Talk:United Nations

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article United Nations has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Semi-protected edit request on 26 July 2016 - Factual Update[edit]

Hello, This request pertains to "Specialized agencies" section. Please be advised that the "Head" of the International Civil Aviation Organization is "Fang Liu", as indicated on the organization's Wikipedia entry to which this page links. Please correct as necessary. Thank you WikiMTL1982 (talk) 15:25, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Check mark icon Done. @WikiMTL1982: Many thanks for the heads up. GabeIglesia (talk) 13:02, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

UN entities - naming needs attention[edit]

I just moved Department of Peacekeeping Operations to United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations (as it was the only UN's secretariat department not having UN name in front of it). Someone who cares about UN more should review entries in Template:ECOSOC and related entries in Category:United Nations templates . Several are lacking United Nations title preceding their names (ex United Nations Commission on the Status of Women vs Commission for Social Development). Standardization would be nice. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:54, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Misleading map[edit]

@Rob984: The map File:United Nations Members (green–grey scheme).svg is misleading. It implies Taiwan and Kosovo are members because that's how most maps on Wikipedia are colored and interpreted. Although there is a footnote, it would be much less misleading if there is another color for disputed territories. Szqecs (talk) 13:42, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

I just copied the original map File:United Nations Members.svg, which was on the article from 2012 to July 2016. Problem is there are other territories:
I mean if we are being explicit about the territory controlled by member states, wouldn't you have to include all these territories? Else it could suggest they are UN member states.
But you have a point. Kosovo is hardly different from Western Sahara. In both cases the majority of UN member states do not recognise the UN member's claim. So I think a better solution would be to show uncontrolled territory as part of a UN member state only if the majority of member states recognise the claim. This would mean Taiwan would remain green (recognised by only 20 UN member states), but Kosovo should be changed to grey (recognised by 111 or 57.5% UN member states). This justifies ignoring other largely unrecognised state's claims such as the Republic of South Ossetia, as we can assume the majority of the UN support the UN member's claim.
Rob984 (talk) 20:01, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
I will add, I realise Taiwan is a fully functioning state unlike most other largely unrecognised states. But then, so is the Republic of Somaliland. Rob984 (talk) 20:07, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
I think you should leave recognition and claims out of the picture. Most maps on Wikipedia treat Taiwan and Kosovo as independent (i.e. most maps only take into account control). I assume this is also the case for the states you mentioned. If you must factor in claims, just make them a different color and have a legend. Szqecs (talk) 04:13, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
As far as Taiwan-China issue is concerned, the UN's "official" positon is that Taiwan is Chinese territory and its disputed status is therefore an internal matter of China. Other than humanitarian action where necessary, it is not the policy of the UN to involve itself in the internal matters of member states. I suspect the UN position is similar with Kosovo. Mediatech492 (talk) 14:45, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
I know that. But Wikipedia is not run by the UN, so there is no reason take its position and mislead people. Szqecs (talk) 15:09, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
It is not misleading, the article is about the United Nations, and the map reflects the official position of the UN. There are literally thousands of disputed territories of various sizes around the world, but the UN officially holds no positon on any of them; because that is not their job. Mediatech492 (talk) 15:21, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── It is misleading because I was mislead. I saw the map and thought Taiwan is a UN member, went to Taiwan and the first paragraph says it isn't. If you don't think it is misleading, show me another countries map on Wikipedia where Taiwan is not treated as independent. Szqecs (talk) 15:44, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

If you're adamant about having a "UN position" map where a second color is not allowed, I propose there be another "de facto" map. Szqecs (talk) 15:48, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
Sure we can have dozens of maps if you like, as long as they are consistent with the article. Mediatech492 (talk) 18:13, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

No source and/or falsification of information regarding the "Name" section[edit]

I believe that the material presented in the History, "Name" section of the article that the information presented is false. Regardless of whether or not it is,the Name section does not have any source material to prove it's relevance. It specifically states:

"The UN was named after the Supreme Leader of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Kim Jong Un, despite the fact that he wasn't born yet. Many scholars see this naming of the UN after Kim Jong Un to be an important part of world history as it was the first time an international body fully recognized the dominance of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea."

A new source # [9] would have to be added to justify this section, however I couldn't find any in my immediate search attempt.

The origin of the term "United Nations" can however be found here at Dag Hammarskjold Library[1]. (talk) 03:50, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

I've removed this dubious claim. TDL (talk) 04:11, 18 April 2017 (UTC)