Jump to content

Talk:United Nations

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleUnited Nations was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Did You KnowOn this day...Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 15, 2004Peer reviewReviewed
October 18, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
December 19, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
August 9, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
October 2, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
December 4, 2013Peer reviewReviewed
January 12, 2014Good article nomineeListed
October 15, 2024Good article reassessmentDelisted
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on January 19, 2014.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Poland is considered a founding member of the United Nations despite not having attended the first meeting?
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on October 24, 2004, June 26, 2007, June 26, 2009, June 26, 2011, June 26, 2014, June 26, 2015, June 26, 2018, June 26, 2020, and June 26, 2023.
Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive This article was on the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive for the week of September 10, 2006.
Current status: Delisted good article

Taiwan in the members map

[edit]

Taiwan, was expelled from the UN in 1971 because of a UN resolution that recognized the People's Republic of China as the sole legitimate government of China and moved all the rights of the Republic of China to the PRC, also expelling Taiwan from the UN. On the map, Taiwain appears marked on light blue as a UN member, when it should not. It's not a minor detail considering the UN is a international organisation for the cooperation among world governments, and considering the Wikipedia page about UN Members even has a section reffering to the expelling of Taiwan, it shouldn't be marked on the map. Can someone incorporate a map with the issue solved please. 190.150.46.41 (talk) 04:17, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Taiwan is technically not a eligible state and the sheer existence of the country is disputed upon. Taiwan counts as the territory of the Peoples Republic of China. Rynoip (talk) 22:48, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I know that the PRC claims sovereignty over Taiwan but my understanding is that they have almost total de facto independence. The article about Taiwan is also quite explicit that Taiwan/the ROC isn't a part of the PRC and does exist as a country, "Taiwan, officially the Republic of China (ROC), is a country". Taiwan/the ROC just doesn't function as a part of the PRC and the PRC only claims that it's their rightful territory not that they currently control it. I mean one of the P5 switching governments was a big moment in the history of the UN I think that should be reflected in the article WikiFreedom23 (talk) 09:03, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Since 1971, the Republic of China, also known as Taiwan, has been excluded from the UN and consistently denied membership in its reapplications. The UN officially adheres to the "One China" policy endorsed by most member states, which recognizes the People's Republic of China as the only legitimate Chinese government. Critics allege that this position reflects a failure of the organization's development goals and guidelines, and it garnered renewed scrutiny during the COVID-19 pandemic, when Taiwan was denied membership into the World Health Organization despite its relatively effective response to the virus. Support for Taiwan's inclusion is subject to pressure from the People's Republic of China, which regards the territories administered by Taiwan as their own territory."
THis was from the UN article. Rynoip (talk) 21:57, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This map doesn’t cover the UN’s recognition of territorial boundaries, it covers physical territory. If it did, Western Sahara would be blue since the UN recognizes it as a non-self-governing Spanish territory. Unless you are claiming that the PRC currently has control over any part of the Taiwanese mainland, the fact of the matter is that Taiwan is not a member and its territory should thus be grayed out. 141.154.49.21 (talk) 17:55, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thats an argument for Taiwan being grey, not for Taiwan being blue. I have removed the map until we can come up with an accurate one. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:13, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The practice of following UN conventions for the map here is longstanding. There are more differences between the UN map and de facto state presence than Taiwan. CMD (talk) 04:23, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why would we follow UN conventions for the map here rather than NPOV? If there are other accuracy issues with the map thats more reasons not to use it, not less. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 15:30, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No-one has yet discovered the trick to creating a NPOV map. There are no accuracy issues with the map, it follows UN conventions accurately. CMD (talk) 15:40, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We have NPOV maps all across wikipedia? What are you talking about? We can use this map, but not in the infobox... That map presents the wikivoice version, not the UN's version (now it can if they're overlaid on each other and toggleable and explained, but not like this). This would mislead someone into thinking that Taiwan is a member of the UN. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:06, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no map on Wikipedia that covers all views. It is an inherent problem of mapping, down to projection choice. It is unreasonable to pick a particular issue of being potentially misleading and discount the map. The map cannot cater for all potential misleading elements, especially if it's based on island colouration; the same argument might apply to Puerto Rico, Greenland, and other island polities. It may also apply to the various differing borders laid out with a particular view on this (and most other) maps. CMD (talk) 16:33, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We can still have the map, just not there. What does Taiwan being an island have to do with anything? Its relevant because its a country not because its an island. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:00, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I assumed it was the being an island that caused the question. If it's the being a country, the same issues with catering to all elements applies to the other not included de facto countries. CMD (talk) 17:07, 23 August 2024 (UTC)\[reply]
Nobody used the word island before you did. Its not a map of islands which are part of the UN, its a map of states which are a part of the UN. The problem isn't catering to the de facto state the problem is catering to China, on a NPOV map Taiwan is grey because the reliable sources say that Taiwan is not a member state of the UN and that Taiwan is not part of China. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:37, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, yet it is the obvious island that has received the focus, rather than say Northern Cyprus. Again, focusing on "catering to China" is picking one particular issue and ignoring all the other situations. The map is not established to cater to China, it reflects UN maps. Reliable sources do much better than using ill-defined terms such as "part of China", as they do for the many other complex situations hidden behind maps. CMD (talk) 17:53, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This has nothing to do with it being an island. If it says map of member states it needs to be a map of member states as reported by reliable sources, thats how NPOV works. No more whataboutism please, this is a discussion about Taiwan and if you want to talk about other things please open a seperate discussion. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:24, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not whataboutism, it's the same map. An odd focus on one item ignoring all other context is not how NPOV works at all. CMD (talk) 18:37, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is a discussion about "Taiwan in the members map" if you think that there are other NPOV issues in the members map open a new section... This is the only major NPOV issue I see. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:26, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Taiwan is "there" for the same reason most other de facto states are. CMD (talk) 03:55, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Taiwan is a de jure state as well. It splits global recognition with China, they're in the same category recognition wise (both are states with limited diplomatic recognition). Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:28, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also note that the map you're defending doesn't actually appear to do what you say... Check western sahara, its grey. The map does not currently do what you say it does. It also doesn't currently code Taiwan as part of China, it codes Taiwan as blue but not part of China. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:31, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's an example of the map doing what I said it does, the Western Sahara is one of the areas on the Special Committee on Decolonization and is mapped like that by the UN. CMD (talk) 16:35, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We don't follow the UN's mapping conventions, we follow NPOV. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:39, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As the current map does as best possible using a consistent standard, rather than arbitrarily changing the world map due to a particular POV about the display of some particular country. CMD (talk) 16:46, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Its an ok map for presenting the UN's own view, but currently we have it in wikivoice. We have a standard consensus world map, nobody is suggesting that we create a custom one just code the blue countries in blue and the grey countries in grey. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear what we have now is the result of "arbitrarily changing the world map due to a particular POV about the display of some particular country" you are arguing against using a standard world map. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:54, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We don't have a standard world map. We have standard conventions for individual country maps that has found a way to balance POVs (except for three situations I'm aware of that do not follow them), but aside from that it's mostly ad-hoc. This map shows the areas considered covered by the UN member States and the areas not considered covered, for example the Western Sahara as raised above. To the extent any map is Wikivoice, the current map is an accurate depiction of that information. That it doesn't reflect the preferences of Taiwan, Morocco, France, etc. is a reflection of the real world. CMD (talk) 17:10, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the real world the state of Taiwan is not part of the state of China and is not a member state of the UN, you are describing a convienent political fiction and calling it a reflection of the real world. A map which was a NPOV reflection of the real world would have Taiwan in grey. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:41, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's clearly not convenient, but it is what it is. A map which singles out Taiwan for incongruous treatment is not NPOV. CMD (talk) 08:13, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The examples you provided doesnt really correlate well to the situation. Greenland is well known to be a Denmark overseas territory and it isnt disputed as much as the Taiwan and China situation. Rynoip (talk) 10:22, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't appear to be an accurate statement, are you sure you aren't confusing an extreme political POV for reality? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:14, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So are we taking this image down? Aside from an editor with a clearly biased POV, there is little reason not to. 141.154.49.21 (talk) 16:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My personal view supports taiwan as a country however as with the article is about the un with its one china policy, I do not mind if you take down the image or not. Rynoip (talk) 10:10, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
THE UN does not have a one china policy. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:06, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
my bad Rynoip (talk) 22:04, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was referring to the article about the one china policy. I see you have recently removed the section of the United Nations adhering to the One China policy in the controversy section despite being clearly mentioned in the source?
If you delete that part shouldnt there also be a new source instead of the old one?
https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/24/world/asia/24iht-taiwan.1.6799766.html Rynoip (talk) 22:59, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA concerns

[edit]

I am concerned that this article no longer meets the good article criteria. Some of my concerns are listed below:

  • The article has some uncited statements and paragraphs.
  • At over 9,000 words, WP:TOOBIG recommends that it be divided or trimmed. I think this article could benefit with a subject-matter expert removing extra information.
  • The lead, at six paragraphs, is more than the recommended amount listed at WP:LEADLENGTH. I suggest that this be trimmed and the citations removed, as WP:LEADCITE says they are not needed.

Is anyone willing to address these concerns, or should this article to go WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 20:22, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

[edit]

United Nations

[edit]

The following discussion 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.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review
Result: Delisted. Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 18:31, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article has numerous uncited paragraphs, including the entire "Hymn to United Nations" section. At over 9,000 words, WP:TOOBIG suggests that it might be eligible to be trimmed, and the lead (with six paragraphs) might be a good place to start. Z1720 (talk) 07:49, 7 October 2024 (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.

Media bias cases in BJP

[edit]

Some cases on BJP in any state of India 124.123.174.130 (talk) 17:02, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:United_Nations&oldid=1255006722"