Wikipedia talk:WikiProject NATO

???	Total
0	0

Our banner

I have created the following template for use as our project banner. What do you think?

Good start, but the image on the left doesn't seem to clearly show the NATO logo at a small scale. Would any of these images be better (or perhaps others at commons:Category:North Atlantic Treaty Organization)?

Dl2000 (talk) 03:26, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that a better depiction of the logo would be better. Take a look at the flag here [1] (I'm not sure if that's actually free although it is on a USG site). Also, I like [2], probably cropped around the banner to remove Hilary Clinton. Cool3 (talk) 03:39, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Importance Scale?

Should we have an importance scale for the project? Some project, notably WP:MILHIST don't have an importance scale, but I tend to think one would be appropriate given the relatively well defined scope of the project? It's fairly simple to add the parameter to the template. Cool3 (talk) 21:01, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Merger?

Can we not merge this as a military alliances task force of WP:MILHIST? It would have all the back end support for free there and could bring in the Warsaw Pact, CENTO, SEATO, and others if it did. Buckshot06(prof) 16:15, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, the primary goal of forming this project was to look at more than just the military aspects of NATO. While MILHIST does a good job of covering military matters, it's not really set up to support or coordinate articles like Secretary General of NATO or NATO enlargement. Simply put, NATO is more than just military. Cool3 (talk) 17:47, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Ranks

I realize this WikiProject is in its infancy, but I'd just like to suggest that the NATO ranks pages are updated to include the two newest member states. Cheers.--Thewanderer (talk) 01:57, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Presumably, this means adding Albania and Croatia to the various lists specified in NATO ranks. Currently taking a run at those, although the insignia images may not be set up at first. Dl2000 (talk) 16:08, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, exactly. Good job so far!--Thewanderer (talk) 20:31, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Draft conventions/Manual of Style

A draft style guide for the NATO project is now available at Wikipedia:NATO/Conventions. This is a draft; review and discussion on this is encouraged. We probably don't need too many rules, but can discuss further on the Conventions talk page. The goal is to have consensus for a basic set of conventions to use in NATO articles. Dl2000 (talk) 03:09, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

FA Collaboration

I'd like to propose that we begin a Featured Article Collaboration project (perhaps designed to produce one per month). We could start with an article of relatively high quality (at least B-class, preferably GA) and then polish it up to FA class for the end of the month. If you guys agree, then I'd like to propose starting with Operation Deny Flight, which is currently a MILHIST A-Class and only narrowly failed a previously FAC (it's pretty low-hanging fruit). I think working together on an FA would be a big boost for our project here in it's infancy. What do you think? Cool3 (talk) 18:07, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Some bots for you.

See WP:AAlerts (discussion monitoring), User:AlexNewArtBot (to find newly created articles) and User:WolterBot (cleanup). Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 07:57, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps invitation

This message is being sent to WikiProjects with GAs under their scope. Since August 2007, WikiProject Good Articles has been participating in GA sweeps. The process helps to ensure that articles that have passed a nomination before that date meet the GA criteria. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. Instead of reviewing by topic, editors can consider picking and choosing whichever articles they are interested in.

We are always looking for new members to assist with reviewing the remaining articles, and since this project has GAs under its scope, it would be beneficial if any of its members could review a few articles (perhaps your project's articles). Your project's members are likely to be more knowledgeable about your topic GAs then an outside reviewer. As a result, reviewing your project's articles would improve the quality of the review in ensuring that the article meets your project's concerns on sourcing, content, and guidelines. However, members can also review any other article in the worklist to ensure it meets the GA criteria.

If any members are interested, please visit the GA sweeps page for further details and instructions in initiating a review. If you'd like to join the process, please add your name to the running total page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles from the worklist or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. With ~1,300 articles left to review, we would appreciate any editors that could contribute in helping to uphold the quality of GAs. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:10, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

FAC for Hastings Ismay now open

Hello all, I've nominated the article on Hastings Ismay, NATO's first Secretary General for featured article status. Please join in the discussion at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hastings Ismay, 1st Baron Ismay/archive1. Cool3 (talk) 23:31, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Operation Sky Monitor A-Class Review

Operation Sky Monitor is currently undergoing an A-Class Review through WikiProject Military History. Please join in the discussion, here. Cool3 (talk) 22:52, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Post Cold War Global NATO

The current NATO article is extremely weak in explaining the evolution of NATO after the Cold War and in conjunction with the evolution of the EU. NATO during most of the Cold War was an alliance whose sole purpose was to defend Europe against aggression by the USSR/Warsaw Pact.

NATO is a sui generis institution and is not easily catagorized by analogy with other organizations and relationships. Just like the EU, it is unique. Members of NATO are "allies". The EU itself is a de facto member of NATO by virtue of the Berlin Agreements. The six non-NATO EU nations have a sui generis relationship with NATO, while not formal members they are de facto members by virtue of their membership in the EU. After the Cold War, NATO has transformed itself into a global military alliance whose three major operations have taken place outside its boundaries - Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan. Save Malta and Cyprus which have very small militaries, Sweden, Finland, Austria and Ireland (together the six non-NATO EU nations) have all contributed military forces to all three post Cold War NATO major operations. Ireland has an even more complicated relationship with both the EU and NATO as its constitutional neutrality is recognized as a special case within the structures of the EU itself.

NATO becomes a global alliance by virtue of a series of relationships. These begin with the four "contact countries" - Japan, Korea (Korea means the Republic of Korea), Australia and New Zealand. These get reinforced by bilateral or multilaterial military alliances of these four nations with major nations of NATO. This begins with the Mutual Defense Treaties (MDT) of the USA with Japan and Korea and through ANZUS with Australia and New Zealand. Each of these are nuanced. Japan's constitution precludes it joining any military alliance outside of its MDT with the USA. Japan also has a pacifist constitution which renounces war. But this restriction has evolved and relaxed over time due to the passage of time and necessity. Japan sent naval combat ships into the Indian Ocean as part of the initial US invasion of Taliban control Afghanistan. Australia, New Zealand and Korea sent forces into Afghanistan. Australia sent forces to Europe under NATO command in the Balkins. Japan's self defense zone has never been defined and could today include Taiwan, the Philippines and Korea. Japan is purposefully vague. The USA has extended its nuclear deterent shield over both Japan and Korea. And the US-Canadian NORAD command has now been expanded over the Pacific to cover North Korea specifically and the PRC and Russia in the East practically. With this comes the creation of an allied anti-missile shield over the Pacific and Arctic which loops together the USA, Japan, Korea and Canada. The USA then have other MDTs in the East; the Philippines and the several Pacific island nations in various sui generis associations politically with the USA along with the US Pacific territories.

This American led NATO globalization also occurs through several European states (the UK, France, Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, Denmark, Finland and Norway). Begin with the UK, the UK has territorial possessions all over the world. These territories are theoretically part of NATO. The recent tests of this was the Falklands War and several Moroccan-Spanish incidents. The USA requested that the UK not enact Article 5 and force the NATO alliance into the war. The USA was an ally of both the UK and Argentina. The USA and Argentina are both signators to the Rio Treaty which requires collective defense of the Americas against outside aggressors (the USA argued that it recognized the Falklands as British territory and that Argentina was the aggressor and therefore the Rio Treaty would not apply, Mexico left the Rio Alliance over this conflict). DeGaulle's schism with NATO began with the Algerian Civil War and NATO's reluctance to intervene. While the question of NATO defense of outlining and perhaps colonial possessions of member states remains ambiguous, the emergence of the EU creates a second de facto globalization of NATO. The incorporated territories of the EU globally is complex. But from fully incorporated non-European territories like French Guiana (in South America) and New Caledonia (South Pacific) to expressly excluded such as the the British Crown possessions, the EU has largely formalized these outlining NATO member territories into the EU itself. Under the Berlin Agreements defense of these territories of the EU is first a question of NATO. If NATO declines, the EU would act and be able to use NATO military assets to do so.

The UK then has its set of defense pacts starting with the FPDA which ties the UK, Australia, Malaysia, Singapore and New Zealand to the defense of Malaysia and Singapore. The UK has various obligations to defend the Commonwealth nations against external aggression. Malaysia and Singaopre both have sent forces to Afghanistan under NATO-ISAF.

Several South American nations have their own special relationships with the Allies. Chile, even under its current left-wing social democrat government continues to tighten its military bonds with the Allies. It participates in the massive RIMPAC military exercises and has adopted NATO standards, tactics, training and weapons to its entire military. Next is Columbia which has a de facto MDT with the USA. Columbia is sending forces to Afghanistan this year under NATO-ISAF. Guyana and Surinam have moved towards the allies as Venezuela-Cuba-Nicaragua have sought to morph the ALBA socialist economic block into a communist military alliance. Peru is also wired into the Alliance as a RIMPAC partner and by virtue of its war against foreign backed communist insurgents.

Lastly, NATO has three formal partnership programs - the Partnership for Peace, the Mediterranean Dialogue and the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative which bring into "partnership" with NATO a multitude of nations. Within each of these programs individual nations develop bilateral agreements with NATO which range from membership tracks (Macedonia and Montenegro) to consultation (Russia) to unexpected as is the partnership with Jordan which works with NATO to train forces of the Palestinian Authority.

The project should address these realities which are very relavent in today's world and largely missing from the current wiki NATO article.

7o62x39 (talk) 22:53, 7 July 2009 (UTC)7o62x39

NATO Traning Mission Afghanistan (NTM-A)

I have been tasked with creating a page for NTM-A would you have any sugestions Ed.vasquez (talk) 08:28, 22 November 2009 (UTC)ed.vasquez