This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Latest comment: 3 years ago325 comments248 people in discussion
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 :) CaptainEekEdits Ho Cap'n!⚓08:00, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.
Wait to see what RS call it, say, tomorrow. Atm, I'm seeing "protests", not so much "storming". History is happening in real time and we should take a breath. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 20:44, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose: this gives the conspiracy theorists involved undue credit. Nothing has been "stormed". Protests have led to some Trump supporters entering the Capitol but they are not going to "take" it. — Bilorv (talk) 20:47, 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)
Comment. What Biden called it is completely irrelevant (I say this as a Biden voter). We go by reliable sources. Biden is not a reliable source. Tamwin (talk) 21:18, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose On grounds that it is currently happening. Wait for the end of the week, when media coverage is less sensationalized. When things cool off it will be easier to see what really happened. Mulstev (talk) 21:20, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support given the fact they stormed the Capitol is surely going to be one of the most notable things about it unless something even bigger happens. "Protests" is too vague, I'm sure there's protests near the Capitol all the time. —ajf (talk) 21:21, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support. This seems to be the best description of the situation for now, although I suspect this will need reevaluation over the coming days. Mz7 (talk) 21:23, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support Stronger language seems to be necessary for what is going on. Still think this should be described as a coup attempt, but a Storming would also be an accurate description.District9123 (talk) 21:24, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support Particularly now that the article has been posted in the main page. Content regarding previous protests, or those taking in other states, can be merged or split into other articles. --NoonIcarus (talk) 21:26, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support on clerical reasoning -- the major media outlets seem to have converged on the this phrasing, and will likely reflect the term people are looking for when searching for information. SpurriousCorrelation21:27, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support This is more than a "protest", stronger language is necessary: something like "insurrection" or "riot", I think, would be appropriate. GyozaDumpling (talk) 21:29, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose An event done by a couple of dozen people is not comparable to the thousands of protestors. It's an important part that needs to be included but should not be the main focus. -AndrewRG10 (talk) 21:34, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
I don't know what feed you were watching but there were literally hundreds of people that went inside the Capitol, and thousands more that breached the security perimeter outside. Benicio2020 (talk) 00:42, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose with alternative. This should be moved to 2021 United States Capitol Insurrection. As someone has already mentioned, the definition of insurrection much better fits what is taking place here. Whichever term Biden had used doesn't really have any bearing on this but that is helpful to know. I similarly oppose the term "storming", citing WP:NPOV; the word isn't supposed to be used here because not all of the protestors were also rioters. Compare the article on the Storming of the Bastille as someone stated above; everyone there was prepared for violence, while many, though not all decided to keep it peaceful at the Capitol. LegendoftheGoldenAges85, Team M (talk | worse talk) 21:35, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support move to 2021 United States Capitol Insurrection definition of insurrection: "an organized attempt by a group of people to defeat their government and take control of their country, usually by violence". * Oppose "storming"; this word does not represent the full scope of the event, and whether Capitol was physically stormed in full sense of that word is questionable from my perspective. Also, as I'm typing this, Biden called it an insurrection. Alalch Emis (talk) 21:14, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
CNBC ("POLITICS National Guard will head to the Capitol to tamp down pro-Trump insurrection").
Business Insider ("Biden calls violent pro-Trump siege on US Capital an 'insurrection'").
Unlike what some say, some reliable sources have called it insurrection. These sources bear much more weight than sources containing the verb "storm" (and not the noun "storming") for the purposes of this discussion. This is what the media that is actually making a call on terminology predominantly going with, it's increasingly becoming clear. The media just saying "storm" in the headline has not yet made that call and relying on that to change the title to "storming" is premature. I can keep adding to the list of sources.
Facts of the event meet the definition of an insurrection: a group was present at an organized event (the protest which was organized), a radical element of that organized group which acted in unity with the whole of the group (the protesters who didn't enter but exerted pressure on the authorities with their presence, and they knew that Capitol would be breached), this radical element attempted to disrupt the government in a sensitive moment by severing constitutional continuity which "defeats" the government on an existential level, in order for the political faction they associate with to unlawfully remain in power when it would have lost power, and violence was used to this effect. And on top of it there were guns, and a woman was killed.
(edit conflict) Support Or even call it Insurrection as the news did. By definition it wasn’t a protest because their intent was to infiltrate the building and disrupt the constitutional process. Trillfendi (talk) 21:40, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Strong Oppose This is an attempted coup. This is an insurrection. Call it what it is. I understand waiting a few days to finalize an answer, however do not romanticize this. Jonmaxras (talk) 21:42, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose (for at least the next few hours) – overly headlineish and doesn't reflect the content of the article, which also covers events leading up to the people entering the Capitol. Also oppose the various other alternatives proposed, for various reasons, with the same caveat. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 21:43, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Wait for now - currently ongoing, and the current title can serve well for the next few days (or hours?) until we can see what more RS's call it. Seagull123 Φ 21:49, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
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)
Oppose (at the moment). Let's wait a couple of days at least for any name change. The events are still in early development and the current title covers them well anyway. We still don't know where this will go from here. Maybe protests continue and the storming is only a facet of them, maybe violence scales up, maybe... we'll see. --MarioGom (talk) 21:56, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Comment: And now protesters stormed the Governor residence. 2021 storming of the United States Capitol is just not sufficiently descriptive of all the events going on during the protests. Also, for those arguing for the move that this is not a protest because they stormed the Capitol, I'd like to remind that Wikipedia (and reliable sources) routinely describe similar events as protests. --MarioGom (talk) 23:28, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose: The situation is still moving too quickly to decide what to call it. This is particularly true if it continues to include (as I think it should) the section on related events outside DC, and probably also material the attempted bombing(s), which I imagine should all be treated in one article. - Astrophobe (talk) 21:56, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support: The actions have gone way beyond "protest" criteria. They ran towards a building, broke windows, climbed in, and sent politicians running, all while armed. That is literally a storming.
Oppose, per GorillaWarfare. "Protest" is probably going to be inadequate, but waiting a little bit to see what terminology reliable sources end up using sounds like the best solution. (Risking, of course, that we to some degree might unwittingly end up influencing that to some small degree. But I see no way around that.) /Julle (talk) 22:17, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support, this has ceased to be a protest and does not deserve to be referred to as such. Keeping the title the way it currently is would be disingenuous to readers. Zelkia1101 (talk) 22:24, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
And Comment To everyone calling it an "insurrection" or something similar: they don't seem to be well-armed, so if you do want to call it that, it's quite a poor attempt. Esszet (talk) 22:20, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Comment-reply that's too high of a standard. There was violence, that's the bar that needs to be met, not that the group was armed, least of all well-armed. The definition of insurrection: "an organized attempt by a group of people to defeat their government and take control of their country, usually by violence". That being said, some in the group were armed.
Reply No, that bar is too low, a bunch of people breaking into the Capitol and throwing rocks and things is not a serious attempt to overthrow the government. If there were firefights with police, alright, but this is a poor attempt at an insurrection at best. Esszet (talk) 23:24, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support can always rename it again later if the need arises. "Protests" were people waving sings outside; clearly the main focus of this article goes way beyond that. Media is referring to it this way too. Benicio2020 (talk) 22:28, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Using the verb storm and it's gerund by the media does not mean that they qualify the event substantively as "storming". BBC headlines do not use the verb storming as a noun, nor do most other headlines. Noun =/= verb.
Support At this time, the storming is the most notable event. If the violence spreads beyond the capitol building, I'd want to rename it a riot or split into multiple articles. --Furbybrain (talk) 22:40, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Wait The main focus was the storming of the Capitol building however I think protests is a more descriptive term. I would be open to one which takes into account both storming and protests.Des Vallee (talk) 22:42, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Strong support Clearly a descriptive name, it appears the entire focus is based around the taking of Capitol Hill, therefor we should entitle it as such. Des Vallee (talk) 00:34, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Strongly oppose storming as both too emotive and not conclusive enough. While storming may be used to describe a part of the events, the total of the events are better described as riot, unrest or protests. I would support "riot".Onetwothreeip (talk) 22:48, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support "Protests" may describe some of what happened today, but when people invade the Capitol building with weapons, that is NOT a protest. That's an invasion. (At least one person has been killed.) "Attempted coup" or "riot" would be appropriate, but definitely not "protests". Brettalan (talk) 22:57, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose Calling it "2021 storming of the United States Capitol" is just stupid, it sounds like something that would be on an TV Movie of the Week, I would like to see it stay 2021 United States Capitol Protests. YborCityJohn (talk) 23:01, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support Individuals stormed the Capitol and occupied it, and this is the most notable part of the event. "Storming" is the most accurate description of what the individuals involved did. --Aabicus (talk) 23:08, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support We seem to have dueling requests to move this page. NPR guidance is to call this an "insurrection". We should follow that. They stormed the Capitol. This is not a "protest". – Muboshgu (talk) 23:10, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support, as others have said, storming is an accurate description and the most significant aspect of the event. "Protest" doesn't accurately communicate the scope of what happened. Sectori (talk) 23:11, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support. To call it a mere "protest" is at odds with the facts. People can protest without violence. That was not the case here. Kablammo (talk) 23:13, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support. The current title, "protests", is grossly misleading. It's notable for being an attack on the capitol building, widely described as domestic terrorism or riots, not for being "protests" (which occur on a daily basis in DC). I would support "2021 attack on the United States Capitol" or "2021 Unites States Capitol terrorist attack" or similar wording as well. --Tataral (talk) 23:15, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Wait I think we should wait before jumping to conclusions. We did not move George Floyd protests to George Floyd riots, because of a lack of reliable sources calling them riots. We should wait until the answer is definitive. I might change my opinion when the answer Is more definitive. Scorpions13256 (talk) 23:15, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support the "riots" or "storming" formulation or "coup attempt". On the matter of "insurrection": Calling it the "Capitol insurrection" implies, by metonymy, that Congress rebelled against the legitimate government; in that case I'd much rather go with 2021 Capitol Hill insurrection. Sceptre (talk) 23:16, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Wait - This event is still ongoing. Protest is obviously no longer the correct word, but I do not believe "storming" is a correct term either. "Storming" suggests that they successfully captured the Capitol, such as Storming of the Bastille; it has been confirmed that the National Guard was able to take back the Capitol. I believe there is a better word choice. I also believe that there may be other events that develop from this. NDfan173 (talk) 23:18, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support, the aggression is the by far most significant and reported aspect of the event. Additionally, there is no shortage of sources calling i a "riot" – I've seen the exact use of "storming" in many of the sources linked above as well. The Floyd protests are uncomprable did not involve a significant occupancy of a major federal building in the US's capital. Aza24 (talk) 23:20, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support I mean perhaps we could wait a bit longer, but I fear as "protests" is an incredibly misrepresentation term for the scope of the event. I mean realistically this is the first time the Capitol building was breached since the British did in the War of 1812. Maybe riots could work too, but "protests" is strictly a euphemism in this case. - 18:24, 6 January 2021 (EST)
Oppose "storming", propose 2021 United States Capitol attack or 2021 United States Capitol assault. Storming is an euphemism here. If this had happened in Africa or South America, we might be talking about a coup or a putsch. Case it point: the storming of the Venezuela legislature in 2017 resulted in injuries to staff and legislators, and it is called 2017 Venezuelan National Assembly attack. As we speak, we have at least 1 - perhaps 2 - deaths related to the attack on the Capitol. Assault or attack seem appropriate here. Beisbol (talk) 23:50, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
A person was shot and killed at the US Capitol, this is a bit more than being rowdy in my opinion. In Venezuela, protesters/rioters managed to get their hands on legislators, while at the Capitol people managed to evacuate and escape the mob. At the very least, it was an assault. Beisbol (talk) 03:19, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support, obviously. "Storming" is more widely used in reliable sources and puts the attention on the actually notable part of what happened. Ichthyovenator (talk) 23:55, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support, "protest" is relatively vague, most news articles describe it as storming or rioting to differentiate this event from other events. Catiline52 (talk) 23:57, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support. More descriptive. Sticks to what RS say. If RS begin to use harsher language, then the name can be changed again at a later point. What is clear is that simply saying "protests" is unacceptable. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 23:59, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support either "storming" or "riots"; sources at their mildest refer to the event as both and seem to be in agreement that this is long past a rally or protest. NekoKatsun (nyaa) 00:03, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose the word feels a little dramatic. GorillaWarfare put it well. I would support protests or riot or whatever we're calling rowdy protesters these days, but I think it is probably wise to wait a bit. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 00:11, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose Recentism -- Too soon on all grounds. On true definition, Insurrection fits the bill, as this is an attempt to overthrow and object to the election results. OfficerManatee (talk) 00:16, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support I support the move,but i prefer we go with the news sources and move it to 2021 U.S. Capitol Insurrection.Alhanuty (talk) 00:28, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support any move, and suggest speedy close (can always relitigate later) as "protests" is clearly no longer accurate. Lightly prefer nom's "2021 storming of the United States Capitol" title but the suggested "riots" variant is still better than the current "protests." SnowFire (talk) 00:31, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support. It's at the core of the events and overshadows the rest. To those who say wait, I say that I do not mind giving it a second look later. gidonb (talk) 00:34, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support. Every news source I have read has reported that the Trump supporters have entered the Capitol building by force. JIP | Talk00:47, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Iteration of 2021 United States Capitol insurrection – Insurrection at the United States Capitol; this is an unprecedented event, no need for a year (see: Gunfight at the O.K. Corral), and "Insurrection at" construction is a much nicer way to put it than "X insurrection"; some headlines: TV News Scrambles to Cover Insurrection at US Capitol, George W. Bush slams pro-Trump 'insurrection' at US Capitol
On second thought, Insurrection at the United States Capitol is actually much better. Not sure who left the comment above me, but I agree with their reasoning. This is the only time this has ever happened. Still, I support the suggested title over the current one. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 00:59, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose Let's give it a few hours and see how the WP:COMMONNAME settles. Also, likely want to stay away from non-neutral descriptions, especially in the early days before the historians weigh in. N2e (talk) 01:09, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Strong Oppose "Storming" is not neutral language. When BLM anarchists burned down cities they were called "protests" by wikipedia. When Trump supporters breach the security check, you try to call it storming. Left-wing, biased wikipedia back at it again. Any semblance of impartiality is gone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.36.208.45 (talk) 01:07, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
The BLM "anarchists" want black people to be treated as human beings. These Trump supporters are violently trying to overthrow a legally elected presidency. There is quite a difference here, dear far-right pro-Trump zealot. JIP | Talk01:42, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support per nom. The framing of this as a 'protest' is very disingenuous, but that's because this article was made way before the 'storming.' SWinxy (talk) 01:13, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support This was not a simple protest. Armed insurrectionists stormed the US Capitol building while the US Senate and US House of Representatives were holding a joint session of Congress to ratify the electoral vote from the 2020 presidential election. They vandalized the US Capitol building, fired shots into the Senate chamber, and required a mobilization of National Guardsmen and police from MULTIPLE different states, as well as US federal agencies. If you don't want to call this a coup attempt, fine. But to call it anything less than a storming of the US Capitol is simply wrong and anybody who feels like this was a simple protest is a Trump apologist. Storming isn't neutral language, and this was not a neutral act. Domestic terrorists charged a federal building with US lawmakers inside. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brobbins847 (talk • contribs) 01:14, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose wording of "2021 storming of the United States Capitol" and oppose moving the article right now. Let's wait a bit to see what the media calls it over the next few days. Format should be "2021 United States Capitol ___" and I'm leaning towards using the word "insurrection" in there. NixinovaTC01:26, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support (sort of) I see that many do not want the term 'protest' used, and I am in agreement with that. Usually when this sort of event occurs, the term 'riot' is used and that is the term that I would prefer for consistency's sake. However, I wouldn't mind if a term other than 'riot' becomes chosen, such as the terms 'inserrection' or 'storming' should consensus choose one of those. -boldblazer (talk) 01:38, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose Some elements of the mostly peaceful protest entered the Congress causing disruption—nothing different from the norm of the last months, but as soon as realized they weren't socialists it surely became a sediction. Please avoid "coup", "terrorism", "insurrection", we're not a partisan newspaper. --Foghe (talk) 01:39, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support (somewhat) This event was clearly not a protest, and after hearing Congressional leaders including the Vice President call it an insurrection, as well as almost all major networks, it's clear that the title should be changed to Insurrection at the United States Capitol. The 2021 isn't needed, no source is calling it "the 2021 Insurrection at the United States Capitol". Foxterria (talk)
Wait I think that we should wait a day or two and see what the media comes up with, but the current title is fine for now. However, the use of the word riot in the article is inaccurate. "Riot," as defined by Oxford Languages, is "a violent disturbance of the peace by a crowd." The majority of the protesters, minus the ones who stormed the Capitol, were peaceful, and anyone who watched the live feed today would agree with me. To call them all rioters is an act of bias against them. Springfield2020 (talk) 01:50, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support - "Storming" is used by major media outlets (CNN [8], Fox [9], NY Times [10], Washington Post [11], Wall Street Journal [12]). The protests beforehand are of questionable notability, but the storming of the U.S. Capitol is covered internationally. It's affecting Senate votes that are happening at this very moment. I think it's clear that "storming" is a neutral and widely publicized account of what happened. --Elephanthunter (talk) 01:58, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Strongly Oppose,Violates Wikipedia's neutral language policy to call it "storming." When BLM riots resulted in the death of police (david dorn), fiery destruction of cities, and looting of small businesses, wikipedia simply called it "protests." But when trump supporters get past security and pose for selfies in Pelosi's office Wikipedia has the chutzpah to call it "storming." Sad.
Strongly Support, this clearly has gone far beyond mere "protests". Wikipedia neutrality doesn't mean we should mince words or speak euphemestically. ThirdDolphin (talk) 02:05, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support While I'd prefer insurrection or coup, this is better than the current title. I also think that if we go with storming we need to include the year, as the Capitol was stormed by the British Army during the War of 1812. (As it was a foreign army, it was not an insurrection so it's not a problem if we go with that title.) Smartyllama (talk) 02:11, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support But would prefer using the term riot. To me that is stronger than "protest" (and more accurate) but more neutral than "insurrection" or "attack" or "storming." While there are certainly valid arguments for using those stronger terms, to my riot captures the violent nature of the event without passing judgement. —Schistocyte(talk)02:29, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose: While some pro-Trump protesters entered the Capitol building, they didn't manage to hold it for a very long time. The event was a part of the 2021 protests that have taken place outside the Capitol, so am against the renaming proposal. Fernsong (talk) 02:32, 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)
Support: It's being constantly referred to as a storming by multiple major outlets, because it literally was one, with many Trump supporters clearly making it into the Capitol building to cause violence and disarray. PlanetDeadwing (talk) 02:37, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support - I would prefer "storming" since almost all news outlets are referring to it as such, and would probably be ingrained into the public memory (and history) as a "storming" more than anything else. Spykryo (talk) 02:40, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Soft support: I think it would good to separate the protests and the storming of the building which are two different (although strongly connected) things. -Xbony2 (talk) 02:43, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support move. "Storming" works, in parallel to the very similar event Storming of the Legislative Council Complex. "Riot" is more accurate than "protests", though riots are usually more distributed geographically. "Insurrection" is also applicable, preferred to "protests" and supported by sources. -- Beland (talk) 02:43, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support - I support the rename as requested. I'd also support 2021 United States Capitol incident. The current title is inadequate. C(u)w(t)C(c)02:58, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support. Reliable sources are referring to the mass as a "mob" + the LA and New York Times explicitly stated they would not refer to the group as protestors. "Storming" is a suitable word as it accurately mirrors notable sources referring to it as such and isn't as strong/inciting as other terminology, such as "insurrection", etc.--Bettydaisies (talk) 03:24, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support, this is not a protest. Not only do many media, but also most Senate call it as a insurrection because all of them consider that those Pro-Trumps actions were disrupting value of democracy. It is also not a peaceful protest because there was the dead due to this tragedy, and because Electoral vote count was stopped by those pro-Trumps. -- Wendylove (talk) 03:29, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support: Protests don't include mobs of crazies breaking into the United States Capitol building. Call it what it is. It was a riot. Sad for democracy. Pennsylvania2 (talk) 04:46, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support: to "Storming of the US Capitol" or similar title. This was no ordinary protest. It was the first time the Capitol was breached since the War of 1812. Yekshemesh (talk) 05:00, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose: The trespassing into the Capitol was a brief part of several days of protests and several hours of riots. Either create a new article for the insurrection part alone and keep the title as is, or keep the title and refer to riots/instructions in subsections. Sinsoto (talk) 05:18, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support. Given what took place, I think "protests" is at best an understatement, and in the most critical lens, is a whitewashing of the horrific acts that took place and their impact going forward. As for the best word to use, I lean against "storming"; I would lean towards "riots" or "insurrection". From the media I have personally consumed, "insurrection" is the word I have heard the most from journalists and politicians. –Erakura(talk)05:31, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support storming, with riot as second choice. Storming seems to be widely used today, and precisely describes what happens. Oppose "insurrection" for now. power~enwiki (π,
Oppose/Comment: Should be "2021 United States coup d'etat attempt".
Support. This was far more significant than a protest, this will be regarded as a major historic event. “Insurrection” has been used to describe this event by several lawmakers in subsequent remarks made at the Capitol. I think “storming” is the most accurate, non-political description based upon similar events that have occurred in the past, e.g. Storming of the Bastille. AChakra California (talk) 05:51, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Strong SUPPORT. This was an unprecedented and huge event in the course of the nation's history. The main event was the insurrection. The protests just led up to it. Like most major media organizations, we must call it what it is. IbexNu (talk) 06:06, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Wait We shouldn't resort to labeling what could, and will, someday be referred to as a potential major historical event. That is not our job, that is more or less the media. When a term starts getting thrown around a fair lot, we can and will discuss again. Bigtime_Boy (talk) 06:08, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Strong oppose. This is an over-the-top designation and we need to wait until there is more information. The mention on the main page is irrelevant, and in any case it was over-hasty. We don't know how many people entered the building, how they were armed, or what sort of resistance they encountered. "Stormed" makes it sound like an elite military operation. StAnselm (talk) 06:28, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Comment: Storming feels informal - "insurrection", "riot", or any other word to indicate violent protest. Stormed doesn't hit the mark. But by all means, WP:NPOV doesn't mean we can't call this what it is. Theleekycauldron (talk) 06:38, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
I Support 'Insurrection and Storming' as it:
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)
Strong oppose - riot. 'Insurrection' and 'storming' imply some justified, organised operation. This was a riot. Jw2036 (talk) 06:52, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose as premature. I may change my !vote later but, given the situation remains fluid, and we don't know what all future subjects this article may come to encompass, the proposed name change may be too limiting. Chetsford (talk) 06:37, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support: what happened is way beyond anything resembling a "protest". Other alternative wording could include "riot" or "insurrection"; but "storming" still is the most adequate way to decribe what just took place. Azurfrog (talk) 07:08, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support: the current word "protest" is far too vague and weak. storming, insurrection, or coup attempt, yes. Protest just doesn't sufficiently cover what happened. --Zippy (talk) 07:32, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
I also support this. Also, from what I have seen on streams the majority of protestors have not entered the Capitol building. Mårtensås (talk) 20:50, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support the above. "2021 storming of the United States Capitol" is a very un-wiki-like title to use; a riot is a riot, and should be known as such. (I do agree broadly that "protests" is an insufficient and inaccurate description for this incident.) RexSueciae (talk) 22:41, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support: this started as a protest but turned into a riot, and the riot will be more notable than the protest. --Slashme (talk) 23:21, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support the above. This would account both for the forceful entry, which is more of a source of notability than merely the protests, and the naming conventions on enWP. Assem Khidhr (talk) 23:36, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose any change for the next 4 hours. It's certain these are protests. It's pretty clear the title will be changed once the dust settles, but nothing else seems clear now. power~enwiki (π, ν) 20:50, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
I don't know if "stormed" is the right word, but I do know that this was way beyond "protests" and reliable sources say the same. Benicio2020 (talk) 00:46, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support I prefer something like 2021 putsch at the United States Capitol which seems to more accurately describe the event but obviously that will never get consensus. Neutrality is correct that reliable, independent, secondary sources seem to no longer be referring to this event simply as a protest. — Wug·a·po·des20:50, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support I support storming, but even that doesn't describe the scale of what's going on. I know I'm a IP, but frankly this is close to a coup seeking to overturn the will of the American people. When you're recovering IED's and gunshots are being fired into the Senate chamber, this isn't a protest. This is a coup. 2603:6000:A507:C600:6428:15B7:CA4E:181C (talk) 21:10, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose premature name change until dust settles a bit. I also think "storming" is too flowery a term, and we should see what the RS decide to call it with the benefit of some hindsight. GorillaWarfare(talk)20:59, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose as premature. The current title is more neutral — we should hold off until we know how the dust settles, as others have said. Tamwin (talk) 21:05, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support Putsch or Insurrection this is not a protest or a riot or a storm, this is an attempt to reject the democratic election which Trump lost by 10 million votes, overthrow the incoming U.S. government and end the United States's 300-year tradition of democracy, encouraged and abetted by Trump's own, criminal failed attempts at a self-coup. Wikipedia editors are so mealy-mouthed it disgusts me. You have encouraged this.108.30.187.155 (talk) 21:07, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Support per this precedent - the events as unfolded thus far meet similar terminological grounds. Benjitheijneb (talk) 21:51, 6 January 2021 (UTC) ADDITION: As someone has kindly taken it upon themselves to remove my comment: this support is conditional on "insurrection" not emerging as common use, which would of course call for revision in coming days following WP:COMMONNAME. Benjitheijneb (talk) 00:18, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
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)
Oppose I watched the event unfold live on TV, and there was a large crowd of people on front of the Capitol who apparently forced themsleves inside by sheer numbers. This is not a riot because there was no violence, at least outside the building. It is also not an insurrection, because the protesters did not attempt to take control of the government. Storming is also inappropriate because the protesters did not succeed in taking control of the Capitol. 122.60.65.44 (talk) 03:24, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose Most sources I've seen refer to the event as a "storming" of the capital. "Riots" could be sufficient enough but "storming" is more precise and indicative of what actually occurred.Yeoutie (talk) 04:14, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose, It's clearly not a protest, but there's little reason not to wait to see what reliable sources end up calling it. Perryprog (talk) 01:36, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support. By definition of the word riot(noun) a noisy, violent public disorder caused by a group or crowd of persons, as by a crowd protesting against another group, a government policy, etc., in the streets. [13] The storming of the US Capitol fits the definition. KyuuA4 (Talk:キュウ) 04:16, 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.
Oppose-BLM and antifa assaulted random people and burned down buildings for much of the summer and yet we at Wikipedia label these the "George Floyd protests." In this case, a handful of conservatives, responding in part to unprovoked attacks by police, got past some security guards and walked around in the Capitol building, causing minor property damage, and that gets called a riot. Welcome to globalist fantasy land and double standards. Display name 99 (talk) 05:34, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support renaming to "riots". "Storming" sounds too romantic, and "insurrection" implies too great a level of organization and duration, while "riots" is more neutral. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 06:12, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support - this was a riot, due to loss of police control. "Storming" suggests some degree of organisation that didn't exist. Jw2036 (talk) 06:54, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
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)
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)
"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. SpurriousCorrelation01:40, 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. --FlagFreaktalk01:57, 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)
I support using the word "insurrection." "Terrorist attack" is OK. But anything stronger than "protest" would be an improvement. Maurreen (talk) 01:56, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Unlike the George Floyd protests, which were mostly peaceful but did notably erupt into violence sometimes, the "protests" at the Capitol are very unusual and would be better described as riots. The January 5 events can be considered a part of the background leading up to the riots. However, I would wait until we know what the sources will call it. FreeMediaKid!02:09, 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)
Support storming This insurrection was much more than a protest, and the word storming is the most accurate description of what actually happened. The word riot can be used to describe a variety of activities, but this was a deliberate attack on a specific building, so storming is the correct term.Calmecac5 (talk) 03:03, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support with preference to storming, then insurrection, then riot. Protest vastly, vastly understates this, as multiple people have mentioned. Nmurali02 (talk) 03:47, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support The name of the article should include the word "storming." There were many hundreds of people on the steps of the capital, which is a restricted area. Dozens of individuals broke through the windows and occupied the offices of members of Congress. A woman was shot inside the Capitol building. Mediaexpert3 (talk) 04:03, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support at minimum using storming, but prefer2021 United States coup d'etat attempt. Taken in context with ongoing objections to the certification of electoral votes, I believe what is happening now sufficiently constitutes a coordinated effort to overturn the established political order of the United States federal government. SweetFruityKindOfSad (talk) 04:17, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support the usage of insurrection or riot, with a preference for the former. "Storming" seems a little too informal for an article title, honestly. -Pikavangelist (talk) 04:36, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Comment Most reliable sources refer to the overall events as riots. The storming was a very specific part of the riots. "Insurrection" is a purposefully dramatic term and not appropriate. Onetwothreeip (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support the use of "storming" over "insurrection". Although the exact chain of events and motives that lead to protesters trespassing the Capitol is a bit murky and would direct the naming of this event, "storming" is a better description of what they did, which was to forcefully enter a particular institution and act offensively and seditiously inside a government building, though seemingly without the knowledge and organizational wherewithal on how to follow through with overtaking a government. (Perspective from the Philippines) LionFosset (talk) 04:40, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support Prominent individuals, prominent media outlets and recognized news sources have interchangeably used riots and insurrection. However, for the record, I do believe riot is more encompassing of the overall intent and lack of coordination of the individuals. In turn, the majority of the individuals who were at this protest were not violent nor was it a coordinated effort of armed violence. That is why I do not believe it should be considered an insurrection by definition, but rather a riot. --- Jrobb52505:10, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support storming its the better descriptive term than riot or protest given the events. Although this term is not used very often, these events don't fit into other, more typical, categories. ErieSwiftByrd (talk) 05:24, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose This was not simply a storming, siege or anything of the sort in any way shape or form. The "storming" was only a small (even though very prominent) part of these protests. Much of the article does not even regard the supposed "storming."Nathanzachary56 (talk) 05:43, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose storming This word would only excite the white supremacists that read the Daily Stormer white supremacist Nazi publication. And "storming" is too soft a word. -TenorTwelve (talk) 05:54, 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)
Support storming, as it leaves absolutely no dispute as to the subject of the article. Insurrection is okay, but may be premature as I suspect we're going to see far more examples of insurrection in the near future. The majority of coverage and noteworthiness has to do with domestic terrorists gaining access to the Capitol, the evacuation of lawmakers, and the subsequent destruction of property and loss of life. We do not have the luxury of being unspecific with so many eyes on this page today. TritonsRising(talk) 06:23, 7 January 2021(UTC)
Oppose as premature. I may change my !vote later but, given the situation remains fluid, and we don't know what all future subjects this article may come to encompass, the proposed name change may be too limiting. Chetsford (talk) 06:37, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose storming, but support a rename. It wasn't a protest. It was a siege and a breach of security. -- RobLa (talk) 06:44, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support, but open to alternate phrasings. "Protests" is certainly an inaccurate and misleading descriptior of what happened, and I don't see any RS referring to the incident as a "protest". Other commenters make good points as to why "storming" might have other connotations. I don't think "riots" is a good description, since the key event was not a riot, but a focused attack. So, perhaps another title to consider would be "2021 United States Capitol mob attack". I don't think "insurrection" is a good term, because I've never heard that term being used to describe a single event. Skrelk (talk) 06:51, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Prefer riot, but support storming as well. "Insurrection" is apt, so if it were to come out on top I wouldn't be unhappy, but I think it's just a little too pointed at the moment. If time shows that "insurrection" has become the WP:COMMONNAME, then it should be changed at that time. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:52, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose storming This word would only excite the white supremacists that read the Daily Stormer white supremacist Nazi publication. And "storming" is too soft a word. -TenorTwelve (talk) 05:54, 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)
Support storming, as it leaves absolutely no dispute as to the subject of the article. Insurrection is okay, but may be premature as I suspect we're going to see far more examples of insurrection in the near future. The majority of coverage and noteworthiness has to do with domestic terrorists gaining access to the Capitol, the evacuation of lawmakers, and the subsequent destruction of property and loss of life. We do not have the luxury of being unspecific with so many eyes on this page today. TritonsRising(talk) 06:23, 7 January 2021(UTC)
Oppose storming. While storming is a better descriptor of what the situation was, I agree with others here that the word is too "soft" to describe the situation. On the contrary, I also think words like "coup", "insurrection", "rebellion", and others may be too charged. Unless a great majority of outlets begin to refer to this event as such, or perhaps national security officials describe it as such, a different word, should be used. Maybe 2021 breach of the United States Senate. Miss Show Business (talk) 06:27, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose storming, but support a rename. It wasn't a protest. It was a siege and a breach of security. -- RobLa (talk) 06:44, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support, but open to alternate phrasings. "Protests" is certainly an inaccurate and misleading descriptior of what happened, and I don't see any RS referring to the incident as a "protest". Other commenters make good points as to why "storming" might have other connotations. I don't think "riots" is a good description, since the key event was not a riot, but a focused attack. So, perhaps another title to consider would be "2021 United States Capitol mob attack". I don't think "insurrection" is a good term, because I've never heard that term being used to describe a single event. Skrelk (talk) 06:51, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Incident Incident is a catchall term that would encompass both events of today and any events that occur tomorrow that may be more pedestrian. Chetsford (talk) 07:03, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support insurrection. Nicely clinical and descriptive. "Storming" has all sorts of unwelcome Third Reich undertones (stormtrooper, Der Stürmer, etc), which would doubtless please the perpetrators and so the word should be avoided. Ericoides (talk) 07:08, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
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)
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"
Latest comment: 3 years ago12 comments10 people in discussion
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.
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"
Oppose. Unless official sources, and the majority of reliable sources, start calling this terrorism, I don't think this is likely to gain traction. GorillaWarfare(talk)17:45, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Response. These were clearly terrorist attacks. We need to recognize it as such. An official source is not needed when such clear evidence exists, witnessed by so many people. We need to recognize this for what it was, and hopefully we can spark lasting change within the United States. PaulSprague19(talk)17:55, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose. Contrary to GorillaWarfare, I wouldn't insist on official sources, but I would say until the majority of reliable sources call it a terrorist attack, Wikipedia shouldn't either. Also, I would take a narrower definition of terrorism than the broad one you include above. The United Nations, although it has promulgated several variations, consistently defines Terrorism as actions taken with a specific mens rea. "Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public", or "with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public or in a group of persons or particular persons". I think the intent to provoke terror is an essential element to terrorism, and one I think was absent from yesterday's regrettable events. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving18:09, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose any article moves for the next couple of days. Majavah (talk!) 18:20, 7 January 2021
Support I agree, too many article change requests, and i think they are all ( except for the change to the ' 2021 storming of the united states capital')pretty bad and annoying. Call me Deathisaninevitability Deathisaninevitability,soifearitnot-1234 (talk) 19:52, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
(UTC)
Comment: The attacks have widely been called domestic terrorism. That was the term Chuck Schumer used in the senate, CNN, MSNBC used the term all night long, Hillary Clinton used it, it has been used by many, many others, both US political leaders and RS. But perhaps we don't need to have it in the title. If we were to consider another title, 2021 attack on the United States Capitol could be a possibility. --Tataral (talk) 18:36, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
A plethora of terms have been used to describe the events, so much so that it is quite easy to cherry pick hundreds of sources to back up any particular choice of words you wish to use. While "relying on sources" for facts and events is necessary, choosing from the large menu of possible words to describe the events, some of which carry certain pejorative or emotional-laden senses, should be up to editorial judgement, and we should always strive for WP:NPOV when choosing between otherwise equivalent words when deciding between those which carry emotional baggage and those that do not. The current title is no worse than the one you propose (it's no better either, but it's no worse) and it has the advantage of already being there. Storm or attack seem roughly equivalent to me. --Jayron3218:55, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
I didn't propose that we move the article anywhere at this point, I just explained why I don't think it's not necessary to have "terrorist" in the title while pointing out that it has indeed been called terrorism by both official (Biden, Schumer) and RS. Regarding attack vs storming, I find them to be roughly equivalent as well; some editors had reservations about storming in previous discussions, and I just mentioned attack as one of the possible alternatives, which is not the same as proposing that we spend time and energy on a new formal move discussion to move it there (at least not now). --Tataral (talk) 20:45, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose and WP:SNOW. Obviously not in line with our policies. If this description becomes widespread then we may revisit this but this is not yet the case. --Calthinus (talk) 20:14, 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.
Incorrect Derrick Evans link
Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
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
Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
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)
I don't see that vandalism in there, nor do I see where the people who broke into the building are called "protesters". Thank you, Drmies (talk) 21:33, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
COVID navbox
Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
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)
Latest comment: 3 years ago6 comments5 people in discussion
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)
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
Latest comment: 3 years ago7 comments6 people in discussion
@Saxones288: The only sentence in the Times of Israelsource 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)
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)
Agreed on scrapping the box. This does not live up to Wikipedia's standards. I doubt we will be able to discover whether each of the protestors is associated with a group, and whether those groups coordinated it. This is not the same as "France" and "Netherlands" in American Revolutionary War where there is clear attribution.
Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
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)
Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
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)
Can pentagon generals send troops without a Presidential order?
Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
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
Latest comment: 3 years ago10 comments7 people in discussion
@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. — Czello22:38, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Public domain images
Latest comment: 3 years ago6 comments4 people in discussion
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)
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
Latest comment: 3 years ago7 comments5 people in discussion
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)
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)
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
Latest comment: 3 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion
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)
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
Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
New draft regarding possible impeachment and removal, or removal via 25th amendment
Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
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 (talk • contribs) 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. LizRead!Talk!03:31, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Unified definitions of 'rally', 'protest', 'coup d'état' and 'riot'
Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
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.
Latest comment: 3 years ago39 comments34 people in discussion
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)
Oppose I’ll repeat my comment in an earlier thread on the sources listed in 2 above: Every one of those sources listed refer to the Capitol being stormed (mostly in the first paragraph). Several of them only use the term ‘insurrection’ in the article title and not in the body of the article, often within quotes i.e. not in the voice of the source. Insurrection appears to be used as a loaded term. At best, the cited sources indicate no more than equal support for storming and insurrection. It seems to me using dictionary definitions that storming is more appropriate - insurrection gives more political heft to what was simply rabble violence. DeCausa (talk) 22:26, 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)
Strongly Support Though there has being discussion prior to this new requested move, I agree that the name of the incident that occurred at the Capitol should be called what it's being called by the media at large, senior officials from both democratic and republican party members and other affiliated security branches of government. This was an insurrection against the United States Congress, and at large the media calls them insurrectionists or terrorists. The media does say that the insurrectionists 'stormed' the Capitol building, but calls the event and those who stormed the building insurrectionists or people carrying out a coup. As stated in this thread it supports Wikipedia:Article titles. Foxterria (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 22:44, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose -- no, please. See my comments on the previous name change discussion. I personally think that "2021 United States Capitol riots" would be the most appropriate title. The newly-proposed one is unwieldy. RexSueciae (talk) 22:56, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose. The title has been discussed to death and most of us would like to move on. I think the year is important in identifying this specific event. I don't think "storming" is off-limits just because QAnon also uses that word. If it is off-limits, the next-best alternative is riots, because it describes what MAGA's did, rather than what they were trying to do. "U.S. Capitol Insurrection" is much worse because it introduces needless ambiguity as to whether it's an insurrection at the Capitol, of the Capitol, or by the Capitol. RoxySaunders (talk) 22:56, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Comment - This proposal conflates too many things: a) the descriptive term (e.g. "protest", "storming", "standoff", "breach", "insurrection"), b) how much chronological information to include (e.g. year, month-year, none), and c) the structure of the title. Personally, I care the most about "a", and dislike both "protest"/"protests" and "storming". It seems most urgent to have a serious conversation about the term before structuring the title around the term. Of the terms I listed, I mildly prefer "standoff" to the others, but my mind can be changed. -- RobLa (talk) 23:05, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Strongly Oppose The current title is the result of a previous consensus and accurately reflects the events and coverage of them.. ErieSwiftByrd (talk) 23:06, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Oppose - insurrection would be a more organized undertaking in my view. This was just a misguided unstructured mob, so storming is rather appropriate. If some future investigation reveals that they were actually organized, equipped and commanded in some way, then I would agree to call it an insurrection. Crnorizec (talk) 23:09, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Strongly support - It's the term that most accurately describes what happened as detailed above. It's the term that elected officials are using on the floor of the House and Senate, it's the term that's being used in the media, and it's the term that most people will use when they look up the article. CheeseburgerWithFries (talk) 23:18, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Weak support But I think a discussion of what elements we want in a title should be complete first before moving again. Do we want the year? "Insurrection"? Some variation on "coup"? It's all still being discussed. But being made aware that "storm" has QAnon connotations, I think a move away from that should happen in some form. If this gets broad support, count me in. Kingsif (talk) 23:18, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support I think "insurrection attempt" would be a better phrase, though I think "coup d'etat attempt" would be better. Skrelk (talk) 23:25, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support I would not be inclined to support this change if they had simply broken into the capitol building. However, considering individuals were occupying offices of extremely high-ranking government officials and made their way on to the floor of the upper chamber of the legislature, there is really no other description that fits. Maybe "insurrection attempt" Cliffmore (talk) 23:27, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Strong support - When I searched for this article, I assumed that it would be something like "US capitol insurrection wiki". I believe most people will search using this. It's accurate and is more appropriate given the significance of what occurred Teammmtalk email23:33, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Not Yet While I support this language with my personal politics, unless this event begins to be discussed more in this framework, it would be NPOV. And while it might become framed in this way, we don't predict the future here. I suspect this move request to be closed under no consensus and reopened in the future should the public terminology of this event changes. ~Gwennie🐈｟💬📋｠ 23:35, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Strongly Support Definitionally the incident was a violent uprising in a direct attempt to halt the progress of democracy. If this isn't an insurrection, I don't know what is. Ottoshade (talk) 23:43, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Support. Regardless of the eventual name change, these were not "protests", as protesting does not involve invading any capitol building unlawfully. "Insurrection" is a stronger word than the action of "storming". If the name were to be changed to insurrection, then I do not oppose it. KyuuA4 (Talk:キュウ) 00:01, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Support given that we have more than half a dozen news organizations calling it 'insurrection' along with multiple politicians, it's apt to call it 'insurrection' instead of calling it something else violating WP:NOR. -Abhishikt (talk) 00:06, 8 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.
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.
Resolved
Not done Uncited and egregiously editorialized request. BrxBrx(talk)(please reply with {{SUBST:re|BrxBrx}}) 23:47, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Done. Mt.FijiBoiz (talk) 00:20, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Already done. OhKayeSierra (talk) 03:28, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
