Talk:Munich Agreement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

F. L. Lucas[edit]

Is there any particular reason as to why the article includes two full op-eds by a F. L. Lucas? --PRODUCER (TALK) 12:44, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes, precisely because they're by "a" F L Lucas. He was one of the leading critics of the appeasement movement of this period, sufficient to appear on Nazi post-invasion arrest lists. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:54, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
I still don't understand how that justifies two full op-eds being included in the article from a Wikipedia policy perspective. I'm less concerned about who wrote it and more about why policy would have it be included it, be it supportive or critical of the agreement. This appears to have been added by a IP fan who has spammed it and other works by Lucas across numerous articles. [1][2][3][4][5][6] --PRODUCER (TALK) 19:26, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Czechoslovakia had alliance with Britain?[edit]

From the introduction: The phrase "Munich Betrayal" (Czech: Mnichovská zrada; Slovak: Mníchovská zrada) is also used because the military alliance Czechoslovakia had with France and Britain proved useless.

Britain had no formal alliance with Czechoslovakia - UK was bound only by vague Covenant of the League of Nations. I changed this nonesense few years ago and it is back...Pavlor (talk) 19:03, 11 June 2014 (UTC)