The furthest that the guardian went, was saying their claims of an FBI setup were "not entirely outlandish".
But then you introduced the story here as if the FBI "created the plot". That's not what your link said
Of the 13 people involved the FBI has admitted to 5 of them being directly or indirectly working on behalf of the FBI including the group leader. There is significant evidence pointing to the fact that if the FBI had not been involved the plot would've never happened.
At the risk of true scotmanning, no, I didn't come away from either the guardian nor wiki links thinking the evidence was "significant".
Actually I didn't see any evidence in either link, that without the FBI, no attack would have happened.
What evidence do you think could lead you to conclude, that no attack would happen if not for the FBI?
So the leader of the group who was supplying the group was also being supplied by the FBI and was an informant for the FBI and acting under the FBI's direction. I don't know how you can get much more convincing then the lead dude who is spending hours planning it and who will got all the supplies was 100% of the FBI's pocket and then come to the belief that the FBI didn't directly instigate it.
Do you think with all of those facts that the crimes they are accused of would have happened without Chappel in the lead?
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-proudboys-leader-excl...
I don’t think your example supports that. “Group leader was formerly an informant for both the FBI and local law enforcement” does not indicate “FBI planted him as group leader”.