The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been
designated as a contentious topic.
The subject of this article is
controversial and content may be in
dispute. When updating the article,
be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a
neutral point of view. Include
citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
This article is written in
American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other
varieties of English. According to the
relevant style guide, this should not be changed without
broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Donald Trump, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Donald Trump 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.Donald TrumpWikipedia:WikiProject Donald TrumpTemplate:WikiProject Donald TrumpDonald Trump articles
Attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election is within the scope of WikiProject Joe Biden, a project dedicated to creating and improving content related to
Joe Biden. If you would like to participate, visit the
project page, where you can join the
discussion and see a list of open tasks.Joe BidenWikipedia:WikiProject Joe BidenTemplate:WikiProject Joe BidenJoe Biden articles
I don't think we have sufficiently
weighty RSs to add this to the article, but its in the media and I wanted to note them for followup later. Politico had this scoop,[1] which has spawned (of course) a cascade of other media stories based on the original Politco piece. Apparently a secret service agent, Trumps lead guy, gave closed (not public testimony). The committee hasn't disclosed it. So what we have here is he said..... he heard it from a friend.....that the other person told a bunch of people..... stuff (Politico heard it from a source that the agent testified to the panel.) This is why I don't think the report has enough WEIGHT to be added to the article. But it sure is interesting. Even as the violence was happening, Trump was tryhing to talk his detail into taking him down to the capitol. Instead they took him to the White House. At least, if the report is accurate.
Imagine if Secret Service had really taken Pence to Andrews and Trump got to the capitol.....
Anyway, the other part of this story that we might be able to use if the committee discloses the agent's testimony is commentary from Professor
Ruth Ben-Ghiat, who studies fascism and coups, and opined that "“If you’re having a coup and summoned everybody, and aim to be anointed as the head of a new illegitimate government, you have to be there,” I'm sure there's a weightier RS than HuffPost but for now, [2]
Latest count is 20,800,
guidelines say to almost always get under 15,000 - is that our target?
Superb Owl (
talk) 03:34, 27 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Reorganize from 'November', 'December', 'January' to topics
After finally reading the entire article from start to finish, there are quite a few times when the article summarizes what's already been written in an earlier section because it reintroduces a topic from November in December and again in January or other sections that comes with re-explanations of a topic.
I sketched a new possible outline for the article
here that could save us ~1-2000 words and maybe make the article easier to skim.
Superb Owl (
talk) 16:04, 27 February 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Superb Owl, your draft outline is heading in the right direction. (Also see the
Select Committee's presentation outline, because their goal was to convey a larger picture than just the minutia in a timeline.) Ultimately, this annotated timeline won't be the only article about the entire conspiracy, from suppressing votes to subverting the election result.
The public knowledge that's currently available is too limited about event details, the connection between events and what happened behind-the-scene. We'll need to learn more from
Federal prosecution of Donald Trump (election obstruction case) and
Georgia election racketeering prosecution. When those investigations reveal the strategies that insiders coordinated, then the revealed strategies will help in creating the structure of a Wikipedia:Navigation template.
In the meantime, this article can be cleaned to temporarily serve as an annotated timeline for readers to reference during the upcoming trials. Related articles can be started to present some background and explain causes. As previously suggested, this article should spin-off some topics (e.g.
Stop the Steal,
election audits).
rootsmusic (
talk) 18:22, 27 February 2024 (UTC)reply
This article is an excellent resource, and a fine piece of research and writing. Wikipedia should not pander to the intellectual laziness of the masses and edit out any of the fine work that has been done. The many subtitles make it easy enough to skim and find subjects.