Talk:2023 United Nations Climate Change Conference

Bias

This article reads like greenwashing. It is widely accepted that the appointed president of COP28 has a massive conflict of interest and that the conference is unlikely to achieve very much given UAE's current massive expansion of oil and gas production. Further information: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/uae-brings-forward-oil-production-capacity-expansion-2027-2022-11-28/ https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/UAE-To-Expand-Oil-Gas-Production-Capacity-With-150-Billion-Investment.amp.html https://www.spglobal.com/commodityinsights/en/market-insights/latest-news/natural-gas/011023-uaes-adnoc-forms-new-gas-company-as-it-seeks-to-expand-internationally 93.82.11.248 (talk) 12:49, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

The page should be locked and vetted. Climate denialism has no place here 2A02:A03F:6468:2E01:E028:21BC:2F11:A209 (talk) 05:46, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. The article cites a bunch of individuals praising Al Jaber's appointment, and only features a bit of criticism at the bottom: https://www.politico.com/news/2023/05/18/markey-blasts-decision-to-host-climate-summit-in-uae-00097747 https://www.ft.com/content/34fb5016-d9f4-4d4d-9bb4-174bfcadbe77

There's a decent chance that this a manipulation attempt, just like Al Jaber's team was trying to wash his article as well: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/may/30/cop28-president-team-accused-of-wikipedia-greenwashing-sultan-al-jaber Cortador (talk) 11:12, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. This article highlights the vulnerability of the UAE to climate change and the efforts it's undertaking to reduce emissions, but almost ignores the fact that the UAE's economy is built on the production of fossil fuels. The bias here is obvious and reads like a PR statement for COP28, not objective information. 152.44.135.26 (talk) 21:45, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• COP28 UAE BRAND LOGO.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:23, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

I Agree to delete, since it now has been censored. 2600:6C48:7006:200:5C10:C716:750B:C3B2 (talk) 01:34, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Removal of COI tag

I think the issue of employee shilling for the conference and its organisers has been addressed at this point, and the issue is also mentioned in a new section, backed up by reliable sources. Does anyone object to the removal of the COI tag? Cortador (talk) 07:35, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Seems neutral enough now. Removed per WP:SILENCE. CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 04:03, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Article Should Have CEO Al Jaber in Lead Summary

Why is the CEO of one of the Earth's leading fossil fuel polluters the chairperson of this global warming summit? Why isn't the fact that the CEO of the UAE oil company, ADNOC, (that has refused to release fossil fuel pollution information publicly for 7 years) is the chairperson of this alleged environmental conference? As controversial as this is, (the US Congress and European Parliament has even weighed in) this should be in the opening summary of the article, not buried in its middle. Are there editors here affiliated with the UAE or petroleum corporations? This article adds to the mockery that the conference has already created by having such a ridiculous appointment. It's like having a convicted child molester in charge of a daycare center or nursery school, and Wikipedia is contributing to it. Stevenmitchell (talk) 09:20, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

The UAE allows freedom of speech so please correct that. People need to talk respectfully to have their opinions respected

The UAE allows freedom of speech so please correct that. People need to talk respectfully to have their opinions respected, so should global writers who know nothing about UAE leadership 2001:8F8:1335:1333:F0DB:DAE1:C59B:2381 (talk) 20:51, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

doesn't seem so.

"Article 184 decreased the punishment for “anyone who mocks, insults, or damages the reputation, prestige or standing of the state” or “its founding leaders” from 10-25 years to a maximum of five years."

https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/middle-east-and-north-africa/united-arab-emirates/report-united-arab-emirates/

"A number of well-known commentators have been jailed in recent years for criticizing the authorities, expressing support for dissidents or human rights, or calling for political reform."

https://freedomhouse.org/country/united-arab-emirates/freedom-world/2021

"Previous laws that severely suppress freedom of expression have often been used to stamp out dissent. Local news sites, many of them owned or controlled by the government, exercise self-censorship in accordance with government regulations and unofficial red lines."

"In October 2020, a UAE court sentenced a UAE resident, Ahmed Etoum, under the previous provision to 10 years in prison based entirely on peaceful Facebook posts criticizing Jordan’s royal family and government."

"Defamation continues to be criminalized in the UAE under articles 425, 426, and 427 of the penal code, with palpable effects on media freedoms and even on private communications between individuals."

https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/06/05/uae-sweeping-legal-reforms-deepen-repression 173.73.251.202 (talk) 18:25, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

exactly. and there's a lot more than that: 2368 words written in one section of a Wikipedia article alone, see Human rights in the United Arab Emirates#Freedom of speech JM (talk) 12:23, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

"and big meat companies planned to push meat (meat industry is known as a significant source of greenhouse emissions) as "sustainable nutrition" at COP28"

I don't think this belongs in the lede. Of course representatives from various industries are going to try and greenwash themselves at a COP conference - it's not anywhere near as important as the UAE planning to use the conference as a way to get oil deals. Eldomtom2 (talk) 12:30, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

I like meat. Many do. 2600:6C48:7006:200:5C10:C716:750B:C3B2 (talk) 02:22, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

ITN candidacy

This article is currently under consideration for In The News (ITN) for the en.Wikipedia.org main page. Arguments for or against this can be presented there, based on the ITN criteria. Boud (talk) 02:05, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Add a couple of close up pics of people?

I think this needs more interesting people pics. They could be swapped every few days for variety. Chidgk1 (talk) 10:34, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

The first sentence of the article reads off as vandalism

As of 2023 December 13 at 17:43 UTC, the first sentence of the article reads "To whoever is reading this: You are a total bunch of horse dung that should be incinerated. Go jump off a bridge." I believe that this is vandalism but I am not well-versed in what to do about it. To anybody who knows how to remove this, please do on my behalf. Thank you. Sussybaka6000 (talk) 17:44, 13 December 2023 (UTC) EDIT: As of 17:46 UTC, the sentence has been removed. Thank you to whoever removed it.

No Cop Out at Cop 28?

While crude, and not very Wikipedia-like, might it not be said that the comment reflects a degree of concern - found within this Talk page - at the way this conference has been Greenwashed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.24.196.97 (talk) 17:49, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

No mention of keywords "nuclear" or "solution" anywhere in this article. 2600:6C48:7006:200:5C10:C716:750B:C3B2 (talk) 02:23, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 13 December 2023

2023 United Nations Climate Change Conference → COP28 – COP28 is the clear WP:COMMONNAME for this event and meets MOS:ACROTITLE. It's being used in nearly all the (many) news articles about this event, and it's used in the official graphic. Even the opening sentence of this article says that the event is "more commonly known as COP28". (Similar discussions may need to be held about other COPs if this passes.) Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 21:12, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

• Support per nom . ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:06, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Firstly the new name would not be WP:CONSISTENT; I would also oppose a group move, as many of the conferences are not commonly referred to by the "COP+number" acronym (and others just have different common names). Secondly per WP:PRECISE; the COP acronym refers to "conference of the parties" and is used for conferences other than just the UN climate change conferences (for example the UN Biodiversity Conference, the Ramsar Convention and the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants all use the COP+number configuration). ~ F4U (talk • they/it) 23:02, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
• Support per nom as this is very clearly the common name. Whether this also applies to other COP meetings is a separate issue and not part of this move request. Schwede66 00:26, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose All 28 UN Climate Change Conferences have system in names in Wikipedia and fully support arguments of user F4U. Jirka Dl (talk) 06:31, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose because biodiversity conferences are also COPnn Chidgk1 (talk) 12:48, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose as for F4U; I would also note that a similar argument could have been made for COP21 — the latest truly "landmark" climate conference, in my opinion — and COP26, but even in those cases we decided to stick to the original titles... Oltrepier (talk) 14:47, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
• Support per WP:COMMONNAME. --Plumber (talk) 19:38, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose as per F4U. yaguzi (talk) 23:01, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

outdated photo of Al Wasl Plaza

The photo of Al Wasl Plaza was taken during Expo 2020 and is over two years old, showing the former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro. It should be updated with a photo from the actual COP28 Conference or removed. 170.173.0.22 (talk) 03:54, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

BoutOnce of content

I understand that the conference was very controversial and that there were many negative factors. Nevertheless, I think that in its current form the article focuses more on various side details and the actual results of the conference are not really visible. For example, I don't like the detailed description of the negative moments broadly described in the introduction (and again practically repeated verbatim a few paragraphs later) instead of simply summarised in the introduction.

It seems to me that, for example, the form of the presentation on the dewiki is more appropriate. Jirka Dl (talk) 07:13, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

@Jirka Dl Did you refer to the first section of that page?

Anyway, I actually think the lead section is quite balanced as it is: maybe the paragraph about the controversies is the only one that could be trimmed a bit more, but honestly, Al-Jaber's conflicts of interest were so many, evident and hard to swallow that it's just difficult to keep it short and simple... Oltrepier (talk) 18:24, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

I can't say much else about the rest of the article, though. Oltrepier (talk) 18:24, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

@Oltrepier I was referring both to the first section but also to whole content. I know that the results of COP are not very optimistic, but maybe good solution could be to mention also other results ("loss and damage", pledges on renewables, new members of end of coal coalition etc.) in lead section and leave controversies paragraph as it is. In the following text I would prefer to see clear paragraph "Results", inc. negative results. Maybe good inspiration could be found in Carbon Brief article. Jirka Dl (talk) 20:17, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps the article was forced to focuses on side-issues because there were few meaningful results to came from Cop (out) 28?