Talk:Universal Postal Union

message: Is it really necessary to link to every language article on wikipedia whenever a new language is mentioned?
91.154.122.82 (talk) 13:27, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Language wiki links

message: I don't think the Channel Islands are technically part of the United Kingdom.  In fact:
Crown dependencies are possessions of the British Crown, as opposed to overseas territories or colonies of the United Kingdom. They include the Channel Island bailiwicks of Jersey and Guernsey and the Isle of Man in the Irish Sea. None forms a part of the United Kingdom, being separate jurisdictions, nor do they form part of the European Union. (from the entry on Crown dependency.  This could be mentioned somewhere, as this makes them appear to be part of the UK.  The Jade Knight 03:01, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: As the Treaty was concluded before 1951 (the date of the Bevin Declaration), the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man were considered a default part of the United Kingdom in International Law, and were implicitly covered by the UK's accession to the UPU. They did not acceed in any seperate way. As you will note from the Crown Dependency article, the UK has responsibility for the foreign relations of the Crown Dependencies. 136.2.1.101 10:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Channel Islands

message: Should the names be presented according to the official list ? — Instantnood 19:13, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the names should be presented according to the official list. Historical members may be listed if verifiable.--Jusjih 05:49, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Suggestions on how to add historical members? In the general list, or separately? Let it be noted that with historical members there should be two dates: one for accession / ratification and one for the end of membership. Possibly, it would be good to give the reasons for ending membership. Has anybody any idea how many former members there are? I know of one: Orange Free State, but have to verify accession date. Michel Doortmont (talk) 09:42, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Took matters ahead. On reflection a separate sub-category seemed the best option to enter former member countries to the membership list. So I created this and added the Orange Free State to it. Note that most probably all the entries here need separate references for accession and stoppage dates, as the UPU website does not provide these. Please add more. Michel Doortmont (talk) 10:42, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The main problem is that there really does not need to be another long list, just for the sake of listing, on an article page when there is a perfectly good external link available to use and it contains much more information too. Either the article is about the UPU or it is a list of UPU members, but I don't think it can do both effectively. UPU members should either be on a separate list page, or just use the link I gave above. Since it was put there I had been considering removing the list because it seems redundant. The idea of a short category that lists a small number of unusual country listings, such as former members does seem good, unless it gets out of hand, which is unlikely. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 03:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Names of members

message: What is the history and current status of French as the/an official language of the Union?
At least last time I checked, international postal forms at a post office have the native language(s) -- and French.
How does this relate to the Union being a UN agency now -- with the UN having 6 co-equal administrative languages?
: Hu? It's not related at all. The International Court of Justice is the principal judicial organ of the UN, and it's official languages are English and French as well. What is the problem? JensMueller 18:16, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The official website says "French is the official language of the UPU. English was added as a working language in 1994." However, it does not tell us the historical reason why French was chosen. I don't know the reason either. --Yejianfei (talk) 14:35, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  you are a little late to this topic but here goes. I suspect this was because French was the language of nobility and of diplomacy, so at the first meeting in Bern that set up the Treaty of Bern in 1874 the most common language for the participants would have been French. Perhaps at the next meeting in Paris in 1878 they decided to use it in future. There are some interesting points here. There are also some very good points made in this reddit topic supporting the dominance of French developed by that time. ww2censor (talk) 15:31, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  What language(s) was the Treaty of Bern written in? The Wikisource only lists the English version and German version. Where is the French version? --Yejianfei (talk) 15:42, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps this answers the question for you. It was signed in French even though, as you found, other language translations exist. and here is the page that set up French as the official language. ww2censor (talk) 16:25, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  French as Official Language 

message: When did the International Postal Union become the Universal Postal Union? --Thecurran (talk) 19:05, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As of 1878, mentioned in the text of the article. Michel Doortmont (talk) 09:39, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  IPU 

message: Is there article correct in saying the UPU originally was called the "General Postal Union"? According to this is was originally called the "World Postal Union". --MarsRover (talk) 04:50, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems that some people use the term "World Postal Union" but you should really use the most reliable source, the UPU itself which uses the term "General Postal Union" here. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 15:21, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In agreement: the earlier name was indeed General Posal Union' before it was changed to UPU. My mistake in the comment above. For a source and the text of the original treaty: The Avalon Project at Yale Law School: General Postal Union; October 9, 1874. Michel Doortmont (talk) 15:56, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good addition. I have tidied the new link with the appropriate format. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 16:19, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Never too old to learn, though interesting that you are using a different type of title than an editor who corrected me in the Biography Project pages (namely in the way I reorganised the section heading). Note that I do like this one better. I will add the same link to the Treaty of Bern article and consider adding the text to Wikisource. Michel Doortmont (talk) 18:37, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  World Postal Union? 

message: In case anybody wonders what all the tumult is about:  was changed, some months ago, from reading Republic of Macedonia to Macedonia. For reasons which are too long to explain here (most of them are in Macedonia (terminology)) Greek extremists take this as an affront.  They also take the wording of a proposed naming convention, WP:MOSMAC, to require the use of former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in full, whenever Macedonia is mentioned in the article on an organization which treats that as the offficial name (some do, some don't); so the text of the article has now been changed from Republic of Macedonia to Macedonia to former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. 
WP:MOSMAC was never intended to require official names, and it's not consensus, largely becuase it is abused in this fashion. This too may pass. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:19, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please remember that Wikipedia uses verifiable sources and I have reverted the Macedonia edit because the most verifiable source for membership of the UPU is the UPU website. Until the UPU changes that, their web site of members still lists Macedonia as "The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" on their members page and because this is an article about the UPU and its membership that verifiable source is what we should use. Maybe the UPU will change it soon and then you will have a source that can be used to support your edits to list Macedonia under M. If you can prove otherwise please provide a source that supports the position you state above and I will support that change. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 18:10, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What needs to be verified are assertions of fact; in this case that the state which we have an article on as the  Republic of Macedonia is a member of the UPU. The phrasing of that fact is up to us; cutting and pasting the UPU's list is a poor way to do it - if it were not public domain, it might be well be a copyright violation. As another instance, we should not be referring to Article 23, unexplained, because they do - their list is part of the same website as their constitution; ours isn't. Fortunately, I know what it means, but then I took some trouble to search the site. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:00, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Excuse me but are you accusing me of posting the list of UPU members to the article page? That is the impression I get from the post on my talk page. If you read the other posts on this page you would see that I suggested that such a list might not be useful because there is a good external link. BUT, you know quite well that verifiability, not facts, trumps all on Wikipedia. If you can't prove "the state which we have an article on as the Republic of Macedonia is a member of the UPU" then it will not fly. So, as I suggested above, if you are able to verify your name change with a source I have absolutely no problem in accepting that, but, for now, I have provided a verifiable source confirming the Macedonia membership of the UPU by the name provided and that should stand no matter what the current name of the article about that country is on Wikipedia. Perhaps you would like to see a a debate about a similar situation try figuring out the problem of the Irish state of Ireland where the name of the island is also Ireland by reading this talk page. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 01:39, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Macedonia

message: I'm puzzled as to why the entries for Belarus and Ukraine list their entry date as 1947 when they weren't independent countries at the time. All the other former Soviet states have entry dates in the early 1990s. Hellbus (talk) 02:40, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: These are the date provided by the UPU themselves on their members page. I presume they know the correct dates better than any of us. If you have another verifiable source, we could perhaps use that instead. ww2censor (talk) 04:04, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The Belarusian SSR and the Ukrainian SSR were also members of the UN in their own right from as early as 1945. See UN members#USSR. 83.89.16.138 (talk) 13:07, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That strikes me as a bit odd, but it does explain the UPU membership dates. I was expressing confusion, not doubt. Hellbus (talk) 02:34, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Belarus and Ukraine 

message: The article could use information about how mail is routed from one country to another for which there are no direct transportation connections.  For example, most western hemisphere nations wouldn't have any airliners flying to most countries in Africa. The postal service apparently uses transit, "Open Postal Transit" and "Closed Postal Transit".  CPT involves a closed package of mail, say, from Canada to Gabon, passing through, say, France, and then being forwarded on by French postal services to an airline taking it to Gabon.  OPT would be used when the volume from a country is so small that a package is not efficient, therefore, the mail is forwarded, individual item by individual item, from Belize to, say, France, and by French authorities from France to Gabon. GBC (talk) 09:03, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I was looking for this information as well.  I did find a list of "International Mail Processing Centres" , though some explanation of how they work and how they are connected would be great.  The UPU transport page might have links to more useful documents, though some are in French. Apparently  there was some consternation in 2005-08 with the USPS wanting the rates it pays private air carriers to be deregulated, and to have the ability to contract with non-U.S.-flag carriers.  Not sure what happened with that, but it does shine a light on part of the transport process. -- Beland (talk) 19:42, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone else pointed out . -- Beland (talk) 19:46, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Postal transit and transport 

message: What about post to/from Kosovo?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.130.33.204 (talk) 14:32, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Currently Kosovo is under UN Administration as UNMIK, so does not have its own independent postal administration that could be a member of the UPU. ww2censor (talk) 16:26, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kosovo Post 

message: Moved well referenced list of locations to main article on Postal Union Congress to replace unreferenced table and avoid duplication. Maidonian (talk) 18:08, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Locations of congresses 

message: There reads (in section Member countries): The other states with limited recognition such as Somaliland and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) also route their mail through third countries because the UPU will not allow direct international deliveries.
Oh, UPU has the power not to allow "direct international deliveries"? Sounds strange that an United Nations agency would decide how post is delivered. 85.217.20.68 (talk) 14:56, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  direct deliveries 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Universal Postal Union. 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:
*Added  tag to http://www.upu.int/en/activities/terminal-dues-and-transit-charges/2010-2013-cycle.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140429075733/http://news.upu.int/nd/new-resolution-adopted-on-palestinian-postal-operations/ to http://news.upu.int/nd/new-resolution-adopted-on-palestinian-postal-operations/
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20141016001534/http://www.taiwanncf.org.tw/media/tforum/20081008.htm to http://www.taiwanncf.org.tw/media/tforum/20081008.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:00, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I couldn't find in the original treaty any reference to obligations of member states regarding the postal service during wartime, whether in general or for mail exchanged between warring countries. Are there any other documents of UPU tackling this? Any sources at all on the subject? --A. Gharbeia (talk) 23:59, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Post in wartime 

message: Specific text to be added or removed: The current UPU Director General is Bishar A. Hussein (to be changed in the right-hand-side box).
Reason for the change: Mr. Metoki is the Director General-Elect, and his mandate starts on 1 January 2022, when the article can be changed back to how it is now.
References supporting change: https://www.upu.int/en/News/2021/8/Congress-ushers-in-change-for-UPU
Universal Postal Union (talk) 23:44, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I have closed this request because  indicated its completion above. Z1720 (talk) 15:06, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request - UPU Director General  

message: Could you please change the Director General back to Masahiko Metoki (Japan) as he started his mandate on 1 January 2022? Thank you.
Reference: https://www.upu.int/en/Universal-Postal-Union/About-UPU/Director-General
193.247.56.25 (talk) 16:36, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Best, SpencerT•C 05:48, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request - UPU Director General (2022) 

message: I don't want to flag a supposedly international article as needing globalisation. However, the sections on history and terminal dues appear to have too much American focus. The Deutsch-Österreichischer Postverein is only mentioned as an aside.  There is no mention of the change which brought about our modern postal system: Rowland Hill's 1840 introduction of prepayment and stamps. It also reads as if the US were behind the whole idea rather than the prompting of Germany. Compare it with the article Treaty of Bern in which all countries seem to have equal weight.
I haven't read the discussion topics thoroughly but this issue doesn't seem to be covered. Since I am not an expert on the subject, I just want to point out my impressions. It will be up to those with greater knowledge to act on this. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 04:23, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  US Centric ? 

message: Is there a list of symbols and logos and business name used by UPU member countries.
* Germany uses a horn (aka bugle) and it colour is yellow.
* Australia (AustPost) uses a stylised letter "P" coloured white on a red background.
MountVic127 (talk) 01:02, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  UPU member logoes and symbols?