Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5

Requested move 6 January 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: Moved to 2021 storming of the United States Capitol.

This is perhaps the best attended RfC I've ever seen, some 200 !votes after less than 12 hours. Thanks to all who participated. I understand I am closing this quite early, but given the sheer volume of comment, it is unlikely that additional input will change the situation. Furthermore, the format of this RfC has gone off the rails, and there are now multiple sections for multiple names and folks are casting votes without a common format, so it will only get harder to close from here.

There is a clear consensus that the title should not be "2021 United States Capitol protests". The alternative was less clear. "Storming" seems to have a very rough consensus by !vote count and by the sources (at this time). A great many votes here were simply "I like it". That's not how we generally do things. Thankfully folks provided a policy driven reason: WP:COMMONNAME, citing the many major reliable sources that are using "storm" as their language. An option for "riots" or "insurrection" (among others) has also been floated, but the poor structure of their additions has not made them viable alternatives to the original, COMMONNAME proposal. I also note that very few sources were floated to back up "riot", and that it seemed to be the WP:OR interpretation of events by editors, along with terms like "coup". We say what sources say, and for the moment they seem to say "storming".

This is a stopgap measure, and is not meant to be a permanent solution. Once the issue calms down, I encourage folks to tackle this again. Please wait at least a week until further renaming, so that the media can agree on a WP:COMMONNAME. I also suggest that if an RM is going to have multiple options to use things like "Option A" or "Option 1", so that it is easier to close :) CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n! 08:00, 7 January 2021 (UTC)



2021 United States Capitol protests2021 storming of the United States Capitol – The protests preceded a much more noteworthy event, which will be the focus of the bulk of this article: the storming of the Capitol by an armed mob Neutralitytalk 20:42, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

General move survey

--Neutralitytalk 20:45, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Also BBC. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 20:47, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Haaretz opinion piece As pro-Trump Extremists Converge on D.C., Will There Be ‘Bloody Civil War’ or More Bluster? Wug·a·po·des 20:54, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Support using coup or insurrection. As someone else stated, "storming" is too poetic; this is no romantic "Storming of the Bastille." This was also not simply a protest, and "2021 United States Capitol protests" is way too vague and will become outdated as soon as there is another protest at the Capitol this year, which is certain to happen. This is an article for the events of today (and the past few days for context), not a catch-all for all 2021 Capitol protests. Duey (talk) 02:08, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Support I agree with the statement that Duey made. We should call it like it is, a Coup d'état. The definition on the referenced page (as of now) is "the removal of an existing government from power, usually through violent means." The attempts to disrupt the count was an attempt to prevent Joe Biden from taking office. I see no issue with calling it a Coup d'état. --MinerRo (talk) 04:45, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Alalch Emis (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Also want to add that I wouldn't be opposed to renaming it later, as it seems clear this is more than a protest, but I think it would be better to wait a bit before moving it. Seagull123 Φ 21:52, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Indeed, while there were plenty of protestors remaining peaceful, there were many violent/destructive actors that, in my opinion, warrant the term "insurrection". LegendoftheGoldenAges85, Team  M  (talk | worse talk) 22:08, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
After looking at the article, this is clearly the focus, so riot. Esszet (talk) 01:24, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
This clearly is perfectly justified under Wikipedia policies. Des Vallee (talk) 02:24, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Mostly peaceful and yet they stormed the damn Capitol. "George Floyd protests" is used because that's the most common name, it's not Wikipedia making a judgement. Meanwhile, this event is so far typically identified as a "storming" or "insurrection". Ichthyovenator (talk) 03:20, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
I'd also consider 2020 United States Capitol breach. I don't think "riot" is the proper title. C(u)w(t)C(c) 03:33, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

ν) 05:42, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

  • accurately reflects both the legal act, and the manner in which the event took place.
  • neatly encapsulates any aftershock events which will likely follow this historic incident.
While I am in concurrence with many of the arguments from the "wait" camp, the article can be renamed more than once as the situation develops or is rebranded. Given its importance, the article should be renamed without further delay. Don4of4 [Talk] 06:43, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Move survey: riots

Albertaont, uh, Joe Biden isn't president, and regardless, him saying something does not make it so. Also, the Storming of the Bastille was an insurrection, and a much more violent one at that. 98 people were killed. Please read some history. Display name 99 (talk) 05:36, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 Comment: Something similar happened in Australia, 1996 Parliament House riot, similar things have likely happened elsewhere. Therefore riot (or riots presuming occurring in multiple locations?) seems appropriate.

Survey: riot, storming, insurrection

It's clear from the above discussion that there is consensus to move the article to a different title. The two main suggestions have been "storming" and "riots". Which of these would editors prefer? Onetwothreeip (talk) 00:42, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

More sources say "storming" than "riots" by a wide margin. Benicio2020 (talk) 00:47, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Washington Post is calling it an "assault". I think that fits well. Tomato7331 (talk) 09:32, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
This thread is false, there is no such clarity on which of the pro-move suggestions are the main ones. Insurrection is also a top contender, and perhaps some others. This thread is a pseudo-move discussion and needs to be closed. Alalch Emis
What does it mean for a thread to be "false"??? There is consensus that "protests" is not adequate (approx. ~100 supports vs ~25 oppose). Insurrection is mentioned a lot (more than "riots" from what I can see?), but "storming" seems like it pretty clearly is the main contender by a quite wide margin, so that's what I'm supporting. Ichthyovenator (talk) 00:58, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Let's give it some time. The WP:COMMONNAME will emerge over a few days, not in the early hours of news media sources hitting the newswires and web. Let's face it, the daily media news circuit naturally has an incentive to, shall we say, embellish the title of various news articles to get the clicks. In a few days, we'll have the benefit perhaps of a few historians weighing in on the matter, and looking at it from a bit more of an arm's length. N2e (talk) 01:15, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
My preference is "insurrection", and in the #Insurrection section below you'll find Senate leaders calling it that. Nixinova T C 01:29, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
"insurrection" is probably the most "correct" term; "storming" is the term that has become the de facto description of the event by WaPo, the NYTimes, and similar large news orgs. I would be fine with either, leaning toward "storming" as it best serves the goal of Wikipedia being an Encyclopedia. SpurriousCorrelation 01:40, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Any of these four terms (storming, riots, insurrection, attack) would be technically accurate. I'd recommend insurrection, which not only multiple lawmakers are referring to it as, but is also I think the most encyclopedic and least emotionally charged. --FlagFreak talk 01:57, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Time will tell us more about the term that settles, but right now in the Capitol and on news stations (see NPR) the term insurrection is being used. "To rise against a civil authority" is the definition from Merrium-Webster dictionary, whose editors have already created a special page for the term ("lookups have spiked 34,450%" the page says) [14]Comm260 ncu (talk) 02:56, 7 January 2021 (UTC)


CNN, NBC News and other networks have systematically called it a terrorist attack during the last few hours. It was called a terrorist attack by Schumer in the senate as well. I think we should also consider a title that includes that word in some form, e.g. 2021 terrorist attack on the United States Capitol. --Tataral (talk) 01:53, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

We typically don't name articles "terrorist attack". That's not a judgement on whether they're terrorist attacks or not, it's just not a good naming scheme. September 11 attacks was certainly a series of terrorist attacks, but we feel no need to include it in the name. El Al Flight 253 attack, Northwest Airlines Flight 253, 3 February 2007 Baghdad market bombing, 10 May 2010 Iraq attacks, 7 July 2005 London bombings and so on. "Terrorist attack" isn't very descriptive. /Julle (talk) 02:07, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Now that I think about it, it seems that insurrection would be more accurate than simply riots, as it describes the motive behind the autocratic sabotage. Nevertheless, I would still wait until the sources have a consensus on what to call it. FreeMediaKid! 02:17, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
@TenorTwelve: I think it matters not what reactions a word choice could incite, and "storming" somehow feels right, at least for me; stronger than "protests" but not at the level of "coup attempt", with the added benefit of specifically referring to people forcefully trespassing an institution. English-speaking historians themselves didn't think it was too soft to be applied to that prison insurrection of 1789. LionFosset (talk) 06:14, 7 January 2021 (UTC)


@TenorTwelve: I think it matters not what reactions a word choice could incite, and "storming" somehow feels right, at least for me; stronger than "protests" but not at the level of "coup attempt", with the added benefit of specifically referring to people forcefully trespassing an institution. English-speaking historians themselves didn't think it was too soft to be applied to that prison insurrection of 1789. LionFosset (talk) 06:14, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Discussion

This feels a bit too meta, but I don't see the possibility for consensus emerging when the options are so fluid. It seems the options are:

I am hesitant to suggest closing the above discussions when so many people have already !voted, but it's very difficult to discern any emerging favourites when the options are so loosely structured. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 07:04, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

This is tough. I'd be in favor of another poll with clearer options, but so many people have already commented. Also, not sure if these are the only options - I suggested Insurrection at the United States Capitol - I don't think the year should be in the title. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 07:10, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Insurrection or riots are the best to describe the events that unfolded. Football3434 (talk) 07:31, 7 January 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.

Page Title to "2021 Terrorist Attack on the United States Capitol"

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 WP:SNOW. Sceptre (talk) 20:22, 7 January 2021 (UTC)




Yesterday's (1/6/21) events clearly fit the bill of a terrorist attack. Wikipedia's first sentence on the article of Terrorism is "Terrorism is, in the broadest sense, the use of intentional violence for political or religious purposes." President Donald J. Trump of Florida incited his supporters to commit a terrorist attack during the largely ceremonial electoral college count[1]. Domestic terrorism is still terrorism.

I vote to change the title to "2021 Terrorist Attack on the United States Capitol"

Paulsprague19 (talk) 17:42, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

References

(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.

Incorrect Derrick Evans link

The article currently links to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derrick_Evans when it should in fact link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derrick_Evans_(politician) 86.177.11.183 (talk) 21:13, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Fixed, thanks. Majavah (talk!) 21:16, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Talk page archive

Archive 1 is already quite long. How do we get One Click Archiver to start an Archive 2? ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:14, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

@Terasail: Thanks for creating Archive 2. When I use OCA, content is still sent to Archive 1. ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:15, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Should be working correctly now. Majavah (talk!) 21:18, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Majavah, Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:33, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Yeah I don't use that script, I created the second archive since the first hit 150k. Just trying to reduce page size with closed discussions since it was at 300k which is just not useful. Terasail[✉] 21:18, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

I have two or three small requests

One, this incident should no longer be called a "protest" and the armed hostiles should no longer be called "protesters". Since they carried loaded firearms while breaching the Capitol with intent to assassinate senators and representatives, they forfeited the label of "protester". Please do not whitewash this serious event.

Next, the statement "DONALD TRUMP IS YOUR PRESIDENT WHEATHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT

YOUR MOM HA GOT EM ", please remove it, and please find the individual who posted it and ban him/her permanently. People with this mentality do not belong in the editorship of Wikipedia.Riffel2021 (talk) 21:30, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

COVID navbox

Resolved

Is the COVID navbox appropriate/necessary? Unless I'm overlooking, the article's prose mentions COVID once... ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:55, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

I'd say no, unless there's an argument to be made that COVID-19 was the main reason behind the police response and thus central in the development of what happened. Which I don't think is the case? /Julle (talk) 22:15, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Agreed and boldly removed. Majavah (talk!) 22:30, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:38, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 January 2021 (3)

In text below (1) delete HAD before GATHERED (this use of the pluperfect is wrong), (2) delete comma before ON

Thousands of Trump supporters had gathered in Washington, D.C., on January 5 and 6 to protest against the election results, which Trump had been falsely claiming were due to electoral fraud. Ryabovich (talk) 20:50, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

 Done TimSmit (talk) 22:35, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Short description

I changed the short description from "Storming of the Capitol Building in January 2021" to "Protests inside and around the Capitol Building in January 2021" since there is no consensus to support "storming" as of yet. Putting this in the talk page since I could not add an edit description in shortdesc helper. lovkal (talk) 21:47, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

It's pretty clear this is a storming [15][16], to name just a couple. I'll happily see what others think though. Willbb234Talk (please ((ping)) me in replies) 21:53, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
I think the majority of us agrees that this is not an ordinary protest, and a storming at minimum. However, there's an ongoing move discussion on this page above that is, as of yet, unresolved. The short description should match the article title, so until the discussion is resolved, "storming" is not warranted. --LordPeterII (talk) 22:12, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, it would be easier if this was "is this a protest, yes or no?" to which I think most would say that sources seem to indicate "no, it's something else", but is that something else a ... storming? A coup? A riot? An insurrection? That will take longer time to agree on. In the meanwhile, the description should match the article. /Julle (talk) 22:36, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
I think there's agreement that this is a protest, which includes violent protest. The question is whether that's the most appropriate, balanced title for the article. DenverCoder9 (talk) 22:56, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
In my opinion I think we should wait for the renaming discussions to end and then change the short description accordingly. lovkal (talk) 23:09, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

America First/Groypers and neo-confederates

@Saxones288: The only sentence in the Times of Israel source related to Groypers/America First is "Wednesday’s event is being touted on social media by a string of far-right extremists, from the Proud Boys to right-wing militias to Nick Fuentes, head of the white supremacist Groyper Army." This does not support that America First was a "side" in the conflict. Please stop warring it back in. GorillaWarfare (talk) 21:57, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

This is part of why I think we should scrap that whole section of the infobox. It's just going to be endless stuff like this until things settle down. Bondegezou (talk) 22:02, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Additionally, Snopes says that someone raised a Confederate flag and some folks were waving them around. It does not say that neo-confederates were a prominent group in the events today. GorillaWarfare (talk) 22:09, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
I am scrapping the 2 groups/associations. TheEpicGhosty (talk) 22:43, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Neo confederates were present, so were "QAnons" all sources describe this extensively. I am not sure if "Groypers" were present. If sources could be provided for this it would good. I think there is a difference between Groypers being present and them organizing into blocks, I mean you could most likely found an immense amount of wacky ideologies present that does not mean they were organized. Neo-Confederates and "Qs" were extensively present. Des Vallee (talk) 22:46, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support ditching the cluttered, confused, confusing lower part of the infobox. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 22:58, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Oregon, for the "Outside the District of Columbia" section

---Another Believer (Talk) 23:06, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Image downsize request.

I request for File:2020 presidential election US electoral college certificates.jpg to be downsized. This is because a bottle of Aquafina along with part of the Aquafina logo is visible within the picture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:198:103:9270:8b3:43f3:514:b6b4 (talk) 19:03, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

If there is anything copyrightable about the bottle at all, it's comfortably c:Commons:De minimis. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 19:09, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
I agree with Finnusertop. There's nothing problematic about the image. Mz7 (talk) 19:38, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
No prob w/ image. ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:44, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 January 2021

CHANGE "a mob of armed rioters stormed" to "a group of armed American insurgents committed an act of Terrorism, storming" Nojustiice2021 (talk) 23:41, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

 Not done Uncited and egregiously editorialized request. BrxBrx(talk)(please reply with ((SUBST:re|BrxBrx))) 23:47, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Edit to 5.

5th person's death. An additional fatality should be reminded, as former police person died on Jan.7.2021. Which sums it up so far as 5.Wil1andar (talk) 23:54, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Source? Mt.FijiBoiz (talk) 00:00, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Source here: https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/07/politics/capitol-police-officer-dead-after-riot/index.html
Already added in infobox. EvergreenFir (talk) 00:13, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks guys. Peace to all.Wil1andar (talk) 00:19, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Death yotal

Is it worth highlighting in the total deaths that one was a police officer e.g. Deaths: 5 (including 1 police officer) Darce98 (talk) 00:14, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Total* Darce98 (talk) 00:16, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
I agree. It should probably read something like - Protestors: 4, Police officers: 1. Mt.FijiBoiz (talk) 00:17, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
and  Done. Mt.FijiBoiz (talk) 00:20, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

A U.S. Capitol police officer has recently died during the riot

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/07/politics/capitol-police-officer-dead-after-riot/index.html XXzoonamiXX (talk) 00:02, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Someone added it to the infobox already. EvergreenFir (talk) 00:12, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Can pentagon generals send troops without a Presidential order?

Don't know if this has been covered here, but questions have arisen on TV about no presence of the US military stepping in yesterday. I'm thinking the Pentagon cannot order such action without the cooperation of the President. Am I correct? — Maile (talk) 23:22, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

@Maile: This much is stated in the article "The order to send in the National Guard, which Trump initially resisted, was approved by Vice President Pence. This bypassing of the chain of command has not been explained." - Kevo327 (talk) 23:27, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
That's not what I'm talking about, since Pence was involved in that. It's another issue. I'm talking about what if the Pentagon saw an overthrow of the government about to happen, could they act independently of the President or Vice President and send in the US Army and/or the US Marines? — Maile (talk) 23:39, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Violent Intent

WP:NOR and WP:SPS EvergreenFir (talk) 00:24, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.


see:

https://twitter.com/jsrailton/status/1347011413101998080 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thetilo (talkcontribs) 17:35, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

WP:SPS. Twitter is not a reliable source, and we don't do original research based off images. GorillaWarfare (talk) 17:37, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
I think it's worth watching for WP:RS to start reporting on this. Here's another example. https://twitter.com/AUIRASWHORE/status/1347003757440229378?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1347003757440229378%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.redditmedia.com%2Fmediaembed%2Fks5x8c%3Fresponsive%3Dtrueis_nightmode%3Dfalse I don't yet advocate for adding this to this article, but I'd not be surprised if this becomes a topic from reliable news today (if not already). Jdphenix (talk) 18:26, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
GorillaWarfare, Jdphenix: This has already been mentioned by public figures and media. For one, it was mentioned by Anthony Scaramucci here and by Seth Abramson here. This was then discussed in two articles (here and here) from Newsweek. Prinsgezinde (talk) 19:05, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Correction: It was apparently mentioned by quite a few media sources, including BBC. Prinsgezinde (talk) 19:01, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support, per WP:RS provided by Prinsgezinde.
Oppose, both the source and the editor are biased and operating with unclean hands. Trump Is a Juggernaut (talk) 22:25, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
@Trump Is a Juggernaut: Please assume good faith and avoid personal attacks. — Czello 22:27, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
@Czello: That wasn't a personal attack. I was pointing out that the above editor has a posting history that raises questions about their neutrality. Trump Is a Juggernaut (talk) 22:33, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
@Trump Is a Juggernaut: I think it's a bit rich for you to "raise questions about their neutrality" when you have your username. You said they had "unclean hands". Always remember to assume good faith about other editors: digging through their edit history and assuming they're here to inject their own view into articles isn't cricket. — Czello 22:38, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Public domain images

Any ideas on where to look first? Charles Juvon (talk) 21:00, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Flickr is usually where I go. You can also filter by CC-licensed images using Google Image Search. I doubt any photographers currently in DC have sat down to upload and license their photos yet, though. GorillaWarfare (talk) 21:02, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Historic:
BritishBurnTheCapitol-CoxMural
Charles Juvon (talk) 21:07, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
User:Victorgrigas sometimes shares helpful images/videos for current events. Pinging for possible leads? ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:22, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Pistols drawn on the Floor of Congress Charles Juvon (talk) 22:15, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I'd suggest 1.) make a keyword list of things that people might upload footage under, like: MAGA, DC, Capitol, Capital, Revolution, Protest and so forth. 2.) look for new uploads 3.) Flickr, YouTube, Vimeo, SoundCloud all have cc-licenses. This guy in particular is prolific: https://www.flickr.com/people/95413346@N00 4.) VOA is useable if its made by VOA staff (which is like 10% of the time) 5.) be careful of license laundering

Victor Grigas (talk) 23:49, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Leadership

Donald Trump should be added in the "leadership" section on the insurrection side in the infobox given that he blatantly incited the attack on Capitol and that the entire faction looks to him as their leader. Not listing him and painting this as a movement without leadership is blatantly whitewashing Trump of his part in the affair. TKSnaevarr (talk) 21:46, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

He did not tell them to attack the Capitol. He in fact eventually told them to leave the Capitol. I don't think he is really leading the protesters/rioters in any meaningful sense. Tamwin (talk) 21:48, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Agreed. I removed it as he has publicly called for peace and wants them to stop. End of. Willbb234Talk (please ((ping)) me in replies) 21:50, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Trump's tepid message to the insurrectionists doesn't change the fact that he'd spent months inciting exactly this kind of action. There is also no question that the groups involved in the insurrection look to him as a leader/figurehead -- they have directly acknowledged his orders before, notably when obeying his now-infamous "stand back and stand by" comments last year. Even if one takes his backing down as genuine, he was blatantly the inciting figure and leader of the movement at the start of the attack on Capitol. TKSnaevarr (talk) 22:25, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Do reliable sources describe him as the leader? Tamwin (talk) 22:28, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
TKSnaevarr, no. President Trump has not explicitly told anyone to storm the Capitol building, he asked them in a Tweet to stop the violence, and then in another to leave. Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 22:42, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
But isn't he essentially giving orders? In various videos he's released condemning them, he uses the first person plural ("they stole the election from us"), identifying himself with the protestors and the rioters, and then talks about "the other side". He's aware that these people see him as their leader, and rather than dismissing them, he continues trying to appeal to them, telling them gently, "you have to go home now". You could say he's taking advantage of the fact that they see him as their leader to try and order them to leave peaceably and get them to dispel the violence. But he's not exactly distancing himself from them. --121.99.126.230 (talk) 01:45, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Caused By

Since a major cause of the protest was President Trump's claims of election fraud, should that be added to the infobox in the "Caused By" section? Alienmandosaur (talk) 22:32, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Got a reliable source? GorillaWarfare (talk) 22:34, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
https://www.npr.org/sections/congress-electoral-college-tally-live-updates/2021/01/06/953616207/diehard-trump-supporters-gather-in-the-nations-capital-to-protest-election-resul "President Trump himself addressed the crowd and urged them to protest what he falsely claims was a rigged election before marching to the Capitol and pushing past security barriers there."Alienmandosaur (talk) 22:41, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
GorillaWarfare Trump's claims being the cause was quoted by CNN in its live session. Will that be considered a reliable source? 180.151.224.189 (talk) 01:32, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
I think you'll need to demonstrate that this is the mainstream view among reliable sources, which to my observation it is not. He certainly helped to incite the protest, as did quite a few other people, but I don't think it should go in the infobox. GorillaWarfare (talk) 01:37, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

DC National guard statement

https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Releases/Release/Article/2464427/statement-by-acting-secretary-miller-on-full-activation-of-dc-national-guard/ Victor Grigas (talk) 00:53, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Fix wrong link - Derrick Evans

Hey, I'm unable to edit, but there's an error in that "Derrick Evans" links to a totally unrelated British man - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derrick_Evans, as opposed to the actual participant - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derrick_Evans_(politician). Given the gravity of the situation, it might be prudent to fix this swiftly.

2A00:23C6:2723:7900:4936:77E9:A3FE:2E3D (talk) 02:23, 8 January 2021 (UTC) T

Citation 3 missing

Citation 3 is currently broken. Please fix it. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 01:59, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

 Already done. OhKayeSierra (talk) 03:28, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

New draft regarding possible impeachment and removal, or removal via 25th amendment

I made a draft at User:MarkiPoli/2021 efforts to remove Donald Trump. There isn't much there as of now so please edit it if you want and add to it. I believe an article is now necessary considering there are members of the cabinet talking about the 25th amendment in earnest, and 36 House democrats (at least) have said Trump should be removed, either via impeachment or 25th amendment. If anyone wants to make the article in mainspace after its cleaned up a little, go ahead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarkiPoli (talkcontribs) 02:33, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Until there is some reporting on this, it's just a conversation that is ongoing and it has been a subject of discussion for four years now. The guy has just 14 days left in office, this is more of a symbolic gesture. Liz Read! Talk! 03:31, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
[17], [18], [19], [20], [21] - For the moment, this looks serious. Theleekycauldron (talk) 07:01, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
CBS News has reported itMarkiPoli (talk) 03:54, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Unified definitions of 'rally', 'protest', 'coup d'état' and 'riot'

I have noticed that there are many conversations in the talk section that are debating to change the title of this page. Some of these arguments have almost devolved into the minutiae of what the words 'protest' or 'rally' even mean. In order to avoid the endless pit of argument, I propose that Wikipedia use a standardized definition. I recommend using a source that is NOT Wikitionary, since that can be freely edited and the arguing will start again.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/riot

This is my first time contributing to Wikipedia in any way, so please forgive any errors in protocol. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:6081:5300:6:9159:1518:3906:67cc (talk) 03:59, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 7 January 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: No result; we've just had a massive RM on the issue that was closed due to receiving over 200 comments in less than 18 hours, and the closer there said that any further requested move should not be discussed for another week, to allow for a breather for the article. I intend to help enforce that close, at least until after the weekend. Sceptre (talk) 00:09, 8 January 2021 (UTC)



2021 storming of the United States CapitolUnited States Capitol insurrection

1. Better meets the requirements of Wikipedia:Article titles.

2. Supported from WP:RS. See:

3. Accurate. This was "a violent uprising against an authority or government." Remember, wikipedia does not Wikipedia:CENSOR.

4. Given the connection of "storm" to QAnon, title is not Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. See storm Casprings (talk) 22:18, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

They delayed the certification of the president elect and came directly from a political rally. It was certainly political. Wikipedia:CENSOR.Casprings (talk) 22:35, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
I didn’t say it wasn’t political. Most dictionaries use insurrection as a synonym for rebellIon, revolt, uprising etc. A bunch of crazies bursting in to the Capitol and once in there, not knowing what to do other than put their feet up on Pelosi’s desk, get thrown out in a couple of hours taking the metro home doesn’t meet the dictionary definition in my view. DeCausa (talk) 22:51, 7 January 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.