I am not sure if I understand your reply above correctly:
 UNSD uses the term  "statistics divisions"  ( I agree, but the term refers to division(s) in the UN headquarter or agencies in different countries, NOT a specific way of geographic divisions of the world.)
 You still prefer previous title (i.e. "United Nations statistical divisions") to the current one (i.e. "United Nations geoscheme")?
If so, please allow me to repeat a bit on the following:
 The term "Statistics Division"(capitalized singular form) in the UN context refers to the organization of United Nations Statistics Division with the website at unstats.un.org.
 The term "statistical divisions"(plural form) can mean any categorization schemes, not just geographical ones. Google this: "statistical divisions" site:un.org
 The term "statistical divisions"(plural form) can ALSO mean any organization bodies who are doing statisitcal work in governments.  Google this: "statistical divisions" site:un.org
Therefore, it is not advisable to use the ambigous general term "statistical divisions", or the wrong organization term  "Statistics Division" to refer to UN M.49 . UN statistical divisions can refer to any agencies doing statisitcal work under the UN system, or imply that there are certain UN statistical categorization schemes in a general sense (not geographical). 

I agree that UN geoscheme is widely used for stastitcs and ALSO mapping. Natural Earth has region_un and subregion metadata for each country. I use it quiet often. It is why I notice that most of academic work refer this geographic categorization/classification scheme as "UN geoscheme". Try Google BOOK search and you will find at least the following:
"The best option to identify the states from Asia could be use the United Nations (UN) geoscheme for Asia. As per this, Asia is subdivided to four broad categories:...."
"The UN geoscheme defines the region as all states of mainland North America south of the United States; conversely, the European Union excludes Belize and Mexico from its definition of the region ...."
"Country groups are based on UN Geoscheme and World Bank regional classification."
"...were grouped into regions and subregions based on the United Nations Geoscheme (http://unstats.un.org /unsd/methods/m49/m49regin.htm)"
"... that the United Nations Statistics Division would later classify as Eastern Asia, Southern Asia and Southeastern Asia according to its geoscheme. In fact ..."

I also agree that many UN agencies (in fact, many other reports, consultancies, etc. have different "statistical divisions" (in the general sense of categorization schemes) for research. This is exactly why I believe the term "UN geoscheme" is better. Although it is NOT official term or a technical term (UN M.49), I have not yet found an ambigous use of the term. Correct me if I am wrong on this, so far every online and academic citations that I have found when the term  "UN geoscheme" is used, it refers to exactly the regions and subregions as defined in UN M.49 . 

Moving forwards, since don't have the time nor will to take it to RM, and if you do not have any further couter-evidence or -arguments with the evidence and claims that I layed out above, I can help by making the necessary editing without going to RM. Of course, if you still have lingering concerns, please summarize your current arguments (preferrably after considering the evidence that I have already presented) and new evidence/citations here, before I bring it to RM. (comparingChinese Wikipedia vs Baidu Baike by hanteng)