Talk:North Atlantic Treaty

message: The terms Atlantic Pact and North Atlantic Pact were in common use before NATO was formed. The Western European Union predated NATO and numerous declassified documents in the National Archives, London, use these terms freely, in the context of WEU military planning. One such example is DEFE 11/279 Clandestine Organisations, which documents WEU efforts to set up clandestine resistance and sabotage organizations in Eastern and Western European countries behind Soviet front lines in the event of a Russian attack and advance to the Rhine. Some rewriting of the main article needs to take account of this other use of the term Atlantic Pact.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by George.Hutchinson (talk • contribs) 10:22, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Atlantic Pact misnomer

message: In the content section, there is an excess of detail relating to the history of usage of the articles of the treaty.  The information appears, to me, to be unrelated to the actual content of the treaty and could also be construed as detailing a conflict unrelated to the article for political purposes.  I believe the article needs to be edited significantly.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.226.151.3 (talk) 16:22, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality and relevance 

message: where are articles 2 and 3?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.49.6.225 (talk) 12:36, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The NAT has 14 articles. The link to Full Text is at the bottom of the Wikipedia article. 75.131.210.126 (talk) 19:36, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  articles 2 and 3? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 10 external links on North Atlantic Treaty. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150626182142/http://www.todayszaman.com/diplomacy_pm-turkey-may-invoke-natos-article-5-over-syrian-border-fire_277185.html to http://www.todayszaman.com/diplomacy_pm-turkey-may-invoke-natos-article-5-over-syrian-border-fire_277185.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150626180355/http://www.todayszaman.com/diplomacy_observers-say-natos-fifth-charter-comes-into-play-if-clashes-with-syria-get-worse_277187.html to http://www.todayszaman.com/diplomacy_observers-say-natos-fifth-charter-comes-into-play-if-clashes-with-syria-get-worse_277187.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150626231647/http://www.todayszaman.com/diplomacy_nato-says-monitoring-tension-in-turkey-syria-border_277247.html to http://www.todayszaman.com/diplomacy_nato-says-monitoring-tension-in-turkey-syria-border_277247.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150626220508/http://www.todayszaman.com/diplomacy_turkey-to-discuss-syria-with-nato-at-brussels-meeting_277793.html to http://www.todayszaman.com/diplomacy_turkey-to-discuss-syria-with-nato-at-brussels-meeting_277793.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150627020350/http://www.todayszaman.com/diplomacy_turkey-intends-to-provoke-tension-in-syria-by-raising-article-5-syria-says_278953.html to http://www.todayszaman.com/diplomacy_turkey-intends-to-provoke-tension-in-syria-by-raising-article-5-syria-says_278953.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150626222519/http://www.todayszaman.com/diplomacy_turkey-syrias-jet-downing-an-attack-on-the-whole-of-nato_284651.html to http://www.todayszaman.com/diplomacy_turkey-syrias-jet-downing-an-attack-on-the-whole-of-nato_284651.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150627043202/http://www.todayszaman.com/diplomacy_nato-envoys-to-meet-tuesday-over-downed-turkish-jet_284476.html to http://www.todayszaman.com/diplomacy_nato-envoys-to-meet-tuesday-over-downed-turkish-jet_284476.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150626194107/http://www.todayszaman.com/diplomacy_turkey-says-jet-shot-down-in-international-airspace_284462.html to http://www.todayszaman.com/diplomacy_turkey-says-jet-shot-down-in-international-airspace_284462.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150627050427/http://www.todayszaman.com/diplomacy_turkey-not-to-invoke-art-5-nato-war-in-syria-as-unlikely-as-ever_284616.html to http://www.todayszaman.com/diplomacy_turkey-not-to-invoke-art-5-nato-war-in-syria-as-unlikely-as-ever_284616.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150627050703/http://www.todayszaman.com/national_nato-wary-of-syria-intervention-but-ready-to-defend-turkey_294712.html to http://www.todayszaman.com/national_nato-wary-of-syria-intervention-but-ready-to-defend-turkey_294712.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:24, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: We nbut we are dying and suffering at the hands off your vets.n eed your help here. No affence 😘 please help us . now before more dye. Lisa bunch 2600:387:F:4B32:0:0:0:8 (talk) 22:40, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Springfield oregon 

message: I removed the Cuban Missile Crisis from the table because it wasn't invoked then, but there does seem to be interesting literature about why it wasn't invoked, which may be useful to add: https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1224&context=eilr, https://www.jstor.org/stable/2152053 //Lollipoplollipoplollipop::talk 12:08, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you think was going on with that other source I found from the National Security Council (that's a pretty good competing source, right?)?  I saw that the NATO ambassador Finletter was ordered to convene, so I treated that as an Article 4 invocation.  Your second source is interesting, so let me hold off until I can get access to the full version, but I'd like to see it to doublecheck through it.  I also wonder if there were past invocations, but we just don't know about them because they haven't been declassified yet, or how many of these sources have kept up with recent declassifications.  Fephisto (talk) 16:57, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: NATO meets all the time and has ambassadors doing things all the time. It's not under Article 4 unless the article specifically is invoked. Past classified invocations is an intriguing idea, but I don't think its likely, to be honest. //Lollipoplollipoplollipop::talk 19:24, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I got a chance to look at the second link you linked here (that Wikipedia library access feature is amazing), thanks for that, it really helped clear things up.  I also tried to incorporate the prior link into the article, since it makes clear the deterrent nature of Article 4.  Fephisto (talk) 23:54, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cuban Missile Crisis 

message: When in reference to a specific article of the treaty, is it considered a proper noun?  E.g., should one say "but by Article 5, allied members must" or should one say "but by article 5, allied members must"?  Currently, the capitalization is inconsistent throughout the article.  Fephisto (talk) 15:43, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: A lot of the referenced news articles appear to capitalize "Article" when in reference to a specific article of the treaty, so I've gone through and copied that same style here.  Fephisto (talk) 01:23, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar Question 

message: There's been a spike of activity on this page because of the recent news, thus why I put the notice on the Article 4 section.  So far, there has been no official call for Article 4 by Poland due to the explosion in Poland.  To quote NATO Secretary General as of yesterday:
 There's been no call for an Article 4 meeting. That's based on the findings, based on the analysis and based on the results so far of the ongoing investigation.
This might or might not change, though.
Regarding Article 5, although U.S. Congressman has made comments on it, I haven't been able to find any sources that any member of the Polish government itself has been considering, which I would think would be the minimum criteria to include it in the Article 5 table.  Those are my 2 cents, if anyone else wants to chime in, or if something has changed.  Fephisto (talk) 14:05, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding the Explosion in Poland