Talk:International sanctions against North Korea

This article is written in British English with Oxford spelling (colour, realize, organization, analyse; note that -ize is used instead of -ise) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Korea High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject North Korea.

International relations

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Trade

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trade, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Trade on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TradeWikipedia:WikiProject TradeTemplate:WikiProject TradeTrade articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

On 23 August 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved from Sanctions against North Korea to International sanctions against North Korea. The result of the discussion was moved.

US Source of information

Here is one link that lists all the sanctions by US on NK: https://www.state.gov/e/eb/tfs/spi/northkorea/ . It may be helpful in improving the content of this article. Thank you. (talk) user:Al83tito 05:22, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ImperialMilitaryWatch.com

ImperialMilitaryWatch.com is not a reliable source. At a quick glance it looks like a reputable magazine (and in fact the URL http://imperialmilitarywatch.com/ gets forwarded to the much more respectable-sounding http://militarywatchmagazine.com), there is no masthead; the "about" page gives no indication of who is behind the website. There's no indication of corporate ownership or association with some organization like a research institute or a think tank. Their Facebook link is broken, their other supposed social media links lead back to their own website. That's not how reliable sources are built. Even if the supposed magazine were reliable, the article by Abt is labeled "The statements, views and opinions expressed here do not necessarily represent those of Military Watch Magazine." - it's an opinion piece which the publisher explicitly disowns. It isn't significant enough to be mentioned on Wikipedia. Huon (talk) 01:21, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Many publishers state that opinions don't necessarily represent their views, and in fact many publish opposing views. Felix Abt's opinions are notable as he has extensive business experience in North Korea. But if you object to the source, OK, let's leave it out.--Jack Upland (talk) 07:14, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The lead

The lead right now is cumbersome and it's hard to tell just what the important points are about the history of sanctions against NK. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 14:52, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Table instead of paragraphs ?

The flow this article is cumbersome. I'm suggesting that the different paragraphs should be put into a table for a better overview of said paragraphs.

Asabiyya (talk) 15:31, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No. This article should consists mostly of WP:PROSE. Right now these bullet point lists miss the mark, but a table would be even worse. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:45, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reorganizing content for relevancy at the expense of chronology

In the section on the United States, all content is ordered chronologically. I was wondering if it would be appropriate to break such a pattern in the interest of relevancy. The proposed change would be to move the final sentence (about the US reconsidering a travel ban) to the end of the second paragraph (where the travel ban is initially discussed). Would this be a relevant/welcome change? Nolandanley (talk) 22:06, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 23 August 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Move History6042 (talk) 17:52, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(non-admin closure)

Sanctions against North Korea → International sanctions against North Korea – Per WP:CONSISTENT, similar to other titles such as International sanctions during the Russo-Ukrainian War, International sanctions during the Russian invasion of Ukraine and International sanctions during apartheid. The term has significant use by sources and sanctions have been sanctions by international organizations, such as the United Nations Security Council. NoonIcarus (talk) 14:48, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Move as per proposer.--Jack Upland (talk) 00:26, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Move per proposal toobigtokale (talk) 23:07, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

PoE

The Panel of Experts has been discontinued by a Russian veto, Jack Upland (talk) 20:52, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]