Talk:Copenhagen Accord

Delete or move elsewhere?

Until there is an actual treaty, I think this should be merged to United Nations Climate Change Conference 2009. Most of the text of this article is already in that one anyway. -Atmoz (talk) 01:05, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree; this is premature. We can't even be sure there will be a treaty.  --Lambiam 11:28, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

I also agree, especially now that the Copenhagen Accord is no longer pursued as a stand-alone document but has been integrated into the negotiation text prepared for the June 2010 session in Bonn. The lasting significance of the Copenhagen Accord is therefore quite limited and is best discussed as an outcome of COP15. rjtklein 15:24, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

US response

i found this Reuters article , claiming USA has formally agreed to reduce emissions by 17% http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60R6YF20100128?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews 86.123.168.47 (talk) 17:03, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Accord

I moved the article from Copenhagen Treaty to Copenhagen Accord. Apologies if I messed anything up. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:40, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Seems fine. I wasn't sure what they were going to call it.=P Smallman12q (talk) 22:20, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was page moved.  Skomorokh  11:40, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

---

Copenhagen treaty → Copenhagen Accord —- correct name for text subject of agreement at Conference - [1] - Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:27, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Support move. But why did you move this article by cut and paste at 10:33, 19 December 2009? This violates Wikipedia's policy per Help:Moving a page. --Pengyanan (talk) 00:37, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Because I cocked it up. I apologised elsewhere, but happy to do it again. Sorry. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:32, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

That's all right. I think administrator will merge the edit history of the two articles when the process of the moving request is completed.--Pengyanan (talk) 13:38, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Transwiki

Wouldn't this be better suited to wikisource? It seems sensible that any discussion of the text would be better placed in the main article and there can a box linking to the wikisource text. The Danish text section could be included in the main article too. what do you say? Smartse (talk) 00:59, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

What do you mean by "the main article" - 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference? I think it's too early to tell whether the Accord will eventually require a separate article to the Conference, and for the time being it should remain, in my view. The issues arising in relation to the conduct of the conference are not the same as the issues arising in relation to the content of the Accord, for one thing. But the Accord text should certainly be at Wikisource, as the Kyoto Protocol is. Personally, I have no experience in using or adding to Wikisource, and have no time at the moment to develop my personal expertise in that area! Ghmyrtle (talk) 23:13, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Emission Pledges

The page "Who's On Board With the Copenhagen Accord" is the most comprehensive resource that outlines which countries are signed on and what their commitments will be. Unless you find a better one, I think Wikipedia visitors would find it of value. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rhys Gerholdt (talk • contribs) 16:21, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

The emission pledges is not correct, the US for example has only agreed to lower theirs by 17% from the 2005 levels. And Chine will lower their carbon intensity and the emissions per see. So all this needs to be corrected as it look completely wrong at the moment Arkaska (talk) 13:32, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Copenhagen Accord. 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/20100310070404/http://www.inwent.org:80/ez/articles/166521/index.en.shtml to http://www.inwent.org/ez/articles/166521/index.en.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 15:17, 30 November 2016 (UTC)