Talk:United Nations Population Fund

message: This article could use some improvement. 24.215.155.9 02:31, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvement

message: The section "UNFPA and its critics" was swiped from the UNFPA website at [:http://www.unfpa.org/news/news.cfm?ID=679].  I'm removing the copyvio material although this information really does need to be in the article (albeit rather more NPOV).  This whole article needs to be expanded & reworked.  NTK 02:40, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyvio

message: The article previously stated (as fact) that the UNFPA does not support forced abortions or sterilisations.  This is disputed by some people (including the US government).  So I modified the article to try to recognize this.   -- 69.181.74.76 01:49, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Coerced abortions

message: The section on UNFPA and United States policy stating that the law banning distribution of U.S. funds to programs that support abortion activities is 20 years old is inaccurate.  This law was first implemented during the Reagan Administration, repealed by Clinton, and then reinstated under the current Bush Administration.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.102.96.178 (talk) 13:44, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: U.S. Funding

message: The article is now being cleaned (adding more external citations, fixing headings, typos, adding more recent information). Cleanup areticle has now been removed - 04 May 2007 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 57.69.17.243 (talk) 15:59, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup task done

message: I've tried to make the section of the article regarding the UNFPA's relationship with the U.S. more thorough and objective. The original section stated debatable conclusions without qualification and also had a broken, argumentative feel, due to different opinions being inserted to counter previous paragraphs without regard to the overall flow of the section.
I've also added a brief 'controversies' section, which alludes to allegations made against the UNFPA over the years. Most of these are fleshed out in the section discussed above, regarding the UNFPA's tumultuous relationship with the U.S. over the past few decades. Granted, the merit of such allegations can be debated, but it's disingenuous to try and ignore that the UNFPA has taken a lot of heat from various groups for its involvement with much-criticized government policies, such as China's population control program. To omit this facet of the organization falsely presents the UNFPA as an organization with no history of controversy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.11.112.189 (talk • contribs) 
:Controversies sections are controversial on Wikipedia Wikipedia:Criticism, Wikipedia:Criticism sections and articles.  Since this one dealt primarily with U.S. govt/UNFPA relations, I merged it into that section.  Zodon (talk) 09:16, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Article Edited

message: I suggest an article about the United Nations Population Division.  --Hamiltha (talk) 06:38, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  United Nations Population Division 

message: I was reverted because "you can't contest a copyvio". However, I think it is ok to contest any speedydeletion template.  says "If this article does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, or you intend to fix it, please remove this notice, but do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself."  So I removed the template.
--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 19:01, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I was under the impression that only admins could remove copyvio tags from articles, hence my revert. Of course I could be wrong. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:04, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speedy deletion for copyright 

message: I don't think it is a copyvio of this job ad as the job ad only contains 5 sentences of the article, the job ad is from Feb 2015 and post-dates the article by several years, and some job sites copy summary descriptions of employers from Wikipedia. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 19:01, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, I don't think it is either. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:04, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It was a copyvio of the UNPFA's website. The bulk of the problem was added in 2010 by a single user. Deleting that content also seems to have helped the tone of the article, it reads less like an advert. --Versageek 21:31, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible copyright infringement

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on United Nations Population Fund. 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.aul.org/UNFPA_Funding
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090708013822/http://www.c-fam.org/publications/id.73/pub_detail.asp to http://www.c-fam.org/publications/id.73/pub_detail.asp
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070811103059/http://www.unescap.org/esid/psis/population/popheadline/308/art5.asp to http://www.unescap.org/esid/psis/population/popheadline/308/art5.asp
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070927215824/http://ncseonline.org/PopPlanet/CCMC/HTML/2002july22.cfm to http://ncseonline.org/PopPlanet/CCMC/HTML/2002july22.cfm
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081217013025/http://www.pop.org/report/finalchinareport.pdf to http://www.pop.org/report/finalchinareport.pdf
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) 00:29, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: A major section says this UN agency was "falsely accused". Could some contributor explain the reason that our article sides with the defenders and against the accusers? By what means did our editorial board determine that the accusations were false? Better to say that a certain fact-finding group found no evidence to support the charge. --Uncle Ed (talk) 14:55, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Taking sides

message: The article would be improved by covering both sides of a number of sharply divisive issues:
* Does UNFPA support coercive population control measures?
* Has it given awards to top government officials who have carried out such measures?
* Has it used any funds or matériel to enforce coercive policies?
It's interesting that groups which support "reproductive rights" say UNFPA is not doing any of the above, while groups opposed to abortion say it's working "hand and glove" with governments to support coercion. If there are no objective sources, can we say that one side is right and the other has been debunked? --Uncle Ed (talk) 15:33, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as the presentation of the controversy around a Population Research Institute report is concerned, I have set it straight. However, WP:NPOV might still or again not be fully obeyed in the article. –Joppa Chong (talk) 01:34, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversies

message: There are 17 Sustainable Development Goals that the United Nation has implemented in order to improve the lives of people and the planet. The goals work to move forward in bettering people and the resources available currently without jeopardizing how future generations will access and use their resources for survival. The 17 goals don't just look at the next few years, they look at the big picture and include everyone, everywhere. In order to attain these goals, it is important to look directly at the global aspect of health because it will result in new forms of social organization and interaction to grow the economy. Unfortunately, the Sustainable Development Goals are not cheap to fund, these goals cost a total of 5-7 trillion dollars each year to keep moving forward. The United Nations has turned to looking for investment opportunities to make up for the almost 3 trillion they are short. Luckily for the United Nations, the overall global income is increasing, making more people susceptible to invest their money into these goals to help make a better future for the people and planet. (Addeyolson (talk) 00:16, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Without a clear connection to the UNFPA article, I recommend you consider posting at Talk:Sustainable Development Goals provided with a special aim. –Joppa Chong (talk) 01:56, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sustainable Development Goals