This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
NATO article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 180 days |
This article is written in British English with Oxford spelling (colour, realize, organization, analyse; note that -ize is used instead of -ise) 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 page is not a forum for general discussion about NATO. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about NATO at the Reference desk. |
This
level-3 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other talk page banners | |||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present. |
The following discussion 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.
Editor added {{
GAR request}}
tag on t/p last month. 2006 listing has valid cleanup banners and citation issues. Unusually, updating doesn't seem to be an issue.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk) 12:39, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
An article can be failed without further review (known as a quick fail) if, prior to the review it has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid ... All content that could reasonably be challenged ... must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph.
After at least one week, if the article's issues are unresolved and there are no objections to delisting, the discussion may be closed as delist.
A GAR closure should only be contested if the closure was obviously against consensus or otherwise procedurally incorrect...Before disputing a GAR closure, first discuss your concerns with the closing editor on their talk page.Am I to understand that you wish to improve the article back to GAR standard? In the future, please leave a note on the relevant GA reassessment page; that would save us all a lot of bother. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 19:15, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
It is landing. If you open the Operation Deliberate Force page, it is correct. If anybody needs proof, the air brakes are deployed(open). Tb-3000 ( talk) 17:27, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
Could it be helpful to add a map of Article 6, such as this one? 2600:1002:B012:ABB2:9554:4E1C:1C34:6CC3 ( talk) 04:21, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
After just having watched the rather recent interview with Putin, this final part of the lead sounds like it could have been sneaked into the article by Putin himself. It indirectly puts the blame on NATO for tensions with Russia ( Wikipedia:Undue weight). And unlike almost everything in the lead, this part doesn't have a reference. It sounds like weasel words to me.
Enlargement has led to tensions with non-member Russia, one of the twenty additional countries participating in NATO's Partnership for Peace programme. Another nineteen countries are involved in institutionalized dialogue programmes with NATO.
Torr3 ( talk) 01:17, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
it is common for citations to appear in the body and not the lead, so there is nothing unusual about that. I see no glaring problems with the sentences you quoted. It is indisputable that tensions exist between NATO and Russia. The Neutral point of view is a core content policy on Wikipedia. Cullen328 ( talk) 01:25, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Could someone with access update the article to reflect Sweden joining NATO. TheOrigamiAnalysis ( talk) 15:54, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hungary ratifies Sweden's entry Octilllion ( talk) 18:20, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
Sweden has joined NATO earlier today after finally being accepted by Hungary.
This article needs to be updated accordingly to appropriate with reality. Please remain focused and quick. 87.120.102.13 ( talk) 18:46, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change
"NATO is a deterrent intergovernmental military alliance".
to
"NATO is an intergovernmental military alliance".
Calling it a "deterrent" is unsourced and at the very least WP:UNDUE for the first sentence. As far as I can tell it got shoehorned into the article without consensus. 22090912l ( talk) 23:23, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Why are Puerto Rico and French Guiana in dark green? I thought that there were outside the Treaty, since they are south of the Tropic of Cancer (and Guiana not being an island.). Alexander K. Cox ( talk) 21:12, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
"Finland is the newest member; it joined on 4 April 2023, spurred on by Russia's invasion of Ukraine" is no longer an accurate statement as Sweden, for similar reasons as Finland, has joined the alliance on 3/7/2024 after Turkiye and Hungary dropped their dissent against it. S22N ( talk) 16:36, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Under the "Membership" section, it still mentions NATO having thirty-one members three different times. This should be changed to saying thirty-two instead:
"NATO has thirty-one members, all in Europe and North America"
"Twelve of these thirty-one are original members"
"Membership has subsequently grown to 31 through several enlargements"
In addition to this, it mentions Finland being the newest member under the Enlargement subsection of Membership. This should be changed to Sweden. Lowkschwonz ( talk) 17:08, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
The map in the Membership section needs to be updated to show Sweden as a member.— Anita5192 ( talk) 17:32, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
I checked the new map and saw that an old, albeit very nitpicky problem, is back again (which was fixed in the last version). There's some kind of a white border in Romania showing Transylvania. I know it's very very nitpicky, but I just had to mention it, haha. Seems to be something with the base map
You can see what I mean by just zooming in on Romania on the map (linked the map here for ease of access). There's a clear outline of Transylvania for some reason. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/North_Atlantic_Treaty_Organization_%28orthographic_projection%29_in_NATO_blue.svg
Once again, I know that it's very nitpicky but I don't know why it's there, lol. Thanks! (Also, there's some green colored parts at Alaska) But thanks! MeManBlaze ( talk) 21:16, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
=== Enlargement === {{Main|Enlargement of NATO}} {{stack|[[File:History of NATO enlargement.svg|thumb|upright=1.0|right|NATO has added 15 new members since [[German reunification]] and the end of the [[Cold War]].|alt=A map of Europe with countries labelled in shades of blue, green, and yellow based on when they joined NATO.]]}}
Sweden has joined. Can you please change "15" to "16"? Human Transistor ( talk) 22:42, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Upon reviewing the map representation of NATO members, I noticed that territories like Hawaii (USA) and others such as French Guiana (France) and the Falkland Islands (UK) are depicted similarly to mainland territories. While these territories are integral parts of NATO countries, there exists a significant nuance concerning Article 5's mutual defense commitments that might not be immediately apparent from the map.
Article 5 is the cornerstone of NATO's foundation, stipulating that an armed attack against one or more members is considered an attack against all members. However, the application of Article 5 is geographically limited.
Specifically, it applies to the territories of member states in North America, Europe, the Turkish Straits, and the Mediterranean Sea islands. This definition excludes certain territories like Hawaii, which, despite being a part of the United States, falls outside the geographic scope of Article 5's mutual defense commitment.
Given this, I propose that the map could benefit from a visual differentiation between territories where NATO's Article 5 commitment is applicable and those where it is not. This adjustment would not only provide clarity but also align with the factual geographical limitations of Article 5, enhancing the map's informational precision. Implementing such a distinction could prevent misunderstandings about the exact scope of NATO's mutual defense obligations and accurately represent the geographical coverage of Article 5. Would it be possible to revisit the map's design to reflect these critical distinctions?
- Atfyfe ( talk) 23:59, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
This map is not updated, can anyone rectify it ?
BlackSun3988 ( talk) 03:18, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
Are the links to the Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, and Ukraine as the recognized aspiring members intentionally excluded? As a reader, I would have found them convenient. Junghyeon Park ( talk) 03:08, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
Just notifying that a discussion about the color scheme of c:File:History of NATO enlargement.svg is being done at c:File talk:History of NATO enlargement.svg Abzeronow ( talk) 17:44, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Based on this article - https://edition.cnn.com/2024/03/29/us/nato-treaty-hawaii-intl-hnk-ml-dst/index.html, Hawaii is not part of NATO, so at the map Hawaii should be grey.
Dasomm ( talk) 19:41, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
185.12.14.2 ( talk) 06:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
I'm going to make the text in this article clearer and more presentable to read.
'''[[
User:CanonNi]]'''
(
talk|
contribs) 06:44, 25 April 2024 (UTC)This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
NATO article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 180 days |
This article is written in British English with Oxford spelling (colour, realize, organization, analyse; note that -ize is used instead of -ise) 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. |
NATO has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page is not a forum for general discussion about NATO. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about NATO at the Reference desk. |
This
level-3 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other talk page banners | |||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present. |
The following discussion 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.
Editor added {{
GAR request}}
tag on t/p last month. 2006 listing has valid cleanup banners and citation issues. Unusually, updating doesn't seem to be an issue.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk) 12:39, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
An article can be failed without further review (known as a quick fail) if, prior to the review it has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid ... All content that could reasonably be challenged ... must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph.
After at least one week, if the article's issues are unresolved and there are no objections to delisting, the discussion may be closed as delist.
A GAR closure should only be contested if the closure was obviously against consensus or otherwise procedurally incorrect...Before disputing a GAR closure, first discuss your concerns with the closing editor on their talk page.Am I to understand that you wish to improve the article back to GAR standard? In the future, please leave a note on the relevant GA reassessment page; that would save us all a lot of bother. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 19:15, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
It is landing. If you open the Operation Deliberate Force page, it is correct. If anybody needs proof, the air brakes are deployed(open). Tb-3000 ( talk) 17:27, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
Could it be helpful to add a map of Article 6, such as this one? 2600:1002:B012:ABB2:9554:4E1C:1C34:6CC3 ( talk) 04:21, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
After just having watched the rather recent interview with Putin, this final part of the lead sounds like it could have been sneaked into the article by Putin himself. It indirectly puts the blame on NATO for tensions with Russia ( Wikipedia:Undue weight). And unlike almost everything in the lead, this part doesn't have a reference. It sounds like weasel words to me.
Enlargement has led to tensions with non-member Russia, one of the twenty additional countries participating in NATO's Partnership for Peace programme. Another nineteen countries are involved in institutionalized dialogue programmes with NATO.
Torr3 ( talk) 01:17, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
it is common for citations to appear in the body and not the lead, so there is nothing unusual about that. I see no glaring problems with the sentences you quoted. It is indisputable that tensions exist between NATO and Russia. The Neutral point of view is a core content policy on Wikipedia. Cullen328 ( talk) 01:25, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Could someone with access update the article to reflect Sweden joining NATO. TheOrigamiAnalysis ( talk) 15:54, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hungary ratifies Sweden's entry Octilllion ( talk) 18:20, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
Sweden has joined NATO earlier today after finally being accepted by Hungary.
This article needs to be updated accordingly to appropriate with reality. Please remain focused and quick. 87.120.102.13 ( talk) 18:46, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change
"NATO is a deterrent intergovernmental military alliance".
to
"NATO is an intergovernmental military alliance".
Calling it a "deterrent" is unsourced and at the very least WP:UNDUE for the first sentence. As far as I can tell it got shoehorned into the article without consensus. 22090912l ( talk) 23:23, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Why are Puerto Rico and French Guiana in dark green? I thought that there were outside the Treaty, since they are south of the Tropic of Cancer (and Guiana not being an island.). Alexander K. Cox ( talk) 21:12, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
"Finland is the newest member; it joined on 4 April 2023, spurred on by Russia's invasion of Ukraine" is no longer an accurate statement as Sweden, for similar reasons as Finland, has joined the alliance on 3/7/2024 after Turkiye and Hungary dropped their dissent against it. S22N ( talk) 16:36, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Under the "Membership" section, it still mentions NATO having thirty-one members three different times. This should be changed to saying thirty-two instead:
"NATO has thirty-one members, all in Europe and North America"
"Twelve of these thirty-one are original members"
"Membership has subsequently grown to 31 through several enlargements"
In addition to this, it mentions Finland being the newest member under the Enlargement subsection of Membership. This should be changed to Sweden. Lowkschwonz ( talk) 17:08, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
The map in the Membership section needs to be updated to show Sweden as a member.— Anita5192 ( talk) 17:32, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
I checked the new map and saw that an old, albeit very nitpicky problem, is back again (which was fixed in the last version). There's some kind of a white border in Romania showing Transylvania. I know it's very very nitpicky, but I just had to mention it, haha. Seems to be something with the base map
You can see what I mean by just zooming in on Romania on the map (linked the map here for ease of access). There's a clear outline of Transylvania for some reason. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/North_Atlantic_Treaty_Organization_%28orthographic_projection%29_in_NATO_blue.svg
Once again, I know that it's very nitpicky but I don't know why it's there, lol. Thanks! (Also, there's some green colored parts at Alaska) But thanks! MeManBlaze ( talk) 21:16, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
=== Enlargement === {{Main|Enlargement of NATO}} {{stack|[[File:History of NATO enlargement.svg|thumb|upright=1.0|right|NATO has added 15 new members since [[German reunification]] and the end of the [[Cold War]].|alt=A map of Europe with countries labelled in shades of blue, green, and yellow based on when they joined NATO.]]}}
Sweden has joined. Can you please change "15" to "16"? Human Transistor ( talk) 22:42, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Upon reviewing the map representation of NATO members, I noticed that territories like Hawaii (USA) and others such as French Guiana (France) and the Falkland Islands (UK) are depicted similarly to mainland territories. While these territories are integral parts of NATO countries, there exists a significant nuance concerning Article 5's mutual defense commitments that might not be immediately apparent from the map.
Article 5 is the cornerstone of NATO's foundation, stipulating that an armed attack against one or more members is considered an attack against all members. However, the application of Article 5 is geographically limited.
Specifically, it applies to the territories of member states in North America, Europe, the Turkish Straits, and the Mediterranean Sea islands. This definition excludes certain territories like Hawaii, which, despite being a part of the United States, falls outside the geographic scope of Article 5's mutual defense commitment.
Given this, I propose that the map could benefit from a visual differentiation between territories where NATO's Article 5 commitment is applicable and those where it is not. This adjustment would not only provide clarity but also align with the factual geographical limitations of Article 5, enhancing the map's informational precision. Implementing such a distinction could prevent misunderstandings about the exact scope of NATO's mutual defense obligations and accurately represent the geographical coverage of Article 5. Would it be possible to revisit the map's design to reflect these critical distinctions?
- Atfyfe ( talk) 23:59, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
This map is not updated, can anyone rectify it ?
BlackSun3988 ( talk) 03:18, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
Are the links to the Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, and Ukraine as the recognized aspiring members intentionally excluded? As a reader, I would have found them convenient. Junghyeon Park ( talk) 03:08, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
Just notifying that a discussion about the color scheme of c:File:History of NATO enlargement.svg is being done at c:File talk:History of NATO enlargement.svg Abzeronow ( talk) 17:44, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Based on this article - https://edition.cnn.com/2024/03/29/us/nato-treaty-hawaii-intl-hnk-ml-dst/index.html, Hawaii is not part of NATO, so at the map Hawaii should be grey.
Dasomm ( talk) 19:41, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
185.12.14.2 ( talk) 06:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
I'm going to make the text in this article clearer and more presentable to read.
'''[[
User:CanonNi]]'''
(
talk|
contribs) 06:44, 25 April 2024 (UTC)