until the year is over. TolWol56 (talk) 23:54, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose for now While there is no certainty on the outcome of the coup, it is too early to make a prediction. And there was a coup attempt a month earlier, which goes under the Name "September 2021 coup attempt", removing the "October" from the article will cause confusion to the timeline. Pink Saffron (talk)
 * Oppose because we have no prediction of what's to come of this coup d'état as of yet. Momoapplegirl (talk) 14:44, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment I think its best to shorten the titles as much as possible, so it could be a good idea to move the article to “2021 Sudanese coup d’état” but by that logic, we’d have to change the September attempted coup to “2021 Sudanese coup d’état attempt”. However this could cause confusion between the successful coup, and the coup attempt. Maybe it could be best to change the title of one article and keep the name of the other? I’m not sure, just throwing ideas out. <b style="border:2px solid #d11111;padding:0 9px;background:#ffffff;color:#3656c9;border-radius:6px">Jack Ryan Morris</b> Wax seal featuring the arms of Jack Ryan Morris.png (talk) 14:50, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose. While this coup d'état is definitely more noteworthy than its September counterpart (which was only just an attempt), I feel that this rename would cause more ambiguity and solve fewer problems. I'm gonna land with a NORUSH for now - it's always safer to wait and see what happens next. Liamyangll (talk to me! &#124; My contribs!) 03:13, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Support. The coup was successful. Sources report it as a coup, not a coup attempt. Vpab15 (talk) 11:29, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

<div style="padding-left: 1.6em; font-style: italic; border-top: 1px solid #a2a9b1; margin: 0.5em 0; padding-top: 0.5em">The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

NYT analysis
The New York Times reported that factors motivating the military to halt the transition to democracy included their personal risk of national or international war crimes charges and their risk of losing control of the gold trade.[25] Why are we just including the publishing of one newspaper? And I don't see why it needs a separate section, when it could be in the Events section (which in itself has way too many subheadings, in my opinion). <b style="color:#0033ab">Joseph</b><b style="color:#000000">2302</b> (talk) 15:14, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * It's a separate section because claims of what the main reasons for the coup were are different from the events of the coup. There's no restriction to NYT in terms of sources: add other sources if they also provide what they see as the key factors. Analysis of why something happened is distinct from what happened - that's why these make sense as separate sections.


 * There are subheadings because each of these is quite likely to expand a lot over the coming few days and weeks - however long the coup lasts - and because subheadings help the reader choose which aspects s/he thinks are most important. Many people will browse and not read the full article. Boud (talk) 16:43, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree with Boud, there will likely be more information in the days and months to come. The way the article is organized allows for future expansion. Jurisdicta (talk) 02:33, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Arab and Israeli intervention
We need source to check if Egypt, the UAE, and/or Israel actually intervened on the side of the military. ~EvaTheWingdale, October 27th, 2021 — Preceding unsigned comment added by EvaTheWingdale (talk • contribs) 13:08, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Egypt, Saudi, Russia, and UAE
IP users added Egypt, Saudi, Russia, and UAE as "supporting" the coup using sources. None of these sources explicitly state that Egypt, Saudi, Russia, or UAE support the coup. The sources are used as base for analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to reach or imply a conclusion not stated by the sources, which is a form of WP:OR and should be removed. None of these countries put statements or have been concluded by multiple RS that they support the coup WP:EXCEPTIONAL. Gorebath (talk) 01:33, 29 October 2021 (UTC)


 * I agree. It can't be concluded that Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE have had an active role so as to constitute them as strictly supportive of the coup. They do have strong military ties but it's incorrect to assume that they provided support for the coup. Russia along Saudi Arabia and the UAE has provided financial aid to Sudan's sovereign council as stated in the citation but that's still irrelevant. I've added their official response to the relevant section and removed them from the "Belligerents" field. Amaxs (talk) 02:31, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

I agree too. It is not proved and furthermore no concrete indication is given. Sarthakdangol (talk) 10:08, 29 October 2021 (UTC)


 * As per the analysis section, al-Burhan is generally seen as being supported by Egypt and Hemetti is seen as supported by the UAE + Saudi Arabia. But we don't have any sources talking of direct support for the coup itself. Boud (talk) 21:59, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Euphemism of 'fragile democracy' for carrying out genocide
If we are going to quote the EACC's point-of-view of support for the federal Ethiopian government that is currently responsible for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide, including sexual violence used as a weapon of war, then we cannot use the EACC's euphemisms unless we quote them directly, using quotation marks. A descriptive summary requires summarising the substance of the statement, and the substance is that EACC refers to negotiations (refused multiple times by the federal Ethiopian government) as "surrender", while in the Sudanese case, the transitionary arrangements prior to 25 October 2021 and still recognised by the US, Europe and UN are the result of long and difficult negotiations, with no use of win-lose terminology such as "surrender".

We can improve this by iterative improvements, but please preserve the proper archived reference. Boud (talk) 10:14, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

The Wikipedia article ten stages of genocide is good background to the Ethiopian situation, and close to irrelevant to the current Sudanese situation (but relevant to the past situation of Sudan). We don't want Wikipedia to contribute to stage 10 for Ethiopia, the genocide denial stage, by using a euphemism. We can quote an organisation that contributes to stage 10 if we attribute it correctly. Boud (talk) 10:32, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Rectification of numbers of protesters on 30 October
I have just rectified the numbers of protesters on 30 October as reported in sources. The earlier text saying "between two hundred thousand and two million" is not justified according to the sources in The Guardian or Mada Masr. - Given that most likely nobody in Sudan has the capacity to count and total the numbers of protesters all over the country, the formulation by Radio Dabanga "unprecedented numbers" seems to me closer to reality and more reliable than the millions mentioned by Mada Masr. Munfarid1 (talk) 09:14, 2 November 2021 (UTC)


 * I don't see what prevents people in Sudan from having the statistical ability to estimate crowd numbers and the arithmetical ability to add up numbers from cities and towns around Sudan. The usual Wikipedia convention is to interpret a plural as a minimum of two, and ignore the possibility of greater numbers, since there's no constraint. So Radio Dabanga's "hundreds of thousands" is 200,000 and Mada Masr's "millions" is 2,000,000. So "between two hundred thousand and two million" is well justified by the sources. The problem with "unprecedented" is that it's subjective: it can't be known that the number is unprecedented if the number isn't known. Boud (talk) 22:23, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Copyvio link
See Copyright problems/2021 November 4 for a copyright violation problem for a big part of the international reactions section. Boud (talk) 18:38, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

2022 events
This event does not seem to be settled, and the article should either be extended or a new article created for the more recent events. - Indefensible (talk) 01:22, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * In these situations, should the article name be changed again? IMO, The coup was only happened in 2021 and not continued into 2022. 125.167.57.8 (talk) 01:51, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Supporting Countries
It is not encyclopedic practice to list “supporting countries” in the article head as countries for which the coup is analyzed to be in their interest. For most of the listed countries, there is no cited evidence that they supported the coup (I’m not saying they didn’t, but you wouldn’t know it). For example, Israel is listed as supporting the coup. But the cited article is a media speculation that the coup could be beneficial to Israel. Similar for the Arab listed countries. Supporting a side in battle requires public statements at minimum, and more commonly some form of material aid. As it stands this is disgraceful and was clearly written with anti-Sunni/Israel interests, which isn’t in itself bad except it’s so clearly not encyclopedic. 130.132.173.166 (talk) 11:32, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 5 May 2023
<div class="boilerplate mw-archivedtalk" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;">
 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not Moved per no consensus + the request was created by a confirmed sock (non-admin closure) >>> Extorc . talk  20:25, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

2021 Sudan coup d'état → 2021 Sudanese coup d’etat – It doesn’t seem gramatically correct. I mean, it’s like saying “America Civil War”, “Syria Civil War”, “Romania Revolution”, etc. WikiManUser21 (talk) 16:46, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Doesn't seem any worse than "Iraq War".  See noun adjunct, nouns can be adjectives sometimes in English.  SnowFire (talk) 04:42, 7 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Support per WP:CONSISTENT. Multiple articles use this style of title like other sudanese coup articles, February 1992 Venezuelan coup d'état attempt, 2008 Mauritanian coup d'état, 2013 Egyptian coup d'état, etc. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:43, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

<div style="padding-left: 1.6em; font-style: italic; border-top: 1px solid #a2a9b1; margin: 0.5em 0; padding-top: 0.5em">The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Note this request was made by a ✅ sock account.-- Ponyo bons mots 22:23, 10 May 2023 (UTC)