Talk:League of Nations

Contradiction in article?

The image shows that the US was never a member, but the article explains that President Wilson won a nobel peace prize as the architect of the League. 2603:6011:5F39:969B:649B:1E6E:41CA:F3B7 (talk) 15:24, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

That's correct. See the Establishment section: "Despite Wilson's efforts to establish and promote the League, for which he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in October 1919,[56] the United States never joined". Nikkimaria (talk) 03:42, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Se 2600:6C40:F00:57E:8034:C4BB:6CB0:DB0A (talk) 11:40, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

Map

I think the animated map should be on top of the infobox—frankly, the anachronous one isn't very informative and its key is awkward. Remsense聊 21:08, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

I agree, it should at the very least be directly under the first map. There's no objections here so feel free to change it as you please. HarvardJock (talk) 00:18, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 February 2025

Make the league of nation's definition proper 49.47.218.42 (talk) 13:51, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. What do you think is improper about what's currently there? DrOrinScrivello (talk) 15:16, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

What does that mean? HarvardJock (talk) 00:23, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

WP:URFA/2020

As part of WP:URFA/2020, Wikipedia editors are reviewing older featured articles to determine if they still meet the featured articles criteria. After looking at this article, I noticed the following:

• There are uncited statements in the article, including entire paragraphs.
• The article is quite long at over 12,000 words and I think prose can be summarised more effectively or spun out into other articles.
• The "Economic policies" section has an orange "expansion needed" banner. Is this still valid?
• The article's formatting needs to be reevaluated: there are lots of one-paragraph sections that should be merged together (like in the "Resolving territorial disputes" section) while the information in the "Organization" and "Plans and proposals" sections needs to be reduced or broken up using additional headings.
• Lots of sources listed in "General and cited references" are not used as inline citations.

Should this article go to WP:FAR? Z1720 (talk) 04:08, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

I agree with some of these, so perhaps not fully in line with WP:FAR but I don't feel too strongly about it. HarvardJock (talk) 00:24, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

• @HarvardJock: An FAR has been opened, which you can access by clicking on this link. Feel free to leave comments there. Z1720 (talk) 01:11, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

  It's archived though. Doesn't that mean the discussion has closed? Usually when something is archived that means a decision was made (or no conclusion) and therefore moved out of the active talk page or discussion page. I could be wrong though, I'm only familiar with active talk pages and don't know the policy on archives. HarvardJock (talk) 02:38, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

  I added my opinion anyway. I agreed with your points mostly and in addition I added my own concerns very briefly. HarvardJock (talk) 02:44, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

• @HarvardJock: The discussion has not been archived, it is still active. Your comment was in the correct location. Z1720 (talk) 02:47, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

  Ok great. My mistake then. HarvardJock (talk) 02:49, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

  It appears it's been removed as a featured article. I think that's good for now, we can make proper changes to make it featured again. HarvardJock (talk) 03:39, 11 April 2026 (UTC)