This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France 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.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance
This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe 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.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
Latest comment: 1 year ago8 comments5 people in discussion
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 reviewafter discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Fall of Maximilien Robespierre → Coup of 9–10 Thermidor – The current title centers on the personal downfall of Maximilien Robespierre, whereas the article addresses a broader political event: the orchestrated overthrow of Robespierre and his Montagnard allies on 9 Thermidor Year II. "Coup of 9 Thermidor" is a more historically accurate and neutral title. It is consistent with the naming conventions of similar events (e.g., the "Coup of 18 Brumaire") and better reflects the article’s focus on the political context of the Thermidorian Reaction, rather than solely Robespierre’s fate. Marissa TRS (talk) 04:20, 12 June 2025 (UTC) —Relisting.Alpha3031 (t • c) 07:39, 28 June 2025 (UTC)Reply
Support. I was stuck either-or before I saw "Coup of 9–10 Thermidor" was already the subject of the infobox. "Coup of 9 Thermidor" (per Jruderman) does read better and is more often cited than 9-10 Thermidor. Marissa TRS (talk) 21:29, 14 June 2025 (UTC)Reply
I think Coup of 9 Thermidor is indeed more common but I also agree with the user 'Javert2113' in terms of context and how it links to Thermidorian Reaction. Maybe it doesn't really need the change? Schwampl (talk) 17:42, 23 June 2025 (UTC)Reply
Oppose: The matter at hand is the fall of Robespierre and his capture and death, and the article properly describes that. The broader political event by definition was the Reaction, but Robespierre's removal was part of it; and I see no particular reason to change our name, especially given the play The Fall of Robespierre, which may have influenced how it is described in English. Still, if it is to be changed, the "Coup of 9 Thermidor" would be the best way to describe it. —Javert2113 (Siarad.|¤)16:21, 15 June 2025 (UTC)Reply
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.
Latest comment: 1 month ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Is this page strictly necessary? I saw there was previous discussion around whether to merge it with the Thermidorian Reaction article, which was closed for lack of consensus. I'm a bit concerned about the inherent bias in having a separate article just about Robespierre, which inevitably over-emphasizes his importance wrt Thermidor, leading to an inaccurate perception of the coup as a whole, which had causes and motivations stretching far beyond "just Robespierre". Also, fixating so heavily on Robespierre alone ignores the many other politically influential and relevant deputies who were also removed and/or executed during the coup, artificially inflating Robespierre's political power. Important to remember that Robespierre was never a president, prime minister, dictator, or head of state, and his sizeable political influence was mostly the result of popular attention (many appreciated politicians that did not take bribes) and political alliances rather than any codified executive powers. ~2026-38763-73 (talk) 00:41, 8 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
The article is absolutely necessary. There are entire books dedicated to the topic. His speeches at the Jacobin Club and then the Convention were the catalyst to the events of 8 and 9 Thermidor, in which he was shouted down as a tyrant and the Convention called for his arrest. There are certainly a myriad of complementary influences for the events of the Thermidorian Reaction, but to argue that the fall of Robespierre isn't itself a core topic is just counter to the historic consensus. — Chao Garden 🌱 ~ say hello01:06, 8 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
