Jump to content

Talk:NATO: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Reverted to revision 279277338 by Ravenlord. (TW)
Undid revision 279448260 by BritishWatcher (talk)
Line 105: Line 105:


[[User:Ravenlord|Ravenlord]] ([[User talk:Ravenlord|talk]]) 02:11, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
[[User:Ravenlord|Ravenlord]] ([[User talk:Ravenlord|talk]]) 02:11, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

== NATO killing ==

Shame on you for the killing of innocent people ten years ago. But, regardless, God bless you - we are just Christians, and we are do not forgeting... --[[User:Pokrajac|Pockey]] ([[User talk:Pokrajac|talk]]) 21:10, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:41, 27 March 2009

Good articleNATO 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 13, 2006Good article nomineeListed
August 9, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
Current status: Good article

Template:WP1.0

Map

The map includes France who is not a NATO member. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.229.25.21 (talk) 02:32, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

France has been a NATO member since the Treaty was signed in 1948. It did withdraw from the NATO military command structure in the 1960s, but that was not a withdrawal from the organisation. As you will see from Google News if you check, discussions are now underway to return France to the military command structure as well; they may assume command of Allied Command Transformation and Joint Command Lisbon. Regards Buckshot06(prof) 12:34, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Map

The map of NATO countries needs updated to reflect Albania and Croatia's membership. SpudHawg948 (talk) 20:57, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They haven't joined yet, though. Buckshot06(prof) 18:36, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Map Image

I know the map of Europe and North America were mashed together to make the map image look better (without a giant ocean between)... by why on Earth does Alaska appear to be as large as 50% of the continental USA?? Alaska may be our biggest state here in the USA, but it is not that huge! Who the heck made this map??

Probably a Mercator projection; distorts the size of land areas near the Poles. Buckshot06(prof) 05:17, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not Just Albania

The article states that " the former Warsaw Pact states - except Albania - joining the alliance in 1999 and 2004", are we forgeting the de facto leader of the Warsaw Pact, Russia? While Latvia and Estonia are NATO members (and Georgia and Ukraine will likely become members); Russia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan and other fmr Soviet Republics are not currently members of NATO. LCpl (talk) 01:41, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He's got a good point there! Dharma6662000 (talk) 23:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kosovo on maps

Two maps within the article disagree on whether there is an independent state of Kosovo, or there is no. Also please consider the South Ossetia and Abkhazia with the same legal state as Kosovo (i.e. recognized by part of UN members). AFAIK, part of NATO members recognize K. as independent, part does not, and none of them recognizes A. and S.O. as independent. Here are the maps in question: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/NATO_expansion.png and http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5e/Location_NATO.svg .FeelSunny (talk) 22:17, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would be really nice if we could have a picture of that statue of the NATO logo, the one with iron beams sticking out from it. It's a really impressive piece of industrial art, shame not to have any pictures of it here. Nastykermit (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 09:18, 17 December 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Deputy Secretary General

This needs to be updated. Alessandro Minuto Rizzo has been replaced in 2007 by Claudio Bisogniero, who helds this post up to date. (Sebecq (talk) 14:54, 18 December 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Confirmed: NATO biography of Bisogniero. Crystal whacker (talk) 14:57, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Updated, will add the other previous deputies to the list as well although will have to dig for nationality. Seems odd that theres been 3 Italians as deputy for over 14 years, anyone know why? BritishWatcher (talk) 15:11, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for editing

{{editsemiprotected}} Please, since the appropriate page has been created in Wikipedia, I would kindly ask to redirect the links (both of tehm) of the:

paragraph 7 Organizations and Agencies Third to last bullet - the Research and Technology Agency (RTA),[57] reporting to the NATO Research and Technology Organization (RTO);

to the link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_Research_and_Technology_Organisation


Also, as according to the offical definition, I would suggest to change the spelling (in teh above mentioned lines and in the relevant reference at number 57) so to reduce ambiguity.

Thank you. ABwiki 19:11, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

 Done, thanks. I've also added a redirect to that article at NATO Research and Technology Organization so as to assist people who search with the other spelling of organisation. ~ mazca t|c 19:40, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

France re-entry into military command

France has re-entered NATO's military command, so everything relating to it's withdrawal needs to be changed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.45.67 (talk) 12:06, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's not entirely true. Firstly, the official announcement is not yet been made, and second, all the material covering 1966 etc needs to stay; we just add some data saying that in 2009 France reentered and it seems that French officers will take command of Allied Command Transformation and Joint Command Lisbon. But we have to wait for the final formal announcement. - Buckshot06
Sarkozy's proposal must be debated by the French Parliament first, where it is expected pass next week. Regardless, the history will need to be revised.--Patrick «» 19:26, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


The OECD Model

The same way as the OECD was first established between Europe and America and later extended to Australia, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand and Mexico (Chile, Russia and Israel are candidates) it is expected for NATO to do the same including Australia, Japan, South Korea and probably Mexico. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.18.150.22 (talk) 04:10, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed NATO Wikiproject

Hi there, I've recently proposed a NATO Wikiproject to cover all things NATO. If you'd be interested in helping get one started, head over to the nomination page and voice your support. Cool3 (talk) 04:53, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Future Enlargement section

There is a notice "citation needed" for the following sentence:

Other potential candidate countries include Montenegro and Bosnia & Herzegovina.

I have found two links on NATO official web site to support this claim:

http://www.nato.int/issues/nato-montenegro/index.html

http://www.nato.int/issues/nato-bosnia-herzegovina/index.html

Ravenlord (talk) 02:11, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NATO killing

Shame on you for the killing of innocent people ten years ago. But, regardless, God bless you - we are just Christians, and we are do not forgeting... --Pockey (talk) 21:10, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]