Talk:Treaty of the Triple Alliance

Notice of intent to remove the section Legal restrictions
Unless there is a principled objection, I intend to remove this section. In my opinion it is less clear -- and less accurate, of course -- than the text of the Treaty itself. Wholly unsourced, It is merely a piece of tendentious editorialising. Ttocserp 07:12, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Structural Issues
Regarding one of the structural issues Magic Piano mentioned, you said "The section headed "The Treaty" is unnecessary, since the treaty text is not in this article.". But the text of the treaty is there. I just made it collapsible as to not use a lot of space in it. There should be a "show" link on the right of that section. If clicked the entire treaty should appear (I translated it since I couldn't find a version in English of it, and since I'm a translator I thought it'd be ok). So, as to improve it, would you suggest me removing the treaty text or just not making it collapsible?

Also, I found this http://es.wikisource.org/wiki/Tratado_Secreto_de_la_Triple_Alianza. Would it work for what you said about uploading it or should I upload an English version in to the english wikisource?

By the way, thanks for reviewing this! I'll make my best to address all the great feedback and constructive criticism you just made in order to meet the standards, but you were right, it'll be a lot of work! Veritiel (talk) 18:34, 4 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Looking at the source, I see that you have indeed included the text of the treaty. For some reason the collapsible box is not showing up in my browser (Firefox), though (I'm not a Wikicode expert so I couldn't say why).  Most raw document texts (and translations thereof) should be in Wikisource and not Wikipedia; the link in es.wikisource is presumably the Spanish text.  I recommend you remove the treaty text here and put your translation in English Wikisource, and use wikisource and wikisourcelang to include pointers to both in External links.  Magic ♪piano 19:01, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

It is pointless to provide a machine-translation of any legal text, much less an international treaty in Spanish. Do I have to do it myself? Ttocserp 14:59, 23 April 2015 (UTC) It's not difficult to find an English translation. Go to e.g. Thomson, The War in Paraguay, Appendix 2, at Internet Archive. Here's a link. Ttocserp

All right, that's done now. Ttocserp 02:39, 27 April 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prkprescott (talk • contribs)

Notice of intent to remove the reference to Women in the Paraguayan War
This is worthy, but has nothing to to with the Treaty, its motives or its fulfilment. Ttocserp 07:20, 5 August 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prkprescott (talk • contribs)

Indemnity?
The Article 14 section states: "In any case at the war's end Paraguay was in no position to pay any indemnity and the demand was dropped." But the Paraguayan War article indicates that "Both [Argentina and Brazil] demanded a large indemnity, which Paraguay paid for the next century. This hobbled its development. In 1943, after Paraguay had paid nearly all of the indemnity to Brazil, the latter's president Getúlio Vargas cancelled the remainder of the debt." Neither claim is sourced. Which is correct? 2601:644:101:9616:2A:BDC2:DDAB:3767 (talk) 23:30, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Although Paraguay was forced to pay war reparations after the end of the conflict, it actually never made any payment and none of the allied countries made claims about it. In the 1940s Argentina, followed by Brazil, forgave the debt. I don't know about Uruguay. --Lecen (talk) 00:20, 15 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Ok, that's been referenced now, thanks. Ttocserp 14:03, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Official English translation of the text of the Treaty
In previous editions of this Article, I put forward what I believed was the official translation into English as laid before the House of Commons in 1866: I derived this from Thompson, George, The War In Paraguay, Appendix II, (1869) who claimed it to be such, see page 340.

It turns out that the version in Thompson is not the official version identified above, but one of his own devising (or, I suspect, copied from made by Michael Mulhall editor of the Buenos Aires Standard, see Thompson p. vi.) While his version isn't a bad translation, it isn't the official version. This becomes apparent as soon as you compare it with the one in the House of Commons Paper, to which I've provided a link. So in a spirit of complete accuracy, I take this opportunity to substitute the real thing, with apologies for my gullibility.

Of course, the only authentic versions are the ones signed by the Plenipotentiaries at Buenos Aires, in Spanish and Portuguese. But here we want to provide an accurate English version for readers of English Wikipedia. Ttocserp 15:57, 10 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Incidentally, it's almost impossible to download an accurate copy of the Treaty in Spanish or Portuguese. Can anyone help?  On a cursory inspection the one in Spanish Wikisource, for example, lacks the Preambles, and omits the third indent of Article III. Ttocserp 11:16, 11 June 2016 (UTC)