World Heritage Site

The World Heritage Site entry contains absolutely no negative or contrary information of any kind and lends the false impression that that United Nations program is completely uncontroversial. Yet, it does have its detractors and it is controversial in some quarters. Any information on controversies surrounding the program has been missing from the entry for over six months.

On May 6, 2006 I added the following three links:
* "USA-UN Man and Biosphere & World Heritage Sites" (link)
* "U.N. Reaches for National Parks" (original domain expired, but the same document is here and here)
* "U.S. Wary of World-Heritage Status, Travel Editor Says" (link)

The first two were deleted over time, with the third link - from National Geographic - deleted on 22:52, 19 September 2007 by user Balthazarduju. Whatever that user's motivations for the deletions, the article was deprived of any contrary information whatever, and has remained in that same misleading state for over six months.

Note that a search for terms such as "world heritage site" "land grab" and related brings up many other articles, including this from Front Page Magazine and this alert from the Heritage Foundation. Based on past experience, adding any of those links to the article would sooner or later result in them being removed on one pretense or other.

9/3/09 UPDATE: For a specific example of what's missing from Wikipedia's article, see this unconfirmed claim:

For example, in 1995, Bill Clinton got the UN to declare Yellowstone Park a "World Heritage Site in Danger." That gave him the "international obligation" to close down a coal mine on private property three miles away ­ despite the fact that coal had been mined in the area for 150 years before Yellowstone Park was created, and the Crown Butte Mines had won an award for excellence in 1992.

See also this, this, and this.