Talk:Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity

Tablization
I think the list will be improved if converted into a table form... --Charlie Huang 【正矗昊】 10:43, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, did it myself. --Charlie Huang 【正矗昊】 17:41, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Relation to World Heritage Sites?
Can anyone tell the distinction between this list and World Heritage list? Apart form being mostly non-material kind of heritage, are there basically different rules and policies? Does listing as "Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity" give the same value to a phenomenon as listing in World Heritage? Can certain countries have a list that has both kinds of heritage, or they are too different in other aspects than being certified by UNESCO as heritage, to be on one list? Tar-ba-gan (talk) 13:31, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * The two lists are maintained by different bodies within UNESCO, and have their basis in different conventions - namely the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (The World Heritage Convention) and the Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage. I think by the nature of the differences between these types of heritage, different policies are necessary. The activities of the UNESCO committees, and the criteria for inclusion on the lists, reflect these.
 * There are clearly similarities, however. Quoting from the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage: "Considering the deep-seated interdependence between the intangible cultural heritage and the tangible cultural and natural heritage, ... Noting the far-reaching impact of the activities of UNESCO in establishing normative instruments for the protection of the cultural heritage, in particular the Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage of 1972, ... Noting further that no binding multilateral instrument as yet exists for the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage," It's clear that this later convention was intended very much as a counterpart to the The World Heritage Convention.
 * Both lists have similar concepts of their entries being "representative", or "outstanding examples ", rather than attempting to be 'complete'.
 * I'm not sure you can directly compare the 'value' of tangible and intangible heritage. But in any case neither list is even attempting to compare the value of the items within a single list.--David Edgar (talk) 10:53, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Why three tables?
Is there a good reason for separating the entries by year of nomination? Most people would not care in what year the masterpieces were listed. If there was just one list it would be easier to see which masterpieces belong to Bolivia for instance. There would even be space for a column "year of nomination". bamse (talk) 14:39, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, that might be better. If we make a single sortable table, then it would be possible to sort either by country name or by year of nomination.
 * The only issue is that some masterpieces belong to multiple countries (eg. see the two shared between Latvia and Lithuania (and in one case Estonia)), so how would they be listed?--David Edgar (talk) 14:56, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Indeed the multiple country masterpieces (mcm) are a problem. I can only see two solutions: 1. make the country column non-sortable, or 2. split mcm in two (or more) entries. So in the second case there would be two entries: "Tajikistan Shashmaqom Music" and "Uzbekistan Shashmaqom Music". Of course there should be a note saying that the entry is an mcm. I would favour the second solution, how about you? Also, are there enough pictures available to fill an "image" column? bamse (talk) 15:14, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


 * One more idea. Would it make sense and is it possible to have a "type" column with entries like "theatre/music/..."? bamse (talk) 19:12, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I would also favour your second solution. (That's effectively what the UNESCO site does, listing "Shashmaqom Music" under sections for both countries, with the other countries also noted.)
 * I'm not sure we should necessarily have an image column; it tends to make the table more weighty, and in any case plenty of these traditions aren't always easy to picture. I would probably go with a selection of images representing a small number of the entries, separated from the table.
 * Yes, I think a "type" column might make sense. Ideally using similar terms to the 'domains' specified at and the terms used on the linked sub-pages. --David Edgar (talk) 11:06, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Map correctness?
The map looked a bit strange and I did some spot checking: I wonder what is the source data that was used to create the map. — Miym (talk) 21:49, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 2 × Estonia, 1 × Latvia, and 2 × Lithuania in + 1 × Latvia in
 * 2 × Estonia, 2 × Latvia, and 2 × Lithuania in the lists on this page
 * 1 × Estonia, 2 × Latvia, and 3 × Lithuania according to the map if I read it correctly.

Caption under last picture?
I'm sorry, new to wiki and therefore unsure about where to go about captions on pictures in articles. I just wanted to point out that the caption under the last picture showing an example of the castels states that they're a Masterpiece in Nairobi when in fact they're in Catalonia. I would have edited it myself but I don't know how so I figured someone else probably does.Jmacharia (talk) 13:56, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * The mention of Nairobi is not the location of the image, but the location of the fifth session of the Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (at which the castells were proclaimed masterpieces). See: http://www.unesco.org/culture/ich/index.php?lg=en&pg=00272 --David Edgar (talk) 15:47, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't it then be "among the Masterpieces proclaimed in Nairobi in 2010" not "among the proclaimed Masterpieces in Nairobi in 2010.", and furthermore, is it relevant to mention Nairobi in the caption when the location of the sessions are not mentioned at all in the text? Also, there is currently no mention of the 2010 session in the body of the article. Finally, the reference given in the caption is a BBC video, which is less desirable than a text one as many readers and editors (myself included) lack the bandwidth to easily watch and verify them, and, even with the bandwidth, it can be much more time consuming to watch an entire video than to scan or search a text document.-- 203.82.93.81 (talk) 00:52, 6 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I was finally able to view that BBC segment, and all it says is that some people are lobbying for castels to be recognized as MotOaIHoH. The "Decisions adopted" document listed in the link provided by David Edgar states, in "DECISION 5.COM 6.40", that it takes note of Spain's nomination of human towers, decides that human towers satisfy the criteria, and "Inscribes human towers on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity." -- 203.82.93.74 (talk) 11:39, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090716023040/http://www.unesco.org/culture/ich/index.php?lg=EN to http://www.unesco.org/culture/ich/index.php?lg=EN

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:12, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091004003221/http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID%3D46523%26URL_DO%3DDO_TOPIC%26URL_SECTION%3D201.html to http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID%3D46523%26URL_DO%3DDO_TOPIC%26URL_SECTION%3D201.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:53, 1 December 2017 (UTC)