Talk:General debate of the seventy-third session of the United Nations General Assembly

International relations: United Nations Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject United Nations.

Formatting

The current GD page has used consistent formatting for the last 6+ years. Yes, there is a righto change it but kindly seek consensus and explanation for why the new version would be better.Lihaas (talk) 15:02, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As far as this editor concerns, it is you actually who introduced new feature to the article, i.e. pre-debate issues. There should be only two choices for it: either (1) all pre-debate issues which is not confined to the theme of debate are listed, or (2) no pre-debate issue should be listed at all, let the overall summary and replies by delegates be written at the conclusion of the General Debate. For me, this editor stands for the second option. Aamuizz (talk) 15:44, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes we do list what happens after the debate in the Right to Reply. These issues have to do with the GD annual arrival of leaders to the UNGA. If there are other issues, buy all means add htem. No one is keeping them out. this is one related that I found.Lihaas (talk) 00:52, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But I don't expect you to write only India-Pakistan relationship as the only pre-debate issue. As far as the world concerns, India-Pakistan relationship is not the priority of the world at the mean time. That's why I stand for the second option. So just wait for summaries and replies. Summaries and replies will make this article more constructive than before. Or otherwise, general readers will interpret this General Debate wrongly for highlighting only one pre-debate issue, which is India-Pakistan relationship. While I respect your edits towards this article, I expect you reciprocate it the same way. Aamuizz (talk) 03:48, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying to ONLY have that. If there are other issues pertaining to the GD week, by all means add them.

Definitely you ve had some great edits here. I'll keep the pre-debate issue hidden till it s over. Then we'll se ehow it comes out.Lihaas (talk) 22:11, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GD background

As per India-Pakistan relationship is not a highlight of this General Debate this page is not about the "highlight" of the GD it si about events at the GD as are all articles on said subjects.Lihaas (talk) 15:04, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Same as above, there should be only two choices, either to list all pre-debate issues or list none of it (and let summary takes place at the conclusion of the General Debate). When India-Pakistan relationship becomes the only pre-debate issue written in the article, general readers will understand that India-Pakistan relationship is a highlight of the General Debate. That is the reason this editor stands for the second option. Just list the countries and their representatives in a daily manner, and issue a comprehensive conclusion at the end of this General Debate. Aamuizz (talk) 15:44, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As far as lising the countries, yes, that is what wehave been doing every year since 66th UNGA.Lihaas (talk) 00:53, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speaker source

The original source of the pdf is different from the actual speaker list as per the traditions source. For example, Ecuador was schedulred after usa but came before. I have been doing this every year , including adding the right of reply.Lihaas (talk) 15:29, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For past years, it has been a tradition for Brazil and US to speak as first and second countries. (Please refer to the UN Library website for more information.) But there might be unforeseen circumstances, so Ecuador becomes the second country to speak this time. As far as I concern, however, I use the Journal of UN to provisionally list countries which are expected to address the General Debate. So I stand for it as it is an official document issued by the UN Secretariat. Aamuizz (talk) 15:44, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I kept the sourced info on the tradition (I actually learnt when it started). As for the list of speakers, am using what we every year from the UN site as speaker order changes from schedule at almost every session.Lihaas (talk) 00:54, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Replies by countries

Thanks to Lihaas for adding replies from countries in each day of the General Debate. But for better understanding by general readers (and not only certain people), it would be better if replies by countries be made short and concise. Aamuizz (talk) 07:10, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. And also, inline citations for quotations are not optional. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:19, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]