Talk:International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
November 28, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed
May 13, 2018	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

Globalization Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Globalization, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Globalization on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.GlobalizationWikipedia:WikiProject GlobalizationTemplate:WikiProject GlobalizationGlobalization articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organizations High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

International relations High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Finance & Investment Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Article Revision[edit]

This article is being discussed at the World Bank Group talk page. Please visit to participate in the discussion about the future of this article. --Brettbergeron 21:19, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clean-up[edit]

This needs clean-up, bureaucratic language has no place on Wikipedia. Tazmaniacs 00:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how much has changed since it was tagged, but it looks OK to me (although a rather large number of redlinks still exist in the later sections of the article.) I've removed the cleanup tag; please be more specific about what needs cleanup if restoring it. RJFJR (talk) 13:52, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment period passed with no additional comments. Meclee (talk) 01:52, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Meclee (talk · contribs) 21:00, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1.   Well-written:

       (a) the prose is clear and concise, respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct; and
       (b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.[5]

I find the article to be clear and concise, grammatical, and in compliance.

2. Factually accurate and verifiable:

       (a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
       (b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines;[6] and
       (c) it contains no original research.

Article appears factually accurate and is definitely verifiable.

3. Broad in its coverage:

       (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;[7] and
       (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

Gives good coverage.

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each.

   Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.[8]
   Illustrated, if possible, by images:[9]

Un-baised.

       (a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
       (b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.[10]

No suitable images available.

Will await further comments/reviews for 10 days. Meclee (talk) 21:00, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

third party sources needed[edit]

I copyedited and cleaned en passant, but more work is needed. The lede was terribly repetitious and it still doesnt really reflect the body. As of today, more than half (11 of 19) the references are by ICSID, therefore many more third party sources are needed. No surprise that the page gives undue weight to the inner workings; page needs a criticism section.

I am somewhat shocked, that someone had the nerve to nominate this page for WP:good article. please ping me if you want to discuss this. Thanks.--Wuerzele (talk) 03:46, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The German Wikipedia page on ICSID describes how the 'judges' are selected for each case. 101.166.68.175 (talk) 00:30, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Very odd sentence in the case study section[edit]

The case study section contains a sentence which doesnn't appear to make any sense whatsoever. It says: "The case also attracted criticism for Tullow's use of local legal representation, Kampala Associated Advocates (KAA); the Ugandan law firm was founded by Elly Kurahanga, the president of Tullow's operations in Uganda and concerns were raised over his impartiality in the issue." It seems to say that a company which initiated an investor-state litigation against a company used a law firm the founder of which is president of that company in the country in question. And this raised concerns about impartiality. But why the hell would the lawyer representing a party in litigation have to be impartial? Of course he's not impartial! SchnitteUK (talk) 18:07, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed this "criticism" because it makes little sense, as stated above. SchnitteUK (talk) 09:19, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:56, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:34, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ecuador[edit]

[Ecuador Re-Ratifies The ICSID Convention: Impact Of The Ratification In Ecuador And In The Region https://www.clearygottlieb.com/-/media/files/alert-memos-2021/ecuador-re-ratifies-the-icsid-convention.pdf]

Ecuador has re-joined the ICSID convention, effective 3 September 2021. The map needs to be updated. Could someone do this? https://icsid.worldbank.org/about/member-states — Preceding unsigned comment added by Magzan68 (talk • contribs) 13:56, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]