Talk:2021 Myanmar coup d'état

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2021 Myanmar coup d'état article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 30 days

A news item involving 2021 Myanmar coup d'état was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 1 February 2021.

Wikipedia

Military history: Asian / Southeast Asia / Post-Cold War

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	Southeast Asian military history task force
	Post-Cold War task force

Myanmar High‑importance

2021 Myanmar coup d'état is within the scope of WikiProject Myanmar, a project to improve all Myanmar related articles on Wikipedia. The WikiProject is also a part of the Counteracting systemic bias group on Wikipedia aiming to provide a wider and more detailed coverage on countries and areas of the encyclopedia which are notably less developed than the rest. If you would like to help improve this and other Myanmar-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.MyanmarWikipedia:WikiProject MyanmarTemplate:WikiProject MyanmarMyanmar

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : offices, ministries and politicians of current cabinet, requested articles on Burmese subjects and articles on smaller towns and villages
Expand : Top-importance and High-importance articles
Photo : add photos of incumbent politicians
Stubs : Category:Myanmar stubs
Update : offices, ministries and politicians of current cabinet after 2015 election
Other : If you know Burmese, go on the Myanmar Wikipedia and make sure each article on the English Wikipedia has one in Burmese also

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Text and/or other creative content from 2021 Myanmar coup d'état was copied or moved into 2021 Myanmar protests. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Semi-protected edit request on 10 May 2021

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

change '707 civilian deaths' to 'over 750 civilian deaths.' Mysteryboiii (talk) 10:23, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 13:57, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The UN secretary general does condemn the junta's arrests

As clear from the link in Intergovernmental responses. The text currently implies that he has only expressed concern.--95.42.19.211 (talk) 16:14, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction

The article says that it’s unclear whether the military could declare a state of emergency since only the president could. Well, then it is not unclear. 82.36.70.45 (talk) 23:49, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see this as a contradiction. Generally speaking, constitutional issues are clear only when they are settled, usually by a court giving a definitive interpretation. The military can declare a state of emergency (well, actually anyone can) but whether it is constitutional is something that can only be determined if it is challenged in a court. --RegentsPark (comment) 00:16, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(I obviously meant if it can be declared constitutionally, not just de facto.) I teach logic at uni and this is definitively a self-contradiction. It’s not a matter of opinion. If only a court can decide whether only the president can do X constitutionally, and that hasn’t been decided by a court, then we should avoid saying that only the president can do X constitutionally. And if we do say that only the president can do X constitutionally, then it is self-contradictory to say that we don’t know if someone else can also do X constitutionally. Because that’s what “only” means: it means no one else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.36.70.45 (talk) 02:07, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the cited Crouch article, I don't think the text was accurately reflecting what she said. I've rewritten it. --RegentsPark (comment) 18:33, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, since the article isn't protected, you can dive in and edit it yourself. --RegentsPark (comment) 18:37, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image is just cropped screenshot of youtube video

Hi all, I don't edit a whole lot but I feel like this is against the rules? The main image ("2021 Myanmar coup.jpg") appears to just be a cropped screenshot somebody took of a youtube video showing a fitness instructor oblivious to military activities. I'm unsure which video in particular as it was heavily reposted by numerous news agencies when this event occurred.

link to the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3gef1Wn9BE

It appears to be the top-left 1/4 of the frame from between 0:00 and 0:20. Max imus1254 (talk) 12:06, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"China is depicted as having hegemony over Myanmar in Western media"

That's an odd statement to make based on a total of three articles, one of which is an individual opinion piece. The implication of the wording "depicted as having hegemony over" is heavily loaded and is not a value-neutral account, not to mention that such a strong wording does not accurately reflect the cited articles. The term "Western media" as an entity (again, based on just three articles) is also unclear, and above all, unnessescary for this article.

A more neutral statement that doesn't make sweeping statements over how the situation is portrayed would be a better fit. E.g. "China has had a significant influence over the country in modern times, and appears to be looking to maintain this influence despite the coup. [as evidenced by... large trading partner, infrastructure projects, etc etc.]" The follow-up sentence about China and Russia not condemning the coup would flow more logically, and it would avoid such a loaded statement as is present.

At the very least, the wording "hegemony" is far too strong and does not belong here, especially given the uncertain situation after the coup. 175.114.42.166 (talk) 04:33, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]