Talk:International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons

low profile
AM I SORRY, but for a public mean maker this organisation has a kinda low profile. To much pressure because of the prize or why the website is broken? Even here in Wikipedia is but just a little information about their doing and attraction. Every language translation is the same boring articel written by just one person in one style. Well, there is not many information to spread here. Not much accomplished. But even that could be furiously spread among the world that there is no movement in nuclear disarmament. [06.10.2017] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.90.212.92 (talk) 12:48, 6 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I disagree with your claim, "Not much accomplished" by the time you wrote that comment, 6 October 2017. ICAN spearheaded the effort to obtain the adoption by the UN three months earlier, 7 July 2017, of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.  I'd call that a major accomplishment.  The Nobel committee agreed, awarding them the Nobel Peace Prize later that year.  DavidMCEddy (talk) 17:33, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Missing Nobel Prize Icon
The Swedish Article has the Nobel Price Icon in the Infobox. Shouldn't it be added in the English one as well?GustafSeb (talk) 08:53, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Divesting
On 2021-12-14T16:32:10 User:86.188.36.150 complained that the section on "Divesting" was "Blatant WP:SOAPBOXing. Most of the references are either politically biased of unconvincing."

Let's analyze those references:

Beyond this, New York City has joined the ICAN Cities Appeal and decided to divest from nuclear weapons according to a post on icanw.org. I can look for other sources for this. DavidMCEddy (talk) 18:06, 14 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Basically: you have proven my point. In particular, blogs are completely unacceptable because they can be edited by anybody and are considered to be WP:SELFPUBLISHED sources by whomsoever posts the entry. Stating that the readers have to make their mind up on whether a source is politically biased or not clearly does not demonstrate that it is free of bias. ===86.188.36.150 (talk) 17:41, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

why no mention of the UN's designated day?
Why is there no mention of the "International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons" anywhere on wikipedia? Seems like quite an oversight. 208.201.242.22 (talk) 14:33, 29 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is written and maintained by volunteers. Almost anyone can change almost anything on Wikipedia.  What stays tends to be written from a neutral point of view citing credible sources.
 * You or almost anyone else can insert a comment about this at some appropriate place, citing some source, e.g., a web page on un.org discussing this. DavidMCEddy (talk) 15:05, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Cold War Science
— Assignment last updated by DixitLepus (talk) 22:28, 29 April 2023 (UTC)