Talk:Sweden–NATO relations
Page contents not supported in other languages.
| This is thetalk page for discussing improvements to theSweden–NATO relations article. This isnot a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies |
| Find sources: Google (books ·news ·scholar ·free images ·WP refs) ·FENS ·JSTOR ·TWL |
Archives:1,2Auto-archiving period:12 months  |
 | A news item involving Sweden–NATO relations was featured on Wikipedia'sMain Page in theIn the news section on7 March 2024. |  |
 | This article is ratedC-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I don’t understand the use of light and dark colors (light green vs. dark green, light red vs. dark red) in the table. I think it needs to be made consistent to be based on some explicitly stated criterion.
It doesn’t seem to correspond to the majority/plurality or any particular threshold for the margin.Mpsayler (talk)22:52, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's been edited many times, but it stills reads very poorly. This is how it currently reads: "Sweden is a country in Northern Europe and is a member of the intergovernmental military alliance North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)." It has FOUR links to Wikipedia articles!
I know that we don't have to make every article in Wikipedia identical in structure and syntax, but we can use the lead sentence inFinland–NATO relations as a very simple template. Its opening sentence is currently, "Finland has been a member of theNorth Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) since 4 April 2023." If readers want to know what NATO is, they just click the link. I think that the opening sentence of this article used to look almost exactly like the Finland page.I propose (1) making the opening sentence its own paragraph and (2) writing it, "Sweden has been a member of theNorth Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) since 7 March 2024." Of course, we would remove that date from the final sentence of the lead section. As for how the acronym is defined, there's no rule that says that we always must write the acronym first and then provide its expansion in parentheses. Just look at several articles and you'll find different styles that work equally well.
The rest of the opening section could use more work and also has some awkward portions, but the first sentence probably is most in need of improvement right now. Thanks and cheers!Holy (talk)21:40, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Purposes of flags in this section is unclear: (1) Of course Sweden has diplomatic relations with all NATO countries, why yet another list? (2) The targets of these wikilinks are either article about the country X, article "Foreign relations of country X", or even more strange,Foreign relations of Sweden. What is the purpose of this section with no sources?Викидим (talk)06:16, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Public opinion did not shift. The Swedish public wasn’t consulted because, according to the government, the topic of joining NATO was too complex for the people95.203.21.163 (talk)09:25, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
