Talk:Triple Entente

message: Fix the bloody 3rd paragraph!
Thank you for your suggestion!  When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make whatever changes you feel are needed.  Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit any article by simply following the  link at the top. You don't even need to log in!  (Although there are some reasons why you might like to...) The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold.  Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly.  If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills.  New contributors are always welcome. SushiGeek 20:07, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And for a second time...Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes.  Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the  link at the top. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to).  The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills.  New contributors are always welcome. +A.0u 00:11, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

message: Also the map is incorrect.  Siam (Thailand) was allied with France, U.K. et. al. and its troops saw action on the western front. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.27.142.94 (talk • contribs) 
also BELGIUM was neutral in 1914 and got dragged into the war because the plan von schliefen called for a 'backdoor' attack on france via belgium.
:Actually, the map depicts Belgium correctly; the caption states that the map refers to circumstances in 1915, not 1914. +A.0u 05:00, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fix it soon! 

message: Wikipedia should be ashamed of such articles as this one. Some of the more idiotic statements:
*Russia was by far the largest of all the six European powers.
*: The British Empire was larger and more populous by far.
*loans from France had helped Russia to develop some industry
*: Ridiculous oversimplification. In economic terms, Russia was about as strong as France.
*:: In fact, in 1914, Russia was the fourth largest industrial power in the world, after the U.S., Germany and Great Britain. -Swampfox1942
*Austria recently annexed most of Yugoslavia
*: Please check when the term "Yugoslavia" came into being. If you need to refer to Bosnia and Herzegovina, there is no need to sport anachronistic terms.
Since Great Britain was the last to acceed to the concert and it was by no means the most vital member of the alliance, I suggest we discuss her at the bottom of the article, rather than at the top. --Ghirla-трёп- 22:46, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  That is one possible interpretation, but word "alliance" has more than one meaning. Sometimes "informal alliances" are still considered "alliances". However it might be better to use some other word, for example, "block". Do you think that will do..? --Martynas Patasius (talk) 19:31, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Many historians use "alliance" for the Triple Entente (although that risks students mixing up the two coalitions).  "The Triple Entente, then, at its inception in 1907 was an alliance that incorporated balancing and tethering motives." [Patricia A. Weitsman, Dangerous Alliances: Proponents of Peace, Weapons of War (2004) - Page 100.]; "He began to lobby intensely for an alliance of Russia, France, and Britain to counterbalance the Triple Alliance of Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy." [Fiona K. Tomaszewski - 2002 - p 83]; "[Germany's] aggressive actions caused the United Kingdom, France, and Russia to form an alliance—the Triple Entente—against Germany." [John J. Mearsheimer - 2002];  the  Dictionary (Webster 3rd) says "alliance is "an association....that is created by a formal agreement (as a treaty or compact) in their common interest especially for mutual assistance and protection." Rjensen (talk) 20:16, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Writing this some years later...Perhaps its as well to say that there was no paper signed by all 3 until after the war started, it was 3 bilaterals that when viewed together meant something like "we're looking at you, triple alliance" but although the entente could be said to exist in some sense after 1907, it was a pretty tenuous affair, especially the last leg which took a while to bed in properly. It was down to the diplomats to make the thing into something real, which they duly did.Selfstudier (talk) 19:11, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  For shame 

message: Russian Empire during WWI turned Communistic/Red, but the Civil war continued into early 1920s. Could somebody give exact dates when each of the three connections between the three empires/states were created and when the links between Russia and the other two were severed? In my opinion, this article is very important to WWI and Interbellum, as well as Communism, and the history of Britain and France, but I still don't label it on the importance scale...
Kazkaskazkasako (talk) 21:43, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  When was Triple Entente disassembled? 

message: Could someone (who knows, i.e. not me) explain in a bit more detail the reasons for the formation of the triple entente (especially since the triple alliance was formed in the early 1880s, I think, and the triple entente comes 20+ years later)  Much appreciated.
Dcmcmurtry (talk) 07:11, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Causes for Entente expansion? 

message: Italy joined the war on the Allied side in WW1, get rid of map.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.65.81.212 (talk) 08:50, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The map is not meant depict what happened during WW1. Italy was an ally of Germany before the war. --Martynas Patasius (talk) 21:13, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map is wrong. 

message: From the introduction: (from French entente [ɑ̃tɑ̃t] "good will"). This is not correct. French entente does not mean "good will". Its meaning in French is essentially the same as in English: friendship, understanding, agreement. See http://en.pons.eu/translate?q=entente&l=enfr&in=&lf=en . Even if "good will" arguably might be one permissible meaning, it's not the central meaning. I've revised it. Omc (talk) 16:38, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meaning of French ''entente'' 

message: As to the last picture: «согласие» means the same as, per the article, French word entente does, it's not just 'agreement'. Literally, it means 'covocalness', with people not just agreeing with each other, but thinking in the same fashion. I think there is a room for a better translation. - 91.122.12.137 (talk) 15:05, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  The picture in the end 

message: The article asserts that "Russia then broke the treaty in 1900 which resulted in a dispute.[citation needed]."  I think this is just wrong.  Will delete after a few days unless someone objects here. pagnol (talk) 21:45, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Franco-Russian Alliance 

message: 'The League' is mentioned twice within the 'background' section but with no earlier reference to it - just what League is being referred to? Perhaps someone with knowledge of the subject can clarify this para for readers. thanks Geopersona (talk) 06:28, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  The League 

message: I'm in no way an expert on the subject, but the section about the Anglo-French Entente Cordiale cites it as the end of British splendid isolation. This seems to lie in opposition with what is said on the page about the Anglo-Japanese Alliance, ratified 2 years earlier, saying, '"Splendid isolation" was ended as for the first time Britain saw the need for a peace-time military alliance.' Is this nitpick worth correcting, or does what constitutes the "end of splendid isolation encompass multiple growing agreements over this broader period of time?
It also seemed of interest that the Anglo-Russian Entente would be able to take form under the background of the prior Anglo-Japanese Alliance. Is it the case that tensions between Russia and Japan had cooled down after the Russo-Japanese War? Is addressing Britain's apparent conflict of interest here even relevant to the content of this article?
Sorry if these concerns seem out of place. I'm new to editing. --Roljy (talk) 21:45, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Impact of Anglo-Japanese Alliance 

message: anu - anong bansa ang kasapi sa triple Alliance at Entente? 2001:4453:6C5:7B00:1004:E3BF:2389:E676 (talk) 05:16, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Araling panlipunan 

message: The Triple Entente (from French entente [ɑ̃tɑ̃t] meaning "friendship, understanding, agreement") describes the informal understanding between the Russian Empire, the French Third Republic, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland as well as Romania, which joined later. It was built upon the Franco-Russian Alliance of 1894, the Entente Cordiale of 1904 between Paris and London, and the Anglo-Russian Entente of 1907. It formed a powerful counterweight to the Triple Alliance of Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy. The Triple Entente, unlike the Triple Alliance or the Franco-Russian Alliance itself, was not an alliance of mutual defence. 143.44.164.174 (talk) 13:30, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ap 

message: I just noticed that when I hover over the links that redirect to this article read:
"Is fornite addiction real?"
I don't particularly thing this is an apt description of this page, though I may be wrong. Ferbabdass (talk) 06:19, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not the apt description, and was a result of the vandalism reverted by Philipnelson99 still being cached, resulting in Wikipedia showing this cached version as a preview. After I forced a cache purge for this article, wikipedia seems to display the correct preview in links to this article. Abakesh (talk) 15:41, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect description