This post is ´sticky´ and keeps track of the proposed WHS below:

Angola
- Quiçama National Park

Antarctica (claimed by New Zealand)
- Ross Island

Argentina
- Railways of the Andes (Argentina/Peru)

Austria
- Modern Legacy of Vienna

Belgium
- Westhoek: places of memory and monuments of the Great War (Belgium)

Bhutan
- Dzongs of Bhutan (Bhutan)

Bolivia
- Lake Titicaca (Peru / Bolivia)

Burkina Faso
- Peaks of Sindou

Canada
- Klondike and the Gold Rush trails (Canada / USA)

China
- Tashilunpo Monastery (Tibet)

Colombia
- Ciudad Perdida (Colombia)

Cyprus (North)
- Fortified City of Famagusta

Egypt
- Marine Reserves of Sinai (Israel/Egypt)
- Suez Canal

France
- Vers une architecture: Major Buildings of le Corbusier (France, India)
- Devils Island (France (French Guiana)

Germany
- Olympic Park in Munich
- Divided Cities along the German Border

Ghana
- Sumbrungu Painted Houses

Greece
- Diolkos: Ancient Railways (Greece)
- Minoan palaces of Crete (Greece)
- Cultural Landscape of Santorini

India
- Andaman Islands (India)
- Amritsar (India)
- Varanasi (India)
- Palitana (India)
- Vers une architecture: Major Buildings of le Corbusier (France, India)

Indonesia
- Tana Toraja Cultural Landscape (Indonesia)

Iran
- Towers of Silence (Iran)

Iraq
- Ur (Iraq)
- Taq-I-Kisra (Arch of Ctesiphon) (Iraq)

Ireland
- Island of Inishmore (Ireland)

Israel
- Marine Reserves of Sinai (Israel/Egypt)

Japan
- Major Buildings of Frank Lloyd Wright (USA/Japan)

Kazakhstan
- Baikonur Cosmodrome / Cape Canaveral (Russia/Kazakhstan, USA)

Mexico
- Copper Canyon
- Cenotes of the Yucatan

Micronesia (Federated States of)
- Nan Madol (Micronesia, Federated)

Myanmar
- Bagan (Myanmar)
- Shwedagon Pagoda

A pattern is beginning to emerge here! Given the way we all insist on recording our nominations and views in different ways it must make it difficult for Els to "keep the score" and may be she has been concentrating on 2008 recently but i think the scores are a bit wrong.
eg (I haven't been through them all and am not quite sure sometimes if Els has "voted" or not and only found Nan Madol!)
Nan Madol has 6 I think not 4 (m_m, Xer, Els, Sol, Ass, Paul)
Panama has 4 not 3 (Sol, Ass, Xer, m_m)
Catalhoyuk has 3 not 2 (Sol, Ass, m_m)
Mecca has 4 not 3 (Melt, Ass, Sol, m_m).
Klondike has 3 not 2 (Sol, Xer, Ass)
Moscow has 4 not 3 (m_m, Sol, ass, Melt)

Can I add 1 to Amsterdam.

I only see 4 at theNan Madol item. Where are the others?

Sorry - Nan Madol has 5 as it was in the list of m_m but not Paul.

It might be worth reiterating that proposals can only be acepted as separate subjects and votes should be made under that subject or, I agree, it is too difficult to follow all the possible multiple posts which MIGHT have a proposal/vote!

Yep it would seem reasonavble to only count votes expressed on specific propossal threads.

As an alternative would it be worth while to have a thread that has an entry for each user where they can update their own votes and preferences? (sorry I may have got my terminology wrong re: threads posts notes etc.)

It's the easiest for me to follow the votes in the separate proposal subjects, so I'll add that 'rule' to the Rules Top 50 Missing

It is difficult to vote for a top 50 when all the alternatives are not yet known. We may have to start withdrawing votes if interesting proposals such as Xeres' proposal Diolkos are suggested late in the process.

Is it perhaps an idea to go through a nomination and discussion stage and at an agreed point each user send in a ballot containing his or hers top 50? This method will also enable the list to be ordered correctly.

We can can pander to our bureaucratic tendencies by demanding that each suggestion have a formal nomination at the start of its thread.

I think that Paul's idea is the most practical to go about it.

OK. We go for separate Nomination / Discussion and Voting Stages.
As more people are joining the forum every day, let's go on first with more Nominations.

Would it be possible to sort the sticky post at the head of this thread on country and to include links to the "nomination" page? Now that the "nomination process" seems to be accelerating it is getting more difficult to compare the current proposals. This post would then be the definitive list and would not include any proposals which are withdrawn or old versions which have been re-submitted after changes.

I am sorry if this involves too much work, Els. If you can access and copy the raw links in a post I am willing to do the typing.

i'll be adding one more to my nomination list: the coral reef system of palau

i just realized that i overlooked another potential whs the should be included: plain of jars! a nomination is being prepared, of course subject to the removal of the landmines there... we don't want tourists getting maimed... there was a request for international assistance for this nomination some years back too...

Of course it is up to Els and how much development effort she is prepared to put in but I think the following proposal for handling access to the "Top 50 missing" and the voting should be able to make good use of facilities she has already developed without too much which is "new"

a. Put all properly nominated sites on a dB - as for T list sites - could have link to eg Wiki or other reasonably good overview of each site as well as to the "nomination" info showing the reason and criteria. In general the more you treat the "Top 50 missing" sites in the same way as inscribed and T List sites the less development it will take and the more facilities we would get - even visit reviews??
b. Produce a list the same as that for entering "visited sites" with a "tick box" after each
c. Allow all REGISTERED users to enter up to 50 votes max (keeping an eye out for the "Rohtas Syndrome" of course!!)
d. Use the existing "top 25" feature to show in this case the current top 50 (with option to see beyond)
e. Show the most recent 5 new nomination suggestions as per the existing feature for "connections"

f. Thus all registered users have the chance to alter their votes across the 50 in the light of new nominations - if they have used all 50 they will have to remove 1 in order to add 1!!

Ongoing "management" by the Webmaster would be limited to adding the new nominations and links - "voting" would look after itself

Unless there are many more than 50 possibilities and assuming most users will use all their votes there will be many sites with the same number votes. In order to resolve this and give an order final list we could prioritise our votes, however; this would require much more work for the already overworked web mistress.

If Solivagant's suggestions about the nomination pages were made "compulsory" it would make a very impressive site, especially given the inconsistency and often very poor documentation in the real T list.

We could reduce the number of allowable votes until the number of nominations was significantly larger than 50. A simple "rule of thumb" might be "half (or a third?) as many votes as there are proposals?" That should ensure some differentiation? So - to get a "Top 50" would require at least 100 (or 150) nominations? That wouldn't impose yet more work on the Webmaster and would avoid the possible overcomplexity of "prioritization".

I wonder also if we should highlight whether a proposed "Top 50 missing" site is on the T list or not and have a link to that (ie on this site which in turn leads to UNESCO for what it is worth on T list matters) if it is. Thus we avoid duplication for such proposals