Talk:1964 Brazilian coup d'état

message: Ptah,
I read your citations concerning the last paragraph of the article: there is no citation on FHC as a socialist or populist. He consideres himself a social-democrat today --but he was widely considered a communist, not a socialist or populist. These words were not used. As Passarinho said (quotaion above) people were pro or against communist --for such was the persecution that you had "to be or not to be". Do I need to cite? No, Shakespeare...
::As for teh left-wing presidents you´ve mentioned, I think they confirm that communis was a part of our every day life -- not only a threat.
:--Ludovicapipa yes? 00:14, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While he contributed articles to a communist sponsored journal, he was never a communist party member. Both he and his father were members of the Partido Trabalhista Brasileiro who worked in coalition with the communist party at a legislative level when they needed to, but that was the extent of their relation. That is what the cited article illustrated. The party policies promoted by the Partido Trabalhista Brasileiro were populist socialist: rent controls, agrarian reform, etc. Cardoso was to the left of his party, and supported these populist socialist policies. In the end, it does not matter. I have added a citation which describes the rhetoric of the Partido Trabalhista Brasileiro as leftist populist, and, as the leaders and key supporters of that party did, in fact, flee into exile (think Goulart, Brizola, etc), the substitution of leftist populist should suffice.--(Ptah, the El Daoud 06:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: FHC

message: I have cut your new section (quoted at the bottom of my comment in full), and will explain point by point my reasoning. I have added a new sentence to the introduction which states: "Some historians, including Jarbas Passarinho, argue that the threat of both global and local communist movements was real." I included your citation... If we are going to bring up Castro, Guevara, Mao or Stalin and/or Khrushchev, we will need to explain each inclusion specifically. If you think a paragraph should be dedicated to explaining this, I think we could easily make room for it in the political climate section (although it will probably have to go through a few drafts before either of us are content with it). I object to the inclusion of Passarinho's views on (La Violencia), for the initial waves of violence took place between the Liberals and the Conservatives. The communists took advantage of a "normal" civil war (liberal reformers versus the established conservative establishment) and made it a three-way conflict. Could this have happened? Perhaps, but it ignores the fact that the initial cause of concern was civil war between liberals and democrats who supported different versions of capitalist democracy, not communism. Your last sentence, "He also point out that although censorship was severe, it was Latin America´s softest since media" was incomplete. Did you mean to say "since media outlets continued to operate?" If you did, we can include that, but I need to point out that I will provide citations which show that media outlets continued to exist under all of the juntas, and journals under all of the juntas (in Paraguay, in Argentina, in Chile and in Brazil) were shut down when they went to far in criticizing the government... I have to work late tomorrow, but I'll respond to any new edits of yours later that night or on the following day. --(Ptah, the El Daoud 06:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Re: "The meaning of the words ''threat of communism''"

message: I have a big problem with the following:
:According to Jarbas Passarinho, 1964 coup d´etat avoided the imminent communist threat represented by several world and local manifestations, such as: militar insubordination in 1963 in Brasilia, mariners in 1964; kidnapping of an American embassador (1969) Seqüestro de diplomata americano, um dos atos mais ousados da guerrilha no período da Ditadura , Fidel Castro´s, Che Guevarra´s, China, Soviet Union and Cold War. Jânio Quadros's tribute to Che Guevara (August 19, 1961), Goulart's trip to China, and the reestablishment of diplomatic relations with Soviet Union were among possible threats to the status quo. Even militaries wanted to move forward with democracy, since economy was growing and Medici was a very popular president. Passarinho states that Colombia still faces civil wars, because there was no AI-5 and that Brasil could have had the same fate if it was not the military government. He also point out that although censorship was severe, it was Latin America's softest since media supported the coup Em nota de redação, a Folha explicou que "O regime militar (1964-1985) passou por diferentes fases. No contexto da polarização da época, que dividia o país, a Folha aprovou a deposição do presidente Goulart. Esteve sob censura entre 1969 e 1983, quando a supressão das liberdades públicas atingiu seu ponto máximo. A partir de 1974, o jornal foi uma das principais vozes a reivindicar a democratização do país."  and along with the Congress was still open and operating ítulo: Golpe 'foi inevitável, mas durou demais', diz Jarbas Passarinho (The coup was unavoidable but lasted too long . This public support, which lasted until mid seventies (1974), was extended to entrepreneurs, business people, mid class, who also supported the ARENA, the situationist party Brasil 1964: Revolução ou contra-revolução?. Thus throughout Brazilian history  Incursões na História das Anistias Políticas no Brasil, one observes a steady tradition of conservative governments, and severe repression against social revolutions, since monarchy, right-wing republicanism and today's neoliberalism.
How can one say that the coup avoided the "imminent communist threat" by citing the Elbrick kidnapping--something that happened 5 years after the coup took place? It seems like a pretty obvious anachronism. I've tried to remove that and Ludovica has reverted me. Anyone else have an opinion?--Dali-Llama 04:19, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I will later add this fact whithin a post event context which will be entitled something like "the threat was real" Ludovicapipa yes? 07:01, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Even if you add something like that, it begs the question of causality: Would they still have kidnapped the ambassador if the coup hadn't happened? One can't predict that, and even saying that the "threat was real" citing this event is WP:OR.--Dali-Llama 08:05, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

text: That´s a question with no answer. The facts speak for themselves: they did it, and they were communits --so, the threat was real. The other fact is that as time went by, they kdinapped other embassador, and then by 1969 they had to stop because the army worked on it. It makes one think that if there was not a military action they would have continued --as they were in fact planning. And make one guess that if there was no military government, Brasil would now be like Cuba, S. Union or China. It´s not up to me to guess anything, only to write. Ludovicapipa yes? 10:42, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're bending yourself backwards to defend the dictatorship. You're arguing that they were planning the kidnapping in 1964. Again, my point stands: causality is the problem here.--Dali-Llama 17:55, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

text: You bring up a good point. The link for the Jarbas Passarinho quote is dead, apparently, and it accounts for half of the paragraph. Without that half sourced, the rest of the section falls apart. I do think this section is important, and needs to be re-written. I'm removing it until an NPOV (and "live") source can be used.--Dali-Llama 02:38, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  A minor point - a source doesn't necessarily have to be NPOV, it only needs to be cited in a NPOV manner. I agree that an alternative source should be found. Phonemonkey 02:48, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree--Hence why I added the disclosure to the previous (now non-existent) source.--Dali-Llama 03:04, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citing Kidnapping of Ambassador as "threat of communism" 

message: :I propose the first citation, from Joseh Page (aome historian) should also be deleted. It states teh revolution that never was. I ask: how can he say that the revolution would never have happened? A reasonable answer is that: the revolution never happened because of the military intervention. So this is anachrnism --he can´t say, after it happened (no revolution) that it would never have happened and it was just a military excuse. So, comparing my citation from Passarinho to the one from Page, Iam sure, it´s better to deal with facts: the kidnapping happened (and was just a feature of a real communist threat).
* -- this is an alterntive link.
::1969 kidnapping can be mentioned as a post military coup --as many others. Ludovicapipa yes? 04:54, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations

message: :No it´s obivous now that you want to push yr point of view: you linkd an image of a Veja cover which said: The year we got rid of him.
:I didn´t notice the link was broken. So i shoed another one, which is already on the text, since beggining.
:Elio gaspari is known as a pro-Lula, pro-PT --against FHC, against Collor. Ludovicapipa yes? 05:55, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That shouldn't matter in relation to the dictatorship.--Dali-Llama 06:08, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Yr point of view

message: As promised, here's a radically expanded and fully sourced version of the article. Some points which I'd like us to use from now on:
*Keep analysis to its own section. Notice that in writing this, I've kept it facts-only. No analysis. No "why it happened", just "what happened". I've retained the Jarbas Passarinho quote, as it provides an insider's perspective on things. "Context" is tricky, so let's just make sure any discussions we have are confined to a section specified as such.
*For the love of god, no original research and no synthesis. Having a list of events and concluding by saying there's a trend is not permitted unless it's been stated as such in a reliable source.
We'll see how it goes.--Dali-Llama 08:42, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good. I´d like to see more commets on the social support: as it was mentioned on the previous article, society (media, mid-class, entrepenerus wanted the coup in order to avoid communis threat). Ludovicapipa yes? 10:59, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Can you provide more links on public support? Ludovicapipa yes? 11:45, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, there's a whole section missing about the newspaper headlines and how the CGT strike in support of Jango never happened. There's also the student protests on the 1st and the removal of Miguel Arraes. I'm gonna work on it later today, as well as integrate your contributions into it. The problem is, again, I'm trying to keep analysis to its own section.--Dali-Llama 12:45, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

text: And the first paragraph of what you just added is complete WP:OR, by the way. The second paragraph contains useful info I'll be moving into the analysis section: again, let's keep any justification or analysis to its own section. I want to stick to the facts as much as possible.--Dali-Llama 12:48, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Iam talking abt public support to the Coup, for hte militaries. Ludovicapipa yes? 12:51, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I´d like to see Gaspari´s citations all deleted or diminished, since he is a communist supporter. Can you find a more diversified range of citations, not only frm one single author. Ludovicapipa yes? 12:55, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no need. He's only describing facts--not providing opinion. He's not (and neither is the article) saying the coup was good or bad, but describing the sequence of events. Unfortunately, I cannot find an online source which provides the same degree of depth as he does, so at this point he's not replaceable.--Dali-Llama 19:19, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Version 

message: ::You've been adding analysis on why the coup happened. That's fine, but as I've said before, you need to adhere to the policies I've mentioned countless times, which you don't. When I edit your contributions, I check them to see if they adhere to policies such as verifiability, reliability, synthesis and original research.
;TRANSLATION ONLY
::Can you tell me where exactly am I drawing personal conclusions out of citations?
:They are all ther. I ´ve only translated them. Ludovicapipa yes? 16:59, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: You said...

message: :You are saying I mixed them toghether? Well, I could split them. Do you agree with that? Ludovicapipa yes? 17:12, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: three citations

message: :1. Entretanto, o golpe militar foi saudado por importantes setores da sociedade brasileira. Grande parte do empresariado, da imprensa, dos proprietários rurais, Carlos Lacerda e Cordeiro de Farias (1955). da Igreja católica, vários governadores de estados importantes
:http://www.cpdoc.fgv.br/nav_fatos_imagens/htm/fatos/Golpe64.htm
:Ludovicapipa yes? 17:18, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Yes it does: civilian support

message: Segundo JGM:
"Instabilidade governamental, desintegração do sistema partidário, virtual paralisia da capacidade decisória do Legislativo, atitudes equívocas por parte do presidente Goulart, quando nada com respeito à sucessão; a ameaça representada por uma reforma agrária mal definida; inquietação militar em face da tolerância do governo aos motins dos sargentos; e radicalismo crescente, tanto da direita como da esquerda (...), tudo isto complementado pela inflação em alta e, naturalmente, pelo fantasma assustador da revolução cubana"
Segundo o CPDOC:
the perception of a communist threat in Brazil went by a growing perception of "materialization" until it reached its climax with 1935 Revolt".
Segundo CPDOC:
Entretanto, o golpe militar foi saudado por importantes setores da sociedade brasileira. Grande parte do empresariado, da imprensa, dos proprietários rurais, Carlos Lacerda e Cordeiro de Farias (1955). da Igreja católica, vários governadores de estados importantes (como Carlos Lacerda, da Guanabara, Magalhães Pinto, de Minas Gerais, e Ademar de Barros, de São Paulo) e amplos setores de classe média pediram e estimularam a intervenção militar, como forma de pôr fim à ameaça de esquerdização do governo e de controlar a crise econômica
:Ludovicapipa yes? 17:18, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Quit repeating yourself and address what I wrote. This is not advancing the discussion at all.--Dali-Llama 17:20, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What would you like me to answer? You said the link was wrong --it was correct. What else would you like? Ludovicapipa yes? 17:25, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's it? You're saying I'm wrong? No rational argument? No justification pointing out what you wrote and what the source wrote? Give me a comparison of what you wrote and then show me specifically what the source wrote that led you to your conclusion.--Dali-Llama 17:44, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

text: but you said conclusion are not allowe. Wow, you seem to be very confused. Bith surces talk abt a communist threat: locally an globally. The also mention teh appearence of communist party, sailor´s revolt, political instabiltity, Goulart´s social reforms. Both sources call it no longer a threat but an imminient reality. Do you agree? It´s written and translated. Ludovicapipa yes? 18:00, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: No conclusion, only translation

message: Segundo JGM:
:1. "Instabilidade governamental, desintegração do sistema partidário, virtual paralisia da capacidade decisória do Legislativo, atitudes equívocas por parte do presidente Goulart, quando nada com respeito à sucessão; a ameaça representada por uma reforma agrária mal definida; inquietação militar em face da tolerância do governo aos motins dos sargentos; e radicalismo crescente, tanto da direita como da esquerda (...), tudo isto complementado pela inflação em alta e, naturalmente, pelo fantasma assustador da revolução cubana"
*Ctation:
:http://www.mre.gov.br/cdbrasil/itamaraty/web/port/consnac/orgpol/periodos/regmil/apresent.htm
:2. Segundo o CPDOC:
the perception of a communist threat in Brazil went by a growing perception of "materialization" until it reached its climax with 1935 Revolt".
:http://www.cpdoc.fgv.br/nav_jgoulart/htm/7A_conjuntura_radicalizacao/O_anticomunismo_nas_FFAA.asp
:3. Segundo CPDOC:
Entretanto, o golpe militar foi saudado por importantes setores da sociedade brasileira. Grande parte do empresariado, da imprensa, dos proprietários rurais, Carlos Lacerda e Cordeiro de Farias (1955). da Igreja católica, vários governadores de estados importantes (como Carlos Lacerda, da Guanabara, Magalhães Pinto, de Minas Gerais, e Ademar de Barros, de São Paulo) e amplos setores de classe média pediram e estimularam a intervenção militar, como forma de pôr fim à ameaça de esquerdização do governo e de controlar a crise econômica
:http://www.cpdoc.fgv.br/nav_fatos_imagens/htm/fatos/Golpe64.htm
:Ludovicapipa yes? 17:24, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: No conclusion, only translation

message: All you did was copy the same thing I did and re-translate it! I'm hoping this was your attempt at a compromise edit. Let's compare:
My version:
José Guilherme Merquior, a Brazilian diplomat and sociologist defined the causes of the 1964 coup as "governmental instability, disintegration of the party system, erroneous attitudes by president Goulart (if not none at all) towards presidential sucession; the threat represented by a poorly-planned agrarian reform; military restlessness towards government tolerance to insubordination; and a growing radicalism, by both left and right wings (...) all compounded by high inflation and, naturally, the frightening phantom of the Cuban Revolution. Lamounier, Bolívar.Regime Militar. Brazilian Ministry of Foreign Relations. Retrieved on August 22, 2007.
According to Celso Castro of the Fundação Getúlio Vargas, the perception of a communist threat in Brazil became increasingly tangible until it reached its climax with the 1935 Revolt. He cites events leading to a growing anti-communism in the armed forces, such as: the Russian Revolution (1917), the foundation of a communist party in Brazil (1922), the conversion to communism of "tenentista" leader Luís Carlos Prestes (1930), and his departure to the Soviet Union; the appearance (March of 1935) of the Aliança Nacional Libertadora, dominated by communists, the sargeants´s revolt (1963), the sailor´s revolt, Jânio Quadro giving a medal to Che Guevara, Goulart's trip to China, and the reestablishment of diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union by Goulart as being threats to the status quo. O anticomunismo nas Forças Armadas Castro further argues that the 1964 coup was supported by some important sectors of society: two conservative parties (PSD and UDN) the business class, land owners, the media and the Catholic church, as well as the governors of important states such as Rio de Janeiro, Minas Gerais and São Paulo.Castro, Celso.O Golpe de 1964 e a instauração do regime militar. Fundação Getúlio Vargas: Centro de Pesquisa e Documentação de História Contemporânea do Brasil. Retrieved on August 22, 2007
Your version:
According to José Guilherme Merquior: "Government instability, disintegration of the system supporting, virtual paralysis of the capacity of the Legislative, misleading attitudes on the part of president Goulart, towards anything with regard to the succession; the threat acted by a land reform badly defined; military inquietude in face of the tolerance of the government to the sergeants' mutinies; and growing radicalism, as much of the right as of the you are, everything this complemented by the inflation in discharge and, for the frightening ghost of the Cuban revolution".
Mre.gov.br.
The perception of a "communist danger" in Brazil went by a process of growing "materialization", until reaching its climax with the Revolt of 1935. Like this, after the Russian Revolution of 1917, they had room in the country the creation of Communist Party of Brazil (then Party Brazilian Communist. PCB) in 1922; the conversion of the leader "tenentista" Luís Carlos Prestes to the communism, in May of 1930, and his/her departure for the Soviet Union, the following year; and the appearance, in March of 1935, of the National Alliance Libertadora, ruled by communists.
However, the military blow was greeted by important sections of the Brazilian society. Great part of the business community, of the press, of the rural proprietors, Carlos Lacerda and Lamb of Farias (1955). of the Church Catholic, several governors of important (as Carlos Lacerda, of Guanabara, Magalhães Pinto, of Minas Gerais, and Ademar of Barros, of São Paulo) states and wide middle class sections asked and they stimulated the military intervention, as form of putting end to the communism threat.
If in 1917 the communism in Brazil was still seen as a remote danger, "alien" and "exotic", little by little he was if turning closer. 
These local manifestations were insufflated and justified by a world political scenario, which consisted of several communist revolutions taking place in China, Cuba, Soviet Union.
I'm flabbergasted, but encouraged. This was not your original contribution (far from it, this is, indeed, a literal translation with no original research or conclusion). You literally translated the same thing I did, but moved it to the middle of the article! There are several translation and grammar problems involved in your version ("Lamb of Farias" ?), so I'm merging both and placing them in the analysis section, as again, there's a narrative which you're breaking by inserting a random section named "The historical meaning of the words "threat of communism" in the middle of a narration that describes the specific events that happened. --Dali-Llama 18:39, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You said I could not conclude anything, so I only translated. An dyou deleted. Yr artcile does not explain teh causes --it omits the causes of the coup --you don´t want to tell the truth: communists are to blame and omit history. Wikipédia is a fun!! Ludovicapipa yes? 20:12, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: From my latest edit, I've only deleted the last two lines which are opinion and somewhat redundant. It's not that the article omits the causes of the coup: It gives ample mention to the events that preceded the coup, such as the sailor's revolt, Goulart's promise to nationalize oil, etc. You wanted to add a general "cause" being "communism". That's fine, but it's a historical perspective which is an analysis of the events (not a description of the events). That should be included, with authors disclosed and in a separate section . There's a difference between providing facts and letting the reader decide for themselves and what you originally did, which was conclude the cause for them. Right now the article accurately describes what happened in the coup, and at the end provides perspective by saying what three different people feel the causes of the coup were. I can't see how that's omitting history. And I don't think communists are to blame. I don't think the military is to blame, either. It's not for me or you to say who's to blame, that's the point. So now we've added sources both of us find reliable, are properly cited and are identified at the end of the article, addressing the causes of the coup. Is there anything else you feel we should discuss?--Dali-Llama 20:27, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation 

message: :Tá bom. Um dia quero ver vc escrever um argio sobr eo legado de Lula. hahahaha Ludovicapipa yes? 20:49, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ok

message: There in the first line...I know Goulart is populist, but do populist=left-wing in English? He was capitalist n' lovin' it, from what I know, being friends with Vargas (fascist sympathizer populist). He wasn't even a social-democrat! He fully supported the United States government diplomatically during the missile crisis, and he was a wealthy landowner. He was, at most, a centrist, and that's only because he promised (we can't even know for sure if that would really happen) to modernize the country's (capitalist) economy to avoid economical collapse, and give some benefits to workers in exchange for political support. Hardly the Godless commie-lovin' dictator-wannabe anti-American bastard the supporters of the coup wanted the world to believe he was. --200.222.30.9 03:10, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Goulart, a left-wing? 

message: I've edited the article with the following rationale:
1)"Coup" vs. "maneuver"/"revolution" - While it is perfectly reasonable to mention the dichotomy of coup vs. revolution between the different sectors of Brazilian society, the bottom line is that this was in fact a coup d'etat, whether one was in favor of it or not. To call it a "maneuver" is euphemistic.
2)Interpretation of Goulart's policies and "Historical Context" - per WP:SYN, we try not to add synthesis of sources to the text. Unless sources are provided which can illustrate "mistaken" assumptions or conflicting viewpoints which meet WP:RS, we should strive to keep personal analysis out of the text. The same goes for the last portion of Historical Context, which while may very well be true, does not meet any of the criteria for inclusion.
3)Lincoln Gordon's history and further details about the dictatorship - This article is related to the events that immediately preceded and immediately followed the military takeover. We should keep information about persons and future events to their respective articles (which are already in Wikipedia).
Feel free to comment or respond! Cheers.--Dali-Llama (talk) 20:35, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That section was inserted in order to acommodate a long-departed editor with a very particular viewpoint. However, I think that with the exception of Jarbas Passarinho, both historians mentioned meet WP:RS. It would be nice to include some more left-leaning historians, but I tried really hard to write that section in a way that it does not endorse those historians' points of view. I'll actually go ahead and remove Jarbas Passarinho.--Dali-Llama (talk) 13:02, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  My revision of 01/08/09 

message: I am surprised at how airbrushed the tome of this article is. Most Brazilian's refer to the period of military rule as ditadura militar (military dictatorship) or simply ditadura (dictatorship). This article makes it look like it was a walk in the park. (It wasn't.) Morganfitzp (talk) 20:55, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a random anonymous editor who is trying to whitewash this article. You just caught one of his edits. Look up the history of the article and you'll see the original. Cheers.--Dali-Llama (talk) 13:02, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Military Dictatorship

message: The article writes:"The friction between the military and João Goulart boiled over with his intervention in a revolt by sailors of the Brazilian Navy led by José Anselmo dos Santos, historically known as Corporal Anselmo, and later exposed as an agent provocateur. On March 25, 1964, nearly 2,000 sailors assembled in Rio de Janeiro, petitioning for better living conditions and pledging their support for Goulart's reforms. The Minister of the Navy, Sílvio Mota, ordered the arrest of the sailors leading the assembly. Mota sent a detachment of marines to arrest the leaders and break up the assembly, led by Rear Admiral Cândido Aragão. These marines ended up joining the assembly and remained with the other sailors.[6]"
In fact "Corporal Anselmo" was an agent of Fidel Castro and the "Sailor's revolt" was did under direct orders of Fidel Castro.This revolt that began the military revolt."Corporal Anselmo" was designed as leader of Vanguarda Popular Revolucionária - a marxist organization- for Fidel Castro himself.After being arrested, "Corporal Anselmo" became linked to brazilian policeman Sérgio Paranhos Fleury and betrayed his former leaders in left, but this happened in 1971. Agre22 (talk) 15:48, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Sailor's revolt

message: Next opportunity, can someone please substitute "Bay of Pigs Invasion" (an event) in place of "Bay of Pigs invasion" (a location), thanks.PeterWD (talk) 11:36, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Disambiguation of Bay of Pigs link

message: I've cleaned up the article's introduction, based on the Portuguese version of the article. --201.10.159.138 (talk) 03:30, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleaned up introduction

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://www.arquivonacional.gov.br/memoria/crapp_site/presidente.asp?rqID=8
** In 1964 Brazilian coup d'état on 2011-05-25 03:49:54, 404 Not Found
** In 1964 Brazilian coup d'état on 2011-06-06 12:53:04, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 12:53, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://www.arquivonacional.gov.br/memoria/crapp_site/presidente.asp?rqID=23
** In 1964 Brazilian coup d'état on 2011-05-25 03:49:54, 404 Not Found
** In 1964 Brazilian coup d'état on 2011-06-06 12:53:29, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 12:54, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 2 

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://www.pdt.org.br/personalidades/brizola.doc
** In 1964 Brazilian coup d'état on 2011-05-25 03:49:54, 404 Not Found
** In 1964 Brazilian coup d'état on 2011-06-06 12:54:25, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 12:54, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 3 

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://www.cpdoc.fgv.br/nav_jgoulart/htm/7A_conjuntura_radicalizacao/A_revolta_dos_marinheiros.asp
** In 1964 Brazilian coup d'état on 2011-05-25 03:49:54, 404 Not Found
** In 1964 Brazilian coup d'état on 2011-06-06 12:54:28, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 12:55, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 4 

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://www.cpdoc.fgv.br/nav_jgoulart/htm/biografias/Joao_Goulart.asp
** In 1964 Brazilian coup d'état on 2011-05-25 03:49:54, 404 Not Found
** In 1964 Brazilian coup d'état on 2011-06-06 12:55:02, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 12:56, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 5 

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://www.cpdoc.fgv.br/nav_jgoulart/htm/6Na_presidencia_republica/Os_militares_e_o_governo_JG.asp
** In 1964 Brazilian coup d'état on 2011-05-25 03:49:54, 404 Not Found
** In 1964 Brazilian coup d'état on 2011-06-06 12:55:43, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 12:56, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 6 

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://www.cpdoc.fgv.br/nav_jgoulart/htm/biografias/Olimpio_Mourao_Filho.asp
** In 1964 Brazilian coup d'état on 2011-05-25 03:49:54, 404 Not Found
** In 1964 Brazilian coup d'état on 2011-06-06 12:56:08, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 12:56, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 7 

message: Was this a "coup d'etat" or "military coup"?
Was it a "golpe de estado" or "golpe militar"?
The military overthrew the standing government and replaced it with a military government and rewrote the constitution. For 20 years, successive military presidents were chosen by and from the military.
With this in mind, why is it a state coup and not a military coup? --Lacarids (talk) 14:54, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title of Article? 

message: The military coup in 1964 began in March 31 and ended in April 1 (sources: 1, 2, 3). As the article says, in the section "The coup", the military overthrew the civilian government. The IP wants to change that to say that it was the Brazilian congress that overthrew the president. He is using this source to back the claim. The source says "The National Congress approved, early this Thursday (21 November 2013), cancellation of the session of the Congress of 2 April 1964 that declared vacant the office of the President João Goulart". According to the chronology presented in the article, the coup happened in March 31 - April 1 1964 period. The following day, with the military already in control of the country, Congress then came in support of the coup (that had already happened) and legalized it by declaring vacant the office of the presidency. But, as the article and the sources say, the president had already been ousted. Coltsfan (talk) 18:41, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: This is just plain vandalism, incredible how this page was not protected. Will keep a eye on this article too. AdjectivesAreBad (talk) 02:09, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

text: So there was no military coup? Thanks for rewriting brazilian history and for contradicting every source in the article. Coltsfan (talk) 03:55, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

text: Just to correct an unhistorical statement for anyone who may read: Goulart never lost the Presidential election because he never run for Presidency. He ran for Vice Presidency and was elected as that. Erick Soares3 (talk) 14:57, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

text: By trying to disqualify a source by simply calling it "left-wing" (without showing any solid/valid source of your own that would contradict the article) already show a POV intention. Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. Coltsfan (talk) 19:51, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

text: That doesn't make any sense. Sorry, but that is just POV pushing. And things don't work like that. Coltsfan (talk) 00:30, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

text: The source you posted does not contradict what's in the article. Your arguments don't make sense. Coltsfan (talk) 03:53, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

text: Again, these sources only prove what is in the article already. Congress only acted after the military had already forced Jango out of Brasilia and out of the office of the presidency. (new sources in english: 1, 2, 3; and portuguese: 1). Facts are facts, and revisionism don't work. Coltsfan (talk) 19:27, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Armed forces or Congress? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on 1964 Brazilian coup d'état. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.dominionpaper.ca/international_news/2004/04/06/us_role_in.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070703095612/http://www.cliohistoria.hpg.ig.com.br:80/bco_imagens/ditadura/para_ouvir.htm to http://www.cliohistoria.hpg.ig.com.br/bco_imagens/ditadura/para_ouvir.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:21, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:36, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: The 1964 Brazilian coup d'état occurs during the Easter Octave of 1964 because its Easter Sunday was a 29 March and its Low Sunday (Quasimodo) was a 5 April. Injust reversion!
2804:18:F2:CA9F:1:0:62C8:4C5D (talk) 13:07, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Easter Octave of 1964 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :CIA activities in Brazil and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at  until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:49, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "CIA activities in Brazil" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]