Talk:Ceasefire

Remove irrelevant paragraph
I have removed an apparently paragraph about a band, and put it in Cease Fire (Band) instead. However, since it is unreferenced and probably self-publizing, it may be removed soon. If you have reference sources, please append in the new article, thanks. --Raphaelhui (talk) 05:03, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Specifics?
What about Cessation of Hostilities, in, say, the Ethiopia/Eritrea border dispute conflict? This article is not up to date becose peace treaty has been signed between north and south korea —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.200.146.2 (talk) 16:27, 14 October 2007 (UTC) The k Firstly, this is an article about what a cease fire is, not a history of "cease fire" declarations. Secondly, on October 4th, 2007 North Korean leader Kim, Jong Il and South Korean president Roh, Moo Hyun signed a peace declaration seeking a formal end to hostilities that will officially end the Korean War. The declaration invites China and the United States to participate in drafting this treaty. As of today November 13th 2007, there is no peace treaty between North and South Korea. Therefore, technically, both Koreas are still under the terms of the 1953 cease fire. Personally, this is an achievement, as I was stationed in Chun-Chon, South Korea at Camp Page in 1989/1990 when both Germanys came together and the Berlin Wall came down. There were high hopes among the college students that the Koreas would be next. Greenbomb101 19:46, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Truce
Truce redirects here. Is truce the very same thing as a ceasefire? Should this article be moved to truce? If a category is created, should it be named Category:Truces of Category:Ceasefires? Do note that cease fire implies a modern era terminology (firearms...), and there were many truces before that (ex. Truce of Jam Zapolski, etc.). Also: should this category be a subcategory of Category:Peace treaties, of Category:Treaties on an equal level with peace treaty? PS. There is also a merge tag for this article and armistice. Worth considering.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:50, 9 July 2008 (UTC) cease fire, pick up your wounded, red flare, fire at will. Ceasefire belongs to the battlefield, truce belongs to diplomacy and life in general. Also: truce always has two active parties behind it. Ceasefire may be unilateral (i.e. anti-guerilla action when there's only one regular force in the field). NVO (talk) 01:52, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry if it's too late but I suppose that "truce" is a continuous state, while a "ceasefire" is firstwhile an act of literally ceasing fire. It may end in a lasting truce or may not:

Korean War
The Korean War Armistice Agreement should not be listed in this article as an example. It was a formal agreement signed by the relevant and authorized parties. --S. Rich (talk) 23:29, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

2013 news stories
Recently (Feb & Mar) the nK official news agency has been saber rattling. This is not untypical. Many such stories surface again and again over years and years and years. However some editors want to add this recent info to the article. Couple of problems: 1. Foremost, WP is WP:NOT. 2. The news stories purport to pertain to a ceasefire, whereas the issue in the Korean War is the existence and enforcement of the Armistice. The news stories we see should be looked at with an encyclopedic eye, and this article should not be used for POV edits opining on the events. – S. Rich (talk) 20:11, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

If this does happen...
I know that Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, but it was announced on the news on Radio Four tonight that Israel and Palestine were getting near to a ceasefire. If this does happen, we could add it as an update to this page (November 20 2012). ACEOREVIVED (talk) 22:13, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This page should not be speedily deleted because this is a vitally important article. It most certainly is above the notability standard; no actual reason has been given -- BasedMises Mont Pelerin 23:53, 22 May 2021 (UTC)