Talk:Preventative Coup of November 11

Feedback from New Page Review process
I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Reviewing; good work on the article!

Tails  Wx  13:08, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Should the title call it a coup?
Regardless of his objectives, Lott's methods were those of a traditional military coup - a sudden occupation of the capital and preemptive control of possible centers of resistance. But Wikipedia article titles should reflect the most accepted name. This article's Lusophone title doesn't call it a coup, and neither does Brazilian scholarship, which typically calls this event "contragolpe" or "golpe preventivo", accepting and emphasizing its stated legalist intentions. "Golpe de 1955", when it does appear, usually refers to the failed plans to prevent Kubitschek from taking office (e.g. page 12, page 37). The Portuguese wiki is right in avoiding a straightforward "Golpe de Estado no Brasil em 1955", which is how this English title would be called.

With Anglophone authors, there are precedents for simply calling it a coup. Thomas Skidmore describes it as a coup d'état. John W.F. Dulles mentions a "1955 coup against Luz". The Historical Dictionary of Modern Coups describes a "successful constitutional coup". The Dictionary of Contemporary Politics of South America names it as a "constitutionalist coup". On the other hand, Alfred Stepan lists the "1955 coup" alongside the 1961 coup as failed movements, so he refers to what the anti-Lott faction was doing. Another book mentions the "1955 coup d'état and the abortive coup d'état of 1961; the 1955 one wasn't presented as an "abortive" coup, so the author means Lott's movement.

With "golpe preventivo", which is an accepted usage, one could argue preventivo is just an adjective and coup d'état articles should have standardized titles, and hence this term supports the current English title. The precedents I've cited could also argue in favor of this title. And yet the confusion I've shown speaks strongly against it; the "1955 Brazilian coup d'état" is an ambiguous term, it can mean either the hypothetical anti-Kubitschek coup or the real coup carried out to prevent it. When Brazilian sources mention a "1955 coup" without adjectives, they usually mean the former. To prevent any misunderstanding, the title should make it clear this was Lott's coup. I still don't know what would be a perfect title. This question deserves multiple answers and discussion. Serraria (talk) 04:30, 16 September 2023 (UTC)


 * I agree that it's unclear what to title it. As you say there are definitely English language sources that call it a coup. The "Historical Dictionary of Modern Coups D’état" actually describes it as two distinct coups. And yeah what you say matches my understanding that Brazilian sources are reluctant to call it a coup. Is there a more ambiguous term to refer to the incident? I couldn't find good sources to support "Revolution of November 11" which is the name used in Template:Brazilian_coups. Maybe "1955 Brazilian anti-coup d'état" would be acceptable? Or maybe just "Preventative Coup of November 11"? BrokenSegue 06:01, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
 * What about "Brazilian coups d'état of November 1955"? This is what Dulles calls it and it is ambiguous which (anti) coups it refers to. I picked the current title mainly for standardization with all the other articles. In reading Article_titles I'm still unsure what is the best name. Consistency suggests the current name. And it is used in the English literature (to which I think we give some preference on English Wikipedia). BrokenSegue 06:28, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
 * The Portuguese wiki uses the ambiguous "Movimento de 11 de Novembro", but it seems there isn't a widely used English translation for this. There's also "Novembrada", but that's too vague and could refer to several unrelated events. "Brazilian coups d'état of November 1955" is an intriguing option, and almost close enough to the standardized name. Serraria (talk) 16:00, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @Serraria I think "Preventative Coup of November 11" is a better option for the article. But we must go with what most sources say. I think we don't need to find an exact name in the sources, as there might not be one, but if the term "preventive coup" or "anti/counter coup" are more used then we can make an argument for calling it "Preventative Coup of November 11". Torimem (talk) 16:12, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm going to rename it to that in a few days if nobody objects. BrokenSegue 16:47, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Is there evidence that Luz was planning on blocking Kubitschek?
The article currently just states it as an accusation but the Brazilian sources all seem pretty confident it was going to happen and justify the coup. But I can't find any actual evidence of this. I can't read Portuguese but reading the pt-wiki article through translation it doesn't seem very NPOV. BrokenSegue 16:56, 21 September 2023 (UTC)