Talk:1997 Cambodian coup d'état

Requested move 1 February 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: Consensus to move (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 21:22, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

---

1997 armed clashes in Cambodia → 1997 Cambodian coup d'état – Please place your rationale for the proposed move here. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 20:19, 1 February 2021 (UTC) —Relisting. Jack Frost (talk) 09:36, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Following from this page's move and then reversion of the move as there wasn't a discussion, let's discuss. These events were characterised as a coup by several reliable sources.

• https://www.economist.com/asia/1997/07/10/a-coup-in-cambodia
• https://thediplomat.com/2017/06/remembering-the-cambodian-coup/
• https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1997/07/08/coup-ousts-cambodian-prince/79b825e2-cc2e-425f-be12-a5d57c3d7fc2/
• https://www.hrw.org/report/2015/01/12/30-years-hun-sen/violence-repression-and-corruption-cambodia
• https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13006828
• https://www.un.org/press/en/1997/19970709.cambodia.html
• https://www.nytimes.com/1997/08/17/travel/cambodian-coup-leaves-tourist-sites-empty.html

I could go on. Only within the government is this really characterised as just "clashes". I feel like there's really little debate that this Wikipedia article should characterise this as a coup. --Arcahaeoindris (talk) 20:19, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

I have just seen this discussion as I was not notified of it on my talk page. The United States and other major powers in the region and outside did not characterize the 1997 events as a coup, and hence "armed clashes" is correct usage in this context. I will supply material later this week. — Nearly Headless Nick {c} 10:58, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

• Support - Happy to move based on the sources provided. "Armed clashes" is also less concise, less accurate, les natural per WP:CRITERIA. FOARP (talk) 10:39, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
• Support Contemporaneous and present sources widely use the accurate term coup. Armed clashed is wildly inappropriate and fails to convey the part where Sen used the military to seize all power for himself. Nick's claim above is a blatant lie: per articles [1][2][3] the US did in fact consider it a coup, hence the suspension of aid as it does in the case of coups. ASEAN even excluded Cambodia's entry, "deploring Hun Sen's use of force", not just "clashes." Here's a more comprehensive 1998 journal article saying "By definition, however, the July event must be considered a coup." Sir Nicholas has a history of edits defending the Sen regime, and his edits to Cambodia-related articles should be monitored. Reywas92^Talk 19:31, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
• Support per above. The events follow a definition of what a coup is. KingSkyLord (talk | contribs) 19:43, 17 February 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.

Expand with info from article on Ranariddh

For those looking to improve this article (which is much needed) there is a lot more detail on the article for Norodom Ranariddh. --Arcahaeoindris (talk) 22:12, 18 February 2021 (UTC)