Talk:Foreign policy of the United States

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Foreign policy of the United States. 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/20101210173605/http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/Canada/Background.html to http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/Canada/Background.html
*Added  tag to http://www.amnestyusa.org/all-countries/colombia/us-military-aid-to-colombia/page.do?id=1101863
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160306023546/http://fas.org/spp/starwars/program/milestone.htm to https://fas.org/spp/starwars/program/milestone.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.geocities.com/travbailey/why.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081220124800/http://www.cfr.org/publication/9488/ to http://www.cfr.org/publication/9488/
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) 19:29, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There is a long list of policies on which the US Government is pressuring foreign countries in order to achieve a universal legislation. This deserves its place on this page, as soft pressure can be just as significant as an all-out blockade or war. Please expand it as appropriate  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.62.99.129 (talk) 16:49, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interference with the internal policies of foreign governments 

message: You are invited to participate in Talk:War hawk#Requested move 21 May 2019 about whether War hawk should be moved to Hawk (foreign policy). The discussion could be closed as early as today. Sorry for the late notice. R2 (bleep) 18:32, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  War hawk 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:01, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:22, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:37, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: I believe that the article as it stands deviates from WP:SUMMARY and also needs work regarding WP:PROSE, WP:EXAMPLES, and WP:OVERQUOTING. The page's size can be significantly reduced by converting lists to prose, removing excess examples, summarizing quotes, and removing outdated statistics, and I believe that this would allow for a more concise summary of the subject (especially since much of this information is covered on more specific articles as per WP:SUMMARY). The structure also leaves something to be desired, with related subjects tacked on as separate sections, and I would like to consolidate these based on policy area. The only sections that I think should be significantly reduced are the section on the 21st century (which focuses disproportionately on 2017) and "non-participation in multi-lateral agreements" (I argue that a list of things not done is undue and indiscriminate); both of these sections should probably be reduced to a single sentence at most. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:20, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: If there are no objections, I'm going to begin restoring some of the additions to the article. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:02, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I would strongly object to mass deletions of reliably sourced materials as was done before, at least not without consensus here. It went way beyond just a cleanup.--C.J. Griffin (talk) 05:19, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reorganization