I quoted party of the treaty explaining that the is not need to wait. You did not quote any contradicting part..
Article 6 wrote:
For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack: on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France, on the territory of Turkey or on the islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer; on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in whicH occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.
Even the simplified en wikipedia article mentions the question if/when/why the US/NATO would be involved
The Simple Wiki article does not. The en.wikipedia article says the US was thinking of getting involved, but there was no mention of NATO. The news may have suggested that NATO countries would help if asked, and indeed team-NATO has deployed outside of the treaty region as exceptions. For instance, in the former Yugoslavia and in the Gulf of Aden. In those cases, there is a a request to have a supplemental tasking. But, if France was invaded tomorrow by Russia, each NATO country is supposed to respond as they deem necessary to help ensure France's integrity, whether individually or in concert.