Talk:Mutual Defense Treaty (United States–Philippines)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program assignment
This article is the subject of an educational assignment at and Western Carolina University supported by WikiProject United States Public Policy and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program&#32;during the 2012 Spring term. Further details are available on the course page.

Above message substituted from on 14:09, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

the present
Anyone knows the situation of this treaty in the present? Is it still binding today? Jordz (talk) 06:21, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is still in effect. Article XIII describes how it might be terminated, but neither party has moved to terminate it. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 03:18, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

"Opposition movement" edit reverted
I've reverted this edit because the edit cites this news article in support of assertions which the article does not seem to support (e.g., "Opposition has risen to its current levels as a result of seemingly ignorance on the part of the U.S. towards the Philippine's plight involving the Spratly Islands dispute"). Also, the edit has WP:DATED problems (e.g., in "Fairly large recent protests have taken place", the meaning of the term "recent" is ambiguous in the article -- WP articles need to be meaningful in the timeframe of the reader (whatever that timeframe might be) rather in the timeframe of the writer. The timeframe of the wikipedia editor who wrote the article text is often not clear to later readers. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:02, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

"Opposition movement" edit reverted
I've reverted this edit because the edit cites this news article in support of assertions which the article does not seem to support (e.g., "Opposition has risen to its current levels as a result of seemingly ignorance on the part of the U.S. towards the Philippine's plight involving the Spratly Islands dispute"). Also, the edit has WP:DATED problems (e.g., in "Fairly large recent protests have taken place", the meaning of the term "recent" is ambiguous in the article -- WP articles need to be meaningful in the timeframe of the reader (whatever that timeframe might be) rather in the timeframe of the writer. The timeframe of the wikipedia editor who wrote the article text is often not clear to later readers. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:04, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

After looking at the result of that reversion, I've removed some more content for reasons stated above. I've done this hurriedly because I am very pushed for time at present. I will try to revisit this article and give this a closer look soon; perhaps others can give it that closer look in the meantime. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:14, 1 May 2012 (UTC)