Talk:Charter of the United Nations

message: I think the issue of the Bush Doctrine and the UN Charter is a valid subject, but it doesn't belong in an article about the UN Charter, but rather in the already existing article about the Bush Doctrine.
:I concur. I'd rather see an annotated text of the charter, if it can be reproduced here, and a history of its development and noting nations that haven't ratified it. Mkilly 07:38, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, but the material was still here, so I've moved it and made a link there.  SpaceFrog 17:46, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bush Doctrine in UN Charter 

message: A poll as to whether or not the language template should be included in this article is being conducted at Talk:United_Nations_Commission_on_Human_Rights#Poll Raul654 19:41, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Language template poll

message: For some time I have been working on revisions to the Bricker Amendment article.  I finally posted it and have a PR at Wikipedia:Peer review/Bricker Amendment/archive1.  I'd welcome comments.  I know all those references may seem extravagant, but I'm hoping to get it as an FA and those voters want lots of footnotes.  PedanticallySpeaking 16:26, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bricker Amendment

message: There are currently five different links to the text of the charter, which is rather excessive.  Surely a link to the official site and/or the Wikisource text are all that's needed.  Silverhelm 06:33, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: As I understand it, there are nineteen chapters. We only have two here. Does anyone else see a distinct lack of information? 125.238.89.244 (talk) 19:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but the links are there for the rest of it.  I actually came here looking for a list of signatories and was surprised that it's not here.  IIRC, the USSR, Ukraine, and Byelorussia all signed separately giving the USSR 'de facto' 3 votes.  If I can find a list of signatories, I'll post them here. 138.162.128.55 (talk) 03:42, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The rest of it? 

message: I'm requesting this article be moved to Charter of the United Nations, as per the charter's official name given here and here. Unable to move the page using the move tab. --Joowwww (talk) 14:37, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Per Wikipedia:Naming conventions, the standard is to use the most common name, not necessarily the official name.  In this case, the charter is most commonly known as the United Nations Charter or UN Charter.  Polemarchus (talk) 16:10, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually you're right, don't bother it would mean moving all the chapter article pages too. Request withdrawn. --Joowwww (talk) 21:59, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: Any one know if there is a pdf on the net of the above? I would like to see the signatures etc. Regards. Redking7 (talk) 09:11, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this is it. --Mathew5000 (talk) 01:13, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That's quite a good external link - I've added it to the list. Laurent (talk) 01:39, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: From treaties.un.org/Pages/CTCs.aspx you can get to some useful related pdfs, such as a single file with all five language versions of the original Charter, plus materials on the three amendments. Also it's worth mentioning the publication Multilateral Treaties Deposited with the Secretary-General, which you can download in three volumes: . (Those pdfs are very large, so you should "save target as" on them instead of opening them in a web browser.) The first volume contains some information on the specific dates that each of the original UN members ratified the Charter (which you can also find here). --Mathew5000 (talk) 03:26, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Pdf of signed Charter

message: Here, I've removed the infobox link to what appears to be the latest in a longstanding series of nonexistent images or redirects. Perhaps one of the images here might be suitable (I don't know their copyright status -- perhaps images at the un.org website are public domain ??) Wtmitchell  (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:17, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to nonexistent image of signing ceremony removed 

message: 20:49, 24 April 2014 RHaworth (talk | contribs) deleted page Charta of the United Nations (R3: Recently created, implausible redirect)
"Charta of the United Nations" is the name given in the introduction.
It is vandalism to delete a redirect that is named so. ArmijaDonetsk (talk) 22:07, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you're trolling, but I'll bite anyway. It's not vandalism. Read the definition at WP:VANDALISM. The admin did not carry out a "deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia". Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:11, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Obviously ArmijaDonetsk was overlooking the difference between the correct English spelling "charter" and his misspelling "charta". I wouldn't call that an "implausible" misspelling though, so I find redirects from those misspellings at least worthy of consideration. It's "charta", "carta" or something similar in so many other languages that many non-native readers of English Wikipedia might easily look for it under such a spelling. I must admit that I myself, when I first saw these edits and deletions, was wondering "hey, what's wrong about those redirects, why didn't we have them all along?" Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:40, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: My apologies if this was not trolling. It just sounded so—silly, or rap-tastic, or something. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:16, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalizing admin 

message: According to the U.S. State Dept., Truman witnessed but did not sign the charter in June with the rest of the member nations. He had to wait until August, after the treaty had been ratified by the Senate. Have I read this wrong, or is the first paragraph of this article in need of adjustment? Krychek (talk) 21:27, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Signing a treaty and ratifying it are two separate steps. The U.S. ratifies treaties by having a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate. Prior to this, the President or his representative can sign treaties, after which they are sent to the Senate for ratification. Truman did not sign the UN Charter at the conclusion of the S.F. Conference, but the U.S. Secretary of State Edward Stettinius, Jr. did, as did six other U.S. officials. The original signed copy of the UN Charter can be found here, where you can view the original signatures by all countries that were done in S.F. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:18, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  U.S. did not sign at the San Fran ceremony 

message: I think that the simplifications and clarifications from Good Olfactory make the article harder to read (for a newcomer who looks first at an encyclopedia article for an introduction).  I think that the editor has made the article harder to read, not easier to read, merely by taking out core 'bits' of useful, helpful information. MaynardClark (talk) 05:15, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Specifically, what from this is problematic? The main simplification was clarifying the extremely convoluted sentence in the lead that set out the five permanent members. There was no need to mention Chapter II in that sentence at all, IMO. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:23, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Good Olfactory's 'simplifications