Talk:Headquarters of the United Nations

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleHeadquarters of the 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.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 13, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
May 17, 2009Good article nomineeNot listed
November 27, 2010Good article nomineeListed
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on October 24, 2011, October 24, 2016, October 24, 2019, and October 24, 2022.
Current status: Good article

History[edit]

Where did the UN have its HQ before the building was constructed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.83.107.213 (talk) 01:11, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it officially had a headquaters, but both the general assembly and the security council held various meetings in places like San Francisco, London, and Geneva.--Supersexyspacemonkey (talk) 00:13, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request[edit]

We need more info! Does anyone have a map or know a whole lot about the interior of the building?

    • It would be cool if we could use some satelite imagery.

International territory[edit]

Imagine a person that wants to get to the UN headquarters (to hold a speech or something else). To get there the person would have to be on US territory first (for example on the way JFK airport - UN headquarters), thus he or she could be prosecuted by US law.

Is there a way to come to the UN HQs without going through national ground first? I.e. is there a helicopter landing place or something else that would allow someone to come from his or her country and go directly to the HQs via international ways? Thanks, --Abdull 10:28, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Probably not. Even if the answer is yes, that way is probably closed to the public.--Jusjih 00:16, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Correction, one has to pass American immigration and customs inspection before reaching the UN HQ, so forget your thought. Even foreign diplomats have to show their proper passports and visas to pass American inspection. Diplomatic immunity is not unlimited.--Jusjih 00:33, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a way to the Vatican that doesn't go through Italy? I mean, even if you take a helicopter to the Vatican, you'd still have to pass through Italian airspace. So what? 204.52.215.107 05:24, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unless you want to use a time machine, there is no logistical way to get into the Vatican without going through Italian Territory, the only other option is if you want to spend years of your life creating a tunnel that undermines Italy entirely, and i think you wouldn't want to do that, the time travel thing also would take you years of your life to make a functioning one, and if you do you might end up like that guy from 1999 who taveled into the past but died from head trauma and a lot of other things. 98.4.98.210 (talk) 19:34, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The whole coming and going thing is irrelevant. Accredited diplomats and heads of state have diplomatic immunity, and the US respects that even if it's at war. This is why guys like Castro, Chavez, and Ahmadinejad can come and go to the UN as they please. This is also why Iraqi diplomats at the UN continued to give press conferences during Desert Storm in 1991 without a peep of US objection. Sure, US customs & immigration can refuse to admit diplomats but that can only be done in accordance with the terms of the US/UN host country agreement which has the force of federal (treaty) law. Wl219 06:41, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, no, technically, all persons, including heads of state, diplomats, and all persons with diplomatic immunity, have to pass through US inspections. The charter grants the US as the host country the right to do so, with the understanding that all accredited officials of member states will be allowed to pass. This is because they have to travel through US soil/water/airspace. There is actually no such thing as a diplomatic immunity that prevents you from passing through customs. The inspection and validation of your credentials is what certifies your immunity status.
The US is not at war with Cuba, Venezuela, or Iran, they simply do not have diplomatic relations, but yes, even at war (e.g. Iraq), the enemy has the right to maintain a diplomatic staff there, though not necessarily the right to send people to UNHQ indiscriminately. For political reasons, it would be very stupid of the US to deny someone like Castro or Chavez entry, but on the other hand, they do not "come and go as they please," they go for special summit events of the world's leaders, or on other rare occasions, when it is appropriate for them to go and to be allowed entry, since their countries are members.
Not every diplomat has diplomatic immunity. Usually only embassadors and heads of state have it, sometimes lesser staff and miscellaneous individuals for special reasons, but usually the majority of diplomatic staff, and visiting politicians, don't have immunity. In their case, they usually need to get a US visa to go to the UN. The US has in the past denied entry to some diplomats because their countries decided to make last minute plans to attend a negotiation meeting or a conference or an assembly meeting, and there was no time to process them.
Some leaders do, however, at the discretion of US authorities, enter without a passport, but this is courtesy, and is not always given.

--Supersexyspacemonkey (talk) 00:37, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

UN staff does NOT have diplomatic immunity[edit]

The article has a lot of wrong information regarding diplomatic immunity. UN staff members do not have diplomatic immunity. For starters, there are more Americans working at the UN than any other nationality, and you cannot have diplomatic immunity in your own home country. Foreign UN staff have a G-4 visa (International organization officer or employee, and members of immediate family), which not only doesn't grant any immunity, but its also very restrictive. The only people working at the UN itself with diplomatic immunity are political appointees such as heads of major organizations (UNICEF, UNESCO, UNDP) and chiefs of the handful of existing major independent programmes, all of which are temporary positions, and none of them are UN staff. In the case of the Oil-for-food programme fiasco, only one person involved - Alexander Yakovlevhad - had to have his diplomatic immunity revoked in order to be prosecuted.

The case regarding the parking tickets back in the mid-90s was not related to UN employees, although it was reported as such by the media at the time. The people who were involved were those working for local consulates and their countries' missions to the UN. They are not UN employees, and do not work at the UN, although a lot of these missions and consulates are located within the same neighbrohood. Foreign representatives of their countries' governments are the ones with diplomatic plates on their vehicles.

And for the record, I've been working at the UN for nearly 20 years, have a G-4 visa, no longer own a car but when I did it had NYS plates, had two speeding tickets and five parking ones and had to pay every one of them, recently had to pay a $150 dollar ticketd for crossing a red light on my bicycle, and have been arrested for disorderly conduct (a fight broke out at a bar where I was having a drink, and as I forced mine and my date's way out of there, the police came in and arrested anyone who looked like they'd been in a fight).

Architecture[edit]

This article needs material on the architecture and architects of the Headquarters buildings.

Proposed alternative of UN HQ[edit]

I read in National Geographic's September 1961 special UN edition that one of the alternatives for UN HQ is a travelling cruise ship moving regularly among member states. The article just stated it as a passing remark and I don't have other clues for the source/reference. Could somebody with a background on this matter verify this?

This sounds interesting, but I cannot verify this.--Jusjih 00:18, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The UN HQ should really be open for all. As a logical consequence, it should have its own international airport and sea port. that it doesn't. There is a member you can not go around to get there - the USA. It should have its own small territory somewhere under international control, instead of extraterritoriality. I was hoping to read some plans and ideas here on the moving of the HQ. The ship is a nice thought.--Mátyás (talk) 12:01, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Buildings/park before the UN?[edit]

Does anybody have any information about buildings, parks etc. that was removed in order to build the UN building? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.232.24.10 (talk) 13:54, 4 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I thought there was an Edison power plant or something and then Rockefeller took over the land, or something. But that plant's probably a few blocks away, so that probably doesn't count. I do know, however, that a residential set of apartment buildings popped up across First Avenue from the UN site back in the 1920s or 1930s named Tudor City, surrounding a small park, and both are still around (provided, of course, that one climbs up a staircase after crossing First Avenue). 204.52.215.107 05:44, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It used to be a swamp before, which is what gave the neighborhood around the UN its name of Turtle Bay. One interesting little fact - if you look at the older buildings across the street on Tudor City, you'll notice that they only have a few very small windows facing towards the UN. That is because the swamp there was also used as a drainage ditch and garbage disposal. So the buildings all have their majestic façades facing towards Tudor City park, and only the bathrooms have a little window facing the open view of the river and Queens. Jdsouza 20:19, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA nomination[edit]

Hi. Someone nominated this article for GA (I don't see the GA template here but trust this is so). A great subject but needs more work to pass GA. Here are some notes that I hope will help (feel free to use or not if I missed something). -Susanlesch 23:44, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Can you say briefly (in a sentence), what the United Nations is?
  • Can you say the headquarters where built between 1947 or 1948 and 1952?
  • Can you mention that flags of every nation fly at the UN and when?
  • Who designed the interior?
  • Is renovation to cost $1 billion USD? (I read that here.)
This is hardly a reliable reference for the cost. Also who is paying? 74.78.162.229 (talk) 13:35, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can you give a source for the section "Public gatherings"? Who says it is a "tempting" venue? Who says which "few organizations... are allowed to hold events at the UN"?
  • Can you format all of the notes as citations? See WP:CITE#HOW.
  • Why are there five citations for the single paragraph in "Renovation plans"? If five are needed, then I would cite each sentence.
  • Can you give sources for the uncited parts? For example, the first four paragraphs of "Planning and construction"?
  • Can the article be written in the active voice? Who is speaking? Who is acting? Things like "was proposed" and "Brooklyn has also been suggested" need to say who proposed what. Or for example, "The $8.5 million purchase was then funded by his father, John D. Rockefeller, Jr., who donated it to the City." could read "John D. Rockefeller, Jr., Nelson's father, then donated $8.5 million to the City of New York for...."
  • Can external links include the headquarters' Web site?
  • Can you mention the Foucault pendulum?

International territory?[edit]

What exactly does it mean when one says that the United Nations is "international territory"? What does it mean to the visitor? When someone breaks a law, whose law is he or she breaking, and how does he or she get punished, and who does the punishing? If the US is at war with a country and that country's diplomats happens to be at UN headquarters, what happens? How does the status of the UN headquarters compare with that of Vatican City from a legal and practical point of view, as far as relations with the surrounding country are concerned, and with countries in general? 204.52.215.107 05:37, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Same as my answer above. US law applies to the extent it's allowed to under the US/UN host country agreement. From a practical standpoint for visitors, that means there's no tax for purchases at the gift shop. Wl219 06:47, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See [1] Wl219 06:52, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was there today, and it also apparently means the UN can get away with providing tacky unitednationese gifts at steep prices (in American dollars, of course) and running a unitednationese post office. Their International style architecturally is beautiful but dated, and their restrooms apparently are stuck in the 1950s. 204.52.215.107 02:54, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yeah, and it also makes an excuse for them to use heavier security than in most New York skyscrapers.204.52.215.107 03:02, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Security measures are probaby connected more with the high-level government officials being there every day than the extraterritoriality principle. Mystache 12:13, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Who is responcible for the security of the UN? BrainOverfloW (talk) 06:11, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
UN Department of safety and Security Jdsouza (talk) 18:07, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

how many countries including in united nation?[edit]

i just would like to know how many countries inculding in United Nation? Because many countries has been gets a freedom for their are country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.19.65.24 (talk) 03:28, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See United Nations member states. There are currently 192 member states. --Joowwww (talk) 12:01, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:United Nations Headquarters/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

This is a premature nomination. This article is not yet deserving of good article status. It lacks much about the history of complex, including cost of construction, beginning and completion dates, etc. In addition, no mention is made of the major organizations that use the building: Security Council, ECOSOC, Secretariat, etc. Article lacks in image use. The images previously used were not very informative, when there is a sizable collection of images at Commons. In addition, sources are not formatted into citations, and some are even just links inserted directly into the prose of the article (a couple of these ended up being dead links). In addition some of the article is excessively detailed while much of it is not detailed enough. I haven't actually completed reading the full article yet, but it's really unnecessary. This one just isn't yet up to snuff. I just added an infobox, which cleaned the place up. I will also be adding more images into the article as well (might have to search a bit on Flickr as well). I will be working on this article now in the future, and hopefully can help out a bit. ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 03:41, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where does this review stand?[edit]

Shouldn't this nomination be closed out? This is showing up as the oldest unreviewed article. So I was going to volunteer to review it. However, apparently the article has been reviewed, but this fact has not been properly documented. Please properly close out the review or document that the review is ongoing as appropriate. Granted, I have not checked the history to see the improvements made since the nomination, but in its current state, I would have placed the nomination on hold, not failed it. While I agree with most of the findings, some of these are over and above the Good article criteria.Dave (talk) 05:10, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Closing GA Review[edit]

Though I know normally the first editor to begin a review should be the one to pass/fail/hold, since this nomination has been "in review" since March 2009 without action, I'm going to mark this FAIL and suggest that it be renominated by an interested contributor at a future time. Vicenarian (talk) 04:44, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Who donated the land?[edit]

In the J.P. Morgan corporate site (www.jpmorgan.com/pages/jpmorgan/about/history) it is mentioned that "1947: The firm gives $8.5 million to the United Nations to purchase the 17-acre property for its headquarters" In the Wikipedia article is says that the money/land was a Rockefeller donation. Which one is true? Ovelix (talk) 18:54, 9 March 2010 (UTC)Ovelikios[reply]

Guess what family had a CEO in Chase Manhattan. Guess what Chase Manhattan is named today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.80.128.55 (talk) 04:34, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Link broken[edit]

The secong external link is broken 83.60.183.191 (talk) 14:58, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:United Nations Headquarters/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Shenhemu (talk) 11:46, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article was nominated GA in 2009, see Talk:United Nations Headquarters/GA1, but failed. Main reason was a lack of historical info, beginning and completion dates, organizations using it, etc. All that information has been added later.

The text and design now look good to me at first glance, but a few dead external links need to be fixed. One link to ABC News (Ref 31) has been dead since 2007...

-- Shenhemu (talk) 12:03, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing that the majority of references don't use cite web, and even worse, the majority of the article is unreferenced.... This article does for sure fail the GA criteria! + Its the UN headquarter, the article can be made much bigger. --TIAYN (talk) 20:27, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed the dead links and added additional refs. Racepacket (talk) 15:20, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I even removed the ABC News link. We are now at 40 footnoted sources. I think that the article deserves a GA, but would like to hear from Shenhemu. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 19:48, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think most of TIAYN's concerns have been solved with the latest quality improvements by Racepacket. I don't think the article should be much bigger, since this is only about the headquarter, not about the UN itself. Still, I suggest to add some more cross-refences to other major UN articles, where possible. Be waiting with final GA listing. Shenhemu (talk) 03:30, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good article now! Thanks to Racepacket and all other contributors! Shenhemu (talk) 07:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Suffice - ?[edit]

"Due to the significance of the organisation, proposals and offers to relocate the Headquarters buildings would suffice now and then. " Suffice pro surfice? 128.214.182.172 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:33, 2 February 2011 (UTC).[reply]

File:New York City United Nations UNO 06.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:New York City United Nations UNO 06.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:05, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Corbusier And Niemeyer[edit]

I am not an expert on this subject in any way, but the Corbusier and Niemeyer section seems to have a bit of a Niemeyer bias. It doesnt mention Corbusier's contributions, nor that of anyone else involved.Djacobs7 (talk) 07:15, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ownership of the UN Headquarters[edit]

According to the City of New York's NYCityMap system the United Nations headquarters and property is owned not by the United Nations but by the City of New York's Department of Citywide Administrative Services, I would like to change this information to reflect the correct up-to-data info but I am afraid that it might spark a editing war which I'd like to avoid at all costs. Unfortunately the way the NYCCityMap system is setup there is no way to directly link to the data and requests have to be manually entered each time. So I'd like to know how this should be handled properly. TheGoofyGolfer (talk) 06:28, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The reason is because the UN Headquarters District Agreement Annex 1 specifically enabled the UN to widen their territories to the Bureau of Manhattan, City of New York, and State of New York.... and they did.

So the UN Headquarters District is actually expanded to Manhattan... Which is why it's so weird with money. the UN HQD also expanded to the entirety of New York City.

The fact that the CITY OF NEW YORK owns the UN headquarters district plot of land is evidence of the UN widening their territories as per the treaty annex 1. the Government of New York City is inclusive of the UN Government. (Paris Peace Treaty - Article 45 calls the UN a government and not an NGO).

The CITY OF NEW YORK issues their own Birth Certificates separate from the State of New York, and even Title 20 C.F.R. §422.103 (2) specifically indicates that New York City is NOT part of the 50 states just as DC is not part of the 50 States, and likewise Puerto Rico, Guam, and Virgin Islands.

But also according to New York City Universities, anyone with a State of New York birth certificate is not considered "a resident of the State of New York" until they have a certificate, yet people with CITY OF NEW YORK birth certificates are considered de facto "State of New York Residents", yet without a State Birth Certificate!!

How can someone be considered a State of New York Born resident without a State of New York Birth Certificate? So. There is something REALLY REALLY REALLY funny with "The Headquarters of the United Nations"... and it is not being addressed in this article.

Furthermore, there are 4 supplemental headquarters district agreements between the US and UN that cover all kinds of things that really should be documented on the article page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:2350:71A0:516A:E4CF:C375:9C4B (talk) 18:11, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kofi Anan's son and Oil for Food[edit]

The "International character" section currently contains "In 2005, Secretary-General Kofi Annan waived the immunity of Benon Sevan, Aleksandr Yakovlev, and Vladimir Kuznetsov in relation to the Oil-for-Food Programme.[22] All have been charged in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, except for Kofi Annan's own son, who was also implicated in the scandal." I have removed the last phrase "except"... for various reasons. First, its wrong from the point of view of language. Annan's son is not part of the enumeration above, hence not part of the "all" referenced, and hence the "except" makes not sense. Secondly, it does nothing to illustrate the international character of the HQ, nor is it particularly connected with the UN HQ at all. It's probably fine in Oil for Food, or maybe in Kofi Annan, but here it's entirely gratuitous. And thirdly, the given source is much more circumspect than our "implicated", which is very vague and suggestive , without providing any substance. Please don't restore it without good reasons. If you restore it anyways, at least fix the language problems. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 06:47, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

None of these objections to a perfectly reasonable sentence are acceptble. Also, please review WP:BRD: the article rermains in the status quo ante during discussion, so your re-revert was improper. As an admin you should have known better. BMK (talk) 12:02, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any substantial discussion. You simply seem to ignore my points, both grammatical and substantial. As for BRD, I'd say the edit that introduced this sentence was bold, and I reverted it. Anyways, the current sentence is bad. I'd suspect that the point is to somehow discredit Annan and.or the UN, which would violate WP:NPOV and arguably WP:BLP. Unless you can come up with a good reason why this broken sentence should be in that section, I'll gladly remove it again - if need be under WP:IAR. But I prefer a substantive discussion to acronym warring ;-). --Stephan Schulz (talk) 12:48, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You have no points worth discussing, frankly. Your "language" point is ... worthless. It's a perfectly good sentence. Is there some subtext here I'm not understanding, because your "explanation" really makes no sense at all. It stays in the article until there is a consensus here to remove it, don't revert again. BMK (talk) 00:01, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OMG, you're a freakin; administrator? Please refresh your knowledge of WP:BRD. Your Bold edit has been Reverted by another editor, the next step is Discussion. During the discussion, the article remains in the status quo ante. It is to that state I have returned it to, re-reverting without a consensus to do so is edit-warring, as you should know. BMK (talk) 00:05, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Given that you already knew that I am an admin back at your first reply, the surprise seems to be a bit, well, surprising. WP:BRD is an essay. WP:IAR is a policy. Anyways, I am discussing. Back to the subject. If you think that the language is perfectly fine, which group of people does the only occurrence of "all" in the section I quoted above refer to? My understanding is that it refers to Benon Sevan, Aleksandr Yakovlev, and Vladimir Kuznetsov, none of which is Kofi Annnan's son. A better phrasing for what I think this is trying to say would be a new sentence "Kofi Annan's son, Kojo Annan, who was also implicated in the scandal, was not charged." That would at least fix the language problem. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 21:29, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
re admin: actually, I forgot - it happens when you get older. BRD is an essay but it's probably the most widely cited essay in the project, and to see an admin totally disregard it is shocking, to say the least. IAR is never a justification for edit warring.
"All the apples were rotten, except for one." Any problem with that? BMK (talk) 21:39, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"There is a red apple, a green apple, and a blue apple. All of the apples are rotten, except for the orange." - that's my problem with the language. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 06:19, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Very nice construction, but unfortunately not analogous to the one in the article. The sentence is grammatically correct as it is, it is your understanding of it is flawed. Perhaps your command of English is not as "near native" as you think it is? BMK (talk) 07:58, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There is always the chance of falling prey to the Dunning–Kruger effect, but I don't thinks that is the problem here. The word "all" refers to something - it's not "all things" or "all humans", or even "all UN employees in New York". In my interpretation, it refers to the set of three specific people listed in the previous sentence. None of those three is the son of Kofi Annan, who is therefore not an exception to the claim that all from that set of 3 people were charged. He just was not charged. That may be an exception from "all implicated" (though I doubt that), but it's not an exception to "all of Benon Sevan, Aleksandr Yakovlev, and Vladimir Kuznetsov were charged", which the current sentence claims. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 08:17, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nu? --Stephan Schulz (talk) 16:44, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nu what? There is no grammatical problem with the sentence, it's perfectly acceptable and perfectly clear. BMK (talk) 20:52, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Since we seem to be at that level: "Is not". It's also probably a BLP violation, since the main story about the "implication" seem to have been officially withdrawn, with an official excuse, by the Sunday Times. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 21:16, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Seems"? Has it been withdrawn or not? BMK (talk) 21:58, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
BBC CNN The GuardianNYT. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 22:43, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it's not exactly a refutation of the sentence in our article, since the Times alleged that he "admitted" to doing it, which is what he sued over, while our article just says that he wasn't indicted, which remains true. Still BLP policy being what it is, I agree that the use of Annan's name in the sentence raises the possibility that he was involved, so it's safer from that point of view to simply remove it, which I will go and do now. BMK (talk) 23:21, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Also note that e.g. the BBC says the Sunday Times withdrew "withdrew the claims (that Mr Annan was involved in oil trading linked to the discredited Iraqi oil-for-food scheme)" in general, and also mentions that the UN's independent inquiry found no evidence supporting the claim Kojo Annan was involved. The other sources generally agree. It's not ironclad, but then what is? --Stephan Schulz (talk) 23:56, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Images of the General Assembly Hall[edit]

We really do not need 3 images of the General Assembly hall, so I removed one. Epic Genius (talk) 00:37, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Epicgenius, very good. You just removed the wrong one, that's all. BMK (talk) 07:58, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for fixing that, BMK. I'd intended to remove the image showing the hall full of people, but apparently these image's names are very similar, and I must have gotten confused. Epic Genius (talk) 11:40, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Headquarters of the United Nations. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:51, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Headquarters of the United Nations. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:00, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Updates[edit]

I'd like to include recent renovations, hours of visitation for the general public, and basically any new, current information in 2016.

http://manhattan.about.com/od/historyandlandmarks/a/United-Nations-Headquarters.htm

https://www.unjspf.org/UNJSPF_Web/page.jsp?page=Contact

http://www.aviewoncities.com/nyc/unitednations.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aleishar21 (talk • contribs) 04:56, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Aleishar21 (talk) 04:59, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the edit, however, a few changes should be made as the new section "Updates" isn't necessary. The building upgrades should be included in the "Overhaul" section, and need to be sourced with a proper reference (About.com is questionable as a reliable source). The information about the death of the architect isn't relevant to this article; people wondering can simply read his specific article. Coinmanj (talk) 02:15, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Headquarters of the United Nations. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:45, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 17 external links on Headquarters of the United Nations. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:56, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Headquarters of the United Nations. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:18, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request photographs of Foucault pendulum[edit]

Hello.　I have a request for Wikipedians near NYC. I want you to take and upload some picutures of Foucault pendulum in Headquarters of the United Nations.

Please upload to commons:Category:Foucault pendulums in United Nations General Assembly building. Regards!-Tengo las llaves (talk) 15:36, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Online platform[edit]

Where is star shop office located in Us headquarter? 41.216.73.9 (talk) 04:47, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Go Find Me HELP[edit]

Food to help pastor Anthony kinlawa in Uganda and his family are in need of food, coal, rent desperately! Please pay it forwards To Go Fund Me account! He helps rescue youths from Sex Trafficking. Has a Small church to preach the word of God! What a humble man of God It was a pleasure to meet him and to find out how much he struggles for basic needs and works tirelessly to help people. Please pay it forward!🙏 24.28.40.202 (talk) 03:04, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Headquarters_of_the_United_Nations&oldid=1207600350"