Talk:September 2022 Burkina Faso coup d'état

Reliable Sourcing

Specifically, i have reservations against using a tweet as a source. No matter how accredited the tweeter may be, this is a statement that could be better sourced using, say, an actual primary or secondary source, especially as it is a statement made by a public figure. Perhaps the primary Russian source would be better. 36.65.242.246 (talk) 02:24, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 8 August 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) BilledMammal (talk) 13:17, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

---

September 2022 Burkina Faso coup d'état → September 2022 Burkinabé coup d'état – Hello,

I wanted to start a discussion to move this article to September 2022 Burkinabé coup d'état, as it is common practice to use the country demonym rather than the name (see 2020 and 2021 Malian coups d'état and the recent 2023 Nigerien coup d'état as per WP:CONSISTENT). Aydenholtonvlogs (talk) 23:36, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose. There was a similar discussion at Talk:January 2022 Burkina Faso coup d'état#Requested_move_24_January_2022 (consensus to move articles from Burkinabé coup d'état to Burkina Faso coup d'état). On reading it I agree with the general point made by some editors that naming practices vary by country, like New Zealand vs. New Zealander and San Marino vs. Sammarinese; other examples might be 1986 Lesotho coup d'état or 1981 Seychelles coup d'état attempt. So, as far as the consistency criterion is concerned, I wouldn't try to create consistency across different countries in choosing adjective or noun, and at most just try to have consistency between Burkina Faso articles. I also disagree with some editors' judgment that using the noun is ungrammatical. Overall I'm satisfied with the current title. Adumbrativus (talk) 06:15, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose I've seen at least a few Burkina Faso related move requests that proposed to change it to Burkinabé, and this seems to be consistently rejected in favor of using the country name. While I certainly understand the nominator's logic and sympathize with it, I also have to say I find Adumbrativus's rationale to be very agreeable. Finding one naming convention that works for all countries just won't work. But finding a convention that works for one country certainly does. While the nominator points out at we refer to the Malian and Nigerien coups yet call this a "Burkina Faso" coup, this sort of mismatch between when to use the denonym versus the country name happens all the time. We would say "Canadian election" but not "Canada election", yet we say "United States election" and not "American election"; we say "Australian election" but not "Australia election", yet we say "New Zealand election" and not "New Zealander election"; we say "French election" but not "France election", yet we say "United Kingdom election" and not "British election", etcetera etcetera. The trend seems to be to use the country name if the country's name consists of multiple words, but I'm sure there are some good exceptions. A one size fits all rule for all countries wouldn't work (and certainly couldn't be determined at this RfC), but a case by case solution like what we're doing already works fine in my view.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 03:52, 16 August 2023 (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.